You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Stuck at the Hospital: Recap of the Larken Rose/Chase Rachels "Public Property" Debate (nobody really "wins" when self-ownership is off the table)
Uhhhhhh....in collectivism the opinion on the individual who doesn't want immigrants to use the service doesn't matter as one of two things would likely be the case.
1.) The vote was conducted and those who voted for immigrant acceptance will have the cost of treatment dictated to them and not the others if there's a minority.
2.) Health care is a human right and unless a resident needs the treatment the immigrant can have the treatment.
Oh well, there's one more...uhmmmmm...there are no immigrants in collectivism?
I'm not sure what you mean by "in collectivism," as there are both voluntary and involuntary forms.
In involuntary collectivism you get a bullet in the head if you step out of line because it's not collectivism, it's just aggressive and up front human farming.
So no, you're beating around the bush as it's clear what I was speaking of.
I agree. Did you think I didn't? you did not differentiate in you original comment between voluntary and coercive collectivism. I just wanted to make that differentiation. Not disagreeing here man.