Total Posts:255|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

I have a question for the libertarians 1.

Sitara
Posts: 745
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 1:48:46 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
What is the libertarian solution to people like me with preexisting conditions and the need for medications which cost about 1200 dollars a month, and people like my mother unable to find employment and have no coverage at all? What do you have to offer that liberals do not?
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 1:53:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 1:48:46 AM, Sitara wrote:
What is the libertarian solution to people like me with preexisting conditions and the need for medications which cost about 1200 dollars a month, and people like my mother unable to find employment and have no coverage at all?

"Solution"? You're assuming that it's a problem that needs to be solved. If you can't afford your medication and no one will pay for it for you, you don't have the right to take the money by force. I would rather you be without those medications.

"What do you have to offer that liberals do not?"

The only moral system in the world.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
Sitara
Posts: 745
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 2:02:07 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 1:53:24 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 10/30/2013 1:48:46 AM, Sitara wrote:
What is the libertarian solution to people like me with preexisting conditions and the need for medications which cost about 1200 dollars a month, and people like my mother unable to find employment and have no coverage at all?

"Solution"? You're assuming that it's a problem that needs to be solved. If you can't afford your medication and no one will pay for it for you, you don't have the right to take the money by force. I would rather you be without those medications.


"What do you have to offer that liberals do not?"

The only moral system in the world.

Without my medications, I will die.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 2:26:54 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 2:02:07 AM, Sitara wrote:
At 10/30/2013 1:53:24 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 10/30/2013 1:48:46 AM, Sitara wrote:
What is the libertarian solution to people like me with preexisting conditions and the need for medications which cost about 1200 dollars a month, and people like my mother unable to find employment and have no coverage at all?

"Solution"? You're assuming that it's a problem that needs to be solved. If you can't afford your medication and no one will pay for it for you, you don't have the right to take the money by force. I would rather you be without those medications.


"What do you have to offer that liberals do not?"

The only moral system in the world.

Without my medications, I will die.

They don't care. Libertarians do not believe in the concept of society. That is, until it's time to sign up for medicare or collect their social security check. Then their all for it.
Sitara
Posts: 745
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 2:29:20 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 2:26:54 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 10/30/2013 2:02:07 AM, Sitara wrote:
At 10/30/2013 1:53:24 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 10/30/2013 1:48:46 AM, Sitara wrote:
What is the libertarian solution to people like me with preexisting conditions and the need for medications which cost about 1200 dollars a month, and people like my mother unable to find employment and have no coverage at all?

"Solution"? You're assuming that it's a problem that needs to be solved. If you can't afford your medication and no one will pay for it for you, you don't have the right to take the money by force. I would rather you be without those medications.


"What do you have to offer that liberals do not?"

The only moral system in the world.

Without my medications, I will die.

They don't care. Libertarians do not believe in the concept of society. That is, until it's time to sign up for medicare or collect their social security check. Then their all for it.

Exactly sir. There are some good ones, but they are few in number. I am just shocked that they violate their own beliefs so blantatnly: the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 2:33:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Scraping together $1,200/month for something that your life depends on is not difficult; however, it would be much more affordable in a free market for two main reasons:

1. Competition. The absence of patent laws would mean generics of all medicines. Instead of you paying a shitton for medicine that is worth a fraction of that due to patents, competing firms in the private market would find the optimal price to sell it at. Why pay $1,200/month under statism when you can pay $50/month in a voluntaryist or libertarian society?

2. Absence of Institutionalized Extortion. Without the US government extorting and squandering around 40% of the national income, not only would you and your family would have more to spend on medication, but other people would have more disposable income to spend on medicine (reducing costs with economies of scale), donate to medical charities, and donate to research.

Well that ended up being like five reasons, but whatevs. Oh, and the fact that it's the only moral system: i.e., lacking in the initiation of violence. Prior to Obamacare 75% of the healthcare industry in the US was controlled by government (about 50% directly and 25% indirectly through mandates). Mo' gov, mo' probz.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Sitara
Posts: 745
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 3:55:05 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 2:33:40 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Scraping together $1,200/month for something that your life depends on is not difficult; however, it would be much more affordable in a free market for two main reasons:

1. Competition. The absence of patent laws would mean generics of all medicines. Instead of you paying a shitton for medicine that is worth a fraction of that due to patents, competing firms in the private market would find the optimal price to sell it at. Why pay $1,200/month under statism when you can pay $50/month in a voluntaryist or libertarian society?

2. Absence of Institutionalized Extortion. Without the US government extorting and squandering around 40% of the national income, not only would you and your family would have more to spend on medication, but other people would have more disposable income to spend on medicine (reducing costs with economies of scale), donate to medical charities, and donate to research.

Well that ended up being like five reasons, but whatevs. Oh, and the fact that it's the only moral system: i.e., lacking in the initiation of violence. Prior to Obamacare 75% of the healthcare industry in the US was controlled by government (about 50% directly and 25% indirectly through mandates). Mo' gov, mo' probz.

Wrong. It is hard to find 1200 dollars for my meds. Not only do I have preesisting conditions, I can't get coverage except for disability, and theen there's the cost of my medications. I find it awefully rude when people downplay my problems and tell me how easy I have it when in reality I do not. I am love income. I do not have that money to spare.
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 4:02:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 3:55:05 AM, Sitara wrote:
At 10/30/2013 2:33:40 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Scraping together $1,200/month for something that your life depends on is not difficult; however, it would be much more affordable in a free market for two main reasons:

1. Competition. The absence of patent laws would mean generics of all medicines. Instead of you paying a shitton for medicine that is worth a fraction of that due to patents, competing firms in the private market would find the optimal price to sell it at. Why pay $1,200/month under statism when you can pay $50/month in a voluntaryist or libertarian society?

2. Absence of Institutionalized Extortion. Without the US government extorting and squandering around 40% of the national income, not only would you and your family would have more to spend on medication, but other people would have more disposable income to spend on medicine (reducing costs with economies of scale), donate to medical charities, and donate to research.

Well that ended up being like five reasons, but whatevs. Oh, and the fact that it's the only moral system: i.e., lacking in the initiation of violence. Prior to Obamacare 75% of the healthcare industry in the US was controlled by government (about 50% directly and 25% indirectly through mandates). Mo' gov, mo' probz.

Wrong. It is hard to find 1200 dollars for my meds. Not only do I have preesisting conditions, I can't get coverage except for disability, and theen there's the cost of my medications. I find it awefully rude when people downplay my problems and tell me how easy I have it when in reality I do not. I am love income. I do not have that money to spare.

Limiting belief. Make it happen. Get a job, sell unnecessary items you own, offer to help your neighbors do work in their houses or offices for money. Go door-to-door and ask for donations after explaining your story.

The only boundaries are those which you've chosen to accept. Walk through life with ease, and if something shitty like $1,200 meds comes up, don't stress about it. Accept it and take right action to make it happen.

I don't want to hear any more complaining. Negativity will not solve your problems, it will exacerbate them. Stop fantasizing about how much easier life would be under libertarianism, and start making your life better today.

/thread
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 5:45:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 2:02:07 AM, Sitara wrote:
At 10/30/2013 1:53:24 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 10/30/2013 1:48:46 AM, Sitara wrote:
What is the libertarian solution to people like me with preexisting conditions and the need for medications which cost about 1200 dollars a month, and people like my mother unable to find employment and have no coverage at all?

"Solution"? You're assuming that it's a problem that needs to be solved. If you can't afford your medication and no one will pay for it for you, you don't have the right to take the money by force. I would rather you be without those medications.


"What do you have to offer that liberals do not?"

The only moral system in the world.

Without my medications, I will die.

I honestly don't care if you think that that gives you the right to rob people.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 5:53:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 2:26:54 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 10/30/2013 2:02:07 AM, Sitara wrote:
At 10/30/2013 1:53:24 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 10/30/2013 1:48:46 AM, Sitara wrote:
What is the libertarian solution to people like me with preexisting conditions and the need for medications which cost about 1200 dollars a month, and people like my mother unable to find employment and have no coverage at all?

"Solution"? You're assuming that it's a problem that needs to be solved. If you can't afford your medication and no one will pay for it for you, you don't have the right to take the money by force. I would rather you be without those medications.


"What do you have to offer that liberals do not?"

The only moral system in the world.

Without my medications, I will die.

They don't care. Libertarians do not believe in the concept of society. That is, until it's time to sign up for medicare or collect their social security check. Then their all for it.

Just like how those who are against robbery still want the robbers to return what they have stolen are suddenly "for" robbery, right?
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 6:32:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
WSA: If you're not a millionaire, it's because you're lazy.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,256
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 6:43:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 2:02:07 AM, Sitara wrote:
At 10/30/2013 1:53:24 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 10/30/2013 1:48:46 AM, Sitara wrote:
What is the libertarian solution to people like me with preexisting conditions and the need for medications which cost about 1200 dollars a month, and people like my mother unable to find employment and have no coverage at all?

"Solution"? You're assuming that it's a problem that needs to be solved. If you can't afford your medication and no one will pay for it for you, you don't have the right to take the money by force. I would rather you be without those medications.


"What do you have to offer that liberals do not?"

The only moral system in the world.

Without my medications, I will die.

You are gonna die with meds too.

We already have too many old whiners in the world. Out with the old and in with the new. Go make a baby or something; stop being so selfish.
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 8:33:17 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 1:53:24 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 10/30/2013 1:48:46 AM, Sitara wrote:
What is the libertarian solution to people like me with preexisting conditions and the need for medications which cost about 1200 dollars a month, and people like my mother unable to find employment and have no coverage at all?

"Solution"? You're assuming that it's a problem that needs to be solved.

Increase costs would say shes correct.

If you can't afford your medication and no one will pay for it for you, you don't have the right to take the money by force.

Yes she does...right to life..
And why not? IF she does take money "by force" as your complaining, it means less people default on their expenses, saving all of us money. Besides, individual mandate is really just a state corporation operating in the market to the insurance companies sucking up all the low income earners, how is she taking money "by force"? Why is it somehow okay for you to infringe on the ability of the state to open up a business? Hypocrite.

Know what happens to hospitals who have clients who default? They go to a judge, and the hospital not only gets those medical bills paid for, but the legal expenses and punitive damages for wasting their time; when someone defaults it costs we the people more. Stop people from defaulting, you've won half the battle.

I would rather you be without those medications.

And this is why I wish some people have to apply to have kids..... may your children have diabetes and you feel the pinch as a result.



"What do you have to offer that liberals do not?"

The only moral system in the world.

How in the hell is telling her she should die the "right" thing to do? See, this is why I hate Ayn Rand... the poor quality of life caused by the premature deaths of individuals (about 40 thousand per year due to a lack of insurance) is the biggest bout of barbarism any civil society ought to reject. If we already have a social safety net below no one is allowed to fall to uphold the right to life, then how can the right to life be rejected when it comes to checking ones pulse?
Thank you for voting!
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 8:34:37 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 1:53:24 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 10/30/2013 1:48:46 AM, Sitara wrote:
What is the libertarian solution to people like me with preexisting conditions and the need for medications which cost about 1200 dollars a month, and people like my mother unable to find employment and have no coverage at all?

"Solution"? You're assuming that it's a problem that needs to be solved. If you can't afford your medication and no one will pay for it for you, you don't have the right to take the money by force. I would rather you be without those medications.


"What do you have to offer that liberals do not?"

The only moral system in the world.

The poster boy for objectivism strikes again.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 8:42:04 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 2:33:40 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Scraping together $1,200/month for something that your life depends on is not difficult; however, it would be much more affordable in a free market for two main reasons:

1. Competition. The absence of patent laws would mean generics of all medicines. Instead of you paying a shitton for medicine that is worth a fraction of that due to patents, competing firms in the private market would find the optimal price to sell it at. Why pay $1,200/month under statism when you can pay $50/month in a voluntaryist or libertarian society?

2. Absence of Institutionalized Extortion. Without the US government extorting and squandering around 40% of the national income, not only would you and your family would have more to spend on medication, but other people would have more disposable income to spend on medicine (reducing costs with economies of scale), donate to medical charities, and donate to research.

Well that ended up being like five reasons, but whatevs. Oh, and the fact that it's the only moral system: i.e., lacking in the initiation of violence. Prior to Obamacare 75% of the healthcare industry in the US was controlled by government (about 50% directly and 25% indirectly through mandates). Mo' gov, mo' probz.

What's to stop patent laws existing without a state, WSA? I mean otherwise corporations are basically handing over all business to the most capable investor. You're left with no incentive for anyone but the wealthiest to have an idea. You really have no f*cking idea what you're talking about.
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 9:09:48 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 3:55:05 AM, Sitara wrote:
At 10/30/2013 2:33:40 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Scraping together $1,200/month for something that your life depends on is not difficult; however, it would be much more affordable in a free market for two main reasons:

1. Competition. The absence of patent laws would mean generics of all medicines. Instead of you paying a shitton for medicine that is worth a fraction of that due to patents, competing firms in the private market would find the optimal price to sell it at. Why pay $1,200/month under statism when you can pay $50/month in a voluntaryist or libertarian society?

2. Absence of Institutionalized Extortion. Without the US government extorting and squandering around 40% of the national income, not only would you and your family would have more to spend on medication, but other people would have more disposable income to spend on medicine (reducing costs with economies of scale), donate to medical charities, and donate to research.

Well that ended up being like five reasons, but whatevs. Oh, and the fact that it's the only moral system: i.e., lacking in the initiation of violence. Prior to Obamacare 75% of the healthcare industry in the US was controlled by government (about 50% directly and 25% indirectly through mandates). Mo' gov, mo' probz.

Wrong. It is hard to find 1200 dollars for my meds. Not only do I have preesisting conditions, I can't get coverage except for disability, and theen there's the cost of my medications. I find it awefully rude when people downplay my problems and tell me how easy I have it when in reality I do not. I am love income. I do not have that money to spare.

You're missing the point. In a libertarian/voluntaryist society with a free market, it won't cost as much. When you remove all of the legal barriers to entry for the medication, more companies will come back with a relatively homogenous product, meaning you'll have choice of where you buy. When you have the choice of where to buy, companies can't afford to charge such a large amount. After all, if one company is charging less than another company, you'll be buying from the less expensive company. This leads to the competing companies lowering the prices (in order to get business).

After all of the companies have relatively homogenous prices for the same product, one company might decide to lower prices and get more businesses. Then everybody has to lower prices.

Lather, rinse, and repeat until the prices reflect what the product is actually worth, where price equals cost for the company.

In a libertarian society, the medication wouldn't cost nearly that much. With the patent markups applied in the pharmaceutical industry, it is not entirely unreasonable to assume that the price could be lowered as much as 800%-1000%

http://www.wanttoknow.info...
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 9:15:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 9:09:48 AM, ClassicRobert wrote:

Address my point to WSA, dude. Oh, you can't? Whoops, capitalist innovation just nosedived.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 9:16:19 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'm getting very sick of idiots who've read absolute bullsh*t but have been to stupid to realize it as such and then go on to own that bullsh*t. It's... a joke.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 9:18:15 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
"Look, this guy wrote stuff with numbers. Also, this other guy says stuff that I don't understand, but you don't have to know that. The main point: I don't like government."
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 9:22:20 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 9:15:08 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 10/30/2013 9:09:48 AM, ClassicRobert wrote:

Address my point to WSA, dude. Oh, you can't? Whoops, capitalist innovation just nosedived.

Oh, you ask questions arrogantly with the expectation that people won't be able to answer them?

That's part of the whole "there's competition" argument. Lowering prices isn't the only way to out-compete other firms. Improving quality is another way to do it, and it's a way that happens every day.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 9:25:55 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 9:22:20 AM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 10/30/2013 9:15:08 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 10/30/2013 9:09:48 AM, ClassicRobert wrote:

Address my point to WSA, dude. Oh, you can't? Whoops, capitalist innovation just nosedived.

Oh, you ask questions arrogantly with the expectation that people won't be able to answer them?

That's part of the whole "there's competition" argument. Lowering prices isn't the only way to out-compete other firms. Improving quality is another way to do it, and it's a way that happens every day.

You don't get it. Patent laws actually protect equality in a competitive market. They actually make the market more competitive, allowing for new players to get into the game with new ideas. Abolish patent laws and these new players cannot get into the game; their ideas will just be swept up by the already-established players with whom they will not be able to compete. Abolishing patent laws actually stifles creativity. It deals a huge blow to "capitalist innovation".
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 9:30:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Patent laws hold back monopoly. You have your "by the people, for the people" government as a collective monopoly to protect against monopolies owned by individuals. That's how it works. No patent laws = surefire fascism. Oh, unless you have some sort of collective check against that... maybe we're going for redistribution rather than patent laws? lol
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 9:34:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 9:25:55 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 10/30/2013 9:22:20 AM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 10/30/2013 9:15:08 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 10/30/2013 9:09:48 AM, ClassicRobert wrote:

Address my point to WSA, dude. Oh, you can't? Whoops, capitalist innovation just nosedived.

Oh, you ask questions arrogantly with the expectation that people won't be able to answer them?

That's part of the whole "there's competition" argument. Lowering prices isn't the only way to out-compete other firms. Improving quality is another way to do it, and it's a way that happens every day.

You don't get it. Patent laws actually protect equality in a competitive market. They actually make the market more competitive, allowing for new players to get into the game with new ideas. Abolish patent laws and these new players cannot get into the game; their ideas will just be swept up by the already-established players with whom they will not be able to compete. Abolishing patent laws actually stifles creativity. It deals a huge blow to "capitalist innovation".

The above is, of course, entirely representative of a market where large companies don't just acquire all of the patents they can so that they can have a monopoly on the market. Companies like Monsanto use patents to have 90%-95% market shares.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 9:35:22 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 9:32:21 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I'm not arrogant, but a frustrated intelligent person among retards.

I understand that. Your phrasing could have been better though.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 9:40:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/30/2013 9:34:44 AM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 10/30/2013 9:25:55 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 10/30/2013 9:22:20 AM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 10/30/2013 9:15:08 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 10/30/2013 9:09:48 AM, ClassicRobert wrote:

Address my point to WSA, dude. Oh, you can't? Whoops, capitalist innovation just nosedived.

Oh, you ask questions arrogantly with the expectation that people won't be able to answer them?

That's part of the whole "there's competition" argument. Lowering prices isn't the only way to out-compete other firms. Improving quality is another way to do it, and it's a way that happens every day.

You don't get it. Patent laws actually protect equality in a competitive market. They actually make the market more competitive, allowing for new players to get into the game with new ideas. Abolish patent laws and these new players cannot get into the game; their ideas will just be swept up by the already-established players with whom they will not be able to compete. Abolishing patent laws actually stifles creativity. It deals a huge blow to "capitalist innovation".

The above is, of course, entirely representative of a market where large companies don't just acquire all of the patents they can so that they can have a monopoly on the market. Companies like Monsanto use patents to have 90%-95% market shares.

There's no stifling of creativity there, though, is there? Abolish patent laws and companies like Monsanto, the already-established companies, will take 100% market shares. Also, I'd assume they're buying the patents, no? I wonder does that factor into your 90-95%.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 9:43:29 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Of course I do believe capitalism is to stifle creativity in general. I'd be rather with Chomsky there.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2013 9:47:26 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
The idea would be that the cost of health-care would become so affordable, that even w/ a pre-existing condition you'd be able to pay for it out of pocket, compared to the present day state of thing.

I'd say some main problem with the current state of healthcare is the artificial restriction of the supply of healthcare workers and that health insurance lowers the incentive to find cheap solutions to healthcare problems since one is a "third party". John Stossel has a great segment on healthcare explaining it.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...