You guys are always saying the"rich" don't pay their fair share. Just wondering if you've seen the talking points that have a hard number as to what is "fair."

Who are "you guys"?  You appear to assume that I'm one of those far left progressive kooks.  My opinions are certainly further left than yours, but that leaves a lot of space.

Sure, seen the "fair share" talking points.  That's as vague as "living wage" or "market based solutions".  Sounds good, appeals to the base but impossible to quantify.

Hey Gary, how much is a "fair share"? Give us a hard percentage.

Where did I mention "fair share"?  No idea how to quantify, pretty sure everyone would have a different number.

I've spent a fair amount of time struggling with the social, and societal issues surrounding private health care, and public(economic) policy on health care. I'm mostly a radical anarchist when it comes to govt, and I bend some and call myself a Libertarian for the most part. There are a couple of things that govt does moderately well, and many, many, many things that govt does an average job, and still plenty of things that govt does poorly.

A reasonable position to take.

First I can say honestly I don't have an answer. We all know someone who has health challenges that cause misery and grief and hope that they can be taken care of. But - as with anything, it's a matter of priorities. Here's the clause from the constitution that covers these kinds of things: 'provide for the common defense and general welfare'. It is called the 'general welfare clause'. What did it mean when it was written and what does it mean now? Since this is an open ended question and there is no one answer, we have to look to politics to solve it. Politics - is like sausage. People like the finished product, but no one wants to know how it's made. The left wants everything, all the time, for all people with no limits, and no requirement to invest in the sausage making. The money should come from high taxes, and be distributed 'fairly' as needs arise. Well, guess what? Whenever there's a big fat pile of tax money sitting in the bank, everyone suddenly has this great NEED for it. This applies in spades to health care money. No matter how much is piled into medicare, it always runs short. Gee? What a surprise(not). You can never, ever give away enough money to people. No one, on any planet, in any system will stop taking money if offered, or available. This too - applies to health care in spades.

Don't disagree with most of this.  Will quibble with the position that the "left" wants everything, all the time.  From my view the "left" and the "right" are more than willing to feed off the public teat, they just want to spend it on different things.

Want an abortion? Well, did the govt impregnate you? No. So, why do you think it's all right for the govt to pay for your abortion.

Can you provide a verifiable example of government funds going to abortion for convenience?  Might want to start with this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyde_Amendment

Now, having said that, this is the ONE exception that I will gladly pay for with one caveat. If the govt is going to pay for your abortion then you MUST also get permanent conception prevention of some kind(tubal ligation, etc).

Are you also in favor of Federal funding of birth control to minimize the rate of abortions?  Personally believe government should neither promote nor prohibit abortion.  It is such an emotional and personal decision that government should play no role.

 

about the OPs situation with CP? Well, I have a relative with moderate CP. He's 71 years old. He has never been given a dime of assistance for his CP. CP has been around since the dawn of mankind, why should the collective now, in this century be responsible for their care? Have we solved world peace? Have we paid ALL the other bills of the govt that are overdue? Is the nation and world other pressing common problems all taken care of that we can now focus on individuals? These are not rhetorical questions. At what time do we set the individual or family problems ahead of issues and problems that affect ALL US citizens? This is what was meant by the 'common defense and general welfare'. Those issues that rise to the national level of interest that it will be beneficial for all citizens, not just a small minority. Roads = common welfare. Schools = common welfare. Fire equipment = common welfare. Air Traffic Control = common welfare. See a theme here? How does one or ten, or 50,000 with CP in a nation of 3.2 million rate or rank? Sorry, I think you see where this is headed.

I do agree with your premise of "common welfare" and the examples you show.  Not so clear as why you believe that the health of our citizens isn't part of that.

The constitution rights question. The constitution lays out specific rights for protection. Does that mean that this is the limit of those rights, and that any other rights are excluded? Are there rights that are not written but should be considered automatic, and presumed applicable? Like - life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Note it says 'pursuit of' happiness. Not the 'guarantee of happiness'. If happiness is being treated for CP, and getting the most out of your life with the disability, then fine - go forth and pursue. If you need help from someone, ask family, ask neighbors, ask church, ask the public. But - this is a far, far cry from taking from those more fortunate and giving to those less fortunate by FORCE(don't pay taxes, and go to prison).

Wish I could offer you more money, but if I pay for you, then I pay for them, and then the other guys, and by the time we're all done - the few are paying all the health bills for the many. Won't work.

Taxes are a necessity of a civilized society, no way around it.  You may believe it is being taken from you by force, but there isn't a way around it.  Funny how the argument usually boils down to dollars - generally follows the line that someone is getting something for free and I'm paying for it, and I don't like it.  Wish we could all pick and choose what our tax dollars go for, most likely the services provided by our government would be quite different.

Out west they do own a lot of land. It's Constitutional and it's also in federal law. A lot of people like to go on about federal land ownership out west but don't understand the history behind how and why the federal land owns that much land. Again, my comments are not speaking about Obama's land grabs, only what the federal government has historically owned.

Yes they do.  At one time they owned it all (pretty much).  The government selling land was a major source of revenue for many years. 

One thing I'm not clear on, was a bit of talk about a "land grab".  Was that the government taking private property or re-designating land they already owned.

Or, there was nothing to be done.  Rush has a valid point in that hacking has been a time honored activity since the beginning of the internet.  I'm sure this isn't the first instance.  Since none of us truly know the extent nor the details, it is pretty hard to determine what, if anything could be done after the fact.

I have seen no real evidence that the President himself has colluded with the Russians, personally believe that would have been a pretty stupid thing for him to do.  As far as the remainder of the campaign staff, that isn't clear at all.  Would have thought that if there is "nothing there" the President would have been eager and open to move the investigation as quickly as possible.  Get the staff out there testifying under oath so everyone can see.  But... that wasn't his strategy.  The President admits that firing Comey, in his mind, relieved the pressure, bad move IMHO.  While the President or his staff may not have actively colluded, it's pretty murky what they knew and whether they were aware and potentially encouraged such activity.

Okay, my first post on Pilot Spin.

There are aspects of the climate science "consensus" that are solid and there are aspects that are not.

<snip>

Good post!

Welcome to the board.  I'm sure you will find it "entertaining"! 

We are leaving on a two week European tour in a few hours so you guys will have to have fun without me for a while.
But I might find a little time to check in on the iphone, just so you don't miss me too much.

Cool!  Hopefully travel will be uneventful and the weather cooperative!  Are you planning a trip report and pictures so we can all live vicariously through your travels?

Not that it is the least bit effective.  I live in NJ.  A few years back, Zuck gave $100 MM dollars to the Newark school system.  Results?  He might as well have spent it on hookers and blow, except fewer public school unions and 'consultants' would have benefited directly.

Yep, remember that fiasco!  One of the reasons Cory Booker is on my "Not Favorites" list.