5 ms·

2) They are putting on steam largely because of the USA's shit healthcare system I know both sides of this. Obamacare was truly a boon to me when I was an "ind

2) They are putting on steam largely because of the USA's shit healthcare system I know both sides of this. Obamacare was truly a boon to me when I was an "independent consultant." We in the USA need to value our liberty. But if you want people to value liberty, you first have to keep them safe from Kafkaesque nightmares which involve their bodies not working correctly and not getting fixed. Basically, it works just like hunger. In particular, in the present day US, the societal cohorts which create media seem to be comprised of 1) out of touch left-leaning upper class people or 2) people with so few resources they are at risk. Together, they form a larger faction. This is a recipe for a society that stops tells itself it wants freedom and changes into a society that wants to take care of people. (1 are people who identify as those doing the taking care of, and 2 are people who would be taken care of.) If you want people who appreciate and take care of their freedom, you have to make sure they're not hungry and sick. History shows us this clearly. http://smbc-comics.com/comic/healthcare http://smbc-comics.com/comic/healthcare

twic 8y ago
I don't understand what you've written at all. Are you in favour of the US healthcare system, or against it?
- gameswithgo 8y ago
  I can tell that he is against but the rest of it was completely opaque to me
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    I can tell that he is against Not exactly. (Or maybe not necessarily.) I could picture a system I'd like that would look a lot like the system we have right now. I'm not expert enough to know how that would work. but the rest of it was completely opaque to me Are you part of the societal cohort comprised of left-leaning upper class people in tech and media? Are you part of the societal cohort comprised of lower middle class people working in tech and media? Are you from a different part of society? That would be useful information for writing a clarification. Exactly what part was opaque to you?
- stcredzero 8y ago
  I don't understand what you've written at all. Are you in favour of the US healthcare system, or against it? There's this thing called "nuance." In very general terms, I'm for personal liberty and autonomy. However, I also recognize that people don't care about that, when they are hungry or fear bankruptcy and illness. [1] The US healthcare system is broken, in that large numbers of people are left in a state of risking bankruptcy and illness. For me, the path forward would involve a safety net for such people, while minimizing encroachment on personal freedom. Not sure what that would look like. [1] - A stable society must provide a minimum across society, based on perception of relative status. Otherwise, people are wired up to cause chaos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3XYHPAwBzE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3XYHPAwBzE
  - odorousrex 8y ago
    How does a national health care system (say such as Canada or UK) encroach on personal freedom? (Short of say the obvious...increased taxes for you.) I've found a lot of "opponents" of universal healthcare actually support a safety net for less fortunate people - they just don't want to pay for it. This is a perfectly valid reason, but I wouldn't call it encroaching on personal freedom, so I'm curious as to how else you see it affecting liberty?
    - stcredzero 8y ago
      they just don't want to pay for it. This is a perfectly valid reason, but I wouldn't call it encroaching on personal freedom, so I'm curious as to how else you see it affecting liberty? For one thing, why are you so insistent that I'm an opponent of health care reform. (Subjectively speaking, there's this sour stickyness of you assuming things inside my head around that. If you are, please, don't. You would be wasting our time and energy with that.) I voted for Obama the 1st time in large part because of health care reform. That said, I've since changed my mind. The individual mandate in Obamacare is too big an encroachment on individual freedom. Big government agencies tend to encroach on individual freedom because they tend to accrue de facto then de jure power. Would anyone dispute that the IRS has considerable power, enough to create some potential for abuse? (Not saying we should get rid of them, however.) As far as individual freedom goes generally, watching the events of the past several years, including those around "activists," and big tech companies, has made me a lot more concerned about individual freedom. A lot of people seem to be paying lip service to concepts like Freedom of Speech and Due Process, but then putting wide ranging things into effect which interfere with or abrogate those rights, though they are not technically illegal. (yet)

twic 8y ago

I don't understand what you've written at all. Are you in favour of the US healthcare system, or against it?

gameswithgo 8y ago
I can tell that he is against but the rest of it was completely opaque to me
- stcredzero 8y ago
  I can tell that he is against Not exactly. (Or maybe not necessarily.) I could picture a system I'd like that would look a lot like the system we have right now. I'm not expert enough to know how that would work. but the rest of it was completely opaque to me Are you part of the societal cohort comprised of left-leaning upper class people in tech and media? Are you part of the societal cohort comprised of lower middle class people working in tech and media? Are you from a different part of society? That would be useful information for writing a clarification. Exactly what part was opaque to you?
stcredzero 8y ago
I don't understand what you've written at all. Are you in favour of the US healthcare system, or against it? There's this thing called "nuance." In very general terms, I'm for personal liberty and autonomy. However, I also recognize that people don't care about that, when they are hungry or fear bankruptcy and illness. [1] The US healthcare system is broken, in that large numbers of people are left in a state of risking bankruptcy and illness. For me, the path forward would involve a safety net for such people, while minimizing encroachment on personal freedom. Not sure what that would look like. [1] - A stable society must provide a minimum across society, based on perception of relative status. Otherwise, people are wired up to cause chaos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3XYHPAwBzE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3XYHPAwBzE
- odorousrex 8y ago
  How does a national health care system (say such as Canada or UK) encroach on personal freedom? (Short of say the obvious...increased taxes for you.) I've found a lot of "opponents" of universal healthcare actually support a safety net for less fortunate people - they just don't want to pay for it. This is a perfectly valid reason, but I wouldn't call it encroaching on personal freedom, so I'm curious as to how else you see it affecting liberty?
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    they just don't want to pay for it. This is a perfectly valid reason, but I wouldn't call it encroaching on personal freedom, so I'm curious as to how else you see it affecting liberty? For one thing, why are you so insistent that I'm an opponent of health care reform. (Subjectively speaking, there's this sour stickyness of you assuming things inside my head around that. If you are, please, don't. You would be wasting our time and energy with that.) I voted for Obama the 1st time in large part because of health care reform. That said, I've since changed my mind. The individual mandate in Obamacare is too big an encroachment on individual freedom. Big government agencies tend to encroach on individual freedom because they tend to accrue de facto then de jure power. Would anyone dispute that the IRS has considerable power, enough to create some potential for abuse? (Not saying we should get rid of them, however.) As far as individual freedom goes generally, watching the events of the past several years, including those around "activists," and big tech companies, has made me a lot more concerned about individual freedom. A lot of people seem to be paying lip service to concepts like Freedom of Speech and Due Process, but then putting wide ranging things into effect which interfere with or abrogate those rights, though they are not technically illegal. (yet)