I Don't understand the Issues with Obamacare

[Machinesworking]

Rather, her point is, as I said, that the few of us who are actually able and willing to do a good job end up supporting the remaining majority of talentless leeches. And this happens at all levels of society, from quarry workers to factory workers, to artists to industrialists.

This is bullshit. The majority of people do a good job. It's not a special minority who nail a nail in properly or file their reports in on time, or make the sandwich properly, perform surgery, or design a house. This is the basic failing of the owning class, that they think they are "special". Mostly they are not, they might do a good job, but no better than the working class who are now unable to afford their own house etc. This line has been used for the last 30 years to basically annihilate the middle class in the states. You may not want to talk of class, but the numbers add up to absolute destruction of the lower and middle class, which of course you refuse to address, except for by slithering in comments about how they're stealing through tax money, socialism and all the regular buzz words.
How is it that you see the extremely wealthy are now or have been being screwed by the system in place? So far they're making off like bandits. Do you really believe that the middle class is less productive and worthwhile than 30 years ago? Are you that naive? One thing is certain, it's been the far rights agenda that's created this gap, and it's not getting any better by ranting about socialism and gutting domestic policies.
You want to solve the USA's debt issues? get rid of excessive military spending.

[Galt]

This is bullshit. The majority of people do a good job. It's not a special minority who nail a nail in properly or file their reports in on time, or make the sandwich properly, perform surgery, or design a house. This is the basic failing of the owning class, that they think they are "special". Mostly they are not, they might do a good job, but no better than the working class who are now unable to afford their own house etc. This line has been used for the last 30 years to basically annihilate the middle class in the states. You may not want to talk of class, but the numbers add up to absolute destruction of the lower and middle class, which of course you refuse to address, except for by slithering in comments about how they're stealing through tax money, socialism and all the regular buzz words.
How is it that you see the extremely wealthy are now or have been being screwed by the system in place? So far they're making off like bandits. Do you really believe that the middle class is less productive and worthwhile than 30 years ago? Are you that naive? One thing is certain, it's been the far rights agenda that's created this gap, and it's not getting any better by ranting about socialism and gutting domestic policies.
You want to solve the USA's debt issues? get rid of excessive military spending.

You keep trying to make this about class, and this does you a disservice. I agree entirely that most upper or even middle class people are in no way better than your typical worker bee, but that hasn't got diddly-fuck to do with what I'm saying.

As for your claim that most people are productive, well now you're just being stubborn. For every Steve Jobs, there's a little army of Steve Ballmers; for every James Cameron, there're dozens of foetal Michael Bays biting at his knees. If you really think that 'everybody's pretty much ok', then either you haven't spent enough time observing humans IRL, or you're part of the 80% who use cheap political tools, faux moral high ground and appeals to emotion to mooch off the truly great. Given your political leanings, I'd be more inclined to bet on the latter.

Incidentally, I'd lump the US military into this same group with you. They are at best unnecessary.

And as for your indignation over the destruction of the middle class, it is rather quite ironic, given that it's people like you—those who have chosen an illusory feeling of safety over freedom and prosperity, those who have willingly handed the Keys to the Republic over to the barbarians—who have caused this destruction.

[Galt]

We live in a capitalist world. Hunger has historial and current causes.

For example, food prices were pushed up a few years ago by a surge in speculation. Speculation is rich people with too much money trying to figure a way to get even richer, no matter how many children die of starvation in the process.

The child might live in a country that has seen civil war. Wars in Africa are all related to colonialism, which continues today in the form of neo-colonialism and geo-politics. For instance America supplied weapons to all the countries involved in the Congo war. America destroyed Haiti's agriculture.

There are lots of causes and issues here. Your best bet is to start by googling the subject ans seeing what people like Oxfam have to say.

Check out my claim about Haiti, a simple specific example. You will find that, like everything I say, it is 100% verifiable and correct. The same thing happens in other places, and that is just one of many causes of hunger.

Most hungry people live in Africa and India. India was deindustrialised by the British. Africa was also deindustrialised or sabotaged by colonial powers.

There is enough food in the world to feed everyone already. Imagine you are sitting at the table with a few others. Two are dying of hunger, one is stuffing his face until he is ill, and one is throwing food away. Would you not pass food to the two who are hungry?

Another problem is big companies like Monsanto who create dependency and poverty.

The list goes on. I have only mentioned a few things very briefly. I am not interested in debating this subject, just do some open-minded reading.

So in other words, you just took a random dead kid, assumed he was in some way related to [random Marxist talking point], and paraded his image around like a trophy.

You sick, sick man.

[re:dream]

OK


<start of rant>


I have to say I found the use of that image in very poor taste. My day job is all about dealing with and fighting poverty, and in my view this kind of use of images makes things worse, not better. I come across this all the time: photographs that I call 'poverty porn' - in which images of poor people, usually black, are used as anonymous icons to shock and score points. Google the image and you will see: the names and identities and even the location of the people involved have been forgotten. They are just anonymous images, racial stereotypes of the Western idea of 'starving Africans'.

I don't think it helps the cause of poor people in any way.

For one thing, it does not speak to me of compassion or concern for those people; it just seems to be use of their suffering to score points in an internet debate. The fact that the bodies concerned are semi-naked just underlines the disrespect of the photographer.

For another, as an image of African suffering it is misleading and inaccurate, because it perpetuates the notion that essentially African people are just passive victims, unable (or unwilling) to fend for themselves, and sitting around waiting for Western Aid. Whereas in my experience most poor and marginal African people are enormously enterprising and hard working, working hard to make a living under extremely harsh conditions.

If you are genuinely concerned with hunger in Africa; rather than perpetuate simplistic racial stereotypes, I would encourage you to engage with, recognise and support the dynamism and resourcefulness of the continent's people.



</end of rant>

I don't know whether anything that I say will connect with anyone, and I certainly have scant hope that it will convince you, Funken; but this image has been sitting in my craw all day and I don't feel I can remain silent.

[regretfullySaid]

Well put.

I'm crawed(?) with

There is enough food in the world to feed everyone already. Imagine you are sitting at the table with a few others. Two are dying of hunger, one is stuffing his face until he is ill, and one is throwing food away. Would you not pass food to the two who are hungry?

Something needs to be done with the guys overstuffing and throwing food away when they have, right in front of them no less, people who could use the food. I'm talking about punishment to the point of brainwashing, actually brainwashing compassion and empathy into those people, so they're conditioned to feel like they're being electrocuted if they overstuff or throw away and instead of giving it to someone who needs it more than them.
So until that happens, don't just give the food to the poor, but whack the guys overeating and wasting over the head with a 2x4, because they're still going to be creating more waste which in turn leaves more hungry hungry.

[beats me]

it seems like there are two running trains of thought, one group of people wants it to exist and another group of people doesn't want it to exist. Isn't the united states large enough for both groups to have what they want? why not let people and business who want to enroll in obamacare enroll and be subject to the internal market that only those enlisted in the program have access too, and let the people and businesses that don't want obamacare do their own thing especially since that is what they want right. If I'm not mistaken they judge obamacare like forced subsidizing and as far as subsidizing goes they don't support that tax payer money subsidizes emergency rooms either right. so why doesn't the government just create a 'non-healthcare' system for those people who don't want obamacare or emergency care to be subsidized by taxpayer money, and let the people who enlist in obamacare to indulge in that program and emergency care subsidized by only other people who believe in that practice?

I'm trying to learn about healthcare right now and the going sure is slow

Just for informational purposes I wish the government one year would force everybody filing taxes to take a survey of how they would like their individual taxes to be broken down percentagewise as far as health, military, infrastructure, etc. Then compare the reality of what the people want to where the money is actually going. Then for each category list the positives and negatives as a result of the amount of money distributed by the will of the people.

[docprosper]

OK


<start of rant>


I have to say I found the use of that image in very poor taste. My day job is all about dealing with and fighting poverty, and in my view this kind of use of images makes things worse, not better. I come across this all the time: photographs that I call 'poverty porn' - in which images of poor people, usually black, are used as anonymous icons to shock and score points. Google the image and you will see: the names and identities and even the location of the people involved have been forgotten. They are just anonymous images, racial stereotypes of the Western idea of 'starving Africans'.

I don't think it helps the cause of poor people in any way.

For one thing, it does not speak to me of compassion or concern for those people; it just seems to be use of their suffering to score points in an internet debate. The fact that the bodies concerned are semi-naked just underlines the disrespect of the photographer.

For another, as an image of African suffering it is misleading and inaccurate, because it perpetuates the notion that essentially African people are just passive victims, unable (or unwilling) to fend for themselves, and sitting around waiting for Western Aid. Whereas in my experience most poor and marginal African people are enormously enterprising and hard working, working hard to make a living under extremely harsh conditions.

If you are genuinely concerned with hunger in Africa; rather than perpetuate simplistic racial stereotypes, I would encourage you to engage with, recognise and support the dynamism and resourcefulness of the continent's people.



</end of rant>

I don't know whether anything that I say will connect with anyone, and I certainly have scant hope that it will convince you, Funken; but this image has been sitting in my craw all day and I don't feel I can remain silent.

All good food for thought IMO so thanks for that. Interesting points.

[Machinesworking]

As for your claim that most people are productive, well now you're just being stubborn. For every Steve Jobs, there's a little army of Steve Ballmers

OK I use OSX, but if you think Balmer is somehow an unproductive leech, then you're beyond delusional. Whether or not he made a good figurehead for Microsoft doesn't take away from the fact he has a high work ethic and has been vastly successful in his field. This whole jock 'olympic gold only!' mentality about people is exactly why any sort of economic system you propose should be immediately trashed. You don't even get the basic worth of people, why would any system you propose be in any way something positive for people?

[Galt]

OK I use OSX, but if you think Balmer is somehow an unproductive leech, then you're beyond delusional. Whether or not he made a good figurehead for Microsoft doesn't take away from the fact he has a high work ethic and has been vastly successful in his field. This whole jock 'olympic gold only!' mentality about people is exactly why any sort of economic system you propose should be immediately trashed. You don't even get the basic worth of people, why would any system you propose be in any way something positive for people?

Nope. Under his leadership, Microsoft has gone from industry leader to playing catchup with an outlook so bleak, I wouldn't be surprised to see it go belly-up within 10 years. Their current strategy is based on hardware and software integration, yet they have ZERO products in that market that have any chance of making any kind of impact. Microsoft spent the 90s copying Apple, and now can't even pull that off. Ballmer has killed Microsoft, end of story.

[stringtapper]

Microsoft has gone from industry leader to playing catchup with an outlook so bleak

I see what you did there.

[Machinesworking]

OK I use OSX, but if you think Balmer is somehow an unproductive leech, then you're beyond delusional. Whether or not he made a good figurehead for Microsoft doesn't take away from the fact he has a high work ethic and has been vastly successful in his field. This whole jock 'olympic gold only!' mentality about people is exactly why any sort of economic system you propose should be immediately trashed. You don't even get the basic worth of people, why would any system you propose be in any way something positive for people?

Nope. Under his leadership, Microsoft has gone from industry leader to playing catchup with an outlook so bleak, I wouldn't be surprised to see it go belly-up within 10 years. Their current strategy is based on hardware and software integration, yet they have ZERO products in that market that have any chance of making any kind of impact. Microsoft spent the 90s copying Apple, and now can't even pull that off. Ballmer has killed Microsoft, end of story.

The great man theory again. Essentially you think that because Balmer was a mediocre leader of his company none of his contributions to the rise of Microsoft matter. It's the single dumbest way of looking at people I can think of, and why the whole concept of great men is a house of cards.

[Galt]

No, you're right; there are no great men, no mediocre men, we are all exactly the same. This is clearly the case. Nobody is smarter than anybody, nobody is more talented; nobody makes a better tuna sandwich, and all dudes have exactly the same length, thickness, shape and taste of cock. FACT.

[stringtapper]

[stringtapper]

He says there's no doubt about it
It was the myth of fingerprints
I've seen them all and man
They're all the same

[stringtapper]

Listen up, maggots. You are not special. You are not a beautiful or unique snowflake. You're the same decaying organic matter as everything else.