Updated: Help with rebuttal of RP by a Friend who lives in UKSubmitted by Scarecrow on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 14:27
Fellow RPers, I dont post alot here but am in need of some help with a reply to a friend who now lives in the UK (US Citizen but marred to UK citizen)and was shocked that I was a RP supporter and sent me the following email when I asked why he didnt like him....
So let's get on with RP's many problems as I see it from my perspective outside the "bullshit bubble" you all live in.
I agree, what the US has done so far is an abomination.
But do notice his prescription: un regulated, lassez-faire free markets.
"Ron Paul believes that only true free market competition will put pressure on the providers and force them to lower their costs to remain in business. Additionally, Ron Paul wants to change the tax code to allow individual Americans to fully deduct all health care costs from their taxes."
Let's take that in it's two parts.
One, a market economies golden rule is whatever the market will bear.
Think hard on what that means.
Then dig into recent memory and think about what happened when the regulations were loosened on the financial markets, did they suddenly get responsible or did they go for the gold and take everything down with them in the name of short term profit?
Second: You do know what a tax deduction is right?
You do understand that you will only not be taxed for that amount, not that you will be covered for it right?
So a tax deduction for medical coverage that costs $1000 a month (that is dirt cheap for full coverage for a family of 4 with a $1000 deductible) means you get tax relief amounting to $1400 at the end of the year. You pay the difference, $10,600 in this case. Depending on your tax bracket you get even less off right on down to nothing. Given that RP wants to lower your taxes you can count on the number being lower.
I also notice he is big on doctors "charity" for the poor. Can they not do that already? So why aren't they?
That "charity" crap is pure BS, it never has worked and it never will work in a society as large, diverse and spread out as you have in the US.
Next we'll take a look at his points to consider, leaving out the meaningless rthetorical nonsense that some of them are:
1) No one has a right to medical care. If one assumes such a right, it endorses the notion that some individuals have a right to someone else’s life and property. This totally contradicts the principles of liberty.
BS, 100% pure I've got mine screw you crap. This statement ignores the fact that you live in a society and that there is an implicit social contract involved in such a grouping.
2) If medical care is provided by government, this can only be achieved by an authoritarian government unconcerned about the rights of the individual.
More BS, how do explain the NHS, a state run medical system that is free to everyone in the UK and rates far above anything the US has ever offered in efficiency, care and life expectancy of it's patients?
3) Economic fallacies accepted for more than 100 years in the United States has deceived policy makers into believing that quality medical care can only be achieved by government force, taxation, regulations, and bowing to a system of special interests that creates a system of corporatism.
Seriously? The US has the worlds foremost free market for profit medical system. And it sucks. Not because of government regulation or government intrusion,k it sucks because the people involved are only in it for a profit. that includes the doctors.
4) More dollars into any monopoly run by government never increases quality but it always results in higher costs and prices.
So how come health care in the EU is the best on the planet and the cheapest to run and delivers the biggest bang for the buck?
In other words, yet more BS.
The rest of that is all just more misinformation, pure BS and ideological claptrap with no basis in reality so I will not bother to take this any further.
If he couldn't even get his first 4 points correct then he's already proven his disconnect from reality.
This one is thankfully short and simple.
He states that the Dept of Education is unconstitutional.
BS, the constitution neither approves NOR forbids such an entity. RP's constitutional interpretations are rather strained and devoid of connection to the actual document in this case.
He also states that it should be left to states and local governments to deal with educating their own.
Think about that, those in Barr Harbour get great educations and those in Richmond CA get shafted.
No money in Richmond, lots of money in Barr Harbour. Get it yet?
That's not propaganda, you can see the effects right now in CA, Prop 13 took the money from the schools and now a school system that was the envy of the country is rock bottom.
The real world examples are available if you care to look.
Next topic: Taxes.
He wants to eliminate them.
So there goes your health care write off eh?
The rest of his math is dubious but not critical, the elimination of taxes altogether is enough.
Here is the deal, taxes are what you pay to live in a civilized society. Period.
If you have no taxes you will soon enough have no infrastructure.
But the biggest most glaring problem? He is a Lassez_Faire free market capitalist who actually believes that fully deregulating all industry will suddenly produce companies that are guided by both their conscience and sense of fair play.
Only a fool would believe that. Recent US history proves without a doubt that is pure fantasy.
Regulations are there for a reason, usually because the entity under regulation has already in the past committed some act considered so heinous that even the market oriented government of the US, one of the world biggest champions of lassez-faire capitalism, had no choice but to slap them with some rules. Remove those rules just because you don't remember why they were implemented will result in those industries pushing their luck as far as it will go just as they did when they were originally reigned in with the regulations you and RP seem to hate so much.
That is enough, but I could easily go on all night long cataloging RP's faults, fallacies and delusions.
Just to disabuse you of my political affiliations (before you accuse me of being a dupe of some shadow agency) I am a proponent of highly regulated capitalist economic systems (stress on regulated) and democratic parliamentary systems of government. These are the system in place here in Europe and they work far better than any you have over there.
If you are looking for some way to make you r lives better you could do good by studying what we are doing here.
So any help with a 'correct" reply with links to back it up would be greatly appriciated, so Thanks in advance....
got a reply back when i asked him who he would pick in the 2012 Election & Here it is.....
I can make it easy to respond.
What makes you think unregulated free markets will produce a better society?
What makes you think YOU will be one of those to benefit from such an arrangement?
Why do you think dealing with the poor by charities alone (as espoused by RP) won't produce conditions similar to those in Dickensian London where that was the preferred method?
He does have some points that I do definitely agree with, recreational drugs and military adventurism are two.
But to get those benefits you have to submit yourself to the rule of the strong, the powerful and the rich. You are none of those.
I make over 4 times your income and I am not one of those.
I doubt you even know one of those.
RP's WHOLE thing is deregulated Lassez-Faire free markets, ANYTHING else he espouses is just to get people like you on board.
He's a Libertarian, I know what that is.
So who would I vote for?
Bernard Sanders would be a good choice, Kucinich in a pinch.
Other than that you are screwed.
Even so, RP is no prize and will not make things better, he will just make things different. And his solutions are pretty much guaranteed to leave the vast majority scrambling for scraps and you can bet your ass that you will among them.
I mean seriously, charity to solve poverty? Really? You can't be that obtuse.
He seems to be REALLY stuck on the Charity for the Poor issue but makes a good 6 fig saluary as a Network Engineer
I notice NO mention on where ANY of the $$ for the poor is supposed to come from otthr then taking it from tax payers even though we all know that NONE of our Income tax money goes to help anyone but the Banksters & the 'Military-Big Pharma-Big Agra-Prison Security-Industrial Complex'
And as far as regulation goes... WHO makes these regulitarty rules ? Who enforces them ?... /sigh