therightfangirl | (no subject)

Australian here, please tell me you're joking, otherwise you're just an ignorant foreigner.

I have some understanding, some Americans think that the government isn't society, that if you want to get things done you don't just chuck money at the government and hope it gets fixed, the government to them isn't some panacea of solutions.
Once you have a government solution, you have it for everyone, regardless of choice, when you bring in more government you lose choice as resources that would have stayed in the hands of the people going towards providing many various solutions or wants are now funneled into a giant bureaucracy.

This is a fundamental disagreement on how people want to live, it's not just some, OH SIRRY MURRICANS, WHY DO THEY HATE THE POOR>?!?!?
Americans give more than any other people on earth, especially conservatives, they believe that you should help that person on the street but shouldn't force another person to pay for that help, they do "care for each other", they just don't think you should have government to direct that "care".

I'm not arguing for either side, I'm just tying to show the other side instead of all these overly simplified bullshit answers.. You can find this out if you just like... go to /r/conservative or /r/libertarian in a matter of minutes... It took me under an hour to find out the argument.

[link]

I just loved how this Australian was able to so clearly articulate conservative America's issues with socialized healthcare/socialism to this English....twit....who opened the thread with the (ohsotired) meme of "WHY DO AMERICANS HATE POOR PEOPLE?" Also liked the "DO THE RESEARCH" zing.

Go over there if your blood pressure is feeling low and needs a lift. In the same thread there is this:

It's not your time and money, attained by you in isolation. It's time and money granted to you on the back of infrastructure built and maintained by the people. Roads, regulation, police, etc., are all required for you to be able to have time and money to do with what you will.
Each society decides what the basic requirements of its people are and then demands that each person contributes according to their means, mostly through tax. Most people don't question paying taxes to maintain roads, though obviously some do. And you'll pay for police to stop your neighbour from robbing you. But the US seems to draw a strange line at health care.
Health care is then just another public service, supporting the baseline of society. You wouldn't give out about a policeman protecting someone from a mugging even if they paid no taxes. Giving out about public health-care seems equally bizarre from a european perspective.
TL;DR: The same thing everyone else has been saying in this thread.

[link]

Someone was at Obama's "you didn't build that!" speech. Or maybe it was at E. Warren's? Either way, its a bit alarming to think that argument might be catching on, because the concept of private property, of ownership of one's time and the fruits of one's labor, is a bit central to our way of life...

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I find it best to go Rand on them. "Ok, if it's built by the public, then let the public finance and run my business. Let the public do my research. What's that? You need me to do it?"

Or, if I REALLY want to have fun, I suggest that, if my time and effort aren't my own, what else isn't? Maybe we also don't have rights to our own bodies (shaes of Obamacare). Maybe we should mandate companionship for the romantically challenged - have the government "tax" women their time and bodies to go over and spend it with some lonely geek. After all, if we're just part of a system, what does it matter?

"Maybe we should mandate companionship for the romantically challenged - have the government "tax" women their time and bodies to go over and spend it with some lonely geek."

Actually, that was part of the original soviet plan. Read Trotsky, they were planning on arranging "scientific marriages", And of course, there was hitler's (national socialism) aryan eugenics program.

Those aren't exactly "equality of jigginess", but they *are* government demanding that women give it up according to government edicts.

LOL Completely extreme yet parallel: your contentions deserve a round of applause!