Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: eartotheground
Well now that's the ticket. I was just discussing with some of my very left friends and they got pretty angry at my suggestion.

I asked them how it couldn't come to that. Doctors charge too much, for unnecessary procedure and by extension the are paid to much.

Why should someone who is charged with helping a person live profit?

If the doctors wages are cut down to whatever the government thinks how much should their Nurse Assistant be paid? Sure their service is important but not as important as a doctor, who is taking a cut in pay. Surely they cold afford a cut in pay. They are after all helping another human live, it doesn't quite seem fair.

To this I wonder if specialists aren't earning more than is fair, at the expense of people who can ill afford the care provided. In fact, aren't they really taking advantage of another human being, who they should help to live?

Are they lab professionals really worth the money paid to them? Many are paid bonuses for the amount of work they provide. Should they really make money on the back of some ones health?

Are we not “our Brothers keeper” just as Cain responds to God?

Shouldn't each of us individually work for the common good?

Should our motivation not be one of “greed” but of altruism?

I ask, because I want know where it is written that all men are beholden to another and while one may profit their health, the financial gains of another should be lost?

/S

73 posted on 09/12/2009 3:07:45 PM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Vendome

The Plymouth Colony under Gov. Carver nearly starved to death because it followed similar communalist ideas...look up this early socialist communal experiment in utilitarianism. English colonists, under the reforms of Gov. Bradford, rewarding personal effort, accountability with profit, allowed the Colony to survive and thrive....and, history of a very positive sort was made before the ‘modern’ ideas of socialism from France arrived more than a hundred years later.

No nation-state can survive socialism ultimately, as it requires wealth generation to fund its operations. We, as a country eschewed wealth generation from labor and goods production with the introduction of Lyndon Johnsons’ ‘consumer’ society which has been maintained and institutionalize here since then. When wealth generation stops, then only piracy ensues until there are no more targets. We are in the target phase, and, only the rich are left, the pickings increasingly slim, and our credit rating internationally is effectively dead. Nothing good can come of redistributionist thinking. It was proved to the world in the 1620s.

Capitalism has not failed. We just moved away from it with a ‘consumer’ society and by avoiding bankruptcy in 1971 with our conversion to a DEBT_CAPITALIST system...we would borrow to infinity to subsidize spending, as WE LACKED ADEQUATE CAPITAL. Now the world does not have, or even want to loan us their CAPITAL., and, socialism, the end result of DEBT-CAPITALISM, is near the end of its rope.

The rich and the middle class are woefully undercapitalized to pay for the dreams of the ‘father’ in office.


79 posted on 09/12/2009 3:28:30 PM PDT by givemELL (Does Taiwan Meet the Criteria to Qualify as an "Overseas Territory of the United States"? by Richar)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson