Obama Care

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

The point I was trying to make:

To say something is impossible, and basically shoot down every point of reason, and pretend we shouldn't even attempt something because of the possibility of failure is a lazy attitude, and one that is not conducive to progress.

For the record, I have no position on this matter, and I generally favor smaller government. I'm just sick of the defeatist attitude.

I doubt anyone argues it is impossible for the government to implement universal healthcare, only that it is unreasonable to expect government to handle it efficiently. Further, when things have proven track records, and they generally are bad, it is not "lazy" but prudent to examine the failed attempts very closely and determine why they failed.

When solving problems one does not come to valid solutions without a thorough look at why past attempts have failed. If people aren't willing to do that, then it is typically because they don't have good answers to the problems, and so instead they ignore them in the hopes that this time it will be different. There are fundamental problems with putting the responsibility for individual healthcare on the Federal government's plate and no one has really ever explained how a government that is in Trillion Dollar debt, with a SS retirement plan that is close to insolvent, and a medicare/medicaid program that eats up a significant portion of the budget outlays, can afford to take on such a huge financial burden.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

The point I was trying to make:

To say something is impossible, and basically shoot down every point of reason, and pretend we shouldn't even attempt something because of the possibility of failure is a lazy attitude, and one that is not conducive to progress.

For the record, I have no position on this matter, and I generally favor smaller government. I'm just sick of the defeatist attitude.

Its not a defeatist attitude the problem is once it is put into place its here to stay no matter how much it cost. Its not like we are building a rocket that we can test over and over again until you have a completed project. This is something that's put into place and never goes away.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I doubt anyone argues it is impossible for the government to implement universal healthcare, only that it is unreasonable to expect government to handle it efficiently. Further, when things have proven track records, and they generally are bad, it is not "lazy" but prudent to examine the failed attempts very closely and determine why they failed.

When solving problems one does not come to valid solutions without a thorough look at why past attempts have failed. If people aren't willing to do that, then it is typically because they don't have good answers to the problems, and so instead they ignore them in the hopes that this time it will be different. There are fundamental problems with putting the responsibility for individual healthcare on the Federal government's plate and no one has really ever explained how a government that is in Trillion Dollar debt, with a SS retirement plan that is close to insolvent, and a medicare/medicaid program that eats up a significant portion of the budget outlays, can afford to take on such a huge financial burden.

Good post, well said.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I doubt anyone argues it is impossible for the government to implement universal healthcare, only that it is unreasonable to expect government to handle it efficiently. Further, when things have proven track records, and they generally are bad, it is not "lazy" but prudent to examine the failed attempts very closely and determine why they failed.

When solving problems one does not come to valid solutions without a thorough look at why past attempts have failed. If people aren't willing to do that, then it is typically because they don't have good answers to the problems, and so instead they ignore them in the hopes that this time it will be different. There are fundamental problems with putting the responsibility for individual healthcare on the Federal government's plate and no one has really ever explained how a government that is in Trillion Dollar debt, with a SS retirement plan that is close to insolvent, and a medicare/medicaid program that eats up a significant portion of the budget outlays, can afford to take on such a huge financial burden.

It's not impossible for the government to implement universal healthcare, but it's unreasonable to expect them to do it right? In other words, there is no way they can do it right. That is defeatist.

I'm not against looking at the failures, but when you never *ever* offer any positive ideas, and just keep saying why it won't work, that is defeatist. Also, it's lazy when you offer the reasons for failure "in the effort of prudence", but you never offer any advice about how it could work. In other words, you just want to examine the failures so you can continue to oppose Universal Healthcare. You don't want to examine to failures so you can correct them. That's lazy.

Why don't you come up with some positive ideas? How do you think it's possible for the government to take on such a huge financial burden? What would need to be sacrificed? I suspect your answers would be: not possible and nothing.

Don't try and disguise your defeatist attitude with this crap. You know yourself that you're not interested in finding ways for it to work.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

It's not impossible for the government to implement universal healthcare, but it's unreasonable to expect them to do it right? In other words, there is no way they can do it right. That is defeatist.

I'm not against looking at the failures, but when you never *ever* offer any positive ideas, and just keep saying why it won't work, that is defeatist. Also, it's lazy when you offer the reasons for failure "in the effort of prudence", but you never offer any advice about how it could work. In other words, you just want to examine the failures so you can continue to oppose Universal Healthcare. You don't want to examine to failures so you can correct them. That's lazy.

Why don't you come up with some positive ideas? How do you think it's possible for the government to take on such a huge financial burden? What would need to be sacrificed? I suspect your answers would be: not possible and nothing.

Don't try and disguise your defeatist attitude with this crap. You know yourself that you're not interested in finding ways for it to work.

You are absolutely correct, I do not want to find a way to allow government to intrude and control the most important part of my life. I have in the past posted my thoughts on government, very clearly I believe. I am for a minimal government, one which secures our freedoms through a strong air force/navy and a standby army. Our Defense spending is as unwise as would be universal health care. We need the people of the US to remember that our history was made not by Government providing for our needs, but by individuals and local citizens working through hardship and toiling to bring the prosperity we enjoy. Government should serve to safeguard the basic principles we all hold dear, freedom of the individual, justice that is blind when it comes to race, creed, wealth. I am not a defeatist because I believe that Government has a limited role and a limited place in determining what is and is not appropriate health care spending. I am not defeatist when I look at the history of the Government and know that there are those who want nothing more than the purse strings to control who has access to the premium healthcare and who is shunted through the mass system (if you argue this point, go ask any congressman/woman what their healthcare package consists of). I simply do not want Government to be involved. I think it is a bad idea at its base. and as for being lazy, those who think the government should provide services instead of individuals being required to put in whatever it takes to provide for themselves and their families, that is lazy. I bust my tail, and i know most of us on here do everyday, and i try my best to provide the healthcare that my family needs. Lets all do that, and not look to big brother to handle it for us.

I don't expect that you would agree with these points, but at least recognize that to want a true limited government is neither lazy nor defeatist, in fact if government is limited that is when the opportunity to work hard, and lift this country out of its current debt is the most possible.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

We need the people of the US to remember that our history was made not by Government providing for our needs, but by individuals and local citizens working through hardship and toiling to bring the prosperity we enjoy. Government should serve to safeguard the basic principles we all hold dear, freedom of the individual, justice that is blind when it comes to race, creed, wealth.

What a f'ing joke,

Crawford was commissioned to design the Statue of Freedom in 1854 and executed the plaster model for the statue in his studio in Rome. The statue was originally topped by a liberty cap but Senator and Secretary of War Jefferson Davis (who would later become the President of the Confederacy) was in charge of the construction and refused to allow the statue to wear the hat. He told Crawford to either remove it or he would give the commission to someone else. (Davis knew that in ancient Rome only freed slaves wore these hats and he didn't want to have a freed slave on top of the Capitol Dome.) So the American eagle helmet replaced the hat when the sculpture was made.

While Freedom was being cast at Mills' foundry the foreman in charge of the casting went on strike. Instead of paying him the higher wages he demanded Mills turned the project over to Philip Reid, one of the slaves working at the facility.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by saden1

What a f'ing joke,

And how did things work out for Jefferson Davis and the confederacy? What's the "f'ing joke?"

[saden1]

Originally Posted by GMScud

And how did things work out for Jefferson Davis and the confederacy? What's the "f'ing joke?"

The f'king joke is that America's history began with tragedy wherein men enslaved men while preaching freedom. One must uncomfortably laugh when they hear such talks as "America...history...[blah blah]..freedom."

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by saden1

The f'king joke is that America's history began with tragedy wherein men enslaved men while preaching freedom. One must uncomfortably laugh when they hear such talks as "America...history...[blah blah]..freedom."

I get it. There's certainly some hypocrisy in our history and how we preach things these days (it makes me physically cringe to say that).

I find a bit of irony in the fact that you seem rather anti-American History (at least the way it's talked about and taught), yet you favor the gigantic government side of the aisle.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by saden1

The f'king joke is that America's history began with tragedy wherein men enslaved men while preaching freedom. One must uncomfortably laugh when they hear such talks as "America...history...[blah blah]..freedom."

Or one can recognize that it was the ideals of freedom which led to the day when every United States child can believe that he/she can hold the highest elected office, not because of their status or their wealth, but because they live in a land that offers individuals the ability to go where the parents did not. One must uncomfortably cry when the history of the United States is so blatantly perverted to promote the Federal takeover of the healthcare that it's supporters harken back the days of slavery, something long since abolished, denying the very ideals of freedom, and individual responsibility that great men such as Martin Luther King Jr - I have a dream ... where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. , and John F Kennedy - Ask NOT what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country(don't hear many UHC supporters touting that line!) in US history proclaimed.

It is f'king laughable that you Saden, who cheer so loudly for Obama, demean the ideals of freedom that led us to this momentous period where he has risen to the presidency.

The Ask Not What Your Country Can Do For You speech by John F. Kennedy

Originally Posted by JFK speech

And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe - the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.
...

To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required
...
And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country.

My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.

[CRedskinsRule]

also let us remember that slavery was a worldwide tragedy and scourge. Romans had slaves during their empire.
Europe took it up before the United States even existed

1562 Britain begins its slave trade in Africa. Slave Trade increases significantly with development of plantation colonies of the Americas, especially in Brazil. Other countries involved in the European slave trade included Spain (from 1479); North America (from 1619); Holland (from 1625); France (from 1642); Sweden (from 1647); and Denmark (from 1697).

It was indeed worldwide:


This was a tragic time in world history and especially the history of the United States, and I don't know one person that I deal with who thinks otherwise.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Or one can recognize that it was the ideals of freedom which led to the day when every United States child can believe that he/she can hold the highest elected office, not because of their status or their wealth, but because they live in a land that offers individuals the ability to go where the parents did not. One must uncomfortably cry when the history of the United States is so blatantly perverted to promote the Federal takeover of the healthcare that it's supporters harken back the days of slavery, something long since abolished, denying the very ideals of freedom, and individual responsibility that great men such as Martin Luther King Jr - I have a dream ... where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. , and John F Kennedy - Ask NOT what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country(don't hear many UHC supporters touting that line!) in US history proclaimed.

It is f'king laughable that you Saden, who cheer so loudly for Obama, demean the ideals of freedom that led us to this momentous period where he has risen to the presidency.

The Ask Not What Your Country Can Do For You speech by John F. Kennedy

One must wonder if all is well in America in light of Obama's election. I say no and that we still have a long way to go.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

also let us remember that slavery was a worldwide tragedy and scourge. Romans had slaves during their empire.
Europe took it up before the United States even existed

It was indeed worldwide:


This was a tragic time in world history and especially the history of the United States, and I don't know one person that I deal with who thinks otherwise.

How does slavery being a world wide practice absolve America of its sins? Don't you realize that when you speak of the founding of this country and the issue of freedom you're are in essence only speaking of freedom for Caucasians? You are making the founding of America something it is not, and that something is inclusive.

That's all I'm trying to say. It's fair assessment, it's an accurate assessment, and it's not meant to demean America; it is simply the truth.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by GMScud

I get it. There's certainly some hypocrisy in our history and how we preach things these days (it makes me physically cringe to say that).

I find a bit of irony in the fact that you seem rather anti-American History (at least the way it's talked about and taught), yet you favor the gigantic government side of the aisle.

Don't label me. I believe there is more to a government than simply providing a defense department. Providing social services is in the mandate of a government and "rising tides lift all boats" idiom is not limited in scope to to the realm of economics. Because I hold these view it doesn't mean I enjoy seeing my money wasted.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by saden1

How does slavery being a world wide practice absolve America of its sins? Don't you realize that when you speak of the founding of this country and the issue of freedom you're are in essence only speaking of freedom for Caucasians? You are making the founding of America something it is not, and that something is inclusive.

That's all I'm trying to say. It's fair assessment, it's an accurate assessment, and it's not meant to demean America; it is simply the truth.

I did not say it absolved the US. I specifically said it was tragic ESPECIALLY in the US, because it was in direct opposition to the ideals that were stated in our founding documents. But, with respect to freedom, we have continued to march towards our ideals, not back into the erroneous ways of slavery. But with respect to individual responsibility that goes hand in hand with freedom and liberty, IMO -we are moving back towards the type of Government that enslaves the populace, not the type which empowers individuals.

Further the ideals, while not inclusively practiced at our founding(and I would argue that that was not purely US, but world wide beliefs of the time) it has broadened and grown in a short time (historically speaking) to where it is today.