Sometimes stupid loses

John A. wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 16:28:28 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

John A. wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:38:04 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Peter N wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 09:15:43 -0400, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:
It's about our freedom to choose which the president would
eliminate if he could. If he could've shoved universal health
care down our throats he would have but he was willing to admit
that it wouldn't fly. But many will admit that this health care
bill is a start and that they want to "teak" it as time goes by
with the ultimate goal being universal halth care. It's the same
old argument, there are those that believe that government should
"take care if us" and then there are those of us who want to take
care of ourselves. Because there are some who can't take care of
themselves (and many are in that camp due to their own choices),
those of us who can can't be allowed to either.

Think of it as a governmental mandate of our moral obligation to
take care of our fellow human beings. Certainly you don't object
to that.

I surely don't object to paying for the keep, (health and
othe3rwise) of those who were born defective in some way, either
physicalluy or mentally, so they can't care for themselves. It's
the other ones I object to. /the ones who, having the same physical
abilities and mental abilities that I was born with, chose to blow
every cent they made on fast cars and women and booze, and are now
begging at the door asking for Obama's help (My tax payers help)
Didn't you ever read the story of the ants and the grasshopper?
Well, I have been a good ant all of my life, and now, when I am
trying to enjoy the payoff, the grasshoppers of this world have
gotten Obama in and they are stealing my storehouse, and it ****es
me off!!

Well, then, let's just pay for public healthcare with taxes on fast
cars and women and booze. Maybe with a tax on food too, with an
accompanying credit for the amount of tax expected to be paid on a
healthy diet so that it's the overeaters who pay.

Well, that sure is the liberals way of handling the situation. (I'll
give you that) But, I am a libertarian. What's wrong with just
letting them die on the streets?

Well, if you have to have that explained to you, I have to ask what's
wrong with having you sent to some country effectively without law,
like maybe Somalia.

You'd be sending the wrong ones. We are the ones who have worked and paid
taxes our whole lives to pay for all your government shannagans. Why don't
you pack up and send the hangers on who never saved a dime for their
retirement, or paid a dime into any health care plan in their entire lives,
(working or not) If you send people like me there, then you would really be
in big trouble.

John A. wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 20:05:40 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

John A. wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 16:28:28 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

John A. wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:38:04 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Peter N wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 09:15:43 -0400, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:
It's about our freedom to choose which the president would
eliminate if he could. If he could've shoved universal health
care down our throats he would have but he was willing to admit
that it wouldn't fly. But many will admit that this health
care bill is a start and that they want to "teak" it as time
goes by with the ultimate goal being universal halth care.
It's the same old argument, there are those that believe that
government should "take care if us" and then there are those
of us who want to take care of ourselves. Because there are
some who can't take care of themselves (and many are in that
camp due to their own choices), those of us who can can't be
allowed to either.

Think of it as a governmental mandate of our moral obligation to
take care of our fellow human beings. Certainly you don't object
to that.

I surely don't object to paying for the keep, (health and
othe3rwise) of those who were born defective in some way, either
physicalluy or mentally, so they can't care for themselves. It's
the other ones I object to. /the ones who, having the same
physical abilities and mental abilities that I was born with,
chose to blow every cent they made on fast cars and women and
booze, and are now begging at the door asking for Obama's help
(My tax payers help) Didn't you ever read the story of the ants
and the grasshopper? Well, I have been a good ant all of my
life, and now, when I am trying to enjoy the payoff, the
grasshoppers of this world have gotten Obama in and they are
stealing my storehouse, and it ****es me off!!

Well, then, let's just pay for public healthcare with taxes on
fast cars and women and booze. Maybe with a tax on food too, with
an accompanying credit for the amount of tax expected to be paid
on a healthy diet so that it's the overeaters who pay.

Well, that sure is the liberals way of handling the situation.
(I'll give you that) But, I am a libertarian. What's wrong with
just letting them die on the streets?

Well, if you have to have that explained to you, I have to ask
what's wrong with having you sent to some country effectively
without law, like maybe Somalia.

You'd be sending the wrong ones. We are the ones who have worked and
paid taxes our whole lives to pay for all your government
shannagans. Why don't you pack up and send the hangers on who never
saved a dime for their retirement, or paid a dime into any health
care plan in their entire lives, (working or not) If you send people
like me there, then you would really be in big trouble.

But you seem to be the one who wants to live without law or regulation
or rules of any sort beyond "he who has the gold makes the rules." So
again I say maybe you should go someplace where that is how things
are. Maybe you'd be happier.

But that is not the case. I believe in the Constitution and the laws made
under the constitution. I do not break those laws that would protect others
(and myself) from harm or transgression of my rights from others. I just
don't believe the government should steal my tax dollars and give them to
hangers on who could work and support themselves but choose to live off the
dole. And I have seen these people doing exactly that for my entire life.
Of course there should be both law and regulation. Laws that protect us from
taking away others rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and
regulation to keep people from banding together in restraint of trade to
defeat the competitive system. (Unfortunately, our government has been
conspiring to defeat the competetive system, but that is the subject of
another discussion)