Ok, this middle ground that I speak of is probably the best solution to any problem. If my jaw is set, and your jaw is set, we fight. However if we fight to a standstill. Who wins. You will say you won. I say I won, we fight again. Lets take the health care issue. There are facts involved in this. Where is the middle ground. How can we acceive this middle ground. If I could prove to you that Universal Health care could acturally save you money. Could you prove to me that it would cost you more? What is the truth, which, is in the middle ground some place? It is never in an extreme. Answer as you wish but try to stay respectfull, Please
2007-02-09
12:40:32
·
6 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Law & Ethics
Run for office! Bless you!
There is always a way to achieve the stated aims of the opposite party while remaining true to your own party's stated aims.
The problem is that the stated aims of a party are rarely what they really want, and their real aims can rarely be admitted publically, or even sometimes to themselves.
And every side takes advantage of every concession of the other side rather than trying to find a solution, figuring that if they give, even a little, the other side will do the same to them (and they are probably right).
We must always vote for men of integrity, but also for men who would rather represent us than "vote their conscience". They might argue with us, disagree with what the public wants, present evidence against what we want, but they vote for what the people they represent want while trying to educate them.
When we fill the House, the Senate, the White House, and the Supreme Court with such men, we will have the government you, and all of us, wish for.
You have the power. Use it. Ethics, no rumor spreading, no name-calling, no sedition, Patriots (our country's interests, not a seperate agenda) first.
See you at the polls.
2007-02-09 12:53:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by mckenziecalhoun 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
You seem to be question mark challenged, but if I might ask some rhetorical question, I think you might get the picture. What is the middle ground in abortion? To kill or not to kill, do we just maim?
Where is the middle ground in fight or surrender? Just fight for a couple years and then surrender?
Where is the middle ground in Socialized medicine? The government taxes me to give you health care, but I have to pay because I worked hard and saved my money? You get very mediocre health care with my tax money, but I want good health care, so I have to pay a good Dr. cause the free system is lousy and will let you die?
Is being free a middle ground?
The Laffer curve is proof that too much taxation destroys wealth, while light to moderate taxation allows entrepreneurs the opportunity to generate wealth which flows to everyone. Where is the middle ground between too much taxation and too little?
No, there is NO middle ground. Socialism has been tried time and again. It has always failed. Someone that keeps trying the same experiment and expecting DIFFERENT results is insane.
2007-02-09 12:53:51
·
answer #2
·
answered by plezurgui 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
I'm a pretty middle-of-the-road guy. Extreme solutions seldom work. Nevertheless, if socialized medicine was the panacea so many people claim it is, Canadians wouldn't be coming down here to get treatment when they're seriously ill, because they'd probably die waiting for an appointment in a free government clinic. Of course, as is always the case in socialist/communist countries, there's always an "express lane" for the political pigs, and the rich, who are politically connected here, there, and everywhere. Universal health care provides the illusion of protection, but an illusion is all it is. Give me free enterprise any day!
2007-02-09 13:08:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by texasjewboy12 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
I disagree with you premise at the outset... it is better to decisively win.. one point or the other.... in addition you haven't defined what "Universal Health Care" would be.... is it a government run system? or one in the Private Sector? And who would save money? The young and healthy? (unlikely) or the old and infirm? (almost certainly) And is that the only problem with the health care system? Should other problems be addressed first?
2007-02-09 12:51:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Two people argueing over anything is just like a political poll. Either side can make it look like they have the best standpoint.
That is why most places majority rules. The only thing that breaks a tie in most cases is sheer numbers.
2007-02-09 12:44:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by billydeer_2000 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
truthfully the middle floor is the mid way factor between 2 contrasts. Is that no longer in basic terms blatantly obtrusive? the middle floor is the factor the place the two facets have compromised.
2016-09-28 21:45:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋