• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

No Breaks for "Mr. Danger": Chavez wins re-election by LANDSLIDE

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,576
431
126
Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Originally posted by: Vic
I can't twist the self-evident fact that you're further to the left than Stalin which is why you think even real liberals are right wingers.

You just admitted that you don't believe in the concept of inherent rights and that you believe that basic rights are bestowed by government. That's in complete opposition of the most fundamental of classical liberal philosophies, rot. And you not only admitted that, you ridiculed me for it. Quite frankly, I'd say that if it wasn't for your blind ignorance keeping you from reading your own posts, you'd never post here again out of humiliation.

Oh, as for the real right wingers you mention, I have no trouble debating with people of different viewpoints provided that they are intelligent, open-minded, and willing to agree to disagree on some things. I'm not an ideologue or a partisan hack, you're just none of those.
Keep believing this crap, problem is noone else does but you. Ever wonder why noone will ever back you but far right wingnuts? Think about it. And it is not just because you have been found to be dishonest again and again.
Who says nobody believes him? The concept of inherent rights is so absolutely enshrined in liberalism and modern politics that upon formation, the United Nations put a declaration of their 'inherent', 'inalienable' and 'essential' status in the very first document that body wrote:
On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the full text of which appears in the following pages. Following this historic act the Assembly called upon all Member countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and "to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories."

PREAMBLE

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,
- United Nations's Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Any decent read of the history of the human species and how societies have evolved covers the exact same grounds. To summarize, even though humanity did not always have a government, we have always strove for the same freedoms. This is not by sheer, amazing coincidence. If you're truly interested in debating this topic, I really do recommend reading something like Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. It starts recounting history around 11,000 B.C. - surely enough to let you recognize a pattern if you're looking for one honestly.

It's really quite clear that come hell or high water, society eventually breaks free of whatever nonsense institution is governing them and trends back to a set amount of essential liberties.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
48,495
9,451
126
I loved that Jared Diamond book. Very enlightening. I recorded the PBS TV special he did and burned it to DVD as well. It's condensed but still good viewing.

As I noted, inherent rights are not given or granted, they can only revoked by force. Liberalism begins there.
If you think the government giveth and the government taketh away (or the people if you prefer), then you ain't a liberal. Period.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,576
431
126
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: sandorski
No, I don't think Doctors are conspiring. Medicical Treatments are Expensive though and not everybody can afford them.

Was my post an appeal to Emotion. Certainly, as was Vic's.

The fact of the matter is that Free Market Capitalism is not the same as Freedom. It is Freedom only to the extent that one has benefitted. The more Benefit, the more Freedom one has.

In both Free Market Capitalism and Socialism compromises on Freedom occur. In Vic's aruement, Wealth Accumulation has been compromised in Socialism for the Benefit of the many. In my arguement, the Poor's ability to benefit from all that Technology has been provided has been compromised for the benefit of the Individual's potential to accumulate Wealth. True Freedom comes from making the choice as to what kind of Society is created including the choice of Economic System.
What are you going on about? You started with:
Anyway, here's your answer: Joe lives in the perfect Free Market/Capitalist Society.
We're not talking about today, we're talking about the perfect free market. In the perfect free market, the offered price for services like cancer diagnosis and treatment are as low as the market can possibly bear. They have to be - that's the definition of the perfect free market. The inherent competition between those offering service very naturally leads to this.

I don't know about this "Free Market Capitalism is not the same as Freedom" fluff, but I can say with certainty that socialism is absolutely not a winning "compromise" to make with capitalism. If socialism is required to drop the price of an offered good or service below what the market has naturally determined it to be, then someone is being ripped off. Being forced to work for less than what you're service is entitled to is, yes I went there, slavery.

I don't care that much about Venezuela making an obviously poor choice because it'll make an interesting footnote in history a few decades hence, but it's idiocy to imply that freedom includes the right to enslave absolutely all of the population to the Castro's second coming because he's promising you personally a cut of the oil revenue.
It may be true that the Best Price Possible is a benefit of the Free Market, but it does not mean that it is Affordable to All.

I'm no fan of Socialism or Free Market Capitalism(I'm talking the Pure form of each, of which only Pure Socialism has ever been tried), but when it comes to Wages and Workers getting what they are Worth, that was only acheived in Industrialized Free Market Economies when the Socialist concept of Worker Unions forced it. Both Economic systems offer valueable ideas that make the best current Economic Systems possible, that being Mixed Economic Systems.

My point is and always has been is that: It's the choice of the Venezuelan People to decide. It is not My choice, it is not Vic's choice, nor is it You choice. They are Free to choose for themselves, we have no Right or Freedom to choose for Them. If they want a Cut of the Oil Revenues, then that's their choice and don't go and make it out like they are the only one's who have ever Voted for someone because of what they can get from them. We do it every Election, the only difference is what we are willing to be bought for.
Your first and second sentences lead you right back into subjecting a set people to slavery.

Look, if the best price possible isn't necessarily meant to be affordable to everyone. It will be the price that mutual competition has brought it down to. To do any better, you must declare, "But everyone should have ____!" Which now forces the either the providers of Service X to operate at break-even or loss, or pulls funds from the rest of the community to subsidize those poor people afflicted by whatever that provider is offering a cure for.

That sounds wonderful in theory - it's not asking much to help the sick, is it? Course not. But here's the central problem: IT NEVER ENDS THERE.

Cancer treatment gets subsidized. Wholly understandable.

Lukemia sufferers don't deserve the same? Of course they do - add them on.

Alzheimer's? Add it on.

AIDS? Add it on.

Cystic Fibrosis? Add it on.

Add it on. Add it on. Add it on. Add it on. Where does it stop? Hmm, some people are men born in a woman's body - they deserve to be able to affordably switch genders. Add it on. What exactly have you gotten us into? An ever-expanding amount of subsidized treatments that take more and more of our tax dollars away with near zero chance of ever utilizing. And you should be grateful for the pleasure of doing so! Hello, fellow slave.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,485
3,596
126
Inherent/Natural Rights are Belief, not Fact. They are Religious(and no, this does not mean that the US is based upon "Christianity") in nature, that being they are assumptions/beliefs upon which to establish a Civilization. All Civilizations are based on these types of Belief. All Civilizations have their assumed Rights. No Civilization can exist without such shared Beliefs. Without these shared Beliefs there is nothing, but Every Man for Himself or the Laws of Nature.

That is why interfering in Other Nations internall affairs doesn't quite work as expected. Societies tend to find their own solutions and resist the solutions from outside societies. By and large the many troubled spots in the world exist today because of outside influence(European Imperialism), not because European ideas of Civilization are flawed(though they are as all are), but because the Societies they tried to impose those ideas on couldn't accept being told what to do.

This is why you have to let Venezuela go. They have accepted the concept of Democracy, let them develope from there. If the claim that "Socialism always fails" is true, they will learn that lesson and move away from it. If it is not true, they may still move away from it, but that should still be their choice.

That said, there is nothing wrong with trying to convince others of the benefits of alternate systems, Economic or Political. However, once you have Interfered with another Socieities developement(especially though Violent means) you have gone too far. The only possible exceptions being if Genocide or other senseless violence begins to occur, but even then interference doesn't always make sense.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,485
3,596
126
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: sandorski
No, I don't think Doctors are conspiring. Medicical Treatments are Expensive though and not everybody can afford them.

Was my post an appeal to Emotion. Certainly, as was Vic's.

The fact of the matter is that Free Market Capitalism is not the same as Freedom. It is Freedom only to the extent that one has benefitted. The more Benefit, the more Freedom one has.

In both Free Market Capitalism and Socialism compromises on Freedom occur. In Vic's aruement, Wealth Accumulation has been compromised in Socialism for the Benefit of the many. In my arguement, the Poor's ability to benefit from all that Technology has been provided has been compromised for the benefit of the Individual's potential to accumulate Wealth. True Freedom comes from making the choice as to what kind of Society is created including the choice of Economic System.
What are you going on about? You started with:
Anyway, here's your answer: Joe lives in the perfect Free Market/Capitalist Society.
We're not talking about today, we're talking about the perfect free market. In the perfect free market, the offered price for services like cancer diagnosis and treatment are as low as the market can possibly bear. They have to be - that's the definition of the perfect free market. The inherent competition between those offering service very naturally leads to this.

I don't know about this "Free Market Capitalism is not the same as Freedom" fluff, but I can say with certainty that socialism is absolutely not a winning "compromise" to make with capitalism. If socialism is required to drop the price of an offered good or service below what the market has naturally determined it to be, then someone is being ripped off. Being forced to work for less than what you're service is entitled to is, yes I went there, slavery.

I don't care that much about Venezuela making an obviously poor choice because it'll make an interesting footnote in history a few decades hence, but it's idiocy to imply that freedom includes the right to enslave absolutely all of the population to the Castro's second coming because he's promising you personally a cut of the oil revenue.
It may be true that the Best Price Possible is a benefit of the Free Market, but it does not mean that it is Affordable to All.

I'm no fan of Socialism or Free Market Capitalism(I'm talking the Pure form of each, of which only Pure Socialism has ever been tried), but when it comes to Wages and Workers getting what they are Worth, that was only acheived in Industrialized Free Market Economies when the Socialist concept of Worker Unions forced it. Both Economic systems offer valueable ideas that make the best current Economic Systems possible, that being Mixed Economic Systems.

My point is and always has been is that: It's the choice of the Venezuelan People to decide. It is not My choice, it is not Vic's choice, nor is it You choice. They are Free to choose for themselves, we have no Right or Freedom to choose for Them. If they want a Cut of the Oil Revenues, then that's their choice and don't go and make it out like they are the only one's who have ever Voted for someone because of what they can get from them. We do it every Election, the only difference is what we are willing to be bought for.
Your first and second sentences lead you right back into subjecting a set people to slavery.

Look, if the best price possible isn't necessarily meant to be affordable to everyone. It will be the price that mutual competition has brought it down to. To do any better, you must declare, "But everyone should have ____!" Which now forces the either the providers of Service X to operate at break-even or loss, or pulls funds from the rest of the community to subsidize those poor people afflicted by whatever that provider is offering a cure for.

That sounds wonderful in theory - it's not asking much to help the sick, is it? Course not. But here's the central problem: IT NEVER ENDS THERE.

Cancer treatment gets subsidized. Wholly understandable.

Lukemia sufferers don't deserve the same? Of course they do - add them on.

Alzheimer's? Add it on.

AIDS? Add it on.

Cystic Fibrosis? Add it on.

Add it on. Add it on. Add it on. Add it on. Where does it stop? Hmm, some people are men born in a woman's body - they deserve to be able to affordably switch genders. Add it on. What exactly have you gotten us into? An ever-expanding amount of subsidized treatments that take more and more of our tax dollars away with near zero chance of ever utilizing. And you should be grateful for the pleasure of doing so! Hello, fellow slave.
I'm not even sure where you're going with this. Insurance is very similar to what you seem to be condemning here. Is Insurance some insidious form of Socialism?
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
48,495
9,451
126
Can you opt out of insurance? Can you opt out of socialism?

There's your answer.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,061
494
126
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: sandorski
Some people have a skewed view of Freedom. Capitalism/Free Markets are not Freedom, Socialism is not Freedom. What is Freedom is the ability to choose either of those 2, any variation of those 2, or any other Economic system. As long as the People of any Nation is Free to choose their Leaders, they are Free to choose their fate. Democracy and only Democracy is the only Institution that ensures Freedom.
What about the person who votes for the losing candidate? What about his freedom to choose? Or did you vote for GW?

This is why free markets are freedom and socialism is not. Free markets do not require that people be involved when they do not wish to, while socialism requires that everyone be involved whether they like it or not.
He/She certainly Lost, but he/she still had the choice. Perhaps next Election they will Win.

Both Systems(Free Market/Socialism) requires everyone to be involved, like it or not.

Exactly what involvement does a truly free market require, like it or not? If you don't want to benefit society, then you just won't receive any benefit from society.
That is all. Unlike socialism, free markets don't require you to work solely for the benefit of others (which is the antithesis of freedom, slavery, by definition).

I'm sorry to say, but you don't know what freedom is. Democracy can just as easily be a tyranny as any other system. Just like an absolutely monarchy could foster freedom if the king is kindly and wise. Democracy defines a way in which government decisions are made, not necessarily any particular system of government, free or not-free, of itself.
Socialism works on the same principle. I know what Freedom is. Freedom is to choose, part of that Choice is how Society is structured. If Capitalism/Free Markets are the only choice, there is no Freedom.
WTF how do you people get so brainwashed?

Okay, suppose you live in a socialist society and it is voted upon -- democratically, of course -- that everyone has the right to "free" ice cream. You, it just so happens, are lactose-intolerant, and so you don't want the free ice cream. Now, because nothing, not even ice cream, can possibly be truly free, the cost of the "free" ice cream for everyone is still collected as taxation. Are you of lactose-intolerance allowed to choose not to have to pay for everyone else's ice cream? No. Under any possible socialist system that could be conceived of, you would have pay (which means, "work for," as money = labor/time) for everyone else's benefit with no benefit to yourself, nor choice allowed. There is no freedom, except for the freedom to vote for new and interesting ways of screwing your neighbor, and to vote in vain attempts to try to stop your neighbor from doing the same to you.


edit: BTW, you didn't answer my question to your statement that free markets are restrictive of freedom, you just distracted from it.
Ridiculous example.

I shouldn't have to even answer that question, you should know of plenty examples yourself. Unfortunetly you are quick to label another as "Brainwashed" when it is you who has bought the rhetorical kool aid.

Anyway, here's your answer: Joe lives in the perfect Free Market/Capitalist Society. He works hard, is a good Father and Husband, but has always been unable to make more $$ than to Supply his family with Its' basic needs, Food, Shelter, Clothing, and a few extras like a TV, occassional trip to Grandmas, etc.

One day Joe gets sick. No poblem, he thinks, he's been sick before a few days of fluids/rest will clear it up. A few days pass and hhe's even more sicker. So he calls a Doctor, makes an appointment, and goes to the Dr.s office.

Receptionist: That'll be $100 to see the Doctor
Joe having taken some money from the Vacation fund hands her the $100

He sees the Doctor, who does much of the usual things, but the Doctor soon concludes, "I'm not sure what's going on here. I need to run more Tests"

Joe: Are they expensive?
Dr: Some are, but we could run a few cheaper tests that'll only be $100?
Joe: Ok, but will they be conclusive?
Dr: Depends, for some things yes, but other more serious things they can't pinpoint, only narrow it down.

Joe decides to do the Tests, Doctor tells him he'll call in a week with the Results.

Week passes: Phone rings, Joe answers, it's the Doctor.

Doctor: Joe, I have some bad news. You have Cancer. Without further testing I can't determine where the Cancer is though.

Joe: How much for that Testing?

Dr: $7000

Joe: ?? I don't have that kind of $$. How much does Treatment cost? We can Treat it without knowing the details can't we?

Dr: To effectively treat it we need to know where it is, the price range of Treatments goes from $15000 on the low end to $250,000 on the High end. Without Treatment you'll have maybe 6 months to live.

Joe hangs up phone wondering what to tell his wife.

Even Free Market Capitalism has Losers and limits to Freedom.
I dont know, sounds to me like this guy is about to keel over and the doctor is going to get screwed out of his cash.

/shrug
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
48,495
9,451
126
No no no in real perfect free market capitalism you can screw people over even when you don't provide them with a marketable product.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,485
3,596
126
Originally posted by: Vic
No no no in real perfect free market capitalism you can screw people over even when you don't provide them with a marketable product.
I said nothing of the sort. That example was merely to show that some Essential things are not Afordable to All. Nothing more, nothing less. You, Yllus, or anyone else can go ahead and think I hate Doctors or think they're thieves or whatever other bizarre strawman you can create. Have fun.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
48,495
9,451
126
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Vic
No no no in real perfect free market capitalism you can screw people over even when you don't provide them with a marketable product.
I said nothing of the sort. That example was merely to show that some Essential things are not Afordable to All. Nothing more, nothing less. You, Yllus, or anyone else can go ahead and think I hate Doctors or think they're thieves or whatever other bizarre strawman you can create. Have fun.
I didn't create any straw man. Your argument used the words "the perfect Free Market/Capitalist Society" and then portrayed a very factually inaccurate picture of what the economics of such a society would look like.

Plus, it was just stupid, if you'll forgive me. For one thing, federal law prohibits the denial of medical services based on the patient's inability to pay. Second, no amount of money in the whole world is going to prevent death, even untimely. Last year, a friend of mine who was a successful businessman (~$300k/yr.) died of cancer at the age of 36. His money couldn't save him, nor could it have saved anyone else in a similar position. That's life.

 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,576
431
126
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: sandorski
It may be true that the Best Price Possible is a benefit of the Free Market, but it does not mean that it is Affordable to All.

I'm no fan of Socialism or Free Market Capitalism(I'm talking the Pure form of each, of which only Pure Socialism has ever been tried), but when it comes to Wages and Workers getting what they are Worth, that was only acheived in Industrialized Free Market Economies when the Socialist concept of Worker Unions forced it. Both Economic systems offer valueable ideas that make the best current Economic Systems possible, that being Mixed Economic Systems.

My point is and always has been is that: It's the choice of the Venezuelan People to decide. It is not My choice, it is not Vic's choice, nor is it You choice. They are Free to choose for themselves, we have no Right or Freedom to choose for Them. If they want a Cut of the Oil Revenues, then that's their choice and don't go and make it out like they are the only one's who have ever Voted for someone because of what they can get from them. We do it every Election, the only difference is what we are willing to be bought for.
Your first and second sentences lead you right back into subjecting a set people to slavery.

Look, if the best price possible isn't necessarily meant to be affordable to everyone. It will be the price that mutual competition has brought it down to. To do any better, you must declare, "But everyone should have ____!" Which now forces the either the providers of Service X to operate at break-even or loss, or pulls funds from the rest of the community to subsidize those poor people afflicted by whatever that provider is offering a cure for.

That sounds wonderful in theory - it's not asking much to help the sick, is it? Course not. But here's the central problem: IT NEVER ENDS THERE.

Cancer treatment gets subsidized. Wholly understandable.

Lukemia sufferers don't deserve the same? Of course they do - add them on.

Alzheimer's? Add it on.

AIDS? Add it on.

Cystic Fibrosis? Add it on.

Add it on. Add it on. Add it on. Add it on. Where does it stop? Hmm, some people are men born in a woman's body - they deserve to be able to affordably switch genders. Add it on. What exactly have you gotten us into? An ever-expanding amount of subsidized treatments that take more and more of our tax dollars away with near zero chance of ever utilizing. And you should be grateful for the pleasure of doing so! Hello, fellow slave.
I'm not even sure where you're going with this. Insurance is very similar to what you seem to be condemning here. Is Insurance some insidious form of Socialism?
It's the result of your own words. "But it does not mean that it is affordable to all." If the best price a free market can attain isn't good enough, then what recourse is there but to subsidize using force on the rest of the tax base? And where do we start in deciding what get subsidized, and where do we end?

Under a government mandated subsidization of these services, we eventually end up covering everything in a mostly halfassed manner. Half-assed because people know they're working for less than they deserve. Half-assed because when you try to do everything, all you ever pull off is doing some things well and most things poorly. Half-assed plus there's no competition for the customer to threaten to run to. One can look at almost any public service industry to grasp that.

Being considerate and wanting the best for those who can't afford great treatment in the absence of heavy subsidization is great, but do it realistically. The free market system isn't perfect, but it sure as hell is the best system we've thought of yet. And it doesn't need any improvements care of socialism.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,485
3,596
126
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Vic
No no no in real perfect free market capitalism you can screw people over even when you don't provide them with a marketable product.
I said nothing of the sort. That example was merely to show that some Essential things are not Afordable to All. Nothing more, nothing less. You, Yllus, or anyone else can go ahead and think I hate Doctors or think they're thieves or whatever other bizarre strawman you can create. Have fun.
I didn't create any straw man. Your argument used the words "the perfect Free Market/Capitalist Society" and then portrayed a very factually inaccurate picture of what the economics of such a society would look like.

Plus, it was just stupid, if you'll forgive me. For one thing, federal law prohibits the denial of medical services based on the patient's inability to pay. Second, no amount of money in the whole world is going to prevent death, even untimely. Last year, a friend of mine who was a successful businessman (~$300k/yr.) died of cancer at the age of 36. His money couldn't save him, nor could it have saved anyone else in a similar position. That's life.
What? So in the Perfect Free Market Society Everyone can afford Anything? shens

Again, you are extrapolating way beyond what I have said. Certainly some people die from Cancer despite the amount of Treatment. OTOH, increasingly more and more people are cured because of Treatment. If one can't get any Treatment, they have no chance of surviving.

Most proponents for Pure/Perfect Free Market/Capitalism would eliminate such Regulations for requiring Treatment(in the case of Cancer I'd like a Medical Profesionals view as to whether they are required to provide Treatment by Federal Law). Such Regulations are considered not Free Market concepts.

I'll just point out that I'm not talking about the US System when talking "Free Market/Capitalism", because they are not the same thing. The US System is primarily Free Market/Capitalism, but it is still a Mixed Economic System only slightly different than European Mixed Economies that are primarily Socialist in nature.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,485
3,596
126
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: sandorski
It may be true that the Best Price Possible is a benefit of the Free Market, but it does not mean that it is Affordable to All.

I'm no fan of Socialism or Free Market Capitalism(I'm talking the Pure form of each, of which only Pure Socialism has ever been tried), but when it comes to Wages and Workers getting what they are Worth, that was only acheived in Industrialized Free Market Economies when the Socialist concept of Worker Unions forced it. Both Economic systems offer valueable ideas that make the best current Economic Systems possible, that being Mixed Economic Systems.

My point is and always has been is that: It's the choice of the Venezuelan People to decide. It is not My choice, it is not Vic's choice, nor is it You choice. They are Free to choose for themselves, we have no Right or Freedom to choose for Them. If they want a Cut of the Oil Revenues, then that's their choice and don't go and make it out like they are the only one's who have ever Voted for someone because of what they can get from them. We do it every Election, the only difference is what we are willing to be bought for.
Your first and second sentences lead you right back into subjecting a set people to slavery.

Look, if the best price possible isn't necessarily meant to be affordable to everyone. It will be the price that mutual competition has brought it down to. To do any better, you must declare, "But everyone should have ____!" Which now forces the either the providers of Service X to operate at break-even or loss, or pulls funds from the rest of the community to subsidize those poor people afflicted by whatever that provider is offering a cure for.

That sounds wonderful in theory - it's not asking much to help the sick, is it? Course not. But here's the central problem: IT NEVER ENDS THERE.

Cancer treatment gets subsidized. Wholly understandable.

Lukemia sufferers don't deserve the same? Of course they do - add them on.

Alzheimer's? Add it on.

AIDS? Add it on.

Cystic Fibrosis? Add it on.

Add it on. Add it on. Add it on. Add it on. Where does it stop? Hmm, some people are men born in a woman's body - they deserve to be able to affordably switch genders. Add it on. What exactly have you gotten us into? An ever-expanding amount of subsidized treatments that take more and more of our tax dollars away with near zero chance of ever utilizing. And you should be grateful for the pleasure of doing so! Hello, fellow slave.
I'm not even sure where you're going with this. Insurance is very similar to what you seem to be condemning here. Is Insurance some insidious form of Socialism?
It's the result of your own words. "But it does not mean that it is affordable to all." If the best price a free market can attain isn't good enough, then what recourse is there but to subsidize using force on the rest of the tax base? And where do we start in deciding what get subsidized, and where do we end?

Under a government mandated subsidization of these services, we eventually end up covering everything in a mostly halfassed manner. Half-assed because people know they're working for less than they deserve. Half-assed because when you try to do everything, all you ever pull off is doing some things well and most things poorly. Half-assed plus there's no competition for the customer to threaten to run to. One can look at almost any public service industry to grasp that.

Being considerate and wanting the best for those who can't afford great treatment in the absence of heavy subsidization is great, but do it realistically. The free market system isn't perfect, but it sure as hell is the best system we've thought of yet. And it doesn't need any improvements care of socialism.
I'm not arguing against Free Market systems, I'm arguing against Pure Free Market Systems. I'm also against Pure Socialist Systems. Neither can work, because neither addresses all the Needs of Society.
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Originally posted by: Art Vandelay
That was a great documentary.

Amamos a Sr. Chavez. Nosotros, la gente.

Estoy alegre tú tengo gusto de él.

Chavez es un hombre valiente haberse pegado con lo que él hizo y contra los muchos enemigos. Desea la libertad viva.

Éstas son pistas que tengo gusto de pasar encendido

excusar mi español te agradecen
For those of us that do speak and read Spanish, would you mind giving us an English translation? The Spanish you used makes zero sense. I'm assuming you used a translator, because you ignored basic grammar rules, and tried to use the English way of speaking and structuring your sentences.


 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
Originally posted by: Jmman
I have posted this before and I will probably end up posting this again. Not only am I probably the only poster here who has even been to Venezeula, I also have family that lives there. Chavez isn't exactly the "hero" of the people some make him out to be. The country is heading in the direction of his hero Fidel where if you criticize the government you end up in prison or worse........
I'm probably going to cross into Venezeula for a day if we go to Bucaramanga while were are in Santa Marta. We were supposed to go for sure, but then our trip times to Santa Marta got changed, so I'm not so sure we are going to Bucaramanga anymore.

That being said, I've got very close ties to Colombia... and I know many Venezeulans here in the U.S. and abroad. Very few of them have a positive view of Chavez. Steeplerot will continue to deny it, but he can't help it. He doesn't want to work for a living, and he is simply as much of an elitist as those that he bashes. People in South America don't respect Chavez anymore than seeing him as a way to handouts. Those who *really* want to work have a strong hatred for him.

 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,050
6
81
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: Jmman
I have posted this before and I will probably end up posting this again. Not only am I probably the only poster here who has even been to Venezeula, I also have family that lives there. Chavez isn't exactly the "hero" of the people some make him out to be. The country is heading in the direction of his hero Fidel where if you criticize the government you end up in prison or worse........
I'm probably going to cross into Venezeula for a day if we go to Bucaramanga while were are in Santa Marta. We were supposed to go for sure, but then our trip times to Santa Marta got changed, so I'm not so sure we are going to Bucaramanga anymore.

That being said, I've got very close ties to Colombia... and I know many Venezeulans here in the U.S. and abroad. Very few of them have a positive view of Chavez. Steeplerot will continue to deny it, but he can't help it. He doesn't want to work for a living, and he is simply as much of an elitist as those that he bashes. People in South America don't respect Chavez anymore than seeing him as a way to handouts. Those who *really* want to work have a strong hatred for him.


Working does not mean you sit on your ass sucking up inherited oil wealth while the rest of your countrymen starve and go uneducated, I wont even waste the time playing the worlds smallest violin for them.

The minority Spanish descended whites can work like the rest, no more free ride because of their family/skin color.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
48,495
9,451
126
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Originally posted by: Art Vandelay
That was a great documentary.

Amamos a Sr. Chavez. Nosotros, la gente.

Estoy alegre tú tengo gusto de él.

Chavez es un hombre valiente haberse pegado con lo que él hizo y contra los muchos enemigos. Desea la libertad viva.

Éstas son pistas que tengo gusto de pasar encendido

excusar mi español te agradecen
For those of us that do speak and read Spanish, would you mind giving us an English translation? The Spanish you used makes zero sense. I'm assuming you used a translator, because you ignored basic grammar rules, and tried to use the English way of speaking and structuring your sentences.
:p I agree.

Basically he says (although you probably already know):

I am happy you like him.

Chavez is a brave man to have done what he has done against many enemies. May liberty live.

Crappy Spanish.

Pardon my crappy Spanish, thanks.


edit: and yeah, the wife of a colleague of mine is a native Venezuelan (and she ain't white). She hates Chavez with a passion that actually shocked me, veteran of many the heated discussion.
One of my GF's co-workers is a native Panamanian and black as any African, and she hates Chavez as well. So yeah, rot's usual generalizations fall short.
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: Jmman
I have posted this before and I will probably end up posting this again. Not only am I probably the only poster here who has even been to Venezeula, I also have family that lives there. Chavez isn't exactly the "hero" of the people some make him out to be. The country is heading in the direction of his hero Fidel where if you criticize the government you end up in prison or worse........
I'm probably going to cross into Venezeula for a day if we go to Bucaramanga while were are in Santa Marta. We were supposed to go for sure, but then our trip times to Santa Marta got changed, so I'm not so sure we are going to Bucaramanga anymore.

That being said, I've got very close ties to Colombia... and I know many Venezeulans here in the U.S. and abroad. Very few of them have a positive view of Chavez. Steeplerot will continue to deny it, but he can't help it. He doesn't want to work for a living, and he is simply as much of an elitist as those that he bashes. People in South America don't respect Chavez anymore than seeing him as a way to handouts. Those who *really* want to work have a strong hatred for him.


Working does not mean you sit on your ass sucking up inherited oil wealth while the rest of your countrymen starve and go uneducated, I wont even waste the time playing the worlds smallest violin for them.

The minority Spanish descended whites can work like the rest, no more free ride because of their family/skin color.
Making it into a race issue shows how far out to the pasture you truly are. At least in Colombia, people have little concept of racial inequality or understand the racial problem in the US. There's no massive accumulation of wealth among the whitest people or those with longstanding family ties to Spain. I don't even quite understand the point you are making.

Are you saying that not only has Chavez cured poverty, disease, and hunger, but now he's cured racial strife and Classism? There's Classism and racism to a degree in any country, but I can promise you race is relatively ignored in most areas of SA that I've been to.

What's you exposure to Venezuela other than being an admirer of Chavez? Simply reading a bunch of leftwing hatchet jobs on those with legitimate opposition to his government? Trying your horrible Spanish on the "ethnic" looking dude at Hot Topic after you get off from work at Starbucks? Seriously. What's your connection. What makes your opinion more correct or valid than mine.

This all goes back to theory. You have a lot of theory, but little experience with reality.
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Originally posted by: Art Vandelay
That was a great documentary.

Amamos a Sr. Chavez. Nosotros, la gente.

Estoy alegre tú tengo gusto de él.

Chavez es un hombre valiente haberse pegado con lo que él hizo y contra los muchos enemigos. Desea la libertad viva.

Éstas son pistas que tengo gusto de pasar encendido

excusar mi español te agradecen
For those of us that do speak and read Spanish, would you mind giving us an English translation? The Spanish you used makes zero sense. I'm assuming you used a translator, because you ignored basic grammar rules, and tried to use the English way of speaking and structuring your sentences.
:p I agree.

Basically he says (although you probably already know):

I am happy you like him.

Chavez is a brave man to have done what he has done against many enemies. May liberty live.

Crappy Spanish.

Pardon my crappy Spanish, thanks.


edit: and yeah, the wife of a colleague of mine is a native Venezuelan (and she ain't white). She hates Chavez with a passion that actually shocked me, veteran of many the heated discussion.
One of my GF's co-workers is a native Panamanian and black as any African, and she hates Chavez as well. So yeah, rot's usual generalizations fall short.
My GF's exact words:

This guy is an asshole (talking about Steeplerot). He doesn't know what he's talking about, and his Spanish doesn't make any sense. I had called her in the living room to come take a look at another Chavez fan. She then said: His Spanish is bullsh!t. It should be "Por favor excusen mi español les agradezco."

She was reallly pissed and actually made me logoff because she said everything rot said was a lie, and "didn't like me to read such stupid things." Yes, her English is not perfect.... yet :p
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
345
126
There are a lot of priviliged creeps in Venezuela who hate Chavez for blind ideological reasons, the way many on the right hate Jane Fonda far beyond her actions.

Venezuela has a terrible problem with an elite wealthy class who screw the rest of the nation; they own 90% of the media as well, and use it for anti-Chave propaganda.

I saw a story from one of the international election observers who talked about a light-skinned blonde Veneuelan woman who met him at the airport and made hysterical claims about things Chave was going to do, saying she was afraid the airport would be shot up as well - these people have worked themselves into a frenzy and are doing all kinds of terrible things to try to overthrow Chavez, from the crippling strike, to the coup, to the snipers shooting innocent protestors and faking the news reports to make it look like Chavez supporters shootig into a crowd, to the above-mentioned constant propaganda, to the recall eletion (using the recall provision that Chavez himself put in to enhance democracy).

There can be criticisms of Chavez, I'm concerned about his wanting make the presidential term longer, but these people are effectively selfish, hystierical, dishonest traitors who seem to be in virtually civil war against the elected government, wanting to protect their absurd share of the wealth.

Big surprise that some Venezuelans people meet don't like Chavez; the ones who can travel more tend to be wealthier.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
48,495
9,451
126
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Originally posted by: Art Vandelay
That was a great documentary.

Amamos a Sr. Chavez. Nosotros, la gente.

Estoy alegre tú tengo gusto de él.

Chavez es un hombre valiente haberse pegado con lo que él hizo y contra los muchos enemigos. Desea la libertad viva.

Éstas son pistas que tengo gusto de pasar encendido

excusar mi español te agradecen
For those of us that do speak and read Spanish, would you mind giving us an English translation? The Spanish you used makes zero sense. I'm assuming you used a translator, because you ignored basic grammar rules, and tried to use the English way of speaking and structuring your sentences.
:p I agree.

Basically he says (although you probably already know):

I am happy you like him.

Chavez is a brave man to have done what he has done against many enemies. May liberty live.

Crappy Spanish.

Pardon my crappy Spanish, thanks.


edit: and yeah, the wife of a colleague of mine is a native Venezuelan (and she ain't white). She hates Chavez with a passion that actually shocked me, veteran of many the heated discussion.
One of my GF's co-workers is a native Panamanian and black as any African, and she hates Chavez as well. So yeah, rot's usual generalizations fall short.
My GF's exact words:

This guy is an asshole (talking about Steeplerot). He doesn't know what he's talking about, and his Spanish doesn't make any sense. I had called her in the living room to come take a look at another Chavez fan. She then said: His Spanish is bullsh!t. It should be "Por favor excusen mi español les agradezco."

She was reallly pissed and actually made me logoff because she said everything rot said was a lie, and "didn't like me to read such stupid things." Yes, her English is not perfect.... yet :p
You see, Mill, there's your answer. Your GF is just rich. That's why she fled to Alabama. Didn't you know? Lucky for you some privileged rich American kid off the internet explained to you her selfish, hysterical, dishonest ways. See, it was just counter-revolutionary propaganda and bourgeois news reports faked to make it look like Chavez' troops shot at innocent protesters... really it was CIA snipers like the ones on the grassy knoll who also guard the secret of the Grays at Area 51.
Dé gracias a dios sabemos la verdad. ;)
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,050
6
81
Originally posted by: Mill
"didn't like me to read such stupid things." Yes, her English is not perfect.... yet :p
Truth hurts huh?

Both of you sound like you are prefect for each other.

Birds of the same feather.

Oh well, karma is a b1tch.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY