4 ms·
Thousands of people will die in the process, it's a high price to pay for a political win.
by noobermin 10y ago
Thousands of people will die in the process, it's a high price to pay for a political win.
- mobiplayer 10y agoSingle payer is not a political goal, it objectively saves and improves lives.
- wayn3 10y agoSaving and improving lives IS a political goal.
- mobiplayer 10y agoThen everything is a political goal, and there's no point on you classifying anything as a political goal as to measure its value. "Too high price for a political goal" and "everything is a political goal" are not compatible. So, tell me, what's your point really?
- wayn3 10y agothe point is, one party values not redistributing money over saving peoples lives. the other does not. one of them got elected by poor rural people who really need the ACA. i dont think that political goals have value. theyre about the last thing to have "value". "Exterminate all jews" was a relatively popular political goal just a couple decades ago. As far as "valuable things" go, political goals range relatively low on that totem pole.
- mobiplayer 10y agoHah! I tried hard to avoid bringing the Holocaust reference as a political goal, but I guess it clearly shows that saying something is a "political goal" is a moot point, which you seem to agree with anyway :-)
- wayn3 10y agowhy try so hard?
- mobiplayer 10y agoGodwin's
- dragonwriter 10y agoIt is a political goal. It maybe shouldn't be a divisive, partisan political goal for the reasons you describe, but in fact it is that, too.
- mobiplayer 10y agoThen the argument of "too high for a political goal" is moot, because everything is a political goal.