If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
There's no need for the state to force people to wear them. It should be up to personal responsiblity.
It's in the state's interest to encourage personal responsibilty in matters such as wearing seatbelts.
Seatbelts are necessary if you want to increase your chances of staying alive.
If you want to die, then yes, I would say they are unnecessary.
Perhaps people would be more respsonsible if they weren't expecting free treatment at their local NHS hospital.
That's an interesting point.
Or perhaps people would be more responsible if they were warned of the full dangers?
Anyway let's not turn this debate into your push for privatisation campaign.
Free market health care should replace the NHS.
Are you suggesting that a free market health system wouldn't get clogged up by the same level of trauma cases, emergencies etc?
In fact MoK wasn't it the Wanless Report (was it Wanless?) anyway his report that said a private insurance based healthcare system would mean the NHS would get clogged up with all the insurance claims and forms and would suck away resources from actually curing people?
Really why? According to your beliefs we could just privatise the police into private security firms so a household or street or whatever could hire a policeman in the same way that you can hire a security guard nowadays. Why would you make the police a special case - I disagree with the idea but I don't claim privatising everything as my ideology.
Only the police and armed forces should be in state hands.
Bullshit!!! MILLIONS of people still smoke, even THOUGH THEY KNOW it's bad for them!!
Like millions of people are alcoholics and they know it can damage the liver, but they still do it.
Why does everyone pick on smokers :mad:
Aye, it was Wanless. Interesting read too. If you are in the business of course.
Always makes me laugh when people compare NHS and private hospitals and think that Private are better and could therefore cope with emergencies.
Why the police though? You could easily privatise them so why are they a special case, by your reasoning of reducing the state's power wherever possible we could privatise them too. So why do you exempt them, I wouldn't mind if you seemed to have some sort of coherent platform of beliefs but you apparantly don't.
Isn't it my responsibility to protect myself?
Are you an anarcho-capitalist now?
No I am wholly in favour of state involvement in many fields. However, you state that you believe that the states role should be reduced to the bare minimum - hence you can privatise the police force just as you could the health service and education so I'm wondering why you would not privatise them as you believe the state's role should be at the bare minimum. Or is it as these things usually are that right wing supported organisations are exempt from these sorts of policies. :chin:
Who determines what "public order" actually is?
People only despise traffic wardens because they hate having to pay the ticket. No rational person would say we don't need parking controls.
Find a book and look up the definition of a minimum state.
Hah! The irony of one sentence man telling me to go and look things up! :rolleyes:
A minimum state is one in which all services which can be run in the private sector are run in the private sector and as I have pointed out the police force could be run in the private sector. So would you mind just answering the question I put to you - do you back the idea of the police force being run by the private sector when they can be run by the private sector?
A minimum state is a state reduced to its bare function.
So the only institutions owned by the state are the police force and courts.
Besides I've never said that the police force should be privately owned!
and
Because I can't see any.
You claim to subscribe to the view of the minimum state do you not? Therefore if, as I have shown, the police force could be run in the private sector you would therefore agree that it should be run in the private sector? Or is this another theory you've skim read without understanding the full implications of it? :rolleyes: