The Biggest Threat to Obama's Health Care "Reform" - Reality - Page 4

Not only that but the claimed examples take place in an age full of good intentions and government thievery. Utopia is never achieved. Suffering never completely ends. Death is always still the final state.


If someone has managed to go through their entire lives and somehow alienate every single person they have encountered to the point that no one wants to help them no matter the circumstance, then in my view, no one should be forced to help them. If they were selfish enough to never save a dime for themselves and selfish enough to never cultivate a single interest or relationship with anyone out there, then let the chips fall where they may. If they are beyond the reach of even pity and every available charity everywhere, then again, let the chips fall where they may.

What do you mean wow? Read the criteria carefully. Groverat said this person was a person that NO repeat NO family, friends or charitable organizations would be willing to help.

That includes you. The person would be beyond pity and beyond the help of anyone OTHER than government.


Hey don't be surprised if when someone crafts a scenario in which the only choice is be painted into a corner, that the choice stinks.

Can you think of a person that would be "un-help-able" by Grove's criteria? Can you imagine taking that asshole brother of yours down to ten relief organizations and every single one of them turning him down and while you are in them asking for help he lights your car on fire and then tells you to fuck off while crawling away on his arthritic knees. He described the person as being beyond the help of friends, family and organizations that are not the government. Who the hell meets that criteria?

See that would be the only type of scenario I can think of to even match what he says. As Taskiss notes, the links don't support his claims. I've never met someone that has no friends, family, savings and has burned every possible bridge with everyone everywhere.

See in Grove's scenario your brother wouldn't just be an asshole. He'd have to be the type of person who was terrible enough to drive you to not help him thus justifying the government extracting the money from you to help him anyway. He'd have to murder your wife, cut out both your kidneys and sell them while burning down your home, and stealing your cars.

If there were such a person, a person that not a soul or organization anywhere would ever care to redeem, why should the government redeem them? Why should they steal and not allow the judgment of all those parties to stand?

I'd love to have an answer to these questions...

If there were such a person, a person that not a soul or organization anywhere would ever care to redeem, why should the government redeem them? Why should they steal and not allow the judgment of all those parties to stand?

Please answer the question rather than casting aspersions around.

If there were such a person, a person that not a soul or organization anywhere would ever care to redeem, why should the government redeem them? Why should they steal and not allow the judgment of all those parties to stand?

Meanwhile I find the bubble that declares that there would never be a single charitable organization to help those drug-addicted children if not for the government. I find it bizarre that you think such children would never receive aide from anyone. We know the exact opposite to be true in reality.

So enjoy your own bubble.


Be honest, this is nothing more than an ad-hom attempt and phrases like intellectual cowardice reflect no true desire to have dialog.


Keep supposing from within your bubble. The criteria provided made it clear that aid organizations would deny them for some reason and thus the ONLY avenue of help they could seek would be government. Charitable organizations have all those criteria. You declared a special hypothetical where they would for some reason be unwilling and thus the ONLY possible outcome would be government.

Please read your own posts before casting about accusations.


How is this any different from today? The stats I provided already noted that of the uninsured, millions already qualified for help but simply did not apply for it. Declaring that one solution isn't utopia doesn't make the other solution utopia in the perceived vacuum. All those hypotheticals are true for public options as well.


So be galled. I assure you that if there were a voucher system my income would be much higher and would be within a purely private system as well. My returns on activities outside of teaching are much higher which is why I long ago shrugged and do nothing extra in terms of duty or pay.

How many communities out there are without the power to do anything? I wouldn't say there are many. In fact the very variables that we call disadvantages often become positive traits the second we move outside of the victimization mindset. Every coin has two sides.

CBO is the bad guy in my view. A review of their predictions would show that they are the most accurate but still off widely with regard to actual cost. Their claims about future medicare costs were off by 900% as an example. So in this instance they may claim the higher costs and less savings than OMB and other governmental department but the reality is that all of them are truly off by huge percentages when the real numbers come in.