Health care I disagree on. I can work with infrastructure. Roads are infrastructure. The military is infrastructure. Health care is a personal choice. Retirement is a personal choice.

Here's the deal...

Should a person who earns more pay a larger percentage (not talking amount, just percentage) based on how much they earn? So... should a person who makes $1,000,000 a year pay 30% of his income vs a person who makes $20,000 pays nothing?

Should I be required by law to the doctor for an annual physical exam?

Ironically, in America those same people are often against capitalism and are actually for communism in many cases... if not socialism.


Yes. If a mean level of quality of life was somehow established, you'd find many people who made more money than necessary to achieve this quality, and many who would not make enough. I feel that it's morally reprehensible if you have excess that you don't need, when others do have a need, that you could provide for. [/quote]

Wait... who's to say that this "rich" person doesn't need the money? Who should make that call and what gives that person/group the right to do so? Who decides when a person is "rich" and what happens when more people become "rich" over time?

Should people pay taxes based on what they earn or what they consume?


Satisfaction for giving comes from a willing heart. That can be backed up with scripture. The Bible talks a lot about how blessed the cheerful giver is. You don't hear about the person who doesn't know he is giving or didn't sacrifice to give. Taxation for the sake of the poor is robbing and removing at least some satisfaction from people who would otherwise be able to give that much more to help the poor.

The other thing to consider is this: Is the government the most efficient means to help the poor? What percentage of money that the government takes for the poor actually goes to helping the poor? How much of it gets sucked up in the bureaucracy? Surely you'd heard about the $640 toilet seat.

And what about speed? What's with the 6 week or longer wait for CAT scans and MRI's in the UK? Surely you don't think it's because the government is more efficient at deciding who should get access to the equipment than the doctors.

Its class envy again.  The rich person gets punished basically in socialism, he is suppossed to give more because he has it, and everyone else be the recipiants.  Its like looting a store , hey its there, and we need it.  Even the story of the talents in the bible, God gave three people , three different amounts, it was up to them to do something with it.  I guess I don't understand that. 

Most countries right now that have socialized medicine are rationing help, and the structure is falling apart.  The few that are doing well are generally using oil profits to do so (sweden). Many rich people still come to the US when they need real care.  If america would offer more market solutions like lower cost health care plans or entry level versions the issue (which is mostly politics) would go away.  Young demographic are being asked to buy insurance policies that are for kings, and really don't need much at that time in there life, so they are "uninsured".  In america it is law that you can not be turned down for treatment at a hospital if you need it, regardless of being insured or not, especially in life threatening cases.  

Pudd: Just curious where you are at do you own your own home?  Car? Studio?  What is your living situation like there?  Wondering what the differences are?

that's an extremely shallow and simplistic view of America...

yet oh so true. i know friends of mine who have left larger churches because they feel like they are just being used by the church to get things. look at my work, we sometimes get mispicked parts coming in. instead of notifying the distributor and sending it back, we simply file a shortage, add the part into stock and put it up. and the next day we get the part we ordered and we get free inventory. give me examples of the people of this nation not taking what they want regardless of what is right, ill back down. but the real question is... why are americans so greedy?

Well, that's the problem here. Some of the presidential candidates have gone on record that these exams should be required by law as well as lifestyle changes. Beyond that, even back when Hillary was first lady, her proposal for health care was a law that said if you had ANY private health insurance in addition to the government's you could be thrown in jail.

Socialism here at least, doesn't seem to be about choices.


Honestly, there really isn't much difference between the two philosophies. Both require a progressive/graduated income tax for example and government controlled education. The only difference is how far the government is allowed to intrude into my personal life.


Education and health care are not requirements for life. They make life BETTER, but don't confuse them with needs. Here in the US, I'm amazed at how well someone with an 8th grade education from the early 1900s has done and I'm likewised amazed at how well home schooled adults have done. I'm also amazed by how many people who do have health insurance never have a need to even see a doctor.

You avoided the question too. Who's to say the "rich" don't need that money? What if they are using that money to create new jobs for the country? Don't you see that if the government takes that money, then it is no longer there for the "rich" to create jobs that in turn provide more tax paying citizens for the government to collect from.


You avoided the question. What makes them best for deciding who needs what? What makes them the best to decide for the people rather than the people themselves?


No, I don't have money. If the government taxes what I earn, I no longer have that portion of my money. I cannot give 30% of my income should I choice because the government said it knows what is needed better and seizes it from me.


Right now, many of us are. We are pushing to end the income tax system here and to replace it with a consumption tax which will also remove all corporate taxes. The consumption tax will be an inclusive one so a $100 shirt today will cost $100 after this tax. $23 of that $100 will be sent to the feds. This system rewards people for saving. It makes the US the largest tax shelter in the world. It will for the first time tax those who are involved in various illegal occupations. It will even tax the rich more b/c they will spend more, not because they earn more, possess more or "can afford to pay more". The poor will actually end up better off too as every month, there will be a rebate check that covers the taxes people pay on the necessities of living such as food. This check will be a couple hundred dollars per family... and it's fair because everyone rich or poor will get it. This has been the most researched tax plan in the history of the US and is endorsed by so many economists that it's crazy not to implement it. Want to read up on it? Check out www.fairtax.org and look up the 2 books by Neal Boortz and John Linder on the subject.
•
The FairTax Book: Saying Goodbye to the Income Tax and the IRS
• FairTax: The Truth: Answering the Critics



What??? seriously... look at the UK healthcare system. Sure it's got a few things right, but it's screwed up worse than the US system which is plagued by frivolous lawsuits and other bloats due to government regulations.

Yeah... lobbists. Don't get an American started on them.


Again... Hillary Clinton in the 90's... her plan... private = jail time.


OK... fine. Answer this...

What percentage of taxes should a person with a $1,000,000 salary pay? - Why?
What percentage of taxes should a person with a $100,000 salary pay? - Why?
What percentage of taxes should a person with a $20,000 salary pay? - Why?


All of that can be handled via a consumption tax like the Fair Tax. One that does not punish people for being successful financially. As far as the freedom goes, if I choose to have a private health care plan, do I get to opt out of the government one? If not, do I really have that freedom? Why should someone capable of paying for insurance on his own have to pay twice?

in some ways we have, and in others we've 'found' our way.  For one thing, if we still believed that extreme libertarian (read "ron paul") philosophy, hitler would have won WWII.

It's also a good thing to have safety standards in workplaces, standards on our food,medicine,who can drive,who can vote,etc etc.   I also don't think it's wrong to have a basic curriculum for what kids should know.
  Where we've lost our way in schools is with activists wanting to make "good citizens" in school and teaching them what to think, rather than how to think and problem solve.

like i said, it's about how much we want government involvement and what that focus should be, not whether we want them involved at all.

Do i believe in nationalized health care? i don't think so.  but something needs to be done with the current system.  HMOs are telling doctors what tests to do & what prescriptions to write, and that is ridiculous.   
   

Yeah... I know and agree. I just want to tell the doctor what to do. I trust the government less than the HMO though.