Any of the 2020 DNC Presidential candidates 100% against abortion (aka murder)?

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee Controversial Topics Any of the 2020 DNC Presidential candidates 100% against abortion (aka murder)?

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 53 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1805107

    RebbeDebbie
    Participant

    It seems as though every democrat running for president in 2020 supports murder, because they refuse to go on record to support life. I think we can all agree that abortion is murder. Aside from President Trump, does no one have any morals?

    Are things really this bad ?

    #1805118

    And you just woke up to this fact?

    #1805122

    akuperma
    Participant

    One can not be Democrat unless one supports abortion on demand, without restrictions. It would be like wanting to join the Nazi party (in Germany, during the Third Reich) but opposing persecution of Jews, or like join the Communist Party of the Soviet Union but favoring private property.

    In all fairness, other cultures have allowed murder of children, such as the toleration of infanticide for a variety of reasons (e.g. birth defects), and in Rome a head of the family could order the execution of any descendant at any age. The American left feels that mothers should be able to kill their babies at least until birth, and some argue longer. If this boths you, become a Republican.

    #1805154

    Reb Eliezer
    Participant

    No one supports abortion. only they are not against. it. It is up to the mother to decide if it is necessary. The rich are always able to get abortions by traveling to a place were it is allowed, but the poor will endanger themselves
    by doing it a precarious environment.

    #1805176

    akuperma
    Participant

    Reb Eliezer: The rich can also hire a hit man to kill people they dislike, whereas the poor have to risk getting caught and do it themselves. So should we decriminalize murder? Until the government, led by a bunch of religious fanatics put a stop to it, the rich could buy slaves and do whatever they wanted to with them, so are you arguing for repeal of the 13th amendment? The Democrats made a clear policy choice to allow (and insome cases, encourage) the murder of the weakest and most helpless persons in society. A Yid who owes his primary allegiance to HaShem should no more consider joining the Democrats thanone in the 1930 coudl have supported the National Socialists in Germany. If you decide that some lives aren’t worth living, how long before someone decides that our lives aren’t worth living (and do say it won’t happen, because there are still people old enough to remember when a major democracy voted to kills their “untermenchen” as they saw them.

    #1805207

    Reb Eliezer
    Participant

    Some are fanatic and don’t allow abortions in any case even when the mother is in danger when a child is a rodaf as long it is not viable. See the last mishna in the 7th perek in Oholas and the Rambam Hilchas Rotzeiach 1,9.

    #1805214

    Reb Eliezer
    Participant

    The Republicans who let the poor suffer end up killing them.

    #1805218

    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    Democrats obviously hold עובר ירך אמו

    #1805251

    jackk
    Participant

    Typical trolling.

    How many people have died in ICE custody the past 3 years?
    How many families separated ?
    How many mass murders have there been in America the past 3 years?
    How many refugees have we sent back to die in their own countries?
    How many people would have suffered if they had lost their insurance due to removing obamacare?

    When the republicans truly care about the living , I will vote for them .

    #1805261

    Joseph
    Participant

    Reb Eliezer, you’re comments poorly reflect upon yourself as a very desperate attempt to halachicly justify your political preferences.

    #1805277

    smerel
    Participant

    These days abortion is no longer a question by Democrats.

    They have moved on to supporting worse forms of murder like euthanasia and infanticide.

    #1805282

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Are things really this bad ?”

    They are much worse. I saw a poster insinuate that Trump had any morals . while granted, it was obviously a troll post, since it included demonstrably absurd simplifications like “I think we can all agree that abortion is murder.” nonthelss other posters agree

    “Aside from President Trump, does no one have any morals?”

    when a man who built his persona on bullying and demeaning others. Who took pride in his shmutz filled life (until it was less politically expedient to do so) who lies more than any politician ever has, to the point where calling out his lies seems silly, I mean which lie do you choose, and even his defenders grant that he is a liar but dismiss it as oh thats just Trump.

    support him gezunderheit whther because he is more por israel, or because you feel his party is more anti abortion. but T ohold up Trump as a paragon of virtue?

    Yes things are that bad.

    #1805290

    yehudayona
    Participant

    Halacha is not 100% against abortion. There are situations where abortion is mandated.

    #1805298

    klugeryid
    Participant

    Yy
    When??

    #1805295

    Joseph
    Participant

    Yehuda Yona: Halacha is not 100% against killing. There are situations where killing someone is mandated.

    Should killing be legalized?

    #1805320

    Reb Eliezer
    Participant

    I cannot support someone and the party following him, who ostracizes immigrants by separating families, and supports the rich by only givihg them a tax cut believing that he knows everything better than anyone else.

    #1805313

    Milhouse
    Participant

    “Reb Eliezer”, the Democrats are now for abortion. They are upset when abortion numbers decline, and demand an inquiry to find out why, and what can be done about it. The days when they pretended to want abortion to be “legal, safe, and rare” are long gone. And yes, it was a pretense; they never actually believed it.

    There is also no evidence for the abortionists’ myth of “back alley abortions”. On the contrary, the example of Dr Gosnell — Philadelphia’s answer to Dr Mengele — the total suppression of media coverage of his crimes, and of the documentary about them, shows how legal butchers are protected by the Democrats from any criticism that could chas vesholom harm their holy cause of murdering as many babies as possible.

    At least jackk is honest, labelling himself a typical troll.

    How many people have died in ICE custody the past 3 years?

    No more than would be expected. No more than die anywhere else. A person has to be somewhere when he dies. Most importantly NOBODY HAS EVEN SUGGESTED that ICE was in any way responsible for any death that occurred in its custody.

    How many families separated ?

    Why is this a problem? Every time a criminal is arrested a family is separated. Do you have a problem with this?

    How many mass murders have there been in America the past 3 years?

    No more than is normal, given the US’s demographics. What has this got to do with politics?

    How many refugees have we sent back to die in their own countries?

    Genuine refugees? Almost none. But tell me why we have any obligation to take in every person who wants to come here.

    How many people would have suffered if they had lost their insurance due to removing obamacare?

    None.

    When the republicans truly care about the living , I will vote for them .

    Liar. You would never vote for a Republican because you are a socialist, i.e. an evil person.

    #1805326

    CTLAWYER
    Participant

    @akuperma
    Making false generalizations about Democrats!
    “One can not be Democrat unless one supports abortion on demand, without restrictions. ”

    I am a registered Democrat. I have held elected office as a Democrat. I do not support abortion on demand without restrictions. The Chairman of my Democratic Town Committee, as well as 6 members of its board are devout Roman Catholics who oppose abortion.

    There is no requirement for being pro-abortion in order to register as a Democrat.

    Your lies are not appreciated.

    #1805333

    yehudayona
    Participant

    Klugeryid, I’m not an authority, but I believe that when the fetus is a considered a rodef, abortion is mandatory. For example, if continuing the pregnancy will result in the mother’s death. Joseph, killing IS legal in some circumstances.

    #1805331

    Reb Eliezer
    Participant

    Milhouse, I don’t appreciate calling me an evil person. I am not a full socialist equavalent to a communist, but I believe that capitalism has gone to the extremes caring only for making money and not for the well being of the workers. Currently they say, if you don’t like our policies, leave. As an old man I personally experienced this. I worked in bank and was let go before earning a pension.

    #1805344

    Joseph
    Participant

    YY: Just like virtually everyone agrees that killing is and should be legal in some rare circumstances, virtually everyone agrees abortion should be legal in some rare circumstances.

    #1805361

    Most importantly NOBODY HAS EVEN SUGGESTED that ICE was in any way responsible for any death that occurred in its custody.

    Are you sure?

    How many refugees have we sent back to die in their own countries?

    Genuine refugees? Almost none.

    Disputed, I guess? Cases have been noted, as they highlighted
    the problems with the processes for handling asylum-seekers.

    #1805362

    Joseph, killing IS legal in some circumstances.

    I considered making that argument, but realized that while true,
    it wasn’t a counter to his parallel to on-demand abortion.

    #1805363

    Reb Eliezer
    Participant

    Yehudayona, I think you are right see the sma CHM 425,2 s’k 8 proving that as long it is fetus in the stomach it is not considered murder because if the womwn is hurt losing her child ch’v, there are monetary damages, so we are obligated to save the mother by whatever means possible.

    #1805370

    Milhouse
    Participant

    “Reb Eliezer”, are you now admitting to also being jackk?!

    I didn’t call you an evil person yet, but if you are a socialist then I’m calling you it now.

    You’re also a liar. Trump has done nothing at all against immigrants. He has acted, properly, against illegal immigrants, taking them into custody for their crimes, and therefore separating them from their innocent relatives just like any other criminal. Since you have no problem with separating robbers and rapists from their families, why do you object to this?

    It is also a lie that Trump “supports the rich by only givihg them a tax cut”, though indeed he should do that. The rich are the ones who pay almost all the taxes. You can’t cut the taxes of someone who doesn’t pay any. And you can’t give a big cut to someone who only pays a tiny amount. The fact is the rich pay far more than their fair share according to halacha. The halacha is clear that a person may be taxed only in proportion to the benefit he will get from that tax. Our progressive tax system violates that law, so the top rates should be cut without any cut to the lower rates; but that’s politically impossible, so it hasn’t been done.

    You also lie when you claim “Some are fanatic and don’t allow abortions in any case even when the mother is in danger when a child is a rodaf”. NOBODY of any importance in the pro-life movement is proposing to criminalize abortions in those extremely rare cases where it’s necessary to save the mother’s life. Under even the most radical proposals out there, the defenses of necessity and defense of others would remain available to any such abortionist.

    #1805390

    Reb Eliezer
    Participant

    I am not Jackk, but please explain to me why are socialists evil who help the needy. The rich should pay more because they use the benefits of the country more because they have more to lose. They are not all criminals who are separated from their families. If they are illegal, then the whole family is illegal. I don’t call you names and appreciate if you did the same. The doctors get punished performing abortions without regard of reason and the circumstances are not so extremely rare.

    #1805392

    Milhouse
    Participant

    The Torah regards killing an unborn baby exactly the same way it does killing a nochri. A nochri who kills another nochri, whether born or not, or an unborn yisroel, is executed for it. A yisroel who does the same is not executed. Does that mean it’s not murder? You tell me. But whatever you say about killing an unborn baby you have to say the same about killing an adult nochri.

    Also, if abortion were not murder we wouldn’t need to justify it when the mother’s life is in danger by invoking the law of a rodef. A baby who is attacking its mother and putting her life in danger is killed exactly like anyone else who is doing the same thing. If someone is pointing a gun at an innocent person and about to pull the trigger it doesn’t matter whether that person is 20 years old, 2 years old, or minus two months old.

    #1805391

    Milhouse
    Participant

    Are you sure?

    Yes, I’m sure. There is simply no such suggestion. Some evil people are insinuating it, but not openly suggesting it because they know they have no basis for doing so. Any time you have a large number of people in custody, some of them will die, simply because it was their time.

    #1805403

    A simple Google search shows otherwise, although it seems
    Jackk got the agency wrong.

    An NBC article, Why are migrant children dying in U.S. custody?, begins as follows:
    At least seven children are known to have died in immigration custody since last year, after almost a decade in which no child reportedly died while in the custody of U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

    #1805448

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    “A baby who is attacking its mother and putting her life in danger is killed exactly like anyone else who is doing the same thing. ”

    Ah simpelton*, but what if the baby isnt attacking the mother? What if cancer is attacking the mother and chemo would kill the baby.

    Note, I’m not asking for your pesak, I am sometmes involved in these cases and I now how they are paskened. My point is WHO should decide You? the state legislature? congress? Or the patient and their Rabbi?

    “How many mass murders have there been in America the past 3 years?
    No more than is normal, given the US’s demographics. ”

    This is by far my favorite quote. how cheap can human life be to you that mass murders are “normal” how depraved have we come that in order to support your party of choice, you downplay mass murder? and this is the party that calls itself pro life? Ah nechtigen tug.

    * If you call people who care about others evil, “simpelton” is a bit of a compliment for you.
    And watch yourself, the Torah is more socialist than capitalist. The Torah opposes Ribbis, selling property, unfettered competition, price gouging, it supports mandatory support for the poor. That is not to say it is fully socialist, but it is closer to socialism than free market capitalism

    #1805462

    Quayboardwarrior
    Participant

    @milhouse our objection to abortion is based off our beliefs. I.e. The Torah.

    What right do we have to tell our host country what their laws should or shouldn’t be?

    The Torah also forbids killing (unless in exceptional circumstances, like the death penalty, and even then decided upon by a base din who try their best to exonerate the accused etc etc).

    Do you oppose the death penalty this strongly too?

    #1805488

    Reb Eliezer
    Participant

    Milhouse, Your justification does not hold water. Even if it creates monetary harm, abortion is done only when the fetus is a rodef, see the SMA mentioned above. The judgement is min hashomayim because his intentions matter. For goyim, they consider it murder but not us, so they get killed.

    #1805707

    chiefshmerel
    Participant

    Republicans believe that life begins at conception. Democrats believe life begins at birth.
    Democrats believe life ends at death. Republicans believe life ends at birth.

    Or so it seems. Republicans believe in self reliance (hey, Kim Jong Un! #Juche), they don’t support any kind of safety nets or health care.

    #1805718

    Reb Eliezer
    Participant

    CS, The Democrats follow the Jews whereas the Republicans follow the goyim. Only the goyim are commanded on the iborim. By the Jews punisment by the beis din is monetary. The Meharsha says that is why Pharaoh used the Jewish midwives as they are not commanded killing a fetus in the mothers womb.

    #1805740

    Milhouse
    Participant

    please explain to me why are socialists evil who help the needy.

    Because they don’t help the needy, they steal from other people to help the needy. Or just stam, because they don’t think people should be rich.

    The rich should pay more because they use the benefits of the country more because they have more to lose.

    The top 20 percent of households pay 88 percent of federal income taxes. They certainly don’t get anything even remotely approaching 88% of the benefits. The top one percent pay 40%; you can’t claim they get 40% of the benefit.

    They are not all criminals who are separated from their families.

    Yes, they are all criminals. They all entered the country illegally, which is a crime for which they are arrested.

    If they are illegal, then the whole family is illegal.

    The children have not committed any crime. And under the Flores consent decree they can’t be kept in custody for more than 20 days. In any case you can’t have it both ways; you can’t complain both about children being in custody and about children being separated from their criminal parents when the parents are arrested.

    The cases where abortion is necessary to save the mother’s life are extremely rare; almost to the point of nonexistence.

    At least seven children are known to have died in immigration custody since last year, after almost a decade in which no child reportedly died while in the custody of U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

    And who is suggesting that the government is responsible for these deaths? Nobody. It’s a ridiculous idea. Every one of those children died because they were sick, and they didn’t become sick in custody. They just happened to be in custody when their time came. And of course there are more of them now than 10 years ago, because in case you haven’t noticed we now have hordes of invaders crossing the border, including children, which we didn’t have before..

    Ah simpelton*, but what if the baby isnt attacking the mother? What if cancer is attacking the mother and chemo would kill the baby.

    In such a case you are not killing the baby, you are treating the mother. The baby’s death is an unfortunate side-effect, which you very much don’t want, but have to accept because life is cruel. Psik reisha delo nicha leih. In such a case even lehavdil the Catholic church permits it. And there is certainly nobody in the pro-life movement proposing that it be banned.

    My point is WHO should decide You? the state legislature? congress? Or the patient and their Rabbi?

    The same people whose job is to decide whether any killing is justified. The legislature to set standards, and the courts to determine whether they apply in a particular case.

    It is not possible for the exact same act to be murder when a nochri does it and not murder when a yisroel does it. Murder is murder, regardless of who is doing it. The penalties may be different, but the act is the same.

    how cheap can human life be to you that mass murders are “normal”

    Murder is normal. Given a certain population size, you are going to have a certain number of murders. And different demographics are going to commit murder at different rates. After adjusting for demographics the US murder rate is lower than in many western countries. And mass murder is so rare that it’s a statistical blip. It’s impossible to tell whether it’s falling or rising, because the sample size is so small.

    The Torah is not at all socialist. It does not oppose ribbis; on the contrary, lanochri tashich, and nochrim are expected to charge each other interest too. We Yisre’elim are not to charge each other interest not because it’s somehow wrong but because we’re supposed to treat each other like family, and you don’t charge family interest. It’s a subset of the mitzvah of ahavas yisroel. The obligation to give tzedokah is also a subset of ahavas yisroel. There is no mitzvah to give to nochrim, and if you do give you get no sachar for it, because there’s no mitzvah to love them. Nor are they expected to love one another, so they too get no sachar for giving each other tzedakah. The same applies to that whole set of mitzvos; this is not the normal moral standard of how we’re to treat people; on the contrary, the idea is that we are to treat our fellow Yisre’elim BETTER than standard, to do them favors we would not do for a normal person, because they’re not normal people, they’re our own flesh and blood.

    What right do we have to tell our host country what their laws should or shouldn’t be?

    Are you crazy? We have the right and duty to tell the whole world what is right and what is wrong.

    The Torah also forbids killing (unless in exceptional circumstances, like the death penalty,

    Stop right there. The Torah supports and requires the death penalty. One of the seven mitzvos is dinim; the nations are REQUIRED to enforce the other six laws with the death penalty. And part of Losheves Yetzoroh is a particular requirement to enforce it in the case of murder and robbery. And no, the court is not supposed to try to exonerate a murderer. On the contrary, “the earth cannot be forgiven for the blood spilled on it, except by the spiller’s blood”. Even among Yisre’elim the batei din must be supplemented with the king’s courts, which make sure murderers don’t live to murder others. For nochrim there are no procedural barriers at all.

    I think that’s enough for now.

    #1805784

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Millhouse
    “In such a case you are not killing the baby,… ”

    As I said I’m not asking for your pesak, most poskim agree with you (though not all for a nice list of marei mekomos see Feldheim’s Ecncylopedia of Jewish Medical Ethics) but in practice, in all cases I am fmailiar with you are right the Rav allowed the abortion. Though again, in ALL cases that I’m familiar with period, the Rav allowed an abortion even in cases that were not strictly speaking “pikuach nefesh” by the literal definition

    ” In such a case even lehavdil the Catholic church permits it.”

    The catholic church does NOT permit it in such a case. Years ago when I was at a catholic hospital, there was no question the hospital wouldnt do it, there was a bit of an argument among the ethics board, whether they could even refer her to a place to treat her.

    “The same people whose job is to decide whether any killing is justified”
    what if their standards are different than ours?
    The comparison to murder falls apat on a simple analysis. Do you know of anyone who had a sheila whether he could killl a live person? And that in that situation the pesak differed from the law?

    “We Yisre’elim are not to charge each other interest not because it’s somehow wrong ”
    Lol

    #1805791

    meir G
    Participant

    only rav miller zatzal felt that this was a policy worth making an issue over even if it meant losing clout, funding,,,,,what is clear is that most gedolei hador DID NOT share that view as far as ” our response” . some even felt that it was a brocho
    rav miller zatzal cheshbon was 3 fold ; A. shitas haraved that tochacha is principal oriented not goal oriented (i was there when rav miller called rav pam when the aguda honored joe lieberman)
    B. a chilul hashem that the catholics were anti publicly and not am hanivchar
    c. that al pi zohar aveiros as these drasticly cut the shefa milmallah and its NOT what does it have to do w/ us .

    #1805852

    smerel
    Participant

    <i>only rav miller zatzal felt that this was a policy worth making an issue over even if it meant losing clout, funding</i>

    That is not true at all. Read some of the Jewish Observers articles on this issue. Particularly abortion.

    Both of the predictions made back then came true

    (1)that abortion would be more acceptable by frum people even in cases that are not life and death. Ditto for many other liberal anti-Torah ideas

    (2)the pro-abortion crowd would not stop there and move on to things like infanticide and euthanasia
    Even though those things were unquestionably wrong back then to supporters of abortion

    #1805857

    Joseph
    Participant

    Meir: “Some even felt WHAT was a Brocha”? And “most gedolei hador” felt WHAT was not worth “making an issue over” and an issue WHERE?

    #1805881

    jackk
    Participant

    Milhouse,

    My point is that the republican party’s callous attitude towards people dying shows that their attitude towards abortion has nothing to do with their aversion to Murder.
    All your answers reflect the republican attitude.

    Me: How many people have died in ICE custody the past 3 years?
    You: No more than would be expected. No more than die anywhere else.
    Me: Can we try to ensure that there are ZERO deaths ?
    You: Most importantly NOBODY HAS EVEN SUGGESTED that ICE was in any way responsible for any death that occurred in its custody.
    Me :That is untrue. They are responsible for every death that occurs in their custody unless they did their utmost to prevent it.
    If they died because of the callous attitude that they are illegals anyway – then they are 100% responsible.

    Me: How many mass murders have there been in America the past 3 years?
    You: No more than is normal, given the US’s demographics. What has this got to do with politics?
    ME : Everything. Again – Can we try to prevent these mass murders ? The NRA, which owns the republican party,prevents anything from being done.The same party that is anti-abortion is pro-gun. Go figure.

    Me: How many refugees have we sent back to die in their own countries?
    You: Genuine refugees? Almost none. But tell me why we have any obligation to take in every person who wants to come here.
    Me. “Almost none” – That is completely untrue. Thousands of genuine refugees fearing for their lives have not been let in or have been sent back. The republican attitude that we have no obligation to refugees or even immigrants is disappointing , anti-Torah and was the LAW OF S’DOM. r”l.

    Me: How many people would have suffered if they had lost their insurance due to removing obamacare?
    You: None.
    Me: LOL. ROFL.

    I am not a socialist and I try to be the best Jew that I can. My allegiance is to the Torah and not to an american political party.
    Neither the republicans nor the democrats follow the Torah. A Torah jew does not identify with either of them.
    Hashem and his Torah care for every human being on this earth.
    If you can’t vote for a democrat because of abortion, you cannot vote for a republican either.
    (Also, the death penalty has proven to have killed innocent people. The american justice system is very fallible.)

    SCOTUS has determined that, based on the constitution, abortion (i.e, Murder) is 100% legal in America. The constitution also allows in America the Cardinal sin of avoda zara.
    We should think about those 2 things during Thanksgiving. It might lead us to act like Rav Miller Zatsal and completely repudiate Thanksgiving.

    Please do not engage in Ad Hominem attacks.

    #1806003

    Ben L
    Participant

    TO say either political party really cares about anything other then power seems to me to be a stretch and there is a pretty specific MIshna in Pirkei Avos about exactly what the leaders of a country wish.

    That said.
    To say that President Trump signed a Tax Cut for the rich and not the poor is simply false.

    When I say false, I mean objectively false.

    If one wishes to state that more discounts went to what is termed rich, that would be true.

    However at the same time we should realize that the overwhelming majority of taxes are payed by the wealthy.

    In fact the poor already do not pay Income taxes in fact tax deadline is a money making time for a large part of America.

    How are you supposed to discount the taxes of those who do not pay taxes.?

    I also wonder how the passage of a bill that led to what is objectively one of strongest job markets in years the actual beginning of a raise in salaries across the spectrum and hundreds of thousands of unemployed individuals finally finding work able to be called anti-poor?

    #1806039

    yehudayona
    Participant

    Ben, you oversimplify. While it’s true that the unemployment rate is very low, that’s not necessarily an accurate picture of the job market, and it’s certainly not clear that the Trump tax cut is responsible for it. I just read an article in Quartz about something called the Job Quality Index. The JQI measures the quality of jobs, and it doesn’t paint the rosy picture that the unemployment rate does.

    To answer your question about how to discount the taxes if those who don’t pay taxes, we already refundable credits like the Earned Income Credit.

    As for the effect of the Trump tax cut on different groups, can you find documentary evidence to challenge this statement? “In general, higher income households receive larger average tax cuts as a percentage of after-tax income, with the largest cuts as a share of income going to taxpayers in the 95th to 99th percentiles of the income distribution.”

    Don’t forget that the deficit has increased greatly due to the tax cut.

    #1806040

    meir G
    Participant

    smerel i dont deny the predictions but factually please elaborate on any other godol , that joined rav miller zatzl ( not that rav miller needed other haskamos) but these are the facts. the gedolim chose either a total shev veal taaseh or a minute machoh , ( like an article in the observer) specificly ( rav yakov & rav zelig…
    joseph; you are passionate about this issue ill explain a bit – not stopping a politician from voting pro choice or pro toayva is very very far from bearing responsibility and this was a yesod in the diff approaches. as far as the brocho hameivin yovin i cant explan in eng. on a public forum

    #1806072

    Ben L
    Participant

    As for Refundable Tax Credits.

    Lets be clear what those are, instead of someone paying taxes they are given money from the government.

    That money comes from somewhere.

    That somewhere is someone else.

    So you are taking money that Paul earned to give Joe.

    That is called re-distribution.

    In simple terms the word is socialism.

    Now of course the justification for that is “The wealthy have enough”.

    In other words I have the ability to determine how much money is enough. And once I have determined that I have the ability to take the rest of their money.

    The basis of such thinking is a) Jealousy b) THe feeling that somehow your needs justify you taking from someone else.

    And from a practical matter it is simply wrong.

    The current Democratic economic proposals would hit the frum Jewish community hardest of all/

    We cannot use many of the services we are taxed into paying, yet the taxes make a middle class life un-affordable resulting in the need for numerous tzedakas for Yom Tov, Chasunahs etcc. Yet the higher tax cuts on the wealthy will dry p the source of funds for those tzedakas.

    #1806124

    Quayboardwarrior
    Participant

    @ben L
    Socialism may be a dirty word, but capitalism isn’t all that great either. Wealth creates further wealth. So whilst there are 10s of millions who barely break even every month, the wealthiest are only getting wealthier.

    And with corporate lobbying the way it currently is, it allows the richest to ensure laws are enacted to allow for them to preserve their wealth.

    Wealth disparities have widened over time. In 1989, the bottom 90 percent of the U.S. population held 33 percent of all wealth. By 2016, the bottom 90 percent of the population held only 23 percent of wealth. The wealth share of the top 1 percent increased from about 30 percent to about 40 percent over the same period.

    Which is why certain socialist policies may lend a healthy balance within an otherwise capitalist system.

    It’s not a question of jealousy, it’s that 99.9% of individuals would benefit from a policy that perhaps may make it a little more difficult for a single person to buy a $400m yacht, but would mean another million children don’t have to go bed hungry at night.

    These policies work in European countries, yet Americans are so keen to argue against them, when the country would certainly benefit from them.

    Take the UK’s NHS as an example. Universal healthcare no matter how rich or poor you are. It may not be perfect but it affords each and every individual the security of knowing if their health were to take a turn for the worse, they were to break a leg or have a complicated north, they’ll be taken care of without the threat of falling into debt. Paid for through taxes which means the wealthy pay in disproportionately.

    Bottom line is the current system is failing millions to the benefit of the few. This isn’t just my humble opinion. But also Ray Dalio a man worth $17 billion who only stands to lose by socialist reforms.

    #1806135

    Ben L
    Participant

    First off to state that Capitalism has failed is absurd.

    Capitalism has created one of the strongest economies in the history of the world.

    The average standard of living in the USA is so much higher then the rest of the world it’s a joke.
    You can look up the statistics if you do not believe it.

    To state that European that socialism has worked in European in countries is also blatantly absurd,
    a) Countries have collapsed or are nearing collapse because of it i.e Greece, the Yellow Jacket protests in France b) The US picks up much of that tab for certain thing in Europe such as defense & drug innovation which allows them in turn to spend more on social services (a fact President Trump is trying to change) .c) THere are tiny countries with abundant natural resources that go alot further then the natural resources of a country with 320 million people.

    To state the NHS works is basically ignoring reality.
    Check up what happens in England if your 70 year old grandfather needs dialysis. Check up the degree of rationing that takes place.

    And actually the wealthiest amonst us are the ones who stand the most to benefit from the impostion os Socialism.
    A socialist system requires minimum wages and price controls that create a high barrier of entry into the market place.

    In other words it becomes really hard and expensive to start a business.
    The only one who can are those with extreme wealth which is why in Socialist economies the rich tend to stay rich and the poor stay poor.

    So of course the rich like Buffet and Gates are pro-socialist policies you just ensured they have no competition!

    #1806137

    Ben L
    Participant

    Furthermore to state that in the US people are going hungry one must examine why so many Democrat policies have failed.
    a) Food Stamps
    b) Public Schools
    c) School Lunches
    d) Medicare & Medicaid
    e) Obamacare
    f) WIC
    g) Social Security
    h) Earned Income Tax Credit
    i) HUD
    The existence of all these policies combine to create what is known as the Social safety net and should ensure no child goes hungry or is homeless.

    Are you saying these socialist policies have failed?

    #1806179

    Quayboardwarrior
    Participant

    @ben L

    Did I say capitalism has failed??

    I said in its current form the trend over the past 30 years or so is for the wealth to converge at the very top. It’s only getting worse with time, the wealthy are getting wealthier and the working class of people that can no longer afford the “American Dream” is only growing. And certain socialist policies are needed correct that.

    I’ve no idea why you mention the Greek financial collapse. If you’re suggesting it’s all down to “socialism” you’re very wrong.

    What I was referring to was the Nordic model. Countries like Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Norway, and Sweden that afford every individual a certain safety net. Countries that coincidentally are on the top of the list for the happiest countries in the world. (Although how that is measured I’ve no idea).

    I’ve no idea why you list those 9 policies as failures. They may not be perfect, but I’m not sure what you’d propose I’m their stead? That millions that can’t work should go homeless and starve?

    As for you’re opinion of the NHS, it simply isn’t as bad as you think it is. There’s a huge American healthcare industry that would like you to think it is. But it simply just isn’t.

    Same goes for the Yellow Jacket Protests. On the contrary, they were protesting against the tax system that protects the wealthy.

    #1806198

    Quayboardwarrior
    Participant

    @ben L

    Ugh your NHS comment is bothering me too much.

    You’ll never find a Brit that says they’d prefer the American system. Because for every person you do find that is waiting for dialysis, you’ll find a million not concerned about how to pay for their insulin or epipen, going to the emergency room just in case without the worry of a huge bill, wondering how they’re to afford having a baby or stuck with a bill because their doctor is no longer covered by their insurers.

    The american health system is a failure, don’t even bother defending it.

    #1806555

    Ben L
    Participant

    a) The American Healthcare system is currently design by Democrat policies that passed without any Republican votes whatsoever. So yes of course it’s a failure it tries to combine socialism with capitalism and succeeds at neither.

    b) Then vast majority of Brits may not complain about the NHS. Then again the vast majority of Brits are fine with limiting Healthcare to elderly while the Torah is decidedly not fine with it. They are also fine with encouraging certain children not to be born, again the Torah is not really fine with that. In other words much of the rationing that takes place is aimed at populations we value while they do not.

    c) In addition if you get a rare condition of disease your treatment options are vastly more limited in Britian then the USA. As someone who suffered from a rare neurological condition, I had firsthand experience with this. As my doctors basically said straight out in Socialist countries my treatments would not have been available.
    So yes for vast majority the NHS works, then again the vast majority do not really get terribly sick do they?

    d) Yes you were referring to a group of tiny countries compared to the USA. As I noted it is simply intellectually dishonest to compare single state countries to 50 state countries.

    e Yes those countries afford a safety net. So does the USA the programs I mentioned combine to form They were designed and implemented to ensure children do not starve. people get medical care, the elderly are taken care of.

    Is your contention that those programs have failed?

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 53 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.