Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 113 (8790 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 09-24-2017 6:33 AM
343 online now:
NoNukes, PaulK (2 members, 341 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Porkncheese
Upcoming Birthdays: Tempe 12ft Chicken
Post Volume:
Total: 819,344 Year: 23,950/21,208 Month: 1,915/2,468 Week: 8/416 Day: 8/24 Hour: 0/1

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2021
22
23242526Next
Author Topic:   Exploring (mostly Cultural) Marxism in today's Left
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2956
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 316 of 381 (813897)
07-01-2017 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 308 by Faith
07-01-2017 9:08 AM


Re: capitalism
Capitalism doesn't have to be that insensitive, and with the right employers it's not.

True enough. But that can only work with the smaller companies where there is still a personal connection between the boss and the employees. So a worker has become disabled beyond the ability to ever work again. So who then maintains him/her from that point forward through the remaining decades of that individuals' life? If any company were to accept such a liability, then that would grossly reduce that company's ability to compete against its competitors. Therefore, according to capitalism, extending benefits to employees disabled in service to you would be detrimental to your economic model. And hence not allowed.

With the wrong employers you still have the legal system for the sake of the workers.

That is that "socialist" system that you oppose so strongly. That you want to get rid of.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 308 by Faith, posted 07-01-2017 9:08 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 318 by Rrhain, posted 07-02-2017 12:50 AM dwise1 has not yet responded
 Message 319 by Faith, posted 07-02-2017 1:32 AM dwise1 has not yet responded

    
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6149
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 317 of 381 (813899)
07-02-2017 12:42 AM
Reply to: Message 315 by Faith
07-01-2017 11:19 PM


Re: Political Correctness again
Faith responds to me:

quote:
What exactly is the percentage of whites who stay here illegally as compared to the "brown" illegals who have crashed the country through our southern border?

You mean you don't know? You claim to be not focused on the race of those who are illegal and you haven't done your homework regarding undocumented immigrants?

And you expect us to believe you when you say it isn't about race? Again, all the policies you endorse specifically target brown people.

And you didn't answer my question: How does a wall between the US and Mexico stop people overstaying their entry visas? That's the most common way a person becomes an undocumented immigrant. There is a net negative migration. How is a wall supposed to have any effect upon this?

And on a tangential note, when are you going to start focusing upon the people who exploit the undocumented? If there is no market for their labor, what would be their incentive to come here?

quote:
What is their rate of criminal activity too?

You mean you don't know? Lower than those who are born here. But, you knew that. We've been through this before. The crime rate of immigrants, both legal and illegal, is much lower than the crime rate of those who are native.

So once again, we see that your claim that you're only focused on their being "illegal" rather than their race is not exactly true. Again, the policies you endorse affect primarily those who are brown.


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 315 by Faith, posted 07-01-2017 11:19 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 321 by Faith, posted 07-02-2017 1:46 AM Rrhain has responded

    
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6149
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 318 of 381 (813900)
07-02-2017 12:50 AM
Reply to: Message 316 by dwise1
07-01-2017 11:48 PM


Re: capitalism
dwise1 writes:

quote:
Therefore, according to capitalism, extending benefits to employees disabled in service to you would be detrimental to your economic model. And hence not allowed.

It's akin to the current conservative, Christianist attempts to dismantle the healthcare system:

It seems that Faith has the same idea with regard to employment: You should rely on the charity of others when your employer screws you over...but heaven forbid we should organize a system such that this...oh, let's call it a "safety net"...is available for anybody at any time without having to go through the bother of setting it up from scratch every time.


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 316 by dwise1, posted 07-01-2017 11:48 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 320 by Faith, posted 07-02-2017 1:37 AM Rrhain has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26306
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 319 of 381 (813902)
07-02-2017 1:32 AM
Reply to: Message 316 by dwise1
07-01-2017 11:48 PM


Re: capitalism
I'm not sure I'm against socialism in all its forms, but I'm certainly against Marxism for all the reasons I've been giving on this thread.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 316 by dwise1, posted 07-01-2017 11:48 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26306
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 320 of 381 (813903)
07-02-2017 1:37 AM
Reply to: Message 318 by Rrhain
07-02-2017 12:50 AM


Re: capitalism
I have absolutely no opinion on the healthcare debate I'm afraid. I understand from the conservative point of view that Obamacare was too expensive for many people and mandated unnecessary coverage. I've HEARD that, but I don't keep up with the arguments. It sounds like not much progress is being made and I'm not sure who to trust about how it should be done. I'm pretty sure, however, there's no reason to trust the Democrats to do it right.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 318 by Rrhain, posted 07-02-2017 12:50 AM Rrhain has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 322 by Rrhain, posted 07-02-2017 2:31 AM Faith has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26306
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 321 of 381 (813904)
07-02-2017 1:46 AM
Reply to: Message 317 by Rrhain
07-02-2017 12:42 AM


Re: Political Correctness again
I am aware of some horrible crimes that have been committed by illegals, and the refusal to act to deport them by some supposed law enforcement officers.

I believe I've said that I think those who take advantage of cheap labor, which encourages the influx, should be prosecuted. Also the sanctuary cities.

Why do you protect them? Deport all illegals, white, brown, black or purple. They don't have a right to be here. But I'm not aware of the white illegals who came here legally; What I AM aware of is a great flood coming over our southern border and the mentality of the left that thinks that's just fine and calls it "immigration" leaving out the word illegal. Why are you objecting to my position, which is the rational one, when those who support this travesty are the guilty ones?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 317 by Rrhain, posted 07-02-2017 12:42 AM Rrhain has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 323 by Rrhain, posted 07-02-2017 4:42 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6149
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003
Member Rating: 3.7


(2)
Message 322 of 381 (813905)
07-02-2017 2:31 AM
Reply to: Message 320 by Faith
07-02-2017 1:37 AM


Re: capitalism
Faith responds to me:

quote:
I have absolutely no opinion on the healthcare debate I'm afraid.

Then you didn't read my post. I was using the destruction of healthcare as being carried out by Christianist conservatives to your attitudes toward employment as they are similar. You're OK with people helping out...but not if it's expected to help out...and not if the people being helped don't meet with your approval...and not if the way in which they are helped is not to your liking.

quote:
I understand from the conservative point of view that Obamacare was too expensive for many people

And astoundingly less expensive for significantly more. It's why more than 30 million people now have insurance who didn't have it before and the uninsured rate is at its lowest ever. As for those who had financial problems, that could have been helped had the Christianist conservatives not sabotaged the funding mechanisms that would have provided assistance in paying premiums.

Of course, this all could have been solved by a single-payer option the way most of the rest of the world does it. Medicare for All.

Or is Medicare a bad thing?

quote:
and mandated unnecessary coverage.

It's like you don't understand how insurance works. It seems that your definition of "unnecessary" means "I don't think I need it." F'rinstance, we have fools such as John Shimkus who, when asked about provisions in the ACA he had issue with, responded, "What about men having to purchase prenatal care?"

Last time I checked, he was born of a woman. Ergo, he enjoyed the benefits of a woman having access to prenatal care and for him to question why it should be included shows he doesn't understand how healthcare works.

But even so, that isn't how insurance works. We've been through this before: You don't pay for someone else's healthcare. You pay for your own. Your insurance may cover procedures that you never have, but that doesn't mean you're paying for it for someone else. Instead, you're paying for your own. After all, we hope you never need to submit a claim for chemotherapy to treat your cancer. And if you never do, that doesn't mean you wasted your money.

Suppose you wanted to pay for all your healthcare yourself. Good luck. Chances are, you'll never be able to do so paying out of pocket. Before the ACA, the most common reason for bankruptcy in the US was medical expenses. And this included people who had insurance. There were caps on payouts and if you have a chronic condition, you can easily hit that limit. Very few people have a few million dollars just lying around.

So you can invest your money. You can create a fund and every month, you might make a contribution to it. That way, you will have money set aside in case you have a bill. You can even invest that money so that it will grow and it will be able to cover more than just what you put in it.

But it still won't be enough. It's hard enough to acquire enough money to retire on let alone pay for medical bills on top of that.

So you can work with your friends and pool your resources. You can then leverage economies of scale and make better investments in order to get a bigger return. But now you have some questions about how to manage this fund. When it's just your money, you can determine what you will and won't use it for. There's nothing stopping you from raiding it to pay for the leaky roof or your kid's college tuition and thus taking the risk that you won't have enough to pay your medical bill. When there's someone else involved, you'll want to set up a schedule for what you will pay for out of that fund and not let it be raided for non-medical expenses.

You'll then need to decide what to do if someone wants out. Do they get to take their "fair share" of the fund? This can easily lead to the collapse of the fund if enough people leave...especially if they do so as someone starts drawing on it. What to do?

Congratulations, you just invented the insurance company: They have the fund. They set up a schedule of what can be filed as a claim. When you pay a premium, you aren't paying to have a tiny little pile of money for yourself. Instead, you're paying for access to the fund. When you leave, you don't get to take any money with you because you never had a pile of money to begin with. Instead, you were just buying membership to their club and when you stop paying, you're no longer a member.

And that's how it works now: The government has established what minimum care is required to be covered by private insurance (which they have the right to do) because we have learned that to deny those services means that people end up going to the ER which is the most expensive way to deliver healthcare and cannot actually provide care for chronic conditions such as cancer, dementia, HIV, etc.

And the ACA simply provided a way for you to buy into the private insurance market. So even taking Shimkus at face value, he isn't paying to have maternity care covered for someone that he thinks is undeserving of having maternity care. Instead, he's paying to have his own prostate exam covered. He doesn't have a pile of money all his own at the insurance company. He's paying for access to their fund and basic medical care necessitates maternity care.

So please, do tell us what you mean by "unnecessary."

quote:
I've HEARD that

And you seem to be very good at parroting talking points you don't understand.

quote:
It sounds like not much progress is being made and I'm not sure who to trust about how it should be done.

I can tell you who not to trust:

Christianist conservatives. Those who say that the ACA is sinking under its own weight are lying to you.

quote:
I'm pretty sure, however, there's no reason to trust the Democrats to do it right.

On the contrary: They're the only ones who can possibly do so.

Medicare for All.

Or do you think Medicare is bad?


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 320 by Faith, posted 07-02-2017 1:37 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 324 by Faith, posted 07-02-2017 5:07 AM Rrhain has not yet responded
 Message 325 by dwise1, posted 07-02-2017 5:49 AM Rrhain has not yet responded

    
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6149
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 323 of 381 (813907)
07-02-2017 4:42 AM
Reply to: Message 321 by Faith
07-02-2017 1:46 AM


Re: Political Correctness again
Faith responds to me:

quote:
I am aware of some horrible crimes that have been committed by illegals

So only a crime rate of 0 is sufficient?

Faith, native-born people are twice as likely to commit crime, including violent crime, than immigrants, and that includes undocumented immigrants. So please explain how a wall is going to help.

quote:
and the refusal to act to deport them by some supposed law enforcement officers.

You've been lied to if that's what you think, Faith.

Remember, Obama has deported more people than any other administration.

Remember, there is a negative immigration across the Mexican border.

Remember, crime is down, including violent crime, and has been going down for decades.

So please explain how a wall is going to change things.

quote:
I believe I've said that I think those who take advantage of cheap labor, which encourages the influx, should be prosecuted. Also the sanctuary cities.

You do realize that the latter is in direct contradiction to the former, yes?

And you do realize that it is illegal to "prosecute" sanctuary cities, yes? It is illegal for the feds to force a state/city to carry out immigration policy (have your forgotten the Arizona case?) And thus (and this has already been decided in the courts), the feds cannot penalize a municipality for not engaging in immigration policy.

So why are you seeking to penalize the victims of exploitation?

Oh, that's right: They're brown.

quote:
Why do you protect them?

Because it's the "Christian" thing to do and monstrous to do otherwise.

quote:
Deport all illegals, white, brown, black or purple.

Again, how is a wall going to help? Remember, the most common way a person becomes an undocumented immigrant is by overstaying a legal visa. Why do your policies only target brown people?

quote:
They don't have a right to be here.

So? Why not provide them a means to earn that right? They provide a great deal of needed support for our society. Why do you seek to punish them for wanting to be Americans?

quote:
But I'm not aware of the white illegals who came here legally

And there we have it. You keep saying that it isn't about race, but then you say things like that. "WHITE"? What about the brown "illegals who came here legally"? Remember, the most common way in which a person becomes an undocumented immigrant is to overstay their legal entry. So why do you seem to think that the immigrants who come in here legally are white?

And don't you think that your ignorance regarding the entirety of immigration in the US might have something to do with your ability to have an effective opinion?

quote:
What I AM aware of is a great flood coming over our southern border

No, you're not. Instead, you've been lied to and you bought the lie.

There is a NEGATIVE rate of immigration across the Mexican border. So the "great flood" you talk about literally does not exist.

In fact, it's going the other way.

Again, don't you think that your ignorance regarding immigration in the US might have something to do with your ability to have an effective opinion?

quote:
and the mentality of the left that thinks that's just fine

Since what you claim to be aware of is quite literally a fiction, what does that have to say about this opinion of yours? Again, don't you think that your ignorance regarding immigration in the US might have something to do with your ability to have an effective opinion?

quote:
and calls it "immigration" leaving out the word illegal.

Because a person is not "illegal."

But since you insist, why don't you respond to my question?

Why not provide them a means to earn that right? They provide a great deal of needed support for our society. Why do you seek to punish them for wanting to be Americans?

quote:
Why are you objecting to my position

Because it is racist.

Because it is monstrous.

Because it is unChristian.

quote:
which is the rational one, when those who support this travesty are the guilty ones?

Because your foundation is quite literally a fiction. Ergo, how can it be "rational"? Again, what does that have to say about this opinion of yours? Again, don't you think that your ignorance regarding immigration in the US might have something to do with your ability to have an effective opinion?

Exactly how is seeking to provide a way for these people to become citizens a "travesty"? Why not provide them a means to earn their citizenship? They provide a great deal of needed support for our society. Why do you seek to punish them for wanting to be Americans?

Oh, that's right. They're brown.


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 321 by Faith, posted 07-02-2017 1:46 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26306
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 324 of 381 (813909)
07-02-2017 5:07 AM
Reply to: Message 322 by Rrhain
07-02-2017 2:31 AM


Re: capitalism
I read a few sentences of your post. None of it is true. Not reading any more.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by Rrhain, posted 07-02-2017 2:31 AM Rrhain has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 326 by dwise1, posted 07-02-2017 5:53 AM Faith has responded
 Message 328 by JonF, posted 07-02-2017 9:31 AM Faith has responded

    
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2956
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 325 of 381 (813914)
07-02-2017 5:49 AM
Reply to: Message 322 by Rrhain
07-02-2017 2:31 AM


Re: capitalism
Suppose you wanted to pay for all your healthcare yourself. Good luck. Chances are, you'll never be able to do so paying out of pocket. Before the ACA, the most common reason for bankruptcy in the US was medical expenses.

My own personal experience within the past decade (I am now 65). Emergency abdominal surgery for a perforated bowel, about $60,000. Blocked coronary arteries requiring three stents, about $81,000. Fortunately, my insurance through work covered most of that. Right now, I paid off my mortgage a couple years ago. That medical bill would have required a second mortgage. And it is trivial compared to really major medical bills.

Mind you, I am myself very lucky. With an investment of merely 35 years of my life (military service), I have medical insurance for the rest of my life, albeit now married to Medicare, but now the out-of-pocket expenses are being covered by the military Tri-Care so I'm no longer paying anything except for Medicare B. My mortgage is paid off and Social Security plus my military pension will more than pay my monthly expenses so I should almost never have to draw from my 401K which has grown surprisingly large. It makes me wonder how civilians could possibly cope.

It's like you don't understand how insurance works.

Like the "leader of the free world." One report I heard is that he thought health insurance costs about $18 a month. A much later report is that all his staffers are constantly rolling their eyes at what a complete idiot he is.

Please, don't get me started!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by Rrhain, posted 07-02-2017 2:31 AM Rrhain has not yet responded

    
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2956
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 326 of 381 (813915)
07-02-2017 5:53 AM
Reply to: Message 324 by Faith
07-02-2017 5:07 AM


Re: capitalism
Faith, you are disabled. Seriously disabled. So disabled that you cannot even leave your domicile to travel to a library to research anything.

How do you live? I would assume that you have medical issues. How are those being attended to?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by Faith, posted 07-02-2017 5:07 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 327 by Faith, posted 07-02-2017 9:26 AM dwise1 has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26306
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 327 of 381 (813920)
07-02-2017 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 326 by dwise1
07-02-2017 5:53 AM


Re: capitalism
Totally socialist.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 326 by dwise1, posted 07-02-2017 5:53 AM dwise1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 330 by dwise1, posted 07-02-2017 1:18 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
JonF
Member
Posts: 3962
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 328 of 381 (813921)
07-02-2017 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 324 by Faith
07-02-2017 5:07 AM


Re: capitalism
I read a few sentences of your post. None of it is true. Not reading any more.

Yeah, denying reality always works.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by Faith, posted 07-02-2017 5:07 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 329 by Faith, posted 07-02-2017 9:33 AM JonF has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 26306
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 329 of 381 (813922)
07-02-2017 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 328 by JonF
07-02-2017 9:31 AM


Re: capitalism
Ignoring misrepresentations is easier on my physical and emotional health than making an issue of them.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 328 by JonF, posted 07-02-2017 9:31 AM JonF has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 331 by JonF, posted 07-02-2017 1:47 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2956
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 330 of 381 (813930)
07-02-2017 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 327 by Faith
07-02-2017 9:26 AM


Re: capitalism
DWise1 writes:

Faith, you are disabled. Seriously disabled. So disabled that you cannot even leave your domicile to travel to a library to research anything.
How do you live? I would assume that you have medical issues. How are those being attended to?

Totally socialist.

Are you saying that you are totally socialist when it comes to yourself?

Or are you denouncing the social safety net that you depend on and that's keeping you alive? Because where are your past employers giving you the money that you need long after you have had to have left them?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 327 by Faith, posted 07-02-2017 9:26 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
2021
22
23242526Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017