3rd Attempt: GOP/Trump Repeal & Replace ACA and Trump lie about pre-exist coverage

I think he is one of those posters where logic does not matter, so debating with him using logic does not work.

 

you already abide by this ethos, unless you are giving away all of your time/wealth to provide health care for anyone that can't afford it

 

not confiscated in that instance, but rather exchanged for health care

 

That's kinda my point though. The rules by which we distributed wealth in the first place is a construct. If we change the construct and change the way we distribute wealth, it's just as valid. You want to make an argument based on a right of property, and I'm just saying that such a right is not sacred. It's not even particularly fair. But it is within our power to change it.

 

I cover additional expenses for her when I can afford it and take her to doc appointments when she needs and I have no work scheduling conflicts. I've no problem helping out a fellow human being especially one as kind as her.

I'm an atheist but when I used to go to St. Catherine's my parents and I were apart of a program with the church to give rides to terminally ill patients that needed rides to their doc appointments. These are mostly senior citizens whose families are too busy to even visit them, much less take them to a boring ass doc appointment. I'd take them out to lunch after assuming they weren't too nauseous and really it's mostly the companionship you get in talking to someone extremely lonely at the end of their life that's most rewarding. You get to take someone's grandma or grandpa out of their low income apartment that's dark and dingy and you get to bring some life in them by simply being a friend. You write like helping those worse off than you is such an enormous burden when it's anything but. Money makes the world go round but IMO it says a lot more about you as a person that you'd bow to the almighty dollar over a fellow human being; In the case of my friend, an American taxpaying citizen no less who chose a vocation for a career in helping sick people with respiratory problems.

Like I said before, some people on this board are okay with letting people with pre-existing conditions die for the sake of an ever increasing federal debt. They don't want to cut expenses on things like tax breaks to big businesses or military expenses. They'd rather let fellow Americans who got dealt a bad hand in the genetic lottery take the fall instead. That's your call and again IMO it says a lot about you as a person.

 

You sir are an awesome human being!

 

Letting people keep more of their own money isn't an "expense".

 

I thought you wanted America to be more like it was in the past, when tax rates were way higher than they are today?

 

You cut off the rest of the sentence. I've no problems with tax breaks to the middle class since they need it more than big businesses do.

For example, the biggest contributing factor why property taxes in Austin are so enormously high is because of poorly negotiated tax subsidies given to companies like Samsung so they'd locate their power plant here under the guise of job creation. Except the jobs created don't end up benefitting local citizens and less than half the number of jobs promised end up actually existing. Companies like Samsung pay little to no taxes meanwhile homeowners in Austin are stuck forking over anywhere from $4-6K a year for a faceless global entity to locate here. Again, it's not right. I read so often about the fear of wealth re-distribution and it's usually the little owned savings of the middle class and the poor that end up having to re-distribute it over to big business. Why is that okay?

 

This is not an intelligent response to what I posted. Read what I posted again and try to do a better job.

 

Are you against raising taxes or not? That is the question.

 

Well it doesn't matter who is getting to keep more of their own money, it's still them keeping their own money, not an "expense" of the state. If I steal 100 bucks from you and give 25 back to you, I didn't incur a 25 dollar expense, I just stole less. That's the only thing I was taking exception to. The way you worded it made it sound like the government was using their own money to pay people rather than the reality of the situation being that they just aren't taking as much away from them. We can discuss for days how the government should use the money they take from people, I just didn't want to lose track of the notion that it's not the government's money to begin with. Should we take from people and give it to the health care industry so that people have a right to medical services? Maybe, but if we are going to do that, we are going to have to restructure a LOT of what the government spends money on to afford it. When 60% of what the government spends the people's money on is already entitlements, it's asking quite a lot to take on another trillion or so in entitlements.

 

I'd be absolutely fine with restructuring our budget to suit the needs of the sick over big businesses and an increased military budget.

 

That really isn't what we're talking about at all. What was being discussed was the notion of tax cuts being an "expense".

Now going off topic, do I want to raise taxes to pay for trillions in additional entitlements? No. I think if we want to make health care a right, we need to cut that money from current entitlements in order to not have to raise or lower taxes.

 

Then we don't disagree in theory.

 

Typical ignorant conservative/"libertarian" world of nutty absolutes. If you don't give away all your money to the government than you are hypocrite. They believe in giving nothing away so they are not hypocrites. The virtue of selfishness, don't you know.

 

Federal taxes are an inflation control mechanism because the government prints its own currency.

 

He won't give a real answer, because he's scared.

Will any of the conservatives against universal healthcare or ACA tell me why we should continue to fund medicare?