Free SPEECH dissolving away..

[Rick Darge]

... and we're not doing anything about it ..

http://film.guardian.co.uk/cannes2007/story/0,,2083430,00.html

[Tom Lowe]

ooooops

[Keith Alan Morris]

thats just harvey attempting a publicity stunt.

[Keith Alan Morris]

and trying to make up for Grindhouse's poor box office.

[Jason Murphy]

What? Harvey? Doing cheap publicity stunts? Say it ain't so!! :wink:

All joking aside, I doubt this started out as a publicity stunt, but never ever underestimate the ability of any Hollywood producer worth their salt to blow something like this up to epic proportions.

Sample script:

The Treasury:

Excuse us, Mr. Moore. We have some concerns about the legality of this trip you took to Cuba. We'd like to talk with you and your producers about these line items here in your budget.

(Unnamed) Producer:

WE'VE HAD TO GO INTO HIDING BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE OUR FILM, OUR FREEDOM AND OUR LIVES!! AND THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE YOUR FREEDOM, TOO!! YOUR FREEDOM TO WATCH THIS MOVIE WHICH WILL BE THE MOST SIGNIFICANT MOVIE YOU WATCH THIS YEAR!! OR ANY YEAR!! STICK IT TO THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION ONE MORE TIME!! WATCH THE MOVIE THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO SEE!!

[Dave Cooper]

I agree with Jason.

[Chris Gearhart]

I just don't like the guy's MO.

[C.H.Haskell]

Interesting to see Moore has to say about Cuba. I spent much time there and as my wife is from Cuba I have witnessed and experienced healthcare in Cuba...simply put, the Doctors and medical staff are top notch professionals and its FREE! Of course there is a flip side to this coin but I am not trying to get in any debate over it.

;)

[Jason Murphy]

Interesting to see Moore has to say about Cuba. I spent much time there and as my wife is from Cuba I have witnessed and experienced healthcare in Cuba...simply put, the Doctors and medical staff are top notch professionals and its FREE!

And there are many countries around the world in similar situations. I grew up in the Middle East, and the health care there was also excellent and (for all intents and purposes) free, even for expatriates.

Don't care that much for either Moore's films or his MO (although the South Park inspired segment on the history of guns in Bowling for Columbine was hilarious; almost worth the price of admission), and he essentially preaches to the choir without actually making any serious arguments (occasionally leading to that ever-unfortunate "self-congratulatory audience" vibe, where everyone in the theatre is just so pleased that they're enlightened enough to agree with the movie), but I am at least glad that his films start conversations, because even if he's being his old gimmicky self and really not saying much substantial about the topic at hand, his subjects are usually worth discussing, no matter your views, and good can certainly come from that.

Although taking potshots at the US health care system? Kicking something when it's that broken is a bit low. Kinda like shooting fish in a barrel. With a 12-gauge.

[Ralph Oshiro]

My health care provider is great! And at $587 a month (just for me), it oughta be! If my union didn't make mandatory deductions from my wages to pay for it (we used to just keep the cash), I'd be with an $89 Kaiser HMO. That's why I never got why those supermarket workers went on strike because their healthcare premiums were going up from $0 to $36 a month. As for nationalized healthcare, I'd rather keep what little remains of what my already high XX% tax bracket income allows. Have you seen the income taxes people pay in (Western) countries with nationalized healthcare?

But then again, on other socio-political issues I'm much, much more liberal. Probably not supposed to discuss politics here, but the front page of the Los Angeles Times today ran a story about testimony from another fired U.S. Attorney who claimed that a GOP party member tried to pressure his prosecutorial agenda on behalf of Republican party political objectives (voter fraud). Phone calls discussing the matter were reported to have been handled by since-resigned, White House Justice Department liason, Monica Goodling. Calls regarding the matter were alleged to have been made to both Carl Rove and the President himself. Why isn't this story plastered all over CNN like a Paris Hilton drug arrest? (I know why . . . 'cause Paris Hilton is HOT!).

[Ralph Oshiro]

. . . and we're not doing anything about it.
We can vote for an administration, and for members of the House and Senate, that promise to uphold the Constitution.

[Ralph Oshiro]

. . . and we're not doing anything about it.
We can make our own documentaries.

[Ralph Oshiro]

. . . and we're not doing anything about it.
We can submit pieces to CurrentTV. They'll air almost anything half-way decent.

[Ralph Oshiro]

. . . and we're not doing anything about it.
We can help support the Electronic Frontier Foundation (eff.org).

[Ralph Oshiro]

. . . and we're not doing anything about it.
Or help support People for the American Way (pfaw.org).

[Clint Johnson]

Interesting to see Moore has to say about Cuba. I spent much time there and as my wife is from Cuba I have witnessed and experienced healthcare in Cuba...simply put, the Doctors and medical staff are top notch professionals and its FREE! Of course there is a flip side to this coin but I am not trying to get in any debate over it.

;)

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch and when you get people erroneously thinking that the medical services are free then there is no end to the troubles. Unchecked, the costs would spiral out of hand as everyone wants the best possible care and people over-use it for every sniffle and cough.

And it is a fairy tale to think that there is any way to give the entire population the very best care that is possible. I don't expect to be able to get the same care as a billionaire can get and that isn't a horrible thing- it is just a fact of life. What I would like is the opportunity to pay more to get more than is offered... but that is something that is fought tooth and nail up here.

In absolute seriousness, there are a lot of people who would see me and the doctor go to jail before letting me pay for a heart bypass surgery myself... is that really what you want?

The cost of a socialized medical system can be controlled in only two ways; by rationing a service and by not offering a service at all. I'm up here in Canada and the socialized medical system is crumbling as the cost rise and the quality falls. The monster has become a sacred cow and none dare change it so the waiting lists get longer and what is available becomes more and more antiquated.

I'm fine with helping out the destitute who have no way to pay for their own medical care but if there is any way for someone to pay for it themselves then they have a moral obligation to pay for it themselves.

Groceries are a lot more important than medical care and they can easily cost more than health insurance... now can you imagine the fine dining that would be available if we had a nationalized food system?

Think about the state nationalizing the automobile industry and tell me what kind of a car would we get? And I do mean "a" as in singular- can't have a multi-tiered auto industry.

Clothing throughout the northern part of this continent is more important than medical care so the state better get on that too.

If you don't believe that the state could deliver quality food, cars and clothing what makes you think that it could deliver quality health care?

If you think that the state could deliver quality food, cars and clothing... well then I guess the last century of experiments in social structures was lost on you and you're doomed to repeat it.

[Chris Gearhart]

Competition is a wonderful animal. Maybe Jim should make a national health program!

[Dave Cooper]

Or...

Or we can do multiple quotes in one post.

[IAN SUN]

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch and when you get people erroneously thinking that the medical services are free then there is no end to the troubles. Unchecked, the costs would spiral out of hand as everyone wants the best possible care and people over-use it for every sniffle and cough.

And it is a fairy tale to think that there is any way to give the entire population the very best care that is possible. I don't expect to be able to get the same care as a billionaire can get and that isn't a horrible thing- it is just a fact of life. What I would like is the opportunity to pay more to get more than is offered... but that is something that is fought tooth and nail up here.

In absolute seriousness, there are a lot of people who would see me and the doctor go to jail before letting me pay for a heart bypass surgery myself... is that really what you want?

The cost of a socialized medical system can be controlled in only two ways; by rationing a service and by not offering a service at all. I'm up here in Canada and the socialized medical system is crumbling as the cost rise and the quality falls. The monster has become a sacred cow and none dare change it so the waiting lists get longer and what is available becomes more and more antiquated.

I'm fine with helping out the destitute who have no way to pay for their own medical care but if there is any way for someone to pay for it themselves then they have a moral obligation to pay for it themselves.

Groceries are a lot more important than medical care and they can easily cost more than health insurance... now can you imagine the fine dining that would be available if we had a nationalized food system?

Think about the state nationalizing the automobile industry and tell me what kind of a car would we get? And I do mean "a" as in singular- can't have a multi-tiered auto industry.

Clothing throughout the northern part of this continent is more important than medical care so the state better get on that too.

If you don't believe that the state could deliver quality food, cars and clothing what makes you think that it could deliver quality health care?

If you think that the state could deliver quality food, cars and clothing... well then I guess the last century of experiments in social structures was lost on you and you're doomed to repeat it.

Clint if you want to see a medical system that is in crisis and is truly a nightmare, check out the 45 million uninsured bellow the 49th.
Or maybe they don't count?

[ericyoung]

Possibly getting political but have a look at Noam Chomsky's "Failed States" - government hypocrisy is hardly a surprise, but the scale is scary.

If it was completely intentional it would be a disgrace and an affront to all of us - unfortunately, I fear there are no conspiracies, just plain selfish human self-interest. A much more intractable problem to solve :sad:

[Alexander Nikishin]

Or we can do multiple quotes in one post.

LOL....

[Ralph Oshiro]

Or we can do multiple quotes in one post.
Hey!.........

[GlennChan]

In my opinion, governments are good at certain things and not at others. If you look at Ontario (and many other places), the government-run organizations do a much better job with the electricity system than private companies. Competition (in this case) is inefficient and you have crap like door-to-door salesman trying to scam you in signing onto their company's plan.

[Gunleik Groven]

Ouch

I allways get tempted by these threads...

The market works
That has consequence

Basic infrastructure (like health care, roads, electricity, schools, broad-band) does not seem to give a private/public company the economical incentives to serve the whole population in any given country. That's why these services should (... fill in preferred soluition here dependent on whether you think everybody or just specific groups deserve these services and what eco-political model you favor... -;)

Cheers!

Gunleik

[Mark B.]

If the government redirected a little bit of money from weapons to health care, the problem would be solved without the need for new taxes.

But maybe what's really going on is that modern mechanization (introduction of computers and robotics) has eliminated the need for having so many slaves living in the U.S... rich people are now hoping those extraneous poor people will die off sooner rather than later.

[Steven M. Bailey]

Since when did we get the grand Idea that we as individuals are entitled to anything? Why is it so hard for the common man to take responsability for his own actions? The mortality rate for all life is 100%. So what if your insured. you're gonna die.:waaa:

Why should the government pay for my Healthcare, or that of my children. Did someone from Washington D.C. knock up my wife while I was away. I chose to have Kids, I am both responsible and liable for that choice. Why should you pay to send my kids to school, or to the doctor, or any where else for that matter. Just so they can learn that they are not responsible for their own actions or the choices they make.:wacko:

Life is hard, deal with it.

Entitlements are what puts the burden on everyone else. The only thing we need to protect(at least here in the USA) are the basic tenants of life, liberty, and the persuit better Hd solutions for all. (or something like that)

I love spouting political crap. It makes me feel all tingly inside

The only reason for government is weapons. Federal: Defend the people from invasion. Local: Defend the people from each other. Healthcare is a free market problem and should be handled accordingly. Govenment regulation and medleing is what has caused most of the problems we now face.

Before all of the insurance and government programs, a doctor would actually make house calls. Now for every hour of patient care there is an hour of paperwork. Times change, Big deal.

[Jason Murphy]

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a libertarian... :)

[chuck colburn]

And if I might guess a fan of Ayn Rand. (me too)

[IAN SUN]

Since when did we get the grand Idea that we as individuals are entitled to anything? Why is it so hard for the common man to take responsability for his own actions? The mortality rate for all life is 100%. So what if your insured. you're gonna die.:waaa:

Why should the government pay for my Healthcare, or that of my children. Did someone from Washington D.C. knock up my wife while I was away. I chose to have Kids, I am both responsible and liable for that choice. Why should you pay to send my kids to school, or to the doctor, or any where else for that matter. Just so they can learn that they are not responsible for their own actions or the choices they make.:wacko:

Life is hard, deal with it.

Entitlements are what puts the burden on everyone else. The only thing we need to protect(at least here in the USA) are the basic tenants of life, liberty, and the persuit better Hd solutions for all. (or something like that)

I love spouting political crap. It makes me feel all tingly inside

The only reason for government is weapons. Federal: Defend the people from invasion. Local: Defend the people from each other. Healthcare is a free market problem and should be handled accordingly. Govenment regulation and medleing is what has caused most of the problems we now face.

Before all of the insurance and government programs, a doctor would actually make house calls. Now for every hour of patient care there is an hour of paperwork. Times change, Big deal.

This in a nutshell, is why we are all :pinch:.

[IAN SUN]

...
The only reason for government is weapons. Federal: Defend the people from invasion. Local: Defend the people from each other. Healthcare is a free market problem and should be handled accordingly....

I'm curious though, why stop at weapons? I mean there are free market solutions for "security" too, both local and national.

[krd]

Since when did we get the grand Idea that we as individuals are entitled to anything? Why is it so hard for the common man to take responsability for his own actions? The mortality rate for all life is 100%. So what if your insured. you're gonna die.:waaa:

Why should the government pay for my Healthcare, or that of my children. Did someone from Washington D.C. knock up my wife while I was away. I chose to have Kids, I am both responsible and liable for that choice. Why should you pay to send my kids to school, or to the doctor, or any where else for that matter. Just so they can learn that they are not responsible for their own actions or the choices they make.:wacko:

Life is hard, deal with it.

Entitlements are what puts the burden on everyone else. The only thing we need to protect(at least here in the USA) are the basic tenants of life, liberty, and the persuit better Hd solutions for all. (or something like that)

I love spouting political crap. It makes me feel all tingly inside

The only reason for government is weapons. Federal: Defend the people from invasion. Local: Defend the people from each other. Healthcare is a free market problem and should be handled accordingly. Govenment regulation and medleing is what has caused most of the problems we now face.

Before all of the insurance and government programs, a doctor would actually make house calls. Now for every hour of patient care there is an hour of paperwork. Times change, Big deal.

There are plenty of countries which satisfy all, or nearly all, of your requirements, at least with respect to lack of entitlements, regulation and public services: Burma, Afghanistan, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Niger, etc., to mention just a few at random. And you can no doubt still get house calls, in all of them.

Which paradise is it going to be?

[laguun]

i would recommend to see the -excellent- documentary "The Corporation" to anyone who missed it. An outstanding movie, IMHO.

it is free to download, donations are welcome however.
download link:
http://www.vuze.com/details/O3HE2T3OIBJNA7GLMOFPWAJ6EG7BP6YQ.html
website:
http://www.thecorporation.com/

it covers all of the involved fundamental problems and conflicts discussed in this thread (profit/public good, free speech/law etc) quite precisely and shows most of the sources of those problems beneath the surface.

[Alex Boothby]

Great film. "Why we fight" is also good.

[laguun]

Great film. "Why we fight" is also good.

yes, "why we fight" is also very interesting and important.

However, i was impressed by the truly global and historical perspective "the corporation" offers while "why we fight" is focussing more on US-american "symptons".

[Mark B.]

I vote Libertarian.

But I still think public health care is a good idea. For starters, having a medical system that provides preventions and cures against contagious viruses is a very good thing for the safety of a country. Most of the really nasty stuff gets passed around by poor people who live in cold moldy condemned buildings surrounded by rats and feces, or by people who can't afford vaccinations, or can't afford to take prescribed medicine for the full term. Unless you live in a bubble there's not much prevention once these viruses hit the bus lines.

Here's some more fun thoughts... how do you feel when you see people suffering? I feel bad when I see it, it makes me psychologically depressed to see people suffering from easily curable problems. And sometimes, perhaps from a slight of vanity on my part, I'll get repulsed by people who have no dental care and their smiles of laughter reveal rotted decaying toothless smiles. I don't want to see that, it ruins my day. I'd guess it ruins just about everyone's day. So it make sense that if the problem effects everyone, then implementing a solution should be a burden shared by everyone.

Something else to consider, if you want to focus on a more unusual but still feasible effect of having no public health care... people who aren't getting medical care are going to get angry at their lot in life (exacerbated by their lack of being able to afford psychological help or mood correcting drugs). They'll blame society for their condition, lose heart for continuing to live in this world, and then they're going to go out and shoot people before killing themselves. You can carry a gun to protect yourself against this scenario, but the first few rounds are gonna leave the crazy guy's weapon before you even know what's happening.

Oh, and having public health care would increase tourism revenues because people would be less concerned about recouping from unexpected health problems while on vacation.

[Steven M. Bailey]

I grew up 25 miles from town. My understanding of local free market defense came in about 20 differant calibers. 12ga, 7mm mag, 44 colt, etc...:gun:

And I, like Clint, had a wolf.

I won't pretend that I have the all answers for everything, but as we legislate stupidity to the fullest with things like; gun control, seat-belts(I never rode in the cab of a truck till that damn law got passed.), global warming, insane building codes and on and on.

As a single act, each of these things may seem justifiable, but cumulativly as a country boy, I see these as a move to castrate our children at birth. They will never grow up to Know the freedom I was born with. California is especially bad.

I don't move, because I love the mountains, the valley, the rivers, the ocean, and here I have easy access to all four.

Back to seat belts, they pass seatbelt laws but kill the drivers ED program entirly.wtf. Not that school should be manditory, but if your going to have it, don't cut the only program that may actually save lives.

I don't dislike the US. as a matter of fact I love it. I will always love it.
I just see that social problems faced by over-sprawling cities cause legislation that kills my culture.

At this point I see no future for the California country boy. We are a dying breed.

Even I just want to make movies, entertaining movies. No strong political overtones. Just good old fashion fun.

I think there is a balance, somewhere out there. Chances are we'll never find it. If every one took care of each other intuitivly and looked out for their neibors we wouldn't need social programs.

nothing is perfect, nothing lasts, and we're all gonna die.:rip_1: :ohmy:

boorah, Well, lets make the best of it:)

[Steven M. Bailey]

I vote Libertarian.
You can carry a gun to protect yourself against this scenario, but the first few rounds are gonna leave the crazy guy's weapon before you even know what's happening.


I'm not afraid to die, just afraid that my children will never see true freedom in the world they were born to. they will never meet their dad in the environment that he was raised in. My culture is fading away.

I actually don't mind paying taxes to see that the poor are uplifted. Weather financially, medically, phisically,spiritually, or even just a full belly.

Ive worked my share of soup kitchens, and worked on a crew that did maintenance work for people who didn't have means.

I also have members of my extended family who have lived with a hand out their whole lives. Their teeth rotted out, their houses came to ruin, their lack of sanitation affecting all around them, not because of a lack of social intervention, pity, compassion, or Government assistance. Just incredible mind boggling stupidity, and sheer laziness.

I understand that the issues are complicated and won't go away on their own. All I want to see is less of a trickling out of our rights and privleges.

Give me my potato cannon back. That thing was fun. Its already illegal to shoot people.

Don't make ownership a crime.

I love to target shoot, It's like redneck golf. Little ball trying to make a little hole far away. The only difference is if you miss you don't chase the ball or even look for it, you just send another one. shooting range: driving range, hot iron: 9 iron, closest to pin: firing pin. They're so close,
Why do they insist on banning my drivers?
Killing people is already illegal, and most of my gun packing buddies would hope to God that a paper target is all they'll ever have to shoot.

Hey, if I stirred anybody up my apologies. If I didn't stir you up enough, well again I appologize. I'm off to bed. Thank God for the freedom of speech and the free flow of Ideas. Good night
Steve Bailey:shifty:

[Joe Carney]

One thing MM is good at is getting people to discuss the subjects of his docs. Have to give him kudos for that.

As far as health care? I don't wan't free, just affordable.
For instance...
When I looked at a bill my doctor submitted to my Health Care provider, it was 500.00 US. If I wanted to pay for it myself, it was 2000.00. I have never been given a decent explanaton as to why I must pay 3 times as much as my insurance company. This is common practice, and it gouging, period. I'm not talking about free or social.

We also have tort lawyers fighting everyday to prevent caps on malpractice awards. Ask any doctor what their single biggest cost is.

We also have laws that prevent local hospitals from sharing expensive equipment. Totally insane, and promoted by the medical manufacturing complex.

USA can't use solutions designed for other much smaller nations (population wise).
We don't need social medicne, we need affordable medicine.
We can't divert money from the war to health care, becuase there isn't any. China is financing our Iraq 'Intervention' and our grandchildren are going to have to pay out the ass for it (1 Trillion dollars and counting). We're borrowing from Peter to pay Paul so to speak.
When I read these posts about personal responsibility. Well thats a good thing. So is caring about your fellow human beings.

My favorite doctors are Muslim Pakistanis believe or not. Somehow thier medical training includes treating your patients as people, not meat.
When I was in the Army, the quality of care from Indian and Pakastani doctors was much better than Caucasion American ones. When I talked to an American ones, they acted like I was keeping them from their golf game.

anecdote...

My late father in law was a decorated WWII vet who served as a belly gunner in a bomber squadron inthe famous 8th Army Air force(I forget what type plane he was in). He came down with severe arthritis and had to have a leg amputated. during or just after the operation, he recieved tainted blood and then came down with sever Hepatitis, which is what ended up killing him. The VA tried to claim he was a drunk, even though he wasn't. To get him off their rosters, they sent him home even though he was in no condition to do so. Others were waiting for that bed, and they had rules that required them to get patients discharged or face penalties.
His primary care doctor, a Pakastani, risked his job by making a 'house call' to check up on him. He acted like one of those old time hollywood doctors that was warm, friendly and had the courage to deal with the emotional issues involved. The whole family, including my mother in law who is conservative christian, are forever grateful.


Sad that my Father in laws' own countryman treated him like crap.
And thats why I'm against free social medicine. It does as much harm as good.
Ask any enlisted Iraq VET at Walter Reed army hostpital in Washington DC.
P.S. I'm a Cuacasion American in case anyone was wondering.

[Michael Hastings]

For instance...
When I looked at a bill my doctor submitted to my Health Care provider, it was 500.00 US. If I wanted to pay for it myself, it was 2000.00. I have never been given a decent explanaton as to why I must pay 3 times as much as my insurance company.

I think my recent experience was just the opposite. I was without health insurance from 2004 through 2006. Last year I went to the urologist for an annual checkup and told them I was without insurance. They said it was normally $90 but discounted it to $68 (and threw in $30 worth of drug samples). This year, getting the same checkup with ultrasound and urinalysis, under the health insurance, I got the copy of the bill from the insurance company and it said the normal bill would have been close to $400, that they had paid the urologist about $200 - their plan negotiated rate - and my copay was $40.

Now I'm not positive they didn't do more tests, but it sure doesn't seem like it to me. It seems like they did the same thing (the doctor spent all of 8 minutes with me in both cases plus the urinalysis.) As a straightforward transaction he was willing to do it for $90 and with the nice guy discount for $68. But when the insurance company got involved it was $200. And I don't really blame the doctor, as a small businessman myself I know that all the added paperwork is a significant hassle and expense.

While I was never a fan of government health care, the private sector has proven that they can screw it up just as badly. I think for reasons of global competitiveness as well as compassion, we (the US) are going to have to go to some type of tax-financed universal health care/defined benefit system.

[Kenn Christenson]

While I was never a fan of government health care, the private sector has proven that they can screw it up just as badly. I think for reasons of global competitiveness as well as compassion, we (the US) are going to have to go to some type of tax-financed universal health care/defined benefit system.

I don't know if it's really competitive or compassionate to have to join all the other countries where you have to essentially wait in a long line for health care.

[Mark B.]

I don't know if it's really competitive or compassionate to have to join all the other countries where you have to essentially wait in a long line for health care.

You'd rather see poor people go without medical care so that you won't have to stand in line for a bit?

I think most countries with socialized-medicine have care facilities as efficient as the privatized ones in the U.S. It's a fairly simple process to streamline, and extra doctors are easy enough to get... in the U.S. we just have to lift the artificial restrictions that are keeping students out of the medical schools (you know the restrictions... originally created so that demand for doctors would be high and thereby raise doctors' salaries).

But I've never experienced medical practice outside the states... anyone here have experiences outside the U.S. they can comment on? Long waits for medical attention or bad care or anything?

[J. Bernard Vallon]

But I've never experienced medical practice outside the states... anyone here have experiences outside the U.S. they can comment on? Long waits for medical attention or bad care or anything?

I've never heard good things about them...but I love the idea on paper.

I think what we could really use is more urgent care clinics. They've been shown to relieve pressure on emergency rooms, which for many are the only means of health care. You go for minor emergencies, when the ER isnt necessary, and the doctors offices are closed or full and waiting a few days for an appointment isnt an option. A lot of waist and clutter in the health care system is because people end up in facilities that are not ideally equipped to handle there problems.

My wife and I are considering a birthing center to have our second baby. We've heard a lot of good things. Again, its a facility designed specifically for what we need, and not what we dont need. Relieve congestion in the hospital.

[IAN SUN]

Last time I went to the doctor there was no line up. Same thing the last time I visited a hospital (my son had an asthma attack). We received warm personalized care from top notch health care professionals. And I wasn't presented with a fat bill either. But hey this is Canada, home of socialized medicine :)

By the way the US government spends more per capita on health care than Canada does.

IMHO y'all are being ripped off.

[Rick Darge]

We're being ripped off in more ways than one..

Not to take a turn but I just read this and it scares me..

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHI20070521&articleId=5720

[Mark B.]

BTW, in an earlier post on this thread I mentioned that a gun won't protect you from a crazy gun-wielding attacker. I'd like to clarify that it was only a practical comment on the fact that the first person who draws in a fight is 99.999% likely to be the winner. I still think that people should carry guns, and I'd especially like to see gun ownership allowed in national parks and whatnot. You can't get from A to B in some parts of the country without driving through a National Park. And if you're filming in a national park you're even more at risk because the gear is going to slow you down if you have to sprint out of danger. What danger? Bears, moose, elk, rattle snakes, cougars, and rabid animals of all sorts (I've heard raccoons are especially bad when rabid). All of those animals can kill you if you don't have a means of protection, especially during mating season when they'll get pissed at anything that moves. Seems like someone dies of a wild animal attack every few years and everyone in the party is always saying "I wish we'd have had a gun... so-and-so wouldn't have died if we'd just had a gun."

[ericyoung]

We're being ripped off in more ways than one..

Not to take a turn but I just read this and it scares me..

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHI20070521&articleId=5720

Looks like Bush & Blair have the same agenda (surprise) - The UK government tried this last year, and it was a close call.

http://www.saveparliament.org.uk/problem.php

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legislative_and_Regulatory_Reform_Bill

It almost sneaked through in the snowstorm of new unnecessary laws constantly being pushed out by the present Labour government.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/article1082114.ece

Fortunately a few sharp eyed people noticed it and kicked up enough of a fuss that members of parliament (MPs), and the media sat up and started talking about it. Even then, it took lots of ordinary concerned British citizens contacting and pushing their MPs to take action against it, before it was amended enough to make it "only" slightly more dictatorial than existing legislation!

If it was intentional, it was a calculated attempt to grab absolute power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_act#In_the_United_Kingdom

If it was unintentional, it was the one of the most ineptly written pieces of proposed legislation in the history of bad lawmaking!!

http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_a_l/simon_carr/article349882.ece

Neither possibility makes me feel very trusting of government. :blink: Uh oh. Now I'm worried that somewhere out there, a dossier has been started on me. :w00t:

"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty..."
http://www.bartelby.com/73/1073.html

.

[Steven M. Bailey]

BTW, in an earlier post on this thread I mentioned that a gun won't protect you from a crazy gun-wielding attacker. I'd like to clarify that it was only a practical comment on the fact that the first person who draws in a fight is 99.999% likely to be the winner. I still think that people should carry guns, and I'd especially like to see gun ownership allowed in national parks and whatnot. You can't get from A to B in some parts of the country without driving through a National Park. And if you're filming in a national park you're even more at risk because the gear is going to slow you down if you have to sprint out of danger. What danger? Bears, moose, elk, rattle snakes, cougars, and rabid animals of all sorts (I've heard raccoons are especially bad when rabid). All of those animals can kill you if you don't have a means of protection, especially during mating season when they'll get pissed at anything that moves. Seems like someone dies of a wild animal attack every few years and everyone in the party is always saying "I wish we'd have had a gun... so-and-so wouldn't have died if we'd just had a gun."

Its the little guys you have to watch out for, racoons, possums, badgers, and skunks.
I once got chased up a tree by a badger in Wisconsin. The stupid thing just wouldn't leave. Skunks carry rabies something fierce, not only are they all kinds of pissy, but they make everything smell like rotting tires.

A few years ago some freinds of mine(a father and son), got tree'd by a group of wild boar. They had a gun but It wasn't very helpful. The father had the gun in one tree, while the son had the bullets in another. They attempted to throw bullets between the tree's until they ran out. A few boars were shot, but they were cannibalized by the others. After six hours of living like monkeys, The boars finally found somewhere better to be. They two climbed down the trees, collected their bullets and their dignity and went on their way.:w00t:

Steven Bailey

[Kenn Christenson]

Someone has actually made a film about the elimination of free speech:

http://www.indoctrinate-u.com/intro/

[Rick Darge]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=G63FEamhpA0&mode=related&search=

[Kenn Christenson]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2006/11/29/cstillwell.DTL

http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/3407

http://www.youtube.com/p.swf?video_id=GAGXusIXNRw&eurl=http%3A//www.google.com/search%3Fhl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26channel%3Ds%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla%253Aen-US%253Aofficial%26hs%3DRl&iurl=http%3A//img.youtube.com/vi/GAGXusIXNRw/2.jpg&t=OEgsToPDskJkdSjEz1ZP1cEv3QGL3Ffp

[PaulClements]

One man's free speech is another man's insult. Free speech has never truly existed in the first place. At best there are measures and different countries have varying tolerances. Unfortunately those tolerances are dictated by political or religous correctness which can be devastating and life threatening at worse or simply misrepresentative of the belief of masses over minorities which might only be disproportionate.

I for one enjoy free speech, it allows me to say things like "Micheal Moore is an ass of a film maker, who manipulates footage to suit his needs. He desires political and financial gain as much as the senators or politicians he is discussing. And because of the lust for fame that many who make successful appearances behind a camera have, his reports will only ever give the answers he wants to find, and the more dramatic the better."

All things told though, Bush and Blair have done a great deal of damage to it. Basically because they're both thick as two short planks! - Gotta love free speech :)

[ericyoung]

One man's free speech is another man's insult. Free speech has never truly existed in the first place...

Well, not so long ago we were allowed to peacefully protest outside parliament in the UK, whenever we liked. We didn't need advance permission from the police.

Now you can be convicted of being a serious organised criminal for turning up on your own and reading out a list of names of Iraq war dead. Hard to find insult in that... unless you're Blair.

[Jared VanLeuven]

Sadly, in so many ways, we are all paying the price for the general lack of basic morality and disregard for personal responsibility that pervades our corporate, governmental and societal experience today. Even taking the religious origin completely out of the argument, how much better could life be for us all if everyone lived the Ten Commandments? Yes, that's a naive assertion I know. However, I fear that much of our current debate and pursuit of solutions in so many contexts is merely window dressing to a much broader issue - that of the degeneration of the virtuous life, the life "well spent" (Cicero). We are, I fear, starting to reap what we have allowed to be sown, whether by our mis-action or by our utterly self-interested inaction. And that microcosm is simply being played out writ large by some corporations and most governments.

Whoo, downer-post! Ack! Flame away, mateys!

[GlennChan]

What I find with organized religion is that those who run it are generally just as good and just as sinful as everyone else. Though it bears pointing out that people are generally good but will occasionally do things like lie, cheat, etc. Though in extreme situations, normal people can end up doing heinous things. In lab situations, Stanley Milgram showed that most normal people will obey the researcher and torture the subject. In real life, very intelligent (and generally considered normal) people built the atomic bomb and actually used it and killed many innocent people (ditto with firebombing). So much for thou shalt not kill.

[Steven M. Bailey]

Man is a flawed creature, and corrupts every thing he touches. Jesus once said, "Religion undefiled before God is this, Take care of the fatherless and, visit widows in their affliction. Wow Religion is a healthcare program ran by un-perfect people who don't really get the point. Seems alot like government. Maybe thats why people seem to dislike so-called organized religion. If religion were following its true purpose, all loving people would have no reason to hate or fear it.
Thank God for free speech, compationate health care, and that He isn't one of us.:innocent:

[GlennChan]

Well of course the other problem with a particular organized religion is that it preaches bad parenting. Look what happened to Jesus.

(I kid, I kid. I think it's a humorous misinterpretation of Christianity. And blown apart... I'm not quite sure I understand your argument.)

[Steven M. Bailey]

Not really an arguement. More of a statement. God is good and wants us to be good to each other. Man is screwed up, and does really screwed up things to each other, whether on their own, or in the name of God. That's all. Nothing terribly profound, unless you don't beleive in God. In which case, good luck with that. :whistling:

[Mark B.]

Religion has caused a lot of bad stuff, and isn't a good guide for running the world. Just look at all the wars that have been started due to religious issues. And many of the current social conflicts wouldn't be of such concern if religion hadn't been in force; homosexuality, abortion rights, abstinence, and the as yet infrequently discussed 'unsafe population growth' (Mormons).

[PaulClements]

If there was only one religion and everyone in the world believed in it then it would likely be a very good guide, the problems occur when two religous factions dispute something, such as Palestine and Isreal. However this is getting off the point of free speech.

Whilst I see where you are coming from Lowkus I don't believe homosexuality, abortion rights, and abstinence and the conflicts against them are solely the domain of religions, there are many non-religious individuals or groups who would likely carry the same beliefs but are probably not as vocal on such issues. If religion wasn't there then there would still be the same conflicts, just represented by a different group.

Religion can be said to have caused a lot of bad stuff but you have to weigh in the human element. There are individuals or groups who, wrongly, act in the name of religion and commit often horrific acts. This has been going for thousands of years. Such acts are often commited for a misguided notion of fame or glory. It doesn't mean that that religion has caused bad stuff, it's just another example of humanity's painful existence on this planet. It is a question of acceptance, which is something man suffers from worldwide and not just in religious circles.

[ericyoung]

A new doc about liberty in the UK.

http://www.noliberties.com/director.htm

[Joe Carney]

More people have been killed, injured,deprived, imprisoned.. under atheistic govt (Communism or Fascism) in the last hundred years than all the religious wars combined throughout history. Humans have a bad habit of letting cruel ambitious people wrap them selves in scripture or ideology and start wars.

[Jared VanLeuven]

The paradox: We as humans yearn at our very core for free will, yet it is that very free will that some use to their own detriment and to the detriment of others. I think we'll continue to repeat this societal roller coaster ride for as long as we are in existence, it's in our nature - the good and the bad.

Wow, maybe we could solve World Peace by the time the cams ship *ducks* :)

[Graeme Nattress]

The first step to world peace is to all agree what 4k camera to shoot the celebrations on :-)

[Jared VanLeuven]

The first step to world peace is to all agree what 4k camera to shoot the celebrations on :-)

Word! :biggrin:

[Kenn Christenson]

Imagine whirled peas.

[Steven M. Bailey]

Just a thought.

Most scripts fail to entertain the wider audiance due to lack of believable conflict. What would our movies look like if early man had achieved whirled peas.:biggrin:

Conflict and resolution lie at the heart of our craft, because they are at the core of our nature. Without the struggle there is no gratification in accomplishment.:shiftyph34r:

[Clint Johnson]

Well over a third are not insuring themselves even when they can, they've made the decision to spend that money elsewhere - and where is it our place to force them to pay for it? The numbers according to the Census Bureau have over 30% of uninsured making more than $50,000 a year half of those making over $75,000 a year. There are no numbers for it but I'd say that if you count the young and healthy people who make less but have decided that it is more cost effective to just pay out of pocket because they feel they are healthy enough to risk it... you get to well over 50% have made the decision not to get insurance.

Another 30% or so are eligible for public health insurance already but have not bothered to sign up.

Then there are the transient uninsured... which accounts for all but a small percentage of the rest. They may not have insurance today but they did last year and they will next year.

Yes, there are those who desperately want medical insurance and have no way now, nor in the future, to be able to pay for it. These are a small percentage of the population and they would be smaller if the costs were lower.

If it wasn't ingrained in the population that it is the government's job to take care of this problem then the rest of the population would easily take care of that small percentage that can't take care of themselves. As it stands, the “solution” many are demanding is for the state to take draconian control of the medical care of 300 million people to help out the less than 1% who can't take care of themselves.

There are so many people who figure that a large market share in a sub-sector of a business market, acquired in a capitalist system through voluntary exchange, is an evil that must be fought by the state... Microsoft's 85% share of the operating system sub-section of the software section of the computer industry for example. In many cases, it is these very same people who will turn around and demand a 100% monopoly be mandated by law for an entire industry with the firm belief that this will ensure that the costs drop while the quality increases.

Giving the state control of the medical system gives them free rein to instill more controls and limits on its subjects. When the health care costs blow up, they see themselves as having no choice but to regulate the lives of everyone to increase their health and limit risks. It is exactly the same thing that is happening when they use security fear mongering to gather more power to the state.

The answer? One could be a non-profit business/charity that means tests people and tops up medical insurance or outright supplies it when there is no other alternative. This would require educating people that the government is a dangerous tool that must be resorted to as a last resort only.

There are enough people who would voluntarily pay to help ensure that the truly destitute get basic medical care. That there are socialized medical systems voted into effect in many democratic societies is emphatic evidence of this fact.

There are two fatal mistakes that these people make.

1) The first is that they have a mistakenly low opinion of humanity in general and firmly believe that most other people aren't as “good” as they are and the only way that anyone else will pay is by getting the government to force them to.

2) The other fatal flaw is a mistakenly high opinion of that portion of the population which dedicates their lives to gathering power over other people, and believing that these people are as “good” as themselves. For some reason I can't fathom, the believe that despite having almost uniformly shown no ability to run a business... no real ability other than doing whatever it takes to gain the power to force others to their will... that these people will take over a trillion dollar business sector and somehow not manage to bring it crumbling down around themselves while passing the bill and blame on to others.

[Clint Johnson]

Try to remember that they do have to live in a soul crushing system that takes almost everything they create from them to pay for it. Hey, so you're living in poverty and your thirteen year old daughter is blowing tourists just so that there is enough food on the table... at least you can pretend that you aren't paying for your medical care! Go NHC!

[Clint Johnson]

I'll keep the list short by restricting myself to my just my family and only the last five years.

I've personally been lucky in health, the worst medical problem I've had is a herniated disk that did some damage to my sciatic nerve. All they could do was injections for the pain and to help me sleep while I waited two weeks for an MRI to free up simply so they could say “yes, a herniated disk is pinching the sciatic nerve”. Surgery wasn't an option unless I paid for it myself or faked an inability to walk through the pain. I had to look to the US for a facility to get it done since the Canadian government has all but eliminated any private medical services here. While I was looking, I took as good a care of myself as I could and managed to get the disk back in place enough to take pressure off the nerve... I am careful now and it looks like I got off lucky with only minor nerve damage. If it gets worse I will have to travel to the US to get it repaired at my own expense since it will not be covered by the system here unless I lie to them.

My father was diagnosed with severe blockage in four arteries in his heart and in need of emergency heart bypass surgery. This was after I drove him to the hospital while he was having a heart attack... a few weeks after a doctor had seen him for chest pains and given him a clean bill of health telling him to go climb mountains. Because he was younger and in better health than others on the list he bumped a few back “If we save you that could mean another fifteen healthy years while those other can only expect another five to ten at best”. A few more died while waiting so he moved further up the list. Because of this, he managed to get the surgery after only a nine month wait rather than the usual twelve to eighteen. Two years later and because the rib cage wasn't properly closed up it still hasn't knitted back together.

My cousin's husband severed two fingers on a table saw- the hospital decided that they couldn't do anything here so sent him by ambulance to another hospital two and a half hours away... with the fingers in a bag of warm salty water. Warm. Salty. Water. Of course the fingers were mush by the time they got to the other hospital and after a cursory attempt to reattach them they gave up.

My aunt had a cesarean section that was improperly closed up and she has suffered through repeated surgeries in attempts to repair the internal scarring.

My sister had her gallbladder partially removed... they were aiming for a full removal of course but didn't get the whole thing. She is in excruciating pain any time a little bit of fat slips into her diet.

It took over a year for them to diagnose my mother with a gluten intolerance. During this time she lost an alarming amount of weight and her health was severely compromised.

There are some good, decent doctors and nurses embedded in the failing system and they suffer for it. Doctors and nurses that have been family friends for as long as I've been alive have left or are planning their exodus form the system, unable to stomach the waiting lists, antiquated facilities, forced cost cutting, out of control bureaucracy and the rising level of incompetence around them.

[Clint Johnson]

The AMA is a government sanctioned guild designed to increase the cost of medical care, eliminate any competition and decrease the liability of doctors. It does good work as well and I am not trying to demonize it- it is an organization that is operating in the interest of the professional members.

Lawyers fight to run the liability of doctors through the roof. This is actually the card that the Canadian government played to get the doctors to get behind the socializing of Canada's medical system. The state promised to protect them against liability for their malpractice if they signed on. Now what happens is that if the doctor screws up they are punished by being sent out to the rural parts of the country. While Burns Lake has some good doctors who are here because they grew up here and it is there home so they will accept only making $300,000 a year... it is also one of the dumping grounds for the doctors who screw up in Vancouver.

A large amount of the blame for the cost of medical insurance can be laid at the feet of the customer as well- the adverse selection by customers means that the less healthy you are the more likely you are to buy insurance - and once they are insured there are too many people who abuse it and use the system far more than they need to. There are also those who modify their behavior to be less risk averse when they know that their liability for adverse outcomes is limited. When insurance companies try to ameliorate this it becomes very adversarial.

The advocates of a socialized medical system believe that it would eliminate the adverse selection... stated plainly, they want to force healthy people to pay for the medical care of unhealthy people. This also increases the risky behavior of a larger segment of the population when the responsibility for their own health is removed from their own hands.

Medical advances mean that there are more, and more expensive, treatments and medicines which everyone feels that they have a right to. What would be a terminal illness twenty years ago can be a treated illness today... and that will cost more.

The population is aging and that has consequences on costs as well. Smoking is down and that has a net increase in the medical costs due to aging as well; it costs less for a person to die of cancer at the age of 55 than it does to take care of that same person for the last ten years as they die of old age. There are some ugly truths in this mess.

[Clint Johnson]

I can get carried away can't I?

[Poi Boy]

So Clint...any opinions on health care ?
Aloha
-A

[Damien Molineaux]

Health care in the US may be cheaper, for the public, and the government, if it was recognized doctors are humans and that humans make mistakes, then they wouldn't have to pay outrageously expensive insurance against the possibility of being sued.

On another note, I highly recommend the movie "The Big Sellout" it follows four stories in four countries on four continents about the privatization of water, healthcare, electricity and public transport (trains). It's a new movie, not yet released, I saw it at "Vision du Réel" one of the premiere documentary film festivals in the world, it takes place every April in Nyon, Switzerland.

Cheers,
Damien

[Dan Blanchett]

Don't get me started on US 'health care.' If you are one of the unlucky millions who go through an HMO, especially in California, then you know how atrocious the quality of care can be for anything serious. Doctors treat you with one hand tied behind their back (if you're lucky).

And God help you if you have a 'political' problem like chronic Lyme Disease, the little epidemic that is quietly destroying the lives of millions of people, including my fiance. Not only do health insurance companies not recognize this debilitating disease, much less pay for its treatment, but 'rogue' doctors who try to treat it are being disbarred. But that's another story.

Back to free speech...

[Clint Johnson]

So Clint...any opinions on health care ?
Aloha
-A

Yeah, I gotta learn to keep my ranting in check... I'm passionately out of step with the majority so there is no recourse under democracy and I am a libertarian so I won't force my ideals on others... I am at a decided disadvantage to the statists.

[TimothyD]

RE: The discussion of religion and politics:

"Most of the trouble in this world has been caused by folks who can't mind their own business, because they have no business of their own to mind, any more than a smallpox virus has."

William S. Burroughs

[TimothyD]

Not to be rude Clint, but IMO let me just say that libertarianism is nothing more than anarchism with a very fascist streak. (I am an anarchist, so I am not insulting anarchism in saying this. Just to be clear)

Like I said, not trying to be rude. Just not too keen on libertarianism.

Ultimately we all need to learn to respect the rights of the individual without ignoring the rights of the community, and vice-versa.

[Clint Johnson]

Don't get me started on US 'health care.' If you are one of the unlucky millions who go through an HMO, especially in California, then you know how atrocious the quality of care can be for anything serious. Doctors treat you with one hand tied behind their back (if you're lucky).


Yes, from everything I've read and seen, the care you get in the US with HMOs is similar to what the entire Canadian health system is. Because there is so much philosophical baggage with the socialized medical system a lot of people cut it all sorts of slack while the more business oriented HMO is seen as insensitive money grubbing bastards... even when the do the exact same thing. Some of the people working within both are good decent people but mostly they are cost management organizations first and foremost.

[Alex Boothby]

The first step to world peace is to all agree what 4k camera to shoot the celebrations on :-)

My rigid dogmatic ideology says Dalsa... but let's fight it out! My army will meet you at the parking lot after school.

[Poi Boy]

I sure hope we get some Red news soon...this thread is getting very old.
-A

[Michael Hastings]

Not to be rude Clint, but IMO let me just say that libertarianism is nothing more than anarchism with a very fascist streak. (I am an anarchist, so I am not insulting anarchism in saying this. Just to be clear)

Like I said, not trying to be rude. Just not too keen on libertarianism.


From wikipedia:

"Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers individual and other societal interests inferior to the needs of the state, and seeks to forge a type of national unity, usually based on ethnic, cultural, or racial attributes. Various scholars attribute different characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually seen as its integral parts: nationalism, authoritarianism, militarism, corporatism, collectivism, totalitarianism, anti-communism, and opposition to economic and political liberalism."

Had to jump in here Tim. Fascism is the antithesis of true libertarianism.

When I joined the Libertarian party - I signed a simple statement (paraphrased) "I do not believe in the use of force to further political or social goals." Simple and direct.

With that said, libertarianism is more of a goal than a practical political methodology at this point in our evolution. Reasonably successful Libertarianism requires a rational, functional legal system, accessible by all. Which one of those is true in today's world? We are simply too much of a mess right now. By extension, in that functional legal world you would have a fair, rational, and accessible political and business system. Again, not quite the reality.

Redistribution of wealth would be essentially immoral (see Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged) in that society.

Guys like Jim Jannard (as far as I know) accumulated their wealth through entrepreneurial savvy - producing products that consumers wanted to willingly purchase with their well-earned dollars - the Libertarian way.

But much of modern wealth has been accumulated by a relative few who manipulate the dysfunctional and corrupted legal and political system. And this is specifically true of the health care system. Given that state of affairs, with the disproportionate costs borne by legacy businesses like GM, Ford, etc. and how it affects their ability to compete, combined with the fact that effectively (through hospitals being required to treat indigents) we have a bastardized form of universal healthcare - one has to wonder if some form of universal health care may be the least of the evils.


I sure hope we get some Red news soon...this thread is getting very old.
-A

Agreed!

[TimothyD]

That's cool Aqua, to each his own.

But I have read Atlas Shrugged and studied libertarianism more generally, as well as most of the larger schools of political thought, and I personally see a major problem with the libertarian ideal of unlimited rights, but very limited responsibility to society. To me it is as simple as my first message above about a balance between individual and collective rights.

Libertarianism in my view places the value of the individual above that of the group, thereby throwing off what I see as a necessary balance. I would even go so far as to say that this ideal of the importance of the individual over society is the primary cause of most of the modern problems of the human race. The sad thing is that in the struggle to be rugged individualists we have given up our individualism in support of systems that gives us nothing but a false sense of security.

As far as Jim or anyone being an entrpreneur, I'm all for it. Just don't tell me that businesses don't need to pay taxes to have access to the resources that belong to us all. If a business acts immorally, we citizens should have due recourse. I am not in favor of corporations by the way, but I firmly believe that people should be rewarded in-kind for their efforts. If you want to work to own something nice, kick ass, but if you don't that's fine too.

Ultimately taxes provide us with all of the infrastructure that makes it possible to survive and for that matter, do business. (Try delivering Red with no roads for DHL to drive on for example.) Saying that you do not support financial burdens on individuals in support of the betterment of the collective is short sighted to say the very least. The idea that the poor are poor because they are lazy is asinine. Sure, there are lazy people, but if you know anyone who is poor, you know they are not lazy. Maybe depressed, beaten down and unambitious, but can you blame them? Would you want to do the jobs they do?

Anyway, there is plenty of dysfunction in any system controlled by individuals and organizations with the power and inclination to become corrupt. So to me, problems with health care anywhere have a lot more to do with the corrupting nature of having power over others, and the sheer inefficiency of heirarchical social structures.


Anyway, I think that most people are good at heart, but we need to learn to stop allowing others to have power over us. I for one am not looking for an "Escape from freedom". Leaders are for followers:)

Cheers,

Tim

[GlennChan]

A question... is libertarianism implemented anywhere in the world? Even on a very small scale. Though I don't believe it's a good idea, I'd like to keep an open mind and see how it plays out in practice.

Interesting things happen when you put theories into practice... take communism for example. It seemed like a good idea. However, economically it did not work very well and all the communist countries ended up being dictatorships. Currently what seems to work well is a mostly free market, but with some government intervention (i.e. in antitrust cases). Some industries seem to work better under government control than in private hands (e.g. electricity).

[krd]

A question... is libertarianism implemented anywhere in the world? Even on a very small scale.

Yes! It exists by default throughout the "third world" -- no regulatory oversight, no public services, no government health care, no mandatory pension contributions and no nanny state indulgence shown to the poor or disabled.

Do libertarians expect citizens of rich industrialized democracies, who enjoy historically unprecedented standards of living, to give up their "entitlements" and their welfare states, to be more like the average El Salvadoran -- in return for being able to install a toilet without a building permit and paying taxes for nothing but battleships? Apparently so.

The fact that this discussion is going on at a site dedicated to a motion picture camera -- when movies depend on state-subsidized consumerism, state-funded infrastructure and the triumph of the taxpayer funded military-industrial-entertainment complex -- is even more odd.

[Mark B.]

There are quite a few different types of libertarians... http://civilliberty.about.com/od/uscivillibertie1/p/libertarians.htm

There's a fair mix between Civil Libertarian and regular Libertarians out there. It really boils down to whether you think the less fortunate should be supported by law (Civil Libertarian) or supported by charity (regular ol' Libertarian).

I would consider myself a Civil Libertarian. I want personal freedoms, but I expect a certain amount of comfort for everyone and I don't think that a laissez-faire fiscal policy will get us there. I recognize that some people are poor because they're lazy, but also that most people are poor because they don't have the means to get rich. Money begets money, and an eight-to-five job doesn't exactly leave time for entrepreneurial endeavors. You only have to look at what's been happening in the U.S. to see that the gap between rich and poor gets wider and wider in a laissez-faire economy.

Libertarians, in my opinion, are very optimistic about people (or very uncaring about what happens to the less fortunate). Their expectation that wealthy people will be charitable enough to help out the poor people seems illogical, since rich people wouldn't be rich if they were charitable. I think a lot of Libertarians switched over to Civil Libertarianism after witnessing the latest activities in the U.S.; the flagrant abuse of wealth and power by the oil tycoons, stock market thieves, self-gifting corporate executives, war-opportunists, and others. Wealthy people just seem to be showing themselves as exceptionally greedy these days.

[Mark B.]

Yes! It exists by default throughout the "third world" -- no regulatory oversight, no public services, no government health care, no mandatory pension contributions and no nanny state indulgence shown to the poor or disabled.

Do the proponents of libertarianism expect the citiziens of rich industrialized democracies, who enjoy historically unprecedented standards of living, to give up their "entitlements" and their welfare states, to be just like the average El Salvadorean, in return for being able to install a toilet without a building permit and paying taxes for nothing but battleships? Apparently so.


Libertarianism is not an abandonment of the care and well-being of the people in the country. It's not anarchism. It's not a country run by armed militias. It's not the freedom-filled society of a desert-dwelling people who are starving and therefore no longer care about laws. It's not a mafia-run state of lawlessness. It's not the system of government in 3rd world countries. Libertarianism is not in use by any government I know of. It's a good idea that hasn't yet seen it's time.

[ericyoung]

...The fact that this discussion is going on at a site dedicated to a motion picture camera -- the product from which depends on state-subsidized consumerism, state-funded infrastructure and the triumph of the taxpayer funded military-industrial-entertainment complex -- is even more odd.

It only seems odd at first glance. But if you look at the recent growth in social and political documentaries which are finding funding and a substantial audience, it isn't odd at all. I've always loved pure entertainment movies, but I find myself growing more and more concerned about the state of the world, and while it's entirely possible to make a doc on a PD150, it would be great to not have the format be even a small barrier to theatrical distribution. Enter Red One.

If movies can be an artform, there's room to make movies that question the status quo, and argue alternatives and hopefully make people think. Quite Red actually! :biggrin:

[GlennChan]

You only have to look at what's been happened in the U.S. this last century to see that the gap between rich and poor gets wider and wider in a laissez-faire economy.
To take a contrarian viewpoint... I don't believe there's anything necessarily wrong with a gap between the rich and poor. To plagarize a bit off of Paul Graham's opinion (see http://paulgraham.com/articles.html ), if money-making is a skill then there's naturally going to be some people who are exceptionally good at it. There's naturally going to be some people who are very good at making money... Bill Gates is one of them. Most people nowadays are rich from creating something of value (software, Red camera, whatever) and not by taking it from other people. If you want money, you're better off making it than trying to take it from someone else.

2- Granted, on the other hand some people's wealth is acquired (partly) from taking it from others or at the expense of others. US oil and arms companies arguably make some of their wealth via lobbying politicians to invade other countries. But on a whole, I don't think they represent the majority of rich people and I don't think it's necessarily fair to characterize all rich people as greedy or as people who do bad/evil/wrong things. (Though some rich people are greedy and do bad things... just like everyone else.)

[Steven M. Bailey]

To take a contrarian viewpoint... I don't believe there's anything necessarily wrong with a gap between the rich and poor. To plagarize a bit off of Paul Graham's opinion (see http://paulgraham.com/articles.html ), if money-making is a skill then there's naturally going to be some people who are exceptionally good at it. There's naturally going to be some people who are very good at making money... Bill Gates is one of them. Most people nowadays are rich from creating something of value (software, Red camera, whatever) and not by taking it from other people. If you want money, you're better off making it than trying to take it from someone else.

2- Granted, on the other hand some people's wealth is acquired (partly) from taking it from others or at the expense of others. US oil and arms companies arguably make some of their wealth via lobbying politicians to invade other countries. But on a whole, I don't think they represent the majority of rich people and I don't think it's necessarily fair to characterize all rich people as greedy or as people who do bad/evil/wrong things. (Though some rich people are greedy and do bad things... just like everyone else.)


I have to admit that there are some who are are indeed less fortunate for one reason or another. However in the US I believe they are a minority among the poor.

I own a residential construction company and have been in bussiness for five years. I started with nothing. I built my first house ten years ago while working for the much hated Wal-mart-ian Empire as a dock worker. I sold that first house and invested everything into Bailey-Built Construction Co.

My long term goal was to provide a financial buffer for my family so as to pursue my earlier career goal of becoming a writer.

Having come from the bottom of the totem pole so to speak, and having never recieved an outside break myself, I sought to hire employees and empower them to become leaders, craftsmen, men of skill. Over five years I had about 10 employees

Boy was I stupid. I gave over a large percentages of company profits to profit sharing, and much of my time to training. I didn't want to have the slaves that Wal-mart kept. Unlike many of my predissesors I held nothing back from them. If they were willing to learn, I was willing to take the time and teach them. Anything from building to finance, from following market conditions to developing land, and dealing with government regulations.

I finally gave up. I tried to treat them as if they owned a part of something so they would nurture it and make it succeed. One by one they each went back to being poor, lazy and stupid. They fought with customers, fought with each other, showed up drunk, showed up high, borrowed money then quit showing up at all. I had tons of jobs lined up but no reliable help. I lost my shirt on contracts already written.

About two years ago my cousin came back from getting his B.A. in Animation and film production. He has spent the last two years helping me finish up all of my loose ends and in turn I am buying three cameras. Two Reds and a tricked out hv20. We are dropping Bailey-Built for Blownapart Studios.

To make a long story even longer: There are many reasons why the poor are poor, and why the rich are rich. It is immoral to penalize the Hard Working Ambitious Inteligent Guy for the sake of the Lazy, Unmotivated, "I don't give a damn about myself or anyone else." guy.

There should be rich and poor. The rich need someone to care for and the poor need something to aspire to. Besides money isn't everything!(unless you don't have any)

There are no absolutes, and this model is only perfect for a the cross section of society in which I have had close intimate experience with. But hey, sometimes experience is all we really have.


Down with the rich!!(untill I become one)

[Poi Boy]

So, what is a pimped out hv20 ? I recently bought one for my wife and am curious. Do you mean with a capture card ? If that is the case it seems so cumbersome to me to tether it to a computer, kind of defeats the purpose of the camera.
Aloha
-A

[dalemccready]

Hey whoever linked to The Corporation website thanks. Great doco. Food for thought.

[Steven M. Bailey]

pimped out hv20=
Brevis adaptor kit, 4 nikkor Zooms, rail set, matt box, 9.2" 720p+ lcd monitor. I will get an intensity/black magic card, but this is mainly a crash/r&d cam. I don't have alot of camera experience yet, but the best way to learn is to hang out here with people who do, and get your hands dirty as soon as possible. Everything but the brevis kit will be cross compatible with the Reds.:nerd:

[Bachman]

Hey whoever linked to The Corporation website thanks. Great doco. Food for thought.

Hey Dale,


If you liked The Corporation I can suggest some other doco's for you

"The End Of Suburbia"
"Why We Fight" (better than Fahrenheit 9/11)
"Crude Impact"

Basically though were all screwed.

T

[IAN SUN]

pimped out hv20=
Brevis adaptor kit, 4 nikkor Zooms, rail set, matt box, 9.2" 720p+ lcd monitor. I will get an intensity/black magic card, but this is mainly a crash/r&d cam. I don't have alot of camera experience yet, but the best way to learn is to hang out here with people who do, and get your hands dirty as soon as possible. Everything but the brevis kit will be cross compatible with the Reds.:nerd:

That sounds way cool! :w00t:

Good thing we here all love image making, because that is a wonderful uniting force, something we can agree on.
If we focused on what that which we differ (what makes a good society) ....oooh boy.

FWIW from your previous post it seems to me your experience with the people you hired exhausted your well of compassion.
Take the cover off that well and let the love for your fellow man rain on in.
In time you may find your "spirit" replenished.

[Poi Boy]

Good advice Bro; as for the hv20, practice without all that stuff on the camera but always in manual mode. You'll get more out of it in my opinion and Your Reds will be here before you know it.
Aloha
-A

[Steven M. Bailey]

That sounds way cool! :w00t:

Good thing we here all love image making, because that is a wonderful uniting force, something we can agree on.
If we focused on what that which we differ (what makes a good society) ....oooh boy.

FWIW from your previous post it seems to me your experience with the people you hired exhausted your well of compassion.
Take the cover off that well and let the love for your fellow man rain on in.
In time you may find your "spirit" replenished.

I am still willing to help people to the best of my ability. I still hold the motto, "invest in people" not really expecting any return.

The point I was trying to make is that there are some problems that will exist no matter what. Some poor will be poor no matter what we do for them. The middle class is losing its ability keep up. And its not fair to tax the wealthy more, just for working harder, being smarter, or just damn lucky. We just have to admit that there are no perfect answers.

People truly are "all" that matter. But that goes for all classes, sub classes, cultures and sub cultures.

I think you have to love people to identify with them. You have to identify with them to entertain them.:)

It seems like its hard, not to get bitter. but who wants to live that way. life is too short. I never really wanted to be a builder anyway. It has been extremely hard work getting through, but I think its a blessing. I will be making incredible movies soon. I don't do any thing half-way.

I just have one more house to finish.:bye2:

[IAN SUN]

Veeery nice!

[Michael Hastings]

Tim:

I went away from Reduser for awhile, and missed your post. My post was a bit convoluted. I wanted to make the point that I didn't think real libertarianism could embrace fascism. (however I think there are quite a number of people who "claim" to be libertarians, that are really just selfish and therefore probably fascistic).

Where I am these days is that in thinking about these issues I try to keep in mind that: "I do not believe in the use of force..." ideal in order to minimize the unintended consequences, but I am aware that almost 50% of our economic output goes through the government, and I don't see that changing substantially in my lifetime or even my grandson's.

Therefore I/we have to try to influence the system - as it is today - as much as possible. I agree 100% with your statements below, and if libertarianism involves limited responsibility to society then I am not one.

As a practical matter, I think that those that have power over us have coopted (and corrupted) the idea of "defense of freedom" to excessively damage the environment, wage preemptive war, abuse the system and ignore the fundamentals of justice and equity to enhance corporate and personal wealth, etc. etc..

Therefore since I think the pendulum has swung pretty far away from what is good for collective society, most of the things I have been promoting lately would be considered pretty "liberal/left wing" and therefore "anti-libertarianian" to some "libertarians".

Again, I'm with you - the balance is the key. So maybe I can't find a label for myself that fits. Hopefully it will end up being: "a decent, intelligent, caring, human being" a "DICHB". I get the sense that that's where you are coming from too.



That's cool Aqua, to each his own.

But I have read Atlas Shrugged and studied libertarianism more generally, as well as most of the larger schools of political thought, and I personally see a major problem with the libertarian ideal of unlimited rights, but very limited responsibility to society. To me it is as simple as my first message above about a balance between individual and collective rights.

Libertarianism in my view places the value of the individual above that of the group, thereby throwing off what I see as a necessary balance.
Anyway, I think that most people are good at heart, but we need to learn to stop allowing others to have power over us. I for one am not looking for an "Escape from freedom". Leaders are for followers:)

Cheers,

Tim

[ericyoung]

...Again, I'm with you - the balance is the key. So maybe I can't find a label for myself that fits. Hopefully it will end up being: "a decent, intelligent, caring, human being" a "DICHB"...

I am aspiring, if not already one, to be a DICHB! Labels are too constricting, but DCHIB may just be open enough! It's like voting for one political party over another, or choosing one religion above others. Those divisions are too coarse to be useful. Just because I voted in optimistic hope for Blair in his first election term in no way means I agree with most of his subsequent policies!

[Steven M. Bailey]

DICHB, the counterpart would be? Beautiful Inteligent Talented Caring Human. :innocent: :whistling:

[Kenn Christenson]

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSN1923370120070519

[Michael Hastings]

DICHB, the counterpart would be? Beautiful Inteligent Talented Caring Human. :innocent: :whistling:

took me a minute... :biggrin:

[Joe Carney]

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSN1923370120070519

Thats why I don't put CITGO gas in my truck. (He is tryng to change it to Petrol Express in hopes we are too stupid to notice).