the point is that you could make such a game, and the game would not be banned

i'm sure some media talking head might bring it up: "outrageous!"

but this of course will just increase sales

well we can't legalize gay marriage because then we have to legalize marriage to dead people and marriage to dogs

and we can't legalize marijuana because then we have to legalize methamphetamine and heroin

i'm being sarcastic in both statements: those statements, and you, are relying on what is called the slippery slope, which is a logical fallacy

it's also kind of strange to see people using it when arguing against what they perceive as hysteria and fear, since the slippery slope is basically hysteria and fear instead of logic

we draw lines, and we can draw lines, and it's not a big deal

because we think

the slippery slope argument depends upon people not thinking and not being able tell the difference between different topics

if you believe that about people, you might as well give up entirely on reason, law, morality, and civilization too

i understand why the laws exist, as defined within a narrow scope. and i don't believe that scope will change, because i have faith in people's ability to think

look: it's easy for americans to grandstand and showboat on this issue, because they didn't have something happen in the usa within 80 years ago which consumed the lives of millions of people because of a hateful, racist ideology. if that happened in the usa, i'd expect us to have the same laws. i'm glad we don't, but i'm not going to hold it against europeans, because i understand the reason for them having this law

you need to sabotage your workplace

do it discreetly, covertly, however you see fit

because your employer defiles founding principles this country was founded on

and you don't want to think of yourself as a vile goon working for a paycheck, right?

you have principles and you love your country, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writ_of_assistance#In_colonial_America

and thank you for reading this week's episode of "Taking The Analogy Too Seriously"

join us next week when "hearing hoofbeats and thinking of zebras instead of horses" will be used to illuminate the principle of Occam's Razor

and DavidClarkeHR will ask "Are we on the Serengeti Plains of Tanzania? Because if we're on the Serengeti, I think this ruins the analogy"

they don't

this idea is stupid

it's not possible, he's a lying troll

obamacare is just a malformed first step, the best that was possible considering the kind of temper tantrums we see in resistance to what is obviously better

universal healthcare is next, which works in all of our social and economic peers

of course you can find problems with government run anything. but we're not aiming for perfect. just better and cheaper

those who are rich are asked to give more. they receive the most benefits from society, therefore they should shoulder a larger burden. furthermore, those who are rich are often rich through no real effort of their own, or, after a certain threshold, it's profit for little effort. no one is for punishing success and hard work. a couple of extra thousand to a millionaire is not anything remotely like punishment. what i believe in is meritocracy, like you. and a modestly larger tax burden for success does not dissuade people from hard work. what dissuades people from hard work is unfairness. that the middle class don't deserve healthcare because they can't afford it, for example

you're an elaborate troll right?

i can't believe you are seriously complaining about a slight financial burden on a hypothetical millionaire

what about police services?

do we have to do a financial means test before cops answer 911?

what about fire services?

do we have to a financial means test before the firemen turn on the hose?

healthcare is same necessary fundamental service, where no questions are asked and response is automatic

therefore it must be paid for in the same way as police and fire, and understood in the same way: a fundamental necessary government service, the way it is all of our economic and social peers (who pay fractions of our healthcare rates, because their policy matches the reality of what healthcare is)

you answered your question: because if you're rich, you can afford the best healthcare around

do you think the healthcare they are buying is the average healthcare of the average american?

do you believe you have to be rich to deserve healthcare?

>That's called something else that was tried numerous times in the 20th century and proven a failure.

the american system is a failure. we pay ridiculous multiples as compared to other countries with universal healthcare/ mandatory insurance, and we have lower quality of care than them

what you call a failure has been proven to be a success in all of our social and economic peers

this is where you trot out out horror stories from countries with socialized medicine. as if the american model has no horror stories, including avoiding the doctor until it is too late because you can't afford him

socialized medicine is not perfect. it's just a hell of a lot better than the american joke of a system

most people live paycheck-to-paycheck. most people can't put away $100,000 for the cancer treatment

what most people do is get insurance, as this is the most financially responsible and intelligent thing to do, and your plan in your comment is bonkers and not financially responsible nor intelligent

you aren't immune to sickness and accidents

if you don't get insurance, and break your arm, you avoid the bill because you can't pay it, or you declare bankruptcy

and that makes you an irresponsible freeloader, because the rest of us have to bail out the hospital for unpaid bills with our taxes

insurance rates should be, and are, graded according to risk, like life insurance or car insurance, so chill out and get your health insurance

unless you are telling us your real motivation is to be an irresponsible freeloader, and avoid your hospital bill if you get hurt or sick

you really didn't read my comment did you?