Healthcare dogmatist, get a load of this one...

[Virgil0211]

Well, at least it seems a lot better than the League of Reason forum...

Anybody in the mood to storm a few beach-heads (Or whatever they're called)? =P

[Lord T Hawkeye]

Nah. That was the one who started this debate. This is someone else. Frankly, I don't know how LTHE can stand posting there. The environment is so hostile.

You've been there?  Geez, small internet or what?

ooh!  He replies with...

You have obviously not read the articles properly. It says that the swedish gouverment integrates more private healthcare into their social healthcare system to please a minority, but in no way that they turn away from it, or worse, abolishes it. Besides you only present a piece of the articles that may have been taken out of context, as long as you don´t present a proper link with the full article it does not really count. Now stop whining because you where disproven.

Sounds more like he's backed into a corner.  I almost don't have the heart to show him the whole thing and make him look the fool....almost!

[Virgil0211]

You've been there?  Geez, small internet or what?

ooh!  He replies with...

Sounds more like he's backed into a corner.  I almost don't have the heart to show him the whole thing and make him look the fool....almost!

I shall say, in my best Emperor Palpatine voice (which isn't all that great...):

"Do What Must Be Done, Lord T Hawkeye. Do Not Hesitate. Show No Mercy."

(I know, quoting the prequels is blasphemy for original trilogy fans, but it seemed to fit.)

[Travis Retriever]

You've been there?  Geez, small internet or what?

ooh!  He replies with...

Sounds more like he's backed into a corner.  I almost don't have the heart to show him the whole thing and make him look the fool....almost!

Oh, god, I face-palmed on the inside when he said you "had been proven wrong".

[Lord T Hawkeye]

Gave Wolfie a tongue lashing but ol' Kia's reared his ugly head now.  He's more eloquent than most of them but a well spoken woo is still a woo.

To my comment that "to claim that without government healthcare, we'll have no health care at all is a false dichotomy. Medicine existed LONG before government took over it."

I get...

I suppose if you make up an argument instead of measure the actual argument, then maybe it will seem like a false dichotomy. Free markets and current markets do not guarantee EVERYONE health care, and have shown that they will not cover everyone. With that in mind, people are suggesting that government is in a special position to offer a guaranteed service to everyone, complimented often with an argument that everyone should have effective, sufficient, and sustainable health coverage no matter what. This does not even remotely approach the absolute that idea of "government provided health care or none at all" that you suggest.
I'm not sure if you don't understand what other people are trying to tell you, or if you are willfully twisting the argument so it doesn't work.

For some reason, reading this makes me dizzy...

And to my statement that demanding I provide evidence that free market works before it can be accepted is like demanding an atheist prove his beliefs and "I am advocating that there's no evidence to support the idea that mandated, one-size-fits-all systems work. I ask where is the sense in having options cut off and nobody steps up to the plate."

He said...

Argument by analogy doesn't work if the sample is disanalagous. Atheism is not a postive argument, it is the null hypothesis. It exists in a vacuum with no underlying assumptions. If you want to say that you do not have a burden of proof, you have to show you support the null hypothesis. Free market capitalism has logical, philosophical, and structural underlying assumptions. You are not arguing nothingness is better than socialism, you are arguing free market capitalism is better than any and all types and degrees of socialism. You are arguing an alternative rather than the null hypothesis, therefore you are not free of a burden of proof. Additionally, any claim to the status quo, which is often seen as a relative neutral ground in advocacy arguments. is defeated by your assertion that the status quo is not acceptable, whatever your grounds may be.
People have responded to how options they or others promote have benefits and faults, but you refuse to provide how options you advance have any qualities at all (good or bad), preferring to claim you do not have a shared burden of proof when you most clearly do.

Oy...so much to do.


This one always baffles me too, someone said in response to the FedEx/UPS vid that unions and wonderful and "I work for a big corporation and the management at our store said there will be no raises while he's there. We have no benefit's package. No guarantee of employment(They made us all sign papers saying they can fire us without reason)."

To which I asked simply "Then why are you working there?"

Seriously?  Do people make their lots in life harder for the sole purpose of argument or something?

[Virgil0211]

More replies with more bullshit. Are you sure one of them isn't MasterGhostKnight under another name?

[Lord T Hawkeye]

Nah, it's just that collectivists are pretty indistinguishable from each other.  ^^

[Virgil0211]

Nah, it's just that collectivists are pretty indistinguishable from each other.  ^^

Man. Reading that thread is so discouraging. I mean, sometimes I think it might very well be a good idea to start a libertarian community. Anybody know of a technology to create islands? =P

[Travis Retriever]

Man. Reading that thread is so discouraging. I mean, sometimes I think it might very well be a good idea to start a libertarian community. Anybody know of a technology to create islands? =P

I'd dig it.  Hey, it worked for the founding fathers, didn't it?

[Virgil0211]

I'd dig it.  Hey, it worked for the founding fathers, didn't it?

I actually had a dream once where Houston, Texas itself seceded from the United States and Texas and created a "libertarian society" with free trade and personal liberty. The Houston harbor would make it a good place for trade, and its already large size and such would make it an interesting little experiment. It's also the largest city in the US without zoning laws.

[MrBogosity]

Man. Reading that thread is so discouraging. I mean, sometimes I think it might very well be a good idea to start a libertarian community. Anybody know of a technology to create islands? =P

There is the Free State Project.

[MrBogosity]

I actually had a dream once where Houston, Texas itself seceded from the United States and Texas and created a "libertarian society" with free trade and personal liberty. The Houston harbor would make it a good place for trade, and its already large size and such would make it an interesting little experiment. It's also the largest city in the US without zoning laws.

Yes, but it's also probably the most horrendous police-state city in the country.

[Virgil0211]

Yes, but it's also probably the most horrendous police-state city in the country.

Well, it was mainly just a dream I had. I probably picked Houston because I was born there.

How is it the most horrendous police-state city in the country?

[Virgil0211]

There is the Free State Project.

How well is that working out, by the way?

Also, here's another post from that thread responding to LTH.

Paying twice...yes You do in that case. How the reasoning is that that back is in place for you and anyone else should something happen, like....job loss, or heaven forbid....the company you have insurance with...goes under.

It's a backup for those with the cash, and the only option for those on limited means.

Elementary yes, but so long as you think about the basic human needs in purely a monetary sense, then I believe there is a problem. I understand your argument, and from a purely financial position it makes sense.

But....health service, education and many others cannot be looked at from purely one viewpoint.

If you argue "Then were do we draw the line?" That's the rub isn't it....that's why we vote in our governments... to govern in our best interests in all areas for all people...not just financial.

To give you an example form here.

Electricity. It was owned and operated by our governement and the Ministry of Electricity for many many years. Sometime ago in the late 80's/early 90's the government (with blessing from business community) sold off the assetts to various operators with the belief that privatization would open the industry up to competition thereby improving service and lowering prices. With this description, many of Joe Public accepted this...

Fast forward to the last few years.

The Governements is having to step in and freeze prices rises and wants answers after all the various generation and suppliers (and there are alot of them) have all been making record profits, hiking prices and generally gouging consumers. They all do it....there is nothing to stop them doing it. Consumers are paying upwards of 10-15% price hikes on electricity every year for the same or less service and supply. While the companies have been registering profits in the billions while bleating that the cost of supply is increasing and thus forcing them to increase prices.

As a result, the public is livid and the power companies pretty much can do what they want because electricity is a necessity, there is no regulation, and they certainly aren't regulating themselves within the supply and demand equation....because they're all doing it.

The elderly are dying in much higher numbers and health costs are skyrocketing because people can no longer afford to pay for the power to heat their homes to safe levels during winter.

In this case....privatization has caused the majority of people a great deal of pain, annoyance, and grief.

That's my opinion and experience thus far....rubbish it if you will.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't that an instance of corporatism?

[MrBogosity]

Well, it was mainly just a dream I had. I probably picked Houston because I was born there.

How is it the most horrendous police-state city in the country?

It seems like whenever I see a story about corrupt or abusive cops, 2/3rds of the time it's about Houston.