View Poll Results: WHO WILL WIN? (THIS POLL ASKS WHO WILL WIN, NOT WHO DO YOU WANT TO WIN)

Voters
12. You may not vote on this poll
  • Coalition by >30 seats

    0 0%
  • Coalition by 16-30 seats

    0 0%
  • Coalition by 15 or fewer seats [CORRECT]

    4 33.33%
  • Hung parliament

    0 0%
  • Labor by 15 or fewer seats

    6 50.00%
  • Labor by 16-30 seats

    1 8.33%
  • Labor by >30 seats

    1 8.33%
Page 5 of 35 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 513
  1. #61
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,590
    Quote Originally Posted by road runner View Post
    Sure you can consider it, though it sounds irrelevant to whether they want to keep the assets or not, as well as irrelevant to the costs of doing so.
    I am not sure I understand what you are talking about.

    My point is: I do not want to assume financial responsibility for people that I do not feel responsible for as I have not acquired any of my assets at their expense and their lack of assets is not due to my actions.
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  2. #62
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,726
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    Perhaps those that you expect me to support, should read Bible too. Where does it say in the Bible that they should delegate responsibility for their lives to me?
    It says that you should help others, even if their problems are their own fault.

  3. #63
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    It says that you should help others, even if their problems are their own fault.
    Do I have to agree and help those who do not deserve it in my view? According to Sharia law, we should cut off thief's hands - shall we have their hands cut?
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  4. #64
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Not at all. Defence, and local law and order, benefit ALL; what I oppose is governments taking from SOME citizens to give to SOME other citizens, with bureaucrats collectively taking about a 75% commission to arrange the wealth transfer.
    So you have no objection to the government providing health care for everyone, just as the government provides defence for everyone?

  5. #65
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,726
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    Do I have to agree and help those who do not deserve it in my view? According to Sharia law, we should cut off thief's hands - shall we have their hands cut?
    You don't have to agree with what the Bible says (although Jesus doesn't call for the amputation of thieves). But you asked for ethical reasons, and I've given you a start.
    Last edited by Patrick Byrom; 25-04-2019 at 03:02 PM. Reason: Formatting and clarification.

  6. #66
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,726
    Sad to see the Liberal Party agreeing to exchange preferences with Clive Palmer.

  7. #67
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    You don't have to agree with what the Bible says (although Jesus doesn't call for the amputation of thieves). But you asked for ethical reasons, and I've given you a start.
    There are plenty of ethical reasons why we should not support those who often act unethically and irresponsibly towards others and themselves
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  8. #68
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,430

    UK's socialized health care: rationing, waiting lists, denial of "free" care

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    So you have no objection to the government providing health care for everyone, just as the government provides defence for everyone?
    Yes I do. Defence is a proper role; health care is not. Fortunately, Australia has a decent system of private health insurance, much less encumbered by government meddling than the USA's. And defence of the nation is something best handled by government, it's very doubtful that government is the best provider of health care. For example, it's never ‘free’—it requires a huge tax burden. And because it's government, money gets sidetracked from doctors, nurses, and medical quipment to bureaucrats. And without the price signals of a free market, rationing and long waits are endemic, as Britons are finding out. I.e., even though they have paid through the nose in taxes for their "free" hospital care, they might be put on waits so long that that their cancer becomes inoperable. For example:



    “If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free.”― P.J. O'’Rourke
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  9. #69
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Yes I do. Defence is a proper role; health care is not. ...
    But you haven't explained why! Everything you say about healthcare also applies to defence: huge tax burden, money diverted to bureaucrats, lack of a free market. And healthcare in the UK is much cheaper than in the US, without any obvious cost to people's health.

  10. #70
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,726
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    There are plenty of ethical reasons why we should not support those who often act unethically and irresponsibly towards others and themselves
    Which ethical system teaches that?

  11. #71
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    It says that you should help others,
    Yes, YOU, with your OWN money, not government, with other people's money. I.e. YOU give to the poor, not vote for politicians to take money from other people and give to the poor, via bloated welfare bureaucracies that take about a 75% commission.

    Conservatives, especially religious ones, are more generous than leftists with their own money, time, and even blood donations, as even the far-left NY Times noted in Bleeding Heart Tightwads. For a recent example, Robert Francis O'Rourke is extremely stingy with his own charitable donations, because he claims he is donating himself, as even the überleftist Mother Jones site noted in Beto O’Rourke Thinks His “Immeasurable” Public Service Was Worth a Lot More Than Just Giving to Charity.

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    even if their problems are their own fault.
    Not that you care anyway, but you are just wrong there. Christ's chosen apostle Paul instructed, “For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.”

    And you beg the question about whether a policy really is helpful. A welfare system is harmful if it punishes work over non-work by cutting benefits by more than what a person earns by working less transport and taxation costs. Or breaks up families by making a mother financially better off (at least in the short term) by marrying the government rather than the father.

    Similarly, if we find someone begging on a corner and claiming to be hungry, it is more helpful to buy them lunch or dinner than give them money that could be spent on drink or tobacco. My wife has done this in a poorer part of Florida: the ones really hungry are very grateful, but there are some who decline the food, so you know what they really wanted.
    Last edited by Capablanca-Fan; 26-04-2019 at 04:21 AM.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  12. #72
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    But you haven't explained why! Everything you say about healthcare also applies to defence: huge tax burden, money diverted to bureaucrats, lack of a free market.
    Because the government's job is to punish wrongdoing and defend life and property from criminals and invaders. Unfortunately even defence can be burdened by the usual faults of government, but in this limited case it's a necessary evil for the government to be involved. And as I explained to RW elsewhere, I think that prisons should be run by the government, not the free market. But most government expenditure is bloating bureaucracies involved with transferral of wealth from some citizens to others, and for the most part, not even from rich to poor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    And healthcare in the UK is much cheaper than in the US,
    Yes, because government is FAR too involved in the USA system. It's a fallacy to claim that the USA has a free market health system; it hasn't had one for a long time. Crony capitalism is sometimes even worse than a government-run system.

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    without any obvious cost to people's health.
    Without any obvious cost? Way to go about ignoring the clear evidence, some from leftist papers like the Guardian, that there are real costs to rationing and waiting lists.
    Last edited by Capablanca-Fan; 26-04-2019 at 02:36 AM.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  13. #73
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Yes, YOU, with your OWN money, not government, with other people's money. I.e. YOU give to the poor, not vote for politicians to take money from other people and give to the poor, via bloated welfare bureaucracies that take about a 75% commission.
    Jesus actually supports taxation in the Bible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Not that you care anyway, but you are just wrong there. Christ's chosen apostle Paul instructed, “For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.”
    So Christians oppose the disability support pension?

  14. #74
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Because the government's job is to punish wrongdoing and defend life and property from criminals and invaders. Unfortunately even defence can be burdened by the usual faults of government, but in this limited case it's a necessary evil for the government to be involved. ...
    And it's the government's job to protect the life and health of its people. So the government should provide healthcare. Your argument works for both.

    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Yes, because government is FAR too involved in the USA system. It's a fallacy to claim that the USA has a free market health system; it hasn't had one for a long time. Crony capitalism is sometimes even worse than a government-run system.
    We've had this argument before. You claimed that the Republicans would replace Obamacare with something better, but we're still waiting

    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Without any obvious cost? Way to go about ignoring the clear evidence, some from leftist papers like the Guardian, that there are real costs to rationing and waiting lists.
    No cost to life expectancy, when you compare the US and the UK.

  15. #75
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    Which ethical system teaches that?
    And is there an ethical system that justifies being useless and irresponsible at the expense of others.
    Utalitarian approach to ethics by the way, suggests being practical. It is certainly a good idea for society to make people more resonsible for their actions!
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 2016 Australian Federal Election [COALITION WINS]
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Politics
    Replies: 322
    Last Post: 24-09-2016, 08:25 PM
  2. Who will you vote for in the federal election?
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Politics
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 19-06-2016, 01:18 AM
  3. Australian Federal Election 2013 [Coalition Wins]
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Politics
    Replies: 380
    Last Post: 29-11-2013, 02:21 AM
  4. Federal Election 2004 (Coalition Wins)
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Politics
    Replies: 185
    Last Post: 27-07-2010, 12:25 PM
  5. Federal Election 2007 (Labor Wins)
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Politics
    Replies: 347
    Last Post: 07-07-2008, 02:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •