OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!

[NTJedi]

Originally posted by Arryn:
Since you are such a big supporter of all things Republican, I find it most hypocritical that you should cite the rising national debt, something that has traditionally exploded under Republican administrations (Reagan, Bush Sr., Bush Jr.) that are staunch believers in deficit spending and letting future generations worry about the problems caused by their populist policies of tax breaks (for rich people & corporations) and warmongering.

Have I written anything about supporting Republicans??? NO ! So despite your vast mind reading abilities you are wrong here. I am not supporting either side... just don't want Kerry because he is trying to make huge changes which will give us HIGHER taxes, more government intervention and he is for abortion which goes against my moral beliefs.
None of the presidents have changed the national debt from increasing to decreasing.... when one of them can do this then I'd have enough faith to give him a shot at some national healthcare system which is also a huge financial task/responsibility.

[Arryn]

Originally posted by Frosted Flake:
As for Arryn thinking all Republicans thinking alike where did that come from? I am a conservative Republican...I believe in balanced budgets,conserving the environment,preserving our country's (and the world's) freedoms. I want to know how the biblethumping southern democrats took over my party? I also want to know how middle America can back Bush after Iraq. Bush,Cheney,Rumsfield and the idiots who authorized torture in iraq have sullied the honor of the world's finest milatary..in the name of expediency.

According to the current political scheme of things, you're a "moderate" Republican. IOW, you're a rational, thinking person, unlike the mainstream mindless drones in your party. As for how your party was hijacked, you must ask yourself what people of like-minded values such as yourself were doing since 1994 and Newt Gingrich's hostile takeover of the Congress, or during the election campaign of 2000? We'd be a helluva lot better off if McCain had won the primary battle back then. Instead of having to face a choice between Bush and Kerry now.

[Vicious Love]

Overrated.

Update: If this was PWoT, I'da just said "Banned". It even rhymes with "Bland". Let hilarity ensue.

Updated update: Dude, it turns out Bush is actually stupid! Critique retracted, this is some brilliant and insightful political commentary.
How come nobody noticed this before?

Yet another update: For that matter, how come he'll still probably win the upcoming elections?

[ July 26, 2004, 12:55: Message edited by: Vicious Love ]

[djtool]

fogive me for not quoting you vigabrand.


I can't believe you would insinuate that a man not pushing his own personal values upon the country is a bad thing. I don't know kerry personally, but i do know that the president is not an elected king. It is not the presidents job to impose his values upon americans, but to manage comprimise with them.

[djtool]

[/quote]We'd be a helluva lot better off if McCain had won the primary battle back then. Instead of having to face a choice between Bush and Kerry now.[quote]

I can't say I disagree.

The whole party thing is a real mess though. Its a shame we have to choose between to Groups of people who, by the nature of their organizations, have to put the american people third on their list of priorities...if that.

(yes i realize I don't have to vote rep or dem i'm sure you get the picture)

[ July 27, 2004, 01:36: Message edited by: djtool ]

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by NTJedi:
Personally I view it as not worth the risk for raising my taxes on something which may be better for the USA. This gamble is not worth the risk.

What gamble? The U.S. is the only industrialized nation that doesn't provide universal health care, spends more per capita on health care than any other industrialized nation in the world, and ranks a dismal 37th in the world.

Earlier you were saying the moral thing to do is help everyone... now you're saying only those which are american citizens.

Yes, the moral thing is to help everyone, however, this is irrelevant to a _national_ health care system.

I don't believe our government has the wisdom to provide an effective healthcare system for everyone since it cannot even handle the growing national debt.

What wisdom is required? You simply create a fee schedule for the various services that Dr.'s and the system will provide that is similar to the one currently in place. When someone uses a service, you pay the Dr. or hospital accordingly. The only difference between this and the current system is that the government sets the rates instead of the health insurers.

There are thousands which abuse the generosity from America and other governments. Example= My cousin helped a woman move groceries which used food stamps. The groceries were going into a shiny expensive BMW. Despite your mind reading beliefs... I have no ill thoughts to those less fortunate.

This is an irrelevant example. If the person can afford a BMW, then they should not be on food stamps in the first place. That's an example of fraud. Please explain how someone is supposed to gain monetary benefit from a health care system that they've already paid for through taxes? Health care is no different than policing in that it's a public good, and I don't hear you suggesting that police forces should be privatized.

And thus I ask again... why not have the USA provide a Universal Healthcare for all nations!

This is another strawman. If those nations were willing to pay taxes to the U.S. to gain healthcare services, then they should, of course, gain access to such services.

There is no reason why the U.S. shouldn't fix its own social problems before trying to fix those of the rest of the world anyways.

It's not like the U.S. has doctors and nurses just sitting around bored. Heck it takes me 5 months before I can make my next doctors appointment after each visit... any cancelation means waiting another 5 months. The taxes could be as high as what switzerland is paying or may not be.... but not worth the gamble.

They could also be as low as the U.K's, where once they pay half as much per person once again. You must remember that the U.S. system costs more per person than every single other system in any industrialized nation in the entire world. All of which guarantee health care to everyone.

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by Norfleet:
Untrue. I generally eschew unnecessary treatments. After all, I have to pay for this crap out of my own pocket, and if I feel fine, I don't need healthcare.

This is most likely completely incorrect. There are any number of illnesses that will kill you even though you "feel fine".

The human body is surprisingly resilient and often self-repairing, provided you allow it to do so, rather than crippling its ability to cope by seeking unnecessary treatment.

You are making the fallacious assumption that unnecessary treatment will be given. You are also making the fallacious assumption that such treatment will hurt the body.

You'd be surprised how much free-time you get once you're retired...which is, after all, the entire point of being retired.

Like I said, given your _maturity level_, you can't be much more than 20 at the most. Probably more like 12 - 15, since you've demonstrated the standard teenage "me first" mentality.

Complete lack of empathy, eh? Not so. I simply can't bring myself to feel sorry for miserable slackers who can't be bothered to take responsibility for even themselves.

And the fact that there are people who are not _able_ to take care of themselves is completely lost on you. Like I said, that's a complete lack of empathy.

[Arryn]

I find it amusing that for the first time, I'm on GD's side of an argument, rather than Norfleet's. Such a wonder.

OTOH, if I'm ever on NT's side I may have a stroke.

[vigabrand]

Originally posted by archaeolept:

quote:

---

Please enlighten me if I'm wrong, but I believe that the average western European pays like 50 to 60 percent of his income in taxes, in order to pay for all the socialized services. In America, it's like 20 to 30 percent I think

lol vigabrand

OECD figures for 1999, which measure total tax burden as a percentage of total economic output, have the US at 14.2%. Sweden is the second highest, at 21.7%, but Ireland, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, France, Netherlands, Spain, Greece, Japan... all have lower overall tax burdens

and yet, somehow, they all manage to have universal health care. who'd a thunk it.

http://www.taxpayer.com/Facts/Intern...omparisons.pdf

---

Those figures are based on income taxes as a percentage of GDP. That's not what we're talking about. Here is a more accurate picture.

http://www.oecd.org/document/51/0,23..._1_1_1,00.html

I was pretty close, with Germany in the 50% of household income for a single worker.

[vigabrand]

Originally posted by djtool:
fogive me for not quoting you vigabrand.


I can't believe you would insinuate that a man not pushing his own personal values upon the country is a bad thing. I don't know kerry personally, but i do know that the president is not an elected king. It is not the presidents job to impose his values upon americans, but to manage comprimise with them.

His job as a senator and possibly president is to represent the beliefs of a certain group of people and govern by them. He is supposed to create legislation and administer based on those beliefs. That is his job. That is why someone would vote for him. Compromise is only when you can't get the full support you need to push whatever adjenda you promised to fulfill.