To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 26116
  Re: A question for my Canadian pals
 
(...) How so? Can you elaborate? What routine things do I expect others to pay for on my behalf? I buy my own stuff. (...) Or the ability of his insurance to pay? (...) You wouldn't hold that person responsible for those costs to the maximum extent (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: A question for my Canadian pals
 
(...) Sure! Here's one example, but there are many: The computer you're using is descended from publicly funded technology for which you have not paid but from which you are reaping the benefit; this is income redistribution that favors you. The (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: A question for my Canadian pals
 
(...) I could argue the point that in fact I (and my parents) paid more into the system than we have benefited from it, and I could do so for every example you cite, I think, if I chose to do so. (as a sketch, for the first one, the computer's (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: A question for my Canadian pals
 
(...) But underlying technology is only one aspect. If any of the designers (at MS, Intel, or wherever) went to a public school or received a government grant for college or for subsequent research, then you are benefitting from public money. I (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: A question for my Canadian pals
 
(...) Ok, here's a question on this one. If we truly believe that society owes everyone healthcare, do we include global society? Do we owe the billions of people in India and China the same standard of healthcare that is being demanded for (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: A question for my Canadian pals
 
(...) Have you thought through to the logical conclusion of the path you're following? The logical conclusion is that there should be no private money at all. But then that raises an interesting question: Who decides what is reasonable to spend (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: A question for my Canadian pals
 
(...) Only insofar as THEY derived a benefit... if what they paid in taxes covered the education services they received, then no... in fact one could argue that I ought to get a credit in my accounting if what they paid was more. But this could (...) (20 years ago, 7-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: A question for my Canadian pals
 
(...) Might the logical conclusion instead be that there should be no money at all, without niggling about public vs. private? I don't suggest that I have a fully fleshed-out alternative to offer, but it seems clear that the consensual hallucination (...) (20 years ago, 7-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: A question for my Canadian pals
 
(...) Well, for millennia we've lived under a system that allocates resources to the economically or militarily powerful, so naturally there's a huge inequity re: who "owns" the resources. If we can fix that inequity, then we can address the others. (...) (20 years ago, 7-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: A question for my Canadian pals
 
(...) It's an interesting point you make about owing healthcare to the world, especially right now with the shortage of the flu virus vaccinations happening. Ontario, where I live, used to provide free flu virus shots to anyone that walked into a (...) (20 years ago, 16-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR