This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="bobbetybob"]NHS rules b*tches!SPBossNHS ftw :D America can't call itself a civilized country if they don't provide free health care just saying.. Have to pay just for an ambulance ride to the hospital = Wrong lol you must be poor. no wait you're right. ambulance should be free. doctors should be free. everything should be free. all of society should work for free to serve their fellow man so i don't have to do anything. poor person logic.
[QUOTE="SPBoss"][QUOTE="bobbetybob"]NHS rules b*tches!mmwmwmmwmwmmNHS ftw :D America can't call itself a civilized country if they don't provide free health care just saying.. Have to pay just for an ambulance ride to the hospital = Wrong lol you must be poor. no wait you're right. ambulance should be free. doctors should be free. everything should be free. all of society should work for free to serve their fellow man so i don't have to do anything. poor person logic.Health care is a basic right. Not a luxury.Â
lol you must be poor. no wait you're right. ambulance should be free. doctors should be free. everything should be free. all of society should work for free to serve their fellow man so i don't have to do anything. poor person logic.Health care is a basic right. Not a luxury. i was under the impression that healthcare was a service provided by working men and women who work in order to earn an income to support themselves. though i guess just calling something a right and demanding that it be given to you for free is also a legitimate approach to the issue. we must be tolerant of stupidity as there is so much of it.[QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"][QUOTE="SPBoss"] NHS ftw :D America can't call itself a civilized country if they don't provide free health care just saying.. Have to pay just for an ambulance ride to the hospital = Wrongtoast_burner
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]Health care is a basic right. Not a luxury. i was under the impression that healthcare was a service provided by working men and women who work in order to earn an income to support themselves. though i guess just calling something a right and demanding that it be given to you for free is also a legitimate approach to the issue. we must be tolerant of stupidity as there is so much of it.[QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"] lol you must be poor. no wait you're right. ambulance should be free. doctors should be free. everything should be free. all of society should work for free to serve their fellow man so i don't have to do anything. poor person logic.mmwmwmmwmwmm
https://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a25
Article 25.
i was under the impression that healthcare was a service provided by working men and women who work in order to earn an income to support themselves. though i guess just calling something a right and demanding that it be given to you for free is also a legitimate approach to the issue. we must be tolerant of stupidity as there is so much of it.[QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]Health care is a basic right. Not a luxury.Â
toast_burner
https://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a25
Article 25.
[QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"][QUOTE="Person0"]pretty sure most billionaires invest heavily in the stock market. also just introducing billions of dollars into the economy that wasn't being used before causes inflation. thinking should study econ a little before you vote again.
The govt billions of dollars from the richest people where the money is just siting and doing practically nothing and give it to poor people. The people spend it increasing demand, this increased demand = businesses needing to hire more people, more people now work and earn an income. This cycle repeats, look you created wealth through the transfer payments.Person0
mmwmwmwmwmwmwmwwmwmwmwmmmmwmwm - 2
you - 0
[QUOTE="toast_burner"][QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"] i was under the impression that healthcare was a service provided by working men and women who work in order to earn an income to support themselves. though i guess just calling something a right and demanding that it be given to you for free is also a legitimate approach to the issue. we must be tolerant of stupidity as there is so much of it.mmwmwmmwmwmm
https://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a25
Article 25.
that's so nice of the UN to call healthcare a right. the UN just cares about people so much. unfortunately calling a service a right doesn't actually do anything to produce the service for free and make it universally available. also the UN has no legal authority anyways so you're being a little dumb right now.The US signed it. that's great. un resolutions still have no legal authority in the US. please read the constitution.[QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]
https://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a25
Article 25.
- (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
toast_burner
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]The US signed it. that's great. un resolutions still have no legal authority in the US. please read the constitution.I never mentioned authority. what it means that the US regards it as a human right.[QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"]that's so nice of the UN to call healthcare a right. the UN just cares about people so much. unfortunately calling a service a right doesn't actually do anything to produce the service for free and make it universally available. also the UN has no legal authority anyways so you're being a little dumb right now.mmwmwmmwmwmm
that's great. un resolutions still have no legal authority in the US. please read the constitution.I never mentioned authority. what it means that the US regards it as a human right. i guess that explains why healthcare isn't free in the US then. no wait, it actually doesn't explain that at all.[QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]The US signed it.Â
toast_burner
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]Health care is a basic right. Not a luxury. i was under the impression that healthcare was a service provided by working men and women who work in order to earn an income to support themselves. though i guess just calling something a right and demanding that it be given to you for free is also a legitimate approach to the issue. we must be tolerant of stupidity as there is so much of it. Hate to break it to you but all rights at some level exist because of a service provided by working men and women who do what they do for an income to support themselves. So unless you're completely against anyone having rights of any kind your argument is kind of terrible. I'll never get this bizarre belief that the constitution just sh*ts out rights without any effort being put in.[QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"] lol you must be poor. no wait you're right. ambulance should be free. doctors should be free. everything should be free. all of society should work for free to serve their fellow man so i don't have to do anything. poor person logic.mmwmwmmwmwmm
 I do not need to take an economics course because I have studied the essays of Ayn Rand and Ron Paul extensively.Laihendi
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]Health care is a basic right. Not a luxury. i was under the impression that healthcare was a service provided by working men and women who work in order to earn an income to support themselves. though i guess just calling something a right and demanding that it be given to you for free is also a legitimate approach to the issue. we must be tolerant of stupidity as there is so much of it.Are you under the impression that doctors in countries that have universal healthcare aren't paid?[QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"] lol you must be poor. no wait you're right. ambulance should be free. doctors should be free. everything should be free. all of society should work for free to serve their fellow man so i don't have to do anything. poor person logic.mmwmwmmwmwmm
[QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]Health care is a basic right. Not a luxury.i was under the impression that healthcare was a service provided by working men and women who work in order to earn an income to support themselves. though i guess just calling something a right and demanding that it be given to you for free is also a legitimate approach to the issue. we must be tolerant of stupidity as there is so much of it. Hate to break it to you but all rights at some level exist because of a service provided by working men and women who do what they do for an income to support themselves. So unless you're completely against anyone having rights of any kind your argument is kind of terrible. I'll never get this bizarre belief that the constitution just sh*ts out rights without any effort being put in. Just because something is a right doesn't mean it should be free. For instance, the right to bear arms doesn't mean that the government has an obligation to buy you a gun if you can't afford one.Ace6301
Hate to break it to you but all rights at some level exist because of a service provided by working men and women who do what they do for an income to support themselves. So unless you're completely against anyone having rights of any kind your argument is kind of terrible. I'll never get this bizarre belief that the constitution just sh*ts out rights without any effort being put in. Just because something is a right doesn't mean it should be free. For instance, the right to bear arms doesn't mean that the government has an obligation to buy you a gun if you can't afford one.[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"] i was under the impression that healthcare was a service provided by working men and women who work in order to earn an income to support themselves. though i guess just calling something a right and demanding that it be given to you for free is also a legitimate approach to the issue. we must be tolerant of stupidity as there is so much of it.whipassmt
I'm sure there are parts of the country where that would happen.
Just because something is a right doesn't mean it should be free. For instance, the right to bear arms doesn't mean that the government has an obligation to buy you a gun if you can't afford one.[QUOTE="whipassmt"]
[QUOTE="Ace6301"] Hate to break it to you but all rights at some level exist because of a service provided by working men and women who do what they do for an income to support themselves. So unless you're completely against anyone having rights of any kind your argument is kind of terrible. I'll never get this bizarre belief that the constitution just sh*ts out rights without any effort being put in.jimkabrhel
I'm sure there are parts of the country where that would happen.
Maybe. I'm just saying that just because something is a right, doesn't mean it has to or should be free.America is the only place where people would literally rather burn their money than have it used to help someone else. A country that literally hates itself. Personally, if my taxes go to helping everyone else have a basic level of living, I'm fine with that. Is it the mentality where u cant be happy unless ur neighbor has less than you? People need to suffer so u can see ur achievements? is that it? I personally dont get it. Even if you are a bum, and a freeloader and a complete waste of space, I believe that if you get sick, you should be able to get help. Im willing to lose a little money off my paycheck so someone can live a day longer.II_Seraphim_II
Yeah there really is a HUGE issue of everyoe being disconnected from eachother here. I feel like if anything will be this countries downfall, it will be just that.
Hate to break it to you but all rights at some level exist because of a service provided by working men and women who do what they do for an income to support themselves. So unless you're completely against anyone having rights of any kind your argument is kind of terrible. I'll never get this bizarre belief that the constitution just sh*ts out rights without any effort being put in. Just because something is a right doesn't mean it should be free. For instance, the right to bear arms doesn't mean that the government has an obligation to buy you a gun if you can't afford one. Except that the right to bear arms is about the government not interfering with a citizens right to own a gun of some sort. They don't have to buy you a gun but they can't stop you from owning a gun. Personally I've always found that amendment questionable as a right. It's not really something given it's something promised not to be taken away. The right to healthcare would obviously be given and even in the current US system they won't turn away people from an emergency room which coupled with insurers and for profit hospitals is largely why it costs more for the current US system than a universal one.[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"] i was under the impression that healthcare was a service provided by working men and women who work in order to earn an income to support themselves. though i guess just calling something a right and demanding that it be given to you for free is also a legitimate approach to the issue. we must be tolerant of stupidity as there is so much of it.whipassmt
America is the only place where people would literally rather burn their money than have it used to help someone else. A country that literally hates itself. Personally, if my taxes go to helping everyone else have a basic level of living, I'm fine with that. Is it the mentality where u cant be happy unless ur neighbor has less than you? People need to suffer so u can see ur achievements? is that it? I personally dont get it. Even if you are a bum, and a freeloader and a complete waste of space, I believe that if you get sick, you should be able to get help. Im willing to lose a little money off my paycheck so someone can live a day longer.II_Seraphim_III think most Americans agree with you about losing a little money to help someone else live.
I think most Americans agree with you about losing a little money to help someone else live.[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"]America is the only place where people would literally rather burn their money than have it used to help someone else. A country that literally hates itself. Personally, if my taxes go to helping everyone else have a basic level of living, I'm fine with that. Is it the mentality where u cant be happy unless ur neighbor has less than you? People need to suffer so u can see ur achievements? is that it? I personally dont get it. Even if you are a bum, and a freeloader and a complete waste of space, I believe that if you get sick, you should be able to get help. Im willing to lose a little money off my paycheck so someone can live a day longer.whipassmt
Fun story, every single millage up for vote at last election got turned down in my area. Guess we can't keep tax money going to our parks and schools.
These weren't huge millages either and alot were just renewing ones we HAD been paying...
I think most Americans agree with you about losing a little money to help someone else live. Excuse me? Why should those who worked hard not enjoy the fruits of their labors? Why should it be stolen to be handed to a lazy bum who acts as a parasite to society? Pre-socialist society was far better off. It allowed for natural selection. If you dumb everything down to the lowest common denominator, progress is guaranteed to become impossible.[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"]America is the only place where people would literally rather burn their money than have it used to help someone else. A country that literally hates itself. Personally, if my taxes go to helping everyone else have a basic level of living, I'm fine with that. Is it the mentality where u cant be happy unless ur neighbor has less than you? People need to suffer so u can see ur achievements? is that it? I personally dont get it. Even if you are a bum, and a freeloader and a complete waste of space, I believe that if you get sick, you should be able to get help. Im willing to lose a little money off my paycheck so someone can live a day longer.whipassmt
Perhaps if people where forced to work for what they want (money, healthcare, etc.), they would cherish it a bit more. Then we might see people acting less entitled, less stuck in the "hand me things" mentality, and society can move forward.
I think most Americans agree with you about losing a little money to help someone else live. Excuse me? Why should those who worked hard not enjoy the fruits of their labors? Why should it be stolen to be handed to a lazy bum who acts as a parasite to society? Pre-socialist society was far better off. It allowed for natural selection. If you dumb everything down to the lowest common denominator, progress is guaranteed to become impossible.[QUOTE="whipassmt"]
[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"]America is the only place where people would literally rather burn their money than have it used to help someone else. A country that literally hates itself. Personally, if my taxes go to helping everyone else have a basic level of living, I'm fine with that. Is it the mentality where u cant be happy unless ur neighbor has less than you? People need to suffer so u can see ur achievements? is that it? I personally dont get it. Even if you are a bum, and a freeloader and a complete waste of space, I believe that if you get sick, you should be able to get help. Im willing to lose a little money off my paycheck so someone can live a day longer.JasonGriffee
Perhaps if people where forced to work for what they want (money, healthcare, etc.), they would cherish it a bit more. Then we might see people acting less entitled, less stuck in the "hand me things" mentality, and society can move forward.
Most Americans are Christians so yeah I'd kind of hope for their own beliefs that they agree losing a little money to help others is right. Wouldn't want them to think they're going to rot in hell for eternity. What even is this "pre-socialist" society? Sweden? US? Canada? None of those have ever been socialist countries. Perhaps you mean before any sort of socialist ideas were implemented in any way? When would that be? The gilded age? At any rate I find calling any period in time better off than we are now to be extremely suspect. But seriously, why are extremists always incapable of seeing anyone else as anything other than an extremist? To these people it seems like it's all one way or the other.[QUOTE="JasonGriffee"] Excuse me? Why should those who worked hard not enjoy the fruits of their labors? Why should it be stolen to be handed to a lazy bum who acts as a parasite to society? Pre-socialist society was far better off. It allowed for natural selection. If you dumb everything down to the lowest common denominator, progress is guaranteed to become impossible.Most Americans are Christians so yeah I'd kind of hope for their own beliefs that they agree losing a little money to help others is right. Wouldn't want them to think they're going to rot in hell for eternity. What even is this "pre-socialist" society? Sweden? US? Canada? None of those have ever been socialist countries. Perhaps you mean before any sort of socialist ideas were implemented in any way? When would that be? The gilded age? At any rate I find calling any period in time better off than we are now to be extremely suspect. But seriously, why are extremists always incapable of seeing anyone else as anything other than an extremist? To these people it seems like it's all one way or the other.Perhaps if people where forced to work for what they want (money, healthcare, etc.), they would cherish it a bit more. Then we might see people acting less entitled, less stuck in the "hand me things" mentality, and society can move forward.
Ace6301
My objection is not to people giving charitably, that is something that should be encouraged. My objection is rather that we a FORCED into giving our money to others, which ultimately constitutes theft.
To your question about Pre-socialism, I was referring to America. Americans have been slowly re-educated into the socialistic mentality. If a politician where to propose ideas that they do today, back in the 1930's to the early 1950's, I can tell you that their political careers would be very short. The socialistic agenda has been slowly inched into society over the last 50-60 years. Do you think that we had gun control in the years after America was founded? No, of coarse not. We still cared about the Bill of Rights back then. But over the last 50-60 years, there has been a big push to put it in place. I finalize my point with this:
The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as government is perceived as working for the benefit of children, the people happily will endure almost any curtailment of liberty.Adolf Hitler
Have you noticed how when there's any kind of shooting, "protecting the children" is always yelled loud and clear? Especially with Sand Hook? Regardless of your opinion on the facts, you have to agree that Obama is just plastering these children's faces on every news conference about gun control. This is not a idea that he thought up himself. This is simply copy/paste policy from the socialists/communists that came before him.
As to your statment about "extremism", I could accuse you of the same. Why is it that a so-called "right-winged extremist" gets demonized, but left-wing radicals that are trying to comletely dominate the discussion are somehow exusable? Is our democracy not for debate? For people and the media to silence one and not the other is nothing short of proparganda in my honest opinion.
My objection is not to people giving charitably, that is something that should be encouraged. My objection is rather that we a FORCED into giving our money to others, which ultimately constitutes theft.
To your question about Pre-socialism, I was referring to America. Americans have been slowly re-educated into the socialistic mentality. If a politician where to propose ideas that they do today, back in the 1930's to the early 1950's, I can tell you that their political careers would be very short. The socialistic agenda has been slowly inched into society over the last 50-60 years. Do you think that we had gun control in the years after America was founded? No, of coarse not. We still cared about the Bill of Rights back then. But over the last 50-60 years, there has been a big push to put it in place. I finalize my point with this:
[QUOTE="Adolf Hitler"]The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as government is perceived as working for the benefit of children, the people happily will endure almost any curtailment of liberty.JasonGriffee
Have you noticed how when there's any kind of shooting, "protecting the children" is always yelled loud and clear? Especially with Sand Hook? Regardless of your opinion on the facts, you have to agree that Obama is just plastering these children's faces on every news conference about gun control. This is not a idea that he thought up himself. This is simply copy/paste policy from the socialists/communists that came before him.
As to your statment about "extremism", I could accuse you of the same. Why is it that a so-called "right-winged extremist" gets demonized, but left-wing radicals that are trying to comletely dominate the discussion are somehow exusable? Is our democracy not for debate? For people and the media to silence one and not the other is nothing short of proparganda in my honest opinion.
Point in case Godwins law shows up and he accuses me of being an extremist without having any clue of my beliefs. Also tax is allowed by the US constitution, sorry bro.I think most Americans agree with you about losing a little money to help someone else live. Excuse me? Why should those who worked hard not enjoy the fruits of their labors? Why should it be stolen to be handed to a lazy bum who acts as a parasite to society? Pre-socialist society was far better off. It allowed for natural selection. If you dumb everything down to the lowest common denominator, progress is guaranteed to become impossible.[QUOTE="whipassmt"]
[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"]America is the only place where people would literally rather burn their money than have it used to help someone else. A country that literally hates itself. Personally, if my taxes go to helping everyone else have a basic level of living, I'm fine with that. Is it the mentality where u cant be happy unless ur neighbor has less than you? People need to suffer so u can see ur achievements? is that it? I personally dont get it. Even if you are a bum, and a freeloader and a complete waste of space, I believe that if you get sick, you should be able to get help. Im willing to lose a little money off my paycheck so someone can live a day longer.JasonGriffee
Perhaps if people where forced to work for what they want (money, healthcare, etc.), they would cherish it a bit more. Then we might see people acting less entitled, less stuck in the "hand me things" mentality, and society can move forward.
Â
That assumes that people who are rich worked hard, and poor people are lazy. Im guessing your average McDonalds employee probably works harder than Paris Hilton, probably is smarter as well.
Â
That line of thinking is based on an assumption that is inherently flawed.
I think most Americans agree with you about losing a little money to help someone else live. Excuse me? Why should those who worked hard not enjoy the fruits of their labors? Why should it be stolen to be handed to a lazy bum who acts as a parasite to society? Pre-socialist society was far better off. It allowed for natural selection. If you dumb everything down to the lowest common denominator, progress is guaranteed to become impossible.[QUOTE="whipassmt"]
[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"]America is the only place where people would literally rather burn their money than have it used to help someone else. A country that literally hates itself. Personally, if my taxes go to helping everyone else have a basic level of living, I'm fine with that. Is it the mentality where u cant be happy unless ur neighbor has less than you? People need to suffer so u can see ur achievements? is that it? I personally dont get it. Even if you are a bum, and a freeloader and a complete waste of space, I believe that if you get sick, you should be able to get help. Im willing to lose a little money off my paycheck so someone can live a day longer.JasonGriffee
Perhaps if people where forced to work for what they want (money, healthcare, etc.), they would cherish it a bit more. Then we might see people acting less entitled, less stuck in the "hand me things" mentality, and society can move forward.
Don't Americans pay a large amount for insurance anyway? Wouldn't you rather some of the money you already pay go to help other people as well?Move to Canada
Aljosa23
Don't joke too much.In some parts of Canada,we are losing our medicare slowly.The health care system in Quebec is awful.Quite often it is a 24 to 36 hour wait to see a doctor[I'm talking hospitals].Most of the medication is not coverd anymore.Thanks to a large part to the PQ party.It was going down with the Liberals,but not at the rate of the PQ.
Excuse me? Why should those who worked hard not enjoy the fruits of their labors? Why should it be stolen to be handed to a lazy bum who acts as a parasite to society? Pre-socialist society was far better off. It allowed for natural selection. If you dumb everything down to the lowest common denominator, progress is guaranteed to become impossible.[QUOTE="JasonGriffee"]
[QUOTE="whipassmt"] I think most Americans agree with you about losing a little money to help someone else live.
toast_burner
Perhaps if people where forced to work for what they want (money, healthcare, etc.), they would cherish it a bit more. Then we might see people acting less entitled, less stuck in the "hand me things" mentality, and society can move forward.
Don't Americans pay a large amount for insurance anyway? Wouldn't you rather some of the money you already pay go to help other people as well? Are you aware of how many people you are going to have to help? There are already people who work hard for their money who are seeing their jobs cut to 28 hours a week so Obamacare can be avoided. Who cares about these people I guess. Now not only are they not going to get company insurance but now they are losing wages that help put food on the table.[QUOTE="toast_burner"]Don't Americans pay a large amount for insurance anyway? Wouldn't you rather some of the money you already pay go to help other people as well? Are you aware of how many people you are going to have to help? There are already people who work hard for their money who are seeing their jobs cut to 28 hours a week so Obamacare can be avoided. Who cares about these people I guess. Now not only are they not going to get company insurance but now they are losing wages that help put food on the table. Sorry that I think hospitals are hospitals and not businesses[QUOTE="JasonGriffee"] Excuse me? Why should those who worked hard not enjoy the fruits of their labors? Why should it be stolen to be handed to a lazy bum who acts as a parasite to society? Pre-socialist society was far better off. It allowed for natural selection. If you dumb everything down to the lowest common denominator, progress is guaranteed to become impossible.
Perhaps if people where forced to work for what they want (money, healthcare, etc.), they would cherish it a bit more. Then we might see people acting less entitled, less stuck in the "hand me things" mentality, and society can move forward.
Murderstyle75
Hospitals should be hospitals but at what cost? People losing their jobs so their employer doesn't exceed 50 employees or cutting hours so the employee falls below the 30 hour cutoff point? And what does Obamacare mean to me? My employer only has five employees and while I'm not exactly poor, I still live check to check without much extra money. Now I need to pay for health insurance? Obamacare is not the answer. Finding ways to put an end to medical price gouging is. Now why is it that a medication my sons mom took so she didnt have a miscarriage only cost us $8 yet the second the FDA approved it, the cost to the same medication raised to $10,000?Murderstyle75
Â
I agree. Â I miss when you when you were entitled to the sweat from your own brow. Obama care is just socialism. Â There is a reason the socialist USSR went under. Â No god and socialism combined made a huge failure. Â Plus they were not allowed to eat meat every other year which destroyed their health.
Hospitals should be hospitals but at what cost? People losing their jobs so their employer doesn't exceed 50 employees or cutting hours so the employee falls below the 30 hour cutoff point? And what does Obamacare mean to me? My employer only has five employees and while I'm not exactly poor, I still live check to check without much extra money. Now I need to pay for health insurance? Obamacare is not the answer. Finding ways to put an end to medical price gouging is. Now why is it that a medication my sons mom took so she didnt have a miscarriage only cost us $8 yet the second the FDA approved it, the cost to the same medication raised to $10,000?Murderstyle75I agree that Obamacare isn't the answer. You need a universal healthcare system like most other developed countries.Â
I'm trying to remember a time when you were "entitled to the sweat from your own brow" but I'm not getting any. There is indeed a reason why the USSR went under and it has nothing to do with healthcare.Â
I agree. Â I miss when you when you were entitled to the sweat from your own brow. Obama care is just socialism. Â There is a reason the socialist USSR went under. Â No god and socialism combined made a huge failure. Â Plus they were not allowed to eat meat every other year which destroyed their health.
0rbs
[QUOTE="0rbs"]I'm trying to remember a time when you were "entitled to the sweat from your own brow" but I'm not getting any. There is indeed a reason why the USSR went under and it has nothing to do with healthcare.Â
I agree. Â I miss when you when you were entitled to the sweat from your own brow. Obama care is just socialism. Â There is a reason the socialist USSR went under. Â No god and socialism combined made a huge failure. Â Plus they were not allowed to eat meat every other year which destroyed their health.
Ace6301
Â
It's because it was socilaist.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment