From: larocqu@gaul.csd.uwo.ca (JOHN LAROCQUE)
Subject: Re: NDP "communism?" (was Re: A vote for Reform...)
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Univ. of Western Ontario, London, Canada
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 03:34:46 GMT

In article <93010.1835102893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> Andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:

>>Means and ends. Why don't you get off your high horse and admit that they
>>both want the same thing but are going about it differently.

>The NDP and communists do NOT want the same thing, the latter want to abolish
>capitalism, the former want to make it more equitable, there is a world of
>difference between wanting to get rid of something and wanting it to work
>better. The NDP are social democrats, the communists are revolutionary
>abolitionists.

There are such things as democratic communists - some guy who ran in London
Center in one of our all too many provincial elections in Ontario. Yes, he
ran against the big Dave Peterson. I've met actually living breathing
communists. No they don't tote guns and kill people - the ones I've met
personally are wonderful human beings. I say hi they say hi. You are
misrepresenting the Canadian communists I know. Deceit is a virtue in the 
NDP. And your brand of communism is "better" then theirs. At least they
are honest when they tell you what kind of government they prefer. Wishy
washy "reform capitalism" crowd. The NDP doesn't know its own a**hole from
a hole in the ground.

>>>The NDP is not in favour of violent revolution and thus are not Communists,

I define violence as an act that goes against my will. Kind of like taxes
or rape. No means no - right?

>>Social democrats or democratic communists? According to the NDP and their
>>ilk in this country, the state is God and individuals mean nothing.

>According to whom in the NDP? What have the provincial NDP governments
>nationalised in the past two years?

Your paycheque as if you haven't noticed with every freaking budget.

>It means trying to end poverty and economic hardship, it means trying
>to give people equal opportunity regardless of their economic origins.

I'm just crying. If only these so-called NDP "social democrats" actually
met living and breathing working human beings instead of preaching their
filthy gospel. What you are saying sounds like Hitler's new order. Or the
latest Soviet Five Year Plan

>Didn't he also say that a rich man has as much chance of going to heaven
>as a camel does to pass through the eye of a needle?:)

Sorry I'm an atheist. :-)

>and what of their children, how do we give them an equal opportunity to
>children of privledge?

We actually owe these people something? They have kids and I'm supposed to
pay. Almost like divorce and alimony without marriage and kids. Sorry but
only financial incentives like depriving bad parent(s) of money will force
changes. 

>and are children to blame for their parents problems?

No, but they are not my children.

>>If we cut taxes by 20% accross the board, we wouldn't need all of this
>>social junk. Healthy people wouldn't have to pay for all of those idiots
>>in the hospital who smoke a pack a day and are now dying of lung cancer.

>and the children of the poor struck with curable ailments would just die
>or be permanently disadvantaged.

Think about it Mr Universal Health Care. Every dollar saved by not taking
care of stupid people like smokers can be used to help real people with
real problems. Since we'll never really get of the Health Care system,
why not streamline it so only people who deliberately abuse their health
get turned away or have to pay directly out of their own pocket. Call it
my compromise.

>People are to blame for diabetes or meningitis?Children are to blame for
>congenital heart, liver or kidney problems?

Have you heard of genetic ailments? A lot of this stuff is here today
because the parents just didn't know. Genetic research is moving
places. 

>Talk about the state dictating the lives of individuals! Some individualist
>you are.

No just a guy who believes that people are responsible for their own actions.
And how can you call depriving peole of money they didn't earn as "the state
dictating blah blah" ?

>>is right - make them pay. People who care for their health should stop
>>bankrolling those people who don't.

>I hopeyou never need a transplant, heck, I hope you never get ill.

There was this guy a couple of years ago in London. He drank and he smoked.
And he happened to get a new lung and heart from some young person who died.
And we paid for it. He promised to clean up - but guess what happened? A
couple of years later he was back at it - a pack a day smoker and an
alcoholic. People like these should just die on the operating table. Real
people who get sick don't abuse their health like all of those idiot
smokers and drinkers - these guys should get the health care that slob
got.

>AIDS has a long incubation period, many got it before "safe sex" was an
>issue.

Safe sex has been around for generations. Take a disease like AIDS to make
it "hip" for young people. Instead of sleeping during sex ed classes in
grade eight - they should listen once and a while. Just to survive.

>Why blame the families if they are not supported, why blame the children for
>the misdeeds of their parents?

A happy child is a wanted child......
Show you care - give the parents some condoms.

>Systems with universal health care are more productive as adults are less
>likely to beeffected by inadequate health care when they were children and
>as there are fewer days off due to illness or disease.

How about rewarding people who look after their health?
-- 
***FEAR*AND*LOATHING**FEAR*AND*LOATHING**FEAR*AND*LOATHING**FEAR*AND*LOATHING**
**  John LaRocque         **   "If you're the new messiah.. I'm going to be  **
**  marshall.law@uwo.ca   **   the one to drive in the nails"  MARSHALL LAW  **
***FEAR*AND*LOATHING**FEAR*AND*LOATHING**FEAR*AND*LOATHING**FEAR*AND*LOATHING**