User Tag List

View Poll Results: Should taxpayers pay for....

Voters
17. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, for vasectomies and tubal ligations

    2 11.76%
  • Yes, to a stipend

    2 11.76%
  • No, for either

    14 82.35%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Should the Government Pay....

  1. #1
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsCreated Blog entryVeteranRecommendation Second ClassTagger First Class
    Overall activity: 45.0%

    patrickt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Oaxaca, Mexico, for over twenty years. Born and raised in Memphis, TN, and worked in Colorado.
    Posts
    27,711
    Thanks
    3,359
    Thanked: 16,222
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    21474870

    Should the Government Pay....

    ....for reproductive health? Right now, reproductive health means killing children. Many want the government to pay for abortions. Many want the government to pay for birth control pills.

    But, I'm wondering how you would feel about paying for vasectomies and tubal ligations. Honestly, I would be happy to have my taxes spend on not only paying for the medical procedure but also paying a stipend for doing it. Say, a woman would get $1500 and a man would get $5000.

    The man should obviously get more because one sperm-producing male can, and do, impregnate a dozen egg-producing females.

    So, here's the poll.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to patrickt For This Useful Post:

    dinosaur (07-11-2019),Northern Rivers (07-11-2019)

  3. #2
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Overall activity: 30.0%

    Dr. Felix Birdbiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Around other people
    Posts
    24,989
    Thanks
    7,239
    Thanked: 24,436
    Rep Power
    21474866
    The government pays for nothing. It is the taxpayer who pays for everything. The government merely is the spender. Under no circumstances would I ever support the government spending my money on this in any manner whatsoever.
    "You can get a lot further with a kind word and a gun
    Then you can get with just a kind word"

    "Al Capone"

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dr. Felix Birdbiter For This Useful Post:

    Hillofbeans (07-11-2019),Lone Gunman (07-11-2019)

  5. #3
    running down a dream Achievements:
    50000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Overall activity: 32.0%

    ruthless terrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    somewhere in the south
    Posts
    3,471
    Thanks
    2,137
    Thanked: 4,999
    Rep Power
    5516551
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Felix Birdbiter View Post
    The government pays for nothing. It is the taxpayer who pays for everything. The government merely is the spender.
    agree about the spender but not sure if the taxpayer will repay the 20 trillion dollar government debt.
    “As sure as God made black and white .. what's down in the dark will be brought to the light.” - Johnny Cash

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to ruthless terrier For This Useful Post:

    Lone Gunman (07-11-2019)

  7. #4
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Overall activity: 30.0%

    Dr. Felix Birdbiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Around other people
    Posts
    24,989
    Thanks
    7,239
    Thanked: 24,436
    Rep Power
    21474866
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthless terrier View Post
    agree about the spender but not sure if the taxpayer will repay the 20 trillion dollar government debt.

    If not the taxpayer than who? One way or another this will ultimately fall on we the people.
    "You can get a lot further with a kind word and a gun
    Then you can get with just a kind word"

    "Al Capone"

  8. #5
    Senior Member Achievements:
    1 year registeredTagger Second Class50000 Experience Points
    Overall activity: 38.0%

    dinosaur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    2,610
    Thanks
    2,960
    Thanked: 4,235
    Rep Power
    7479390
    Why should the solution to our problems always involve throwing more money at it?

    Instead of incentivizing people to BE RESPONSIBLE and MAKE RESPONSIBLE CHOICES by paying them money, why don't we stop incentivizing them to be IRRESPONSIBLE by taking away all the freebies they already get, like child care tax credits, etc. Sometimes, the solution is less, rather than more. Don't want more baby factories, then stop incentivizing baby factories.

    The law of unintended consequences is as powerful as gravity. Making abortions legal and widely available, at a subsidized low cost, has obviously made abortion the birth control method of choice for many. Regulate abortion into a higher cost level and make it difficult to get access, and more people will use other forms of birth control. Incentivize personal responsibility for a change!

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dinosaur For This Useful Post:

    Dr. Felix Birdbiter (07-11-2019),Lone Gunman (07-11-2019)

  10. #6
    Junior Member Achievements:
    50000 Experience Points7 days registered
    Overall activity: 11.0%

    JohnGalt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    29
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked: 18
    Rep Power
    214750
    Quote Originally Posted by dinosaur View Post
    Why should the solution to our problems always involve throwing more money at it?

    Instead of incentivizing people to BE RESPONSIBLE and MAKE RESPONSIBLE CHOICES by paying them money, why don't we stop incentivizing them to be IRRESPONSIBLE by taking away all the freebies they already get, like child care tax credits, etc. Sometimes, the solution is less, rather than more. Don't want more baby factories, then stop incentivizing baby factories.

    The law of unintended consequences is as powerful as gravity. Making abortions legal and widely available, at a subsidized low cost, has obviously made abortion the birth control method of choice for many. Regulate abortion into a higher cost level and make it difficult to get access, and more people will use other forms of birth control. Incentivize personal responsibility for a change!
    Two comments.

    First, I agree. I'm in education and the number of problems we've successfully solved by "throwing money at it" can be counted on one hand. Enough funding is rarely the primary issue if a long term solution is the goal.

    Second, incentives work if there is an equal chance of A and B prior to an important decision and the reward/consequence is immediate. We're dealing with people who are often----not that bright----and employ the "sure it could happen, but probably not to me". As long as the consequence is a) less than 100% likely and b) delayed (i.e. they find out a few weeks later) the incentive you described is likely flawed from the start assuming we carefully consider the behavioral traits of our bell-curve society.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to JohnGalt For This Useful Post:

    dinosaur (07-11-2019)

  12. #7
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteranTagger First Class
    Overall activity: 44.0%

    Taxcutter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    20,043
    Thanks
    91
    Thanked: 16,941
    Rep Power
    21474863
    Maybe yes to The Pill. It is dirt cheap these days.

  13. #8
    Senior Member Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsTagger Second Class1 year registered
    Overall activity: 25.0%

    DLLS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    3,500
    Thanks
    702
    Thanked: 4,611
    Rep Power
    6441820
    When personal responsibility is not an option punish the taxpayer.
    Regarding my avatar: I am the one on your left as you view it

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DLLS For This Useful Post:

    Lone Gunman (07-11-2019),Old Navy (07-11-2019)

  15. #9
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsCreated Blog entryVeteran
    Overall activity: 73.0%

    RMNIXON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    35,948
    Thanks
    22,625
    Thanked: 44,341
    Blog Entries
    3
    Rep Power
    21474877
    This whole problem is a slippery slope of what is medical and necessary. We could cut insurance costs a great deal if we dialed back on what is clearly more personal needs issues rather than actual medical conditions.

    For example I keep seeing these commercials for a daily drug that "might" prevent HIV infection in sexually active young people as featured. And at the end they claim you might be able to pay as little as "0" dollars copay!

    Is this what we pay for? So a small segment of the population can screw about like rabbits and have a reduced chance of HIV infection? Of course the insurance companies can justify this coverage because of even higher costs if they get HIV and must be covered.
    "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free."

    - Ronald Reagan

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RMNIXON For This Useful Post:

    Dr. Felix Birdbiter (07-11-2019),Lone Gunman (07-11-2019)

  17. #10
    Senior Member Achievements:
    1 year registeredTagger Second Class50000 Experience Points
    Overall activity: 38.0%

    dinosaur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    2,610
    Thanks
    2,960
    Thanked: 4,235
    Rep Power
    7479390
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
    Two comments.

    First, I agree. I'm in education and the number of problems we've successfully solved by "throwing money at it" can be counted on one hand. Enough funding is rarely the primary issue if a long term solution is the goal.

    Second, incentives work if there is an equal chance of A and B prior to an important decision and the reward/consequence is immediate. We're dealing with people who are often----not that bright----and employ the "sure it could happen, but probably not to me". As long as the consequence is a) less than 100% likely and b) delayed (i.e. they find out a few weeks later) the incentive you described is likely flawed from the start assuming we carefully consider the behavioral traits of our bell-curve society.
    Regarding your second point: My point is that the taxpayers need not be responsible for and on the hook for "not that bright" decision making and bad "behavioral traits" displayed by segments of our population. When baby momma doesn't get any extra freebies just for being a baby momma, taxpayers win, regardless of whether or not baby momma is "bright" enough to figure out a better path. The "incentivizing" comes from NOT funding the bad behavior, which is a win for taxpayers.

    Even dumb animals can learn, given enough time, learning opportunities, and repetition/reinforcement. The real question is whether or not taxpayers and society as a whole have the patience to bide the time and put forth the effort required to turn "not that bright" into responsible. When half of a society believes rewarding bad behavior is not only necessary, but good, that society is going down the path to destruction. That "light" at the end of the tunnel could be a consuming fireball.

    Unfortunately, one picture of a starving kid on the nightly news is enough to turn stomachs and change public policy. Building a successful society is difficult work.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to dinosaur For This Useful Post:

    JohnGalt (07-11-2019)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •