Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (63421)	5/4/2008 10:30:33 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542011

I don't remember saying you'd enjoy that. I think I merely said you need to choose. When you cut the safety net, as you proposed, people will die- you yourself talked about the "penalties"- and how people should be allowed to suffer them. Go look at what I said. I BELIEVE I said that priorities will differ- one of my greatest priorities is not hurting the least fortunate in society. What you said: Message 24538124 Which implies we just let people sink, if they make the "wrong" choices- I'm assuming getting ill without medical insurance would be once of those "choices". You sure didn't clarify that point. What I said: Message 24538200 Enjoyment? I think not. I said it was about preferences. What people "like" in government isn't about "enjoyment"- it's about what they choose. And clearly, your preferences involve letting people, as you put it- pay the penalties: " The straight-forward approach is to let people make their own decisions and gain their own rewards or pay their own penalties based on those decisions. Nah, can't do that. <g>" Since the penalty for poor decisions- like being poor and having bad health habits, is often death- that's a fairly harsh penalty you're wanting them to pay. I didn't say you'd "enjoy" it- though your post strikes me as cavalier, but I do not like your system. Karen, none of that was unfair. You're the one who misremembered "enjoyment"- maybe because you were enjoying joking around with Rambi. But I didn't say you'd enjoy the prospect of people dying in the streets. You made that up my dear. I hope you'll apologize for it. Talk about demonizing- how VERY ironic. You can't be against the safety net AND pretend that doesn't have real, and fatal, consequences for people who would be caught in it if it were there, AND it is silly to get upset about being called about not wanting a safety net, when you obviously don't like them. You want people to suffer when they make the bad decisions- bad decisions which could lead to death. I do not agree with you. It's not like your positions is per se "bad"- it's just not the kind of society I want. Did you think I was objectively judging you? I'm just subjectively judging your system. I'm a moral relativist after all. And mocking GW? Since the effects are already here, and already hurting people, I think it's completely fair to attribute some insensitivity to that position. And please, it's already quite clear that runoff and new weather patterns are related- which makes mocking the GW aspect that much more ridiculous.