Jump to content

What Are You Thinking About v.CC


pwny

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

Which side are you arguing for? All those supposed to be examples of how WELL government can run things?

Some may disagree with some of those.

I’m not going to get into the argument that some are or aren’t run well. I’m merely pointing out that the slippery slope argument doesn’t hold water, as we clearly have added all sorts of socialist programs without diving into communism. There was no slippery slope when those programs were added, there will be none if we add others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

I bought a 98 cent pair of sandals at Walmart the other day, and lemme just tell you... You get what you pay for in life. 

So you're telling me I would get better health-care if the insurance companies jacked up their profit margins to like 200% more than what it is now? Well why didn't you say so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

Something tells me there are examples showing the advantages of both, all depends which side of the argument you want to take.

Sure it's not a one to one, but every single person in this thread arguing against socialized anything is basically saying it's almost always worse than if it was privatized, which is completely false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TXsteeler said:

Ok so if I find an "inflation adjusted" cost of food or cars or houses graph those will all be flat horizontal lines?

YOU are the one who brought up school as an example of something run well by the government. I disagree and show you why I disagree. Quadrupling costs without any measurable increase in scores. So you go "well what about <blank>!!" You want to talk about schooling? Talk about schooling. Obfuscating is silly.

And if you go back a few pages I indeed posted a graph that listed the relative cost of various goods over the past couple decades. Here's a shocker: many things were actually a negatively sloping line!! Wow. Almost like a free market serves a purpose and without government interference private entities can exploit inefficiencies and create cheaper, more readily available goods.

Edited by cddolphin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TXsteeler said:

So you're telling me I would get better health-care if the insurance companies jacked up their profit margins to like 200% more than what it is now? Well why didn't you say so.

Bro, I was literally just commenting on my sandals.  Literally.  I ain't making no damn health coverage comments. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, HorizontoZenith said:

Bro, I was literally just commenting on my sandals.  Literally.  I ain't making no damn health coverage comments. 

Why is Walmart selling sandals in February? Don’t you live in the Midwest?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, cddolphin said:

YOU are the one who brought up school as an example of something run well by the government. I disagree and show you why I disagree. Quadrupling costs without any measurable increase in scores. So you go "well what about <blank>!!" You want to talk about schooling? Talk about schooling. Obfuscating is silly.

And if you go back a few pages I indeed posted a graph that listed the relative cost of various goods over the past couple decades. Here's a shocker: many things were actually a negatively sloping line!! Wow. Almost like a free market serves a purpose and without government interference private entities can exploit inefficiencies and create cheaper, more readily available goods.

My point is that "inflation adjusted" doesn't necessarily mean it should be a horizontal line on a graph.

Edit: and I asked you to compare private schools as well.

Edited by TXsteeler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TXsteeler said:

My point is that "inflation adjusted" doesn't necessarily mean it should be a horizontal line on a graph.

And who said that it should be? It's data to be examined. What should or shouldn't be is irrelevant, we are concerned here with what is.

You're missing the point entirely. Almost on purpose, seems like.

Would you agree that paying 3.5 times the cost for something that hasn't improved one iota is a bad thing?

Edited by cddolphin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

The Cato Institute was founded by the Charles Koch Foundation. There's not really a whole lot of effort required to get to the bottom of this mystery.

Is he one of those lizard people or something? A billionaire that bathes in baby blood, something to that effect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, iPwn said:

I’m not going to get into the argument that some are or aren’t run well. I’m merely pointing out that the slippery slope argument doesn’t hold water, as we clearly have added all sorts of socialist programs without diving into communism. There was no slippery slope when those programs were added, there will be none if we add others.

That’s fine.

To bring this back to what we were originally discussing, my only real point is that “let the gubmint handle it” doesn’t always work in the same way “free market” doesn’t.

There is always going to be people who take advantage of others and who need oversight, in both the private and public world.

If healthcare is socialized there will be folks who benefit greatly, folks who don’t and a whole lot of folks in the middle.  Where you fall on that line is probably going to determine how you feel about it.  Both have their advantages, and disadvantages for everyone.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...