quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

Being generous involves giving from your own bounty. Being generous with other people's bounties is not really being generous.

I'm not sure Jesus would view individual wealth as our "own bounty" so much as our share of God's blessings, meant to benefit the common good. And I think, given that this is a "kingdom" illustration, that the landowner represents God, not a human. At least, that's how I've always heard the parable interpreted.
Another suggestion that Christ's first followers had a different view of wealth from today's Randian perspective comes from the life of the early church: "All who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need" (Acts 2:44-45).

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Your choosing what to do with someone else's bounty is more akin to theft. At the very least, it's an abuse of private property rights. You get to choose what you do with your private property. I get to choose what to do with mine. I don't get to choose what you do. You don't get to choose what I do. I can't choose to take your money/property and give it to charity and make either one of us "charitable." It doesn't work that way.

Actually, government funding of things like healthcare is <finger quotes>democracy</finger quotes>.
And, I do salute you for your ability to twist the intent of Christian teachings to suit your purpose. But, I know that in your heart, Jesus would have viewed nationalised healthcare as a fabulous thing.
You know it... don't you!

"Democracy?" How so?
Or, are you saying that government funding of healthcare is what government does/should do?

I'm saying that if the people of a country elect a government with a mandate to provide universal healthcare then it is certainly what the government should do.
If the people of a country elect a government with a mandate not to provide universal healthcare then, the government should not do it.
This is an important point in the context of the USA at the moment, in that the current president was given a mandate....

quote:

I do not agree that Jesus would see nationalized health care as fabulous. Jesus is not about the collective, but about the individual. Individual salvation was his preaching, not collective salvation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
The US Military is not selfless and loving. There are a lot of things that are not selfless and loving in the world.
And it doesn't really speak to healthcare here or in the world. Pretty much bullshit derail, is all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Or, are you saying that government funding of healthcare is what government does/should do? YOUR QUESTION

Your system is working well eh?

I have to point out that you did not answer the question.You say I didnt answer your question, yes??? above yes???? I answered.....I believe it does yes, as both of the countries I have lived in have had government healthcare. One I was born in and one I chose to live in.
I know that for the US< healthcare is not important for the poor ...well its been every man for himself till now, but yes its one of the main reasons I dont live in the US.
And, FYI, the US Government health care spending is already more than what other countries spend, as a % GDP. I've pointed that out in other discussions recently. So, how we're going to cut our %GDP down by increasing what we spend is beyond me.

I believe it does yes, as both of the countries I have lived in have had government healthcare. One I was born in and one I chose to live in.
I know that for the US< healthcare is not important for the poor ...well its been every man for himself till now, but yes its one of the main reasons I dont live in the US.
cut the greed by the pharma, insurance, lawyers, doctors, hospital administrators,
its simple actually
when a 4000 dollar operation here costs 30,000 in the US, its not the poor that are doing it.

I don't know what your first sentence is in response to. I didn't ask any question.
"Cut the greed:" Pharma, insurance, lawyers, doctors, hospital administrators...
Wait, you're saying that the high cost of health care is because of the high cost of the procedures/services? What type of maths are you doing? [8D]
what part of insurance, big pharma and lawyers did you miss? AND where did I say services and procedures were the high cost????
I want to point something else out: I've been saying all along that the cost of individual procedures and services is at the heart of the high cost of health care in the US. I have also been saying that Obamacare only shifts the costs from the poor onto those who earn more. That isn't lowering the cost of the services/procedures. Even if we shift from to preventive care away from where we are, that isn't going to lower the cost of services/procedures rendered. It will shift us away from the more expensive services/procedures, but it won't lower the cost of the services/procedures.
I'm not being very successful in finding a comparison of the number of procedures/services provided in the US vs. the number
provided in other countries. The only hits are the ones that compare the costs. We completely agree the costs of services is higher in the US than it is elsewhere. I'm looking for "usage" comparisons, though (ie. how many angioplasties per capita, etc.; but in aggregate form).
Yanno why?? Big Pharm and Insurance Companies dont want you to find out those figures

please note the red bolded parts

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117
Lol, so just because people are being payed to provide health care (doctors, nurses) it isn't loving and selfless? Maybe not from the perspective of the doctors, but if the money comes from else ware, how is that not selfless? And yes, we don't get to choose where our money goes, I already said that. But knowing that atleast some of that money is going toward helping people is a good thing. What I've noticed about your arguments though is you seem to hide your greed behind the poor argument of "using other people's money." That's the biggest load of bs I've heard in a while XD

quote:

The question that can be brought up, though, is if each individual chose to sell his/her possessions, or if the group decided that everyone would sell everything.

quote:

Let's take that to the extreme

quote:

It's about the choice to give. Choosing how much I have to give is not selfless on your part, but choosing how much you give, is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

The question that can be brought up, though, is if each individual chose to sell his/her possessions, or if the group decided that everyone would sell everything.

It appears to have been a prerequisite for life in the community, at least given the story of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11).

quote:

Let's take that to the extreme

To be honest, I don't find extremes real helpful.

quote:

It's about the choice to give. Choosing how much I have to give is not selfless on your part, but choosing how much you give, is.

Do you feel that you're making a "gift," via your taxes, to the military? To the foreign service? Or only when your taxes go to human services?
I see taxes less as a gift than, to quote Justice Holmes, as "what we pay for civilized society."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117

So you're saying that doctors and nurses need to work for free for it to be charitable, is that it?

quote:

Taxes are what we pay to have an effective government. The question of whether or not our government is effective lies in what government's purpose is, and how well government is fulfilling that purpose. I'm sure you recognize that there is quite a disparity in belief of what, precisely, is the purpose of government.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Your choosing what to do with someone else's bounty is more akin to theft. At the very least, it's an abuse of private property rights. You get to choose what you do with your private property. I get to choose what to do with mine. I don't get to choose what you do. You don't get to choose what I do. I can't choose to take your money/property and give it to charity and make either one of us "charitable." It doesn't work that way.

Actually, government funding of things like healthcare is <finger quotes>democracy</finger quotes>.
And, I do salute you for your ability to twist the intent of Christian teachings to suit your purpose. But, I know that in your heart, Jesus would have viewed nationalised healthcare as a fabulous thing.
You know it... don't you!

"Democracy?" How so?

Or, are you saying that government funding of healthcare is what government does/should do?

I do not agree that Jesus would see nationalized health care as fabulous. Jesus is not about the collective, but about the individual. Individual salvation was his preaching, not collective salvation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117
So you're saying that doctors and nurses need to work for free for it to be charitable, is that it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

Taxes are what we pay to have an effective government. The question of whether or not our government is effective lies in what government's purpose is, and how well government is fulfilling that purpose. I'm sure you recognize that there is quite a disparity in belief of what, precisely, is the purpose of government.

Agreed. And you and I will probably never agree as to the scope of that purpose.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Or, are you saying that government funding of healthcare is what government does/should do? YOUR QUESTION

Your system is working well eh?

I have to point out that you did not answer the question.You say I didnt answer your question, yes??? above yes???? I answered.....I believe it does yes, as both of the countries I have lived in have had government healthcare. One I was born in and one I chose to live in.
I know that for the US< healthcare is not important for the poor ...well its been every man for himself till now, but yes its one of the main reasons I dont live in the US.
And, FYI, the US Government health care spending is already more than what other countries spend, as a % GDP. I've pointed that out in other discussions recently. So, how we're going to cut our %GDP down by increasing what we spend is beyond me.

I believe it does yes, as both of the countries I have lived in have had government healthcare. One I was born in and one I chose to live in.
I know that for the US< healthcare is not important for the poor ...well its been every man for himself till now, but yes its one of the main reasons I dont live in the US.
cut the greed by the pharma, insurance, lawyers, doctors, hospital administrators,
its simple actually
when a 4000 dollar operation here costs 30,000 in the US, its not the poor that are doing it.

I don't know what your first sentence is in response to. I didn't ask any question.
"Cut the greed:" Pharma, insurance, lawyers, doctors, hospital administrators...
Wait, you're saying that the high cost of health care is because of the high cost of the procedures/services? What type of maths are you doing? [8D]
what part of insurance, big pharma and lawyers did you miss? AND where did I say services and procedures were the high cost????
I want to point something else out: I've been saying all along that the cost of individual procedures and services is at the heart of the high cost of health care in the US. I have also been saying that Obamacare only shifts the costs from the poor onto those who earn more. That isn't lowering the cost of the services/procedures. Even if we shift from to preventive care away from where we are, that isn't going to lower the cost of services/procedures rendered. It will shift us away from the more expensive services/procedures, but it won't lower the cost of the services/procedures.
I'm not being very successful in finding a comparison of the number of procedures/services provided in the US vs. the number
provided in other countries. The only hits are the ones that compare the costs. We completely agree the costs of services is higher in the US than it is elsewhere. I'm looking for "usage" comparisons, though (ie. how many angioplasties per capita, etc.; but in aggregate form).
Yanno why?? Big Pharm and Insurance Companies dont want you to find out those figures

please note the red bolded parts

Me: Or, are you saying that government funding of healthcare is what government does/should do?
You: Your system is working well eh?

That doesn't answer the question asked.

Me: Wait, you're saying that the high cost of health care is because of the high cost of the procedures/services? What type of maths are you doing? [8D]
You: what part of insurance, big pharma and lawyers did you miss? AND where did I say services and procedures were the high cost????

I think you missed my sarcasm. I thought the "[8D]" would point to that. We agree, which is what the rest of my post was, pretty much saying.

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
FR
After reading this thread I came to the conclusion that in the USA you are willingly paying more so that no poor will stole your "health care".