Driving Unhealthy Hypocrisy

[RealDealNeverstop]

This is not an argument in favor of a socialized healthcare system but merely a whispering attempt of comprehending the support for socialized transportation while finding the same model for healthcare to be reprehensible.

Millions of Americans who pay taxes do not have vehicles so their money is used to subsidize financial support for drivers. Why should people who do not own vehicles pay the same amount in taxes as those who do? How is it justifiable to apply a universal tax system for roads but not healthcare.

It is true those who do not have vehicles benefit from roads for commerce, law enforcement, and other public services but this does not negate the fact wheel-free Citizens help underwrite all drivers.

Can anyone explain why the socialist model for transportation is approved but derided for healthcare?

 

[lordbt]

If road construction and maintenance are funded by gasoline taxes and licensing fees, then those who dont drive and dont use the roads pay nothing. Those who use them all the time pay for their use. If you are going to have taxation, user fees are the most moral form.

Socialized medicine is a direct wealth transfer that is designed to provide a service for those who cant afford it at the expense of those who can.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

If road construction and maintenance are funded by gasoline taxes and licensing fees, then those who dont drive and dont use the roads pay nothing. Those who use them all the time pay for their use. If you are going to have taxation, user fees are the most moral form.

Who doesn't use roads? I mean... even those who don't drive rely on roads.

Socialized medicine is a direct wealth transfer that is designed to provide a service for those who cant afford it at the expense of those who can.

Like security?

 

[CTD]

Roads are not socialism. Roads with special privileged lanes for the ''elite'', sure...

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

Roads are not socialism. Roads with special privileged lanes for the ''elite'', sure...

How are roads not a socialized system?

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

Dp............................

 

[CTD]

How are roads not a socialized system?

If you want a meaningful definition of 'socialism', one that's distinct from alternatives like our constitutional republic, or monarchy, or anything else ... roads aren't something you can claim. If you want some goofball esoteric definition, talk to yourself or the socialists who are forever redefining terms as a means of masking their rotten, filthy, stinking agenda.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

If you want a meaningful definition of 'socialism', one that's distinct from alternatives like our constitutional republic, or monarchy, or anything else ... roads aren't something you can claim. If you want some goofball esoteric definition, talk to yourself or the socialists who are forever redefining terms as a means of masking their rotten, filthy, stinking agenda.

The definition bounces back and forth sometimes because some conservatives can't decide on which particular socialized services they do not want to fit under the definition. They want for only those things they don't want socialized (like healthcare) to get called 'socialized'.

 

[Douger]

If road construction and maintenance are funded by gasoline taxes and licensing fees, then those who dont drive and dont use the roads pay nothing. Those who use them all the time pay for their use. If you are going to have taxation, user fees are the most moral form.

Socialized medicine is a direct wealth transfer that is designed to provide a service for those who cant afford it at the expense of those who can.

Well said lordbt. Maybe we can put the whole "oh so you're against roads?" thing to rest.

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

If you want a meaningful definition of 'socialism', one that's distinct from alternatives like our constitutional republic, or monarchy, or anything else ... roads aren't something you can claim. If you want some goofball esoteric definition, talk to yourself or the socialists who are forever redefining terms as a means of masking their rotten, filthy, stinking agenda.

Thank you for the commentary. When can we expect an answer to the question?

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

If road construction and maintenance are funded by gasoline taxes and licensing fees, then those who dont drive and dont use the roads pay nothing. Those who use them all the time pay for their use. If you are going to have taxation, user fees are the most moral form.

Socialized medicine is a direct wealth transfer that is designed to provide a service for those who cant afford it at the expense of those who can.

Before responding, clarification is needed. Are you claiming people who don't own cars and buy gas don't have any of their taxes used on roadways?

 

[CTD]

Thank you for the commentary. When can we expect an answer to the question?

I don't know. Most folks don't expect meaningful responses to meaningless questions. Some do. If you're one of the latter, you tell us all when you're going to start, and there'll be the answer staring you in the face.

There is nothing inherently socialist about roads. I suppose one could cook up some socialist schemes and try to implement them. What do you have in mind?

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

I don't know. Most folks don't expect meaningful responses to meaningless questions. Some do. If you're one of the latter, you tell us all when you're going to start, and there'll be the answer staring you in the face.

There is nothing inherently socialist about roads. I suppose one could cook up some socialist schemes and try to implement them. What do you have in mind?

You claimed roadways are not a socialist structure but failed for the second time to support your own claim.

 

[ACougar]

He should have said public roads. Toll roads run by for profit corperatins would be an example of capitalism... while taxing everyone and then making the roads free for everyone to use is an excellent example of socialism.

I don't know. Most folks don't expect meaningful responses to meaningless questions. Some do. If you're one of the latter, you tell us all when you're going to start, and there'll be the answer staring you in the face.

There is nothing inherently socialist about roads. I suppose one could cook up some socialist schemes and try to implement them. What do you have in mind?

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

He should have said public roads. Toll roads run by for profit corperatins would be an example of capitalism... while taxing everyone and then making the roads free for everyone to use is an excellent example of socialism.

Thought it would have been obvious I was referencing public roads but I keep making the mistake of thinking. Also, toll roads can be built and maintained by public or private entities, or a combo of the two which is a wet dream for greed and creative accounting.

 

[CTD]

He should have said public roads. Toll roads run by for profit corperatins would be an example of capitalism... while taxing everyone and then making the roads free for everyone to use is an excellent example of socialism.

Sure, if you define 'socialism' as ''any government at all''. Even that won't really cut it. There'd be roads even with anarchy.

Roads are part and parcel of any public property. People are going to traverse it.

We have private roads: they're called 'railroads', and the history isn't the prettiest thing to study.

 

[CTD]

What about all the little pinkos utilizing public sidewalks? How come they get a pass?

 

[Standing_Ultraviolet]

[Edit: Socialism is always a bad idea, but public roads aren't.]

 

[Assyrian]

Roads are not socialism. Roads with special privileged lanes for the ''elite'', sure...

You mean like bus lanes?

 

[ACougar]

How can you have public property with anarchy? The very idea of public property is socialist. Then there is the matter of maintaining the roads, policing the roads, not to mention building new roads when the old roads can no longer handle the traffic.

In Europe the railroads are public, and they seem to be quiet efficient. They took a socialist approach instead of a capitalist aproach... because they realize that both approaches have their strengths and weaknesses. We on the other hand seem to think that adding or making things more capitalist is always the solution, it's like having a car mechanic who is really good with a wrench but refuses to use any other tools.

Sure, if you define 'socialism' as ''any government at all''. Even that won't really cut it. There'd be roads even with anarchy.

Roads are part and parcel of any public property. People are going to traverse it.

We have private roads: they're called 'railroads', and the history isn't the prettiest thing to study.