 | | Re: A question for my Canadian pals —Dave Schuler
|
| | | (...) 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 —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) 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 —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) 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 —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | | (...) 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 —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | (...) 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 —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) 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 —Frank Filz
|
| | | | (...) 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 —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) 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 —Angela Fong
|
| | | | (...) 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)
|
| | | | |
