Why do you hate government

• isadore

  Con_Alma;1239897 wrote:Then let us choose.

  let the poor die, and decrease the excess population.
• isadore

  pmoney25;1239887 wrote:I am not blaming the victims and believe me I am not an advocate of the recent system as I am not an advocate of the ACA. I am just wondering if you think our life choices have any effect on health care. Do you think that less people will be obese and excercise more? Do you think people will smoke/drink less and eat healthier food? It seems to me you think poor people cannot make healthy life choices?

  yes lets lecture the poor, because only they drink, smoke and get fat. we are blaming the victims of our failed health system.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1239912 wrote:let the poor die, and decrease the excess population.

  ???
  
  What the heck are you talking about? I s that really what you want to happen?
  
  Let us decide if we want to participate in such a plans that would act as you previously stated. Let the "poor" do the same thing. Choose.
• gut

  isadore;1239913 wrote:yes lets lecture the poor, because only they drink, smoke and get fat. we are blaming the victims of our failed health system.

  People have no one to blame but themselves for excess drinking and poor diet. I will never support non-accountability.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1240047 wrote:???
  
  What the heck are you talking about? I s that really what you want to happen?
  
  Let us decide if we want to participate in such a plans that would act as you previously stated. Let the "poor" do the same thing. Choose.

  the effect of your "plan" for the "poor" is the decrease of their population.
• isadore

  gut;1240049 wrote:People have no one to blame but themselves for excess drinking and poor diet. I will never support non-accountability.

  the excuse of those who have made theirs and are indifferent to the suffering of others denying medical coverage to the poor and their children in a social darwinian future.
• cruiser_96

  

  isadore;1239911 wrote:gosh a ruddies...
  
  the attitude you express is the one that if carried out will cause the poor, especially the working to suffer if we depend on private coverage. of course it all falls back to the basic right philosophy, i got mine, screw you.

  No it's not. My attitude expressed in the quote that you used to make this above statement is one that says the government CAN NOT add one day to my life! And it would be a fool's trade to give over ANY of my freedom to the government for any "supposed" treatment. Your attitude that the government is omnipotent is what I disagree with.
  
  The poor in this country have the exact same blessing at their disposal that I have... Freedom.
• isadore

  again we see the "i got mine" philosophy.
  gosh a ruddies the federal programs have extend extended the life's of many Americans among the elderly and poor especially. for all americans by efforts by several federal agencies including cdc in research and immunization. it is kind of you to grant the poor the freedom to die because of their lack of resources.
• cruiser_96

  

  Slaves are made in such a way.
  
  Please understand this statement... The government is NOT God. I do NOT owe my soul (or sole) to it.
• isadore

  no sir. "we the people" established a government to "promote the general welfare" of Americans.
• believer

  

  isadore;1240077 wrote:no sir. "we the people" established a government to "promote the general welfare" of Americans.

  I'm certain our nation's founding fathers never envisioned "promoting the general welfare" translating to "expanding the nanny state."
• Footwedge

  believer;1240079 wrote:I'm certain our nation's founding fathers never envisioned "promoting the general welfare" translating to "expanding the nanny state."

  I also doubt that the framers would be big fans of outsourcing trillions of dollars of wealth in order to annihilate the general welfare of it's citizenry here either.
• cruiser_96

  

  Footwedge;1240117 wrote:I also doubt that the framers would be big fans of outsourcing trillions of dollars of wealth in order to annihilate the general welfare of it's citizenry here either.

  While I do not agree or disagree with this statement, I do not think that if it were true, that we should automatically and wholesale conduct ourselves in a way that would undermine that which we do know about the founding of this country, namely certain inalienable rights endowed by their Creator. (I think I read that last line in a book or something one time. Seemed like a cool quote.)
• isadore

  believer;1240079 wrote:I'm certain our nation's founding fathers never envisioned "promoting the general welfare" translating to "expanding the nanny state."

  i am sure our founding fathers never envisioned a state where blacks and women could vote. where a woman could be secretary of state and a black man president. but gosh what they did realize was that our nation would change, evolve and so would the functions of our government
• isadore

  cruiser_96;1240125 wrote:While I do not agree or disagree with this statement, I do not think that if it were true, that we should automatically and wholesale conduct ourselves in a way that would undermine that which we do know about the founding of this country, namely certain inalienable rights endowed by their Creator. (I think I read that last line in a book or something one time. Seemed like a cool quote.)

  rights to liberty and pursuit of happiness but first to life as would be protected by an adequate health care system.
• cruiser_96

  

  isadore;1240129 wrote:... but gosh what they did realize was that our nation would change, evolve and so would the functions of our government

  Based on some of the writings, they would not have wanted what you have expressed through various posts. They wanted limited, and non-oppressive government and governmental control. Just about everything I read from you - if not blatantly expressed - certainly leans that way.
  
  Now, no one doubts that if someone stood up and said the very things you state, and "the people" vote him in, then the people have spoken. The only thing about that is the Constitution would have to be done away with. And there aren't many people I know saying they want that. I could be wrong though.
• Footwedge

  cruiser_96;1240125 wrote:While I do not agree or disagree with this statement, I do not think that if it were true, that we should automatically and wholesale conduct ourselves in a way that would undermine that which we do know about the founding of this country, namely certain inalienable rights endowed by their Creator. (I think I read that last line in a book or something one time. Seemed like a cool quote.)

  It is as factual as a week having 7 days. The founding fathers wanted what was best for it's people and with genius, broke the mold of tyrranical, typical plutacries and asistocracies. They would not approve of the corporatists circumventing human rights, labor laws, and the advancements of basic health safety tenets in order to A. Creation of Nanny state as Believer puts it. B. Create a huge vaccuum for private companies to employ Americans, And C Having to to implement the HUGE expansion of the welfare/warfare state to keep the masses fed.
  
  We have become the antithesis of what the founders wanted us to be.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1240056 wrote:the effect of your "plan" for the "poor" is the decrease of their population.

  What plan?
  
  I haven't offered a plan.
  
  I responded to this post.
  

  ...the last ten years of a person's life are not necessarily a minimal existence, especially in an industrialized state with a safety net. . most people would be quite willing to pay thousands for that guarantee....

  Let us choose to do so as opposed to forcing me to. That's not a plan. It's a request to not force me to participate in a "plan. Do what you want with the "poor". Create a plan for them. I am not poor. Don't force me to pay thousands for the " guarantee" of more years.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1240234 wrote:What plan?
  
  I haven't offered a plan.
  
  I responded to this post.
  
  Let us choose to do so as opposed to forcing me to. That's not a plan. It's a request to not force me to participate in a "plan. Do what you want with the "poor". Create a plan for them. I am not poor. Don't force me to pay thousands for the " guarantee" of more years.

  yes you do have a plan, it is called "i got mine, screw the poor."
• isadore

  cruiser_96;1240141 wrote:Based on some of the writings, they would not have wanted what you have expressed through various posts. They wanted limited, and non-oppressive government and governmental control. Just about everything I read from you - if not blatantly expressed - certainly leans that way.
  
  Now, no one doubts that if someone stood up and said the very things you state, and "the people" vote him in, then the people have spoken. The only thing about that is the Constitution would have to be done away with. And there aren't many people I know saying they want that. I could be wrong though.

  the framers as president expanded the power of the government beyond strict construction because they understanded the document and the people.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1240270 wrote:yes you do have a plan, it is called "i got mine, screw the poor."

  ??? Now you're just making things up.
  
  Why would I have a plan? That's not my responsibility at all.
  
  I don't care what the plan is. All I ask is give me a choice to participate or not. That's all.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1240378 wrote:??? Now you're just making things up.
  
  Why would I have a plan? That's not my responsibility at all.
  
  I don't care what the plan is. All I ask is give me a choice to participate or not. That's all.

  exactly, the screw you philosophy. i am set, screw the poor.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1240386 wrote:exactly, the screw you philosophy. i am set, screw the poor.

  
  How am I screwing anyone? I am not opposed to a "plan". I am not opposed to putting safety nets in place for those who may need one.
  
  Whom am I "screwing"?
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1240454 wrote:How am I screwing anyone? I am not opposed to a "plan". I am not opposed to putting safety nets in place for those who may need one.
  
  Whom am I "screwing"?

  if you are willing to be to support adequate medical coverage for the needy through taxastion, then I was mistaken in my statement the screw you philosophy as applied to health care.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1240623 wrote:if you are willing to be to support adequate medical coverage for the needy through taxastion, then I was mistaken in my statement the screw you philosophy as applied to health care.

  I do indeed pay my taxes that support safety nets put in play by the government... safety nest that are inclusive of medical expense funding.
  
  I only ask that I not be forced to participate in programs that you suggested people would choose to use to extend their lives. Let me choose.