Why don't conservatives force their representatives to give up their socialized benefits?

[Chachma v'Oz]

I bolded the key word in your post. I am glad you chose your wording as you did. The opposition is not to people having this quality of coverage, but to using the power of government to force the hard-earned money of one group of people into the hands of those who do nothing whatsoever to earn it and yet feel absolutley entitled to it.

Unless and until we go with a single payer system, the government has no choice but "to force the hard-earned money one group of people into the hands of" private sector insurance companies if we're to have a national health care program.

Some of us would rather remove "those who do nothing whatsoever to earn it and yet feel absolutley entitled to it" (which sounds a bit strong - not all health insurance executive are leeches), but for now we're stuck with being able to do no more than rein in the profiteers.

[Toby-T]

That is my point exactly F&L. My family has health insurance. Why? Because I worked myself through college, earned a couple degrees, got some work experience under my belt, and eventually landed a good job with a great benefits package. I knew my family needed to eat and needed health care so I did something about it. Libs seem to think a story like mine is miraculous. There is no miracle in good old fashioned hard work.

People need to get their hands dirty instead of just holding them out for freebies.

[Chachma v'Oz]

Some of us, the world over, realize that we all aren't going to be above average. But we all deserve a basic standard of living. Access to affordable health care is seen by civilized people as a very basic standard.

[Toby-T]

Life is not about what we think we deserve. Life is about busting our butts to go out and supply for ourselves what we need. I swear, that sounds like something a kindergartner would say "Its not fair that Johnny has more cookies in his lunch box than I have in mine! WAAAAHHHH!"

I totally agree by the way that access to affordable health care should be a priority to a civilized society, I just think the assumption that this goal can only be achieved by taking all liberty and power from individuals and handing it over to the government to decide how it is distributed is ridiculous.

Bottom line, you want it given to you. I want to earn it for myself. This is the difference in our philosophies.

[Chachma v'Oz]

Life is not about what we think we deserve. Life is about busting our butts to go out and supply for ourselves what we need. I swear, that sounds like something a kindergartner would say "Its not fair that Johnny has more cookies in his lunch box than I have in mine! WAAAAHHHH!"

I totally agree by the way that access to affordable health care should be a priority to a civilized society, I just think the assumption that this goal can only be achieved by taking all liberty and power from individuals and handing it over to the government to decide how it is distributed is ridiculous.

Bottom line, you want it given to you. I want to earn it for myself. This is the difference in our philosophies.

Hardly. I'm more than willing to pay the taxes necessary to provide a basic standard for those who cannot provide for themselves. You, apparently, don't realize how much everyone in society has helped you get to where you are today and resent paying a fraction of it back in gratitude.

[Archaix]

And yet billions of people survived without government support.

Such as...?

Hunger has always been the worlds best motivator.

You seem to think that hunger is that small gnawing sensation in your stomach. Do you actually know what happens to people who actually starve?

The following is a report on the results of a starvation experiment conducted in the US toward the end of WW2, using about 400 volunteers:

Among the conclusions from the study was the confirmation that prolonged semi-starvation produces significant increases in depression, hysteria and hypochondriasis as measured using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. Indeed, most of the subjects experienced periods of severe emotional distress and depression.[1]:161 There were extreme reactions to the psychological effects during the experiment including self-mutilation (one subject amputated three fingers of his hand with an axe, though the subject was unsure if he had done so intentionally or accidentally).[5] Participants exhibited a preoccupation with food, both during the starvation period and the rehabilitation phase. Sexual interest was drastically reduced, and the volunteers showed signs of social withdrawal and isolation.[1]:123-124 The participants reported a decline in concentration, comprehension and judgment capabilities, although the standardized tests administered showed no actual signs of diminished capacity. There were marked declines in physiological processes indicative of decreases in each subject’s basal metabolic rate (the energy required by the body in a state of rest), reflected in reduced body temperature, respiration and heart rate. Some of the subjects exhibited edema (swelling) in their extremities, presumably due to the massive quantities of water the participants consumed attempting to fill their stomachs during the starvation period.

(Read this for more info)

And we will have even millions more across the globe no matter how well intentioned all failed government programs are.

Then let's do something about it, rather than doing sweet F.A.

[Toby-T]

Hardly. I'm more than willing to pay the taxes necessary to provide a basic standard for those who cannot provide for themselves. You, apparently, don't realize how much everyone in society has helped you get to where you are today and resent paying a fraction of it back in gratitude.

If you are going to criticize my position at least take the time to learn what my position is. In this very thread (Post #19) I said the following:

I am not referring to those who CANNOT provide for themselves. I am referring to those who DO NOT bother to. I don't feel that government, nor any other individual, is obligated to provide me and my family with anything at all. It is MY obligation to provide it for myself!

I have no issue at all with my money, both from my giving to the charities of my choosing or from the use of my tax dollars, being given to those who CANNOT take care of themselves. I guess maybe we define that term differently.

How do you define the term "Those who cannot provide for themselves?"

[Chachma v'Oz]

OK, I misspoke. There are those who do not provide for themselves for whatever reason, and I don't advocate throwing them under the bus. They're human beings, people whose very existence allowed me and mine to prosper, and I believe they should enjoy a basic standard of living.

[Toby-T]

Why do you consider it cruel to expect people to enjoy that basic standard of living at the sweat of their own brow? I don't want anyone thrown under the bus either, but you have to admit that a lot of people have thrown themselves under the bus by their own poor decisions and now expect to just be carried forever by others. That is where my frustration comes in.

[Chachma v'Oz]

Those people who threw themselves under the bus made it easier for me and mine to be successful in the job market by taking themselves out of competition for the jobs we coveted. I have no problem paying something back to them for their consideration, intended or not.

Everyone in society, from the top down, helped me and mine get to where we are today, either directly or indirectly, so I have no problem with the notion that those of us who have prospered owe something to them.

[Toby-T]

Those people who threw themselves under the bus made it easier for me and mine to be successful in the job market by taking themselves out of competition for the jobs we coveted. I have no problem paying something back to them for their consideration, intended or not.

Everyone in society, from the top down, helped me and mine get to where we are today, either directly or indirectly, so I have no problem with the notion that those of us who have prospered owe something to them.

I am going to give you some credit here. This is actually a logically reached conclusion on your part. I can follow the path you took to get there, and understand how you reached this opinion. That alone puts you head and shoulders above many in your camp.

However, I just see the world a little differently. I agree with your notion that they may have indirectly benefited me, but why are they owed a portion of that which they didn't earn? Why should they be rewarded for making poor choices? I am not saying "let them die" but to say they should get same standard of living across the board as someone who made the right choices, who busted their tail, and took care of themselves just seems absurd. What would be the incentive for anyone to work in a society like that? and if no one works eventually everyone starves.

[Chachma v'Oz]

I didn't say the same standard of living many of us work for, I said a basic standard of living that most of us wouldn't, and don't, settle for.

[Toby-T]

The fact that we wouldn't settle for it is what motivated us to work for the better standard of living we have. If there is a basic standard guaranteed for all no matter how little one contributes to society than why would anyone bother to work?

God gives nuts and berries to birds and squirrels but he doesn't drop them right in their nest. They do have to do their part to go find and gather them. When you apply the same standard to people you are called cruel and heartless.

[Hyperbully]

If you start out with the premise that government and taxes are inherently bad, you're not really going to accomplish much on a societal level. And you can't enjoy the benefits of a society sustained by government and taxes while protesting their evil.

Also, can we agree that socialism is when the government spends money on things you disapprove of?

[Chachma v'Oz]

The fact that we wouldn't settle for it is what motivated us to work for the better standard of living we have. If there is a basic standard guaranteed for all no matter how little one contributes to society than why would anyone bother to work?

God gives nuts and berries to birds and squirrels but he doesn't drop them right in their nest. They do have to do their part to go find and gather them. When you apply the same standard to people you are called cruel and heartless.

Reread what I said. Most people will not tolerate living with basic standards. That's not the only reason they work to improve their lot, but wanting more than the spartan basics is motivation enough for most people to try to do better for themselves.

The majority of people in this country would not exchange their perhaps meager assets for living in Section 8 housing, buying their groceries with food stamps and taking public transportation for all their needs. They want more and are willing to do what it takes to obtain it. A minority would take it gladly because they feel they deserve nothing better in life. Those are the only ones who will be getting something for nothing, but since they helped me get to where I am today by being so irresponsible I have no problem helping to provide those basic standards out of the riches they helped me amass.

[Toby-T]

What makes you think that the reason they settle for so little is because they feel they don't deserve any better? I hadn't thought of it like that before. Just wondering how you reached that theory.

[Chachma v'Oz]

I believe that either people have enough self-respect to provide as good a life as they reasonably can for themselves and those who depend on them, or they don't. IMO, those who don't have that degree of self-respect feel they don't deserve anything more than what life hands them. No amount of punishment, or entitlement, will change that.

[Truth-Bringer]

No one has ever collected taxes at gunpoint.

Absolutely false. Another total lie from a leftist. Millions of dollars of property has been seized by armed IRS agents in this country.

[Truth-Bringer]

If you start out with the premise that government and taxes are inherently bad, you're not really going to accomplish much on a societal level.

Then explain why the United States became the richest country on earth from it's founding to 1860 after Thomas Jefferson repealed all internal taxes in 1802. Our Constitution is based on the premise that government and taxes are inherently bad and cannot be trusted. The original intent of the Constitution forbade taxes, other than tariff revenue, on the federal level.

[Hyperbully]

Absolutely false. Another total lie from a leftist. Millions of dollars of property has been seized by armed IRS agents in this country.

I'd like an example of a law-abiding citizen's taxes being collected at gunpoint, please and thanks. Al Capone doesn't count.