British Government legalizes maggots for peasants

[antayla]

maggots are people too >

[Kyran]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (SVMc,)
Kyran,

There are two points people are trying to make to you:<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

And for the upteenth time I am not disagreeing with those points
And for the upteenth time I am not disagreeing with those points
And for the upteenth time I am not disagreeing with those points
And for the upteenth time I am not disagreeing with those points
And for the upteenth time I am not disagreeing with those points
And for the upteenth time I am not disagreeing with those points
And for the upteenth time I am not disagreeing with those points
And for the upteenth time I am not disagreeing with those points

Do you understand yet? Stop being redundant. You're completely missing the meat of the issue.

Government Health Care means taxpayers pay for somebody's hospital bill. Sure it may be completely VOLUNTARY for me to receive this money; but it isn't voluntary for others to give me that money. As I've made my case here...
http://www.volconvo.com/forums/index.php?s...=15&#entry15070
...such action should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. It's theft.

Leopard clarifies the point that Government Health Care is paid for at gunpoint. If we don't pay for this, we will go to jail. So why wouldn't I propose the opposite? If you want the government to take something for you we oughtta can your ass.

[jose]

Leeches are widly used in promoting a healthy blood flow in re- attachment of severed fingers

[SVMc]

We've posted extensively on this on the Canadian thread, you can either read it there or I can paste it here, but it's about 9 pages long at last read. So no, I'm not missing the poing of public health care I just disagree with your public health care = theft secenerio.

[antayla]

If you can't opt out of healthcare, it's theft.
If you can't opt out of war, it's theft (not to mention murder)
If you can't opt out of government, it's theft.

The issue here is choice, is it not?

If you really want to end theft, figure out a way to protect yourself (preferably not by force, cause it doesn't seem to work anymore.)

[Mia]

The problem with pure capitalism is this: while everyone (supposedly) has the opportunity to become a doctor or a lawyer or whatever, we can't survive with only doctors and lawyers and whatever. We have to have people in all of the lower-wage jobs that keep everything moving for everyone. These people don't earn enough to live decently and this is why money has to be taken from the wealthy to help them - and they deserve health, care, etc. Even if you don't buy that, you need someone to wait on you and pick up your trash and they need to be healthy to do so.

[Leopard]

Mia,
I'ms sorry, I misunderstand you - please explain what it is about capitalism that forces people to work for less than a liveable wage?

In fact, as I understand how capitalism works, as the NEED for a particular job increases (say everyone was a doctor, then there would be a great need for janitors and no need for doctors), the wage does too. This is exactly why capitalism is so efficient and communism isn't: communism dictates that the state knows the needs of people better than the people themselves do, whereas in capitalism the people determine the overall needs through market pricing. The US is not a perfect example of how the free market acts and government has made major influences which skew the current wage differential we see between the 'upper' professions and the others: Doctors and Lawyers both are operated much like a guild system which is supported by the government. This puts an inherent cap/limit on the amount of these professions which translates into a greatly exagerrated wage, the other side of this is that it leaves more folks available to attend to all the other jobs which means the there are more workers than jobs and decreases the wages of those fields. Actually the effect of this is minimal on the wages, their wages (the 'other' fields') have many different governmental pressures which result in the overall skewing and distortion of the job market.

Even with all that said, you have to understand that there will always be jobs that do not earn a 'liveable' wage - this is natural. There are tasks which just are not valued much by others. Would YOU hire someone at a 'liveable' wage to drive you back and forth to work everyday? probably not, as most people wouldn't because they can do it themselves for much 'cheaper' and the job itself is not worth it to YOU.

What you are advocating, 'taking money from those who are wealthy to give to others because they 'deserve' it', harms the entire society much more than whatever alturistic help you are attempting to provide. Not to mention, its purely immoral (immoral because it is wrong for me to steal your money, no matter what purpose I intend to do with the money). Question: If I wanted to pick up sea shells all day and try to sell them, but I couldn't sell enough at a high enough price to earn a 'liveable' wage, should I then be given some amount of money which was taken from the 'wealthy'? That is EXACTLY what you are proposing...

michael

[Samildanach]

Maggots are a perfectly viable treatment for conditions where there is dead skin/flesh produced, they only eat the dead stuff, sure its not particularly pretty and I wouldn't want it done on me unless I was unconscious or there was no alternative(there are some things you would not want to remember) but they are very efficent apparently.

[Leopard]

Samildanach,
good position - those that approach ideas with out preconcieved notions will undoubtably tend to live longer and have more fulfilling lives