Comments on: Greed, justice and deception Wed, 07 Oct 2015 17:23:32 +0000 hourly 1 By: breezinthru Sun, 23 Dec 2012 11:12:12 +0000 This article and the original comment by OneOfTheSheep are well done.

Both remind of the book, “Ishmael”. It would be a simple matter to put our nation’s situation back on track. We just need to reorient our thinking to something that is a little more fair and a lot more sustainable.

By: OneOfTheSheep Thu, 20 Dec 2012 19:49:12 +0000 @PseudoTurtle/Gordon2352,

Name calling is always the last gasp of those whose opinions are essentially unsupportable by logic or available resources. The last hundred years have seen the greatest improvement of the “common man”, both in America and in the world as a whole, in thousands of years; and yet you show no gratitude for all that has thus “come your way” by virtue of the accident of birth in America or that it cam about when it did.

My wife and I are rich in many ways, but not in money; and yet we are content, yet “still in the game” of life. A pragmatic outlook allows one to exert such influence as they have while actually enjoying this magnificent journey of life. You are clearly dissatisfied with all that surrounds you, yet this is a choice you can put behind you on any day you choose.

What you feel personally is shown everything you do and say whether you realize it or not. I don’t doubt that a life lived in “your world” according to “your rules” would be more challenging than most of us would choose.

In my opinion those who reject your petty delusions of a utopia utterly unachievable in current society are far wiser than you. May you someday understand that those universal aspirations which allow mankind to progress in quality of life are different, of necessity, from options which “we, the people” can realistically implement in this day and time such that tomorrow’s society in America and the world will be a sustainable improvement.

By: PseudoTurtle Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:26:32 +0000 @ OneOfTheSheep —

Once again you rant incoherently, while missing my point entirely.

Your name is certainly apropos.

You truly are “one of the sheep”, and there is no way to reach low grade morons like you, which is why I typically ignore your screed, but you chose to attack my position this time and I decided to demonstrate where your “logic” would take this nation.

Upon reflection, Reuters did me a favor by banning me from posting any more comments. You people are not worth my time and effort, and I was very near to making that decision myself.

This WILL be my last post. But voluntarily, not because I am being forced to stop by Reuters, since they are ways to easily circumvent their ban.

Reuters reflects the great unwashed out there who would rather be fed vegepap than learn the truth.

“Willful ignorance” cannot be overcome, not matter what I say or the logical points I make to counter your rants.

You people deserve each other, and what is soon to befall this nation.


@ tmc —

I understand why you agree with this moron, because you personally have benefitted from globalization — as have the greedy wealthy, upon whom you dote — but as a nation we will not survive their return to Social Darwinism.

I thought there might be a glimmer of intelligence behind some of your replies to me, but you flip-flop your opinion like a dying fish.


As I said, this is my last post and I feel better now that I no longer have to tolerate morons who clearly do not understand the implications of what they are saying.

My reasons for doing it at all, or persisting long after there was clearly no hope of reaching any of the “sheep” out there, are my own. But I feel I have done what I can, and that is enough for me. That it changes nothing no longer matters to me either.

In many instances, what I have said is not truly what I feel personally, but it was said for the greater good.

If you think you know me, you do not. I have never revealed my personal beliefs. They are none of your business.

I will say this, however. I guarantee you would not want to live in my world according to my rules. They would make the wealthy class Social Darwinism look like the “free lunch” you people are constantlfy whining about.


By: tmc Thu, 20 Dec 2012 15:55:40 +0000 Nice to your comments again OOTS! Very well put.

By: OneOfTheSheep Thu, 20 Dec 2012 05:22:21 +0000 @Gordon2342,

When one considers history prior to the end of the last century your perspective and arguments seem at best naive and at worst bizarre. You argue that what society can do today for some it should do for all? I totally disagree. Present government expenditures are multiples of present revenues and yet you argue for greater expenditures? Do you know how to balance a check book?

Some Native Americans (and Eskimo societies?) had a practice of putting those too sick, infirm or otherwise without the ability to contribute to the overall welfare of the group “out” from the fires and the tents to die of starvation or exposure. The wife of an old and respected leader was not exempt.

This was, all things considered, a merciful death (in the context of other options). These “hunter-gathering nomads” knew well their society could not sustain the unproductive. They “drew the line” they had to and refused to put the survival of the group itself at risk. Hard, but necessary choices. The needs of the many outweighed the needs of the few.

Circumstances force society to put a financial value on human life all the time. Think 9/11 victims. Emotion trumped logic…why are the lives of our servicemen and servicewomen “worth less” than 9/11 victims? The trouble with common sense is that it’s not so common any more.

Now that our society has the ability to test and discover an ever-increasing number of birth defects, including autism, I think it should. I see no rational reason why any society should encourage the birth of more and more “special needs” citizens.

Prospective parents who feel bound by their faith or emotions to bring such fetuses to term and birth should not expect taxpayers to fund the cost of their personal burden(s), but they do. I think such parents demonstrate merely a masochistically different form of greed and “entitlement thinking” who seek to transfer to a “compassionate” society their incipient personal financial burden. Notice how taxpayers never have a voice in such decisions? Lifelong “special needs” costs can be obscene!

Entirely different is the situation of children whose autism could not be genetically or otherwise diagnosed in advance. These deserve the same concern and compassion our society provided in the middle of the last century to those unfortunate enough to contract polio. Did America build millions and millions of iron lungs to treat every victim the world over for free? No, but we built many; and went after that disease with enough research priority and dollars that it has largely been eradicated as a threat today with a few exceptions. Similarly, when autism’s “cause” is found, there will be generations of victims with as long as they live. Why should there be more than are unavoidable?

“Responsibility” is the fundamental consideration to what our society SHOULD demand of ALL citizens. School has become more baby sitter than educator. Why? Today we see an ever-increasing number of citizens mature in their teens already too fat for military or other productive work.

Predictable medical costs of adult obesity and diabetes area clear threat to our future national solvency. There are many rewards and penalties that can be employed to assure a society at least as healthy as those that fought WW II. People need to lead, follow or get out of the way!

The same can be said for the exploding epidemic of drug addiction, smoking, HIV or tattoo/piercing infections and associated costs of “care”. These people live off of polite society in much the same way that the pirates of old did. They contribute disproportionately to ever-increasing drug resistance of relatively common bacteria. If they want the benefits of society, they need to “clean up their act”.

Prisoners have not earned a life of idleness. Put them to productive work! Those with skills still have them. Those willing and able can be trained to be productive when they get out. Make prisons self-sufficient as much as possible. They can grow their own food, make/wash their own clothes, generate or capture their own power/heat. The experience of working together towards common goals can be transformative for some, if not all.

For those unwilling, fine. Progressive penalties, one by one…no gym or TV or library access. Eventually all they can do is stare at blank walls, “examples” in solitary others can watch on TV 24/7. I knew a man from one of the slavic countries who said their prisons were small and never got full. There was one door to go in and a special opening through which prisoners received food, cards and knives. It never got full and no one ever left. An option worth considering for incorrigible sociopaths.

The firefighter or policemen or serviceman wounded in the line of duty IS society’s responsibility. “We, the people” accept that some necessary work is dangerous and high risk. The “bargain” that is not always made good is that we will “make it right” (within reason) for those wounded while providing services necessary to our society. Such just debts should be honored fully in good faith without fail.

Retirees on Social Security are a legitimate part of America’s “circle of life”. You won’t be rich and you can’t live large, but all citizens who EARN AND NEED such “retirement” should have reasonable and necessary basic needs met. Local volunteers make “Senior Centers, library access, “meals on wheels”, etc. valued and inexpensive assistance. When we look upon elders it should not be with shame or envy. We all age and that which we sow we should be content to reap, each of us earning over our productive years the right to live out our “golden years” in reasonable dignity.

Since the need to use a wheel chair is not, in and of itself a barrier to mental productivity or a reasonable quality of life, I think society SHOULD make REASONABLE accommodation for accessibility. It seems rather stupid and an unjustified waste of resources to try to make EVERYWHERE “wheelchair accessible”. If you want to climb Everest, do it while you’re young!

If “old people on respirators” can afford them, it’s THEIR money. Just don’t appropriate money I earn before taxes to give EVERYONE one. Stroke? Same answer. When Medicare/Medicaid payments and benefits were originally contemplated, it was usually obvious when one’s “time had come”. What we contributed cannot pay for all medical interventions possible today. Whose “job” is it to say “NO”?

America is not yet a “Star Trek Society” where the government just prints money and passes it out to one and all, who may choose a career and work or not as they see fit. I do see that the Federal Reserve and the Obama administration seem disturbingly well along with such an experiment!

By: PseudoTurtle Wed, 19 Dec 2012 23:18:38 +0000 @ tmc —

It appears I have been banned from any more comments on Reuters.

It appears I have finally angered the powers that be more than they can tolerate with the truth.

So much for freedom of speech.

This was my other account I was using.


By: tmc Wed, 19 Dec 2012 21:36:13 +0000 The capitalist may all be greedy, but the greedy are not all capitalists.

By: Gordon2352 Wed, 19 Dec 2012 21:25:52 +0000 @ tmc —

Yes, you are right, of course — “greed at its worst” — with people living off of the suffering and pain of others.

THAT is what unfettered capitalism does, AND what the wealthy want to do with this nation.

The question is whether we have grown so callous and indifferent as to allow a “market solution” to our healthcare needs?

THAT is what the Republicans want.

THAT is what will happen as a result.

As a nation, we need to read the fine print before we sign up for their version of what they want this country to become.

By: tmc Wed, 19 Dec 2012 20:19:21 +0000 I think the medical fields and industries, including pharmaceuticals, is a prime example of greed. I can understand the hospital asking $4.00 – $12.00 for a Band-Aid. But I don’t understand that same hospital paying 2-6 for it. As the baby boomers ripen, the capitalist take notice. Pharmaceuticals will now adjust the price based on your income. Not how much will the market bear, but how much can an individual pay. Isn’t that nice of them?
Mr. Hadas has a very good point. The requirement that extremely expensive services cannot be refused, and you die if you don’t ask for them is a pretty slick way to ensure maximum profit. Greed at its worst.

By: Gordon2352 Wed, 19 Dec 2012 19:39:11 +0000 Sorry, I am double-counting one group on my list above.

Homosexuals and AIDS should be combined, since even if they don’t currently have the disease, they should be considered to be “potential disease carriers”.

Thus, to anyone reading my list and objecting to homosexals being on it, that is my answer.

As a group, homosexuals DO use an inordinate amount of health care, since it is only a matter of time before they catch AIDS.