Universal health care in the U.S.

Universal health care for those in the US illegally   70 votes

  1. 1. Should those who are in the US illegally be covered under a universal health care program?

    • Yes, comprehensive coverage should be paid for those in the US illegally at taxpayer expense
      18
    • Yes, but only for visits to an emergency room or free clinic
      26
    • No, those in the US illegally should be required to purchase private health insurance out of their own pocket
      26

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

344 posts in this topic

 

Yes there have been tons of idiots throughout history with ideas that were ridiculed by there better knowing peers. Among those idiots are the individuals who have provided the planet with it's most beneficial leaps in technology, medicine and science.

Narcissist or Nut- which one is Pleb? :P Perhaps both.

 

You consider yourself a peer of Newton, Galileo, Archimides, Einstein, Drew, Salk, Barnard, Harvey, Goddard, et al.? You don't even rate alongside Marx and Engels!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there IS a general consensus that health care should from being a product to a universal social good.

But consesnsus doesn't mean that every last conservative or wealthy individual has to consent to give up their position of privilege for the benefit of all.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't really referring to health care, although its hard enough to get a consensus on something as obvious as that. I was referring to getting 6 billion people to drop their national and ethnic identities along with individual self interest and submit their will to some new global order, aint going to happen.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I was referring to getting 6 billion people to drop their national and ethnic identities along with individual self interest and submit their will to some new global order

I think people can decide on their own identities and form their own societies how they want for the benfit of the majority.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

again i am not a economist and am not sure these are the right numbers but i found a soruce of the top 225 GDPs came up with a number about 47000 billion. so lets round it up for the other money from smaller countries keeping in ming the 224 gdp was .01 billion and put it high say 60000 billion global GDP with 6 billion people that works out to 10000 usd per person if we can keep everyone working in excatly the same way for the same time and then split the pie exactly down the middle. Ofcourse we still have to figure out who gets to live in the nice house by the sea. and then what when there is a great artist like picasso or such and eveyone whats his paintings how do you decide who gets it. How do you remove the value put on certin things that can not be quantified in a practical way. Or do we rid the world of usless art and philosophy. i can still remeber career day in my high school. every one should write down 3 jobs they would like to do in the future it was amazing how many people wrote down movie star or executive or sports star. Ofcouce i am sure that is all because of the money that those jobs wont pay now, so only people that really love to act would do it as a job. ofcourse My neighbor seems to liek to sing but it could be that he likes to torture cats. the truth is if I get to pick I guess I want to be boss. ohh and sign me up for some of those 52 inch tvs too and a dvd player cause i have a feeling the writing and acting will suck after the revolution. I am human i think about myself. it is the way it is. i do believe in a certin amout of social responsability. but I also belive that the numbers above are a real picture of how it would be we could improve the lives of most of the world but it would cost us a lot. Sure sign me up if you find a way to give everyone in the world a 4 bedroom house in a nice neighborhood with a nice yard at least 2 cars and money and time to travel.

 

and all of this is assuming you could get people to give up religon and culture

 

pleb have you ever been near a landfill? Did zou ever go somewhere where they want to build one? how about a jail? if you have then you know all about NIMBY not in my back yard. everyone wants a solution to their problems but they would prefer that the stench is in someone elses neighborhood.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes there have been tons of idiots throughout history with ideas that were ridiculed by there better knowing peers. Among those idiots are the individuals who have provided the planet with it's most beneficial leaps in technology, medicine and science.

Anybody notice that Pleb has problems with possessives as well as possessions?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My humblest apologies for having written, there in place of their...

 

But if that's your only argument, quite frankly...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Anybody notice that Pleb has problems with possessives as well as possessions?

I'm usually laughing too hard at his conspiracy theories to notice.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's with the personal attacks...?

 

Is it forbidden in your country to have a different set of ideas from the general consensus? or are you just deriving pleasure and self worth from attempting to belittle someone?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What's with the personal attacks...?

If it makes you feel better, I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking your crackpot ideas.

 

 

Is it forbidden in your country to have a different set of ideas from the general consensus?

Hardly, but you seem to think that differing ideas are of equal merit by default. They're not.

 

 

or are you just deriving pleasure and self worth from attempting to belittle someone?

To be honest, it pains me that there are people in the world that believe such shit despite the preponderance of evidence to the contrary. Given that it's impossible to reason with the indoctrinated, however, I do my best to laugh it off.

 

I derive my self worth from my personal and professional successes.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What's with the personal attacks...?

What's with the misuse of ellipsis?

 

 

Is it forbidden in your country to have a different set of ideas from the general consensus?

Funny you use the phrase "different set of ideas from the general consensus", since the whole presupposition of your viewpoint is that you can somehow convince 6 billion people to share your views (which, despite multiple requests, you have refused to justify other than implying that if you can imagine it - it can happen).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If it makes you feel better, I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking your crackpot ideas.

Hardly, but you seem to think that differing ideas are of equal merit by default. They're not.

To be honest, it pains me that there are people in the world that believe such shit despite the preponderance of evidence to the contrary. Given that it's impossible to reason with the indoctrinated, however, I do my best to laugh it off.

 

I derive my self worth from my personal and professional successes.

You are welcome to the last word...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

To be honest, it pains me that there are people in the world that believe such shit despite the preponderance of evidence to the contrary. Given that it's impossible to reason with the indoctrinated, however, I do my best to laugh it off.

While I don't disagree with you, I do think that's a bit of a sweeping statement. First of all, most of the economies where communism - I assume you're referring to communism - came in were already fucked. The reasons they remained fucked - I would argue - are because of corrupt politicians something which capitalism hasn't exactly succeeded in rectifying either in the 3rd world. Furthermore, China - and I admit I haven't looked into the subject deeply enough, but I think the question is worth raising - is a communist economy which is the envy of the world at the moment. Finally, Russia was at the brink of ruin when the Bolsheviks took over. Russia - with no disrespect intended towards the US - largely won the 2nd world war at a huge loss to personnel and property. They still managed to engage the US in the space race and developed military forces comparable with those of the west. That the system collapsed in the end could be ascribed to various reasons, not solely economic. Especially when now sees how powerful Russia still is despite the fact that they really are for all intents and purposes still a "communist" state, ie. no real democracy exists.

 

But, for the moment, I believe that capitalism with a tinge of socialism, is the best solution we have at present. Open to debate too of course.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think exploring the idea of a utopia is interesting and important, but also totally unrealistic because people are not basically altruistic and industrious. While there is something to the theory that some people are more productive when they don't have to be, most people who don't have to do anything don't do more, they do nothing. I happen to know that people living in a communist "utopian" society tend to be happy about not having to do anything to get their daily bread, but they were not living in a paradise by any stretch of the imagination. They were lazy (even the artists), frustrated, uninspired, and wanted more but were unable/unwilling to shoot for more-- which is also a fitting description of most people living in a free market economy, depending on your perspective.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

While I don't disagree with you, I do think that's a bit of a sweeping statement. First of all, most of the economies where communism - I assume you're referring to communism - came in were already fucked. The reasons they remained fucked - I would argue - are because of corrupt politicians something which capitalism hasn't exactly succeeded in rectifying either in the 3rd world. Furthermore, China - and I admit I haven't looked into the subject deeply enough, but I think the question is worth raising - is a communist economy which is the envy of the world at the moment. Finally, Russia was at the brink of ruin when the Bolsheviks took over. Russia - with no disrespect intended towards the US - largely won the 2nd world war at a huge loss to personnel and property. They still managed to engage the US in the space race and developed military forces comparable with those of the west. That the system collapsed in the end could be ascribed to various reasons, not solely economic. Especially when now sees how powerful Russia still is despite the fact that they really are for all intents and purposes still a "communist" state, ie. no real democracy exists.

 

But, for the moment, I believe that capitalism with a tinge of socialism, is the best solution we have at present. Open to debate too of course.

China as the "envy of the world"? Ask some ordinary folks what life is like there (admittedly much improved from the height of Communism under Mao) and I am sure you will hear that it is not quite the "envy of the world". The increase in living standards that has occurred since Deng came to power in the late 1970s has been entirely due to capitalism.

 

What is propping Russia up right now is high energy prices- and you only need look at the 1980s to see how a drop in energy prices could have a huge effect on the Russian economy (which has a GDP per capita around one-third that of the US). I would hardly call Russia powerful outside of its status as nuclear power with a UN Security Council seat and its amarments and energy industries. High energy prices would exist even if Russia were a democracy, and even during the Yeltsin era the armaments industry had no problems receiving capital and exporting its products.

 

As for WWII, the Soviets fought well, but were also well-supplied thanks to the US. Of course, the Soviet contribution to the Pacific theater of WWII was pratically nil. let's not forget that Japan was an Axis power as well.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

China as the "envy of the world"? Ask some ordinary folks what life is like there (admittedly much improved from the height of Communism under Mao) and I am sure you will hear that it is not quite the "envy of the world". The increase in living standards that has occurred since Deng came to power in the late 1970s has been entirely due to capitalism.

 

What is propping Russia up right now is high energy prices- and you only need look at the 1980s to see how a drop in energy prices could have a huge effect on the Russian economy (which has a GDP per capita around one-third that of the US). I would hardly call Russia powerful outside of its status as nuclear power with a UN Security Council seat and its amarments and energy industries. High energy prices would exist even if Russia were a democracy, and even during the Yeltsin era the armaments industry had no problems receiving capital and exporting its products.

 

As for WWII, the Soviets fought well, but were also well-supplied thanks to the US. Of course, the Soviet contribution to the Pacific theater of WWII was pratically nil. let's not forget that Japan was an Axis power as well.

As for the living standards in China, I can't disagree with you. However, there is no capitalism in China. And by "envy of the world", I meant the skyrocketing growth rates that they have at present. I also find it rather interesting how everyone seems to be turning a blind eye to China's human rights excesses if it means a buck or two.

 

As for the power of Russia, it would be interesting to see what would happen if they cut off their energy supplies. Then I would like to see you debate whether they're powerful or not. As for them receiving supplies from the US, that is exactly what gave the US its boost. Russia got burnt to the ground and had to rebuild after the war. The US supplied everyone else because they didn't get bombed - no Pearl Harbour does not count - and collected all the profits.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My humblest apologies for having written, there in place of their...

 

But if that's your only argument, quite frankly...

You also wrote "it's" in place of "its."

 

I find it interesting when different languages expose the mental processes of their native speakers. Like how many words for "snow" Eskimos use, etc. I find it fascinating that a communist-leaning socialist doesn't use possessives correctly. So send me to the gulags.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now