Should college education and healthcare be a constitutional right?
- Thread starter Sensitive Blake Griffin
- Start date
when it could just be used to buy gold toilets
will anyone think of the need of the asses or rich people to shyt on gold toilets
you poor baby
Not true. Poor people have more loans than average + to the fact that they have families to help and they're fukked the most.
Um, this is kind of a strange slippery slope. We already do give SNAP so that people can have food. We have subsidized housing (though it is terrible). How in the world did those things make taxation skyrocket? They make up a much smaller portion of the budget than things like war. It's like you think of these things only in terms of perceived costs instead of the humanity at stake. It's a matter of what should we give people as a basis of just being human. Once we decide that, we can move towards how to get it done. Why exactly are those things in France a bad thing? You mean nanny services so women don't have to leave the workforce and get passed over? Why is college being free a bad thing? We decided high school should be free, why do we cut the line off at college? What is the difference? Especially now when college = high school, it is the natural result that we would extend that privilege upward.If health care/education are rights, why isn't food? It's essential too. Or why isn't housing a right? Or drinking water? Taxation would have to skyrocket, emphasis intended, to pay for these things. It's a slippery slope. In France, the right to health care has led to a right to regular welfare payments, "free" college, personal nanny services, etc. etc. Only "free" because it's payed for by 60%+ income taxes, including those on the middle class, and Value added taxes, payroll and sales taxes of 20% and higher, it goes on. shyts insane...
Not to mention the whole right to another free individual's labor insanity
You're more worried about perceives costs and entirely ignoring the benefits.
Medical care is a good, and I disagree with anyone having a right to any good/service.
Especially at the expense of another.
Especially at the expense of another.
In America's centrally planned system of deferred cost it should be what everyone is worried about (IMHO), because when you look at it as 'whats right' vs 'whats wrong' cost is almost irrelevant.
the horror!!!!!
when it could just be used to buy gold toilets
will anyone think of the need of the asses or rich people to shyt on gold toilets
I wonder if any percentage of those loans is comprised of luxuries and not basic necessities. i.e. trying to live above one's means.
I missed where private companies can't use their money to do shytwell, it's paying for private jets so
Didn't read through this whole thing but few months back Matt Bruenig had an interesting article in Dissent on a left wing case against free college. Basics of it are that the poor and working class disproportionately don't go to college, and that free college would operate as a redistribution of wealth to the upper middle class.
The Case Against Free College | Dissent Magazine
The Case Against Free College | Dissent Magazine
ADevilYouKhow
Rhyme Reason
"Conservative, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others. (Ambrose Bierce, "Devil's Dictionary," 1911.)
You have used some fancy terminology to say nothing. How the fukk can you say that our economy is planned based on deferred cost and then say what's right or wrong is irrelevant? Do you know how stupid that sounds? What the fukk do you think the deferred costs are there for? BECAUSE WE DECIDED THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS WORTH PAYING FOR. This is not an a budgetary argument, it is an argument about national philosophy. We then figure out how we will allocate the funds. You're sitting here acting like the distribution of our national budget is fixed and that anything else is just adding to it. You did not think this response through.