100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Why do People Vote Against Freedom? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
when you share resources in a home, a community, or a culture there is no absolute freedom,, our actions and inactions affect others, sometimes not in an immediate or obvious way,, but when we are connnected our 'consequences' tend to connect too,, and in a republic, we vote with a majority of what we want those connections and potential 'consequences' to consist of,,, I think some people vote against freedom,, but many others vote against a 'chaos' where everyone does whatever they want that doesnt cause 'immediate' and obvious harm to another individual,, Adam Smith, who Published the Book "Wealth of Nations" (Published 1776) That in a Free Economy, Though People are Working Purely Out of Self Interests, They are in Fact Providing for the Common Good as the Market Sets the Prices on Goods, Services, and Labor. Smith Compared the Economies Across Europe, and Throughout the Colonies of the Britsh Empire Across the Various Industries that were Employed at the Time; He Found that the People Who had the Greatest Freedoms to Pursue Their Own Interests, had the Stronger Economies With Greater Real Wealth and the Communities had Lower Poverty Rates with Greater Charities. I Could List a Number of Examples of Economic Freedom, Where the Market Sets the Price of Goods, Services, and Labor leads to Greater Wealth, Redused Poverty, and More Charity as People are Free to Pursue Their Own Interests; but for Space & Time, I'll Leave that for Later Posting. certainly its major generalizing to say people work just for self interest,,what about all the volunteer work people do? what about the jobs people take for less than what they can live on? There is plenty of reason beyond 'self interest' that people go to work we may have had a 'stronger' economy during slavery,, that doesnt mean that was the best way to run a country though things were different in 1776 and I dont know what standards smith used to compare economies but now, plenty of countries with strong economies, also have laws and reguations which guide their 'free economy' because its not all about economy or freedom or 'wealth', there is a thing called quality of life that the humane wish to continue having those strong economies with freedom and wealth, be tempered with,,, Meddling Nobodies? Votebuying Politicians? Populist Demagogues? by the will of the majority who defines the quality of life,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Tue 03/19/13 09:10 PM
|
|
when you share resources in a home, a community, or a culture there is no absolute freedom,, our actions and inactions affect others, sometimes not in an immediate or obvious way,, but when we are connnected our 'consequences' tend to connect too,, and in a republic, we vote with a majority of what we want those connections and potential 'consequences' to consist of,,, I think some people vote against freedom,, but many others vote against a 'chaos' where everyone does whatever they want that doesnt cause 'immediate' and obvious harm to another individual,, I agree with this. The gov't provisions usually serve to provide the minmums in cases like welfare and the minimum wage. There was not an intention for welfare to become multi generational or a way of life and I agree that somethng must be done about that while still maintaining supoort for families in a true crisis. I do agree totally with the OP about healthcare. Gov't protections traditionally provide the minimum necessary becasue the expense is being paid by others. That is why I have always yelled long and loud that Obamacare is illegal and should not "mandatory" it needs to be flexible enough to allow us to opt out completely or except partial coverage in combination with our private insurer the state is us. those who fail to realize that we are the government simply do not have a grasp on the history of this nation. In my lifetime I have seen many abuses correct by governemnt action that if left to chance the victimization would have continued. 'nuff said. except that, may you never have to learn this the hard way. welfare was addressed years ago and cannot be generational in most places anymore given the five year lifetime maximum for assistance (except food stamps) I think its a socially evolved culture which contributes to make sure everyone is covered, but since it would have been hard to propose a higher tax like in other countries to ensure that healthcare, a mandatory insurance coverage of each persons CHOICE was substituted,,, It usually is hard to seperate things into 'rights'' when they involve taxes,,,,,that is to say, once an individual or corporation asks or excepts perks and benefits from the government, they cant really deny that government the right to make regulations about what conditions they will provide under,,,, we have a healthcare system where people are admitted to emergency regardless of ability to pay, I feel we are fortunate for that, but I realize that those costs have to be covered SOMEHOW< and far too many never are so we have the privilege of a service without truly being required to contribute to it,, that to me is not balanced,,, and we have people who have to loose their homes or watch loved ones die because they cant afford the medical costs that are incurred WITHOUT insurance coverage,,,,and that is not fair and it is balanced and fair IMHO for us all to contribute something in order to ocntinue a system where we can get emergency care when and if the time comes that we need it,,,,and to make the healthcare 'pot' big enough that the high costs will not be justified and fewer people will be in the position to choose between, having food or shelter, or getting the healthcare they need |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
when you share resources in a home, a community, or a culture there is no absolute freedom,, our actions and inactions affect others, sometimes not in an immediate or obvious way,, but when we are connnected our 'consequences' tend to connect too,, and in a republic, we vote with a majority of what we want those connections and potential 'consequences' to consist of,,, I think some people vote against freedom,, but many others vote against a 'chaos' where everyone does whatever they want that doesnt cause 'immediate' and obvious harm to another individual,, I agree with this. The gov't provisions usually serve to provide the minmums in cases like welfare and the minimum wage. There was not an intention for welfare to become multi generational or a way of life and I agree that somethng must be done about that while still maintaining supoort for families in a true crisis. I do agree totally with the OP about healthcare. Gov't protections traditionally provide the minimum necessary becasue the expense is being paid by others. That is why I have always yelled long and loud that Obamacare is illegal and should not "mandatory" it needs to be flexible enough to allow us to opt out completely or except partial coverage in combination with our private insurer the state is us. those who fail to realize that we are the government simply do not have a grasp on the history of this nation. In my lifetime I have seen many abuses correct by governemnt action that if left to chance the victimization would have continued. 'nuff said. except that, may you never have to learn this the hard way. welfare was addressed years ago and cannot be generational in most places anymore given the five year lifetime maximum for assistance (except food stamps) I think its a socially evolved culture which contributes to make sure everyone is covered, but since it would have been hard to propose a higher tax like in other countries to ensure that healthcare, a mandatory insurance coverage of each persons CHOICE was substituted,,, It usually is hard to seperate things into 'rights'' when they involve taxes,,,,,that is to say, once an individual or corporation asks or excepts perks and benefits from the government, they cant really deny that government the right to make regulations about what conditions they will provide under,,,, we have a healthcare system where people are admitted to emergency regardless of ability to pay, I feel we are fortunate for that, but I realize that those costs have to be covered SOMEHOW< and far too many never are so we have the privilege of a service without truly being required to contribute to it,, that to me is not balanced,,, and we have people who have to loose their homes or watch loved ones die because they cant afford the medical costs that are incurred WITHOUT insurance coverage,,,,and that is not fair and it is balanced and fair IMHO for us all to contribute something in order to ocntinue a system where we can get emergency care when and if the time comes that we need it,,,,and to make the healthcare 'pot' big enough that the high costs will not be justified and fewer people will be in the position to choose between, having food or shelter, or getting the healthcare they need I have a HSA Plan for My Healthcare, which I will Keep as Long as I can; I Think that Everyone should have HSA Insurance; one of the Problems with Healthcare is that there's Too Much 3rd Party Payment for Everything. Because I Spend Cash When I See a Doctor, He Doesn't Have to Front Load the Bill with all kinds of Tests, or File Papers to Wait for Payment; And I Have More Control over the Treatment I Get, Weighing the Risk & Benefit. I Also Help Others, There's a Young Girl Locally Who had Recently Beat Cancer, in Part Due to what I Gave through a Local Chruch; Had theFamily Waited on Government Care, She Might be Dead by Now. Government is the Last Place One Should Look for Charity, as Charity isn't a Funtion of Government; Government is Force, Like Fire, It's a Dangerous Servant & a Fearful Master - George Washington. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
when you share resources in a home, a community, or a culture there is no absolute freedom,, our actions and inactions affect others, sometimes not in an immediate or obvious way,, but when we are connnected our 'consequences' tend to connect too,, and in a republic, we vote with a majority of what we want those connections and potential 'consequences' to consist of,,, I think some people vote against freedom,, but many others vote against a 'chaos' where everyone does whatever they want that doesnt cause 'immediate' and obvious harm to another individual,, Adam Smith, who Published the Book "Wealth of Nations" (Published 1776) That in a Free Economy, Though People are Working Purely Out of Self Interests, They are in Fact Providing for the Common Good as the Market Sets the Prices on Goods, Services, and Labor. Smith Compared the Economies Across Europe, and Throughout the Colonies of the Britsh Empire Across the Various Industries that were Employed at the Time; He Found that the People Who had the Greatest Freedoms to Pursue Their Own Interests, had the Stronger Economies With Greater Real Wealth and the Communities had Lower Poverty Rates with Greater Charities. I Could List a Number of Examples of Economic Freedom, Where the Market Sets the Price of Goods, Services, and Labor leads to Greater Wealth, Redused Poverty, and More Charity as People are Free to Pursue Their Own Interests; but for Space & Time, I'll Leave that for Later Posting. certainly its major generalizing to say people work just for self interest,,what about all the volunteer work people do? what about the jobs people take for less than what they can live on? There is plenty of reason beyond 'self interest' that people go to work we may have had a 'stronger' economy during slavery,, that doesnt mean that was the best way to run a country though things were different in 1776 and I dont know what standards smith used to compare economies but now, plenty of countries with strong economies, also have laws and reguations which guide their 'free economy' because its not all about economy or freedom or 'wealth', there is a thing called quality of life that the humane wish to continue having those strong economies with freedom and wealth, be tempered with,,, Meddling Nobodies? Votebuying Politicians? Populist Demagogues? by the will of the majority who defines the quality of life,,,, Who exactly are WE to define what someone's personal quality of life is??? Please tell me? No one person or no one group should be able to dictate to someone else what is acceptable for them in their personal life. It just should not happen. That is not freedom if someone else can infringe on that simply because they personally don't like it. Unless they are infringing on your own rights, you have no right in taking theirs. People are different, they have different needs, wants and desires, different things that have meaning to them. Either accept that and deal with it or find a place that is better suited to you, because that's not what America is supposed to be. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Wed 03/20/13 10:08 PM
|
|
when you share resources in a home, a community, or a culture there is no absolute freedom,, our actions and inactions affect others, sometimes not in an immediate or obvious way,, but when we are connnected our 'consequences' tend to connect too,, and in a republic, we vote with a majority of what we want those connections and potential 'consequences' to consist of,,, I think some people vote against freedom,, but many others vote against a 'chaos' where everyone does whatever they want that doesnt cause 'immediate' and obvious harm to another individual,, Adam Smith, who Published the Book "Wealth of Nations" (Published 1776) That in a Free Economy, Though People are Working Purely Out of Self Interests, They are in Fact Providing for the Common Good as the Market Sets the Prices on Goods, Services, and Labor. Smith Compared the Economies Across Europe, and Throughout the Colonies of the Britsh Empire Across the Various Industries that were Employed at the Time; He Found that the People Who had the Greatest Freedoms to Pursue Their Own Interests, had the Stronger Economies With Greater Real Wealth and the Communities had Lower Poverty Rates with Greater Charities. I Could List a Number of Examples of Economic Freedom, Where the Market Sets the Price of Goods, Services, and Labor leads to Greater Wealth, Redused Poverty, and More Charity as People are Free to Pursue Their Own Interests; but for Space & Time, I'll Leave that for Later Posting. certainly its major generalizing to say people work just for self interest,,what about all the volunteer work people do? what about the jobs people take for less than what they can live on? There is plenty of reason beyond 'self interest' that people go to work we may have had a 'stronger' economy during slavery,, that doesnt mean that was the best way to run a country though things were different in 1776 and I dont know what standards smith used to compare economies but now, plenty of countries with strong economies, also have laws and reguations which guide their 'free economy' because its not all about economy or freedom or 'wealth', there is a thing called quality of life that the humane wish to continue having those strong economies with freedom and wealth, be tempered with,,, Meddling Nobodies? Votebuying Politicians? Populist Demagogues? by the will of the majority who defines the quality of life,,,, Who exactly are WE to define what someone's personal quality of life is??? Please tell me? No one person or no one group should be able to dictate to someone else what is acceptable for them in their personal life. It just should not happen. That is not freedom if someone else can infringe on that simply because they personally don't like it. Unless they are infringing on your own rights, you have no right in taking theirs. People are different, they have different needs, wants and desires, different things that have meaning to them. Either accept that and deal with it or find a place that is better suited to you, because that's not what America is supposed to be. its not personal quality of life, its a public quality of life the standard by which we want to define our culture, the basic values and standards a majority have consented to,,,, the 'pursuit of happiness' didnt necessariy apply to any and everything that makes each person happy without regard to its social affects,,,,, and I agree, my rights stop where yours begin where my 'rights' involve someones taxes (the government) then they stop actually being 'rights' and that source has the 'right' te determine the conditions and standards upon which they will remain involved,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When it comes to Politics, I always start from the Principle of Freedom; I have the Right to Life. I have the Right to Live as I see fit, and Receive the Rewards or Suffer the Consiquences of my Choices. I have the Right to My Property, to Enter Contracts, To Exchange Goods and/or Services for Other Goods and/or Services. A Good Number of People will as a matter of Practice, Vote against These Rights, Limit My Choices for what they Think is Best. They will Vote for People to Pass Laws to make me Conform to What they think is good for me. I Never Got a License to Marry the Father of my Children, I Still Call Him My Husband, and he Calls me His Wife; Some would say that because we Never got a Piece of Paper from the State, we're not Married; Well, Who is the State to Decide for Us What Our Relationship is? There are Those Who Say that I Must Provide for the Poor Through Taxes in a System that keeps the Poor in Poverty in a Form of Slavery Called Welfare So They Vote to Take Money that I Earn to Keep the Poor Enslaved to the State for Their Daily Needs. Just as Frederick Douglass Observed that Many Slaves were so Brainwashed into Believing that it was Only Master Who Could Provide, Many Who are Trapped into Welfare Believe that Only the State Can Provide. There are Those Who Say That I Have to Contract With the Government for My Healthcare, though the Government has a History of Sub-Standard Care; But they Vote for it. There are Those who Vote for a Mandated Minimum Wage, for what People Can Eat, Drink, Drive, Enjoy, and a Great Many other things. Can I not Decide for Myself the Terms of a Contract between Myself and Another? Can I Not Decide How to Tend to My Own Well Being & Enjoyment? Are We Free Citizens or Subjects to the State?  Amen to that post. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I Never Got a License to Marry the Father of my Children, I Still Call Him My Husband, and he Calls me His Wife; Some would say that because we Never got a Piece of Paper from the State, we're not Married; Well, Who is the State to Decide for Us What Our Relationship is? When you think about it, involving church and state in the marriage makes it a four-party contract! When you think a little more, you realize that neither church nor state has any business whatsoever sticking their noses into what should be a 2-party contract between 2 loving people. As a Prime Minister of Canada once said "The government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation." (I note however that he didn't outlaw marriage licences.) Asking permission from the state to get married is the greatest absurdity of all, unless you consider yourself a child of the state who must ask for "Daddy's" permission to marry. Far too many people accept and believe absurdities because "everybody else does", which is a shame, because as Voltaire said: "Those who believe absurdities can be made to commit atrocities." Truer words were never spoken. I used to be amazed at man's inhumanity to man and wondered where it came from...Then I looked at the absurdities people believe and found out.  four thumbs up for that post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
   |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When it comes to Politics, I always start from the Principle of Freedom; I have the Right to Life. I have the Right to Live as I see fit, and Receive the Rewards or Suffer the Consiquences of my Choices. I have the Right to My Property, to Enter Contracts, To Exchange Goods and/or Services for Other Goods and/or Services. A Good Number of People will as a matter of Practice, Vote against These Rights, Limit My Choices for what they Think is Best. They will Vote for People to Pass Laws to make me Conform to What they think is good for me. I Never Got a License to Marry the Father of my Children, I Still Call Him My Husband, and he Calls me His Wife; Some would say that because we Never got a Piece of Paper from the State, we're not Married; Well, Who is the State to Decide for Us What Our Relationship is? There are Those Who Say that I Must Provide for the Poor Through Taxes in a System that keeps the Poor in Poverty in a Form of Slavery Called Welfare So They Vote to Take Money that I Earn to Keep the Poor Enslaved to the State for Their Daily Needs. Just as Frederick Douglass Observed that Many Slaves were so Brainwashed into Believing that it was Only Master Who Could Provide, Many Who are Trapped into Welfare Believe that Only the State Can Provide. There are Those Who Say That I Have to Contract With the Government for My Healthcare, though the Government has a History of Sub-Standard Care; But they Vote for it. There are Those who Vote for a Mandated Minimum Wage, for what People Can Eat, Drink, Drive, Enjoy, and a Great Many other things. Can I not Decide for Myself the Terms of a Contract between Myself and Another? Can I Not Decide How to Tend to My Own Well Being & Enjoyment? Are We Free Citizens or Subjects to the State? this is where people are often mixed up,, we CAN decide what to eat,drink, and drive, we can decide on a minimum wage (via democratic vote) based upon what is reasonable compensation but businesses which receive certain benefits from TAXPAYER(government) have to enter into guidelines and compromises with that government on what they will provide, based on safety, basic rights,,,etc,,,, what we cant do is expect the country to run accomodating EVERY individuals wants and needs and desires,, in a society much of what happens has to occur by a consensus of individuals,, because there are too many individuals for a society that would please all of them all the time,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When it comes to Politics, I always start from the Principle of Freedom; I have the Right to Life. I have the Right to Live as I see fit, and Receive the Rewards or Suffer the Consiquences of my Choices. I have the Right to My Property, to Enter Contracts, To Exchange Goods and/or Services for Other Goods and/or Services. A Good Number of People will as a matter of Practice, Vote against These Rights, Limit My Choices for what they Think is Best. They will Vote for People to Pass Laws to make me Conform to What they think is good for me. I Never Got a License to Marry the Father of my Children, I Still Call Him My Husband, and he Calls me His Wife; Some would say that because we Never got a Piece of Paper from the State, we're not Married; Well, Who is the State to Decide for Us What Our Relationship is? There are Those Who Say that I Must Provide for the Poor Through Taxes in a System that keeps the Poor in Poverty in a Form of Slavery Called Welfare So They Vote to Take Money that I Earn to Keep the Poor Enslaved to the State for Their Daily Needs. Just as Frederick Douglass Observed that Many Slaves were so Brainwashed into Believing that it was Only Master Who Could Provide, Many Who are Trapped into Welfare Believe that Only the State Can Provide. There are Those Who Say That I Have to Contract With the Government for My Healthcare, though the Government has a History of Sub-Standard Care; But they Vote for it. There are Those who Vote for a Mandated Minimum Wage, for what People Can Eat, Drink, Drive, Enjoy, and a Great Many other things. Can I not Decide for Myself the Terms of a Contract between Myself and Another? Can I Not Decide How to Tend to My Own Well Being & Enjoyment? Are We Free Citizens or Subjects to the State? what we cant do is expect the country to run accomodating EVERY individuals wants and needs and desires,, in a society much of what happens has to occur by a consensus of individuals,, because there are too many individuals for a society that would please all of them all the time,,,, That's part of what living in a free country means though, respecting one's individual choices even if you don't agree with that choice, so long as it doesn't infringe on your own. Anything less isnt' free. If someone else disagreeing with something means they can take away what has value to you.......that's not freedom, that's just another form of enslavement. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Wed 03/20/13 10:47 PM
|
|
When it comes to Politics, I always start from the Principle of Freedom; I have the Right to Life. I have the Right to Live as I see fit, and Receive the Rewards or Suffer the Consiquences of my Choices. I have the Right to My Property, to Enter Contracts, To Exchange Goods and/or Services for Other Goods and/or Services. A Good Number of People will as a matter of Practice, Vote against These Rights, Limit My Choices for what they Think is Best. They will Vote for People to Pass Laws to make me Conform to What they think is good for me. I Never Got a License to Marry the Father of my Children, I Still Call Him My Husband, and he Calls me His Wife; Some would say that because we Never got a Piece of Paper from the State, we're not Married; Well, Who is the State to Decide for Us What Our Relationship is? There are Those Who Say that I Must Provide for the Poor Through Taxes in a System that keeps the Poor in Poverty in a Form of Slavery Called Welfare So They Vote to Take Money that I Earn to Keep the Poor Enslaved to the State for Their Daily Needs. Just as Frederick Douglass Observed that Many Slaves were so Brainwashed into Believing that it was Only Master Who Could Provide, Many Who are Trapped into Welfare Believe that Only the State Can Provide. There are Those Who Say That I Have to Contract With the Government for My Healthcare, though the Government has a History of Sub-Standard Care; But they Vote for it. There are Those who Vote for a Mandated Minimum Wage, for what People Can Eat, Drink, Drive, Enjoy, and a Great Many other things. Can I not Decide for Myself the Terms of a Contract between Myself and Another? Can I Not Decide How to Tend to My Own Well Being & Enjoyment? Are We Free Citizens or Subjects to the State? what we cant do is expect the country to run accomodating EVERY individuals wants and needs and desires,, in a society much of what happens has to occur by a consensus of individuals,, because there are too many individuals for a society that would please all of them all the time,,,, That's part of what living in a free country means though, respecting one's individual choices even if you don't agree with that choice, so long as it doesn't infringe on your own. Anything less isnt' free. If someone else disagreeing with something means they can take away what has value to you.......that's not freedom, that's just another form of enslavement. but guess what, choices are limited in t his world,,, if you want to swim on a beach, its probably not going to be available to you in the desert freedom of choice doesnt mean that people have to offer every choice we want,,,, but we do have the 'freedom' to travel to those places that provide the choices we 'prefer' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
when you share resources in a home, a community, or a culture there is no absolute freedom,, our actions and inactions affect others, sometimes not in an immediate or obvious way,, but when we are connnected our 'consequences' tend to connect too,, and in a republic, we vote with a majority of what we want those connections and potential 'consequences' to consist of,,, I think some people vote against freedom,, but many others vote against a 'chaos' where everyone does whatever they want that doesnt cause 'immediate' and obvious harm to another individual,, Adam Smith, who Published the Book "Wealth of Nations" (Published 1776) That in a Free Economy, Though People are Working Purely Out of Self Interests, They are in Fact Providing for the Common Good as the Market Sets the Prices on Goods, Services, and Labor. Smith Compared the Economies Across Europe, and Throughout the Colonies of the Britsh Empire Across the Various Industries that were Employed at the Time; He Found that the People Who had the Greatest Freedoms to Pursue Their Own Interests, had the Stronger Economies With Greater Real Wealth and the Communities had Lower Poverty Rates with Greater Charities. I Could List a Number of Examples of Economic Freedom, Where the Market Sets the Price of Goods, Services, and Labor leads to Greater Wealth, Redused Poverty, and More Charity as People are Free to Pursue Their Own Interests; but for Space & Time, I'll Leave that for Later Posting. certainly its major generalizing to say people work just for self interest,,what about all the volunteer work people do? what about the jobs people take for less than what they can live on? There is plenty of reason beyond 'self interest' that people go to work we may have had a 'stronger' economy during slavery,, that doesnt mean that was the best way to run a country though things were different in 1776 and I dont know what standards smith used to compare economies but now, plenty of countries with strong economies, also have laws and reguations which guide their 'free economy' because its not all about economy or freedom or 'wealth', there is a thing called quality of life that the humane wish to continue having those strong economies with freedom and wealth, be tempered with,,, Meddling Nobodies? Votebuying Politicians? Populist Demagogues? by the will of the majority who defines the quality of life,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Kleisto
on
Thu 03/21/13 02:59 AM
|
|
When it comes to Politics, I always start from the Principle of Freedom; I have the Right to Life. I have the Right to Live as I see fit, and Receive the Rewards or Suffer the Consiquences of my Choices. I have the Right to My Property, to Enter Contracts, To Exchange Goods and/or Services for Other Goods and/or Services. A Good Number of People will as a matter of Practice, Vote against These Rights, Limit My Choices for what they Think is Best. They will Vote for People to Pass Laws to make me Conform to What they think is good for me. I Never Got a License to Marry the Father of my Children, I Still Call Him My Husband, and he Calls me His Wife; Some would say that because we Never got a Piece of Paper from the State, we're not Married; Well, Who is the State to Decide for Us What Our Relationship is? There are Those Who Say that I Must Provide for the Poor Through Taxes in a System that keeps the Poor in Poverty in a Form of Slavery Called Welfare So They Vote to Take Money that I Earn to Keep the Poor Enslaved to the State for Their Daily Needs. Just as Frederick Douglass Observed that Many Slaves were so Brainwashed into Believing that it was Only Master Who Could Provide, Many Who are Trapped into Welfare Believe that Only the State Can Provide. There are Those Who Say That I Have to Contract With the Government for My Healthcare, though the Government has a History of Sub-Standard Care; But they Vote for it. There are Those who Vote for a Mandated Minimum Wage, for what People Can Eat, Drink, Drive, Enjoy, and a Great Many other things. Can I not Decide for Myself the Terms of a Contract between Myself and Another? Can I Not Decide How to Tend to My Own Well Being & Enjoyment? Are We Free Citizens or Subjects to the State? what we cant do is expect the country to run accomodating EVERY individuals wants and needs and desires,, in a society much of what happens has to occur by a consensus of individuals,, because there are too many individuals for a society that would please all of them all the time,,,, That's part of what living in a free country means though, respecting one's individual choices even if you don't agree with that choice, so long as it doesn't infringe on your own. Anything less isnt' free. If someone else disagreeing with something means they can take away what has value to you.......that's not freedom, that's just another form of enslavement. but guess what, choices are limited in t his world,,, if you want to swim on a beach, its probably not going to be available to you in the desert freedom of choice doesnt mean that people have to offer every choice we want,,,, but we do have the 'freedom' to travel to those places that provide the choices we 'prefer' There's only two ways choices are limited, one is by way of where we are relative to what we want to do.....which is what your desert analogy is, and as such does not fit this argument, and the other is by men.....which is the actual topic here. Freedom of choice is an all or nothing type deal, either we have the freedom to choose what we want to do in our personal lives so long as someone elses' right to do the same isn't infringed....or we don't. There is no in between here. Freedom of choice means exactly what it says....it means WE have the right to choose how to run our lives....someone else can't do it for us, bottom line. If at any point someone CAN simply because it goes against their moral or personal code that THEY choose to live by, then we don't truly have it. Freedom is not freedom if someone can take it away. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Thu 03/21/13 09:06 AM
|
|
but guess what, choices are limited in t his world,,, if you want to swim on a beach, its probably not going to be available to you in the desert Msharmony you don't understand what we mean by free choice. Kleisto said: There's only two ways choices are limited, one is by way of where we are relative to what we want to do.....which is what your desert analogy is, and as such does not fit this argument, and the other is by men.....which is the actual topic here. You are all in favor of limiting people's freedom and in the majority voting and telling people how they will be permitted to live. If it sounds just a little bit reasonable to you, you will vote yes for every stupid law any tyrant wants to pass that restricts freedom, then you will argue until the day ends why this is for the best. I wish people would stop attempting to decide what is best for others or society. All they do is restrict more and more of our liberty and our freedom to live our lives as we choose on this planet. One day gay marriage is not "legal" and the next day it is. One day pot is illegal and the next day it is not. These laws are not really laws, they are UCC regulations. There are too many people trying to tell other people what to do and how to live, and they can't make up their minds what is really important. Freedom is paramount. This does not mean freedom to harm or kill or steal from others so don't go into a rant about that. That is common law. You don't hurt, rob, steal from, kill, or rape other people. Law should not be about telling you who you can or can not marry, or what plant you can or can not roll up and smoke or that you have to wear a helmet or seat belt. geeeze. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When it comes to Politics, I always start from the Principle of Freedom; I have the Right to Life. I have the Right to Live as I see fit, and Receive the Rewards or Suffer the Consiquences of my Choices. I have the Right to My Property, to Enter Contracts, To Exchange Goods and/or Services for Other Goods and/or Services. A Good Number of People will as a matter of Practice, Vote against These Rights, Limit My Choices for what they Think is Best. They will Vote for People to Pass Laws to make me Conform to What they think is good for me. I Never Got a License to Marry the Father of my Children, I Still Call Him My Husband, and he Calls me His Wife; Some would say that because we Never got a Piece of Paper from the State, we're not Married; Well, Who is the State to Decide for Us What Our Relationship is? There are Those Who Say that I Must Provide for the Poor Through Taxes in a System that keeps the Poor in Poverty in a Form of Slavery Called Welfare So They Vote to Take Money that I Earn to Keep the Poor Enslaved to the State for Their Daily Needs. Just as Frederick Douglass Observed that Many Slaves were so Brainwashed into Believing that it was Only Master Who Could Provide, Many Who are Trapped into Welfare Believe that Only the State Can Provide. There are Those Who Say That I Have to Contract With the Government for My Healthcare, though the Government has a History of Sub-Standard Care; But they Vote for it. There are Those who Vote for a Mandated Minimum Wage, for what People Can Eat, Drink, Drive, Enjoy, and a Great Many other things. Can I not Decide for Myself the Terms of a Contract between Myself and Another? Can I Not Decide How to Tend to My Own Well Being & Enjoyment? Are We Free Citizens or Subjects to the State? this is where people are often mixed up,, we CAN decide what to eat,drink, and drive, we can decide on a minimum wage (via democratic vote) based upon what is reasonable compensation but businesses which receive certain benefits from TAXPAYER(government) have to enter into guidelines and compromises with that government on what they will provide, based on safety, basic rights,,,etc,,,, what we cant do is expect the country to run accomodating EVERY individuals wants and needs and desires,, in a society much of what happens has to occur by a consensus of individuals,, because there are too many individuals for a society that would please all of them all the time,,,, Why not let the Market Decide what the Minimum Wage should be? If I paid my Cashiers Minimum Wage, they'd run off to one of the other places that employs Cashiers at a higher rate as soon as there was an opening; so I have to pay them the same rate as the Supermarket or the K-Mart, even what Wal-Mart pays, plus a bit extra if they've earned it so that they don't go looking. I have Unemployed come in looking for a Job, (Unemployment among Minorities are as high as 23% - 40%) willing to take Less Than Minimum Wage to Stock, Clean, whatever; Because the Government has saw fit to Inject Itself into the Terms of Contracts between Two Free Persons, I Can't Hire Them Because of Cost; Who Does That Help? If the Minimum Wage Goes Up, I'd have to let My Part-Time Stocker Go and have My Cashiers do his Work; Who Would That Help? Tell me, What Benefits am I getting from the Government to Justify my Giving In to All the Demands That I Pay This or Do That? All that I See is the Barrel of a Gun if I don't Comply. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
1Cynderella
on
Thu 03/21/13 05:44 PM
|
|
When it comes to Politics, I always start from the Principle of Freedom; I have the Right to Life. I have the Right to Live as I see fit, and Receive the Rewards or Suffer the Consiquences of my Choices. I have the Right to My Property, to Enter Contracts, To Exchange Goods and/or Services for Other Goods and/or Services. A Good Number of People will as a matter of Practice, Vote against These Rights, Limit My Choices for what they Think is Best. They will Vote for People to Pass Laws to make me Conform to What they think is good for me. I Never Got a License to Marry the Father of my Children, I Still Call Him My Husband, and he Calls me His Wife; Some would say that because we Never got a Piece of Paper from the State, we're not Married; Well, Who is the State to Decide for Us What Our Relationship is? There are Those Who Say that I Must Provide for the Poor Through Taxes in a System that keeps the Poor in Poverty in a Form of Slavery Called Welfare So They Vote to Take Money that I Earn to Keep the Poor Enslaved to the State for Their Daily Needs. Just as Frederick Douglass Observed that Many Slaves were so Brainwashed into Believing that it was Only Master Who Could Provide, Many Who are Trapped into Welfare Believe that Only the State Can Provide. There are Those Who Say That I Have to Contract With the Government for My Healthcare, though the Government has a History of Sub-Standard Care; But they Vote for it. There are Those who Vote for a Mandated Minimum Wage, for what People Can Eat, Drink, Drive, Enjoy, and a Great Many other things. Can I not Decide for Myself the Terms of a Contract between Myself and Another? Can I Not Decide How to Tend to My Own Well Being & Enjoyment? Are We Free Citizens or Subjects to the State? I don’t believe that, a good deal of the time, the masses really realize what it IS, or who it IS they are actually voting for. I know this thread is not about Obamacare, but since it seems to be fodder for the subject already, I will use it as my "for instance", if you don't mind. I don’t think that(even some of the most intelligent people with an active interest in current issues) realize that Obamacare is not going to provide health insurance in itself. Many I've heard believe that Obamacare requires employers to PROVIDE health insurance to employees. It does not. It only mandates that qualifying employers provide an approved health insurance OPTION. Obamacare does not require that the employer pay for the policy. Obamacare is NOT free insurance for the masses. A lot of people also don’t realize that any employer required to provide an insurance option, can indeed opt out by choosing to pay a fine instead.  (I tend/or choose to forget that they changed it to a "tax" to limbo under the constitutional pole.) Yes, a portion of the fine...um,"tax" the government will then give to the employee, in the form of a subsidy, to make buying their own private policy more economical...note I said MORE economical, because it will not PAY FOR IT. Anyone who can still not afford the cost of a policy (most likely the same people who cannot now) will be fined...er.."taxed" and STILL not have health insurance...and less money to buy a policy the following year. People think that those who are now suffering and dying because they cannot afford treatment or medication will be better off once Obamacare is in full swing. Well, if their employer gives them an option they can afford, then they will. If their earnings are just out of reach of Medicaid coverage now, at $22,000, then come 2014 they will gain Medicaid coverage with earnings up to $29,000...so yes this group of people will benefit from Obamacare too. But nowhere in any of these scenarios is there free health insurance for the nation. A large number of people will still be without insurance and people will still suffer and die without means for treatment and medications. A good deal of people do not GET the basic structure of Obamacare now, let alone when they were voting for someone who promised them a health care reform that would benefit the masses. That, I believe is why they vote away their freedoms, because they are promised utopia and believe it. They know not what they do. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A good deal of people do not GET the basic structure of Obamacare now, let alone when they were voting for someone who promised them a health care reform that would benefit the masses. That, I believe is why they vote away their freedoms, because they are promised utopia and believe it. They know not what they do. Very very true......and also on Obamacare, the other thing they fail to realize as well is the fact that their care is gonna be dictated to them too. Ie if the government decides they don't need something, they won't get it, even if they die, and conversely if they decide they DO, they pretty much have to have it. You're totally right though......most don't realize what they're doing, until it's too late. By then the damage is long since done. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am always in a flux of change as I try to remember I cannot dictate what rights others should have.
So I try to vote for freedom as much as I can. Sometimes I make mistakes, but I can always come back and change my vote next time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbJrA1S-Xx8
Toots & the Maytals - Freedom train Originally performed by James Carr back in 1969! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am always in a flux of change as I try to remember I cannot dictate what rights others should have. So I try to vote for freedom as much as I can. Sometimes I make mistakes, but I can always come back and change my vote next time. First off, one must remember where Freedom comes from; from Nature's Law, or if you will, Nature's God, not from Government. Freedom is also the ability to face the consequences of One's own Actions, Good or Bad. If I decide to live as a Prostitute, that would be my choice; but it would be wrong for me to make others take responsibity for my choice, I either face the consequences of my choice or find another line of work. If I decide to drink 5 gallions of Pepsi a day, that too would be my choice Food Nazis, but I should also be allowed to face the aftermath of that choice. If I should sleep all day when I'm not watching T.V, that too would be my choice; but no one should be forced to pay my bills or buy my food, if I find myself on the street, that would be the consequences of my choice. |
|
|
|
|
