Political discussion thread

HarbouringTheSoul wrote: thellama73 wrote: But providing money for kidney donors will result in more kidney donations. ...and also introduces the ethically dubious issue of people selling their organs because they need money. thellama73 wrote: So you would rather save fewer people as long as they're not rich? I never said that they shouldn't be rich. I said that organ donations should be organized in such a way that nobody (including rich people) is favored. What should be done is to increase the number of organ donations by other means, such as replacing the current opt-in model (if I'm not mistaken) with an opt-out model or, preferably, a mandated choice concept where every citizen is forced to make a decision on whether or not they want to become organ donors after their death. There's no need to commercialize the system and deal with all the ethical issues that come with that.

Naturally, I strongly disapprove of coerced organ harvesting by the government.

Why shouldn't people sell their organs because they need money? If they value the money more than their organ, why shouldn't they be allowed to make that choice?

thellama73 wrote: But providing money for kidney donors will result in more kidney donations.

...and also introduces the ethically dubious issue of people selling their organs because they need money.

thellama73 wrote: So you would rather save fewer people as long as they're not rich?

I never said that they shouldn't be rich. I said that organ donations should be organized in such a way that nobody (including rich people) is favored. What should be done is to increase the number of organ donations by other means, such as replacing the current opt-in model (if I'm not mistaken) with an opt-out model or, preferably, a mandated choice concept where every citizen is forced to make a decision on whether or not they want to become organ donors after their death. There's no need to commercialize the system and deal with all the ethical issues that come with that.

King of Loss wrote: http://www.sfgate.com/business/bloomberg/article/Ohio-Green-Party-Candidate-Sues-to-Block-Voting-4012763.php http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9233311/E_voting_machine_swaps_Obama_vote_for_Romney_taken_offline?taxonomyId=12 A serious concern I think.

The reports I heard had Romney votes changing to Obama, so I expect the errors will cancel each other out, but still there should be no errors at all. I was fortunate enough to vote with a paper ballot in my district.

Epignosis wrote: And that should say "Whom," not "Who."

And they ended their sentence in a preposition!
That's the sort of cavalier grammar usage up with which I will not put!


Edited by thellama73 - November 06 2012 at 14:17

Yahoo!'s poll, for what it's worth:



And that should say "Whom," not "Who." 

manofmystery wrote: That's Stalin, isn't it

“He who casts a vote decides nothing. He who counts the vote decides everything.”

tamijo wrote: thellama73 wrote: tamijo wrote: 10.000 $ may seem a bit more if you got 375$ at the account, than it does if you got 10.000.000 $  Yep. And it's harder to buy caviar if you are poor too. So what? If you cant tell the diffrence yourself, i dont think it matter if i try to explain it.

The complaint that's it's unfair for people with money to get better medical care than people without boils down to an argument that money should have no value. If you believe money should have no value, fine, but you should understand that is what you are arguing for.

If we have money, some people will have more of it than others. If money is traded for goods and services, people with more money will get more and better goods and services.

My parents voted Romney, as I expected, although I gave them a paper on Johnson's stances in an attempt to sway their vote. They said they thought he was excellent and agreed with him on all but one thing (global warming). But they hated Obama so much that they wanted to do their best to get Romney in there.

Blacksword wrote: King of Loss wrote: Dean wrote: King of Loss wrote: I'm predicting that the stock market will crash if Obama is elected and rally if Romney is elected. Because that's how king stupid the market system is. If "wall street" didn't keep second-guessing the flickin' economy we wouldn't be in this mess. So you agree with George Soros? I'm sure I've heard somewhere that Soros has been purchasing sh*t loads of gold in the last year or so. About 12 months ago I saw him interveiewed saying that he thought it may be time for a new reserve currency backed by a basket of currencies, oil and precious metals.