XPost: alt.atheism, or.politics, sac.politics   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns   
   From: jfwalby@gmaill.com   
      
   Webbster wrote:   
   > Attila  wrote in   
   > news:q4qrgk53h13eftt435dpb16niovm2jnud0@4ax.com:   
   >   
   >> On Thu, 6 Nov 2025 16:39:21 -0600, The World of Is!   
   >>  in alt.atheism with message-id   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> Attila wrote:   
   >>>> On Thu, 6 Nov 2025 10:27:29 -0600, The World of Is!   
   >>>>  in alt.atheism with message-id   
   >>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Attila wrote:   
   >>>>>> On Thu, 6 Nov 2025 06:58:38 -0600, The World of Is!   
   >>>>>>  in alt.atheism with message-id   
   >>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Attila wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 18:17:06 -0600, The World of Is!   
   >>>>>>>>  in alt.atheism with message-id   
   >>>>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Attila wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 4 Nov 2025 04:47:35 -0000 (UTC), Webbster   
   >>>>>>>>>>  in alt.atheism with message-id   
   >>>>>>>>>> <10ec0h7$3dg3f$1@dont-email.me> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>         Trump wants to build nuclear power plants.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>         He has chosen Westinghouse to build them.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>         He will pay Westinghouse $80 billion for the projects.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>         In return he has compelled Westinghouse to pay him the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>         government 20   
   >>>>>>>>>>> percent of any “cash distributions.”   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>         Between now and the end of January 2029, the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>         government can compel   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Westinghouse to go public via an IPO, at which point the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> government will be awarded 20 percent ownership of the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> company, likely making it the single largest shareholder.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> This is literally seizing the means of production - AKA   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Socialism   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Socialism takes 100% of everything in sight.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Socialism in action will be shown under the mew mayor of NY.   
   >>>>>>>>>> As long as the city survives the experience.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> You're an alarmist. Socialism is not communism and increasing   
   >>>>>>>>> the socialist nature is like a pH measure not an inducement to   
   >>>>>>>>> 100% socialism. Libraries are socialist structures how are they   
   >>>>>>>>> bad?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Libraries do not produce a product for sale.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Where is the money coming from to support all of the free   
   >>>>>>>> stuff socialism promises?  Will you work for nothing to help   
   >>>>>>>> produce any of it?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Before you say "Tax the rich" be aware the "rich" are the   
   >>>>>>>> one's who can easiest afford to simply pick up and move out   
   >>>>>>>> of the tax jurisdiction.  Frequently taking their business   
   >>>>>>>> with them.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> I guess that's the point. 100% socialism means 100% tax on   
   >>>>>>> everybody and everybody consumes free resources. There is not   
   >>>>>>> 100% tax which means there is a long ways to go to pure socialism   
   >>>>>>> and you are getting up in the air about services that should be   
   >>>>>>> available to everyone becoming available.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> What you describe is Communism.  "From each according to his   
   >>>>>> ability, to each according to his need"  Which sounds good   
   >>>>>> if you are talking about a computer run economy.  Mix in   
   >>>>>> people and the Orwell effect quickly emerges.  "Some pigs   
   >>>>>> are more equal than others."   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> See the USSR for a textbook example.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Why do you claim healthcare should not be available to everyone?   
   >>>>>>> Do you consider some people to be dogs and beneath the system?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Why should the government be involved in the healthcare   
   >>>>>> system at all beyond insuring it is not full of quacks and   
   >>>>>> the pure food and drug laws are followed?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>> Because wealth is not a reliable indication of a person's merit.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Why should the government be involved with a person's merit?   
   >>>> And what does that have to do with the subject?   
   >>>>   
   >>> Quit being obtuse.   
   >>>   
   >>> Being poor is a death sentence under your policies.   
   >>   
   >> There comes a point at which the individual must take   
   >> responsibility for himself and not expect someone else to   
   >> give him what he needs or thinks he needs.   
   >>   
   >   
   > How'd that work out in the Victorian and Gilded Age?  That's great if   
   > you're wealthy, not so great for every one else.   
   >   
   It's also an issue that even if you are moderately wealthy you can be   
   denied insurance coverage for pre-existing conditions. Why is that?   
   Isn't that demonic or socialist or something? The moderately wealthy can   
   be bankrupted in today's hospital setting as well. A surgery can easily   
   cost $250,000. Abolish denial for pre-existing conditions. The system is   
   already rigged in the insurance peoples's favor. They charge more than   
   the average medical cost - it's pretty basic.   
      
   Also I don't like the idea of disclosing my medical information to any   
   insurer who asks for it. That's private. % discloses his finances to   
   anyone who asks, but he's pretty basic too.   
      
   --   
   The esssential conditions of everything you do must be choice, love, and   
   passion.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)