Ron Paul, a first class dick, was nailed pretty badly by this question. But not as badly as the Teabaggers in the audience who cheered the idea of leaving an uninsured person who got a terrible disease to die becuase they made a mistake in not getting proper insurance coverage.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irx_QXsJiao&w=500&h=311]
Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:
In Search of Sungudogo by Greg Laden, now in Kindle
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
I’m curious how you thought he was nailed. I thought his answers were spot on. His platform has been consistent throughout his career.
The Libertarian answer is that it’s the place of voluntary charity, not mandatory taxation, to care for those who cannot care for themselves.
My own opinion is that we can afford basic health care for everyone and ought to implement a single-payer system. The insurance companies have too much “lobbying” money to make that likely though.
The Libertarian answer is that it’s the place of voluntary charity, not mandatory taxation, to care for those who cannot care for themselves.
Exactly. Which he was more or less forced to state (and as you point out, that was not hard to do) and it is inhumane, batshit crazy, undoable, and one of the reasons that most people think of Ron Paul as a nutbag.
He seems to be a crypto-theocrat, which is why I think he’s a nutbag. I don’t object to a libertarian voice in government as the point of view is important, if usually overruled.
Yes, because it’s an important voice in the dialogue that says that the poor deserve to die.
So I assume you wouldn’t mind if we took all your assets and garnished your wages to pay for the care of poor people who don’t deserve to die.
If it takes “all of our assests” to do that then that is what we need to do. Of course, it won’t.
And they didn’t just want this hypothetical man to die, they seemed to not care if he was just left untreated to infect others, including themselves. But it’s better to let someone or many people die than to see someone go unpunished for a mistake.