Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Taricus]

Well, the society you're suggesting would be pretty nightmarish to live in, but I guess at least it's a logically consistent hellhole.

The society I'm suggesting is a Capitalist society. Abortion clinics would just be certified by the government. This is the same with such services as child protection services. These would be private businesses with government certification. This would bring ease to the tax payers and shorten the government's arm.

Sounds pretty nice to me.

So, you would rather hold up your beliefs, even if it indirectly causes other people to suffer?

No, I would rather have the government get less power. Tell me, how would privatization of abortion clinics cause others harm?

tell me, how would child protection services and orphanages work as a business? where would they get their income? i'm guessing your answer will be somewhere along the lines of "selling the children as slaves\involuntary organ donnors\meat for gourmet restaurants", but feel free to surprise me

Thats... thats just being an arsehole Askot.

Or a futurama refence.

[Gamerlord]

Well, the society you're suggesting would be pretty nightmarish to live in, but I guess at least it's a logically consistent hellhole.

The society I'm suggesting is a Capitalist society. Abortion clinics would just be certified by the government. This is the same with such services as child protection services. These would be private businesses with government certification. This would bring ease to the tax payers and shorten the government's arm.

Sounds pretty nice to me.

So, you would rather hold up your beliefs, even if it indirectly causes other people to suffer?

No, I would rather have the government get less power. Tell me, how would privatization of abortion clinics cause others harm?

tell me, how would child protection services and orphanages work as a business? where would they get their income? i'm guessing your answer will be somewhere along the lines of "selling the children as slaves\involuntary organ donnors\meat for gourmet restaurants", but feel free to surprise me

Thats... thats just being an arsehole Askot.

Or a futurama refence.

Oh. From which episode, remind me please?

[Taricus]

The one episode that bender set up an orphanage, I know that he was selling children off to restaurants.

[Gamerlord]

Oh yeah, sorry Askot! 

[Truean]

This may be off topic but why should my tax dollars pay for abortions?

Tax dollars pay for abortions.

Or tax dollars pay for any trouble that might be caused by a woman having an unwanted child she hates.

Or tax dollars pay for an orphan to be raised in a home.

Which would you rather pay for?

I choose none of the above. All are unnecessary to me, a Capitalist.

...If you were attacked and seriously injured by someone, would you not expect treatment for it?

Tax dollars pay for abortions.

Or tax dollars pay for any trouble that might be caused by a woman having an unwanted child she hates.

Or tax dollars pay for an orphan to be raised in a home.

Or treating a woman who was forced to have a backstreet abortion... etc.

No. I do not expect the government to fly to my aid. I do not like the federal government. I do not want anything to do with it. So tell me, why would I want it to help my when I'm hurt? I like to be consistent in my beliefs and especially so in this one.

I do not like the federal government. I do not want anything to do with it.

I'm of the opinion that if you don't want to pay for this country, then you don't love it and can leave it. Take a page from John Galt and get out if you like Capitalism to that extent. I think it would be hilarious to dump the Atlas Shrugged people in the middle of the Rockies  with a "Galt's Glutch" sign, and say "Don't bother with hiding the place, we don't want you or it."

Here's the point and it's just this stark:

There are problems. We can deal with them or not. If we don't deal with them, then they will get worse. We can't keep having as many kids as possible when we can't afford to feed them. Anyone who expects [notably "other"] people to stop having sex is nuts.

"Why should I pay for ______?"

Because nothing is free and _____ needs paying for and if everyone thinks like that then nothing gets done, ever.

In short, "It's someone else's problem!" No,society has to support society or it will crumble. Paying taxes is part of being an adult. If you don't like it; scram.

I love how conservative politicians wear flag pins and scream they love the country they won't pay for, they support the troops they won't buy armor or enough armored vehicles for. Every single solitary registered republican can start buying war bonds or shut up about supporting the troops.... This may very well mean you.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

To put it simply, there are some things that are needed in society that will become a nightmare to use if the sole objective of the business is making money. The government is less interested in making money than private business as it already has a steady income from the taxpayers, so these businesses must be nationalized and all others must be privatized for the highest quality society operating under a capitalist system. Abortion clinics fall in the nationalization category.

[Nikov]

Aqizzar, you are quite incorrect. As of 2002, 89.6% of employee-based health plans covered abortions. Please refer to page 75, Table 1, of this primary source.

[olemars]

Oh. From which episode, remind me please?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_PnSV56eGE

[Nikov]

I love how conservative politicians wear flag pins and scream they love the country they won't pay for, they support the troops they won't buy armor or enough armored vehicles for. Every single solitary registered republican can start buying war bonds or shut up about supporting the troops.... This may very well mean you.

The United States hasn't issued war bonds since 1945. But here, I'll write a check right now for the $46,201.68 of government debt I already owe.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

Oh yeah, sorry Askot! 

the reference changes nothing, i was being an asshole. asking why his tax money should cover expenses for abortions for rape victims and claiming that child protection services and orphanages should be private business counts as a bigger assholery in my book though.

though if my comment bothers you guys i will take it down

[olemars]

Aqizzar, you are quite incorrect. As of 2002, 89.6% of employee-based health plans covered abortions. Please refer to page 75, Table 1, of this primary source.

According to write-in comments, however, some of the insurers reporting that abortion was covered narrowly interpreted this to mean when a pregnancy threatens a woman’s health.

Would be interesting to know the definition of 'some'.

[Nikov]

Aqizzar, you are quite incorrect. As of 2002, 89.6% of employee-based health plans covered abortions. Please refer to page 75, Table 1, of this primary source.

According to write-in comments, however, some of the insurers reporting that abortion was covered narrowly interpreted this to mean when a pregnancy threatens a woman’s health.

Would be interesting to know the definition of 'some'.

Not statistically significant. Also isn't that Roe v Wade anyways?

[Aqizzar]

Aqizzar, you are quite incorrect. As of 2002, 89.6% of employee-based health plans covered abortions. Please refer to page 75, Table 1, of this primary source.

According to write-in comments, however, some of the insurers reporting that abortion was covered narrowly interpreted this to mean when a pregnancy threatens a woman’s health.

Would be interesting to know the definition of 'some'.

That would be a very interesting number, yes, especially in consideration of where the policies might intersect with state laws.  Not that an insurance provider would be dumb enough to cover medical procedures the particular state wouldn't allow.

Not statistically significant. Also isn't that Roe v Wade anyways?

No, and no.  The difference between insuring abortion at will, and insuring abortion only in life threatening cases, and everything in between, is a difference that I would like to see a number for, no matter how statistically small.  And Roe v Wade has nothing to do with insurance, and I'm willing to bet that you think it's a considerably stronger precedent than most state legislatures actually respect.

  At any rate, I for one am not afraid to say I'd be glad to be wrong.

[Nikov]

Well get with the present tense then.

[olemars]

Not statistically significant. Also isn't that Roe v Wade anyways?

I just read your source, I barely even know what Roe v Wade is about. All this stuff is much less complicated around here.