|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 05/07/2004 : 22:54:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Snake:
Having grown up in a country that boasts about it's freedom I guess I was indoctrinated that we have a choice and can do what we want. So yes, paying for someone else who should be able to take care of himself is a bad thing. BTW, Filthy, that doesn't include those who served the country as you did, that's a speical situation and a reward for your courage. I'm talking about average citizens who think the government is there and always will be for them when they don't even try to make their own way. The government isn't...wasn't supposed to be a baby sitter for the whole population.
So, you are saying that the average citizen is a leach? That average citizens don't try to make their own way? Or are you saying that average citizens who, for whatever reason, loose their ability to pay for healthcare, deserve to be sick or die because they may not be veterans? People who have worked and paid taxes and made their way all their lives who hit hard times should not expect to be treated with any amount of dignity and be helped by our government, because the government should not baby sit? Are you saying that there should be no social net because that is a form of socialism which is necessarily bad in all cases? Are you showing everyone on this board that you have a total lack of empathy? Oh wait, I forgot, you are a libertarian. Your version... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 05/08/2004 : 05:43:01 [Permalink]
|
Woody, my point was: when someone criticizes a corporation for behaving as Disney is doing, the standard response from capitalists is that the corporation has the right to do it because their goal is to create a profit. You gave a version of that response.
My question is: is *anything* okay in the name of profit? Do corporations have *any* obligation to act morally and ethically? Is it ethical for Disney to deny Michael Moore a voice? Are there things more important than making money? Do we NEED the rich to get richer in this country?
The fact that Disney has the right to do this doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.
OK, that was more than one question. 
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 05/08/2004 : 06:35:55 [Permalink]
|
This flick will be released in the US. The only question is, who is going to do it.
At the moment, I'm thinking that Disney will eventually bite the bullet and authorize it due to purely capitalist concerns -- stockholders tend to fret about missing out on stuff like that. There's simply too much money involved for them to let someone else have it.
But if they stay stupid and don't, there's plenty moore  companies out there that would be delighted to rake in the cash a hit movie would generate.
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 05/08/2004 : 14:31:25 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
But if they stay stupid and don't, there's plenty moore companies out there that would be delighted to rake in the cash a hit movie would generate.
I think the question of who is/was going to distribute it was decided long before this 'contrversy'. |
www.Carabao.net
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Mick Shrimpton
|
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 05/08/2004 : 14:50:25 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
That average citizens don't try to make their own way? Are you showing everyone on this board that you have a total lack of empathy?
It does seem that a lot of people have the attitude of 'Give me, give me.'
Yes, I have no feelings for anyone (most people*) who gets into debt from over spending and can't think into the future or for people who want more than they can afford.
* of course there are some cases of truly bad luck and unforseen situations but there seems to be more people then need be, who need help, there have to be more reasons that can traced back to poor management. |
www.Carabao.net
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Mick Shrimpton
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 05/08/2004 : 15:32:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
It does seem that a lot of people have the attitude of 'Give me, give me.'
Yes, I have no feelings for anyone (most people*) who gets into debt from over spending and can't think into the future or for people who want more than they can afford.
If I had to pay for all of my own health insurance it would cost me in the neighborhood of $1000 dollars a month. For people younger than I am without pre existing conditions, it costs less, but it is still a chunk of change. Now, as I understand it, you advocate no unions. Those are the people who fought to get companies to chip in. You advocate no minimum wage. I would like for you to explain to me how a person earning minimum wage at, ohhhh, I dunnno, Wal Mart, can afford health insurance? Or do they just not deserve it? So, ok, they don't have it so they must go to emergency rooms if they get sick. Now that is cost effective, isn't it? It's cost effective for the company anyway. But you say the government shouldn't have to foot the bill either. So what do you propose that people, who are not covered by their cheap ass companies so you can get a few cents off on your stinking groceries do? I understand that you don't care about them. But you are going to pay one way or the other, or you will be tripping over dead people in the streets. Maybe you are willing to pay for the Dead Wagon? I dunno...
quote:
of course there are some cases of truly bad luck and unforseen situations but there seems to be more people then need be, who need help, there have to be more reasons that can traced back to poor management.
So, the best way to deal with that is to deny everyone? Oh, by the way, I bet you never made a bad decision. (I happen to know that you have. To bad your healthcare wasn't riding on it...) |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 05/09/2004 : 09:28:36 [Permalink]
|
Okay...So, here's the argument;
http://web.morons.org/article.jsp?sectionid=2&id=4961
Seriously, when a company refuses to release a film that is a good bet to make a profit even without all the hype, the only logical answer seems to be that that company stands to loose money in some other arena.
Furthermore, considering the Bush's actions over the past ten years, does anyone really believe that they wouldn't retalliate in some manner if someone upsets them?
Let's face it...This movie will expose the Bush family connection to the Saudi royal family and the bin Laden family to the mostly ignorant American population. That means that the major media outlets would be forced by public questions to follow up on the story. As we know, the Bush boys don't tell us where their opponents are in error, they attack the person's credibility, or their means of financial support.
Now, Woody, as we've discussed previously, if corporations have the right to set a fair price for their capital, so do the employees that actual produce that capital through their skills and hard work. If organizing themselves in a democratic block to acheive their goals of mutual well-being is wrong, then we should reconsider the means of governess by our own nation.
I work in a unionized company in a 'right to work state'.
I, like my fellow skilled laborers, work between fifty and ninety hours per week at the company's behest. We've watched our benefits package dwindle away to only a shadow of what it once was. We've listened to years of being told how many millions we've lost year after year while the CEO's and FO's made more than twice that amount in bonuses, (and I'm not even considering stock options). We loose our jobs each time the stock dips, and then are told that we are stock holders and benefit from such actions even though our employee owned stock doesn't even equal one full proxy vote.
Then, we got a union. Now, we earn a couple more dollars per hour--well below the national average, but our benefits package is still looking like a phantom wavering in the light of company cutbacks.
And, yes, I do own stock...sort of...I am in the company group stock plan. I don't have a choice. And, don't think this is for our benefit. This is just another way for the company to control our choices and their bottom line. Plus, I am in a couple of 401K's. My investment options are severely limited by time and income.
What it all comes down to is that corporate CEO's make decisions based on how best to maximize profits to the major share holders. Unfortunately, these folks have no investment in the local community, nor the well-being of anyone other than themselves. This is what allows the economy to grow while the middle and working classes stagnate in terms of real income. This is, also, what makes it possible for a company like Disney to practice corporate censorship in consideration of the bottom line--NOT the freedom of individual choice that the Libertarian party so vigorously endorses. |
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 05/09/2004 : 10:51:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Woody D
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
But if they stay stupid and don't, there's plenty moore companies out there that would be delighted to rake in the cash a hit movie would generate.
I think the question of who is/was going to distribute it was decided long before this 'contrversy'.
A further possibility, fer sure. A quiet, little conspiricy amongst Moore, Miramax, and Doozy to jack up the box orfice. I ain't buyin' it quite yet, but why not? 'S been done before. Will be again.
I believe that it was the late '50s when Medicare kicked in. I remember a great howl about 'socialized medicine' and the ruin it would bring to the country, if not the world. And there were a lot of folks stridently whining about social security as a form of communisum. A few years later, I too did some bitching about my hard-earned cash going to help finance some old fart's retirment, and this while I was in the service and living entirely off the taxpayer's dollar. :rolleyes:
Well, if it wasn't for social security, I d be living in a cardboard box, like all too many other veterans. And if it were not for the VA, I'd be so crippled that I'd sacrely be able to function at all, in a cardboard box. So, not quite 30 years ago, after my first spine surgery, my tune changed considerably. I was able to go back to work and didn't snivvle at all about SS and medicare, although I was not getting benefits from either at the time. But it was nice to know that they were there.
I think that basic health care should be a given for any citizen of the US, be it Bill Gates or a homeless drunk hustling quarters on the sidewalk. This does not mean nose jobs, face lifts, or penil implants. Just the basics. I am beginning to think that it might cost the tazpayer less than someone showing up at the OR, getting treated, then vanishing. It would also bring some sembelence of control the the outrageous prices the drug companies are gouging the country for.
Due to the VA, I still don't use medicare and yet I pay $60 bucks a month into it. I still ain't bitchin', but I surely will have a smartass remark to any clown that tries to peddle me a drug card (already got a flyer from SS on it). From what I've read, that's not health care but another scam -- my opinion at the moment. If time proves me wrong, then, wrong I'll be . Again. 
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 05/09/2004 : 20:46:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
quote:
It does seem that a lot of people have the attitude of 'Give me, give me.'
Yes, I have no feelings for anyone (most people*) who gets into debt from over spending and can't think into the future or for people who want more than they can afford.
If I had to pay for all of my own health insurance it would cost me in the neighborhood of $1000 dollars a month. For people younger than I am without pre existing conditions, it costs less, but it is still a chunk of change. Now, as I understand it, you advocate no unions. Those are the people who fought to get companies to chip in. You advocate no minimum wage. I would like for you to explain to me how a person earning minimum wage at, ohhhh, I dunnno, Wal Mart, can afford health insurance? Or do they just not deserve it? So, ok, they don't have it so they must go to emergency rooms if they get sick. Now that is cost effective, isn't it? It's cost effective for the company anyway. But you say the government shouldn't have to foot the bill either. So what do you propose that people, who are not covered by their cheap ass companies so you can get a few cents off on your stinking groceries do? I understand that you don't care about them. But you are going to pay one way or the other, or you will be tripping over dead people in the streets. Maybe you are willing to pay for the Dead Wagon? I dunno...
quote:
of course there are some cases of truly bad luck and unforseen situations but there seems to be more people then need be, who need help, there have to be more reasons that can traced back to poor management.
So, the best way to deal with that is to deny everyone? Oh, by the way, I bet you never made a bad decision. (I happen to know that you have. To bad your healthcare wasn't riding on it...)
That is all so rediculaus there is no good way to answer. It's like a xian asking an atheist to prove there's no god.
And sure we all make some mistakes, I married the wrong person once too, just like you. And was ordered to pay child support. Shit happens and one must take it like a man, deal with it. One shouldn't have the idea to run to the welfare office 1st thing. Which is what I think is the attitude of many people today. And the personal mistake of mine you are refering to didn't put me into bankrupcy or on the street. I made choices that didn't turn out benificaly for me, I will recover as I have when some of the stocks I've bought didn't move in the right direction. I'm talking about the majority of people who borrow money for things they can't aford. Then complain they have no money. I complain because the government takes it away with no choice. I was told recently that only 4% of people pay cash for a car. That's stupid (not to save 1st, then buy).
Think of what you could have if you made your own decissions where to spend your own money, you could aford to see a doctor instead of the government wasting so much on 'programs' and telling you what's allowed or not. |
www.Carabao.net
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Mick Shrimpton
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 05/09/2004 : 22:49:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Snake:
That is all so rediculaus there is no good way to answer. It's like a xian asking an atheist to prove there's no god.
I have no idea what this means.
quote:
Snake:
And sure we all make some mistakes, I married the wrong person once too, just like you. And was ordered to pay child support. Shit happens and one must take it like a man, deal with it. One shouldn't have the idea to run to the welfare office 1st thing. Which is what I think is the attitude of many people today. And the personal mistake of mine you are refering to didn't put me into bankrupcy or on the street. I made choices that didn't turn out benificaly for me, I will recover as I have when some of the stocks I've bought didn't move in the right direction. I'm talking about the majority of people who borrow money for things they can't aford. Then complain they have no money. I complain because the government takes it away with no choice. I was told recently that only 4% of people pay cash for a car. That's stupid (not to save 1st, then buy).
Think of what you could have if you made your own decissions where to spend your own money, you could aford to see a doctor instead of the government wasting so much on 'programs' and telling you what's allowed or not.
I hate to break this to you but people earning minimum wage do not pay much in taxes. They are probably working for a company that does not give them benefits, and they don't have enough money to pay for healthcare. Essentials are probably all they can offered, maybe...
Basically we are in agreement on what your views are. Pity. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2004 : 08:44:41 [Permalink]
|
Great posts, everyone.
I agree with filthy that a basic level of health care for all Americans is the most human and cost-effective solution. Canada's system probably goes too far; it's no picnic to get routine care up there. But something more should be done to care for the health of America's children and poor.
Kil makes the very important point that libertarians and conservatives don't seem to get: we pay for the vulnerable in our society--one way or the other. A good example in this week's Seattle Weekly: http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/0418/040505_news_shelter.php
2,000 mentally ill people are about to be dumped onto the streets of King County. What do you think that will do to the police burden, the emergency room burden, the burden on other homeless shelters...? |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2004 : 12:54:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
quote:
It does seem that a lot of people have the attitude of 'Give me, give me.'
Yes, I have no feelings for anyone (most people*) who gets into debt from over spending and can't think into the future or for people who want more than they can afford.
If I had to pay for all of my own health insurance it would cost me in the neighborhood of $1000 dollars a month. For people younger than I am without pre existing conditions, it costs less, but it is still a chunk of change. Now, as I understand it, you advocate no unions. Those are the people who fought to get companies to chip in. You advocate no minimum wage. I would like for you to explain to me how a person earning minimum wage at, ohhhh, I dunnno, Wal Mart, can afford health insurance? Or do they just not deserve it? So, ok, they don't have it so they must go to emergency rooms if they get sick. Now that is cost effective, isn't it? It's cost effective for the company anyway. But you say the government shouldn't have to foot the bill either. So what do you propose that people, who are not covered by their cheap ass companies so you can get a few cents off on your stinking groceries do? I understand that you don't care about them. But you are going to pay one way or the other, or you will be tripping over dead people in the streets. Maybe you are willing to pay for the Dead Wagon? I dunno...
The government doesn't foot the bill when the uninsured and ineligible for government aid use the emergency room for treatment. (By law, we can't turn them away. We have to treat them for their acute conditions.) What happens to it? It becomes bad debt and is written off. Right now, under the current system and with the action of unions, few Americans fall under this style and mostly illegal immigrants are the main source for this bad debt. Without the protections that WoodyD seems to be railing against, healthcare goes bankrupt. The seniors mere pittance that we get for service (Medicare has cut reimbursement to the point where some services cost more to perform in expendables than Medicare pays) is gone, insurance coverage for workers is only for those who can afford it, and the unemployed masses on welfare (reimbursement often times less than Medicare plus is 9 - 18 months to see any money) is also gone. Result is likely that a majority of hospitals close (thus adding to the unemployed), physicians stop practicing in most states because they can no longer afford to, and the quality of healthcare declines because there's no money in it. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2004 : 18:51:56 [Permalink]
|
| Ahhhh, my mistake... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2004 : 23:35:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tim
And, yes, I do own stock...sort of...I am in the company group stock plan. I don't have a choice. And, don't think this is for our benefit. This is just another way for the company to control our choices and their bottom line. Plus, I am in a couple of 401K's. My investment options are severely limited by time and income.
It is difficult to follow what you are saying in your post. And I don't know about your personal investments.
How can you not have a choice to be in a company stock plan. The info you are giving is limited. Do you mean the company is putting it's own stock in your retirement fund? If so, it's not something they have to do. How can you not have control over your own investments? I got company stock too, I paid for it, but I choose to and how much I wanted and it wasn't mandatory. Options may be limited do to income but one can do a little at a time and build up a bigger portfoilo.
quote:
What it all comes down to is that corporate CEO's make decisions based on how best to maximize profits to the major share holders. Unfortunately, these folks have no investment in the local community, nor the well-being of anyone other than themselves. This is what allows the economy to grow while the middle and working classes stagnate in terms of real income. This is, also, what makes it possible for a company like Disney to practice corporate censorship in consideration of the bottom line--NOT the freedom of individual choice that the Libertarian party so vigorously endorses.
Major or not, if one share holder benifits so do the others. LOL, I have never seen a small investors shares go down in value while someone with thousands of shares go up. Please explain what you mean. |
www.Carabao.net
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Mick Shrimpton
|
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2004 : 00:00:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
I hate to break this to you but people earning minimum wage do not pay much in taxes. They are probably working for a company that does not give them benefits, and they don't have enough money to pay for healthcare. Essentials are probably all they can offered, maybe...
Property tax, sales tax, tax on utilities. Every community is different but I for one don't like paying tax on gas for cars when roads don't look like they've been improved. Or property tax when schools are in such bad shape but the city council takes expensive trips instead. And no matter where one lives....except on the street, I guess, they pay those taxes, and no matter how low their income is. If anyone lives in an apartment don't think they get away with not paying, it's part of the rent because the landlord has to pay it and he has to get it somewhere or looses his property for not paying taxes. So yeah, I guess you are right, they don't pay much if they live in a poor area but they pay something, that along with everyone else they shouldn't have to, IF the government would spend a bit more wisely.
As for health care, there is no right to health care. There are a lot of points to speak about but bottom line, there's too much red tape. Much of the poor and homeless type problems could be covered by charities but the government is fouling that up too. One way is because of taking too much from people (in taxes) to give to government programs that don't work when people could be giving to places of their choice that do work....IF they had to money to give (after taxes). |
www.Carabao.net
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Mick Shrimpton
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
