[ProfessorNumber]

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

Actually dude I wasn't making a joke about you being gay. Honest. You're being way over sensative. I agree with you that a sense of entitlement in this country is a real problem, but I think health care should be a universal right. As it is right now, only the wealthy can afford it. I just don't think that's right.

My apologies for taking your post out of context. Nonetheless, you could not be more wrong in almost everything you stated. First, health care should never be considered a universal right -- it's a service that someone, or some entity, must pay for. If you're a socialist, then you would most likely believe that the government should pay for it. Since I am not a socialist, I believe it should be privately funded, with perhaps several small exceptions. America has some of the most talented doctors/surgeons/specialists in the world. As far as technology and research, we are on the cutting edge. I hope to god that socialist bastards like Obama don't disincentivise new technology and talent, by socializing healthcare. Second, I have family in the medical industry who have actually spoken with doctors from France, and have actually heard the negatives of socialized medicine. Having government controlled healthcare completely devalues it. For instance, there are people -- no joke -- who go into the same health clinics everyday, complaining of the same problems everyday, and who don't have anything wrong with them... everyday. Second, are you aware that legislation in a certain European country has been proposed to prevent "legally obese" citizens from obtaining a hip replacement? Once you turn healthcare over to the government, you have effectively given them complete control over your body. I don't want to be analyzed and have my health quantified by the US government in order to determine whether I'm a worthy candidate for kidney dialysis -- or for that matter where I should stand on the waiting list. That's fucking horrifying. Lastly, healthcare is not out of reach for the vast majority of citizens. I don't mean to be condescending, but many menial jobs -- such as full-time employment at Walgreens -- offer healthcare plans. It's not just the wealthy that can afford healthcare, and you fucking know it. If someone has a family, and isn't willing to make sacrifices elseware, in order to afford healthcare, then they're an irresponsible fuck. Only in very extreme cases of poverty/lack of healthcare, should the government even consider getting involved.

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

You say gay marriage is absurd, but how is it any different than the civil rights movement of the 60's? Replace gay with black. It's interchangable. Why are we denying gay people the same rights as everybody else? If you don't see why that's a big issue then I'm at a loss.

Maybe I'd see it as a large issue if gay people had separate drinking fountains, segregated schools, and were forced to sit on the back of buses. Oh wait, their situation isn't even remotely comparable to that of the black movements in the 60's. If you don't see why your analogy is completely fucking ridiculous, then I'm at a loss. Truthfully, I believe gay people should be able to get married. However, that issue should be put on the backburner, in order focus on issues of far greater importance -- such as the war, and the economy. The economic decisions that the next president will make transcend every other issue, in that they will determine whether democracy can truly still exist. Personally, I believe that the structure and function of the goverment [socialism vs democracy] is a far greater issue than whether two guys can obtain the legal rights afforded to married heterosexual couples. Once again, you [Repug] can't see the wood through all the trees.

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

You're operating with the assumption that the rich got there from working hard. Do you take into account the cycle of wealth and poverty? The rich stay rich, the poor stay poor. I think it's naive to have some feel good, fairy tale outlook on America, that "anyone" can make it. I think that's false. Some, with a little bit of luck, can. But is that fair? Does a poor farmer, who works his ass off from 5 am to 6 pm, not work as hard as some CEO?

I'm operating with the assumption that the rich have the right to be rich. Whether they obtained their wealth through a means equivalent in difficulty to farming for 12 hours a day is completely and utterly irrelevant. Seriously. The rich do tend to stay rich, and the poor do often stay poor. Big fucking deal. That's the nature of capitalism, and nowhere does it state that democratic states should operate on the basis of economic equity for all. In fact, I'm pretty sure that another form of government believes that -- oh right, that's socialism. A "poor farmer" could most likely never perform the work a CEO does. It truly pisses me off when people downplay the importance and function of high level executives, and how much they are paid. Once again, the reason they command such high salaries is due to capitalism. Is their intellectual capability and capacity not deserving of compensation? Also, your views are skewed since we only tend to hear about the "corrupt CEO" who made millions, and ripped off the "poor" lower workers. Never does anyone talk about instances where CEO's decided to forego their salary until the company was profitable (think Ford several years ago).

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

Look, I'm not promoting that we make the rich poor so that everyone is middle class. But I do think the rich, especially the very rich, can pay a little more in taxes for the good of all. The poor might get to live slightly better off lives, and the rich will continue to be rich, although perhaps not as disgustingly so.

Yes, you are promoting that we make the rich poorer, in relative terms, in order to benefit the lower/middle class. The very rich already do pay a lot more in taxes that the lower classes, and they have every right to be disgustingly rich. I personally hate shia labeouf. I think he's a completely average looking guy and a shitty actor. He probably has more money right now than I ever will, and I'm pretty jealous of that. However, I respect his right to do that. The market is clearly willing to pay him very generous amounts for his dog-shit work, and I have zero problem with that notion. P-Diddy spends more on parties than the vast majority of Americans spend on the purchase of home. Sure, he's a douche -- but as long as people are willing to buy products related to him, then he deserves that lifestyle.

I'm so sick of socialist bastards telling me that the rich don't need to be so rich. Bullshit. This notion of economic equality, and the idea that competition isn't necessary is completely fucking stupid. I'm most likely going to be in the field of sales when I graduate from college. If I don't hit my numbers, I get motherfucking fired. The sales manager isn't going to take sales/clients from Sally, and put them in my book, just because Sally has a lot of family connections and thus selling comes easy to her. That would be socialism -- which is what you want.