Discussion of Political Philosophy...

[VolStudent19]

I'm a Polil. Sci. major at UT, and I love to talk more about political philosophies, and how they apply on a modern scale then I do normal partisan politics.

There seem to be some educated people on this board, so I am willing to give it a shot.

I'll start it off.

How do you feel John Locke's variation of social contract theory applies to the modern healthcare crisis?

[kptvol]

I'm not writing your essay for you.

[VolStudent19]

Haha, I only wish we could get assigned an essay on an interesting topic. As it stands now, I have been doing research for a paper on the influence of OPEC on the global economy.

I'll add something to the topic here...

Locke espoused that individuals would willingly form a state, willingly giving up some rights and privacies for the greater protections provided by a common government.

Obviously, one could apply this to the health-care topic. We as citizens provide our taxes and the government (based on the bill) will provide some sort of insurance option. This certainly aligns with the Lockean view of laws being judged based upon their effect/relationship to the common good.

However, Locke also argued strongly for the ability of the individual to protect his life, liberty, and his property. While it is the responsibility of the government to assist in the protection of these rights, Locke believes that it is the responsibility of the individual, first and foremost, to protect these rights.


If you still doubt my desire to discuss these things, and not get help on some sort of school assignment, then go right ahead and bring up a topic and we can go from there. Not trying to offend anyone, just trying to get some intelligent conversation going.

[volinbham]

I think a key term in your description is "willingly".

Our representative system renders this willingness indirect. I would expect that virtually all (90%) citizens willingly support the government providing common infrastructure and protection services. However, I think the willingness is stretched beyond recognition when our representatives decide to continually ramp up what the government "provides".

[BigPapaVol]

Search for LawGator1 and learn all you need. We even had an ethics primer in here the other day. Very enlightening stuff.

I'm with VBH on the government provision. The slippery slope there is unavoidable and the end inevitable. Met needs becoming rights is a problem. I'd rather let individuals figure out meeting their own needs, save those physically incapable, and avoid giving politicians the vote garnering capacity that free "stuff" allows.

[VolStudent19]

Originally Posted by BigPapaVol

Search for LawGator1 and learn all you need. We even had an ethics primer in here the other day. Very enlightening stuff.

I'm with VBH on the government provision. The slippery slope there is unavoidable and the end inevitable. Met needs becoming rights is a problem. I'd rather let individuals figure out meeting their own needs, save those physically incapable, and avoid giving politicians the vote garnering capacity that free "stuff" allows.

I agree, I think that the minute welfare and social entitlement becomes a right, and not a benefit or means of helping the impoverished; then the government moves on from becoming an entity that citizens willingly give to support, and becomes a state that takes what it wants, and gives what it wants.

It is a slippery slope, the larger your government gets, the harder it becomes to stop. Its a dangerous cycle that can spin out of control if not contained.

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by VolStudent19

I agree, I think that the minute welfare and social entitlement becomes a right, and not a benefit or means of helping the impoverished; then the government moves on from becoming an entity that citizens willingly give to support, and becomes a state that takes what it wants, and gives what it wants.

It is a slippery slope, the larger your government gets, the harder it becomes to stop. Its a dangerous cycle that can spin out of control if not contained.

It cannot be contained. We've watched several great civilizations perish for doing the same thing.

[lawgator1]

All the ripples in the pond ...

I agree with BPV and droski that an unintended ripple has been the rapid expansion of entitlements, beyond our means. I'm not sure what we do about it once we've gone down the trail as far as we have.

I'd like to think that the solution is to raise the standard of living for the lowest classes and thereby reduce demand, and of course its hard to argue with that in theory. But that would surely mean even more spendng, on things like edication and infrastructure in particular.

I truly wonder some times if we aren't as a planet headed for a Malthusian Nightmare of our own.

[KB5252]

Originally Posted by lawgator1

All the ripples in the pond ...

I agree with BPV and droski that an unintended ripple has been the rapid expansion of entitlements, beyond our means. I'm not sure what we do about it once we've gone down the trail as far as we have.

I'd like to think that the solution is to raise the standard of living for the lowest classes and thereby reduce demand, and of course its hard to argue with that in theory. But that would surely mean even more spendng, on things like edication and infrastructure in particular.

I truly wonder some times if we aren't as a planet headed for a Malthusian Nightmare of our own.

I would argue that because we have been so liberal in our spending on entitlements we haven't had the money needed to maintain and develop infrastructure.

[lawgator1]

Originally Posted by KB5252

I would argue that because we have been so liberal in our spending on entitlements we haven't had the money needed to maintain and develop infrastructure.

Just now also noted that I spelled it EDICATION.

Great.

[T-TownVol]

Originally Posted by lawgator1

All the ripples in the pond ...

I agree with BPV and droski that an unintended ripple has been the rapid expansion of entitlements, beyond our means. I'm not sure what we do about it once we've gone down the trail as far as we have.

I'd like to think that the solution is to raise the standard of living for the lowest classes and thereby reduce demand, and of course its hard to argue with that in theory. But that would surely mean even more spendng, on things like edication and infrastructure in particular.

I truly wonder some times if we aren't as a planet headed for a Malthusian Nightmare of our own.

wealth redistribution?

[T-TownVol]

Originally Posted by lawgator1

Just now also noted that I spelled it EDICATION.

Great.

dang, he beat me to calling this out....my day is ruined

[KB5252]

Originally Posted by lawgator1

Just now also noted that I spelled it EDICATION.

Great.

No worries, I noticed it as an obvious mistype, well either that or chalked it up to you being a gatur fan.......you be the judge.

[T-TownVol]

Originally Posted by KB5252

No worries, I noticed it as an obvious mistype, well either that or chalked it up to you being a gatur fan.......you be the judge.

Lord, PLEASE nooooooooo!

[lawgator1]

T-town active today, I see. I assume I am being insulted some more. I kind of wear it as a badge of honor, at this point.