knabe
Well-known member
Since nobody built that, there is no such thing as a private business anymore.
frostback said:-XBAR- said:knabe said:Since the supreme court said hospitals can't refuse people who can't pay, will they force doctors to accept patients who can't pay and will they force them to provide services that are reimbursed by Obamacare?
Will they accuse them of discrimination?
Should show cattle producers be forced to sell calves to this who can't afford them? Anything else would be discrimination.
Imagine a firefighter picking and choosing whose house fire they would put out or a policeman choosing whose call for help they would respond to. Imagine if they verified your ability to pay on the spot prior to responding or if they were allowed to discriminate and say, "well, sorry, we realize your house is on fire but we 'choose' not to provide service to polka doted people."
Your comparing apples to oranges. Firefighters are public servants the bakery is privately owned.
knabe said:Firefighters already refuse service.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2011/12/07/it-happened-again-firefighters-let-home-burn-after-owners-didnt-pay-75-protection-fee/
knabe said:Since nobody built that, there is no such thing as a private business anymore.
-XBAR- said:knabe said:Firefighters already refuse service.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2011/12/07/it-happened-again-firefighters-let-home-burn-after-owners-didnt-pay-75-protection-fee/
Perfect example of the market inefficiencies of privatization. any system has inefficiencies.
knabe said:Since nobody built that, there is no such thing as a private business anymore.
The monetary system, tax payer funded infrastructure, laws and regulations- just to name a few- all contribute to the facilitation of private business. They collectively enable the possibility. the possibility, not the mandate.
knabe said:Firefighters already refuse service.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2011/12/07/it-happened-again-firefighters-let-home-burn-after-owners-didnt-pay-75-protection-fee/
aj said:So is the old no shoes no shirt....noservice deal uninforceable?
vc said:MCC I hear you. We do contract and hard money jobs for the local utility here, we are now required to have 45% of our cost go to minority, women or disabled vet owned businesses.
knabe said:
-XBAR- said:You know there are various TYPES of discrimination prohibited by LAW.
knabe said:-XBAR- said:You know there are various TYPES of discrimination prohibited by LAW.
the law isn't static, in fact, it's aggressively expanding to include any possible slight to a liberal and being labeled discrimination.
would the opposite be portrayed if it was a girl, ie when female teachers molest underage boys? the law is currently discriminatory, something you are in denial of. just because it's the "law", doesn't mean it's fair, that's why there is something called jury nullification to address discrimination by the law and/or it's enforcement.
-XBAR- said:It's my opinion that jury nullification- which I strongly oppose- is the culprit of the laws discrimination. The law is black and white. It's only when legislating from the bench is allowed that there because discrepancies.
aj said:What would Al Sharpton do?
-XBAR- said:The law is black and white. It's only when legislating from the bench is allowed that there because discrepancies.