Healthcare is not a right!?

[Carl Veritas]

Government does not own the means to provide health care so it doesn’t fit the definition of socialism.

Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid probably doesn’t fit the definition either but even the politicians admit they are a mess. Yet many believe the same politicians could actually reform the nations healthcare system. They want more of the very thing that is making it ill.

So now if the government does not provide healthcare, who does, the free market?

But if it is the market, why are costs soaring out of control?

The open competition in markets usually produce better quality products, lower costs and innovation. It is (competition) the discovery process–driven by consumer choice–that tells producers what consumers want and the price they are willing to pay.

http://mises.org/story/3727

Governments view of business according to Reagan:

“If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it”

[NeetaT]

“Yeah.
I because 5.4 percent will destroy American initiative.
I seem to remember it doing pretty well during the Clinton years at those levels.

Since socialism necessarily involves government ownership of the means of production (and because the things you cite do not), you comment is as inaccurate as it is vacuously retarded.

Perhaps next you will tell me you are suffering under taxation without representation?

Really.”

No one wants to piss away an extra 5.4% of their income. The good news is people who pay it can justifiably say it is their charitable contribution to the broken health care reform. I can some it up in three words, “It’s a tragedy.”

[NeetaT]

“Yeah.
I because 5.4 percent will destroy American initiative.
I seem to remember it doing pretty well during the Clinton years at those levels.

Since socialism necessarily involves government ownership of the means of production (and because the things you cite do not), you comment is as inaccurate as it is vacuously retarded.

Perhaps next you will tell me you are suffering under taxation without representation?

Really.”

No one wants to piss away an extra 5.4% of their income. The good news is people who pay it can justifiably say it is their charitable contribution to the broken health care reform. I can some it up in three words, “It’s a tragedy.”

[NeetaT]

“Yeah.
I because 5.4 percent will destroy American initiative.
I seem to remember it doing pretty well during the Clinton years at those levels.

Since socialism necessarily involves government ownership of the means of production (and because the things you cite do not), you comment is as inaccurate as it is vacuously retarded.

Perhaps next you will tell me you are suffering under taxation without representation?

Really.”

No one wants to piss away an extra 5.4% of their income. The good news is people who pay it can justifiably say it is their charitable contribution to the broken health care reform. I can some it up in three words, “It’s a tragedy.”

[NeetaT]

“Yeah.
I because 5.4 percent will destroy American initiative.
I seem to remember it doing pretty well during the Clinton years at those levels.

Since socialism necessarily involves government ownership of the means of production (and because the things you cite do not), you comment is as inaccurate as it is vacuously retarded.

Perhaps next you will tell me you are suffering under taxation without representation?

Really.”

No one wants to piss away an extra 5.4% of their income. The good news is people who pay it can justifiably say it is their charitable contribution to the broken health care reform. I can some it up in three words, “It’s a tragedy.”

[NeetaT]

“Yeah.
I because 5.4 percent will destroy American initiative.
I seem to remember it doing pretty well during the Clinton years at those levels.

Since socialism necessarily involves government ownership of the means of production (and because the things you cite do not), you comment is as inaccurate as it is vacuously retarded.

Perhaps next you will tell me you are suffering under taxation without representation?

Really.”

No one wants to piss away an extra 5.4% of their income. The good news is people who pay it can justifiably say it is their charitable contribution to the broken health care reform. I can some it up in three words, “It’s a tragedy.”

[NeetaT]

[quote=urbanrealtor][quote=NeetaT]”Specifically, individuals with annual incomes more than $500,000 — as well as families earning more than $1 million — would face a 5.4 percent income tax surcharge.”

I can now commiserate with people who try to hide income. Let’s punish initiative. This is truly socialism in its most profound form.[/quote]
Yeah.
I because 5.4 percent will destroy American initiative.
I seem to remember it doing pretty well during the Clinton years at those levels.

Since socialism necessarily involves government ownership of the means of production (and because the things you cite do not), you comment is as inaccurate as it is vacuously retarded.

Perhaps next you will tell me you are suffering under taxation without representation?

Really.[/quote]

[NeetaT]

[quote=urbanrealtor][quote=NeetaT]”Specifically, individuals with annual incomes more than $500,000 — as well as families earning more than $1 million — would face a 5.4 percent income tax surcharge.”

I can now commiserate with people who try to hide income. Let’s punish initiative. This is truly socialism in its most profound form.[/quote]
Yeah.
I because 5.4 percent will destroy American initiative.
I seem to remember it doing pretty well during the Clinton years at those levels.

Since socialism necessarily involves government ownership of the means of production (and because the things you cite do not), you comment is as inaccurate as it is vacuously retarded.

Perhaps next you will tell me you are suffering under taxation without representation?

Really.[/quote]

[NeetaT]

[quote=urbanrealtor][quote=NeetaT]”Specifically, individuals with annual incomes more than $500,000 — as well as families earning more than $1 million — would face a 5.4 percent income tax surcharge.”

I can now commiserate with people who try to hide income. Let’s punish initiative. This is truly socialism in its most profound form.[/quote]
Yeah.
I because 5.4 percent will destroy American initiative.
I seem to remember it doing pretty well during the Clinton years at those levels.

Since socialism necessarily involves government ownership of the means of production (and because the things you cite do not), you comment is as inaccurate as it is vacuously retarded.

Perhaps next you will tell me you are suffering under taxation without representation?

Really.[/quote]

[NeetaT]

[quote=urbanrealtor][quote=NeetaT]”Specifically, individuals with annual incomes more than $500,000 — as well as families earning more than $1 million — would face a 5.4 percent income tax surcharge.”

I can now commiserate with people who try to hide income. Let’s punish initiative. This is truly socialism in its most profound form.[/quote]
Yeah.
I because 5.4 percent will destroy American initiative.
I seem to remember it doing pretty well during the Clinton years at those levels.

Since socialism necessarily involves government ownership of the means of production (and because the things you cite do not), you comment is as inaccurate as it is vacuously retarded.

Perhaps next you will tell me you are suffering under taxation without representation?

Really.[/quote]

[NeetaT]

[quote=urbanrealtor][quote=NeetaT]”Specifically, individuals with annual incomes more than $500,000 — as well as families earning more than $1 million — would face a 5.4 percent income tax surcharge.”

I can now commiserate with people who try to hide income. Let’s punish initiative. This is truly socialism in its most profound form.[/quote]
Yeah.
I because 5.4 percent will destroy American initiative.
I seem to remember it doing pretty well during the Clinton years at those levels.

Since socialism necessarily involves government ownership of the means of production (and because the things you cite do not), you comment is as inaccurate as it is vacuously retarded.

Perhaps next you will tell me you are suffering under taxation without representation?

Really.[/quote]

[NeetaT]

No one wants to piss away an extra 5.4% of their income. The good news is people who pay it can justifiably say it is their charitable contribution to the broken health care reform. I can some it up in three words, “It’s a tragedy.”

[NeetaT]

No one wants to piss away an extra 5.4% of their income. The good news is people who pay it can justifiably say it is their charitable contribution to the broken health care reform. I can some it up in three words, “It’s a tragedy.”

[NeetaT]

No one wants to piss away an extra 5.4% of their income. The good news is people who pay it can justifiably say it is their charitable contribution to the broken health care reform. I can some it up in three words, “It’s a tragedy.”

[NeetaT]

No one wants to piss away an extra 5.4% of their income. The good news is people who pay it can justifiably say it is their charitable contribution to the broken health care reform. I can some it up in three words, “It’s a tragedy.”

[Author]

Posts