Mind-Bending Irony and Justice Incarnate

[Ephirith]

This goes out to all you Libertarians, Ron Paul, and Paul Ryan supporters.

http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/4994/randroid.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/717/randroid.jpg/)

I find this to be some of the most cringe-inducing irony I've ever seen in my entire life. Joshua, a loyal acolyte in the cult of Ayn Rand and libertarianism, donates money to an organization that champions personal responsibility and the virtue of selfishness. They despise universal healthcare. They despise altruism.

But then, oh fuck! Joshua contracted lymphoma and he can't pay his medical expenses. I'm battling an overwhelming urge to say:

"Damn Joshua if you wanted medical treatment you should have worked harder and made more money, or gotten yourself a job with better benefits."

I just can't bring myself to do it through facebook. Nonetheless it brings me great joy knowing this scum is withering away with cancer and he can't afford medical treatment.

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/8837/healthcarer.jpg

Also, note that if he were a citizen of Canada or almost any other developed country this wouldn't even be an issue.

He would have paid roughly the same, maybe slightly more, in taxes, but instead of his taxes going toward flying helicopters around Afghanistan it would have gone toward his healthcare treatments.

[Alawen]

I don't think I can find schadenfraude in someone getting cancer, but the irony is thick in this incident. I used to think I understood libertarians but now I don't see anything but greed and willful ignorance. Without a strong state, large populations devolve to anarchy.

[Maddox]

Libertarians don't say that you can't get cancer nor do they say that medical bills are too expensive. They stump for personal responsibility and charity in these instances. Basically, exactly what is going on. What you don't see in this situation is a group of people expecting their healthcare costs to be paid for by the government or trying to force others to be responsible for his problems. Personal responsibility and charity are tenants of Libertarianism.

Also, universal healthcare in the US isn't going to drive costs down nor is it going to do anything to actually improve care in the US for most people. The whole point against obamacare is that there are better ways to reform the health care system that involves driving costs down and improving the quality of care, not just making the incredibly efficient government responsible for it.

Lastly, your a tool for finding 'great joy' in someone else's cancer diagnosis.

[Maddox]

Also, it’s incredibly ignorant to think the WHO statistics of life expectancy is directly relative to quality of the overall healthcare system. Go look at the correlation of a countries wealth (per capita GDP) to overall life expectancy and you will see much more interesting tie. Once you do that and you also realize that people die for reasons outside of healthcare go look at the life expectancy numbers that take out violent crime, accidents, etc. that don’t actually engage the healthcare system and let me know where the US is on that chart. (you might want to check the top of the list.)

If you really want to get a feel for the quality of care for a healthcare system you should look at numbers / statistics that actually focus on healthcare involvement. Things like cancer survival rates when the healthcare system is involved would be good metrics. Also, Infant Mortality Rate could be a good measure, but at least compare apples to apples. There are numerous ways that different countries report IMR and what actually constitutes a live birth. In the US it is showing any signs of life at birth, in some countries it’s surviving past the first 24 hours which is past when ~40% of infant deaths happen. I’m not saying the US is number 1, just compare relative measurements.

I’m not arguing that the US healthcare system isn’t expensive and/or inefficient, but people aren’t necessarily hankering to get into Canada instead of the US to get quality healthcare.

Also, something to note, freedom is rarely easy or convenient, it is founded on personal responsibility. Just because it isn’t easy doesn’t mean we should have the government run our lives for us.

[Lucky]

The whole argument of libertarianism on health care is that charity > state forcing you to do something.

Therefore there is no irony, if it was in fact irony still need a p99 ruling.

[Lucky]

Also, note that if he were a citizen of Canada or almost any other developed country this wouldn't even be an issue.


If he was in Canada he'd be in a lottery for his death panel

[Tasslehofp99]

Who cares? We all have to die someday.

[Barkingturtle]

I don't think it's ever really the right thing to get a boner because someone has cancer, no matter how repugnant their politics may seem.

I mean, not unless you're gonna fuck that cancer, and show it who's Boss. Which frankly seems a less naive means of treating one's cancer than relying upon the charity of libertarians.

[arcanebrain]

You know, thank our holy lord and savior Jesus Christ that America is not a socialist country. It would just be terrible if we were all well-off, happy, and lived long productive lives! I much prefer our current situation where the poor can go fuck themselves and the rich just get richer by shitting on everyone below them and making fistfuls of cash by engaging in ridiculous money voodoo.

[Ephirith]

Personal responsibility and charity are tenants of Libertarianism.

Libertarianism and objectivism are different shades of the same color. This is a worldview that is obsessed with rational 'self-interest'. Charity is NOT a tenant of libertarianism, it is a footnote that they only allow because it's not managed by the government. Say what you will about libertarianism, it's the bastard hellspawn son of Ayn Rand-- who spent her entire life harping on handouts only to get lung cancer and cash checks from the government to pay for her treatments.


not just making the incredibly efficient government responsible for it.


If the government is so terrible then why not work on making it more efficient instead of just scrapping the whole thing?

We have the government because we need to do things the free market can't do effectively on its own. No matter what, the free market can never be proactive, only reactive. It doesn't act with vision or calculation, it's little more than an anarchic force of nature.

Removing direction from society and leaving it at the whim of human emotions and natural forces just doesn't work, anyone who thinks so just wants to live out some redneck survival fantasy, or thinks the government is why they are a retail manager instead of a CEO. Libertarians are invariably poorly educated atheist adolescents who would be republican except fuck christianity and intellectual non-conformity is just so kvlt.


doesn’t mean we should have the government run our lives for us.

This little piece of garbage rhetoric right here makes me so buttfrustrated I literally just developed a hemorrhoid, like I heard an audible "Pop" from my ass as it sprang forth. Not even going to bother.

[arcanebrain]

I like you.

[Kraftwerk]

I don't think it's ever really the right thing to get a boner because someone has cancer.

Your posts make me laugh out loud frequently.

Also, I swear I read something about arguing on the internet somewhere...

[Lucky]

You know, thank our holy lord and savior Jesus Christ that America is not a socialist country. It would just be terrible if we were all well-off, happy, and lived long productive lives! I much prefer our current situation where the poor can go fuck themselves and the rich just get richer by shitting on everyone below them and making fistfuls of cash by engaging in ridiculous money voodoo.

America is a communist country bro

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=53515&

[Maddox]

This is a worldview that is obsessed with rational 'self-interest'. Charity is NOT a tenant of libertarianism, it is a footnote that they only allow because it's not managed by the government.
1) I'm not libertarian but your wrong. It's different to respect freedom of choice and personal responsibility than it is to be obsessed with self-interest, you need to understand the difference. 2) Everyone is concerned with self-interest and self-improvement. You can make claims that you are an entirely selfless being that cares about nothing other than your fellow man but that's disingenuous. 3) Charity is part of conservatism and libertarianism, I understand your opinion but you are generalizing and are wrong.

If the government is so terrible then why not work on making it more efficient instead of just scrapping the whole thing?
Not wanting a historically inefficient and spending happy government to control my healthcare is different than not wanting a government at all. I believe that I can make better decisions about my healthcare than a bureaucrat can.

other stuff

The other parts of your post were essentially drivel. Your analysis of a free market / capitalist economy is willfully ignorant of reality. (or you just really don't understand the libertarian position) Different strokes for different folks I suppose. Go read a little bit about what libertarians stand for (not from your liberal blog analysis but from actual libertarians) and then engage in conversation. Half of the things you said were actually pro-libertarian.

Good luck with the hemorrhoids, based on your worldview I guess you should blame the wealthy people for them.

[mgellan]

If he was in Canada he'd be in a lottery for his death panel

If he was in Canada he would be receiving world class care at one of our many CancerCare Hospitals at no cost to him - get your head out of your ass, must be dark up there.

Regards,
Mg

[Maddox]

If he was in Canada ... world class care

hahaha

[Ephirith]

blah blah blah u wrong, u ignorant, fuck you and your cat ephirith

Well I simply disagree with your perception of the facts, clearly no use telling you you're wrong again so I'm just gonna insult you and ramble.

I've shown an instance of an objectivist eating the reality behind his own ideology, simple as that. Cancer treatments can cost several hundred thousand dollars, last I checked he had like 700 likes on his facebook thing and even if every one of them gave $50 that's only $35k. He will not get treatment, and he is going to die.

Everything objectivism stands for says, "Damn Joshua if you wanted medical treatment you should have worked harder and made more money, or gotten yourself a job with better benefits.", and that's the system you and the other randroids want to achieve. That, instead of a system that encourages the general well-being of fellow human beings. Oh shit, some lazy ass deadbeat welfare queen might get some health treatment. But how many deserving individuals like Joshua would also get treatment they otherwise wouldn't have had?

The difference between us is you think people are shit unless they prove themselves in the free market. You think only the strong deserve happy lives, you want to leave humanity to a primal and natural order. I think it's more complicated than that.

And I'm not a liberal, I'm a spectral syncretic. And no, not all fascism involves racial purity, genocide, marshal law, corruption, or autocracy.

[Lucky]

Canadian health care fucking sucks keep it in your own socialist shithole

You aint even got nukes...even France and Iran got nukes. world class health care lol ur bad at basic sceince

[arcanebrain]

You're a terrible troll.

[Maddox]

... I'm a spectral syncretic, a.k.a. fascism

This conversation makes more sense now... Thanks and good luck.

[Lucky]

there is no left vs right only liberty vs tyranny

forcing me to pay for ppl's health care and welfare is theft, and more important we know it doesn't work

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictions_of_Soviet_collapse

[Jimes]

forcing me to pay for ppl's health care

>implying that is what Obamacare does.

[Lucky]

“The indi*vid*ual man*date was the most impor*tant part of the law,” said Marcelo Rivera, speak*ing for the group Lati*nos Para La Rev*olu*ción. “We are still work*ing with offi*cials to make sure that undoc*u*mented Lati*nos will receive only the best health care pos*si*ble. We don’t want them attend*ing those free clin*ics with doc*tors that have absolutely no experience.”

[Lucky]

http://nation.foxnews.com/obamacare/2012/03/13/1-abortions-obamacare
http://aclj.org/obamacare/how-obamacare-uses-taxpayer-money-pay-abortions

[Lucky]

sfw if you're anti-life

http://amightywind.com/abortionf/abortion05.jpg

http://gaslamppost.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/abortion-8wks.jpg

http://wholeworldinhishands.com/world/images/abortion.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_hyECORLe2jg/TDnA1RlodPI/AAAAAAAAFRs/jng22844FTk/s1600/SupremeCourtAbortionRuling.jpg



It is murder. It ain't your body anymore. It's a child not a choice. The choice was when you had sex without birth control you stupid bitch.

[Tasslehofp99]

sfw if you're anti-life

http://amightywind.com/abortionf/abortion05.jpg

http://gaslamppost.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/abortion-8wks.jpg

http://wholeworldinhishands.com/world/images/abortion.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_hyECORLe2jg/TDnA1RlodPI/AAAAAAAAFRs/jng22844FTk/s1600/SupremeCourtAbortionRuling.jpg



It is murder. It ain't your body anymore. It's a child not a choice. The choice was when you had sex without birth control you stupid bitch.




Dayum, you're taking it to the next level man. Although I did always wonder what aborted fetuses looked like, not quite sure breakfast was the right time to look at that. Anyway, try not to make yourself look like such a religious cook and people will take you more serious I think. Next time try this approach: Think of all those aborted babies that would've been paying into social security and medicaid and all that other nonsense. I know you're a jesus freak man, I can just tell because of how passionate you feel about other people's business...not to mention you're last post beginning with "THANK JESUS CHRIST"

[Barkingturtle]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_hyECORLe2jg/TDnA1RlodPI/AAAAAAAAFRs/jng22844FTk/s1600/SupremeCourtAbortionRuling.jpg


Bad hair. Bony knees. Bad tits. Head not attached.

3/10

Would not bang.

[Akim]

Damn, I hope you vote for Globalist A (obama) or Globalist B (romney), because you deserve to live in the tyranny you want so badly without any individual rights.

[Lucky]

I don't vote because it's a charade of 2 masks on the same face. Explain either decision to your future kids, if you don't murder them. Abortion is in direct conflict with the self-evident and guaranteed rights of life and liberty for the baby who will 1 day be a fully grown adult if you dont scramble its brains. The mother's liberty ends when she infringes on the baby. As far as aborting rapes, 2 wrongs dont make 1 right.

[Akim]

if you have private health insurance you already do. what do you think a premium is? goes into a pool that pays for other people's care

Ah exactly.

DON'T YOU THINK THAT'S A FUCKING PROBLEM??

But the American medical system is a fascist system with a group of "doctor" managers dictating what is accepted medicine and what is not.

The medical system shits on straight facts regarding cancer.
Instead of facing up to it and banning all the fucked up foods and carcinogens that cause cancer, we search for a cure.

I've got the cure to cancer.

Don't eat anything from the industrialized system, Walmart, fastfoods, anything prepackaged. You cannot trust them, they do not care about your health.

Oh you got sick and are dying, fuck you. Go exercise and eat natural foods.
And if I get cancer? Haha too bad dipshit. Cancer doesn't live here idiot.
And my kids? Yeah they never got those autism vaccines, so they're pretty smart, they'll probably stay away from genetically modified foods as well, but if they don't, that's their fault.
Like it's your own fucking fault.

Ditto.

I don't take turns paying for the stray cats food and vet bills, don't plan on paying for your stray kids bills either.

It is my right to not pay for someone else's cancer.

Shouldn't have drank that liquid cancer, err soda, ate that edible cancer, err anything from a GMO store near you (walmart, krogers, industrialized wasteland store #3)

That's their fucking fault. Cancer is not a natural disease. Should have had better parents I guess?

Well that's how I feel about the welfare class. Bunch of fucking stray cats trying to live off of my dole.

Oh and give me a fucking break, there are thousands of charities that are much more effective at giving health care BEFORE the government manipulates prices wildly with fucked up government health care mandates that focus all the doctors on not getting sued and charging 400,000$ for an operation when all you needed was more rest, excercise and better nutrition. Then you want us wealthy to pay for it? fuck you.

[Alawen]

The world was so much better without vaccines. I wish I could have polio or smallpox.

ITT: rampant ignorance, bad science, illiteracy, save me Jebuz.

[Akim]

The world was so much better without vaccines. I wish I could have polio or smallpox.

ITT: rampant ignorance, bad science, illiteracy, save me Jebuz.

Lol have fun forever believing everything you've never researched yourself.

[Lucky]

There is only one kind of immunity and that is natural immunity which is achieved by battling the infectious diseases itself. Vaccination is merely the artificial triggering of temporary responses to manmade pathogens. Vaccines are both harmful and dangerous and are leading to generations of humans with no natural defenses to disease.

Vaccines should never be called immunizations because that is a misnomer. Immunity and vaccinations are two different subjects altogether. Vaccines do not provide long-term immunity; only temporary at best. In vaccines, an antigen is injected into the body to produce a reaction and the immune system responds in the form of antibodies, but antibody presence does not confer immunity. People still catch the diseases that they are vaccinated against.

[Akim]

Lol have fun forever believing everything you've never researched yourself.

And I don't mean googling it. Haha. Go get to a laboratory, go read the sequencing print out of your much appraised vaccines, tell me how it goes. Doubt you'll ever go deeper than, oh some dude doesn't agree with the AMA he must be 12.

[Alawen]

Lol have fun forever believing everything you've never researched yourself.

Why is the last defense of the superstitious to accuse others of ignorance? The last I checked, Jenny McCarthy isn't published in any peer-reviewed journals and Andrew Wakefield's study has been thoroughly discredited due to scientific misconduct and fraud.

I will never understand the feigned intellectual superiority of the anti-science crowd.

[Lucky]

Deaths from measles in 1900 were 13 per 100,000 people. In 1948: less than one. Measles vaccines introduced in 1963 but took full credit for what they never did – eliminate measles. Japanese health authorities realized that early inoculations were causing crib deaths so they postponed them until the 24th month and SIDS virtually disappeared along with whooping cough (pertussis) during the first two years of babies’ lives. Instead of preventing whooping cough the DPT promotes it as well as SIDS. Reuters recently reports that according to the CDC, the number of pertussis cases is growing – in the fully vaccinated population

[Lucky]

<object width="480" height="360"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_OT635QbXrQ?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_OT635QbXrQ?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="360" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[arcanebrain]

I don't even know where to begin with you two. The amount of ignorance you both posses is astounding. I can only hope that you're actually a couple of bored trolls or retarded teenagers, because if both of you are adults and have children then the world is in serious danger. I can only hope your children, unlike you, get a real education and grow up to be intelligent, logical, thinking members of society. Not batshit insane anti-science conspiracy theorists spouting off completely moronic ideas (cancer isn't natural, GMO causes cancer, omg coca cola causes cancer, vaccines are a fraud) on a damn video game message board.

[Lucky]

I don't even know where to begin with you two. The amount of ignorance you both posses is astounding. I can only hope that you're actually a couple of bored trolls or retarded teenagers, because if both of you are adults and have children then the world is in serious danger. I can only hope your children, unlike you, get a real education and grow up to be intelligent, logical, thinking members of society. Not batshit insane anti-science conspiracy theorists spouting off completely moronic ideas (cancer isn't natural, GMO causes cancer, omg coca cola causes cancer, vaccines are a fraud) on a damn video game message board.

Coke, Pepsi make changes to avoid cancer warning - March 2012 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/09/us-coke-pepsi-idUSBRE82814V20120309)

GMO Corn Linked To Organ Failure, Study Reveals (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/12/monsantos-gmo-corn-linked_n_420365.html)

A primer on vaccination vs. immunization (http://weeksmd.com/2009/10/a-primer-on-vaccination-vs-immunization/)

[Tasslehofp99]

WHO CARES? SITTING HERE ON A FORUM BITCHING ABOUT SHIT NO ONE CARES ABOUT WILL NOT CHANGE ANYTHING. STOP CRYING AND LIVE YOUR FUCKING LIFE, STOP WORRYING ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE'S BUSINESS, THANKS! /caps off.

[arcanebrain]

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said at the time it was reviewing the group's petition but stressed that the drinks were still safe. An FDA spokesman said a person would have to drink "well over a thousand cans of soda a day to reach the doses administered in the studies that have shown links to cancer in rodents".

Quit reading so much into alarmist headlines. If you believed every news article you read, you wouldn't be able to eat or drink ANYTHING safely. That takes care of your first link, as to the second:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2010/01/13/gm-corn-leads-to-organ-failure-not-so-fast/

And the third? I'll admit I didn't read the entire thing. But it smacks of anti-science naturopathic bullshit. The vast (like almost all of them) majority of scientists and doctors agree that vaccines save lives and are usually harmless (barring allergic reactions). Oh, by the way, the author of that article which makes stupid claims and backs nothing up with solid evidence? Is a CHIROPRACTOR and a NUTRITIONIST who publishes in "holistic periodicals." You know what's code for? A fucking quack. The article is full of gross misunderstandings. The guy doesn't even understand herd immunity, for crying out loud.

[Daldolma]

Vaccines clearly cause autism and cancer but big government and big corporations are too invested to cut back. Coca Cola is intended to cause addiction and known to cause cancer but is still peddled and supported by the military industrial complex. Stop being so naive, read a book.

[Ephirith]

Vaccines clearly cause autism and cancer but big government and big corporations are too invested to cut back. Coca Cola is intended to cause addiction and known to cause cancer but is still peddled and supported by the military industrial complex. Stop being so naive, read a book.

Don't forget the contrails bro.

And what's with the rainbows in our sprinklers? Big government and liberal media trying to poison us with their homosexuality. It's time to wake up people.

[Lucky]

Quit reading so much into alarmist headlines. If you believed every news article you read, you wouldn't be able to eat or drink ANYTHING safely. That takes care of your first link, as to the second:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2010/01/13/gm-corn-leads-to-organ-failure-not-so-fast/

And the third? I'll admit I didn't read the entire thing. But it smacks of anti-science naturopathic bullshit. The vast (like almost all of them) majority of scientists and doctors agree that vaccines save lives and are usually harmless (barring allergic reactions). Oh, by the way, the author of that article which makes stupid claims and backs nothing up with solid evidence? Is a CHIROPRACTOR and a NUTRITIONIST who publishes in "holistic periodicals." You know what's code for? A fucking quack. The article is full of gross misunderstandings. The guy doesn't even understand herd immunity, for crying out loud.

You clearly don't understand how cancer develops. They shoot up the rats 1000 times to make the process happen in a short period of time. Basically for cancer to develop:


You need the gene that controls self destruction for malfunctioning cells to be damaged.
You need the gene that requires, for a cell to replicate, that it is touching the correct cells.
AND
You need the gene that tells a cell when it SHOULD grow to be stuck on "always on".


Drinking coke and hording down GMO foods for some 20 odd years will do the trick to kill your pancreas, kidneys, liver, stomach, esophagus... you name a cancer you have a vastly higher chance.

Also, vaccines so safe bros

<object width="480" height="360"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5ztiAN9k584?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5ztiAN9k584?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="360" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[Frieza_Prexus]

But then, oh fuck! Joshua contracted lymphoma and he can't pay his medical expenses. I'm battling an overwhelming urge to say:

"Damn Joshua if you wanted medical treatment you should have worked harder and made more money, or gotten yourself a job with better benefits."

I just can't bring myself to do it through facebook. Nonetheless it brings me great joy knowing this scum is withering away with cancer and he can't afford medical treatment.


You're morally outraged that someone doesn't believe in your view of economics, yet you're happy when the man contracts cancer. Am I the only one seeing a complete lack of moral consistency here?

If I, for example, opposed federal flood insurance, do you believe that it would be morally just when my house floods? Would you take pleasure in this? If so, I think you need to take a hard look at your moral compass.

Libertarianism and objectivism are different shades of the same color. This is a worldview that is obsessed with rational 'self-interest'. Charity is NOT a tenant of libertarianism, it is a footnote that they only allow because it's not managed by the government. Say what you will about libertarianism, it's the bastard hellspawn son of Ayn Rand-- who spent her entire life harping on handouts only to get lung cancer and cash checks from the government to pay for her treatments.


True, some people are concerned only with maximizing their own personal interests. However, to say that altruism is poorly accounted for is ignorant at best. The capitalistic model explicitly recognizes that money will flow where people want it to. This might be hard to understand, but more than a few people want to help others. It is demonstrable fact that private interests tend to have less shrinkage and overhead than public entities. All things being equal, private charity then tends to be more efficient than government service. Also, there is the whole notion that it should be voluntary as opposed to mandatory.

Further, you used Ayn Rand as an example to illustrate your point. In taking government services, it is certainly commendable to abstain, but not morally obligatory. Decrying the wisdom of a policy does not preclude utilization of a policy that exists. If, for example, I felt fire protection was unnecessary in our society, morality would not demand I never call a fire truck. So long as I have contributed to the existence of such a service, through taxes or whatever means, I have a vested right and interest in that particular service.

If the government is so terrible then why not work on making it more efficient instead of just scrapping the whole thing?

We have the government because we need to do things the free market can't do effectively on its own. No matter what, the free market can never be proactive, only reactive. It doesn't act with vision or calculation, it's little more than an anarchic force of nature.

Government tends to be inefficient primarily because it was designed that way. First, there are ethical and constitutional arguments as to what is within the proper sphere of federal power. Secondly, it tends to be more efficient to break services down to the lowest level at which they can be offered. For example, do we want federal home owners associations or zoning laws for our small cities? Of course not. The federal system is too far removed from the consequences of the decision to have a deeper understanding than the locals do.

I agree that some services are very much within the federal domain. No one but the most ardent and philosophically strident will argue otherwise.

Everything objectivism stands for says, "Damn Joshua if you wanted medical treatment you should have worked harder and made more money, or gotten yourself a job with better benefits.", and that's the system you and the other randroids want to achieve. That, instead of a system that encourages the general well-being of fellow human beings. Oh shit, some lazy ass deadbeat welfare queen might get some health treatment. But how many deserving individuals like Joshua would also get treatment they otherwise wouldn't have had?

No. The ideal outcome would be that health insurance would have been affordable for this individual without the need for free market distortion and government intervention.

If someone plans poorly and does not take care of themselves, yes, they very likely will die sooner. This is a tragedy and a terrible consequence, but the consequence is of the individual's own making. If I, for example, engaged in very poor eating habits and have a heart attack would my death be any more or less tragic than someone who got cancer?

You submit that we must provide treatment for an individual who willingly chose not to plan for this event, do you equally propose that we regulate an individual's diet and other health concerns?

It is true that, right now, some people lack the means to plan ahead. Insurance is very very expensive. I submit that the answer is not to provide this scarce commodity through the government, but to remove the government as a major player. This will bring down costs through less fraud and by allowing insurance to compete by selling over state lines.

This is a similar situation to social security. We have a terrible savings rate in this country. You can be quite certain that without SS people would take retirement planning far more seriously.

Yes, I readily admit that there is a POTENTIAL problem where, say, enough of the population is still acting foolishly and a large amount of people end up becoming a ward of the state in their old age due to poor planning. In that case government intervention is possibly a solution.

Just because the government can, doesn't mean it should. The least invasive solutions should always be explored first.

I think, in general, people are willing to rally under the banner of government intervention when a prestige-problem or some glamorous (for want of a better term) issue rears its head. I suspect that most people will NOT accept forcing a fat person to stop overeating even if they're 95% likely to die from heart failure within 2 years. Yet, many are willing to rally the feds over an issue like cancer for someone who chose not to plan ahead where the situation and its mortality rate might be exactly the same as above.

We have already embraced the notion of actions have consequences. Why do we seek to alleviate the consequences in one area, yet we are happy to let them occur in others?

All this does is encourage poor planning.

[Ele]

Also, vaccines so safe bros

<object width="480" height="360"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5ztiAN9k584?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5ztiAN9k584?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="360" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

Don't peddle the Desiree Jennings story as a warning against vaccines; it was a psychogenic condition not a neurological condition/disease caused by the vaccine she received.

http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/desiree-jennings-the-plot-thickens/

Not that her selected form of "treatment" was of benefit to her, but she has improved and Inside Edition did a reexamination of their story and showed Ms. Jennings was fine.

******** width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GD1BAxVnFdc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

******** width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/wwlRwGQl5x4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Ele]

Don't fail me again Youtube.

******** width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GD1BAxVnFdc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

******** width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/wwlRwGQl5x4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Bodeanicus]

WHO CARES? SITTING HERE ON A FORUM BITCHING ABOUT SHIT NO ONE CARES ABOUT WILL NOT CHANGE ANYTHING. STOP CRYING AND LIVE YOUR FUCKING LIFE, STOP WORRYING ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE'S BUSINESS, THANKS! /caps off.

NOW LETS GO KILLS SOME DRAGONS, MAKE UP STORIES ABOUT FUCKING, AND CALL EACH OTHER FAGGOTS, THANKS!

[Razdeline]

WHO CARES? SITTING HERE ON A FORUM BITCHING ABOUT SHIT NO ONE CARES ABOUT WILL NOT CHANGE ANYTHING. STOP CRYING AND LIVE YOUR FUCKING LIFE, STOP WORRYING ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE'S BUSINESS, THANKS! /caps off.

Sadly even when people bitch IRL nothing changes either. That's how bad of a state of social decline we are in.

[Frieza_Prexus]

WHO CARES? SITTING HERE ON A FORUM BITCHING ABOUT SHIT NO ONE CARES ABOUT WILL NOT CHANGE ANYTHING. STOP CRYING AND LIVE YOUR FUCKING LIFE, STOP WORRYING ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE'S BUSINESS, THANKS! /caps off.

I disagree with this completely. Culture influences social policy to an extreme degree. Ideas are to be preserved, presented, and shared amongst the citizens in a multitude of forums. Every single person "in the fight" so to speak adds that much more to the aggregate that is our culture.

Yes, some battles (read: on the internet) are virtually fruitless, but you never know who might be reading.

[Ephirith]

You're morally outraged that someone doesn't believe in your view of economics, yet you're happy when the man contracts cancer.... ...I think you need to take a hard look at your moral compass.

He lost any sympathy from me when he became an activist against government healthcare for ideological reasons founded on personal responsibility- yet he still expected other people to help him when he realized he was fucked.

You're right to question my morality though, I think when I wrote this post I was just kind of ignoring what was right and let my emotions run wild. No, I shouldn't be happy about his cancer. But I do think the whole situation reflects poorly on these objectivists.


The capitalistic model explicitly recognizes that money will flow where people want it to... ...All things being equal, private charity then tends to be more efficient than government service.

I don't find your view of private charities compelling. Yes, they are more efficient, but that is irrelevant. They would never have some meaningful, beneficial, systematic effect when they are solely based on the whim of individuals who open their wallets for whatever is getting all the publicity lately.


In taking government services, it is certainly commendable to abstain, but not morally obligatory. Decrying the wisdom of a policy does not preclude utilization of a policy that exists.

There has been some discussion on this. Cancer treatments are expensive and I'm not positive Rand had the money she needed. It certainly makes sense under her intellectual paradigm to spend your life saying "Fuck social security", and then proceed to draw social security and medical checks because, "self-interest blah blah". In this specific example it's murky because she paid into the system against her will. But as the leader of a movement that says "I'm sorry you got cancer. You should have done better in life and made more money. I don't owe you anything", I think it would have been more meaningful of her to be an example of her ideology. Instead she took one last steaming shit on us dull little sheep and keeled over.


This is a tragedy and a terrible consequence, but the consequence is of the individual's own making. If I, for example, engaged in very poor eating habits and have a heart attack would my death be any more or less tragic than someone who got cancer? You submit that we must provide treatment for an individual who willingly chose not to plan for this event, do you equally propose that we regulate an individual's diet and other health concerns?


I have an atypical view when it comes to healthcare. It's too much to explain completely but I don't think people with self-inflicted health conditions like smokers and binge-eating fatasses should have the same coverage as somebody who takes responsibility for their health. In that situation I am all for saying, "Sorry, but this is the result of your own poor choices and you can't expect us to pay for it". In terms of lymphoma, and taking responsibility for having adequate savings, that's a different issue. Self-destructive behavior is negligent. I don't think a 20-something year old lymphoma victim not having $200,000 savings is negligent.

I believe some things simply should not function as a part of the free market, mainly systems meant for people's general welfare and safety, such as healthcare and environmental regulations/pollution. The idea of free market environmental tort law acting as pollution/toxic waste regulation, for example, would be fucking hilarious... if it weren't so terrifying that people actually believe it would work.