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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (9093)	9/4/2009 6:26:58 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 42652

yes you are

To: Road Walker who wrote (9093)	9/4/2009 7:25:42 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Seems some folks are against the 'general welfare'. Reasonable people can disagree about what that entails. People on opposite sides of an issue can each be pursuing the general welfare as they see it. Or they may be opposed to it as you say. It's not always easy to tell one from the other.

To: Road Walker who wrote (9093)	9/5/2009 9:57:27 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Respond to of 42652

Seems some folks are against the 'general welfare'. Taking from those who produce and giving to those who do not has been tried many times and always fails. Your preference for the above system is harmful to the general welfare. The poor are much better off today than they would be under a coerced redistributionist system. Mariners know that when the tide rises it raises everyone's boat. When people who excel at producing are allowed to keep most of the fruits of their labor there is much more in the general pot for everyone; hus those who are unwilling or unable to produce benefit to a greater degree.