Supreme Court allows Texas’ 6-week abortion ban to take effect

[spurraider21]

But it's a fact. What's the difference between paying 40K a year to the federal government for social programs and you helping a family yourself with that same money? Oh because the gubmint good now.

because its not just about my family. public policy is about a lot more than me me me

we're talking about scales here

if i take the position that the government should provide healthcare for its population, and your counterpoint is "you are free to pay for your neighbor's health insurance lol" then you are missing the boat

nobody wants to pay taxes just for the sake of paying taxes. if republicans wanted to raise taxes to support a war or border wall, i'd say that. if somebody wanted to raise taxes to provide healthcare or child care, i'd be all aboard that. i'd also hope that the taxation is done progressively

[DMC]

because its not just about my family. public policy is about a lot more than me me me

Helping another family isn't "me me me", are you daft?

"helping a family yourself with that money"

You're another one of the knee jerk responders who don't read .

If you don't trust yourself with your own money, that's your problem.

[spurraider21]

Helping another family isn't "me me me", are you daft?

"helping a family yourself with that money"

You're another one of the knee jerk responders who don't read .

If you don't trust yourself with your own money, that's your problem.

doesnt address the issue of scale which is the fundamental point in what i re-posted

[DMC]

doesnt address the issue of scale which is the fundamental point in what i re-posted

Scale is just a 10000 foot view. If people helped other people instead of well wishing, the problems would be resolved. When you create a community coffer for people to reach into and pull out money they never contributed to, and don't ever intend on paying back, you basically ensure people who actually need it will have much less than they would otherwise.

Look at COVID scale.. it's still one person infecting other people and so on. The Federal government didn't need to gather all the COVID and hand it out to the needy.

[spurraider21]

Scale is just a 10000 foot view. If people helped other people instead of well wishing, the problems would be resolved. When you create a community coffer for people to reach into and pull out money they never contributed to, and don't ever intend on paying back, you basically ensure people who actually need it will have much less than they would otherwise.

Look at COVID scale.. it's still one person infecting other people and so on. The Federal government didn't need to gather all the COVID and hand it out to the needy.

instead of relying on millions of people conveniently all being charitable to everybody else, i'll just have the government put things into place. makes more sense. and not just being charitable, but making sure resources are allocated to all who need it, not just those who are within view of the charity-doers

its also why we have a military or police force instead of banking on civilian vigilantes or militias

[Adam Lambert]

"If you favor higher taxes then why don't you donate your money to the government" is like Intro to Libertarianism for 19-year-old white men, and DerpMC is still trying to make that argument work at 60+.

It's like arguing with someone who just watched Fight Club for the first time and bases his whole worldview around Tyler Durden monologues.

[Th'Pusher]

Not interested but you follow me around like a lost puppy

Follow you around

I occasionally respond to you, but I generally find you an unserious poster making bad faith arguments. Your ridiculous argument re charity vs taxation and redistribution itt is as good an example as any.

SR21 and EN dunk on you and you seem to enjoy Getting anonymous men’s virtual balls plastered on your face. As long as they’ll go another round, you’re happy.

Or you’re just too ing stupid to realize you’ve lost the argument.

[Th'Pusher]

"If you favor higher taxes then why don't you donate your money to the government" is like Intro to Libertarianism for 19-year-old white men, and DerpMC is still trying to make that argument work at 60+.

It's like arguing with someone who just watched Fight Club for the first time and bases his whole worldview around Tyler Durden monologues.

Yep

[ElNono]

What argument is this making exactly?

That the US doesn't spend enough in childcare? Not sure what that has to do with abortions.

The following posts brought those two together and that's what I was referencing:

Which state has stopped forcing men to provide for children they don't want?

There are men that work long hours to pay for children they don't want or were the result of rape or in fact not even biologically theirs. These people don't think twice about the position the state puts men in. Their propaganda bubble has told them that if men face "x" problem then "y" law would never exist. They are ignorant or liars.

Where is Canada on that list?

Do you want to live in Slovenia?

Your comment wasn't seemingly restricted to that graph, and I quote:

WH is really adept at comparing the US to countries that have completely different cir stances and governments no one here would want.

But if it was, then my mistake. I do think out of that list Sweden, Germany and Finland for example have 1st world governments that have nothing to envy to the US. Nobody is perfect, but if you've traveled and lived overseas, you know that the whole 'american exceptionalism', especially when it comes to government is a bunch of hubris.

[DMC]

instead of relying on millions of people conveniently all being charitable to everybody else, i'll just have the government put things into place. makes more sense. and not just being charitable, but making sure resources are allocated to all who need it, not just those who are within view of the charity-doers

its also why we have a military or police force instead of banking on civilian vigilantes or militias

Charity is fine, government programs are fine, but it's fiscally re ed to think you can pay everyone in South America and Haiti to live in the US with taxpayer money AND do all the other ideologue you want.

[DMC]

That the US doesn't spend enough in childcare? Not sure what that has to do with abortions.

Since America doesn't spend a lot then America must not care about kids, so there's nary room to complain about abortions. Ask WH. It's his tangent.

The following posts brought those two together and that's what I was referencing:








Your comment wasn't seemingly restricted to that graph, and I quote:



But if it was, then my mistake. I do think out of that list Sweden, Germany and Finland for example have 1st world governments that have nothing to envy to the US. Nobody is perfect, but if you've traveled and lived overseas, you know that the whole 'american exceptionalism', especially when it comes to government is a bunch of hubris.

Of course it was. Why else would I mention WH and "countries that have completely different cir stances" and go on to discuss Norway, the number 1 country on that graph?

They have different cir stances, different borders, different climates, cultures and such. Just as Canada doesn't need to spend much on national defense, some other countries don't need to be that concerned with protecting their borders, don't border 3rd world countries and have histories of being ass ed by Russia or Germany.

Whatever brought you to the US, the conditions and cir stances here created it in some way. You cannot have those ingredients and get something different. When the US builds walls to keep people in, then I will wonder WTF.

[spurraider21]

Charity is fine, government programs are fine, but it's fiscally re ed to think you can pay everyone in South America and Haiti to live in the US with taxpayer money AND do all the other ideologue you want.

you're again trying to get into the specifics/weeds of immigration when the point was about people taking it upon themselves to provide social services where the government wont, which is a silly notion and you know it

[Th'Pusher]

you're again trying to get into the specifics/weeds of immigration when the point was about people taking it upon themselves to provide social services where the government wont, which is a silly notion and you know it

Notice though he’s setting the stage for the milquetoast take nobody can disagree with…charity is fine, government programs are fine…

Pegged like a .

[DMC]

you're again trying to get into the specifics/weeds of immigration when the point was about people taking it upon themselves to provide social services where the government wont, which is a silly notion and you know it

It's how this nation was founded. Why is it silly? The point was, instead of paying 50% income tax, take that money and put it where you know it will do good, and that's not on a pallet in Iran.

You don't trust the people but you trust the government elected by those people. Instead of trusting yourself to do the right thing, you still need a parental figure to force you to comply.

[DMC]

Notice though he’s setting the stage for the milquetoast take nobody can disagree with…charity is fine, government programs are fine…

Pegged like a .

You follow me around so much

[Th'Pusher]

You follow me around so much

I’m just providing color commentary to your losing argument. I’m sorry this is happening to you.

[spurraider21]

It's how this nation was founded. Why is it silly? The point was, instead of paying 50% income tax, take that money and put it where you know it will do good, and that's not on a pallet in Iran.

You don't trust the people but you trust the government elected by those people. Instead of trusting yourself to do the right thing, you still need a parental figure to force you to comply.

because its not about ME doing the right thing. this is a country of 330 million people.

i can get by just fine without the social programs that i advocate for. and based on our family's trajectory and future outlook we'd be the ones who would be paying higher taxes as a direct result. but i'm ok with that because i dont only advocate for policies that directly benefit me.

there are millions of folks who need help. me doing some personal charity isn't a drop in the bucket. thats not to say charity is bad. its just insufficient

[ElNono]

Since America doesn't spend a lot then America must not care about kids, so there's nary room to complain about abortions. Ask WH. It's his tangent.

Fair enough.

Of course it was. Why else would I mention WH and "countries that have completely different cir stances" and go on to discuss Norway, the number 1 country on that graph?

They have different cir stances, different borders, different climates, cultures and such. Just as Canada doesn't need to spend much on national defense, some other countries don't need to be that concerned with protecting their borders, don't border 3rd world countries and have histories of being ass ed by Russia or Germany.

Whatever brought you to the US, the conditions and cir stances here created it in some way. You cannot have those ingredients and get something different. When the US builds walls to keep people in, then I will wonder WTF.

I just don't know that defines a government being good or bad. The US has had largely an open border policy for centuries. Heck, illegal immigration was not even penalized by the US Cons ution nor laws until much, much later after it's creation, and they were always loosely enforced.

This country was largely built by immigrants as well, which is an obvious reflection of that policy choice. The big difference back then is that black immigrants were called slaves and were not free. Heck, we loved to ferry in those 'immigrants' back in the day.

Which is really what brings us to today. We love to bring in the jornaleros to pick strawberries for the season nowadays. The problem is when they decide to stay, bring their families or vote.

There was nothing thinly veiled about the previous President stating that he would prefer we get immigrants from Norway instead of Mexico or Haiti. Nobody complains about British or Canadian immigrants or the cost we incur with them.

And obviously, there's nothing surprising about Norway saying, gee, no thanks. They're a fine country and in many respects their government does a much better job than ours do with our people.

At a personal level, what holds me here now is that I built a family here, and it would be hassle to move, but it's also not a possibility I discard outright either given the right opportunity.

[Th'Pusher]

It's how this nation was founded. Why is it silly? The point was, instead of paying 50% income tax, take that money and put it where you know it will do good, and that's not on a pallet in Iran.

You don't trust the people but you trust the government elected by those people. Instead of trusting yourself to do the right thing, you still need a parental figure to force you to comply.

Pallet to Iran

Plus moar neck beard libertarianism 101 from the resident boomer.

Embarrassing

[DMC]

because its not about ME doing the right thing. this is a country of 330 million people.

bull . It is always about you controlling what you do. When that "me" is each of the people of society, which it is, then you bet. "It's not about the trash I threw out my car window... it's about the massive amount of litter along the highways around the US."

Anything to remove personal responsibility and defer to the nanny. Yep you're still growing up.

i can get by just fine without the social programs that i advocate for. and based on our family's trajectory and future outlook we'd be the ones who would be paying higher taxes as a direct result. but i'm ok with that because i dont only advocate for policies that directly benefit me.

But you do. You advocate for policies that remove your personal responsibility to help those around you, like having a maid for your ethics, by voting for policies that take the decision away from everyday people and place those decisions with people who DO in fact make decisions based on their own personal well being, the elected officials. It's just deferred responsibility disguised as social awareness.

there are millions of folks who need help. me doing some charity drive isn't going to be a drop in the bucket

More deferring responsibility. I thought you wanted to help people with legal issues, for free. How is helping one person at a time going to change the world?

[Th'Pusher]

because its not about ME doing the right thing. this is a country of 330 million people.

i can get by just fine without the social programs that i advocate for. and based on our family's trajectory and future outlook we'd be the ones who would be paying higher taxes as a direct result. but i'm ok with that because i dont only advocate for policies that directly benefit me.

there are millions of folks who need help. me doing some personal charity isn't a drop in the bucket. thats not to say charity is bad. its just insufficient

No need for a compulsory tax. Human nature will take care of it.

[DMC]

Fair enough.



I just don't know that defines a government being good or bad. The US has had largely an open border policy for centuries. Heck, illegal immigration was not even penalized by the US Cons ution nor laws until much, much later after it's creation, and they were always loosely enforced.

This country was largely built by immigrants as well, which is an obvious reflection of that policy choice. The big difference back then is that black immigrants were called slaves and were not free. Heck, we loved to ferry in those 'immigrants' back in the day.

Which is really what brings us to today. We love to bring in the jornaleros to pick strawberries for the season nowadays. The problem is when they decide to stay, bring their families or vote.

There was nothing thinly veiled about the previous President stating that he would prefer we get immigrants from Norway instead of Mexico or Haiti. Nobody complains about British or Canadian immigrants or the cost we incur with them.

And obviously, there's nothing surprising about Norway saying, gee, no thanks. They're a fine country and in many respects their government does a much better job than ours do with our people.

At a personal level, what holds me here now is that I built a family here, and it would be hassle to move, but it's also not a possibility I discard outright either given the right opportunity.

Immigrants are fine. Do ent them and let them contribute. Porous borders aren't about legal immigration.

I haven't said it's good or bad but whatever it is, many people seem to be stacking up along the border to get in. Why would they do that if they didn't think they could get an anchor baby in and get some handouts? I'd be right with them if I was born in one of those holes.

[spurraider21]

bull . It is always about you controlling what you do. When that "me" is each of the people of society, which it is, then you bet. "It's not about the trash I threw out my car window... it's about the massive amount of litter along the highways around the US."

Anything to remove personal responsibility and defer to the nanny. Yep you're still growing up.

But you do. You advocate for policies that remove your personal responsibility to help those around you, like having a maid for your ethics, by voting for policies that take the decision away from everyday people and place those decisions with people who DO in fact make decisions based on their own personal well being, the elected officials. It's just deferred responsibility disguised as social awareness.


More deferring responsibility. I thought you wanted to help people with legal issues, for free. How is helping one person at a time going to change the world?

charity isn't a bad thing. its objectively helpful. but it generally will never have the same reach as the government.

its funny, you mentioned how i've had a passion to get into public defense... which is a government program, not personal charity.

you call it a deferral of personal responsibility, i call it being realistic. this is like people who thought we are going to save the planet by doing things like turning off the faucet while brushing our teeth... meanwhile people use significantly more water to keep their lawns nice and pretty. at some point its naivety

[DMC]

charity isn't a bad thing. its objectively helpful. but it generally will never have the same reach as the government.

its funny, you mentioned how i've had a passion to get into public defense... which is a government program, not personal charity.

you call it a deferral of personal responsibility, i call it being realistic. this is like people who thought we are going to save the planet by doing things like turning off the faucet while brushing our teeth... meanwhile people use significantly more water to keep their lawns nice and pretty. at some point its naivety

All these people stacked along the borders are because of the reach their governments had. Who got them to the borders? Not their governments.

So naivety eh, like wearing a mask on a plane that's basically a tube stuffed with people leaning all over you? You probably don't take issue with that one mask thing because it makes you feel like a contributor and it's visible.

Your job only helps one person at a time, Why would you want to do that instead of making more money and paying more taxes to help more people? Surely you cannot make a difference.

[spurraider21]

All these people stacked along the borders are because of the reach their governments had. Who got them to the borders? Not their governments.

So naivety eh, like wearing a mask on a plane that's basically a tube stuffed with people leaning all over you? You probably don't take issue with that one mask thing because it makes you feel like a contributor and it's visible.

Your job only helps one person at a time, Why would you want to do that instead of making more money and paying more taxes to help more people? Surely you cannot make a difference.

you're again shifting the general discussion back to the weeds of immigration

and the airline example is making my point for me. im glad its a rule for everyone to wear masks. rather than just hoping everybody will be a good samaritan.

if the end goal i want is everybody to have health insurance, and i took your approach, i would just cross my fingers and hope that rich people everywhere go out of their way to find poorer people and offer to personally pay their premiums. weird how that hasn't happened yet. no, wait. not weird. the other one. predicable.