Careful, Alceste! You are on the verge of being called a socialist! (But not by me.)
I've called her a socialist many times and I have been right. I bet she agrees with me.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Careful, Alceste! You are on the verge of being called a socialist! (But not by me.)
Wait til The People take control of her fledgling video game company.I've called her a socialist many times and I have been right. I bet she agrees with me.
Wait til The People take control of her fledgling video game company.
She'll put on a tie, take up golf, kick a small dog, & join the Republican Party.
(Perhaps some day she might even become a Libertarian.)
In Canada, everything is free, except for your visits to the dentist and optometrist, your ambulance rides and your prescription medications.
That's not quite true.
At least here in Ontario, dental visits and prescriptions aren't normally covered by public health insurance. Many people get supplementary private insurance to cover these items.
Have some concrete allegations?
Have support for that figure?
We can't know for sure until he releases his tax returns.
He creates more jobs than those who only dole out money forcibly taken from others, eg, Obama.
That would be a matter of opinion.
But allegations based upon speculations aren't fair to Willard.We can't know for sure until he releases his tax returns.
It's like saying Obama was disciplined for cheating since his records are secret.
Sure, we're curious about such records, but specious speculation, while fun, is wrong.
Of course. But it's clear that entrepreneurs & companies create jobs. But how would government do that? Any money they spend,That would be a matter of opinion.
is money taken (even fiat currency) from the private sector, which results in job losses. I doubt that the net effect is job creation.
Instead, I see government spending as necessary to provide basic functions for survival of a peaceful society....spend enuf to achieve
that, & then no more, because it's a drag on the economy.
What constitutes a "peaceful society"? Now that's a matter of opinion to really argue over.
Actually, you're wrong about that, as well. Preventive maintenance is cheaper than the alternative of trying to cure what was preventable. That's why public health care plans are more cost-effective than those that encourage people not to get regular checkups. So it ultimately lowers the "indirect" cost, which, in our case, will be in the form of lower premiums paid to private insurance companies. Not in my case, though, because I am going on Medicare in a couple of months. So my overall costs (with supplemental "medigap" insurance and all the copays and Plan B premiums and other gotchas) will be several thousand dollars per year out of pocket.
Romney made the same arguments and supported a public mandate when he was governor of Massachusetts. Obama, a former Massachusetts resident, seems to have modeled his approach after Romney's. The only reason that Romney threatens to repeal "Obamacare" is that he would never have gotten the nomination by supporting what he originally promoted. Is he going to sincerely try to repeal the ACA? I really doubt he is sincere about it, but most people who will vote for him aren't duped either. They will support him primarily because he is not Obama.
Of course. But it's clear that entrepreneurs & companies create jobs. But how would government do that? Any money they spend,
is money taken (even fiat currency) from the private sector, which results in job losses. I doubt that the net effect is job creation.
Instead, I see government spending as necessary to provide basic functions for survival of a peaceful society....spend enuf to achieve
that, & then no more, because it's a drag on the economy.
There isn't evidence either way that Obama cheated in school, was disciplined,Al Capone went to jail for tax evasion, not murder or anything else associated with being a gangster. Do you think he never committed murder and wasn't a gangster?
Just because someone isn't charged with something doesn't mean they didn't do it. Right now, there isn't evidence either way.
No. "Evasion" refers to illegally done "avoidance".I'm not sure of how the law works in the US (American tax rules scare me), but here, actions that are taken solely to reduce income tax payable are considered tax evasion.
Funny you should mention that. I am a Keynesian in the limited sense which he proffered the approach. But II take it you're not a Keynesian.
Careful, Alceste! You are on the verge of being called a socialist! (But not by me.)
Yup.I've called her a socialist many times and I have been right. I bet she agrees with me.
That's why I said "except". I haven't been to the dentist in almost ten years - since the last time I had a job with dental benefits.That's not quite true..
At least here in Ontario, dental visits and prescriptions aren't normally covered by public health insurance. Many people get supplementary private insurance to cover these items.
Even if you're not sick yourself, it's nice knowing that everyone you know and care about is getting properly looked after, and their health problems are unlikely to cause them any financial problems.That's interesting! I'm generally a very healthy individual, so the Canadian health care system would (currently) be of little benefit to me. Looking back on my expenses for for the last several years, most of my health care costs are related to my (preventative) perscription medications and my dental visits (mainly checkups, with a filling or a crown here and there). Even though I'm in my 60s, I rarely go to the doctor with a real health problem.
You mean wait till she stokes a very large check to the government and is not so proud of her bank balance anymore.
That's why I said "except". I haven't been to the dentist in almost ten years - since the last time I had a job with dental benefits.
And that's why you won't me asserting that Obama never cheated in school.There isn't evidence either way that Obama cheated in school, was disciplined,
& received poor grades.....& has a nude Groundskeeper Willie screensaver.
Just because Obama has escaped detection so far, doesn't make him innocent.
(Hey...this is fun! Anything you can do, I can do stupidinger.)
Even if you're not sick yourself, it's nice knowing that everyone you know and care about is getting properly looked after, and their health problems are unlikely to cause them any financial problems.
Bah - I misread your post. I didn't see the "except for".
My fault for posting before coffee. Sorry.
Originally Posted by Reverend Richard
That's interesting! I'm generally a very healthy individual, so the Canadian health care system would (currently) be of little benefit to me. Looking back on my expenses for for the last several years, most of my health care costs are related to my (preventative) perscription medications and my dental visits (mainly checkups, with a filling or a crown here and there). Even though I'm in my 60s, I rarely go to the doctor with a real health problem.
This is true. And, although I don't make a lot of money, I would be willing to pay a few more taxes if it meant that more of my family had better medical coverage. Quite frankly I am my brothers' and sisters' keeper - yes, even the lazy bums who don't deserve it - but especially their kids, who had no choice in the matter.
You can't properly use the word "universal" unless your entire health care system is... well, universal. What the US has with medicare, medicaid, and for members of the military and congress, is perhaps a "viable, effective framework for publicly funded health care", but certainly not "universal health care". Even Romneycare in Mass. is not "universal". It only expands medicare to cover "most" of the people in Mass. who can't afford private insurance.
I feel like I can never really explain how different "universal health care" is to what Americans have, except to say that no Canadian citizen directly pays for any medically necessary health care cost, ever.
Nobody.
Ever.
You can't get there by a little bit of tweaking here and there. You have to elect people who will decisively say to your insurance companies "You know what? Feck off. We value our own health more than we value your profits". Then it's done.
Of all the people I know, not one has ever lost health care insurance upon getting really sick.
How common is what you claim?