Questions to the Forum Youth
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=165570
Printed Date: 06 March 2026 at 9:18am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Questions to the Forum Youth
Posted By: oldsoldier
Subject: Questions to the Forum Youth
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 7:31pm
|
Curious on the social leanings here and just wondering:
1 Would you accept a additional 30% tax on your income to provide universal healthcare for all americans? 2. Would you accept a additional 10% tax on yout income to provide universal education through secondary level for all americans. These taxes would be in addition to the current tax schedules. (approximately 30% to include income, state, sales, etc) So that would leave you with only approximately 30% of your income to you, but you would have health care, and education. Is that the system you would prefere? (check european tax schedules for standardized social benifits) 3. Should universal health care standard be determined for lifestyle, for example if you smoke, drink, practice unsafe sex, and make personal lifestyle decesions that are harmfull to your health should you recieve more benifits, or less based on personal lifestyle? 4. Should personal health vices be higher taxed (alcohol, tobacco, video games (eye strain), music (hearing loss), etc? 5. Should healthcare be limited to two children per mother, in order to keep it manageable, if not what would be a practical financial limit? 6. Should energy be rationed, electricity, gasoline, fuel oil etc, in order to control consumption and pricing, as well as universal availability? 7. Should individual and family housing be limited in size in order to be more efficient and fair in energy consumption? Just seeing where we are here on the Socialist meter. ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: bj.elder
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 7:33pm
universal healthcare FTL 
------------- 
|
Posted By: bj.elder
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 7:34pm
|
BUT, if there is one thing i've learned from politics, is that you get absolutely NOWHERE trying to discuss these things. sure its fun to argue but in the end all you do is get wrapped up in it and always wind up getting upset. to me its easier to sit on the sidelines and worry about the things i CAN control. (serenity prayer anyone? serenity to accept the things i cannot change) -------------
|
Posted By: BARREL BREAK
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 7:47pm
|
1+2: The issue is slightly more complex than simply putting a number on it. Are we talking combined federal and state taxes (Which vary wildly)? And how is this tax levied? I could support an increased sliding scale tax, but not an across the board 30% increase.
Also, taxation rates in Europe leave more than 30% of income, as far as I know. 3.If I am correct, a universal healthcare plan as currently in place in other nations does not entitle you to unlimited coverage, am I right? 4. Taxed at the retail level, perhaps to a limited extent. On the one hand, these things create additional burdens on the system, but if the policies go too far, it can be seen as a limitation of choice. 5. I see no reason to look at this as a "per house" deal. There is no reason to punish the child in a situation where they have no control over their environment. 6. No. However, we need more stringent efficiency regulations. 7. No, energy is a commodity, to be bartered. |
Posted By: Styro Folme
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 8:00pm
|
the forum youth doesn't have enough patience to do the survey. tl;dl ------------- X |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 8:01pm
|
Having a bad day OS? None of the questions you've provided are black and white enough for a yes/no question. And there are lots of questions like these that could be turned against the conservative point of view (which BTW I consider myself very conservative),i.e. Would You Consent Your Tax Dollars Going to a War You Do Not Support?... Taxation is a complicated issue-one that is exploited more often than explained. ------------- 
|
Posted By: phillll227
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 8:09pm
|
1. No. 2. No. 3. No universal healthcare eliminates this question. 4. Maybe tobacco and alcohol, but not music or video games. I think marijuana should be legalized and heavily taxed. 5. Once again, not having socialist healthcare eliminates this question. 6. No. 7. No. ------------- |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 8:21pm
|
As pointed out, this is once again a significant over-simplification of everything. For one thing, if I paid those taxes for universal healthcare and education, I wouldn't have to pay the 20k+/year that I am paying for health insurance now, and I wouldn't have to pay to send my kids to college. It's not like these things are free now, and they would suddenly become expensive when they became universal. There are several studies claiming that we actually pay MORE per capita for health coverage in the US than many universal-coverage countries. So just adding it on is flat out incorrect. But - I will suggest that I voluntarily live in Wisconsin, which has one of highest tax burdens in the country. Our state income tax is 7.5%, and our property taxes are very high as well. Somehow, my head has not exploded. |
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 8:23pm
But it might when OS breaks the record for number of redundant political threads started in one day. |
Clark Kent wrote:Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 8:28pm
| Moreover, I would suggest that asserting that desiring universal healthcare/education is "socialist" is too simplistic. There are many reasons for desiring one or both of those that have nothing to do with socialism. |
Posted By: Cedric
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 8:41pm
|
Now you're hating on socialists? It never ends.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Hitman
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 8:43pm
|
I like that when I drove my friend to the hospital a few months ago it was nothing out of his pocket. When you're in pain and suffering, the last thing you want to be doing is shelling out cash. You seem stuck in the sixties. 1. I am a Canadian who currently shells out whatever the system costs. It doesn't matter to me, it's been in place before I can remember, it's nothing off my back. 2. Well, this is done in Europe. I do think that it is a little too much because people like me would abuse it. 3. Some people are forced into lifestyles that they do not want. You have to realize that the needy need more help then the wealthy. 4. Never. 5. No, who even has more than two in this day and age? 6. This I am not sure about. 7. It couldn't hurt. ------------- |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 8:52pm
|
20K in healthcare annually.....really poor HC plan there troop. See if you enlisted and retired it would be FREE...............everything has its price, my price for free health care was time.
Da momma still pays into the City of Lincoln plan, but I believe it is only like $47.00 every two weeks, government employees go figure, and we still use it for minor things instead og the lines and time at the VA or tri-care fiasco. I just want an option...believe me "socialized" medicine like the VA and Tri-care is just a fiasco to partake in. Never see the same doc twice in a row, Primary Care physician appointments impossible to get, walk in sick, care nurse hands you a bucket of medications and gives you an appointment (hopefully that week). Unless you are at deaths door, care is better at the local LinCare clinic, staffed by non-government employees. -------------
|
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 8:54pm
| Your point? |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 8:58pm
|
hit send before finished... -------------
|
Posted By: BARREL BREAK
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:00pm
|
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:03pm
|
Ah. I agree that the VA, from my understanding, is not a model we want to expand. I rather like my expensive health care (self-employed, so I pay double), and would very much like to keep it. But other countries have managed better single-payer systems than the VA. Simply because the VA is awful doesn't mean that it has to be that way. Nor do we have to copy what others have done. I am sure that a market-based approach would be welcomed. The bottom line is that there are millions of Americans, including millions of children, that have no health care coverage whatsover - and that is bad and wrong for a whole host of reasons. It is frankly simply an unacceptable state of affairs. So to answer your first question - would I accept some additional taxation if it meant 100% health coverage, at least to a minimal level, of all Americans? Absolutely. |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:07pm
|
I just see the current VA and Tri-care mix as the potential issues any nationalised health care system will encounter, and possible more compounded problems due to a larger beaurococy(sp) required for the scale of that exercise.
The experiment is inplace with the VA and Military Health Care systems, is it working efficiently as a government entity, that is the question, and from the current political attacks and GAO reports, it appears not to be. -------------
|
Posted By: ¤ Råp¡Ð F¡rè ¤
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:25pm
|
1. No 2. No, the majority of the youth is full of morons and they don't give a damn. 3. Yes, if you do harmful things to your body, you don't deserve universal health care 4. Yes, but not for petty things such as video games or music 5. No - what should it be? Not sure, maybe something a system like you mentioned above, where it depends on life styles 6. No 7. Yes - allow more land for businesses, farms, etc. Hell, maybe prevent eminent domain from stealing land. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Pariel
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:31pm
|
All I'll really say is that I would in no way approve of only receiving a third of my income.
If we could do something about the half-a-trillion dollars a year spent on the military, we could do a lot--including nationalized health care. Frankly, I don't really feel a need to drop bombs everywhere, it doesn't help anyone, and it certainly hasn't been helping us. |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:31pm
|
Wouldn't that BE eminent domain stealing land? |
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:39pm
| I would be absolutely alright with the first two. Taxes for 100% population coverage as well as education. |
Posted By: Pariel
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:41pm
|
Just wondering, but why do you keep creating these threads?
I realize you might actually care...but what do you actually get out of it? |
Posted By: ¤ Råp¡Ð F¡rè ¤
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:45pm
Yes, technically, you're right. What I am thinking is that if their was a standard size for property and homes, there would be more available land, and hopefully eminent domain wouldn't be as big of a problem. When I think of eminent domain, I think of business being taken, not homes (considering that is what has/is happening to my family). Of all the seven questions I answered, this is the only one that I am not totally positive about how I feel. Either way, I am strongly against eminent domain, and it seems like this idea might possibly reduce the need to use eminent domain. -------------
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:46pm
|
Knowledge....opinions, thoughts....kind of the nature of the thread title isn't it.
I Believe Sun Tzu wrote "Know thine enemy", and how else would you guage the opinions of the opposing political thought without provoking thier thoughts, opinions, or are we satisfied with only the talking points of major media? But many here can not comprehend any opposing thought to thier limited exposure to real world events, situations, and life expieriences, and dream of the utopia of youth, we all were there, part of the package. -------------
|
Posted By: Pariel
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:48pm
|
Frankly, I think I spend enough time talking--most of what this country needs is people getting stuff done.
I, personally, would be entirely in favor of benevolent dictatorship, or even just a better form of election. Mismanagement and petty politics are a much more major problem as far as the federal government's spending is concerned than the percentage of my paycheck going to taxes (since I don't have a paycheck anyway). |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:51pm
|
See you are still in the utopia of youth, again another quote, the young are proud to be liberal, till the day of thier first tax bill, then they are forced to become conservative for thier own and thier family's financial survival. Someting like that, forgot the author. -------------
|
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:53pm
-------------  irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 9:55pm
|
No, brought up by a service family, USAF dad, I was not authorized to be liberal. I didn't earn it, I did not get it kind of teenage era. Worked since 12, paper route, deli runner, and a few under the table endevours, one went bad and got my invited to join the Army as an alternative to be a guest of the state for a few years. Did have some wild dreams and aspirations in my youth though. Took 40 years for most to finally pan out. -------------
|
Posted By: BARREL BREAK
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:00pm
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:06pm
|
Not universal, but you take the average New Yorker from the city, and an upstater....notice the political and financial thought processes. Totally differant. Again geography, and upbringing has a lot to do with mindset, try getting someone from rural Alabama Democrat farmer and explain his taxes are going up to support some welfare mom in Detroit, and notice the response.
Many do get frustrated as the paycheck shinks, taxes and bills go up, and the utopian dream vanishes into reality. Example most main line left leaning liberal activists insist on social requirements for you, while not placing themselves into the same societal mix. Recent example, Al Gore, never see him fly coach (private jet), large mansions with massive energy bills, drives large BMW, Mercedes, and a few SUV's, but lectures you to be more concious on global warming. -------------
|
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:07pm
|
Also brought up by the service, but made my own decisions. Just because a person is young does not discredit them to experiences, opinions, or credibility. It's a joke to put more faith in someone simply because they are older or because they have a military background. |
Posted By: BARREL BREAK
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:10pm
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:19pm
|
Lets see, 1950'searly 60's vs probably 1980's two totally differant set of societal rules during youth.
Faith is more a standard of shared expieriences, to read a book on a period of history and make your opinion on it, or expierience that history first hand, which is more credible? Lived through the Vietnam years, the Civil Rights Movement, Johnsons dream of a Great Society, saw first hand the pros and cons of that era, and see many of the same issues resounding again today, who better to rationalize the comparisons, my book learned 38 year old college sociology proffesor who learned all she knows of the era from a book, or one who was in the mess of societal change firsthand. I was a 24 year old wounded veteran when I heard we were leaving before the job was done in 1972, knew many local Vietnamese, served with many fine scouts, and in 1975 was more frustrated when we abandoned them by political necesity, as we are doing today, and many see no comparison to todays Iraqi mess. Yep I know nothing of the mind of a soldier or veteran of this war, his frustration, and his question of why? That is just one example of age............... -------------
|
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:21pm
|
I had family not come back from that country, setting up for a great turmoil within my family that still rocks us today. What you see as a job unfinished I, as well as the rest of my family see as a job that should have never been undertaken and couldn't pull out early enough, especially in 1969. I know the mind of the family to go without their soldier. So why either my age or that I have never served discredit my opinions on the matter? |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:24pm
|
BB, are we conservatives not placed into little representitive boxes by our opposition. The hate George Bush co-allition places all conservatives into thier own little representitive niches, so how are we so differant? To quote you: taking an example that is not representative of most people. Why do you insist upon doing that? as I am placed into you little mental box of what you percieve a conservative republican to be. Last time I checked I still liked clean water and air, but I like to keep the money I earn.......... -------------
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:25pm
|
1 Would you accept a additional 30% tax on your income to provide universal healthcare for all americans? i thought all americans could go to high school for free? ------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:30pm
|
The political leaders in 1963, as well as 2003 saw a job that needed to be done. A Democrat in 1964, and a Republican in 2003 placed America on those respective courses. Each changed America, I went and did my duty as my leaders required, those today who are in a 100% volunteer military do thiers. No difference. Whether each, both or neither were necesary or required will be up to history beyond our generations to comtemplate.
All opinions on the matter are relivant, the rational and basis of the opinion are the question. You can support or protest the war, but you must balance your view on the whole picture, not just the slice that suits your needs of the moment. -------------
|
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:31pm
| So why are some people's opinions misguided, youthful, or just something to shrug off your shoulders? |
Posted By: BARREL BREAK
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:33pm
I do, however, make logical jumps based upon you political affiliation, for example, if someone tells me they are a (for example) libertarian, I will assume they oppose eminent domain, since that is an extension of their political views. |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:34pm
...pilot's licenses go easy these days... -------------
|
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:36pm
|
I do not believe this question can be categorically answered. Some things are better learned on the ground - others are not. There are many things I experienced when I was younger that I did not understand until I read/learned about it from books. Other things I thought I knew from personal experience turned out to be flat wrong. Personal experience is not necessarily better or more reliable than the collective learnings of others. |
Posted By: BARREL BREAK
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:38pm
|
Clark - Agreed. For example, which would be more effective; A meta-analysis of several studies about PTSD, or one person's experience in the army?
Assuming that the studies in the analysis are credible. |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:39pm
|
Each of us find the realivance of anothers opinions. Many here see my opinions as misguided, arrogance of age, and shrug them off thier shoulders, it is the right you have. But many here do not balance thier opinions on the whole picture, that seems to be the over-riding issue here.
I can not see into the future, nor can anyone else here, but I do remmember the news footage of Saigon in 1975, the boat people, the Killing Fields of Cambodia, and this bunch who have the potential of "winning" in Iraq are a lot more unforgiving than the North Vietnamese Peoples Army, or the Khemer Rouge. I just forsee our televisions again filled with these images, and the questions put forth on why? -------------
|
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:42pm
|
But why get upset at how your opinion is viewed on this forum when you are doing the exact same thing to anyone that is either young or somewhat left? |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 10:49pm
|
Ask any of the forum types who know me personally, I do not get upset over this trivial forum. I use it as an exchange of ideas, thoughts and opinions and make my personal judgements on the outcomes of threads accordingly. I have bought my ticket and have had my ride of youth and life, I am settled on who I am and how I got here, but I do fear for the next generations as any parent does. My kids are a little older than many here, but the representation of todays youth and its culture will help me understand the questions of my grandkids. -------------
|
Posted By: Hysteria
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 11:12pm
|
Taking OS's 5th question even further, what does everyone think about limiting the number of children a family can have? To vastly misquote a quote that I recall Clark quoting: "The less intelligent the person, the more kids they will have". |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 11:14pm
|
Care to cite a source for the additional 30% tax for universal health care, or 10% for universal post secondary education? FWIW, the Republic of Ireland has free or very cheap university education, and their economy is one of the fastest growing in Europe. Spending money to educate your populace is not an expense, it's an investment in your economy. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 11:16pm
------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 28 March 2007 at 11:20pm
|
Those numbers are just a random selection. What will be the overall tax burden on this is unknown, but for sure your taxes will need to go up considerably to fund this kind of massive social undertaking.
Currently we can not properly fund our current public education system to a standard required, how are we going to fund an addition 4 years of schooling post high school? Where will this funding come from, lotteries (poor peoples taxation), vice taxation, confiscation, it will not magically appear cause we "need" the program. Yes education is an investment, but where do we get the initial capital to invest? -------------
|
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 12:15am
Secondary education refers to college, I believe. -------------
|
Posted By: BARREL BREAK
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 1:48am
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 2:21am
------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: -ProDigY-
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 2:55pm
------------- 
|
Posted By: CarbineKid
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 3:22pm
|
OS I doubt I count as one of the forums misguided youth. Anyhow here's my answers(as if you didn't already know)
1 No 2 No 3 No 4 no 5 No 6 No 7 No |
Posted By: -ProDigY-
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 3:31pm
|
-------------
|
Posted By: Tae Kwon Do
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 3:36pm
|
The 'we hate progress' club.
------------- 
|
Posted By: -ProDigY-
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 3:39pm
|
-------------
|
Posted By: c4cypher
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 3:41pm
|
My responses are my own personal opinions, not The Way Things Should Be.
*EDIT* I just blinked ... looked at this post, looked at the other threads, and then realized somthing. I respect your political views OldSoldier ... but I think you're trolling on political issues. I want to come here to watch Prodigy pick his nose and talk about pepper spray, not solve the great Political debates of our time. |
Posted By: Tae Kwon Do
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 3:46pm
I think if you ask people in Scandinavian/ some European countries, they seem to have quite a different opinion. -------------
|
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 3:50pm
| I think Insurance Companies are such frauds now, it's sad that I'd rather give my money to the government for them to figure out. |
Posted By: c4cypher
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 3:54pm
|
/me smiles and shrugs at Dune. I think you and I would differ on what to do with our money, but I can respect that your money is your own and you can do with it what you like. I'm just going to get upset when people start telling me that I'm being forced to spend more money to solve other people's problems. |
Posted By: -ProDigY-
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 3:55pm
|
-------------
|
Posted By: Tae Kwon Do
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 3:56pm
This makes me wonder if you really understand how the system would work. -------------
|
Posted By: -ProDigY-
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 3:58pm
|
-------------
|
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 4:27pm
|
1 hell no 2. hell no 3. no universal healthcare 4. no, because youd be paying for your own damn treatment because there isnt universal healthcare 5. 0$ 6. or, you know, not. 7. gotta love the totalitarianism yo |
Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 4:37pm
|
Even though I don't make very much I still think we as a society have an obligation to do what we can in order to survive. It disappoints me when people simply worry about their own children, thinking the only way to live is within their own bubble. |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 4:41pm
You do realize that the cost difference need not be great, right? Centralized health care/education might actually be CHEAPER? It's not like health care and education are free now. But it is easy to compare - public high schools in the US are paid for mostly by property taxes. Take a look at your property tax bill and compare that to the tuition cost at the local private high school. Then keep in mind that not all of the property taxes go to education. Shockingly, tuition at a private school is higher than most people's property taxation! And, of course, this little example highlights another little factoid: We already HAVE socialized education in this country. Public schools are... public! Paid for by taxes. Yet the country has not exploded. And that's just K-12. Why, do you ask, is the tuition at such great institutions such as UCLA, SUNY, and UW so much cheaper than many other inferior universities? Because those state schools are heavily subsidized by taxes. That's right - our university system is about 50% socialized already. Yet we have some of the finest universities in the world. People have this delusion that the US is the anti-socialist state. The truth is that we have numerous socialistic features. Some work well, some not so well - just like everywhere else. Socialism isn't an on/off switch. |
Posted By: Hitman
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 5:57pm
|
FINISH HIM!
------------- |
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 29 March 2007 at 6:55pm
|
As long as a get my bowl of rice a day and a hole full of nice soft dirt to sleep in, I can't complain. |