Honest, good hearted thread about fixing our country.

Explain please?

@n64dd said:@mattbbpl said: @n64dd: The industry is inherently uncompetitive, and I'm all for making it non profit.

Explain please?

I'll just give you a few examples since this topic could fill a book.

An easy one to start with is the outrageous pharmaceutical patent system that everyone who isn't part of that system hates. Stories like Shkreli's are all too common because they know people who need the medication need the medication regardless of cost. Then there are facts such as there is little to no price transparency in the system, customers can't shop around for prices on short term or emergency care anyway, doctors' bills to insurance vary wildly (in many cases based only on what they think they can get away with), and the number of medical professionals are limited by those already in the medical professional field thereby driving up prices.

It's all a very complex and inefficient system, unfortunately, that simply can't respond to normal market pressures the way traditional widget markets do. The healthcare market isn't alone in this, but for some reason some people cling to the notion that all markets do respond in such a manner.

Frankly, the US healthcare market is in a bubble. If you look at it's historical growth rates compared to historical US economic growth rates you'll see it far outpacing economic growth in recent decades. Growth projections for each don't show that abating in any meaningful way in the future, but that's obviously not sustainable. We'll either get the healthcare prices under control (at least in line with economic growth rates) or the market will crash.

- Support small businesses (no more large corporations locking down business with petitions and lawsuits to keep people from operating their businesses)

- Get government out of marital affairs (meaning no more alimony and all that other bullshit that causes men to pay a ridiculous amount for children they were tricked into having or through divorce courts)

- Get rid off affirmative action (seriously, nobody needs this shit, this isn't the 1950s, institutional racism doesn't exist and women are not oppressed)

So men are okay to make babies and not support them? Bull shit....my taxes shouldn't go to supporting your kids.

I think all countries are forever to be fundamentally broken in various ways. You fix one thing, you break something else..there is no garden of eden and all countries have too many contradictions to make any one thing work perfectly. All you can do is swap out bandages as the citizens needs, changes. One problem America does have though are too many normal people that have more special needs than the handicapped with their trans gender neutral, got 8 kids with 3 women, refusing to work pos, overly sensitive, I'm a minority, I'm a liberal, I'm a conservative, single mom that can't keep a man, working at 7/11, has addiction to drugs, porn, movies, donut eating ass mofo's.

Men don't make babies, women do. And yes, if a woman tricks a man into impregnating her and the man never wanted a baby a man should be free to walk away and not be forced into to it by courts, with feminists and all their bs about women power and independence I would imagine they would be OK with raising a child without being funded by men, (unless they are loud mouthed hypocrites and can't actually do shit without men), put your mouth where you're money is at, take care of the baby yourself, or don't be y lying witch and actually take birth control or get an abortion.

this conversation is funny.

more amount per dollar goes to patient with medicare then with private insurance. I think its considerably a higher ratio, looking it up now.

so that kinda ends the entire conversation about healthcare

That's a pretty impressive trick.

ever heard of sperm jacking? if not there have been MANY cases where women lied about taking birth control, only to wait until they get pregnant and contact the guy months later (not weeks, MONTHS) later and tell them they are pregnant (obviously to trap them into a relationship as well as financially), I know you're being sarcastic, its obviously telling you have no idea about the problems of single mothers and who are the ones that most often cause the problems to occur, because people like you never give women agency, its somehow the guys fault that a woman is pregnant but nobody talks about women NOT making men use condoms or about women not taking birth control or even refusing an abortion, its men men men, its men's fault and men must suffer.

Holy shit, I've haven't seen this much 'men's right' drivel in a while. Sperm jacking? Who comes up with these terms.

It's as simple as this, when men have sex with a woman they are consenting to the fact that there is a possibility of pregnancy occurring. If a pregnancy results from this sex he has a financial obligation to help raise any child that is the result of it. If your trying to bring the character of the woman into the discussion it's still irrelevant. The man still decided to have have consensual sex with a woman of dubious ethics (assuming your absurd scenarios are present).

I am not even sure that the man is required to do so in such a case. At least not without a legal fight.

Sperm jacking is a very old term, if you weren't so busy being a feminist white knight maybe you'd know a thing about it, amongst other things...

And WOW just Wow, COMPLETELY proved me right, white knights like you don't provide women with agency what so ever, of course men are fucking aware of women being pregnant, thats why contraceptives exist, and birth control pills are far more effective than condoms, and more importantly why men ask if a woman took it BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT HER TO GET PREGNANT, and guess what? women are ALSO aware that they could get pregnant and they most DEFINITELY know what measures to take in order to PREVENT pregnancies, women DON'T get pregnant by accident (unless they are daft which is very unlikely the case) they often get pregnant by design, THEY wanted to get pregnant and THEY didn't care if the man wanted it or not.

But for some twisted and sick reason, if a woman LIES about taking them its magically the MANS' fault? and NOT the woman's fault? AT ALL? she tricked him so she wins so man has to pay? get out of here with your BS, if the WOMAN wanted the baby then the WOMAN should pay, not the man, if the man didn't want a baby why on earth should a man have to pay for it? the most reasonable and LOGICAL answer is HE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO.

first off, in many cases I think the man does NOT have to pay anyway. So the threat is all on the woman for making herself pregnant for political gain.

Second off, your counter is miles away from 'white knight' where the F did that come from? didnt know what to say so just thru out random insults without context?

Yes, it is still on the guy if the woman lies since he committed to having sex. We can take your stupid scenarios and ASSUME it's all true. You engaged in sex with another human being and are therefore responsible for any children sired from it.

My posts are simply in response to the worst case scenario that you're providing. In what world do you live in when you think that woman consist of nothing but conniving witch's trying to get money from men via pregnancy? If this is how you view relationship's between men/women I can only suggest that you leave what ever subreddit you browse and actually try having an adult relationship.

In what planet are men exempted from alimony? the only time that happens is when a woman actively tells the court she doesn't want support, which

a - it rarely happens

b- the man is still at the mercy of the woman, it is up to her whether the man pays or not, but the man never has a choice, which if F'd up and makes no sense

many and I mean MANY single mothers force their partners into a financial obligation, and not just women, courts and families as well, society will favor the woman no matter how wrong it is.

And I called him a white knight because he did exactly what a white knight does, be on the side of a woman no matter how wrong or evil they are.

OK I'm done with you.

Go fight the good fight, brother. Don't let womankind keep us down!

This universe.

So its unlikely a woman would do that, risk is far too high, opportunities far too low

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/living-together-book/chapter10-1.html

Laws governing married couples who divorce (generally labeled marital or family law) do not usually apply to unmarried couples who separate

In most states, neither unmarried partner is entitled to receive any alimony-type support after a breakup unless there is proof of a clear agreement to provide post-separation support.

This is how you create massive rationing. This is a hard one to solve not going to lie.

You only need be accused... and woman have all the control. If a woman doesn't want to have a kid... she gets an abortion without notifying the father... if not the father has to pay... WHILE your taxes go to supporting the kids.

It is a bit late for that. We are already doing a fluff ton of rationing. The only difference is that instead of using the supply as efficiently as possible, those supplies are passed out based upon wealth. After some middlemen get their mark up of course.

I could buy that innovation might slow down. Heck perhaps even go so far as to say It likely would. I however do not think supply would take much of a hit. Some rich folk might feel differently because they no longer get automatic dibs, but that isn't the same as a new shortage.

I mean we'll have more rationing, there will always be rationing, either at a wealth level or at a line level. Once the state takes total control that generall discentivises people going into that field... and then less rationing. And it even stops innovation... as some swedish intelctual said... "please america do not going to a single payer system, we depend on your ingenuity and technology"

what is it called when you give wealthy people a larger tax break then anyone else AND then also restrict social services for the poor?

what is that called?

I rarely side with @Jacanuk but if you are not a legal citizen of this country you should not be able to vote. How is this even a discussion?

Because it is silly to tie voting privileges to citizenship instead of residency. When you vote you are shaping a community. "I live here" is a far more logical claim to a right to participate in that discussion then "I was born three miles north of an imaginary line, while those people were born three miles south!"

Not to mention the fact that if someone is living and working in a community without harming anyone, it is just plain asinine to use an imaginary line to decide if you are going to remove them or not.

Finally, it takes a great deal of mental gymnastics for an American to claim that lineage is the proper arbiter of authority. Those mental gymnastics are responsible for the broken state of our discourse on the subject of immigration, and things will never get better until we set them aside. I mean seriously, just try to rationalize the position of either side in a way that doesn't require being buried under an avalanche of bull fluff. It just isn't possible.

I mean heck, our immigration system screams: "We don't want poor people from poor nations!" at the top of it's lungs, but it is considered deeply racist to admit it. That is totally fluffed, and that silliness was spawned by the "nice" party. It goes down hill fast when you look to the other side of the table.

Wow.....so much wrong with this. So you want strangers to decide how your country runs? do you realize how ridiculous that is? not to mention unfair, not only for native born Americans but for immigrants that worked really hard to earn their place?

And what exactly do you want to do with poor and uneducated immigrants? they would be too stupid to find a job and too lazy to bother to study for it and would be living off of welfare, of which tax payers pay for.

ok hold on a second, although i do not agree with kitten on this point, they are not 'strangers' anymore then the guy at the end of the block I never talk to is a 'stranger'

I can't believe you are saying this. Yes we need immigration reform. No argument there. But that doesn't mean that we should offer privileges exclusive to U.S. citizens to all who are living within our borders.

Btw those border lines are far from imaginary. In several cases they are geographic. In others they were hotly debated over and ultimately warred over.

You're right strangers was the wrong word, more like burglars.

no that is also silly. jesus f christ.

yes I agree that there should be rules to voting and I think its reasonable that one of them be that you are a citizen and yes I think if people who live here they should work to get citizenship before voting. But goddamit 'strangers' 'burglers' just stop with the victim bullshit.

they come here to work because you dont want their job. dont be an ass about this

Okay, but absent an argument I don't really have any option but to disregard your position.

@Dark_sageX: Strangers already decide how the country runs. That line of argument is straight up doofy.

Don't see anything bullshit about it, I mean what would you call someone who breaks in your house without permission?

they come here to work because you don't want their job

OK Jesus where to even begin. You are right, I personally wouldn't want to work in (lets say) a restaurant as a waiter for far below the minimum wage like an illegal immigrant would, but thats because illegal immigrants enabled this in the first place, if you keep providing businesses with ridiculously cheap labor, then local citizens will have to compete for it, and THAT is bullshit, businesses who get caught hiring illegal immigrants should be punished, and illegal immigrants shouldn't be allowed to start their own businesses either.

You are talking nonsense, lay off the crack.

I am not saying its justified or that I support illegal activities (I am actually more on your side on this if you stop being a drama queen about it).

I am just saying calling them 'burglers' is being an asshole. They just come here to work, should they? likely not but that is what is happening, nobody is rapiing your daughter. %^&*()!!!!!!!!!!!!

they are just human beings coming here to work. they should not do that but they do...just stop calling them 'burglers' for **** sake.

sorry mods I will tone it down

Well illegal immigrants do bring in higher crime rates of which it includes committing rape...but I'm getting side tracked:

Look dude, Looking for work does not excuse breaking the law and abusing the welfare system, they should apply fairly like everybody else, and if the host country can't accept any more immigrants then they should respect that, if the host country would have had use for additional labor and that country is in short supply of it then they would increase immigration flow, the fact that they don't simply means they have no need for them, because bringing in anymore would reduce the standard of living for that country, all they would be doing is bringing their problems with them, and thats just not fair to local citizens, and whats even more unfair is to allow them to decide how those local citizens should live, and whats even MORE unfair than that is silencing local citizens who are vocal about it, calling them racists and what not.

Illegal immigrants are aware of this, and don't give a damn, they continue as they are and do everything to support their community, including lying in the media in order to ensure that the political climate is in their favor, sorry but they don't deserve any respect.

They do not bring more crime then we ourselves have, its statically about the same.

look for me calling them 'burglers' or 'mostly rapists' or 'increases the crime rate' is a complete non-starter for me, any common ground we might have I am putting in the hole and saying no way.

talking about immigration CAN happen without racism but i am not going to be helpful for you on that front...

States with higher numbers of illegal immigrants saw an increase in crime rate, that is a fact.

and also: racism? really? are we REALLY doing this? I mean did you just ASSUME that i think all none whites are illegal immigrants? I'm sorry but does calling a criminal who is none white a criminal triggering you? you want me to be careful what I call anybody based on their race? so Its OK to call a white mass shooter a murderer, but if I call a Latino who sneaked through the border without permission a burglar, or a black guy who robbed a store a thug, or a Milano who disrespects the american flag an asshole, I'M a racist? Get the F**K out with that bullshit!

ok lets play your game...here is my question

why do immigrants commit more crime then white people? I am basically going to assume anything you say is true, I am just going to focus on getting to the Why part

I'm going to stop you riiiiiight there, you are STILL seeing things through the lens of race, that is a problem, if you don't stop doing that then we cannot proceed, because whatever unpleasant answer I give you after this, you will think it has something to do with race, and that can only lead to nothing but an unproductive banter, so formulate the question again, but this time leave race out of it.

Can you answer the question altered then?

why do immigrants commit more crime then......americans?

and just so you know, I have no problem talking about race or even being called a racist. no problem with that whatsoever...so lets start

Again with the correlation vs causation. You don't seem to understand it.

He is saying that immigrants commit more crime then americans.

I am asking him 'why'

Why are you asking that? If it's a statistical fact, its just a correlation that a particular group of people from a different culture, socioeconomic status, and ethnicity are behaving differently. Why is a stupidly complex question, a racist would attribute all of it to race.

when I typed the question and before reading a single word in your reply I knew the question would not be answered.

He is saying that immigrants commit more crime then americans.

I am asking him 'why'

is a reasonable question, avoidance of the question speaks VOLUMES. and just so you know, I read the first 4 words of your reply and that is it.

very predictable and I have played this round many a times

a

Its not speaking volumes. You asked the same stupid question in another thread and refused to accept any answer other than race basically. When the reality is different people from different areas with different social norms and different socioeconomic status will be different... whats wrong with that answer? Oh, it's not blaming race.

again not reading anything other than the first 4 letters.

its not remotely 'stupid' to ask 'why do immigrants commit more crime then americans.' its stupid NOT to ask that question.

My hunch is that this is not your first rodeo either, so either A. explain to me how its not racist or B. allow me to call it racism and you embrace that fact instead of being afraid of my moral judgement

in other words, either answer the question or have me call it racist and ask you to explain why is not

You're a racist if you take a statistical fact and jump to the conclusion that its racist. Because you'd have to believe that the differences are caused by race.

Its not racism to point out a statistical fact. And it's not racist because we aren't attributing the differences to race, but to difference social norms and economic status.

I dont care if I am a racist or not. If calling me a racist so that you can bring me down to your moral level makes you happy then fine. I am a racist.

now....answer the question. why do immigrants commit more crime then americans?

keep in mind racism can be based 100% on facts. so if it is a fact that immigrants commit more crime then americans that is fine, its still racism and asking why is not remotely being unreasonable

different... social norms, culture, and economic status.

keep in mind racism can be based 100% on facts. so if it is a fact that immigrants commit more crime then americans that is fine, its still racism.

Right racism can be based on facts, but it's largely morons that don't know how to contextualize those facts.

Like let's say you don't understand the meaning of culture, and socioeconomic... and keep repeatedly asking why until you get a race as the answer. You'd have to be a raging moron to not understand those simple answers.

Wrong, I'm saying ILLEGAL immigrants BRING crime with them. How can they possibly commit more crimes than american citizens anyway? they are a minority (although per capita is a different story...)

And I'm not going to answer that question because a I KNOW you will associate my answers with race and I know you will misconstrue anything I say, I can see the trap and I'm not gonna touch it. again, take off your racism lens and then we will talk.

why was it so hard to just answer the question I dont know.

ok so social norms.

you are saying the social norms of all countries other than the US tend more toward being criminal then the US culture does. Does that mean the entire US culture or just parts of it? is rap culture more respectful of crime then lets say Italian culture?

regarding your second part it would just be overwelemingly more productive for your side if you just would not get offended by being called racist so we can all move to the guts of the conversation here