Do you really care about video games?

[jfrost]

I am pro-universal health care. I'm not for government paid or run universal health care.

A world of difference right there.

[BoringSupreez]

Something I noticed in this giant shit storm of a thread....

Tornado Creator said something about why some people are against universal healthcare. I for one am against it for the fact of how long it can take you to get to the doctor because they have to take everyone when there is universal healthcare. I know 5 people that have died waiting for help with their diseases, who couldn't get any because they were behind 100 people with equal or lesser problems. It's sad.

I've heard that happens because the government sets fees and suchlike too low for very many people to be attracted to having the job of being a doctor. So there's fewer doctors, but just as many patients.

And, WTF happened to this thread? The shit really hit the fan.

Tornado created a tornado again.

[TornadoCreator]

Something I noticed in this giant shit storm of a thread....

Tornado Creator said something about why some people are against universal healthcare. I for one am against it for the fact of how long it can take you to get to the doctor because they have to take everyone when there is universal healthcare. I know 5 people that have died waiting for help with their diseases, who couldn't get any because they were behind 100 people with equal or lesser problems. It's sad.


And, WTF happened to this thread? The shit really hit the fan.

Yeah, and that's very sad, people dying however is a fact of life. They where not purposefully ignored, the system simply lacked the resources to see everyone and unfortunately not everyone can recover. As for "equal or lesser problems" this is anacdotal and useless as a measurement. You don't know how ill the people ahead where. The NHS in this country sees people based on the seriousness of their claim. I have to wait months to see my specialists and I have a chronic incurable illness. My next appointment is November 9th, that over 6 weeks away. Why? Because other people who need it more come first. I understand this and frustrated as I am, I have to accept this.

If I want to be seen immediately I could take private healthcare (although I can't afford it). I'm not against private healthcare. If you feel that you would rather spend your money on getting more focused attention and faster service in hospitals, you can go to a private hospital, the biggest provider in UK is BUPA. I support BUPA. Every person who chooses to use their service, is one less person on the NHS waiting list. If I was wealthy I'd probably choose BUPA myself, however I would still feel happy to pay for the NHS via tax as I know most can't afford private healthcare.

Universal Healthcare isn't perfect, but those people waiting in the long waiting lists, they're still sick either way. The list doesn't get shorter magically by having insurance and paid healthcare, sure, those 5 people you knew may have been seen sooner and could have survived if they where not using universal healthcare, assume of course that they could afford their treatment, but this is only true because many others are no longer in the list, because they can't afford healthcare... and now they're dead. I don't think that's a good system.

[MrPopo]

I have no idea how many people today buy D2 items. I'm sure it's a significant portion (or else there wouldn't be so many people trying to sell their items) but people don't tend to advertise that they purchase items.

And hold on, did you just say that making $100 off an item and spending that on a different item is bad? That's just item trading with real currency as a middleman instead of an in-game currency. In fact, if you want, set up a special paypal for Diablo III that you never put money in to. So now instead of using Stone of Jordans you're using actual, but you never invested your own cash into the sytem.

In Diablo II you were in a situation where you were unlikely to be able to get all your gear from drops. To make up for it you would trade items with other people, frequently in the form of the SoJ currency (as it was easy to use and uncommon enough to have worth). That situation will be the same in Diablo III, only now instead of the SoJ you have the dollar. Just like in D2 you would do Meph runs to get uniques to sell for SoJs and buy the stuff you want from other people now you can do X runs to get items to sell on the auction house and use those proceeds to buy the items you want.

Plus, I suspect that there will still be an item-based economy, as there are a lot of people who cannot access the financial transactions or don't want to access the financial transactions.

I'm tired of trying to explain this shit. I'd rather have a fair game that costs less money than one that is completely designed around who can spend the most real money. That's fine if you prefer the latter, but you will never convince me to play Diablo III. I tried my best to play a pay to win game, but it didn't work out. It was impossible for me to succeed without spending a ton of real money. It bothered me very much and eventually I decided to quit. I don't want to play or support a pay to win game again.

And I keep trying to explain that it is NOT completely based around who can spend the most money.

[TornadoCreator]

I am pro-universal health care. I'm not for government paid or run universal health care.

A world of difference right there.

How would you run a private universal healthcare system that's not government run or funded? I'm not even sure that's possible.

[MrPopo]

You want to justify selfishness. You want to justify greed. Fine, then you are a cruel and awful human being.

Explain to me how I'm better off by not being selfish. Go ahead, I'm curious. And I'm specifically talking about the "giving up something for strangers I will never meet" selflessness you're talking about. I understand why it's a good thing to sacrifice stuff for your friends/family.

You're not. It doesn't make you better off in the slightest. It's about making them better off. You get no benefit whatsoever except perhaps the knowledge that you're making someone elses life easier. For me that's enough I like making other people happy. If everyone follows my way of thinking the collective quality of all life improves, which is a pretty big benefit. Is that enough?

If you can demonstrate that my quality of life would go up higher as a result of your views than as a result of my views then sure, your views make sense to me. But I don't care about the quality of life of random people.

I'm happy to pay tax in order to ensure people are treated well, are healthy and happy. This is a good thing.

Why? Keep in mind you won't get anywhere appealing to my "moral" sense, as I'm a firm believer that morals are an artifical human construct and I don't feel bound by them.

At which point we fundamentally disagree. However you're lying. You do feel bound by morals, which is why you don't rape people you're horny, kill people for the slightest offense, or steal something just because you want it. The reason why I feel happy to do this is because I feel it is simply right. It's a nice thing to care. It's good to care. I care.... don't you? If you don't care, well, fair enough I suppose, but I would consider you a horrible person. Compassion is one of the fundamental values I consider in humanity, to lack compassion makes you for lack of a better word... Evil.

I am not bound by morals, but I am bound by enforceable law. I steal music, movies, and TV shows all the time. As for caring, I care about the people in my life, like my family, my friends, and my kitty. I do not care about the other 6 billion people on this planet.

You want to keep your money and watch people suffer. Correct? No? What to argue this point. Come on then big bad Republican, get off your arse and justify yourself. Why should you have that money?

Because I earned it? I took the time to go to school and get a job and do my job satisfactorily.

So what? You earned the money. Big deal. By our capitalist systems, I can earn money by doing nothing. I could be a corporate shareholder, I could be a landlord, I could own an intellectual property or copyright. These things can earn me money without me even moving. The concept of earning money doesn't impress me. Why do you deserve the money? What good do you do society?

Let's see, the shareholder provides capital for businesses to grow, the landlord provides affordable housing to people, and the holder of IP was involved in the creation of said IP.

Or more specifically. Why the fuck should the CEO who does fuck all, who never works a decent hard days work in his fucking life have millions while others working for his company for minimum fucking wage have to die on the streets or rack up rediculous debts because he is too damn greedy?

I like how you assume that someone is instantly born a CEO and doesn't actually do anything at his company, just sits in his nice office and has his secretary bring him fresh coffee. Nope, CEOs didn't have to do anything to get where they are, or make any decisions now that they are where they are.

Actually yes. CEOs do nothing, not compared to the standard minimum wage worker. They perhaps designed a product or a service, there's a high chance they did sod all and inherited the company from their parents, but even if they did it all themselves, they likely work less in a year than a single worker in their company works in a month, and they earn millions while the worker gets a pitance. You know what I mean, don't try to reduce my argument to rediculousness. You surely agree a CEO doesn't earn their money, not like any worker does... they sit around and get rich off other peoples hard work, it's called SLAVERY! We just changed the system a little.

Slavery huh? The workers are bound to the CEO without any chance of escape? They aren't compensated for their time? And now you're just showing your ignorance of the daily life of a high level executive. To say they do such a little amount of work is laughable.

Go on. Justify it... and try doing it without sounding like a cunt. If you can... I'll give you everything I own (profit motive, otherwise you might get bored).

In the game of life there are winners and there are losers. Deal with it.

Wow. Really? That's what you're going to go for. Well in the game of life, there are decent people and there are cunts... which one are you?

By your definition? A cunt. And I have no problem with that.

Maybe I have a slightly different view on this. Maybe it's because without this flawed NHS system which you claim doesn't work, without that system, I wouldn't be here. Neither would either of my parents. Why? Because we can't afford the rediculous prices that healthcare reaches when privatised. Chances are I'll never have a full time job, my medical conditions will slowly make my ability to work less and less. I'd love to be able to contribute to society more than what I use... but I can't. By your logic. I should go away and die, to save you the trouble of paying for my medical care. How sick is that?

Yes, you are clearly invested in it and have a very biased point of view. But you want to talk about selfish? It seems pretty selfish to me for someone who contributes little financially to the state to demand a huge financial contribution from the state.

Yes it is selfish. I would love to be able to chose to not put such a strain on the hospitals, to not work up bills in the thousands of pounds, to be able to work and keep a little bit of my dignity, but some people aren't that lucky. I take solice in the fact that I'm a generally good person and I try to live my life making as many people happy as I can. I'm a very angry and frustrated man, living in constant pain. It's difficult for me to justify my life and drain on society... but I try. Other people seem to think the world owes them something. I'm thankful that in my country the average person wants to help me, they like the NHS, they support me getting the help I need. They're good people and I respect each and every one of them. In USA they would happily watch me suffer while complaining that stoping my pain might mean they can't afford another burger at McDonalds that week, and that would make me feel truly ashamed.

Do you want me to curl and die? Would you rather I throw myself off a bridge to save you the anguish of paying for my care? I'm sure there are many disabled people without my willpower and force of personality that might actually do it if you make them feel like worthless leeches. There lives are hard enough without being made to feel pointless. But, hell, at least you won't have pay as much tax, everyone will be better off without the disabled and infirm won't them... do I need to take this analogy to conclusion, I would hate to have to break Godwin's law.

There's a big difference between state-mandated eugenics and allowing nature to take its course. I have never in my life seen a single compelling argument for why we need to save every single person on this planet. Some people will succeed and some will fail, some will live and some will die. Do I personally wish you to die? No. But by the same token if you did die tomorrow I wouldn't care. You aren't a friend of mine.

I guarentee that every single person reading this post will be upset, offended and even angry at this point. Go on, call the moderators, report the post, get me banned. I don't care. Because if you can't swallow this point, you're not worth my time... all of you. This is very serious issue and I will not sit back while a bunch of self-important little fucking douches, with their smartphones, computers and long list of games, tell me why people without such luxuries deserve such disreguard. You have no idea what it feels like to go without, because if you did you wouldn't be so fucking selfish.

You should take some time to calm down before writing out your posts; you're getting far too emotional and it's obfuscating the points you are trying to make. But yes, how dare we, we who worked hard in school and in our jobs to earn money use that money for things like games and healthcare. We should fully subsidize those who cannot or are not productive because everyone is a unique snowflake that needs to be treasured.

Yes actually. I realise you're being sarcastic, but that's exactly what I'm saying. You should help those less fortunate than yourself. It's the right thing to do. The non-productive are rarely if ever non-productive by choice. People without work, are usually looking for work and willing to work, would it be so hard for you to help them, to treat them like human beings and not the filth you have to tread on to succeed.

Oh, I agree, there are a lot of unemployeed people who are actively trying to gain employment. I wish them success. There are also a lot of umployeed people who aren't and are content with leeching off the system. But even those looking for employment have to deal with the reality that there are only so many jobs to go around. If every single job is filled why does it make sense to subsidize those who were unable to attain work (for whatever reason)?

I'm a Socialist and proud, I have compassion and dignity. I care about people on a level greater than just myself.

Compassion and dignity is what fuels your socialism? I find that hard to believe when I see that you're relying heavily on the social programs in order to survive.

I'll accept that personal interests would seem the most likely reason for me to be a socialist. But that's not the case. I've always been extremely liberal minded. I have always agreed with socialist ideals and found capitalism sickening. I will point out, my medical issues didn't really start to effect me in a serious manner until I was about 20 years old and even then only in the last 2 years have I sought out specialist help. I have had multiple full-time jobs, I went to university and I was fully intending to be a chemist. This is high paying professional position, I would have been on a 6 figure salary and would probably have been in the higher tax rates. I still voted Liberal Democrats when I was a teenager. I expected to be a rich professional at that age, I didn't expect my medical issues to damage my career prospects so much. I would still even then, have happily supported all socialist ideals I support now... but I won't say I don't feel personally involved, it's annoying for me that so many people will assume an alterior motive, especially as if I was in your position I'd probably be thinking the same.

How many wealthy socialists can you name? It'd be interesting to see if you still held your views had you attained your high paying job. There's a phenomenom here where many people who self-identify as Republicans before going to college come out identifying as Democrats. But while it's annoying, you're going to have to accept that everyone you talk to is going to assume you want social programs because you are making such heavy use of them.

PS: For those who require a less moral and emotionally focused argument. I'd like to point out, the NHS costs less per person in the UK than the combined costs of government buyouts that the federal government is forced into when Americans cannot afford their medical bills. When they find the debt too great and are forced bankrupt, who picks up the bill... the tax payers. So not only is our system more compassionate and fair, but it costs our government less as well... USA you're a fucking failure, you can't even manage greedy properly. The ONLY people who come out on top with the American healthcare system is the fucking insurance companies... and you let them, what idiots are you?

Please back up with sources.

I can happily back up this claim with sources, please give me a few days and I'll send them to you. Alternatively you can look it up yourself online, it's not hard to find the information and inform yourself about the state of the US healthcare system. It's the reason USA is so lowly rated internationally for it's healthcare system.

I look forward to your sources. I'm not about to say that our healthcare system doesn't have problems but making concrete statements on average costs is something that I need to see backed up.

[jfrost]

I am pro-universal health care. I'm not for government paid or run universal health care.

A world of difference right there.

How would you run a private universal healthcare system that's not government run or funded? I'm not even sure that's possible.

I'm in favor of everyone having health care. I don't share your enthusiasm for your means. I'm just pointing out from the outset that rejecting a means is not the same as rejecting the ends, which is something often conflated in discussions like this.

But, if you really want to know, I'd be happy to discuss it with you somewhere else. In a nutshell, I'm in favor of a full private system with no government grants, licensing fees, or any other barriers to entry.

[Jmustang1968]

...

You continue to spew sensationalist socialist talking points. I think you have no idea the work CEOs or anyone do. Are you only equating work done as physical and manual labor?

You are trying to equate CEOs as slave drivers. You say people are reducing your arguments as being ridiculous when you are doing that all on your own.

In USA they would happily watch me suffer while complaining that stoping my pain might mean they can't afford another burger at McDonalds that week, and that would make me feel truly ashamed.

If you truly believe this, you are uninformed and delusional.

[Inazuma]

And I keep trying to explain that it is NOT completely based around who can spend the most money.

The best gear in the game will be worth a ton of money. Unless you are rich in real life, you cannot use it. This is true even if you found the gear yourself from normal play.

Do you want to equip the awesome sword you just found, or would you rather have $500? That's the choice you will have to make.

If you find a decent piece of gear, it will cost you $50 to equip it, because you had the option of selling it in the auction house.

Get it now? Real money is the most important thing in Diablo III. How good you are is based on how rich you are in real life. One way or another, it all comes down to that.

If I play Diablo III, I want to be strong. That means it will cost me thousands of dollars. There is no way around that. The real money auction house has completely destroyed the game.

Go ahead and play your super fucking expensive Diablo III, Mr Popo. You can be weak or you can spend a ton of money to be strong. Your choice. I don't want to do either of those, so I'll pass.

[MrPopo]

You are HIGHLY inflating what the prices of these items will be. And again, if you want the best gear in Diablo II the only RELIABLE way to get it is to pay money. It is no different than Diablo III. If you want go get items in Diablo II or Diablo III without taking money from your wallet and giving it to some guy is to farm up some items that you can convert into the trade currency and use that to get the items you want. It is the exact same thing.