5 ms·

> It's interesting how, when this particular viewpoint comes up, the hypothetical individual is always deeply irresponsible, borderline malicious. But the perso

by snitko 13y ago

> It's interesting how, when this particular viewpoint comes up, the hypothetical individual is always deeply irresponsible, borderline malicious. But the person making the argument never is. No, I may be the most irresponsible person in the world. The difference is, I'm not asking you or anyone else to pay for it. > No, because this is a fundamental philosophical difference that runs to the core of who we are. I value the collective, and am willing to make sacrifices to my individual in order to advance the whole. So would you then personally come to my house with a gun and demand money and escort me to jail if I politely refuse to pay, explaining my reasons? Will you do this, knowing my family is going to suffer? Will you look my kids in the eyes and say "Your daddy is a criminal because he refuses to pay for what I think is right". > As a Canadian citizen myself, stay on your side of the border, please. Please do not assume everyone here is from the US. I'm not talking about a specific country, I'm talking about a principle. US is socialist in many ways too.

loopdoend 13y ago
You're going to have a very hard time owning anything in Canada that isn't subject to seizure without paying taxes. So this hypothetical property you'd be trying to protect would cease to be yours. We don't throw people in jail or point guns at them, and frankly even if you weren't paying income tax you would be paying tons of sales tax that you can't avoid. Worst case scenario you'd be forced into bankruptcy, tax debt is dischargeable up here, unlike in the US.
- snitko 13y ago
  So the question remains: would you personally come to my house to cease it and explain to my kids that they are now homeless because their daddy simply disagrees with what you think is right and refuses to pay to people you believe are good?
  - pessimizer 13y ago
    >because their daddy simply disagrees with what you think is right and refuses to pay to people you believe are good? I'd leave out this part. edit: or to be clear, I'd be as likely to say that as I would be to say to the children of a burglar, "I'm arresting your father because he wanted you to have nice things."
    - snitko 13y ago
      That's an interesting twist. You're basically calling me a burglar, even though it is you who intends to take my money away from me.
      - pessimizer 13y ago
        I'm not calling you a burglar.
rossjudson 13y ago
> not asking you or anyone else to pay for it Sure you are. The moment you're out of your financial depth you'll scream like a little girl and recant. You presume that a private system yields some kind of low-cost alternative to single-payer systems. That's not the case, and it's so far from true in the US that it's laughable. You are the one who needs to look into his kids eyes and explain why they can't have critically needed health care. It should start with "Daddy can't do math", and end with "and so my beliefs were more important than your well-being".

by snitko 13y ago

loopdoend 13y ago

You're going to have a very hard time owning anything in Canada that isn't subject to seizure without paying taxes. So this hypothetical property you'd be trying to protect would cease to be yours. We don't throw people in jail or point guns at them, and frankly even if you weren't paying income tax you would be paying tons of sales tax that you can't avoid. Worst case scenario you'd be forced into bankruptcy, tax debt is dischargeable up here, unlike in the US.

snitko 13y ago
So the question remains: would you personally come to my house to cease it and explain to my kids that they are now homeless because their daddy simply disagrees with what you think is right and refuses to pay to people you believe are good?
- pessimizer 13y ago
  >because their daddy simply disagrees with what you think is right and refuses to pay to people you believe are good? I'd leave out this part. edit: or to be clear, I'd be as likely to say that as I would be to say to the children of a burglar, "I'm arresting your father because he wanted you to have nice things."
  - snitko 13y ago
    That's an interesting twist. You're basically calling me a burglar, even though it is you who intends to take my money away from me.
    - pessimizer 13y ago
      I'm not calling you a burglar.

rossjudson 13y ago

> not asking you or anyone else to pay for it Sure you are. The moment you're out of your financial depth you'll scream like a little girl and recant. You presume that a private system yields some kind of low-cost alternative to single-payer systems. That's not the case, and it's so far from true in the US that it's laughable. You are the one who needs to look into his kids eyes and explain why they can't have critically needed health care. It should start with "Daddy can't do math", and end with "and so my beliefs were more important than your well-being".