Re: MD Individuals and Collectives

From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Thu Sep 22 2005 - 23:40:58 BST

  • Next message: hampday@earthlink.net: "Re: MD The MOQ implies that there is more to reality than DQ & SQ."

    > >> [Case]
    > >> This was not addressed in my earlier post but: Notice that all of your
    > >> examples of "welfare" are directed at children, the elderly and the
    > >> infirm not healthy adults.
    > [Platt]
    > > Fine, except for the caretakers who skim off the benefits directed at
    > > children, the elderly and the infirm.
    >
    > [Case]
    > What make you think that caretakers are skimming?

    After 40 years and trillions of dollars spent on eliminating poverty, it's
    still there as pervasive as ever.

    > [Platt]
    > > In the U.S. every child gets a shot at being educated .
    >
    > [Case]
    > Statistics have consistantly indicated that our system is falling behind
    > the rest of the world.

    And why is that? On average we spend more per pupil than any other
    country. As bad as our government monopoly schools are, every kid still
    gets a shot at being educated, even if not up to world standards.

    > [Platt]
    > > Parents should be held accountable for child neglect.
    > [Case]
    > They are and children can be removed from their homes and the parents
    > jailed. Then the children become wards of the state and under your 1% tax
    > sytem they would be not much better off.

    When did I say anything about a 1% tax? I said a single tax rate, meaning
    the same tax rate for everybody, whether 5%, 10% or 35%.

    > [Platt]
    > > How can liberals sanction murdering children?
    >
    > [Case]
    > Who is sanctioning the murder of children? Your model of willfull neglect
    > is about as close as I can think.

    Abortion is murder of children. What's this about "my model of wilful
    neglect?" Didn't you just cite laws against such neglect that I said I
    favor?

    > [Case]
    > >> You should take a look at these people
    > >> who don't work. They are not who you think they are.
    > [Platt]
    > > Who are they?
    >
    > Here is one: I used to work with a guy named John. He was schizophentic.
    > Before I met him I am told he used to just sit under a tree and listen to
    > the voices in his head. He was not very responsive to anyone. He had been
    > like this for more than 30 years. He began taking a medication that helped
    > him control his aberant thoughts and was starting to function more less
    > normally. The cost of the medication he was talking was about $1,200 per
    > month. He became capable of working in in a limited way but if he got a job
    > he would lose the benefits that made him capable of working and could not
    > afford the medicine. This is clearly a defect in the system but is a defect
    > designed to stop the kind of "waste" you find so disturbing. Then there are
    > the children living the Georgia Retardation centers where I did a bit of
    > observation in the early 80s. I remember this one hydrocephaic kid mostly
    > because of the shear size of his head. But all of those kids were
    > unmanagable by their parents either in behavioral or economic terms. Then
    > there is my mother who raised a family in a traditional way and never
    > worked. When my father died she lost his pension benefits and a big chunk
    > of social security because she had not worked. While my family does not
    > begrudge helping her out in the way you suggest families should I can
    > imagine she is not comfortable with the situation. Let me know if you want
    > more examples.

    Bleeding hearts can always come up with bleeding heart examples. I prefer
    examples of those born in poverty who made it big time, like Justice
    Clarence Thomas. I too could cite more examples.

    > [Platt]
    > > Depends on how you define "public purpose."
    >
    > [Case]
    > Is there anything besides a military that you would consider to be a valid
    > public purpose?

    Sure. Education(via vouchers), parks, highways, libraries, police,
    firemen, courts.

    > [Platt]
    > > Social Security is redistribution of income from one generation to the
    > > other. There is no trust fund. Congress spent it all long ago.
    >
    > [Case]
    > I will not attempt to defend the shameful way both parties have abused the
    > trust fund. But is notice that over the past 50 years "liberals" have
    > balanced far more federal budgets than "conservatives"
     
    Somewhat of a specious argument even if true, like notice that over the
    past 60 years liberals have started more wars than conservatives.

    Platt

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Sep 22 2005 - 23:57:25 BST