- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Are this leftist's views way out of line?
Posted on 9/18/17 at 10:39 pm
Posted on 9/18/17 at 10:39 pm
Today, I was talking to a guy that is a regular at a local taproom that I frequent, and he made a comment about the healthcare system being should not be part of the private sector and that the government should the single payer. I suggested that the reason the costs were so high was because of overregulation and that our health care costs were over 16% of your GNP and we needed to find ways to bring that number down.
Here is what he told me, that made me think. He said that we need to spend MORE money on healthcare. He believed that we have too much disposable income and that we needed to spend more of our money on healthcare, food, housing, energy, etc...
To paraphrase him, he said that many of the leftist policies were designed not only to shift wealth from the wealthy to the poor, but to reduce all of our disposable income, so that we don't use up our earth's resources any more than we have to necessary. He said environmental policies (including global warming), having a higher percentage of people on welfare (or guaranteed minimum income), reduction of oil consumption, rolling back rights to own private property, increased taxes on the wealthy, etc, are all aimed at solving a specific problem, but with the added benefit of slowing down growth.
This guy said he was an English teacher at a local high school and very well spoken. He claims that he does not discuss his views with his students. He said that many, if not most people who support these causes don't see the bigger picture, and don't need to. I asked him if he believed in anthropogenic global warming, and he said that he believed in it, but even if it wasn't true, it served a purpose for the greater good. He feels that we need to use fewer resources and distribute them more equitably - especially in third world countries.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist, so I don't buy into the theory that there is some sort of global master plan to bring down the US, but how many people actually believe in and support this stuff? Anybody on the board believe this?
ETA: This guy was very matter-of-fact and had obviously put a lot of thought into his positions. He was not a raving lunatic, and it didn't appear that he was in a hurry for any of this to happen soon. In fact, he seemed to think that this was all going to take many decades for this to happen.
Here is what he told me, that made me think. He said that we need to spend MORE money on healthcare. He believed that we have too much disposable income and that we needed to spend more of our money on healthcare, food, housing, energy, etc...
To paraphrase him, he said that many of the leftist policies were designed not only to shift wealth from the wealthy to the poor, but to reduce all of our disposable income, so that we don't use up our earth's resources any more than we have to necessary. He said environmental policies (including global warming), having a higher percentage of people on welfare (or guaranteed minimum income), reduction of oil consumption, rolling back rights to own private property, increased taxes on the wealthy, etc, are all aimed at solving a specific problem, but with the added benefit of slowing down growth.
This guy said he was an English teacher at a local high school and very well spoken. He claims that he does not discuss his views with his students. He said that many, if not most people who support these causes don't see the bigger picture, and don't need to. I asked him if he believed in anthropogenic global warming, and he said that he believed in it, but even if it wasn't true, it served a purpose for the greater good. He feels that we need to use fewer resources and distribute them more equitably - especially in third world countries.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist, so I don't buy into the theory that there is some sort of global master plan to bring down the US, but how many people actually believe in and support this stuff? Anybody on the board believe this?
ETA: This guy was very matter-of-fact and had obviously put a lot of thought into his positions. He was not a raving lunatic, and it didn't appear that he was in a hurry for any of this to happen soon. In fact, he seemed to think that this was all going to take many decades for this to happen.
This post was edited on 9/18/17 at 10:42 pm
20
Posted on 9/18/17 at 10:44 pm to Jax-Tiger
It's because he believes no one has the right to enjoy the fruits of their labor. Your wages are the state's & the state doles out to you what they think you should get.
It's communism w/o the violence. Of course, his beliefs would soon beget more violence, so it's moot.
It's communism w/o the violence. Of course, his beliefs would soon beget more violence, so it's moot.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 10:47 pm to Jax-Tiger
Yeah frick that guy. Basically he supports the government deciding what to do with your money. And we know how good they are at that.
This post was edited on 9/18/17 at 10:49 pm
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:00 pm to Jax-Tiger
Textbook communism
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:01 pm to Ole Misdial
quote:
Basically he supports the government deciding what to do with your money.
Yeah, except he didn't believe so much in the government taking and distributing the resources, as much as for the government making it difficult for anybody to accumulate wealth. He sees the process taking a long, long time, because nobody is going to voluntarily give up their wealth all at once.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:02 pm to Jax-Tiger
As an English teacher at a high school and a community college, I can say that he is way out of his league when it comes to logical analysis.
His theories are based on flawed syllogisms. Reducing disposable income is not about saving resources. It is about increasing government spending and wealth redistribution. To call it anything else is disingenuous.
Realignment of resources will not solve any global problems. Those areas will continue to overpopulate, underproduce, and become an even greater strain on resources. His Utopia is little more than a global sharing of misery and poverty.
His theories are based on flawed syllogisms. Reducing disposable income is not about saving resources. It is about increasing government spending and wealth redistribution. To call it anything else is disingenuous.
Realignment of resources will not solve any global problems. Those areas will continue to overpopulate, underproduce, and become an even greater strain on resources. His Utopia is little more than a global sharing of misery and poverty.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:08 pm to Bamapossum
As an addition to my former statements, let me say that any intellectual who supports these ideologies needs to understand that they are committing suicide. Once this "equality" is achieved, the first people executed are the "intellectuals". We can't have people gaining more because they are smarter, or questioning the party line.
This post was edited on 9/18/17 at 11:09 pm
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:12 pm to Bamapossum
quote:
His Utopia is little more than a global sharing of misery and poverty.
I think that a lot of people who support this feel that this will only drastically affect people who are above them on the socioeconomic ladder. They think that the redistribution will mainly affect the wealthy, and not them. They will stay where they are, and everyone above them will come down to their level.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:15 pm to Bamapossum
quote:
let me say that any intellectual who supports these ideologies needs to understand that they are committing suicide. Once this "equality" is achieved, the first people executed are the "intellectuals". We can't have people gaining more because they are smarter, or questioning the party line.
I disagree. I don't see this happening without violence, and the first to go will be the ones leading the violence.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:16 pm to Jax-Tiger
Then they are foolish and naive. shite rolls downhill. Always has. Always will.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:17 pm to Jax-Tiger
quote:
They think that the redistribution will mainly affect the wealthy, and not them. They will stay where they are, and everyone above them will come down to their level
I just don't understand how someone would rather bring others down the ladder to be equal with them than having the opportunity to go up the ladder themselves.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:20 pm to Jax-Tiger
quote:
leftist policies were designed not only to shift wealth from the wealthy to the poor, but to reduce all of our disposable income, so that we don't use up our earth's resources any more than we have to necessary.
You could argue that it is a waste of the earth's resources to support people who do not contribute to society (welfare do nothings). Too much healthcare is leading to longer lives where people are unproductive and using precious resources towards the end. Medical research is actively contributing to this by trying to cure disease in addition to money and resources spent acquiring the cure. You can add fertility treatments to that as well.
I am in no way for anything above. I'm just throwing it out there as a counterpoint to his nonsense.
This post was edited on 9/19/17 at 1:01 am
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:24 pm to Ole Misdial
quote:
I just don't understand how someone would rather bring others down the ladder to be equal with them than having the opportunity to go up the ladder themselves.
This guy is a high school teacher. I don't think he sees himself getting wealthy. I think he sees himself as middle class, so he believes that since he is OK with not acquiring wealth, there really is no reason why anybody else should, either. It's a waste of valuable resources.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:26 pm to Jax-Tiger
I don't think you or he understands the origin of the impetus for such a change. He is little more than an ideological dreamer without a real understanding of the global power elite. Someone must be in charge. It won't be you or him. It won't be me either. Power has always corrupted and it always will. He just advocates a shift in power believing it will be better in some way. Once the power shifts, the new elite will soon fall into the same habits and tyranny. Millions will die. Read some history.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:29 pm to Jax-Tiger
What is this "disposable income" he speaks of? I've heard of it, but rarely have it. I foolishly squander my money on things like food and electricity.
This post was edited on 9/18/17 at 11:30 pm
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:40 pm to Bamapossum
quote:
Someone must be in charge. It won't be you or him. It won't be me either. Power has always corrupted and it always will. He just advocates a shift in power believing it will be better in some way.
Like "Hope and change"?
Yeah, Milton Friedman would make that point by asking people why they felt that monetary greed was somehow worse than the lust for power. Where are we going to find these angels that we can trust to govern us so benevolently?
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:50 pm to Kraut Dawg
quote:
It's because he believes no one has the right to enjoy the fruits of their labor.
So everyone should enjoy the fruits of their labor but people who are sick do not get to enjoy the fruits of being alive if it's too expensive?
Money is more important than life itself. Got it.
quote:
Your wages are the state's & the state doles out to you what they think you should get
Plenty of other countries do it well. Oh and by the way we are the state. We don't live in an authoritarian system. The state is us.
quote:
It's communism w/o the violence. Of course, his beliefs would soon beget more violence, so it's moot.
Give me a break. Plenty of other countries have Universal Health Care and haven't slipped into communism because of it. Your paranoia is showing
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:51 pm to Jax-Tiger
quote:
I asked him if he believed in anthropogenic global warming, and he said that he believed in it, but even if it wasn't true, it served a purpose for the greater good. He feels that we need to use fewer resources and distribute them more equitably - especially in third world countries.
WTF. Yeah lets give Africa more resources and watch as they are still living in mud huts and enslaving children in 200 years.
Some people are so, so naive.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:56 pm to Jax-Tiger
quote:
suggested that the reason the costs were so high was because of overregulation and that our health care costs were over 16% of your GNP and we needed to find ways to bring that number down.
It's funny how some millionaires that make a shitload of money can convince so many people in a country that it's really the fault of regulations that they have to charge you so much. Never mind the fact that there's an obvious need for regulation when health and safety could be ignored for better profits.
Good old Insurance, pharmaceutical companies, ans folks that run hospitals are are terrified that you'll figure out that you don't need them in order to have good health care.
Meanwhile they've got some of you guys so twisted around you don't know whether to scratch your watch or wind your arse.
Don't trust any system that we as the people come up with and can run without excess profits being absorbed but go ahead and Trust all those guys that want to make a buck off you and f*** you in the arse. Some of you guys really need to take a long look in the mirror
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:57 pm to Ebbandflow
quote:
So everyone should enjoy the fruits of their labor but people who are sick do not get to enjoy the fruits of being alive if it's too expensive?
Money is more important than life itself. Got it.
I don't believe anybody said that money was more important than life. I will say, that you can argue that it is our excess that allows us to better take care of those who can't take care of themselves.
quote:
We don't live in an authoritarian system. The state is us.
Not if we become a communist state where we practice, "to each according to his needs."
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News