This is beyond ridiculous
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBk7KCbT1Qk&[/youtube]
Okay, I'm no fan of Ron Paul - his domestic policies could trigger a global second dip and anti-UN stance is just stupid. But weeping over a single passage you dislike? Assuming this video isn't scripted, this is beyond ridiculous. If someone gave me the Ron Paul Survival Report or even some piece of crap written by David Duke I doubt I'd react anywhere near as strongly.
GoonSquad
Veteran
Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...
No, he would donate to the cause. You know, voluntarily help others without being told to, because that's what moral people do?
Where do you get off on claiming that Ron Paul doesn't care about the poor? I guarantee he's done more for the poor than you ever will.
No, he would donate to the cause. You know, voluntarily help others without being told to, because that's what moral people do?
Where do you get off on claiming that Ron Paul doesn't care about the poor? I guarantee he's done more for the poor than you ever will.
Lets hear the top 5.
GoonSquad
Veteran
Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...
No, he would donate to the cause. You know, voluntarily help others without being told to, because that's what moral people do?
Where do you get off on claiming that Ron Paul doesn't care about the poor? I guarantee he's done more for the poor than you ever will.
You Paul guys are too easy...
"It's sort of like me living on the Gulf Coast, not buying insurance until I see the hurricane," said Paul, whose Galveston-based district was devastated by a hurricane in 2008. "Insurance is supposed to measure risk."
The response left Lin in tears. While her insurance covered her treatment, she said, several of her friends were not so fortunate.
"I watched three friends die because they didn't have insurance," said Lin, a registered Democrat who is looking for a Republican candidate to support this time.
"Nobody can afford private insurance, nobody can. And they're dead."
click
_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus
Last edited by GoonSquad on 27 Dec 2011, 11:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jacoby
Veteran
Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash
Jacoby
Veteran
Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash
No, he would donate to the cause. You know, voluntarily help others without being told to, because that's what moral people do?
Where do you get off on claiming that Ron Paul doesn't care about the poor? I guarantee he's done more for the poor than you ever will.
You Paul guys are too easy...
m.yahoo.com/w/news_america/paul-builds-campaign-doomsday-scenarios-161301486.html?orig_host_hdr=news.yahoo.com&.intl=us&.lang=en-us
"It's sort of like me living on the Gulf Coast, not buying insurance until I see the hurricane," said Paul, whose Galveston-based district was devastated by a hurricane in 2008. "Insurance is supposed to measure risk."
The response left Lin in tears. While her insurance covered her treatment, she said, several of her friends were not so fortunate.
"I watched three friends die because they didn't have insurance," said Lin, a registered Democrat who is looking for a Republican candidate to support this time.
"Nobody can afford private insurance, nobody can. And they're dead."
People with preexisting conditions shouldn't be thrown out in the cold but private insurance shouldn't be mandated to cover them either. I'm talking real ones, not BS ones insurance companies think up after the fact. You can't get be in a car crash and demand private insurance cover your costs if you never paid into it, It simply doesn't make logical sense for them to do so. The only reason the private insurance companies allowed for that to be included in the Obamacare bill was because coverage is mandated on everyone.
Your quote did nothing to refute my claim. It wasn't an example of Paul dismissing someone who could not afford health insurance, it was an example of Paul dismissing someone who did not have health insurance after they got sick (whether they were too poor to afford it in the first place is a different matter, as I will address below). His argument is logically sound, I should not be able to buy car insurance after I crash my car otherwise it defeats the risk versus reward element that makes insurance work in the first place! If I get insurance after the event that would make me eligible for claims on that insurance occurs, then the risk for me is zero and the reward is 100%, and if insurance companies allowed this they would quite literally go bankrupt. This is simple economics, whether you "feel" that it should not be this way does not enter into it.
As for the cost of healthcare - In America healthcare costs so much because bureaucrats pick winners through regulatory barriers to entry and subsidize the industry. It is not even close to being "free market". If it were free market, medical services would be much more available to the poor.
Now enough about his policies, your comment made the claim that he doesn't care about the poor. So if you care about the poor so much, do you donate to charity so that people that cannot afford health insurance can get treatment? Do you volunteer your time to charity work?
GoonSquad
Veteran
Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...
Your quote did nothing to refute my claim. It wasn't an example of Paul dismissing someone who could not afford health insurance, it was an example of Paul dismissing someone who did not have health insurance after they got sick (whether they were too poor to afford it in the first place is a different matter, as I will address below). His argument is logically sound, I should not be able to buy car insurance after I crash my car otherwise it defeats the risk versus reward element that makes insurance work in the first place! If I get insurance after the event that would make me eligible for claims on that insurance occurs, then the risk for me is zero and the reward is 100%, and if insurance companies allowed this they would quite literally go bankrupt. This is simple economics, whether you "feel" that it should not be this way does not enter into it.
As for the cost of healthcare - In America healthcare costs so much because bureaucrats pick winners through regulatory barriers to entry and subsidize the industry. It is not even close to being "free market". If it were free market, medical services would be much more available to the poor.
Now enough about his policies, your comment made the claim that he doesn't care about the poor. So if you care about the poor so much, do you donate to charity so that people that cannot afford health insurance can get treatment? Do you volunteer your time to charity work?
Not that I need to justify anything to you, but if you search my posts you will see that I give money to the Salvation Army on a monthly basis, I volunteer at my local homeless shelter, and I teach people to read.
On a side note, most my fellow volunteers are not republicans or Paul supporters.
In sum, I work full time, take a 3/4 load at university and volunteer about 8 hours a week.
Your arguments about healthcosts being driven up by government regulation are pure BS.
Healthcare does not operate under normal market forces. People are not looking for value when ill or dieing they are looking for competency... greedy scumbags depend on that.
_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus
Your quote did nothing to refute my claim. It wasn't an example of Paul dismissing someone who could not afford health insurance, it was an example of Paul dismissing someone who did not have health insurance after they got sick (whether they were too poor to afford it in the first place is a different matter, as I will address below). His argument is logically sound, I should not be able to buy car insurance after I crash my car otherwise it defeats the risk versus reward element that makes insurance work in the first place! If I get insurance after the event that would make me eligible for claims on that insurance occurs, then the risk for me is zero and the reward is 100%, and if insurance companies allowed this they would quite literally go bankrupt. This is simple economics, whether you "feel" that it should not be this way does not enter into it.
Maybe he doesn't think it's moral for healthcare coverage to be left up to the free market. It is not like a car or even a house. A person only has one body and one life on this planet. Some people don't agree that we should let the amount of money someone has determine whether they get to live or die.
I am not asking you to justify yourself, I was merely wondering. I think it's great that you volunteer - So I would ask, if you volunteer of your own free will, why you think it is necessary for the government to tell you how to help others?
No they're not.
People do not purchase health insurance when ill or dying, just as people do not purchase car insurance in the middle of a crash. Your argument is moot.
Last edited by Burzum on 28 Dec 2011, 3:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
How do you decide which resources should be socialized? Would you not agree that food is more important to one's health than medical services? Why then do we not socialize food? Universal free food services sounds amazing, in theory. However, I'm sure you know from history that all known cases of food socialization has led to famine. Socializing a resource causes it to stagnate, the lack of competition means prices are not forced down, and there is no incentive to find more efficient ways of producing the resource.
GoonSquad
Veteran
Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...
I am not asking you to justify yourself, I was merely wondering. I think it's great that you volunteer - So I would ask, if you volunteer of your own free will, why you think it is necessary for the government to tell you how to help others?
Yeah... You expected me to say that I did not do anything personally. Then you were going to attack me as some kind of liberal parasite crying for a nanny state.
As someone who sees the human impact of these social problems on a weekly basis, I can tell you that private efforts are vital BUT NOT ADEQUATE. Government funds/help is needed to cure these problems.
People do not purchase health insurance when ill or dying, just as people do not purchase car insurance in the middle of a crash. Your argument is moot.
People do not purchase health insurance at all BECAUSE THEY CANNOT AFFORD IT.
WalMart is the biggest employer in the US.
The average full time floor employee makes less than $20,000 and has no health benefits...
Say that employee clears $1300.00/month:
$600 goes to rent.
$200 goes to food/sundries.
$200 goes to utilities.
There's $1000 right there, but we aren't finished...
Say, this individual drives an old hooptie (thus no payment), transportation will cost $50/month for liability insurance and $100 for gas.
This leaves $150/month for emergencies AND health insurance premiums. Even if we abandon the possibility of saving for emergencies, the fact remains that you cannot purchase ANY health insurance for $150/month.
The very idea that most people don't purchase health insurance by choice is WILLFULLY ASININE and frankly, it's why Paul supporters have such a bad reputation.
_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus
GoonSquad
Veteran
Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...