Pro-Obamacare picture circulating on Facebook

[PaulConventionWV]

I don't care what the emotional appeal is. It's still wrong to send the government to force people to give otehrs money for their health insurance. She's the reason we've got high taxes and spending. You can't just tell the government that they should steal people's money and give it to someone else.

 

[seapilot]

I don't care what the emotional appeal is. It's still wrong to send the government to force people to give otehrs money for their health insurance. She's the reason we've got high taxes and spending. You can't just tell the government that they should steal people's money and give it to someone else.

Its difficult to have a constructive debate with logic against emotion. You have to appeal to the emotion in order for people to begin to understand the end logic. They are trying to win people by using emotion which unfortunately works immediately than does logic. This is why a lot of libertarians have a hard time getting emotional types, whether they are conservative or progressive or somewhere in between to understand.

 

[onlyrp]

It's not really passed on to people that pay in a lot of cases. Many hospitals have a fund set aside for write-offs in general, and on top of that there are people who contribute large amounts to hospitals that have helped them out. It just becomes a matter of being far cheaper to give away the care/supplies than to pursue collection procedures.

So if I understand you correctly, she shouldn't be denied the surgery, but you're not going to pay for it, you're fine with whatever she gets, as long as it's "somebody else" doing it, whether private charity or hospital's independently wealthy excess revenue, you're just so certain that they're always available, or are you willing to accept "if none are, too bad, not my fault"?

At what point should she be denied surgery? (if you say never, you're not serious)

 

[onlyrp]

I don't care what the emotional appeal is. It's still wrong to send the government to force people to give otehrs money for their health insurance. She's the reason we've got high taxes and spending. You can't just tell the government that they should steal people's money and give it to someone else.

its wrong to save a person's life because your private property is more important, did I understand you correctly?

 

[Wesker1982]

What is our most effective response to this?

Point out that the State is the reason healthcare is expensive in the first place.

Government is good at one thing: It knows how to break your legs, hand you a crutch, and say, ‘See, if it weren’t for the government, you wouldn’t be able to walk.’ (Harry Browne)

Medical Insurance that Worked — Until Government "Fixed" It
The Libertarian Three-Step Program (healthcare)
A list of specific reasons the State makes healthcare expensive, and why the market is the answer

 

[torchbearer]

its wrong to save a person's life because your private property is more important, did I understand you correctly?

it is wrong to use violence, or the threat of violence against someone no matter the ends. your troll status has been confirmed.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Didn't read the whole thread-but if an insurance treats people with pre-existing conditions the same way as people without, they'll go fucking bankrupt. The point of insurance is to take risk into account.

 

[torchbearer]

Didn't read the whole thread-but if an insurance treats people with pre-existing conditions the same way as people without, they'll go fucking bankrupt. The point of insurance is to take risk into account.

government is not reason, it is force.

 

[onlyrp]

it is wrong to use violence, or the threat of violence against someone no matter the ends. your troll status has been confirmed.

self defense? to save a life?

 

[onlyrp]

Didn't read the whole thread-but if an insurance treats people with pre-existing conditions the same way as people without, they'll go fucking bankrupt. The point of insurance is to take risk into account.

I agree, except not all conditions are equal, it would be nice if some pre-existing conditions can simply be charged more to insure.

 

[torchbearer]

self defense? to save a life?

because you need food doesn't give you the right to rob me, nor does it give you the right to hire a third party agency to rob me. no matter if your life is in jeopardy.
the only moral position is to ask for someone to help out of charity.

 

[roho76]

I like how people think of buying insurance after they're already sick, and then act like the insurance company is the devil. It's like letting your house burn down, then trying to get the insurance company to insure your house. -.- She couldn't get insurance before but once she was sick she was willing to pay for PCIP?

Can't believe people would be swayed by this.

I know. It's like the privatized fire department in Kentucky or Tennessee where the guy didn't pay the $75 and then bitched about people not risking their lives because he was to cheap to pay $75.

I'm so sick of the "something for nothing" mentality. Trust me lady that cost you more than you will ever know but your kids will definitely feel the burden of your "free sh*t" mentality.

 

[onlyrp]

Point out that the State is the reason healthcare is expensive in the first place.

Government is good at one thing: It knows how to break your legs, hand you a crutch, and say, ‘See, if it weren’t for the government, you wouldn’t be able to walk.’ (Harry Browne)

Medical Insurance that Worked — Until Government "Fixed" It
The Libertarian Three-Step Program (healthcare)
A list of specific reasons the State makes healthcare expensive, and why the market is the answer

Can you back that up with some data?
Can you rank 1st world countries by state involvement, and then show correlation with high cost?
It's funny that people always bring up the "all other countries have" argument when it comes to death penalty, but would not when it's healthcare.

 

[onlyrp]

because you need food doesn't give you the right to rob me, nor does it give you the right to hire a third party agency to rob me. no matter if your life is in jeopardy.
the only moral position is to ask for someone to help out of charity.

I wasn't talking about food and robbery, you said it's wrong to use violence. So is pointing a gun and threatening a person who is about to using force also "violence"? Is that a justified form of violence? Or is that violence at all?

So when I am robbed or shot at, I should ask morally out of charity to not be shot and robbed? Or am I at some point allowed to use force to save my life, and a life near me?

 

[torchbearer]

I wasn't talking about food and robbery, you said it's wrong to use violence. So is pointing a gun and threatening a person who is about to using force also "violence"? Is that a justified form of violence? Or is that violence at all?

So when I am robbed or shot at, I should ask morally out of charity to not be shot and robbed? Or am I at some point allowed to use force to save my life, and a life near me?

the only moral use of force is to protect your right to your own life and property.
if you come over and point a gun in my face, either factually or through the threat of government violence in order to pay for your medical bills. it would be just for me to protect my life and labor against your aggression.
if you think it is moral to rob your neighbor because you life depended on it, you are at the wrong place and Obama is your man. the only thing you have a right to are the things you earn with your own production. otherwise, we have communism and we can repeat marxist platitudes- to each according to their need, regardless of if they produced anything to trade in returm.

you use violence against me, i will show you the meaning of self-defense. there will by no parsing in the results.

 

[roho76]

I wasn't talking about food and robbery, you said it's wrong to use violence. So is pointing a gun and threatening a person who is about to using force also "violence"? Is that a justified form of violence? Or is that violence at all?

So when I am robbed or shot at, I should ask morally out of charity to not be shot and robbed? Or am I at some point allowed to use force to save my life, and a life near me?

Protection from violence is not violence, it's protection.

 

[onlyrp]

the only moral use of force is to protect your right to your own life and property.

you use violence against me, i will show you the meaning of self-defense. there will by no parsing in the results.

ok then, why was that so hard?

 

[onlyrp]

Protection from violence is not violence, it's protection.

so all we need to do is call something something else, and it gets off the hook?

 

[torchbearer]

ok then, why was that so hard?

because its common sense, and the demagogue is the only one who takes your path.
taking someone else property because you need it for your life is not self-defense. that is the socialist/communist argument. the orwellian double speak that has led us to the government we have today.
that is why its so hard. war is peace, friendship and trade is isolationist. etc.

 

[torchbearer]

so all we need to do is call something something else, and it gets off the hook?

either you are retarded or a troll. doesn't matter at this point because you apparently go back and forth from understanding to not understanding.
i think your purpose is clear.
i have work to do on behalf of the campaign. have fun trolling. in the end- you will get the government you deserve.