[2017-12-08] Healthcare

Blame Quintushalls for this.

Moderator: Kimra

Re: [2017-12-08] Healthcare

Postby JosieQ » Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:27 pm

Explain your statement is what the question mark means. Explain how Snodgrass's setup showing communism is evil shows he's a socialist.
JosieQ
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 6:59 pm

Re: [2017-12-08] Healthcare

Postby Nino » Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:30 am

I gave you a quote of a socialist slogan and a link to wikipedia. Were you just not bothered to go there and read
Stalin's most famous use of the concept is in his 1936 Soviet Constitution. He writes that "The principle applied in the U.S.S.R. is that of socialism: From each according to his ability, to each according to his work."
Or do you think that taking away 80% of ones labour is and giving it to freeloaders reflects "according to his work" fairly?

Im not sure what point Astrogirl was making but imho
1)A lot of people are brainwashed about communism and socialism - you are conditioned to see red so to say while actually using quite a bit of it in daily life
2)communism (like other religions) is a fine thing in theory - problem is they assumed they can build a post-scarcity society in beginning of 20-th century over a couple of decades (did not go well). And the way post-scarcity society might turn out from capital side - e.g. robots taking over production and making non-robot-owning humans redundant is not gona be 100% happy either.
3)Often communism begins as populism (redistribution of goods not being the actual goal but a means to incite masses to rebellion) and ends up as a dictatorship
4)there *are* a lot of ugly things about capitalism. If Astrogirl is from somewhere in soviet block she (I assume) might have noticed that the people who became capitalists after communists were outsted are.... communists. Believe me , most of the current "oligarchs" are former party members - it isnt about the political agenda it is about power grabbing. So there are *a lot* of people who lost *a lot* during the 90-th so regarding
Ayn Rand WAS a starving child under the communist dictator that took her father's business, you fucking psychopath.
be more considered and use a more civil language.
Nino
 

Re: [2017-12-08] Healthcare

Postby JosieQ » Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:22 am

Nino wrote:I gave you a quote of a socialist slogan and a link to wikipedia. Were you just not bothered to go there and read
Stalin's most famous use of the concept is in his 1936 Soviet Constitution. He writes that "The principle applied in the U.S.S.R. is that of socialism: From each according to his ability, to each according to his work."
Or do you think that taking away 80% of ones labour is and giving it to freeloaders reflects "according to his work" fairly?


Yes I read it. Still don't understand what you're saying. I'm trying, but this makes absolutely no sense to me. How does Snodgrass saying communism is garbage make him a socialist? Not getting it. Your quote doesn't seem relevant.

Nino wrote:be more considered and use a more civil language.


Don't tell a stranger how to behave to another stranger. Since we are giving out unsolicited advice. It's absolutely smug and insultingly audacious. Uncivil as I am, I would never dream of correcting someone like their parent in that fashion, even if I knew the person personally.
JosieQ
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 6:59 pm

Re: [2017-12-08] Healthcare

Postby Nino » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:30 am

How does Snodgrass saying communism is garbage make him a socialist? Not getting it. Your quote doesn't seem relevant.

I was not referring to Snodgrass perception that communist is garbage, I was referring to his example of redistribution of products of labor (i.e. the tomato example) and I gave a quote of a famous socialist principle that states that fruits of the labour should stay with those who produced the labour. Idea that said fruits (and tomato is a fruit) should go to somebody who didnt put any labour in is very contradictory to that principle, or others of that kind .

Or take for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/He_who_do ... all_he_eat
He who does not work, neither shall he eat is a New Testament aphorism originally by Paul the Apostle, later cited by John Smith in Jamestown, Virginia, and by Lenin during the Russian Revolution.

As I said before communism is not unlike other religions - you can cherry pick it to support almost any view and at the extreme end there are always some atrocities.

Uncivil as I am, I would never dream of correcting someone like their parent in that fashion, even if I knew the person personally.
You are in a public place so spewing obscenities is not unlike shitting in the middle of a street. If you dont understand it insulting to passer bys then really there is no point trying to tell you something is there? So for future referense *please* assume Im talking to Snodgrass and not you, ok?
Nino
 

Re: [2017-12-08] Healthcare

Postby JosieQ » Fri Oct 12, 2018 10:19 am

Nino wrote:
How does Snodgrass saying communism is garbage make him a socialist? Not getting it. Your quote doesn't seem relevant.

I was not referring to Snodgrass perception that communist is garbage, I was referring to his example of redistribution of products of labor (i.e. the tomato example) and I gave a quote of a famous socialist principle that states that fruits of the labour should stay with those who produced the labour. Idea that said fruits (and tomato is a fruit) should go to somebody who didnt put any labour in is very contradictory to that principle, or others of that kind .


It's contradictory to capitalism also. So you choosing to say he's "in tune" with socialism when he's clearly a capitalist, he quite clearly lauds capitalism over and over and over, and you knowing that but saying what you said comes off as snarky. Your posts are very unclear, your point is unclear, you're unclear. Still don't know what your goal here is. Unless it's to say something absolutely pointless and trivial, like that socialism and capitalism share traits? Is that the point? Because if so no duh.

Oh wait sorry you're not talking to me, let me just finish this up real quick omg don't wanna waste your time.

Nino wrote:You are in a public place so spewing obscenities is not unlike shitting in the middle of a street. If you dont understand it insulting to passer bys then really there is no point trying to tell you something is there? So for future referense *please* assume Im talking to Snodgrass and not you, ok?


And here you are wasting MY time with repeated smugness! Do stop trying to inform me that I'm being insulting when I was trying to be insulting.

But you're right, I should completely let people who want to steal from others and then call the people they steal from immoral garbage get away with it. They shouldn't be called out for being evil, dangerous hypocrites. Thank you so much for that lesson. You are ever so wise. Turn the other cheek I guess, is that right?

Since we're still giving each other friendly advice, let me advise you that you have a problem with making sense, and also apostrophes. You're welcome.
JosieQ
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 6:59 pm

Re: [2017-12-08] Healthcare

Postby Guest » Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:28 pm

Nicci is right about the concept of charity, it should be given when somebody has plenty, but often in reality that scene would have ended with the father saying "No, and that's final" and trying to justify it by saying "I do need a wagon loader, not a man with a bad back. If I hired every man with starving children I would not be able to pay for you, my daughter, to have food to eat and clothes to wear. If those children need to eat they can come to my workhouse and they can work extra hours to sustain their invalid father."

He would be wrong, he would be quite wealthy already, and able to do a bit of charity, but he would not. That is what happens over and over again in real life, and that is something that happens in any society.

But in Nicci's example, the daughter imploring her father worked. Sometimes prosperous capitalists do engage in an act of philanthropy.

In the USSR and in China during their 20th century socialist and communist era, famines occurred and the people there starved to death by the millions. I think another inherent problem in communism and socialism is that the concept of charity is replaced by the concept of taking from all to give to all, and when everyone has less and things are in desperation they forget to be charitable and rely too much on government rationing and bread lines, which only go so far.

Contrast with the USA's great depression. People went poor, broke, homeless, and some starved, but they did not starve in the millions and the whole country did not starve in such great extremes. Part of that was from charity, people lose money but some of them were willing to lose more to keep people from starving to death, times were hard but many people in the US made it through. Another part of that was from human kindness, which I think we all feel to some degree on this forum no matter which side we are on in the debate.

After reading Ayn Rand's books I don't think she would let the ten children starve. Her deal is more to do with promoting exceptionalism and the individual, as a means to benefit society more than the concept of collectivism and the group, which in her philosophy actually drags a society down by smearing the most productive and talented people out of a sense of collective jealousy. Think about how many people you've heard talk shit about a public figure, celebrity, or role model you admire and you'll understand where she's coming from.

She uses fictional characters like the capitalist steel company owner, the talented architect, the musician, and the inventor. She makes them the heroes in her stories, and to her those people figure out how to produce a lot of goods and services, make art beautiful, make music wonderful, and advance technology to the next stage. A post-scarcity society would be impossible if we dragged down those people, and by listening to mob rule and the voices of the many, there would in reality be many many voices that slander those people out of jealousy, out of hate, and all while self-righteously proclaiming that they are good people. She calls them the mediocre. She stepped on a lot of people's toes by saying these things.

As for capitalism/socialism/communism stealing or being evil, those types of society all need to reach a margin of revenue in order to be sustainable. For example, in a business. A capitalist, socialist, or communist has to come along first and decide it is worth it to build a business, hire workers, buy materials, and put in a significant amount of their own money for nothing at first.

A worker has to be paid their wages.

The capitalist underpays them quite a bit compared to their productivity. He can't go too low only on the minimum wage allowed by law and the rates of his competitors. He may decide to pay his best worker a higher amount so that they don't quit and join another company. The margin left he uses to keep the business running, buying materials, fixing machines, paying the rent on land if he doesn't own it. His customers expect cheap, quality, goods and services, and he lowers the prices to compete. But sometimes he pulls a sneaky trick and convinces the customers to pay more for his product. The rest of the profit he pockets as a return to his investment and to make even more money, he may be motivated by a lot of things, wealth, fame, a big house, a beautiful wife, the respect of his peers. If the business fails, he loses his investment, and depending on how much money he has left he may fail on the rest of those as well by going completely broke.

A socialist pays their employee a fairer wage compared to their productivity, and undercuts it only on a paper thin margin. By rule of law she may or may not be allowed to go much lower, but she can still go a bit higher if a certain worker is doing well. She has enough to pay her workers, pay the bills, the electricity, and the computers and machines keep running, even though they are getting kind of old. Something needs to change for her to afford to replace them, maybe if she listens to her new engineer her product will do well and disrupt the market. Her customers save up for her product because they need it, and it is quite costly to them. When she goes home she has a pretty nice apartment, a small family, enough to get by. Most of what she makes goes to taxes. She works a hard, 60+ hour work week, a lot of mental work goes into running her business. If she fails she may lose her investment as well, or the government might bail her out if her business is too important to the nation. But she won't go poor, she is a talented, skillful, a survivor. She'll just have to squeeze into a smaller apartment, and hopefully find another job.

A communist pays their employee the wage required by law. He can go no lower or much higher, and his workers have virtually no choice but to stay at his company for a certain amount of hours each day. Sometimes he doesn't have much work for the white collar workers to do so he lets them wander around town while counting them on the clock. But the laborers are needed on the clock, and sometimes much, much, longer. They look tired, they are falling asleep on their lunch breaks, and he is feeling sorry for them, but the quota has to be met or the government will be hanging him out to dry. His customers spend a majority of their whole months' wages to pay for his goods and services, but they have no choice because they need it. When he goes home he has a big house already, lots of food, and lots of perks provided to him. His father was a party leader after all, and they expect a lot from him. If he fails and loses his business a lot of people will be disappointed in him.

There are issues and benefits to each system, and none of them are perfect. Well-read Freemasons know that Karl Marx admitted as much in his pamphlets he wrote that socialism is supposed to lead to communism, and communism was not meant to sustain a nation, but to destroy it, and from all the chaos and upheaval birth a fourth, new kind of system, in order to achieve utopia. He died before he specified what that utopia system would be like, and many equate communism to the utopia by mistake.

Be civil, rational, and make an effort to be unemotional when debating this topic. The lives of billions of people worldwide ride on where we go with this, many people's own personal lives are at stake. It is easy to get heated in an argument, to get overly emotional, and to insult people. It is very hard to try to think of things from different people's points of views, to think critically, and to be fair to the opposing argument. But if we keep a degree of civility and rationality, while still leveling well-deserved critiques at serious issues, which do involve the lives of many many people, we will be able to reach new ideas and compromises sooner rather than later. Perhaps from those debates and the spread of information thereafter, someday someone will build reasonable solutions to our problems.

As for the poorer person from a few pages back, I'm really concerned for you. Have you thought about starting a crowdfunding page to fix your car? I've seen people start those for all sorts of things like dental work and recovery from assault. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to do that in comparison. If you happen to be in the United States, you should be able to shop around for lower rates soon. Medicare enrollment is on oct 15th. Involuntary healthcare was supposed to pay for people like you for you to get back on your feet, not cause you such financial and emotional hardship. I really do not understand how the same people who claim to care about poor, starving children, could then laugh in your face and say such biting words to you. Children are valued because of their innocence. People forget they grow into adults, too, and lose empathy for their fellow adults.
Guest
 

Re: [2017-12-08] Healthcare

Postby JosieQ » Sat Oct 13, 2018 12:06 am

Guest wrote:Contrast with the USA's great depression. People went poor, broke, homeless, and some starved, but they did not starve in the millions and the whole country did not starve in such great extremes. Part of that was from charity, people lose money but some of them were willing to lose more to keep people from starving to death, times were hard but many people in the US made it through. Another part of that was from human kindness, which I think we all feel to some degree on this forum no matter which side we are on in the debate.


I believe that the more you allow people to keep what they earn, and the better off they are, the more charitable they become. I seem to recall a study I read in college where it pointed out that when taxes were lowest in United States history, charitable contributions were higher. People like to give when they are given the choice. People obviously do not like to give when forced, because of course that is not giving it is theft.

That's the thing about people who think communism is good. In admitting that, they're also admitting that they think people are garbage who need to be FORCED into caring about other human beings. And if that's the case, if humanity will only help one another at the point of a gun, then we are doomed anyway. If you're gonna force a lion at gunpoint to be a vegetarian, it is against his nature and you will fail, and he will either die or beat you and start eating meat again. You're not going to win that fight by force, you're not going to forcibly change the nature of man.

I don't believe we are inherently monsters though.

I've been poor most of my life and had things taken from me, but rarely ever given. As such, I don't give to charity or panhandlers, because I can't afford to and also I am in a constant state of bitterness from having been constantly stolen from. In the very few times where I've suddenly had some kind of windfall and gained a bit of money so that I actually have some breathing space, I immediately become more giving, and will hand a dollar to a guy on the street with a sign that very day. And it's not even sensible, because I should be saving it, because next week there's a catastrophe and I'm poor again and I really need that dollar.

But I believe human nature is to want to help each other, when we don't feel constantly taken advantage of.

Guest wrote:After reading Ayn Rand's books I don't think she would let the ten children starve. Her deal is more to do with promoting exceptionalism and the individual, as a means to benefit society more than the concept of collectivism and the group, which in her philosophy actually drags a society down by smearing the most productive and talented people out of a sense of collective jealousy. Think about how many people you've heard talk shit about a public figure, celebrity, or role model you admire and you'll understand where she's coming from.


Great point. It's always funny to me how my country has always lauded capitalism (until recent years, where it's sliding into socialism on the way to communism), how people en masse will brag that in the US you can be anything, you can do anything, you can work and be rich if you try hard enough! But then they casually and automatically hate anyone with money, and people on news will say facts about something like a person's income in a tone that it's an indicator that being rich means he's somehow a piece of garbage. Always hated that contradiction. XD

Guest wrote:There are issues and benefits to each system, and none of them are perfect. Well-read Freemasons know that Karl Marx admitted as much in his pamphlets he wrote that socialism is supposed to lead to communism, and communism was not meant to sustain a nation, but to destroy it, and from all the chaos and upheaval birth a fourth, new kind of system, in order to achieve utopia. He died before he specified what that utopia system would be like, and many equate communism to the utopia by mistake.


I did not know this and I find it very interesting. :shock: I watched a lot of "Star Trek TNG" as a kid, so there's a utopian society as I envision it. How do we get there though? Well, it's my contention that technology is being artificially held back, in addition to capitalism being artificially tanked, and people being artificially forced into poverty, so basically I think the solution is just to stand back and get out of the goddamn way. We need to overthrow our evil overlords, whose admitted purpose is to reduce the population and widen the gap between rich and poor, with a wealthy elite and a giant, poor underclass. Get rid of them and I think humanity by itself will find its way. How to do that though hmm...

Guest wrote:Be civil, rational, and make an effort to be unemotional when debating this topic. The lives of billions of people worldwide ride on where we go with this, many people's own personal lives are at stake. It is easy to get heated in an argument, to get overly emotional, and to insult people. It is very hard to try to think of things from different people's points of views, to think critically, and to be fair to the opposing argument. But if we keep a degree of civility and rationality, while still leveling well-deserved critiques at serious issues, which do involve the lives of many many people, we will be able to reach new ideas and compromises sooner rather than later. Perhaps from those debates and the spread of information thereafter, someday someone will build reasonable solutions to our problems.


Valid point, and I can be very rational when arguing. But I don't see the point of it when someone's passive-aggressively insulting me, or insulting me outright. I can easily keep my temper when someone with wildly different worldviews doesn't agree with me, if they're civil about it. Because I'm not losing my temper so much as escalating by choice when someone's trying to be a dick as I don't agree with pandering to douchebags. I see people stay calm, and get insulted, and stay calm and debate, and get insulted, and stay calm, and it's just sad. It's like watching someone get slapped repeatedly and pretend its not happening. I'd rather, if you slap me, punch you in the face. To bystanders I look like a crazy, enraged psycho, like omg that reaction didn't fit the circumstances!! But it did. It's infinitely more honest. The hypocrite wanted a fight so why shouldn't I give it to them?

(Except that they don't want the fight I give them, really they didn't want to fight at all but just wanted to cowardly say shitty things to people and get away with it, meh I don't like playing that game.)

Guest wrote:As for the poorer person from a few pages back, I'm really concerned for you. Have you thought about starting a crowdfunding page to fix your car? I've seen people start those for all sorts of things like dental work and recovery from assault. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to do that in comparison. If you happen to be in the United States, you should be able to shop around for lower rates soon. Medicare enrollment is on oct 15th. Involuntary healthcare was supposed to pay for people like you for you to get back on your feet, not cause you such financial and emotional hardship.


That's still me and ohhh I actually DID! What was it... "You Caring" I think? But the problem there is that I don't get do Facebook and Twitter and whatever else, so I don't really have a way to spread the "help me out link" so it didn't really get visits or go anywhere. Not sure how to overcome being as reclusive and hermit-like as I am, and still get help from people. Probably is no way. You gotta buy into society, and I don't. :\

Oh the involuntary heath-care has been so super helpful. I have to get the cheapest option through work because it's all I can afford (Obamacare actually cost MORE and was super unaffordable to me haha seriously), so because it's the cheapest it doesn't actually cover the insulin I need each month. It covered maybe about a third of it, when I was still going that route. (If I wasn't forced to have the insurance, I could pay for all the insulin myself, irony! XD)

For years I was suffering with this until I finally found out you can get insulin from Walmart without a prescription, $25 a bottle. My doctor never told me in all that time, even though she knew I struggled to pay for those goddamn $100+ bottles she had me on, and I was constantly in the hospital with complications from trying to ration it so it wouldn't run out too soon, and she would regularly hold my life hostage forcing me into visits that I neither wanted nor could afford before agreeing to refill my prescriptions at all. (Meanwhile my sister's been on Xanax for like 10 years, hasn't seen her doctor in like 7, just calls her up and says "I need more pills" and the woman says "Okay sure I'll call it in." They love having you on THOSE drugs, but not the drugs you need to live whyyy.)

Anyway since finding the Walmart loophole, I have happily dumped my garbage doctor. And now I pay out of pocket for my insulin, because the insurance doesn't cover it, and I pay for that insurance in addition as it sits there and does nothing. Will it do anything if I face a new crisis, like a broken bone or cancer? Who knows. Hope I don't ever have to find out that it doesn't, because I'm pretty sure it's virtually useless.

But these well-off people who don't seem to know what actual struggle is say it's good for me and others like me, forcing me and us to pay for insurance, and they must know better right? I guess I'm just imagining my problems, because really they've apparently fixed them for me and I'm too stupid to know my troubles have all been seen to by their charity at the point of a gun. @.@

...

Ugh I hate giving enemies so much personal information, going to regret this post when they come back in force and try to tell me what I'm doing wrong and how I can do better without knowing any of the actual details. <.<

Guest wrote: I really do not understand how the same people who claim to care about poor, starving children, could then laugh in your face and say such biting words to you. Children are valued because of their innocence. People forget they grow into adults, too, and lose empathy for their fellow adults.


This is a fantastic, fantastic thing you've just said. It seems like it should be obvious to people but it isn't. I constantly talk about this hypocrisy, how our society is all about "The children, the children, help the children! Oh what you're 18 today, fuck you got nothin' for you go die now." But when I try to express this, simpletons just take away "Oh so you hate kids." DX

Good post, Guest. Good read. I kinda didn't mean to say so much but you got me babbling. [o~o]
JosieQ
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 6:59 pm

Re: [2017-12-08] Healthcare

Postby Astrogirl » Sat Oct 13, 2018 3:37 pm

Guest wrote:Astrogirl, what country did you grow up in? You've dropped hints, I'm guessing it was somewhere around eastern europe? Just curious.

East Germany.
Microaggression? Microaggression!
User avatar
Astrogirl
so close, yet so far
 
Posts: 2104
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:51 am

Re: [2017-12-08] Healthcare

Postby Astrogirl » Sat Oct 13, 2018 4:54 pm

Astrogirl wrote:
JosieQ wrote:Um so, "I know you are but what am I?" is your defense?

I have no idea what that means.

Does anyone else know what she meant?

JosieQ wrote:
Astrogirl wrote:Potentially. Depends on how much you contributed to the tomatoes. The current real world where you keep 7.999 tomatoes and give the other guy 0.001 tomatoes is theft.

That's not capitalism.

Is not? What is it then? I'm reasonably certain that is exactly what capitalism is.

JosieQ wrote:But since you've given me the date... (1st of July, 1990) And since you seriously, frighteningly seem to be saying your country was better off before, then all I can say to you is du bist mehr batshit wahnsinn than I originally hat gedacht.

You may want to run that through Google translate again, telling someone they are Wahnsinn is actually quite a high compliment. Yeah, idioms are weird.

But kudos for finding that out just from this date, that's actually quite impressive considering there doesn't seem to be a Wikipedia page "list of dates countries switched from planned economy to free market economy" or similar.

I'm still curious what you needed the country for. In the case of East Germany you reacted with calling me crazy (well, trying to call me crazy). And in the case of some other socialist/communist country you ... would have reacted differently? Which country would that have been and what would the reaction have been?

JosieQ wrote:
Astrogirl wrote:
Your comment on that is only relevant if your grandparents' literal business and income came from growing tomatoes and selling them, along with chicken's eggs and pork, and your communist government didn't take any of that.

Depends on your definition of business. They both ate the stuff themselves and traded it with other people for hard-to-obtain things (mostly the eggs, tomatoes were not so high in demand to be useful for barter). My grandparents were also teachers, not sure my greatgrandmother had another job.
But people also were farmers who owned their farms and sold their stuff for money and the government didn't take the things they produced away nor their means of production. There was a lot of social pressure to join a co-op (once a month someone came by and talked to you about how nice it is in the co-op, that you work only 40 hours and get 25 days of vacation and you don't have to worry when there is a bad harvest or your animals get a disease), but it was not legally required.


Cool story, but irrelevant as fuuuuuck.

You don't seem to have a firm grasp on what is relevant or not. This is 100% apropos.

JosieQ wrote:I'm actually starting to feel really sorry for you

That's nice, thank you.

JosieQ wrote:if we can go back to my now decades-old desire to agree to disagree and stop talking, that'd be suuuuper.

I have a hint for you: If you want to drop a conversation, just drop it. Don't go in replying with more incendiary stuff and in particular don't add replies to stuff that was not towards you but towards someone else in the thread.

Anyway, forcing people to buy health insurance is right and good, and it should be around 7% of one's income and be required to cover insulin.
Microaggression? Microaggression!
User avatar
Astrogirl
so close, yet so far
 
Posts: 2104
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:51 am

Re: [2017-12-08] Healthcare

Postby JosieQ » Sat Oct 13, 2018 10:59 pm

Astrogirl wrote:
JosieQ wrote:
Astrogirl wrote:Potentially. Depends on how much you contributed to the tomatoes. The current real world where you keep 7.999 tomatoes and give the other guy 0.001 tomatoes is theft.

That's not capitalism.

Is not? What is it then? I'm reasonably certain that is exactly what capitalism is.


Must feel bad to be so wrong all the time.

Astrogirl wrote:You may want to run that through Google translate again, telling someone they are Wahnsinn is actually quite a high compliment. Yeah, idioms are weird.


Actually, looks like Google translate gives you "verrückt". I chose "wahnsinn" because I like the word, from my own experience, from majoring in German (among other things) in college. I'll admit though that your English is much better than my German, however it's still not good enough for you to be having this argument and making your points understood, and understanding the points of others. Which you're doing poorly.

Astrogirl wrote:I'm still curious what you needed the country for. In the case of East Germany you reacted with calling me crazy (well, trying to call me crazy). And in the case of some other socialist/communist country you ... would have reacted differently? Which country would that have been and what would the reaction have been?


I already called it an "obvious trap," remember? Because the obvious trap is, communism always fails. And you blundered right into obvious trap and are from EAST GERMANY, of all places. The most obvious and provable example of how communism is garbage, as the West side provably advanced while the East side provably stagnated? Haha. Hahahahaha. Hahahahahaholyfuckingshitseriously.

Astrogirl wrote:
JosieQ wrote:Cool story, but irrelevant as fuuuuuck.

You don't seem to have a firm grasp on what is relevant or not. This is 100% apropos.


Must feel bad to be so wrong all the time.

Astrogirl wrote:Anyway, forcing people to buy health insurance is right and good, and it should be around 7% of one's income and be required to cover insulin.


Oh do please tell me, scumbag, more about how your kind thieving from me and literally killing me are doing me good? If only they did it right, I guess, it wouldn't still be morally wrong and everyone would be happy! Except all the fit healthy people pissed about how they have to pay in for the more expensive healthcare of the unfit fat people, which leads to legislation telling you you're legally not allowed to smoke or drink anymore, or have cookies, or even a too-large soda. Yeah great plan, divide people even more in your idiotic effort to make them care about each other.

You can't do it right. I know you don't care about freedom, because you're a creepy master-worshiping slave and freedom is worthless to you, but it is inarguable that: Freedom is THE most important thing a person can have. Not your "free" healthcare, not your "free" food or rent, but freedom itself. You enslaving people for their own good doesn't give you the moral high-ground. It gives you no ground. The choice you are giving people is "Be a slave or kill yourself." This puts you so far below anyone else that it's laughable to see you sit down there in your own filth and try to pretend you have any kind of honor, dignity, or compassion. Your refusing to understand that a person has a RIGHT to not be forced to look after strangers, or I daresay even themselves, doesn't make you clever, it makes you stupid. You're a thief and a slaver. Acting like it's for their own good when you decide things on behalf of strangers makes you soulless as well as stupid.
JosieQ
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 6:59 pm

Previous

Return to Latest Comic Discussion 3: Revenge of the Son of Latest Comic Discussion 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests