I want to know how the fuck the right-wing managed to convince people that near-poverty and working yourself to death is a good and desirable thing.
American dream. If you work hard and pull yourself up by your boot straps, you are better than someone else because you did it. It's just an appeal to pride, man. Everyone wants to feel really good about themselves, and feel like they're better than someone else.
Everyone wants to feel really good about themselves, and feel like they're better than someone else.
It's funny, because it's almost like schadenfreude, but in the other direction. Instead of teaching people to take delight in other people's misery, this is encouraging people to take delight in their own misery. So now we've accomplished two things:
1) taught people that it's good for them to suffer 2) taught people that they should not attempt to stop this suffering, because the suffering is good
And then we create people who are actively motivated against their own self-interest.
I blame Christianity, because I feel the need to be angry at a thing.
I don't understand why they think public health care is such a dangerous thing. Expensive, yes, but so is the war and social security. How is it bad other than costing money? They make it sound like it is destroying everything and murdering people like some sort of socialist Godzilla!
I don't understand why they think public health care is such a dangerous thing. Expensive, yes, but so is the war and social security. How is it bad other than costing money? They make it sound like it is destroying everything and murdering people like some sort of socialist Godzilla!
Because it costs money, and for money they'd need taxes, and then we'd have to tax the rich, and that would diminish the dream of how great it would be to be rich... Or some spurious reasoning like that.
I love how almost all of the clips were taken from Faux news, most of the sound bites are out of context, and there isn't one single citation about Obamacare actually costing jobs or the cost of socialized medicine in MA. In fact, I don't there there was one actual fact in that entire video.
It's not fear of national health care it is the fear of loss of liberty. The basic idea is that since that's state will be responsible for paying for your care they will also have the right to cut potential future costs by preventing you from doing things that could cost lots of money to fix later.
Things that you like that are bad for you could be outlawed as a cost prevention.
I don't understand why they think public health care is such a dangerous thing. Expensive, yes, but so is the war and social security. How is it bad other than costing money? They make it sound like it is destroying everything and murdering people like some sort of socialist Godzilla!
The basic reasoning is that they feel the middle class is forced to shoulder the burden of the lazy, worthless, non-working welfare hobos. It's another bit of thinly-veiled racism. They labor under the delusion that poverty is a mark of poor character -- nay, of evil. The underlying precept of Randianism is that wealth is a measure of virtue. Anyone who needs help is actively working against the good of society.
And abject classism, ageism, sexism, weightism (valid arguments can be made for not covering certain cases, but that's a different discussion), and homophobia. Since proper health is universal, public heathcare can be used as a tool as much to heal as to hurt. Hate transsexuals? Don't cover gender reassignments. Want to push down women? Don't cover childbirths or birth control. Fat people disgust you? 350lbs+, no matter the cause, and they're paying out of pocket. Old folks a burden? Don't cover people older than 85. Don't like gays? If a gay man has HIV, his coverage is gone.
For universal healthcare to work, it really has to be all or nothing, as the name suggests. The problem comes when people can't see past their own prejudices in the name of the greater good, and want to use the denial of healing science as a weapon for their own ignorant ends. It disgusts me.
It's not fear of national health care it is the fear of loss of liberty. The basic idea is that since that's state will be responsible for paying for your care they will also have the right to cut potential future costs by preventing you from doing things that could cost lots of money to fix later.
Here's the thing...people pay for the state. I have a distinct feeling most of the 55 percenderps think that all tax money goes to are paying government employees and fixing roads or the military or something. If you want anyone to pay for anything, they scream about how they don't want to pay for anything that anyone else is going to use. I'd be HAPPY to have a small tax increase and be rid of my current over-priced and minimal coverage from my current insurance company, if it meant I'd have no yearly caps, no possibility of being dropped or rejected or uncovered.
It's not fear of national health care it is the fear of loss of liberty. The basic idea is that since that's state will be responsible for paying for your care they will also have the right to cut potential future costs by preventing you from doing things that could cost lots of money to fix later.
Things that you like that are bad for you could be outlawed as a cost prevention.
I am unsure how this is any different from a private corporation telling you "No, sorry, you can't have that procedure" now. Is it really more okay to have a private entity tell me what healthcare I can get, a private entity who is by law required to chase profits before my well-being, than it is to have the government say "No, sorry, you can't have that procedure", especially when the government could get better prices, does not need to mark up all of it's costs because it can run with a terribly small margin, and therefore provide more and better healthcare outcomes?
I am unsure how this is any different from a private corporation telling you "No, sorry, you can't have that procedure" now. Is it really more okay to have a private entity tell me what healthcare I can get, a private entity who is by law required to chase profits before my well-being, than it is to have the government say "No, sorry, you can't have that procedure", especially when the government could get better prices, does not need to mark up all of it's costs because it can run with a terribly small margin, and therefore provide more and better healthcare outcomes?
The fear is not "no operation for you," but "no fries for you." Well there is some fear of, "no operation just take these pain pills" but the loss of liberty angle is based on the government passing laws to outlaw things that are unhealthy under the guise of healthcare.
The fear is not "no operation for you," but "no fries for you." Well there is some fear of, "no operation just take these pain pills" but the loss of liberty angle is based on the government passing laws to outlaw things that are unhealthy under the guise of healthcare.
Do other countries with socialized medicine do this? ie. Ireland, the UK, France, Germany, etc? What sort of behaviors do they outlaw that we don't have laws against already (like hard drugs)?
I'm fine with treating ultra-preventable personal-responsibility things (like self-induced obesity) on the taxpayer dime. Because, this also means that people going down that road will have access to health care and preventative care long before the problem reaches critical mass (pun intended).
If people will go to a doctor when they begin to have a problem, without fear of the cost, it will save us both misery and money in the long run. I'd love to pay for an overweight person getting dietary counseling and subsidized access to a gym if it means they'll be able to veer off the course to full-on obesity.
Comments
1) taught people that it's good for them to suffer
2) taught people that they should not attempt to stop this suffering, because the suffering is good
And then we create people who are actively motivated against their own self-interest.
I blame Christianity, because I feel the need to be angry at a thing.
Also, fursecution is one of my favourite words.
I hope we get to put them into a Roman coliseum and have them fight to the death.
I think I got 'em all.
I will watch every second if this happens. ;^)
Things that you like that are bad for you could be outlawed as a cost prevention.
For universal healthcare to work, it really has to be all or nothing, as the name suggests. The problem comes when people can't see past their own prejudices in the name of the greater good, and want to use the denial of healing science as a weapon for their own ignorant ends. It disgusts me.
Motherfuckers.
If people will go to a doctor when they begin to have a problem, without fear of the cost, it will save us both misery and money in the long run. I'd love to pay for an overweight person getting dietary counseling and subsidized access to a gym if it means they'll be able to veer off the course to full-on obesity.
Topeka decriminalizes domestic violence
"Kansas" just went into the cons. The entire fucking state.