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: RetiredNow who wrote (14856)	3/19/2010 7:45:57 PM
From: skinowski	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

Getting something for nothing is demoralizing - and, it could be argued, often immoral. If we all get government sponsored access to broadband, then we'll have to raise enough taxes to pay for all that access. Since about half of us do not pay any taxes, this would be a clean redistribution from those who pay to those who do not. In the process, we'll lose the input from early adapters who are willing to pay for innovations. Why pay more if the broadband freebee is good enough. Motivation to better oneself is a strong and constructive drive, from which we all benefit. Socialistic freebees are not free - they stagnate. MM, I respect your your clarity of beliefs and your indeed refreshing honesty. I just don't agree. When we talk about the right to Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness, we talk about freedom. By the time we add a long list of additional "basics", we are already talking about an all powerful State, which giveth - and may take away - everything. This is not for me, sir. I'd rather get my lazy butt off the couch, and go to work, and freely pay for my broadband out of my own pocket. Remember reading somewhere many years ago how the French socialists were going to introduce "fairness" in computing. There would be one huge mainframe, and each citizen would be entitled to receive a government provided tax supported dumb terminal. That's an example of the socialistic archetype in action....

To: RetiredNow who wrote (14856)	3/20/2010 2:39:45 AM
From: Maurice Winn	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Even more basic than health care, [or more accurately, medical treatment], is the basic right to food. That's way down at the bottom of Maslow's hierarchy of needs: <I think health care is a fundamental right. You can't build a life and even attempt to care for yourself and your family, if you don't have access to health care. It's simple Maslow's Heirarchy of needs. So in principal, I'm for health care, just like I'm for ensuring access to electricity and broadband Internet for everyone. Those are the basics. What's wrong with that? > By food, I mean the basic supply of it as in "How shall we eat?" though it would be reasonable to enlarge that basic right to "What shall we eat?" to allow for individual requirements to match individual genetic profiles. The pinnacle of eating, "Where shall we eat?", could be left to individuals to decide and pay for themselves with just the food supplies being provided by government. A car is also a basic right and it should be a safe car, not an old dangerous one without ABS, stability control, four wheel drive and so on. Of course internet should be free, and not just via fibre but wireless too so we can enjoy the basic right and security of mobility while connected to cyberspace. Who will provide the principal for these principles? Rich people of course. We used to have hippie communes in NZ and they ran along those principles. From each according to their ability and to each according to their needs. How's that for a slogan? While it's true that after a while they all collapsed because the fewer and fewer enthusiastic workers got tired of supporting those with less energy, or talent, it was an excellent idea for a while. Joking aside, what's wrong with your suggestion is the cost. Mqurice