What's new

XPO | Trumps Trade War

Tao said:
Oh my god, that's si wild!

Weird that I know a German family who moved here and they abhor our health system. And my old neighbor was british who moved here for work and he preferred the NHS system. And my family is from Canada and none of them seem to be joining for our system either.

It's almost like personal anecdotes aren't really a great indicator, amiright?
Click to expand...
So if everything is so good in all those other countries why are those people coming here
 
TruckinGod77 said:
So if everything is so good in all those other countries why are those people coming here
Click to expand...

The british guy was part owner of a company that started in England and opened a branch near where I lived (he ended up getting cancer and going back to england for treatment). The German family moved back when the husbands mother grew I'll to help her out (not sure what happened to them). My family in Canada is mostly still in Canada. The couple who moved down, I don't know why.

None of them came here for healthcare.

As an addendum - the son of the german couple would fly back to germany every year for college and rent an apartment year round to live in while he was there. He did it because flying to and from Germany and renting an apartment year round was cheaper than college in the US and he got to go to an elite school there. "Free" (yes, by free we mean tax payer funded) college is absolutely possible here as well.
 
I would posit that it's because of health insurance companies in large part that health care prices have skyrocketed. When people can rely on a 3rd party to subsidize a substantial part of a purchase, the price for what's being purchased is naturally and sometimes necessarily going to go up. Naturally because insurance interferes with natural price controls that exist within market based competition and necessarily because insurance companies don't want to pay what the health care providers deem to be a fair price so the provider artificially inflates the price in hopes of getting the true profit they actually need.

Health insurance companies have also made people complacent with the decisions they make about their health and the consequences of bad decision making get foisted onto others who have no say in the decision making. In our country, a person can consume bad food, cigarettes, and alcohol and then seek out medical care for their bad decision making and force others via health insurance or govt insurance to pay for it.

I ask anyone, is that fair? Is that fair, Tao? I don't think so. What I believe is fair is when everyone has access to the same opportunity to make choices for themselves whether or not those choices prove good or bad. What's fair is that a person lives with the consequences of those choices, unable to interfere with inalienable rights of another individual. When you're talking about govt ran healthcare, the extra taxes to pay for it, the mandatory compliance that comes with it, it's completely unfair because it strips us all of another inalienable right, the right to do with our time on earth what we choose to do. Our life span, our time is limited and much our time during our best years is traded for wages. Our tax codes should reflect that by keeping taxes to a bare minimum so that federal and local governments provide only the minimum necessary services to the people and no more. Someone asked earlier in this thread where is it written in the Constitution that the government is supposed to provide health care and the answer is...it's not. It's not because the Framers understood the difference between inalienable rights and artificial, govt created 'rights.'
 
Tao said:
Ted Decker trk said, "Why should billionaires not exist?"
Tao said, "They shouldn't exist because it is immoral."

Ted Decker trk said "Where do you draw the line? Net Worth of 999,999,999.99$ and below? What about the person who's net worth is 999,999,999.98$ , they copacetic with your world view."
Tao said, "Yes, it should be functionally impossible to become a billionaire."

Ted Decker trk said, "Praytell, where do we draw the line?"
Tao said, "You only get to ask once."

Ted Decker trk said, "Life insurance counts to Net Worth. With my life insurance policies figured in, I'm worth over 7 figures.
COOL. If I die and my wife gets that money, what prevents someone from saying millionaires shouldn't exist and take her money?
Some are already saying that. You want to take the billionaires money, where will you stop."

Tao said, "We will stop when the guillotines go dull."
Click to expand...
I guess we all know where you stand Tao. Thanks for showing your true colors. It's obvious to me at least that you're speaking to us from the perspective of a socialist who doesn't understand or cares to understand freedom, liberty, or free markets. You might believe that you're morally superior because you want everyone to have access to govt ran health care, but there is nothing morally superior about that at all. In fact from my perspective it's utterly immoral because it affords an artificial right to people to make bad decisions at the expense of others. In other words people who do the right thing should never be forced to pay for people who do the wrong thing and that's what you're asking us to do. You want to be free of hypocrisy? Here is what you do. Go to work for a local health care provider and offer your services in whatever capacity you have for free, maybe scrubbing bed pans would be a good place to start. Give to charities that fund health research or better yet form your own foundation and solicit private donations from people who are willing to donate to a charity that pays for the health problems of others. If you're not willing to do some of these things then don't be willing to shove your brand of morality down the throats of others either.
 
ScotchNeat said:
I guess we all know where you stand Tao. Thanks for showing your true colors. It's obvious to me at least that you're speaking to us from the perspective of a socialist who doesn't understand or cares to understand freedom, liberty, or free markets. You might believe that you're morally superior because you want everyone to have access to govt ran health care, but there is nothing morally superior about that at all. In fact from my perspective it's utterly immoral because it affords an artificial right to people to make bad decisions at the expense of others. In other words people who do the right thing should never be forced to pay for people who do the wrong thing and that's what you're asking us to do. You want to be free of hypocrisy? Here is what you do. Go to work for a local health care provider and offer your services in whatever capacity you have for free, maybe scrubbing bed pans would be a good place to start. Give to charities that fund health research or better yet form your own foundation and solicit private donations from people who are willing to donate to a charity that pays for the health problems of others. If you're not willing to do some of these things then don't be willing to shove your brand of morality down the throats of others either.
Click to expand...

Nobody who is working in a single payer system works for free. They all get paid, all of them. So that entire line of argument is garbage.

It's kind of funny though. You have no problem telling me that your brand of morality is better than mine, yet you insist I am 'shoving' my brand of morality by merely talking about it and that I am bad for doing so. I am somehow a bad person for having an opinion on this and discussing it.

How would I be free of your so-called hypocrisy? I'd pay my taxes and help my fellow man. I've donated to far too many GoFundMe's to think that the status quo is, in any way, sane.

At the end of the day this is not an question of financials or who deserves something, it is a question of morality. Personally, I can't watch this system we currently have break, cause to suffer and kill people and be OK with it. My morals won't allow it. And free markets will not save these people.

That is where I stand, firmly and with resolve. I'm at peace with that.

You can call me a socialist and that other guy can say I'm a communist and maybe you can even claim that me having different morals than you makes me a bad guy. That's all fine, I'm used to that.

You don't have to justify your stance to me, justify it to those that the free market casts aside, broke, dying, and dead. Those are the souls we have to face and explain our decisions to, not anonymous avatars on TruckingBoards. Personally, I can not justify the status quo to these people. I just can't.

Edit: btw, I'm not trying to say that anyone else's morals are terrible. Or that mine are the ultimate. I'm just telling you that my morals lead to these views. That's not an attack on anyone, it is just how I view these things.

I truly believe that we all want to limit suffering and that we all want a better, even perfect, health care system. We just disagree on how to get there. This is ok, this is how we figure ::shit:: out. There is a very good chance that we are all wrong and some other hybrid methodology will turn out to be the best. We should be prepared for this.
 
Last edited:
ScotchNeat said:
Someone asked earlier in this thread where is it written in the Constitution that the government is supposed to provide health care and the answer is...it's not. It's not because the Framers understood the difference between inalienable rights and artificial, govt created 'rights.
Click to expand...
The framers had no idea what we would face when it comes to healthcare let alone what modern medicine would grow to.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...e2410c-d821-11e6-9a36-1d296534b31e_story.html
 
Last edited:
Tao said:
The british guy was part owner of a company that started in England and opened a branch near where I lived (he ended up getting cancer and going back to england for treatment). The German family moved back when the husbands mother grew I'll to help her out (not sure what happened to them). My family in Canada is mostly still in Canada. The couple who moved down, I don't know why.
Click to expand...
So why did you come to the US? and if it is so bad why do you stay?
 
joes bar and grill said:
So why did you come to the US? and if it is so bad why do you stay?
Click to expand...

I was born here. That's pretty much why I don't leave. My wife and I have had extensive conversations about moving to Canada as well, and it may happen.

Also, wanting improvement in something does not mean that I have to accept what I have or move across an ocean. It means I want where I live and love to be better.
 
TruckinGod77 said:
Nobody gets denied if you walk into a hospital to get treatment
Click to expand...
That may be true but someone still has to pay for it . Either through inflated insurance premiums or a single payer system. I hope that no of us are that morally bankrupt to deny someone life or death treatment based on their financial status.
I continue to here people on the right claim their party is the one with Christian values but I don’t see much of the compassion that Christ taught when it come to those less fortunate. They seem to do the complete opposite. Save the baby’s but don’t pay the bill once they are born into a bad situation.
I just don’t get it . I’m sorry if this makes anyone uncomfortable but it has to be said.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tao
Tao said:
I'm not 'dodging' any questions.

I've repeatedly told you the line. Billionaires should not exist. That is a pretty unambiguous statement. So one penny less than that can exist. Every penny over 999,999,999.99 is taxed at 100%.
Click to expand...
Taxed at 100% ?!?

You claim you're not spouting communist socialist tripe but you propose a 100% Tax? That right there belies the absolute farce of your arguments. You're going to take someone's money against their will but it's not communism?

Taking an individual's assesets to distribute among others is the very definition of communism. You are regurgitating the proletariat vs the bourgeoisie. You wish to make everyone equal in terms of healthcare. Doing away with social stratification by making all assets publicly owned is the very definition of communism! You are also violating the idea of an individual's Negative Liberty that is the foundation that makes us free men.
 
Ted Decker trk said:
Taxed at 100% ?!?

You claim you're not spouting communist socialist tripe but you propose a 100% Tax? That right there belies the absolute farce of your arguments. You're going to take someone's money against their will but it's not communism?

Taking an individual's assesets to distribute among others is the very definition of communism. You are regurgitating the proletariat vs the bourgeoisie. You wish to make everyone equal in terms of healthcare. Doing away with social stratification by making all assets publicly owned is the very definition of communism! You are also violating the idea of an individual's Negative Liberty that is the foundation that makes us free men.
Click to expand...

I'm 100% advocating a class war.
 
sucker666 said:
That may be true but someone still has to pay for it . Either through inflated insurance premiums or a single payer system. I hope that no of us are that morally bankrupt to deny someone life or death treatment based on their financial status.
Click to expand...
I don't think any of us advocate to not have a safety net in place for those down on their luck in terms of medical attention, shelter, or food. We have a problem with said safety net being abused by some and by being told that if we can afford something better than the basics that we shouldn't have access to the better things. This is what these single payer socialized medicine goofs want. To bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator in terms of healthcare. God forbid you work hard and can afford something a few steps up. Then you should be taxed at 100%. Tao draws the line at 999,999,999.99$. What about the next Bernie Bra or Warren fanboy who comes along and says no the line is 500,000,000.00$, the next says 1,000,000.00, the next says 500,000.00$, the next says 100,000.00$ , the next says 50,000.00$. You get my point. Most of us are willing to help but there is a limit. And communists/socialists keep pushing the limit till they have all the power.
 
sucker666 said:
That may be true but someone still has to pay for it . Either through inflated insurance premiums or a single payer system. I hope that no of us are that morally bankrupt to deny someone life or death treatment based on their financial status.
I continue to here people on the right claim their party is the one with Christian values but I don’t see much of the compassion that Christ taught when it come to those less fortunate. They seem to do the complete opposite. Save the baby’s but don’t pay the bill once they are born into a bad situation.
I just don’t get it . I’m sorry if this makes anyone uncomfortable but it has to be said.
Click to expand...

Very few of us are that morally bankrupt, thank Crom. But this is usually where this conversation ends up. And our current method of forcing the poor to use the emergency room as their doctors office is extremely inefficient and extremely expensive. Yet, when someone proposes making this better, cheaper, and more efficient it is derided as "communism" and the poor become "freeloaders".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top