#121  
Old 11-18-2012, 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
free healthcare to illegals,
"Illegals"?

Seriously?
  #122  
Old 11-18-2012, 11:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squid Vicious View Post
"Illegals"?

Seriously?
You act as if the term is incorrect or somehow racist.
  #123  
Old 11-18-2012, 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
You act as if the term is incorrect or somehow racist.
It's both. Not that I should've been surprised. Most libertarians I've come across are racist assholes.
  #124  
Old 11-18-2012, 12:30 PM
Why is it wrong to call illegal immigrants illegals?
  #125  
Old 11-18-2012, 12:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erroneous View Post
That is the liberal way, my friend.
And how how did that statement make your side the angel in this scenario? 8 years of Bush and 4 years of Obama and still no one notices they both do this.
  #126  
Old 11-18-2012, 12:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post
1) Government continues to artificially flood even more money into the health care market through subsidies and tax breaks than otherwise would normally be spent by consumers in a free market.

2) Government continues to encourage employers to offer broad umbrella insurance coverage through tax breaks, subsidies, and mandates which leaves more covered people less cost-conscious about their doctor and treatment choices since somebody else is picking up the tab.
You were saying how health care costs will only be going up in the future. Do you think the standard of living will be able to increase at a proportional rate so that consumers will be able to keep up with the rising costs?

Quote:
3) Now government mandates that all insurance companies must cover anybody who asks to join regardless of pre-existing conditions. That means even if an insurer knows a person will end up costing them money (and sometimes A LOT of money), that person must be covered.
Do you think that if someone is too cost prohibitive to take care of, they don't deserve insurance?

Quote:
Finally, the government will acknowledge that it can't pay for every thing for every body and will begin rationing care with the final decisions on how much and what kind of care you get eventually made not by you but by some government bureaucrat(s).
You admit that insurance companies do the same thing, right?

Quote:
With new technologies, here's how it always goes:

Company A invents a new product. At first prices are high as it has no competition, and it is seeking to recoup its investment. Only the wealthy can afford this product.

Then company b copies company a's idea. Now these two companies must compete on quality AND price. This puts downward pressure on prices. When companies c and d get into the game, prices are pushed lower. Now the product can be afforded by more people.

Now that companies a, b, c and d have experience producing these products, they become more efficient at production, and can lower their costs, and in turn, lower their prices. They're still profitable and even more people can afford the product.
How do you feel about pharmaceutical companies (company a) having exclusive rights to sell their medicine for a long period of time before generic companies (company b) can copy the medicine to sell on their own? I think the current period was somewhere around 5 to 7 years, but Obama's bill has actually increased that to 12 years in order to get pharma companies to be on board with ACA (meaning the private companies wanted it, not the government). Do you support the pharma companies' on this?

Quote:
Even so taking out the profit motif, charities have long existed to provide basic care for the truly needy. Doctors (including Ron Paul) often devote part of their practice to providing basic care for those that cannot afford it. There's actually a very strong western tradition of doctors offering discounts and payment plans even to those they do eventually charge when those patients don't have a lot of money. So it's not really a choice between "equal care for all" and leaving a portion of the population to rot in ditches. Even the worst off usually end up with basic care in a purely market system.
I'd like to see some sort of substantive proof of this situation occurring. By that I mean show me an example of the health care situation in a country changing significantly (for the better in this case) because of private charities. And do you think that charities and doctors devoting some of their practice towards "basic care" will cover everyone living in poverty/unable to afford insurance?
  #127  
Old 11-18-2012, 01:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squid Vicious View Post
It's both. Not that I should've been surprised. Most libertarians I've come across are racist assholes.
It is neither, you thinking it i some how racist does not make it so. You are just wrong. They are illegal immigrants. Saying illegals does not imply just Mexicans or whatever you were thinking. When I say illegals, I am referring to anyone in this country illegally.

You remind me of Chris "Tingles" Matthews. He is a closeted racist and if in his mind he can make it racist, it is no matter what the context because that is how HE would (or has) insult someone.
  #128  
Old 11-18-2012, 01:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
It is neither, you thinking it i some how racist does not make it so. You are just wrong. They are illegal immigrants. Saying illegals does not imply just Mexicans or whatever you were thinking. When I say illegals, I am referring to anyone in this country illegally.
Yeah, I guess that would explain all the politicians calling for a giant wall to be built along the Canadian border, and all the right-wing militias who shoot at any Canadians who try to get into the U.S. illegally.

Oh wait...
  #129  
Old 11-18-2012, 01:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erroneous View Post


Lastly, I am willing to agree the USA has a bad health care system and that is why we rank so low, if you can agree the reason we are so low on education ranking lists is because we have gone from focusing on the three R's to all this liberal crap new education.
Can you make a list of some of this "liberal crap" so we can actually address it? Or instead of using a politicized blanket statement, just give some examples so we can get to the point, instead of wasting time chopping through the political kudzu first?

Off the top of my head I would say all the progressive densness of the laws regarding children is a factor. And I'm not talking about protecting children from from perverts or basic safegaurds, I'm talking about the law being lobbed at teachers and preventing them from doing their jobs effectively. Being threatened with a lawsuit because a parent feels their child's gradepoint average was lowered thanks to a C the teacher gave them on a test. Then having the school give in because they don't need something something so minor to go to court, but in the parameters of education and responsibility the issue is far from minor. Liability laws catering to individual issues while paying no mind as to how they broadly effect society.
  #130  
Old 11-18-2012, 01:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squid Vicious View Post
Yeah, I guess that would explain all the politicians calling for a giant wall to be built along the Canadian border, and all the right-wing militias who shoot at any Canadians who try to get into the U.S. illegally.

Oh wait...

There isn't a problem with illegal Canadian immigrants though.
  #131  
Old 11-18-2012, 01:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThunderStorm View Post
There isn't a problem with illegal Canadian immigrants though.
I disagree





(Yea he might not be illegal but he is the reason I think we need a wall between us and Canada)
  #132  
Old 11-18-2012, 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
I disagree





(Yea he might not be illegal but he is the reason I think we need a wall between us and Canada)

Right, but he's NOT "illegal". So your point is invalid. At least in this specific instance.

Not only that, but if it wasn't for the "illegal border jumpers" that come to this country to scrub the toilets and pick the food/veggies out in the fields for pennies, we'd have to over pay a buncha bitchy-ass white people to do it. Which then in turn would make the price of everything go fucking sky-rocketing to astronomical levels thus throwing this whole economy into a major disaster. You think $4.00 for a gallon of milk is bad? Try $14.00 or $24.00! THAT is what happens if you replace all the "illegals" who work for cheap wages with "legals" who'll want competitive salaries.
  #133  
Old 11-18-2012, 02:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaw2929 View Post
Right, but he's NOT "illegal". So your point is invalid. At least in this specific instance.

Read what I said UNDER the picture. Point still valid.
  #134  
Old 11-18-2012, 02:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by creekin111 View Post

Even so taking out the profit motif, charities have long existed to provide basic care for the truly needy. Doctors (including Ron Paul) often devote part of their practice to providing basic care for those that cannot afford it. There's actually a very strong western tradition of doctors offering discounts and payment plans even to those they do eventually charge when those patients don't have a lot of money. So it's not really a choice between "equal care for all" and leaving a portion of the population to rot in ditches. Even the worst off usually end up with basic care in a purely market system.
And how does a a hospital cover the balance that charity can't/doesn't cover? In 2008 charities and other government programs only covered about 26% of healthcare costs, while the uninsured, on average managed to cover 37%. This still left, out of $116 billion in healthcare costs, $43 billion left over.

Now how does a hospital cover that balance? Rolling the cost onto the bill of the insured of course. Where else does the majority of rising deductibles come from? Of course the private insurance companies have to maintain a profit for their shareholders so they are forced to ditch and/or not cover more and more of the "insured", creating more and more uninsured people, rolling on more and more costs on the insured, creating more people dropped from their insurance,etc and of course more and more people for charity to cover? I'm starting to get an idea where that $84 billion under budget for 2012-2022 you quoted from the insurance companies came from.

And I have no idea where this "Free healthcare for illegals" comes into play when the law clearly states who is eligible for AHA:

Quote:
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
Subtitle D—Available Coverage Choices for All Americans
PART II--Consumer Choices and Insurance Competition Through Health Benefit Exchanges

Section 1312 (f)(3) makes clear that undocumented immigrants are ineligible to participate in the health insurance exchanges: “ACCESS LIMITED TO LAWFUL RESIDENTS- If an individual is not, or is not reasonably expected to be for the entire period for which enrollment is sought, a citizen or national of the United States or an alien lawfully present in the United States, the individual shall not be treated as a qualified individual and may not be covered under a qualified health plan in the individual market that is offered through an Exchange.”

Subtitle E—Affordable Coverage Choices for All Americans
PART I—PREMIUM TAX CREDITS AND COST SHARING REDUCTIONS
Subpart B—Eligibility Determinations

Section 1412(d) unambiguously states “NO FEDERAL PAYMENTS FOR INDIVIDUALS NOT LAWFULLY PRESENT.—Nothing in this subtitle or the amendments made by this subtitle allows Federal payments, credits, or cost-sharing reductions for individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.”
In fact in order to apply for the program you have to show proof of your citizenship.

Meantime the government is actually going to be cutting aid given to emergency rooms that treat illegal immigrants. In essence, the AHA has created the "Self-deportation" Mitt Romney stated. So be prepared to pay $14 for a box of strawberries... unless we give the work to inmates, then nevermind.

Now let's put a pin in that argument shall we?

Last edited by electriclite; 11-18-2012 at 02:42 PM..
  #135  
Old 11-18-2012, 02:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
Read what I said UNDER the picture. Point still valid.
No. No it's not. And you know I'm right about the "illegals" working for next to nothing, to keep things in our economy from sky rocketing to ridiculous levels as well.
  #136  
Old 11-18-2012, 02:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaw2929 View Post
You think $4.00 for a gallon of milk is bad? Try $14.00 or $24.00! THAT is what happens if you replace all the "illegals" who work for cheap wages with "legals" who'll want competitive salaries.

Funny how "bitchy ass white people" make quite a bit in this country and things are not astronomical. That is just the liberal lie, to try and have their sloppy immigration policies passed. The local dairy farm I use quite a bit does not have any illegals and their milk is all natural with no hormones. The milk is not that much more than the stuff in stores that your precious illegals helped produce. So that kinda blows your $24/gal milk idea out the window. I think I paid about $5.50 for the last few gallons I got.

http://sparkmanscreamvalley.com/ - About 45 mins from where I live.

The kitchen table and entertainment center I purchased are also made by a local business, no illegals, and the quality is superb compared to the stuff you see in retail chains. Again, made by a "Bitchy ass white guy" and cost was 10% higher than what I could find elsewhere for lesser quality.

Your argument is and always has been flawed because I know plenty of broke, unemployed black and white people who would take whatever job they could get at the moment for whatever pay they had to take until something better came along and it will always be that way. You think Mexicans are the only ones getting paid under the table (shitty pay too!)? Grow up and take a look around sonny. Stop believing everything Matthews and Maddow tell you. They haven't been to a low income neighborhood or around real low income people in decades.
  #137  
Old 11-18-2012, 02:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaw2929 View Post
No. No it's not.
Seriously pull your head out of your ass. The canadian thing was an obvious joke, hence the pic AND what I said underneath. Seriously out of all of the things I have said in this thread you could argue, you pick the fucking Bieber joke? Fucking liberals can't argue a real point so they go after asinine bullshit.
  #138  
Old 11-18-2012, 02:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
Seriously pull your head out of your ass. The canadian thing was an obvious joke, hence the pic AND what I said underneath. Seriously out of all of the things I have said in this thread you could argue, you pick the fucking Bieber joke? Fucking liberals can't argue a real point so they go after asinine bullshit.
Really? I thought a joke was supposed to be funny.....

I'm quoting this before Mr. MovieMaster thinks better of it and decides to edit and/or delete his post. You should probably be banned since you're indirectly insulting me and my beliefs at this point in time.

Last edited by jaw2929; 11-18-2012 at 02:45 PM..
  #139  
Old 11-18-2012, 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaw2929 View Post
Really? I thought a joke was supposed to be funny.....

I'm quoting this before Mr. MovieMaster thinks better of it and decides to edit and/or delete his post. You should probably be banned since you're indirectly insulting me and my beliefs at this point in time.
Quote it all day long sonny. Go tell momma and daddy on me too because honestly that is all you have. You can not argue my point so now it is time to tattle tale. Poor baby =(
  #140  
Old 11-18-2012, 02:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaw2929 View Post
bitchy-ass white people
See I can quote too. That is a racist statement which is against site rules. Wanna join me on the ban wagon?
  #141  
Old 11-18-2012, 03:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
See I can quote too. That is a racist statement which is against site rules. Wanna join me on the ban wagon?
Not really though. It wasn't derogatory, it wasn't a term like "cracker" and it wasn't meant to insult. It was meant to illustrate my point.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
Quote it all day long sonny. Go tell momma and daddy on me too because honestly that is all you have. You can not argue my point so now it is time to tattle tale. Poor baby =(

You're calling me a "baby" and (now) directly insulting me.

Arguing points is one thing. Insulting the person you're trying to argue the point with, is another.
  #142  
Old 11-18-2012, 03:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
Funny how "bitchy ass white people" make quite a bit in this country and things are not astronomical. That is just the liberal lie, to try and have their sloppy immigration policies passed. The local dairy farm I use quite a bit does not have any illegals and their milk is all natural with no hormones. The milk is not that much more than the stuff in stores that your precious illegals helped produce. So that kinda blows your $24/gal milk idea out the window. I think I paid about $5.50 for the last few gallons I got.

http://sparkmanscreamvalley.com/ - About 45 mins from where I live.

The kitchen table and entertainment center I purchased are also made by a local business, no illegals, and the quality is superb compared to the stuff you see in retail chains. Again, made by a "Bitchy ass white guy" and cost was 10% higher than what I could find elsewhere for lesser quality.

Your argument is and always has been flawed because I know plenty of broke, unemployed black and white people who would take whatever job they could get at the moment for whatever pay they had to take until something better came along and it will always be that way. You think Mexicans are the only ones getting paid under the table (shitty pay too!)? Grow up and take a look around sonny. Stop believing everything Matthews and Maddow tell you. They haven't been to a low income neighborhood or around real low income people in decades.
I'm not gonna knock local business, but if you tried to expand them to a national level they'd have to adjust their business model in order to accommodate their customers. They'd more or less come to the same conclusion.

Subtracting the race factor from the argument, Alabama had an issue when it passed HB56, a law that required local police to verify the immigration status of anyone they have a “reasonable suspicion” of being in the country illegally. The passage of the law resulted in a massive exodus of Hispanic workers, leaving a number of businesses without workers, particularly farmers. They ended up applying to the Federal government for temporary relief. Now at first the farmers did actually try employing local unemployed Alabamans but they learned that these people either didn't last the full day or never showed up after their first day.

There were a number of businesses citing the same issue: We hired Americans but we either had to let them go or they just stopped showing up.

There's a difference between a shitty job that that pays with benefits and just a shitty job.



http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/pol...rs-no-changes/

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...-11092011.html

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/12/0...ith-prisoners/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...0jV_story.html
  #143  
Old 11-18-2012, 04:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by electriclite View Post
There's a difference between a shitty job that that pays with benefits and just a shitty job.
You are right, there is a big difference. That still does not explain how there are so many successful businesses in America that only use legal workers. Any business (for the most part) will try to skate around having to pay benefits and minimum wage if they know they can get away with it but some how thinking that America will only strive if we have illegals or that a gallon of milk will jump to $20+/gallon without illegals is just not true. Along with what some would call the benefits of an illegal workforce you have just as many downfalls. Illegals are not paying taxes, with the exception of sales taxes when they shop. They are claiming tax credits in the billions for taxes they have not paid. Medical costs for illegals is insanely high and tax payers end up paying for that too. So yea we save $1 on milk but in the end, as a whole, the country is getting screwed.
  #144  
Old 11-18-2012, 04:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaw2929 View Post
Not really though. It wasn't derogatory, it wasn't a term like "cracker" and it wasn't meant to insult. It was meant to illustrate my point.

So was me calling you a baby, that sword cuts both ways. Also, saying "bitch ass whiney white people" can ONLY be taken as an insult. You will never hear that in a positive manner so don't try and talk your way out of that one kiddo. Had I said "lazy ass chicken eating black folk" you know the reaction I would have gotten so don't think your way of saying it makes it less racist because it is, and always will be racist. Had you just said "Whiney bitch ass people" we would not be having this conversation but you just had to throw in "white" didn't you? This is racism plain and simple.
  #145  
Old 11-18-2012, 05:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
You are right, there is a big difference. That still does not explain how there are so many successful businesses in America that only use legal workers. Any business (for the most part) will try to skate around having to pay benefits and minimum wage if they know they can get away with it but some how thinking that America will only strive if we have illegals or that a gallon of milk will jump to $20+/gallon without illegals is just not true. Along with what some would call the benefits of an illegal workforce you have just as many downfalls. Illegals are not paying taxes, with the exception of sales taxes when they shop. They are claiming tax credits in the billions for taxes they have not paid. Medical costs for illegals is insanely high and tax payers end up paying for that too. So yea we save $1 on milk but in the end, as a whole, the country is getting screwed.
Yeah but you have to define what kind of businesses these are. Are we talking big, corporate level businesses or your small businesses like you cited in your link? Of course the small to mid-level businesses do just fine when they stay at that level. That transitional expansion period is where a company has to re-figure its finances in order to make that transition. Although some small companies are fine with just staying at their level in order not to sacrifice individual standards and beliefs

And let's face it, huge corporations have bypassed immigrant workers by making themselves immigrants and having the work done in countries where the work is cheap. But here are a list of homgrowns who are successful and hiring illegals

Plus as one of the articles states, if they really need workers these places don't have to step up and help get their workers visas (which they absolutely can do thanks to the H2A Visa, but then they'd have to pay their workers a living wage, etc) up the pay they offer complete with benefits and hire Americans, they can just employ prisoners from local penitentiaries at even less than what they pay illegals.

Last edited by electriclite; 11-18-2012 at 05:51 PM..
  #146  
Old 11-18-2012, 05:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by electriclite View Post
Plus as one of the articles states, if they really need workers these places don't have to step up and help get their workers visas, or up the pay they offer complete with benefits and hire Americans, they can just employ prisoners from local penitentiaries at even less than what they pay illegals.
Businesses in all levels will do it and some won't. Some used to, have been caught and fined, and no longer do. Many haven't been caught yet. It is just another tax cheat and until they get caught most will abuse it.

That being said though, there are tons of businesses from small to large who will have nothing to do with an illegal workforce and they thrive fine.

As far as outsourcing goes, you can't really do anything about it besides boycotting those U.S based companies until they bring jobs back to America. I do not like outsourcing but it is not illegal.

I am all for businesses using prisoners for labor. Especially the farm industries. Pay them less than minimum wage, all of it going back to the prison system to ease tax payer burden and it is win/win. You have cheap labor and taxpayers getting a break. If prisoners don't like it, they might finally learn to stop breaking the law. If not, they will have a room and a job waiting for them next time they feel the need to do something wrong.

Last edited by MovieMaster; 11-18-2012 at 05:51 PM..
  #147  
Old 11-18-2012, 06:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
I am all for businesses using prisoners for labor. Especially the farm industries. Pay them less than minimum wage, all of it going back to the prison system to ease tax payer burden and it is win/win. You have cheap labor and taxpayers getting a break. If prisoners don't like it, they might finally learn to stop breaking the law. If not, they will have a room and a job waiting for them next time they feel the need to do something wrong.
I'm teaming up with Creekin on this. What you say is exactly what I've never really understood about the American brand of Conservatism you find in the Republic Party: The raison d'ętre of the political rhetoric is to complain about government interference, too much government, bloated government, bad government, government dictation of how you live your life, government incompetence, etc. and then they advocate programs like: 1. The government has the right to imprison people and force them to work for the state -- you're advocating literal direct state slavery despite the constant rhetoric about much more ambiguous forms of state control which are labeled "slavery," 2. The government can spend trillions of tax payer dollars invading and state building in a country on the other side of the world despite the fact that they don't want it, and the government fails at being competent enough to provide the same basic services in their own territory

This is why I find Libertarianism such a more beautiful and elegant theory. It basically has one (very powerful) proposition: Each person has equal basic liberties and the domain of the government is only to protect property rights and uphold contracts. You can accept or reject the proposition, but the position is quite intuitive, quite consistent, and clever enough that it demands a good reason for you to explain why it is wrong.

Last edited by Gordon; 11-18-2012 at 06:09 PM..
  #148  
Old 11-18-2012, 06:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
Businesses in all levels will do it and some won't. Some used to, have been caught and fined, and no longer do. Many haven't been caught yet. It is just another tax cheat and until they get caught most will abuse it.

That being said though, there are tons of businesses from small to large who will have nothing to do with an illegal workforce and they thrive fine.

As far as outsourcing goes, you can't really do anything about it besides boycotting those U.S based companies until they bring jobs back to America. I do not like outsourcing but it is not illegal.

I am all for businesses using prisoners for labor. Especially the farm industries. Pay them less than minimum wage, all of it going back to the prison system to ease tax payer burden and it is win/win. You have cheap labor and taxpayers getting a break. If prisoners don't like it, they might finally learn to stop breaking the law. If not, they will have a room and a job waiting for them next time they feel the need to do something wrong.

Yes but there are just a few problem with making prisons a profit generating enterprise. Like making sure that the enterprise is constantly staffed. You don't want there to be a strong need for prisons existing outside of the need to lock away convicted felons. And you don't want this need to be constantly staffed affecting the creation of laws and incarceration rates for certain income groups etc. Not to mention if we're going to make prisons income generators does that mean we'll abandon any rehabilitation programs, would the work be categorized as a rehabilitation program, and then there's the issue of ex-cons finding work after prison and not finding it because people don't like to hire ex-cons, which leads to recidivism.... but we'd totally hire people who are currently in prison, etc.
  #149  
Old 11-18-2012, 06:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by electriclite View Post
Yes but there are just a few problem with making prisons a profit generating enterprise. Like making sure that the enterprise is constantly staffed. You don't want there to be a strong need for prisons existing outside of the need to lock away convicted felons. And you don't want this need to be constantly staffed affecting the creation of laws and incarceration rates for certain income groups etc. Not to mention if we're going to make prisons income generators does that mean we'll abandon any rehabilitation programs, would the work be categorized as a rehabilitation program, and then there's the issue of ex-cons finding work after prison and not finding it because people don't like to hire ex-cons, which leads to recidivism.... but we'd totally hire people who are currently in prison, etc.
I really don't think you need to go this far in your criticism of his position. The criticism is, I think, quite simple: He's advocating state slavery. Now if he wants to be consistent and say that he thinks the state should have the right to enslave people it deems unfit for society, then that's fine. But that line of reasoning cannot also be maintained while simultaneously holding the position that the state does not have the right to provide healthcare, or ignore the constitution, or socialize the means of production in the name of collectivist goals.

Here I'm not trying to say any particular political theory is better than another or attack anybody. But you need to be honest and logical in your positions.

Last edited by Gordon; 11-18-2012 at 06:25 PM..
  #150  
Old 11-18-2012, 07:01 PM
EDIT. Nevermind.

Last edited by jaw2929; 11-18-2012 at 07:06 PM..
  #151  
Old 11-18-2012, 07:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon View Post
I really don't think you need to go this far in your criticism of his position. The criticism is, I think, quite simple: He's advocating state slavery.
These people are in prison for violating laws. I am in no way advocating slavery. We are expected, as tax payers, to pay for these criminals to have food, clothing, shelter, medical care, and legal counsel. So they break the law and get this as a bonus? Why should they not be forced to work off and pay for their time? You make it sound as if I think the government can force anyone, anywhere to go off to some labor camp and that is not the case. I think this fits right in line with my statements against government provided health care etc etc. These people can even have a choice:

1)Work and get all of the healthcare, legal counsel, food, and living quarters you need which is what they get now for free

2) Choose not to work and get bread/water for meals, no health care, no legal counsel, and shitty living conditions. Keep them outside, in pup tents with holes in the ground to piss in.

I am sorry if you feel fine paying for scum to live the high life for free, please feel free to ease my burden and pay my share. I just do not feel it is fair.

Last edited by MovieMaster; 11-18-2012 at 07:15 PM..
  #152  
Old 11-18-2012, 07:20 PM
are you an honest-to-god retarded person?
  #153  
Old 11-18-2012, 07:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by electriclite View Post
Yes but there are just a few problem with making prisons a profit generating enterprise. Like making sure that the enterprise is constantly staffed. You don't want there to be a strong need for prisons existing outside of the need to lock away convicted felons. And you don't want this need to be constantly staffed affecting the creation of laws and incarceration rates for certain income groups etc. Not to mention if we're going to make prisons income generators does that mean we'll abandon any rehabilitation programs, would the work be categorized as a rehabilitation program, and then there's the issue of ex-cons finding work after prison and not finding it because people don't like to hire ex-cons, which leads to recidivism.... but we'd totally hire people who are currently in prison, etc.

I think that this is still doable. There would need to be oversight if it were to become policy to prevent corruption. This could also be paid for by the funds prisoners create by working, it would need to be a 3rd party organization. .

I also think this could be a benefit to many of the prisoners. Many will learn job skills that could help them in finding some work once out. They could even use their time spent working while in prison as a positive spin while seeking employment, showing they were responsible enough to work and earn their way. Many people still won't hire them just because they are felons but many may see this as some proof that this person can do the job and might be willing to stick it out.
  #154  
Old 11-18-2012, 07:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Heart Collector View Post
are you an honest-to-god retarded person?

And somehow people say I am the one who needs to get banned........


As usual with you, you have nothing to add but insults. No reply, no counterpoint, just insults. You are the face of the liberal party no doubt.
  #155  
Old 11-18-2012, 07:36 PM
the reply is that a system in which a profit is made from prisoners, whether it's due to their labor or due to their existence, unavoidably results in more prisoners in order to make more of a profit. this is economics 101.

this is in fact what happens in america. anyone older than 12 should be able to figure this out.
  #156  
Old 11-18-2012, 07:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Heart Collector View Post
the reply is that a system in which a profit is made from prisoners, whether it's due to their labor or due to their existence, unavoidably results in more prisoners in order to make more of a profit. this is economics 101.

this is in fact what happens in america. anyone older than 12 should be able to figure this out.

If we had some kind of issue keeping our prisons populated I would agree. Considering most prisons are bursting at the seams, this won't be an issue and shows no sign of being an issue since prison population has increased yearly for quite some time. Anyone older than 11 yrs old should be able to see that.
  #157  
Old 11-18-2012, 08:25 PM
LOL WHAT? You do realize that logically, there is only more incentive to imprison more people for cheap labor, right?
  #158  
Old 11-18-2012, 08:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Lyrik View Post
LOL WHAT? You do realize that logically, there is only more incentive to imprison more people for cheap labor, right?
If the prison wardens were running the police forces I would agree. Police officers and district attorneys would not gain in anyway convicting more people. Also it should be limited to a certain number of people per a prisons max capacity, so that would also prevent over population just to increase labor. There are numerous ways to make this work. I know you liberals just feel so bad for prisoners, asking them to pay for their crimes, but I do not and no argument you could provide would make me feel otherwise.
  #159  
Old 11-18-2012, 08:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
As usual with you, you have nothing to add but insults. No reply, no counterpoint, just insults. You are the face of the liberal party no doubt.
Hmm...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
and no argument you could provide would make me feel otherwise.
Maybe this has something to do with it?
  #160  
Old 11-18-2012, 08:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieMaster View Post
If the prison wardens were running the police forces I would agree. Police officers and district attorneys would not gain in anyway convicting more people.
You're obviously trolling. They do.
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump