Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 16, 2019, 07:42:28 am
News: 2020 Gubernatorial Predictions are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderators: TG, Associate Justice PiT)
  Summary of political beliefs (search mode)
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Summary of political beliefs  (Read 407982 times)
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,334
Thailand


« on: October 20, 2011, 03:25:52 am »

@ Free the Weed: Why do you hate fundies so much? Most of the founders were fundies.

it's not obvious? lol. I'm a libertarian on domestic issues. I'm only fundie on abortion, and immigration.

Otherwise, I'm very much so a social libertarian and oppose the ideology of ignorance.

Mind blown
Logged
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,334
Thailand


« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2011, 11:55:20 am »

I oppose a single-payer system because I believe such a system will inevitably lead to euthanasia in the mid-to-distant future.

I don't understand the reasoning here.

In the US today, most people will oppose the legalization of things like physicial-assisted suicide. I suspect that if the government is paying for healthcare, it will provide an incentive for more people to support physicial-assisted suicide because it saves them money. This is purely speculation on my part; I don't pretend to know the future. But, I think most people view things a bit differently if there is a financial incentive to do so. Of course you can make the argument that it already is more expensive for everyone to keep people alive, but the perception is more important than the effect in determining how it shapes public opinion. Having the government pay for healthcare would make it inherently obvious that the government would be shelling out money to keep patients alive against their wishes.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18923323/ns/health-health_care/t/americans-still-split-doctor-assisted-suicide/#.TqBSLd6a9tM

No exactly.
Logged
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,334
Thailand


« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2011, 05:44:18 pm »

I oppose a single-payer system because I believe such a system will inevitably lead to euthanasia in the mid-to-distant future.

I don't understand the reasoning here.

In the US today, most people will oppose the legalization of things like physicial-assisted suicide. I suspect that if the government is paying for healthcare, it will provide an incentive for more people to support physicial-assisted suicide because it saves them money. This is purely speculation on my part; I don't pretend to know the future. But, I think most people view things a bit differently if there is a financial incentive to do so. Of course you can make the argument that it already is more expensive for everyone to keep people alive, but the perception is more important than the effect in determining how it shapes public opinion. Having the government pay for healthcare would make it inherently obvious that the government would be shelling out money to keep patients alive against their wishes.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18923323/ns/health-health_care/t/americans-still-split-doctor-assisted-suicide/#.TqBSLd6a9tM

No exactly.

Okay then, even more reason why I would want to oppose a single payer system. If most people think it should be legal, making healthcare tax payer funded will only increase their desire to legalize it in more places.
Good example of strawman argument.
Logged
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,334
Thailand


« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2013, 11:08:28 pm »

Definitely Vegetaboi, and he's definitely noticed Oldiesfreak.
Why are we pointing this out, just let him do his job.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC