Texas cuts Planned Parenthood. Costs tax payers an estimated 200 million.

[Tribunal]

This whole thread is about saving the government money, what's up with your red herring?

Actually, this thread is about Texas making a decision, and what people think of it. The primary point of the title is the financial aspect, but that doesn't mean it's the only thing out there or even the only part of the article. I can think it's a poor decision on a human rights and financial front, believe it or not. I can even keep the two separate, something that many others can't seem to.

My original reply was mostly about money because I was responding to a 'why are we deciding a moral issue based on cost' post. The truth is, the Republicans introduced the "it's only about money" framework but still insist on discussing the moral aspect as well. I first addressed the framework (money), and then the immediate, change of subject, moral rebuttal.

[Wells]

You'll forgive me if I find no reason to believe that.

This whole "Americans without insurance" thing is pretty recent.

As for poor people? My heart doesn't bleed for them.

So you don't think sickness lowers worker productivity?

[Laize]

Let's recap Laize. You're for minimal government. But you're ok with government blowing hundreds of millions on a moral stand against things no one hates. But that's not a contradiction because if you could you'd eliminate welfare entirely.

If you pay for neither planned parenthood NOR welfare you save even MORE taxpayer money. Now you're getting it.

[Skizo]

No one has said saving money is the only reason for funding Planned Parenthood. So what's with the strawmaning?

When did I even come closer to strawmanning? I've been saying the same thing this whole time and you never even came close to addressing my point
All I ever said was that considering abortion in a context that abortion saves the government money is immoral and unethical, even if it is a side point.

[Grizzly Willy]

You'll forgive me if I find no reason to believe that.

This whole "Americans without insurance" thing is pretty recent.

As for poor people? My heart doesn't bleed for them.

Are we going to fall back on the "poor people are poor because they're bad people" argument?

[Wells]

If you pay for neither planned parenthood NOR welfare you save even MORE taxpayer money. Now you're getting it.

Sticking you head in the sand doesn't make problems go away. Just because you refuse to pay for poor sick people doesn't mean poor sick people go away or stop being a problem.

Are we going to fall back on the "poor people are poor because they're bad people" argument?

He's falling back to his "I don't give a shit" argument.

[Laize]

So you don't think sickness lowers worker productivity?

Of course it does. That's why companies have a financial incentive to keep their productive workers healthy.

[Grizzly Willy]

When did I even come closer to strawmanning? I've been saying the same thing this whole time and you never even came close to addressing my point
All I ever said was that considering abortion in a context that abortion saves the government money is immoral and unethical, even if it is a side point.

It's irrelevant because abortions aren't being cut here.

[Skizo]

Sticking you head in the sand doesn't make problems go away. Just because you refuse to pay for poor sick people doesn't mean poor sick people go away or stop being a problem.

Uhhh most hospitals are NPO's and provide healthcare regardless of payment, genius. This cost is incurred on hospitals doesn't have an effect on the government.

[Laize]

Sticking you head in the sand doesn't make problems go away. Just because you refuse to pay for poor sick people doesn't mean poor sick people go away or stop being a problem.

If you wait long enough they do. They'll either go where there's jobs (so they stop being poor) or get better on their own (stop being sick) or they die.

[semaphore]

When did I even come closer to strawmanning?

Every single post of yours when you pretend that those of us saying Planned Parenthood should be funded, and Texas is financially stupid for not doing so, are motivated only by money.

---------- Post added 2012-12-08 at 07:36 AM ----------

If you wait long enough they do. They'll either go where there's jobs (so they stop being poor) or get better on their own (stop being sick) or they die.

What an amazing mentality you got there.

[Laize]

Are we going to fall back on the "poor people are poor because they're bad people" argument?

I didn't say they were poor because they were bad people.

They may well be poor because they make bad choices (Such as continuing to work for walmart and simply bitching instead of quitting).

---------- Post added 2012-12-08 at 07:37 AM ----------

What an amazing mentality you got there.

Is that not a valid end to their relationship with society?

[Grizzly Willy]

If you wait long enough they do. They'll either go where there's jobs (so they stop being poor) or get better on their own (stop being sick) or they die.

What the fuck? Gah, you make the idea of a libertarian world sound horrible.

Is that not a valid end to their relationship with society?

No, it isn't.

[Wells]

Uhhh most hospitals are NPO's and provide healthcare regardless of payment, genius. This cost is incurred on hospitals doesn't have an effect on the government.

Hospitals provide emergency care for everyone which increases the cost of health care for the rest of us. Another example of not getting out of the problem of poor sick people.

If you wait long enough they do. They'll either go where there's jobs (so they stop being poor) or get better on their own (stop being sick) or they die.

Straight into awful I see. And we'll never run out of poor sick people. Because everyone breeds. And there will always be poor people.

[Milchshake]

Is it more immoral to abort a fetus?
Or is it more immoral to force a child to be raised in poverty with the higher likely-hood of food-insecurity, poor health, violence.

[semaphore]

Is that not a valid end to their relationship with society?

I'm sure you think it is.

[Skizo]

Is it more immoral to abort a fetus?
Or is it more immoral to force a child to be raised in poverty with the higher likely-hood of food-insecurity, poor health, violence.

One hell of a false dilemma, have you ever heard of adoption?

[Laize]

Sticking you head in the sand doesn't make problems go away. Just because you refuse to pay for poor sick people doesn't mean poor sick people go away or stop being a problem.



He's falling back to his "I don't give a shit" argument.

That's not a fall-back argument.

That's my universal argument.

Excepting education and law enforcement (Which includes the justice and penal system) I don't see government intervention as particularly necessary. Other people's (As in, not my friends or relatives) problems are not my concern.

[Skizo]

Hospitals provide emergency care for everyone which increases the cost of health care for the rest of us. Another example of not getting out of the problem of poor sick people.

Actually, there are many many charity hospitals in the country which give out free medical treatment of many types. And no, it doesn't increase the cost of your treatment, just don't go to the charity hospitals or charity hospital systems.

[Laize]

I'm sure you think it is.

So we're going to pretend people don't die now?