Many years ago, a man took his case to the Supreme Court of the US. He case was against proper trial representation. Until that time if you could not afford a lawyer, you did not get one.
So.....how can a fundamental right be left to the market???
I am not in favor of either, private or public healthcare/education.
I am in favor of QUALITY healthcare and education for ALL. If we can have the greatest army, we can have the greatest healthcare system and best education.
How do we get there??...........I don’t care. But let's agree to make this..........a fundamental right.
If you are forced to pay for wars anyways, and there is nothing you can do about it, why not pay a little bit more to save some of your countrymen???
How about I pay for neither, eh?
-Jon
To darkness I condemn you...
Cesar: I was loving our discussions here until you changed subject to English Composition. Yes, English is my second language, in fact I dont even have a first language. Also I dont care what CAPS means, when I use it .....please notice that my only intention is make important. Going back to Economics. If you make Markets=Economics, in my opinion is wrong. Economics is more than that. HELLO....we are still writing/making this science.
I was loving our discussions here until you changed subject to English Composition. Yes, English is my second language, in fact I dont even have a first language.
Also I dont care what CAPS means, when I use it .....please notice that my only intention is make important.
Going back to Economics. If you make Markets=Economics, in my opinion is wrong. Economics is more than that. HELLO....we are still writing/making this science.
I did not change the subject, I asked a valid question regarding the grammar in your posts. I apologize once again, & wish you well in furthering your English skills.As for my CAPS comment, it is a pet peeve of mine, nothing terribly important; do not take offense from this. A (The) Market is an integral concept to Economics; in no way did I say Markets = Economics, & that's the end of that. What I did say was: entitlements & fundamental rights cannot exist in a free-market like they do in the non-free markets, because free-market action cannot exist with involuntary & coercive actions, nor theft, as they go against principles of the free-market.
WARNING: This signature violates Rule 5. Stay classy!
GilesStratton: Cesar: Normal 0 21 false false false PT X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 I think from an Economics point of view, I guess you do it from a business man point of view, since you argument is based on "free markets". Let's keep it simple. The greatest product our Capitalistic society has created is "to make every man think as if he/she is rich” ………..so don’t mess with my money. People prefer to watch "who wants to be a millionaire, rather than other productive activities. But again they are free in a free market...........right??? You call my idea stealing, wrong and criminal. So I repeat, I think from an Economics point of view and to me this whole thing of healthcare and education (even if provided by "forced" taxation) creates benefits unable to be put in a balance sheet or income statement like you would have it done in your free market world. It is in my opinion……… a socio-economic "Investment". Normal 0 21 false false false PT X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 YOU’RE FULL OF NONSENSE
Cesar: Normal 0 21 false false false PT X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 I think from an Economics point of view, I guess you do it from a business man point of view, since you argument is based on "free markets". Let's keep it simple. The greatest product our Capitalistic society has created is "to make every man think as if he/she is rich” ………..so don’t mess with my money. People prefer to watch "who wants to be a millionaire, rather than other productive activities. But again they are free in a free market...........right??? You call my idea stealing, wrong and criminal. So I repeat, I think from an Economics point of view and to me this whole thing of healthcare and education (even if provided by "forced" taxation) creates benefits unable to be put in a balance sheet or income statement like you would have it done in your free market world. It is in my opinion……… a socio-economic "Investment".
Normal 0 21 false false false PT X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
I think from an Economics point of view, I guess you do it from a business man point of view, since you argument is based on "free markets". Let's keep it simple. The greatest product our Capitalistic society has created is "to make every man think as if he/she is rich” ………..so don’t mess with my money. People prefer to watch "who wants to be a millionaire, rather than other productive activities. But again they are free in a free market...........right???
You call my idea stealing, wrong and criminal. So I repeat, I think from an Economics point of view and to me this whole thing of healthcare and education (even if provided by "forced" taxation) creates benefits unable to be put in a balance sheet or income statement like you would have it done in your free market world.
It is in my opinion……… a socio-economic "Investment".
YOU’RE FULL OF NONSENSE
Cesar:Going back to Economics. If you make Markets=Economics, in my opinion is wrong. Economics is more than that. HELLO....we are still writing/making this science.
Nobody has said such a thing, but economics must involve the study of markets. Markets being the complex voluntary arrangements on men striving to remove dissatisfaction.
In fact, you're the only goingbeyond economics by sliding in value judgements.
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"
Bob Dylan
Thank you for your time my friend.
But why can't fundamental rights exists in a free market??? Can you expand your answer??? I would appreciate it.
Nitroadict: Cesar: I was loving our discussions here until you changed subject to English Composition. Yes, English is my second language, in fact I dont even have a first language. Also I dont care what CAPS means, when I use it .....please notice that my only intention is make important. Going back to Economics. If you make Markets=Economics, in my opinion is wrong. Economics is more than that. HELLO....we are still writing/making this science. What I did say was: entitlements & fundamental rights cannot exist in a free-market like they do in the non-free markets, because free-market action cannot exist with involuntary & coercive actions, nor theft, as they go against principles of the free-market.
What I did say was: entitlements & fundamental rights cannot exist in a free-market like they do in the non-free markets, because free-market action cannot exist with involuntary & coercive actions, nor theft, as they go against principles of the free-market.
Cesar you have to understand the fundamental difference between 'rights' and 'needs'. A right is something that's inherent to you as a human being. It's not given to you by other people but can only be restricted. Can you be free within a crowd? Yes. Can you be free in a desert? Yes. Even if you were a slave before: once you run away from those who control yourself, you're free again. Now needs, on the other hand, are external. It's something that you need to get, typically with the help of other people. If you claim that you have a right to healthcare than you basically ask the government to force other people to pay for your expences. Essentially, you're restricting their freedom in order to get what you want.
Now you might say: but everyone needs to be healthy (educated, employed, etc.). So if everyone pays for everyone else then it's for the greater good. If so, ask this question: why should this need be fullfilled by violating our right to freedom? If you agree that freedom is the basis of free society and a barrier against tyranny, how can you be in favor of using government guns to make people less free? What else are you willing to allow in the name of the greater good? How about sending all libertarians to gulag so they stop creating dissent in our "free country"?
Also, why is it always the government that must provide a solution? Why not volunteering and charity? Why not giving more tax breaks for pro bono work? Why not removing all sort of regulations that drive up the cost of health care in this country? I hope you're not one of those cynics that think that people are not capable of helping each other without government's intervention?
Also, from the practical standpoint, US semi-private health care is still better than any free health care system in any of the developed countries. So what makes you think that making it more socialized it's going to be better? It needs less socialism, not more.
If I hear not allowed much oftener; said Sam, I'm going to get angry.
J.R.R.Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings
Cesar: I agree with about poverty. However, always the hot topic is income equality. How much is too much or too low??? No one knows. But I think like that Chinese wise man that Education could be the beggining. I truly believe class differences decreases a lot when both rich and poor have closely the same level of education.
I agree with about poverty. However, always the hot topic is income equality. How much is too much or too low??? No one knows.
But I think like that Chinese wise man that Education could be the beggining. I truly believe class differences decreases a lot when both rich and poor have closely the same level of education.
And how is there an inequality now? Those who work hard earn more money. Everyone has this opportunity, and everyone already gets access to an education in the US. Dont give me this inner-city schools are no good mantra either- there are success stories from all of them where smart people worked hard to get out of a bad situation and became very successful.
The very idea of 'class' bothers me. I didnt expect on these forums to find someone who actually thought I should feel guilty because I'm intelligent. You believe that everyone on earth should be equal, when clearly we are not. Some people are smarter, some work harder, some get lucky. Yet you feel that, because there are poor(er) immigrants who didnt get lucky, who aren't willing to make the sacrifices to improve their jobs/social standing, that the government should provide this for them. Let's examine how crazy that is.
Let's examine two groups here: Chinese immigrants and African immigrants. Take the Chinese people for example. The original immigrants were essentially slave labor for the railroads and such industries. Dirt poor, poor health, discrimination, etc. However, these people had great pride and work ethic, and they worked hard to improve their standing. The government never helped them, and now no one would argue that they're very well-off in this country. Now for africans. Granted, many of them were not voluntary immigrants, and I dont want to discount slavery, but for this discussion it is irrelevant. They (post-emancipation) worked for crap wages, had poor health, were discriminated against etc just like the chinese. Yet the government stepped in. It required better opportunities a la affirmative action. Welfare came into play. Unemployment allowed people to not seek out serious work. The result? Minimal improvement in the economic department. This illustration is here not to imply that there's any difference between chinese or african immigrants, because there isnt. It's here to point out that where government gets involved to 'help' certain people (be it a race, religion, socioeconomic status), it ALWAYS screws it up, and costs more in the long run.
In short, if people want to improve their lives and afford better healthcare, NO ONE is stopping them from doing so. Get off the crutch of the "government as a provider" and take some responsability for your own actions and life. That's what the people on this board are arguing for, that everyone is their own provider, and that I will never be my brother's keeper at the point of a gun, as the government demands.
I believe this thread belongs in the Newbie section.
I think we should refrain from re-quoting and re-copying previous posts. That makes for difficult reading and a tiresome scroller-coaster ride.
Cesar, since quality free healthcare is a fundamental right of all people, how do you justify that you yourself are not studying medicine with the intention of going around the world and offering people quality healthcare services free of charge out of your own expense? How dare you deny the people their fundamental right? You are like a person who belives people have a fundamental right to their lives, but goes around murdering people denying them that right anyway. In other words you are a hypocrite.
You are right my friend and trust me I agree with you. But your free market argument is very quantitative. My stuff about Healthcare and Education is about Economics but might not fit in free markets. Also as you called it value judgments, I disagree, I think the benefits of Healthcare and Education are very qualitative and lack the quantitative characteristics that would have in a free market full of nice Balance sheets and Income statements.
In fact I dont have any official position about Healthcare and Education other than WE NEED IT FOR EVERYONE and WE NEED TO FIND HOW TO DO IT. And you have to convince me free markets is the way.
I know my English does not sound good to you. But I am no fool my friend, I have a BS Economics and an MBA in Finance.
Ever heard the saying no atheist in a foxhole. You tell you dying or deceased son that you cannot afford to pay for his healthcare.........but it’s ok because you believe in free markets. Right??
GilesStratton: Cesar:Going back to Economics. If you make Markets=Economics, in my opinion is wrong. Economics is more than that. HELLO....we are still writing/making this science. Nobody has said such a thing, but economics must involve the study of markets. Markets being the complex voluntary arrangements on men striving to remove dissatisfaction. In fact, you're the only goingbeyond economics by sliding in value judgements.
Cesar:Ever heard the saying no atheist in a foxhole. You tell you dying or deceased son that you cannot afford to pay for his healthcare.........but it’s ok because you believe in free markets. Right??
And you'd rather tell me at the point of a gun to save your dying son? See here's the issue you're ignoring: if your son is dying, private charity will step in. The church, individuals who want to help, hospitals that provide free care based off grants from wealthy donors. The government is not the only provider, and with the government out of the way, these others will have more ability to provide. And even if they did not, using a gun to force action is slavery, not an argument. Remember, reason ends where the barrel begins.
JParker:And how is there an inequality now? Those who work hard earn more money. Everyone has this opportunity, and everyone already gets access to an education in the US. Dont give me this inner-city schools are no good mantra either- there are success stories from all of them where smart people worked hard to get out of a bad situation and became very successful.
I'm really sorry to have to use this term but, that is a brilliant example of vulgar libertarianism if I've ever seen one. Today's society does not reward people for their ability to satisfy the needs of others. That's the problem of coercion, that only under the state does distribution become detatched from production.
Cesar:You are right my friend and trust me I agree with you. But your free market argument is very quantitativ
Do you know anything about AE?
Cesar:Also as you called it value judgments, I disagree, I think the benefits of Healthcare and Education are very qualitative and lack the quantitative characteristics that would have in a free market full of nice Balance sheets and Income statements.
What the hell are you on about?
Aside from the lack of coherence you also jumped from "everybody deserves healthcare" to "the state can provide everybody with healthcare" to "only the state can provide everybody with healthcare".
GilesStratton: JParker:And how is there an inequality now? Those who work hard earn more money. Everyone has this opportunity, and everyone already gets access to an education in the US. Dont give me this inner-city schools are no good mantra either- there are success stories from all of them where smart people worked hard to get out of a bad situation and became very successful. I'm really sorry to have to use this term but, that is a brilliant example of vulgar libertarianism if I've ever seen one. Today's society does not reward people for their ability to satisfy the needs of others. That's the problem of coercion, that only under the state does distribution become detatched from production.
From openwiki: "Economists and organizations sometimes accused of vulgar libertarianism include Ludwig von Mises, Milton Friedman, Madsen Pirie, Radley Balko and the Adam Smith Institute."
I'm honored.
JParker: Cesar:Ever heard the saying no atheist in a foxhole. You tell you dying or deceased son that you cannot afford to pay for his healthcare.........but it’s ok because you believe in free markets. Right?? And you'd rather tell me at the point of a gun to save your dying son? See here's the issue you're ignoring: if your son is dying, private charity will step in. The church, individuals who want to help, hospitals that provide free care based off grants from wealthy donors. The government is not the only provider, and with the government out of the way, these others will have more ability to provide. And even if they did not, using a gun to force action is slavery, not an argument. Remember, reason ends where the barrel begins.
Cesar: If you are forced to pay for wars anyways, and there is nothing you can do about it, why not pay a little bit more to save some of your countrymen??? JParker: Cesar:Ever heard the saying no atheist in a foxhole. You tell you dying or deceased son that you cannot afford to pay for his healthcare.........but it’s ok because you believe in free markets. Right?? And you'd rather tell me at the point of a gun to save your dying son? See here's the issue you're ignoring: if your son is dying, private charity will step in. The church, individuals who want to help, hospitals that provide free care based off grants from wealthy donors. The government is not the only provider, and with the government out of the way, these others will have more ability to provide. And even if they did not, using a gun to force action is slavery, not an argument. Remember, reason ends where the barrel begins.
This relates to anything we've been discussing how? Your dying son is fighting a war?
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap