Comments by "Charles Brightman" (@charlesbrightman4237) on "Can Democrats and Republicans work together on health care?" video.

@oldrepublican4121 The Declaration Of Independence says in part: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." The Government either keeps it's citizens 'safe and happy' or the citizens can oust the entire government and set up a new government that from the citizens perspective, will keep the citizens 'safe and happy'. People that are not being medically taken care of are not being kept 'safe', and most likely they are not 'happy' either. The original thread above says that the Federal Government has not business in our health period. That is simply a false statement according to the Declaration Of Independence. And according to the DOI, even if the government wasn't doing it, the people can demand it if they believe it would make them feel 'safe and happy' in doing so. 'We The People' ultimately self govern how 'We The People' want to exist, not the government.
2
The Declaration Of Independence says that the Government is supposed to keep the citizens 'safe and happy'. So, the Federal government DOES have a role to play in keeping the citizens 'safe and happy'. And if the government doesn't keep the citizens 'safe and happy', then per the Declaration Of Independence, the citizens not only have the right, but the duty, to alter or even abolish the government and to set up a new government that would keep the citizens 'safe and happy'. Read the entire Declaration Of Independence though.
1
@oldrepublican4121 Here is a copy and paste of my comment on it's own thread for this video, but it's applicable I believe here too: "I said it before and I'll say it again, we should have a MEDICARE PART 'E', VOLUNTARY HEALTH CARE. People could join at anytime and take their health care from job to job or even if they have no job. If a lot of sick and ill people join, guess what? Premiums will be high. (Just like in a 'normal' insurance company). If society as a whole gets healthier, guess what? Premiums could go down. (Often not like in a 'normal' insurance company who might be quick to raise premiums but slow to decrease premiums, if even at all so as to maximize their profits). The Federal, State, and Local governments could still set aside money to help the 'poor' as well as non-profit agencies and foundations, etc could help the 'poor' pay for their premiums. "
1
@oldrepublican4121 Probably because I am a political Independent and can think for myself and not just blindly follow the pack. But wouldn't that idea work? Could still have single payer healthcare with all the provisions of the current ACA (Obamacare) for those who VOLUNTARILY want it. And for the 'poor' who couldn't afford it but wanted it, could potentially get help from a possibly 'universal' or even 'state' fund or funds to help pay for the necessary premiums, of which, the various levels of the government and other organizations would be in control how much they contribute to the fund so as to not drain them dry. Makes sense to me. And also, legalize suicide, at least for terminally ill people who voluntarily choose that path. A lot of resources could be saved that way too as well as reducing some human suffering in this world for those who want that suffering removed from them self. Necessary protections would have to be put in place though so that people aren't encouraged to commit suicide. But I still think it should be an option for at least some people to be able to take. But then again, there I go with reason again. Some things just seem to make sense to me though I guess.
1
@oldrepublican4121 But then again, if the Federal Government can spend billions if not trillions of dollars on wars that don't need to be fought as well as interfering with other democratic nations and overthrowing other nations, why can't the Government help their own citizens keep them 'safe and happy' per the Declaration Of Independence by giving them healthcare? It comes down to in part, how exactly do we, individually and as a society of individuals, want to exist while we do exist, and how should the young, old, ill and needy be taken care of, if even at all? We do have choices, with all the consequences and ramifications, seen and unseen, of all those choices. Then we still all die one day from something, forget everything we ever knew and experienced, and will most probably be forgotten one day in future eternity as if we never ever existed at all in the first place. Or at least so the current analysis that I have done seems to indicate.
1
@oldrepublican4121 Of which should never have been touched in the first place. Gore was right years ago when he said the Social Security fund should be a 'lock box'. Greedy politicians see a huge pot of money and they start salivating. And the Social Security fund is not a free handout, it's an entitlement program that people paid into when they had income from their jobs. And consider also, the recession in this century possibly would have been a depression if it were not in part due to the Social Security payments being paid out and spent to keep the economic wheels greased in important areas. The rich still get rich, but it perculates up instead of trickle down, and the poor are helped along the way.
1
@robertmiller1270 Read the Declaration Of Independence that the founders of America wrote and see if I am not right. 'We The People' can even abolish this current government and set up a new government that 'We The People' believe would make us 'safe and happy', whatever that 'safe and happy' is determined by 'We The People". Hey, I didn't write the DOI, I'm just trying to abide by it like every good American should, in fact per the DOI, it's their duty to.
1
@oldrepublican4121 Even to the point of not only altering the government, but entirely abolishing it and setting up a new government 'whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends,..." The Republicans are on the right, the Democrats are on the left, and the Independents decide which party gets the White House. No major political party can win the White House on their own. And also, the 'Tree of Liberty' being in danger. So how exactly do you perceive the NSA spying on it's own citizens? Does that make you feel 'safe and happy'? If not, why not? If so, why so?
1
@oldrepublican4121 Yes, I agree with what you said above. Consider the following: "We The People" do away with ALL formal political parties in the Government at all levels of the Government and ONLY Independents are allowed in the Government. Sure, people could still gather around like minded issues, but no more formal political parties in the Government. I believe we would have a better Government that way. But then also, consider the following: a. The 6th mass extinction event I believe has already started upon this Earth due to natural reasons. 1. The Earth's magnetic field has been weakening for quite a while now, projected to be at it's weakest around 2035, around 17 years from now. This will allow more harmful cosmic radiation energy to reach the surface of this Earth, and us. 2. The Sun is going into grand solar minimum, projected to be at minimum around 2075 - 2080. Losing some of the solar shield will allow more harmful cosmic radiation energy to reach the Earth. 3. Supposedly our solar system is moving into an area of the galaxy without a 'dust cloud' protection. This will allow more harmful cosmic radiation energy to reach this solar system. So hence, more harmful cosmic radiation energy is going to be reaching us with all the QED AND QCD effects that will bring, even potentially the next jump in evolution and whatever that will bring. Will the next advanced species treat humans like humans treated 'lower evolved' species? b. The Earth's magnetic field is also moving, possibly on it's way to another flip. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't, but it is definitely moving. Many species utilize the Earth's magnetic field for navigation and many species might be where they weren't before. Those that can survive might survive, those that can't, won't. c. The ocean levels are rising, which puts more weight on the tectonic plates, and with the tidal forces, more earthquakes, potential tsunamis could occur, as well as possibly triggering more volcanoes to go off as well as possibly even super volcanoes to go off, of which depending upon whom one talks to, Yellowstone is either due to go off or overdue to go off. And there is a whole lot more that I won't go into here. The gist of it all though is that we as a species have much more to deal with than in-fighting between us. The government either helps keep us 'safe and happy' or they don't. Currently, the way I see it, the problems will be too big for even the US Government to handle on their own. Many people are going to suffer and die most probably horrible deaths on the surface of this Earth. And for those in their safe bunkers, they are only delaying the inevitable. They are still all going to die one day from something, will forget everything, and will be forgotten one day as if they never ever existed at all in the first place, just like the rest of us. ONLY those species that make it out of this solar system continue to survive. Everybody else is eventually going to die and go extinct. Hence also though, why can't we all live in peace on this Earth before we all die and go extinct?
1
@robertmiller1270 So: a. How should we, individually and as a society of individuals, exist while we do all exist? And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? Do I decide for you? Do you decide for me? Do others decide for us? Do we decide for others? Who even decides how to decide? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? b. How exactly should the young, old, ill and needy be taken care of, if even at all? Answering these questions would show which political party, if any, one should be supporting.
1
@tractornation4714 You'd better read the Declaration Of Independence that those founding fathers wrote. And note also, 'God' doesn't actually exist, at least not the 'God' of the Bible. People who believe 'God' exists, (including the founding fathers), are delusional and are believing in fairy tales as if those fairy tales were really true. And if they can't prove 'God' actually factually exists, couldn't prove otherwise either. The founding fathers were delusional in more ways than just one. They actually thought they were better than everybody else.
1
@oldrepublican4121 The mathematics for the TOE doesn't even exist yet as far as I am currently aware. It goes beyond any quantum field theory formulas that I am currently aware of. The outline though is basically as follows: The formula has at least 3 levels to it: 1. The Internal Photon Level: The 3 interacting forces, (which might even be just a singular force with 3 different modalities), all interacting at basically 90 degrees to each other and all simultaneously pulsating and swirling. A complex part of the formula but I believe to be totally doable. 2. The External Photon Level: For each pulsating, swirling photon, all the pulsating, swirling photons interacting with it. An exponential part of the formula that I am not even sure modern day super computers could adequately handle. 3. The Inter-dimensional Photon Level: For each modality within each photon would have an energy frequency associated with it. The energy frequencies could be seen as being in their own space time dimension. (For me, 'space' is energy itself of which is the 'gem' photon and 'time' is the flow of energy; 'temperature' is the interaction of energy), so one would be dealing with way more than just 3 spatial dimensions and way more than just 1 time dimension (as there would many different energy frequencies with many different flows of energy). Whenever like resonate energy frequencies resonated with each other, they would affect each other, kind of like 'spooky action at a distance'. Anytime energy frequencies overlapped, there would be a temporary spike of some sort in each space time dimension. In addition, if in reality the 'gem' photon is just a singular force with 3 different modalities, it's possible that energy could 'slip' between modalities which would also affect the results. A very complex part of the formula on top of all the complexity that came before it. 4. Any time any energy moved in the system, the entire formula would have to be recalculated due to potential ripple effects. Like I said above, I don't even believe the mathematics exists yet for what I am trying to do, but at a minimum, the formula would contain the above levels the way I currently see it to be. ____________________________________________________________________________ 'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe, and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows: Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction. Then: 1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe. (And possibly '0', zero, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have).
1
@oldrepublican4121 Thanks, but if it does, it will be done by someone else. I have recently stopped my cancer treatment for my terminal cancer. When is enough, enough? And why doesn't society legalize suicide, at least for terminally ill people, everywhere, at least for those who want it? Republicans I would think would want that to occur as many people would legally choose to die and save the resources for others. But then, there I go thinking reasonably again. Why spend money on resources on people who don't want to be kept alive? Makes no sense.
1
@oldrepublican4121 Thanks, just trying to make the best of the situation, whatever that situation might be, and if a silver lining can't be found, then I try to make one. No sense being unhappy if I can choose to be happy. While I certainly can't always choose what happens to me in life, I can choose how to respond to it. It's all about having a certain mental attitude and frame of reference for one's mind. I try never to leave home without it. Light weight too. It can pack a lot of knowledge, understanding and wisdom in it for the space and weight. One of my most valuable possessions. Too bad I am going to lose it all, or so the current analysis of my mind seems to indicate. I did write a self published book back in 2012, more of a manuscript really, about 30 or so hard copies and numerous electronic copies in this world, even internationally, even the US Government has some copies. My thinking has progressed from what's even in the book, but the ending still remains the same: We die, forget everything, and are forgotten. (OSICA).
1
I said it before and I'll say it again, we should have a MEDICARE PART 'E', VOLUNTARY HEALTH CARE. People could join at anytime and take their health care from job to job or even if they have no job. If a lot of sick and ill people join, guess what? Premiums will be high. (Just like in a 'normal' insurance company). If society as a whole gets healthier, guess what? Premiums could go down. (Often not like in a 'normal' insurance company who might be quick to raise premiums but slow to decrease premiums, if even at all so as to maximize their profits). The Federal, State, and Local governments could still set aside money to help the 'poor' as well as non-profit agencies and foundations, etc could help the 'poor' pay for their premiums.
1
The Declaration Of Independence says that the Government is supposed to keep the citizens 'safe and happy'. So, the Federal government DOES have a role to play in keeping the citizens 'safe and happy'. And if the government doesn't keep the citizens 'safe and happy', then per the Declaration Of Independence, the citizens not only have the right, but the duty, to alter or even abolish the government and to set up a new government that would keep the citizens 'safe and happy'. Read the entire Declaration Of Independence though.
1