PDA

View Full Version : Economics This Bill is "Moral"? What are you smoking?


chris
03-21-2010, 10:35 PM
I'm in favor of this bill....as pre-existing conditions and getting ill should be covered. I would have paid for it it differently, but that is besides the point.

HOWEVER, I find it comical when several posters state this bill is "moral" when THEIR personal or business taxes are not impacted.

Always easy to spend other people's money. "Atlas shrugged"

My wife is on a business trip to the UK. She asked if we should start looking for a house up by Bath. I said no as the UK is more screwed up than the USA. Now Scotland...maybe.
ROFL

penchief
03-21-2010, 10:53 PM
I never said anything specifically about this bill but I do believe that it is moral to ensure that everyone has access to health care. And that is why I supported health care reform. However, I am not happy with this bill. I think there is too much special interest influence making it more costly than it needed to be.

Single-payer would have been my preference. That said it is probably better than allowing health care to continue down the path it was on.

petegz28
03-21-2010, 10:56 PM
I never said anything specifically about this bill but I do believe that it is moral to ensure that everyone has access to health care. And that is why I supported health care reform. However, I am not happy with this bill. I think there is too much special interest influence making it more costly than it needed to be.

Single-payer would have been my preference. That said it is probably better than allowing health care to continue down the path it was on.

Actually single-payer is the only legal way to enact a "mandate". If you believe in the Constitution that is.

chris
03-21-2010, 10:57 PM
I never said anything specifically about this bill but I do believe that it is moral to ensure that everyone has access to health care. And that is why I supported health care reform. However, I am not happy with this bill. I think there is too much special interest influence making it more costly than it needed to be.

Single-payer would have been my preference. That said it is probably better than allowing health care to continue down the path it was on.

thank you. I could have not said it any better!

To show my ignorance: why didn't they set up it up as single payer?

Direckshun
03-21-2010, 11:02 PM
To show my ignorance: why didn't they set up it up as single payer?

They don't have the votes.

penchief
03-21-2010, 11:02 PM
Because single-payer would have meant we were a bunch of commies. And Lord knows we can't have that!

Plus, no way the powers that be would have allowed single-payer to pass because they would probalby have been cut of the process. The insurance companies needed their piece of the pie.

Chiefshrink
03-21-2010, 11:48 PM
Bottom line: It comes down to whether you believe in God who gives rights or believe that there is no God and only the Govt can give rights. Apparently Direckshun and Penchief belief "healthcare" is a right which they believe the Fed Govt gives rights as opposed to God. Govt is their God and they are proud of it!!!

Me personally, healthcare is not a right, it is a good/service and it should be left to the free people of a free society to give charitable donations to help those who can't pay NOT unConstitutionally forced on all of us to pay for not only care but pay fines if we choose not to pay for govt healthcare. How is that Constitutional??

Jenson71
03-22-2010, 12:15 AM
Bottom line: It comes down to whether you believe in God who gives rights or believe that there is no God and only the Govt can give rights. Apparently Direckshun and Penchief belief "healthcare" is a right which they believe the Fed Govt gives rights as opposed to God. Govt is their God and they are proud of it!!!

Wow, okay. Alright, let's say health care isn't a right. What if we want health care legislation making it a privilege. Now what? Are we heathens or are we unAmerican?

petegz28
03-22-2010, 12:31 AM
Wow, okay. Alright, let's say health care isn't a right. What if we want health care legislation making it a privilege. Now what? Are we heathens or are we unAmerican?

Health care ISN'T a Right. No need to pretend. And as of tonight it is now a mandate.

Chiefshrink
03-22-2010, 12:47 AM
Wow, okay. Alright, let's say health care isn't a right. What if we want health care legislation making it a privilege. Now what? Are we heathens or are we unAmerican?

What is amazing is that 'LIFE' is only important to liberals when they can get into your wallet for their end game of socialism for total control of this country. And in this case, they got the best of both worlds coming out of our wallets for both abortion and univeral healthcare for all.:clap: This so-called executive order by Obama is a farce as the Catholic church has said and I am not Catholic either.

Sure healthcare legislation that preserves our Constitution and the liberties and freedoms afforded by this beautiful document ever written next to the Bible of course. But not healthcare legislation that sees our Constitution as nothing but "negative liberties" as quoted by our "Uncle Obama" who feels that the Constitution is flawed as I am sure you, and other libs agree as to what the Constitution can't do to you. Obama feels that the Constitution should redistribute wealth, PERIOD. That my friend is STEEEEEEEEEALING!!

When a society embraces a govt that allows the poor to be comfortable being poor, it makes it very difficult if not impossible for the poor to have any incentive to be a productive responsible citizen in that society and eventually that society or country for that matter eventually is doomed for bankruptcy and tyranny(e.g. extending unemployment benefits).
Bottom line Jenson: You want something you must pay for it YOURSELF and libs have "ALWAYS" enjoyed having others pay for them "ALWAYS" expecting something for nothing and "DEMANDING IT". These kind of people have "ALWAYS" been "DEADBEAT MALCONTENTS" since birth.:rolleyes:

Like I said before many times when a free society is allowed to be truly free to pursue happiness and let Capitalism work with a moral compass intact then those who are financially successful of which there will be many which will be more charitable thus the non-profits and churches have more $$ to give to those in need. Look up Ben Franklin's first hospital he started and get back to me and you will see the blueprint of which we should be following.

Jenson71
03-22-2010, 01:04 AM
Like I said before many times when a free society is allowed to be truly free to pursue happiness and let Capitalism work with a moral compass intact then those who are financially successful of which there will be many which will be more charitable thus the non-profits and churches have more $$ to give to those in need. Look up Ben Franklin's first hospital he started and get back to me and you will see the blueprint of which we should be following.

We have charities. We have places that take the poor, sick and insane. I don't think that's the problem here. I think we can all agree that the problem was not that sick poor and insane people were wandering the streets. The problem was that health care costs were skyrocketing, many people did not have coverage, and many that did found it inadequate to some degree, as many were declaring bankruptcy extending from sickness or getting coverage dropped.

petegz28
03-22-2010, 01:07 AM
We have charities. We have places that take the poor, sick and insane. I don't think that's the problem here. I think we can all agree that the problem was not that sick poor and insane people were wandering the streets. The problem was that health care costs were skyrocketing, many people did not have coverage, and many that did found it inadequate to some degree, as many were declaring bankruptcy extending from sickness or getting coverage dropped.

Many people? Less than 10% of the country, not counting illegals.

go bowe
03-22-2010, 01:10 AM
Wow, okay. Alright, let's say health care isn't a right. What if we want health care legislation making it a privilege. Now what? Are we heathens or are we unAmerican?i'd go with heathens...

Jenson71
03-22-2010, 01:10 AM
Many people? Less than 10% of the country, not counting illegals.

Well, that's 30 million Americans. That's sort of like saying not many Jews were killed in the Holocaust because it was only 4% of Central and Eastern Europe.

Chiefshrink
03-22-2010, 01:26 AM
We have charities. We have places that take the poor, sick and insane. I don't think that's the problem here. I think we can all agree that the problem was not that sick poor and insane people were wandering the streets. The problem was that health care costs were skyrocketing, many people did not have coverage, and many that did found it inadequate to some degree, as many were declaring bankruptcy extending from sickness or getting coverage dropped.

These charities will be next to nothing as our free capital economy worsens. And why are these costs going up? Obama is Alinskyizing the private sector and especially the ins cos. Demonizing them at every turn and now by law!!!

Ins cos only make 2-3% profit margin contrary to Alinsky popular belief by those who refuse to do their homework. When healthcare is not paid for then hospitals pass the cost on to the ins cos. then the ins cos. pass it on to us in higher premiums. And now we are going to insure 30 million more? Most of who are illegal immigrants and now that the bill has passed the whole country of Mexico will be making a bee line for the border.

Entitlements my friend! Entitlements are what is causing our free capitalistic society a great sickness of more and more unproductive people who become a financial burden eventually to the point of societal bankruptcy. This is what is causing rising healthcare costs not to mention very little competition among the ins cos and out of control trial lawyers who have no cap on law suits.

It is NOT the so-called "evil ins cos. or hospitals" they are just dictating what a free market says to do when there are less and less productive people in a society that is supposed to financially support more and more people on the dole you RAISE prices!! You want lower prices, create more productive people and create more competition among the ins cos.

Simple free market 101 that works except in the eyes of most libs because their agenda is to destroy capitalism and healthcare is sure-fire way to do it just look at Europe and especially the UK:rolleyes:

Chiefshrink
03-22-2010, 09:12 AM
Bottom line: America was not created nor is not for those who want "something for nothing".:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

fan4ever
03-22-2010, 09:19 AM
I never said anything specifically about this bill but I do believe that it is moral to ensure that everyone has access to health care. And that is why I supported health care reform. However, I am not happy with this bill. I think there is too much special interest influence making it more costly than it needed to be.

Single-payer would have been my preference. That said it is probably better than allowing health care to continue down the path it was on.

I think EVERYONE was in agreement that healthcare coverage needed improvement.

fan4ever
03-22-2010, 09:24 AM
Bottom line: America was not created nor is not for those who want "something for nothing".:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Exactly; it's not a "right" when it requires someone else to pay for or provide service to you. This country has an ever-increasing population of people with their hands held out and it's more dangerous than a foreign enemy.

Mr. Flopnuts
03-22-2010, 09:24 AM
I'm in favor of this bill....as pre-existing conditions and getting ill should be covered. I would have paid for it it differently, but that is besides the point.

HOWEVER, I find it comical when several posters state this bill is "moral" when THEIR personal or business taxes are not impacted.

Always easy to spend other people's money. "Atlas shrugged"

My wife is on a business trip to the UK. She asked if we should start looking for a house up by Bath. I said no as the UK is more screwed up than the USA. Now Scotland...maybe.
ROFL

Chris, we've had our differences in the past but I really respect your honesty here. While I don't agree with the bill, it's not my money. Sounds like it is yours though from what I've read about here.

So while I don't agree with the bill, I commend you for accepting your portion of the responsibility and not being a crying, whining, bitch about it like a lot of the people here who won't be financially impacted by one dollar.

chris
03-22-2010, 10:02 AM
Chris, we've had our differences in the past but I really respect your honesty here. While I don't agree with the bill, it's not my money. Sounds like it is yours though from what I've read about here.

So while I don't agree with the bill, I commend you for accepting your portion of the responsibility and not being a crying, whining, bitch about it like a lot of the people here who won't be financially impacted by one dollar.

thank you. What I AM worried about is when they HAVE to raise taxes on EVERYONE to make this work.

I bought into the bill once they CBO stated that it will pay for itseft. But what happens if the Medicare cuts are not made. $500M in lost revenue?

My non-informed gut tells me that we all are going to be paying for this after all the politicians are long gone.

penchief
03-22-2010, 10:28 AM
thank you. What I AM worried about is when they HAVE to raise taxes on EVERYONE to make this work.

I bought into the bill once they CBO stated that it will pay for itseft. But what happens if the Medicare cuts are not made. $500M in lost revenue?

My non-informed gut tells me that we all are going to be paying for this after all the politicians are long gone.

I heard last night that the Medicare cuts are going to be the cuts I hoped they would be. It is going to come from the overpayments being made to corporate middlemen for providing nothing more than what was provided when Medicare was strictly single-payer. This is actually a good thing because Medicare was much more cost-effective and straightforward before the corporate boondoggle was included.

Mr. Flopnuts
03-22-2010, 10:34 AM
thank you. What I AM worried about is when they HAVE to raise taxes on EVERYONE to make this work.

I bought into the bill once they CBO stated that it will pay for itseft. But what happens if the Medicare cuts are not made. $500M in lost revenue?

My non-informed gut tells me that we all are going to be paying for this after all the politicians are long gone.

I don't doubt that at all. They could've done something great, but instead decided to rush through because they didn't have faith in the American public to give them the necessary time to do it right.

Make no mistake about it. I think this bill is going to blow up in our faces and be an absolute nightmare. I just appreciated your positive attitude, and caring about your American brothers and sisters you don't personally know by supporting pre existing condition coverage and the ability for ALL Americans to be as healthy as possible.

Sacrifice is what made this country what it is. Entitlement mentality is what is tearing it apart. And I see plenty of that on both sides of the political spectrum.

wutamess
03-22-2010, 10:41 AM
So while I don't agree with the bill, I commend you for accepting your portion of the responsibility and not being a crying, whining, bitch about it like a lot of the people here who won't be financially impacted by one dollar.

It's an ideology they hold on to. I still don't understand why Pete's so mad when his broke ass won't have to pay 1 red cent to HC for ANYONE ELSE.
You'd think he'd been stripped of his life savings or something.

~clueless.

Mr. Flopnuts
03-22-2010, 10:46 AM
It's an ideology they hold on to. I still don't understand why Pete's so mad when his broke ass won't have to pay 1 red cent to HC for ANYONE ELSE.
You'd think he'd been stripped of his life savings or something.

~clueless.

Yeah. I agree wholeheartedly. There's a whole lot of people out there who have formed these hard line opinions that frankly, they have no vested interest in. They want to protect everyone who ever stepped on their neck to get ahead. That's what capitalism is. People stepping on other people's necks to climb higher up the ladder.

Don't think for one second that Republicans haven't leached onto the overly religious in much the same way Democrats have leached onto minorities. They're all fucking evil as far as I'm concerned.

patteeu
03-22-2010, 10:54 AM
We have charities. We have places that take the poor, sick and insane. I don't think that's the problem here. I think we can all agree that the problem was not that sick poor and insane people were wandering the streets. The problem was that health care costs were skyrocketing, many people did not have coverage, and many that did found it inadequate to some degree, as many were declaring bankruptcy extending from sickness or getting coverage dropped.

What does this legislation do about skyrocketing health care costs?

patteeu
03-22-2010, 10:58 AM
I don't doubt that at all. They could've done something great, but instead decided to rush through because they didn't have faith in the American public to give them the necessary time to do it right.

Make no mistake about it. I think this bill is going to blow up in our faces and be an absolute nightmare. I just appreciated your positive attitude, and caring about your American brothers and sisters you don't personally know by supporting pre existing condition coverage and the ability for ALL Americans to be as healthy as possible.

Sacrifice is what made this country what it is. Entitlement mentality is what is tearing it apart. And I see plenty of that on both sides of the political spectrum.

Do you think people should be allowed to wait until they have a catastrophic injury or illness before they bother with insurance coverage? Do you think it would be right to force insurance companies to cover these opportunists?

chris
03-22-2010, 11:00 AM
I heard last night that the Medicare cuts are going to be the cuts I hoped they would be. It is going to come from the overpayments being made to corporate middlemen for providing nothing more than what was provided when Medicare was strictly single-payer. This is actually a good thing because Medicare was much more cost-effective and straightforward before the corporate boondoggle was included.

Read on MSNBC or something like that the doctors and such will quit seeing patients until Congress caves on the 21% cut.

Thoughts??

CoMoChief
03-22-2010, 11:11 AM
The government should start controlling what food you can and can't eat.

Government should start controlling grocery stores as well. Got to feed the poor and the people who aren't as well off.

It's not fair for people to spend their own money on food left and right, when there are minorities that are suffering, starving, needing food and water when they can't get it.

EATING IS A RIGHT GOD DAMNIT!!!

Mr. Flopnuts
03-22-2010, 12:56 PM
Do you think people should be allowed to wait until they have a catastrophic injury or illness before they bother with insurance coverage? Do you think it would be right to force insurance companies to cover these opportunists?

No. And no.

Mr. Flopnuts
03-22-2010, 12:57 PM
The government should start controlling what food you can and can't eat.

Government should start controlling grocery stores as well. Got to feed the poor and the people who aren't as well off.

It's not fair for people to spend their own money on food left and right, when there are minorities that are suffering, starving, needing food and water when they can't get it.

EATING IS A RIGHT GOD DAMNIT!!!

Don't worry CoMo. We're there now. We've completely abused smokers to the fullest extent we can. Fat people are next.

Mr. Flopnuts
03-22-2010, 12:59 PM
No. And no.

Let me rephrase. I think people should be able to do whatever the hell they want to do, as long as they, and we the people, are willing to let them deal with the repercussions of their decisions. And I mean anything, provided they're not hurting others directly.

penchief
03-22-2010, 01:06 PM
What does this legislation do about skyrocketing health care costs?

That's my biggest concern. I think it has to be addressed and hopefully will be.

King_Chief_Fan
03-22-2010, 02:17 PM
Don't worry CoMo. We're there now. We've completely abused smokers to the fullest extent we can. Fat people are next.

I think that is a good idea. Fat folks are as much a health risk as smokers

patteeu
03-22-2010, 02:29 PM
That's my biggest concern. I think it has to be addressed and hopefully will be.

Shouldn't that have been job 1? What good is universal coverage if no one can afford it? Increasing taxes on CEOs, bankers and insurance executives will only take you so far.

bowener
03-22-2010, 02:50 PM
Bottom line: It comes down to whether you believe in God who gives rights or believe that there is no God and only the Govt can give rights. Apparently Direckshun and Penchief belief "healthcare" is a right which they believe the Fed Govt gives rights as opposed to God. Govt is their God and they are proud of it!!!

Me personally, healthcare is not a right, it is a good/service and it should be left to the free people of a free society to give charitable donations to help those who can't pay NOT unConstitutionally forced on all of us to pay for not only care but pay fines if we choose not to pay for govt healthcare. How is that Constitutional??

Jesus christ, is this what you honestly really believe? That those are the 2 sides to this argument? Really? So, basically what you are saying is that you are either Christian (and most likely white or at least a westerner) and the negation of that (better?) side?

If that is the case, can you please tell me the exact place in the bible that I can find where Jesus/God/Ghost says unto his commodities, "ye shall have a democratically elected set of officials that preside over a nation as part of a three part system set up as checks and balances..."

Also, side note, what if one believed that there was a god, and that god gave 2 shits about what humans think they can and cannot do, and just laughed at us as we run around bitching and killing trying to enforce our "moral views" upon others who see differently? What side is somebody on it they believe this?

Also, what if there are 2 gods (or 3, or n...)?

When it says that the meek shall inherit the earth what exactly does that mean? Does it mean once everything is used up they can have it? Or is it something else, for instance, maybe, the idea that those at the bottom should be given the greatest benefit and aid? I really don't know, so one of you please teach me.

Mr. Flopnuts
03-22-2010, 04:13 PM
I think that is a good idea. Fat folks are as much a health risk as smokers

Some people think that is what this is about. I know better though. Anything to keep more money in the pockets of slim, non smokers who are most definitely in the majority. Nobody gives a shit about anything but money. From the top to the bottom.

SNR
03-22-2010, 04:18 PM
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qxDJMn-534Y&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qxDJMn-534Y&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Calcountry
03-22-2010, 04:34 PM
Wow, okay. Alright, let's say health care isn't a right. What if we want health care legislation making it a privilege. Now what? Are we heathens or are we unAmerican?You are just too damned stupid, that you would sell out your birthright to freedom for so cheap a price. Kind of like the dipshit Esau, selling his birthright to Jacob for a bowl of stew.

Do you have any idea, how much blood has been spilled in this country in order to bring us to today?

CoMoChief
03-22-2010, 05:03 PM
You are just too damned stupid, that you would sell out your birthright to freedom for so cheap a price. Kind of like the dipshit Esau, selling his birthright to Jacob for a bowl of stew.

Do you have any idea, how much blood has been spilled in this country in order to bring us to today?

He doesn't care as long as he's getting a peice of the pie. Fucking dumbass liberal.

mlyonsd
03-22-2010, 05:21 PM
Shouldn't that have been job 1? What good is universal coverage if no one can afford it? Increasing taxes on CEOs, bankers and insurance executives will only take you so far.

Do ya think? The problem is the culture of someone else is always responsible has once again proven that the socialist democratic values that began in the 60's have prevailed again.

These things take generations to come to fruition. I hope I'm around to see the libs on the board cry when someone finally takes something from them.

bowener
03-22-2010, 06:22 PM
He doesn't care as long as he's getting a peice of the pie. ****ing dumbass liberal.

What is this pie you speak of? If it is the generalized metaphorical pie that is often used to describe American's and this "dream" they are supposed to follow, if so, then shouldn't he want a piece of said pie?

What if he feels that, in the long run, all Americans possessing a more equal share of the big metaphorical pie is a better thing for America as a whole.

I think I would like to create a hypothetical scenario involving the metaphorical pie in an imaginary Nation.

I think it would be hard to argue that if you have 5 pieces of pie and next to you sits a starving child with no pie, giving up even just half of 1 slice of your 5 pie slices would be a good and just thing to do. Now I understand that you don't want some Big Bully coming along to tell you to give that starving child some of your pie, after all, as he points out, 5 slices is more than you really need anyway, but it is yours, and that's not to say that you weren't going to give this starving child some of your pie anyway. You're a good guy, you want to help this kid out, you were going to help him, it's just that this big ass bully wants to make sure that you aren't hoarding your pie, like that guy over there on the hill in the 80,000 sq.ft. mansion.

He has 100 million slices of pie, most of which he did nothing to earn. He was born with 90 million of those slices already lying around his cradle. The Big Bully tells you he is going to go over there to the mansion and take some of those pie slices, 100,000 of them in fact. So he does just that, walks up to the door and tells the lucky man to give him 100,000 slices of his 100 million slices. The lucky man complies, this is a big bully after all. So, the Big Bully thanks the lucky man for doing his part, which makes the lucky man feel a little better about losing 100,000 of his original 100 million slices, but, to be honest, he doesn't really even notice it, he may need to wait a few more days before he puts a down payment on another private jet, but he is fine with this, after all, he doesn't have much else to worry about... I mean he does still have 99,900,000 slices (plus interest every day).

The Big Bully strolls on past you and the now full and happy child, and tips his top hat to you on his way by, "nice," he says with a smile. You watch as this big bully walks on down the road handing out a slice of pie to those in need, one after the other, until he has handed out all 100,000 slices of pie, and filled 100,000 empty bellies. This big bully smiles and continues walking down the road until he is out of sight. So you think to yourself about why he was smiling, "is it because he took from the lucky man, or is it because he fed all those empty bellies, or maybe it is because I did the right thing and gave my pie away without being asked." But, you just aren't certain any of those reasons are why he was smiling.

You ponder a little while longer as you eat a slice of your pie and watch the shadows grow long across the grass. "Maybe," you say, "maybe this Big Bully remembers all the Big Bullies of the past, and that what he is doing is just part of a long and continually changing process. One that dates back to the beginning of this Big Bullies family when they wanted a say in what was being done to them. Or maybe it is another Big Bully that felt white land owners weren't the only ones that should get to vote, or possibly it was another Big Bully he was thinking of, the one that took away the right for people to own other human beings, or maybe it was a more recent Big Bully who felt it was best to take more pie slices from all the people but let the companies keep the majority of their slices. I just don't know, there are so many Big Bullies from the past," you say to yourself. Perhaps this Big Bully felt it was necessary to help those that are stood upon most often, the forgotten laborers and the unlucky many born without slices, that will, in turn, have no slices to give to get ahead.

You know deep down that those at the bottom have a 98% chance of remaining at the bottom, and those in the middle have roughly the same chance of remaining in the middle, and again you know that it is about the same for those at the top. You also know deep inside your heart that this all comes down to how lucky you were at birth, those born with and those born without. Those with a few could go to schools that would teach them well enough to go out in to the world and remain where they were born. Those born with a few more would be able to go on to a better school and remain making a few more than the rest, and this continues upward with degrees of difference, it is just how it is... unless of course a Big Bully comes along and decides to help the great majority of the Nation to get ahead.

While you know that the lucky man has a right to his great wealth that he did nothing to earn, you understand that this really is quite a frightening and terrible thing, after all he is the boss of thousands of those without slices, those that helped his family get ahead by doing such hard work for them while having no one to stand up for them and seek better wages and standards for them. Maybe this is why the Big Bully was smiling, because he knew that what he was doing may seem wrong to some now, may seem illegal in fact, but it was the good thing to do. The Big Bully understands that time changes everything, and that in the modern era people need protections from the liberties that allow others with great wealth or power to harm them for their own gain.

Others may say that people have the freedom to choose their jobs, which may have been true when most people lived on a farm of their own and could eat their own food without having to give up slices, but those days are long gone, bigger wealthier entities bought up the farms and grow the food for people now. This leaves people with little choice in the jobs they can take, (that is unless they choose to starve) especially if they were born at the bottom and had no chance at going to a good school, that, in turn, would get them a better chance at a good job. " I still don't know," you say, now gazing at the stars above. "Maybe the Big Bully was smiling because he took those pies from the lucky man, and when the lucky man inquired about why he was taking them, the Big Bully told the lucky man he was taking them because the lucky man and his family had been quite lucky here in the Nation, and this was just a "thank you tax" the Lucky family was giving back to the people and the Nation that had afforded it the possibility to accrue such a needlessly large amount of slices."

Upon pondering a bit longer, the now sleepy child next to you speaks up, "gee, mister, you sure are smart, I hope to go to your school one day, but," the boy pauses for a moment, embarrassed it seems. "Go on," you state. "Well," the boy stutters, "I know you are smart and all, and you've been here an awful long time thinking through this and all, but, do you think the Big Bully was smiling on down the road because of all that stuff that you were going on about before, or because he got to see those huge tits on the lucky mans wife?"

Nodding, you agree, it was because the Big Bully got to see those tig-ole'-bitties on Mrs. Lucky.

I really don't know what I set out to type, I'm sorry if you read to here.

penchief
03-22-2010, 06:22 PM
Shouldn't that have been job 1? What good is universal coverage if no one can afford it? Increasing taxes on CEOs, bankers and insurance executives will only take you so far.

I don't think it would have been possible. There was already too much resistance from special interests. With the framework in place I can see it being easier to bring people on board in order to control costs. It will be easier to single out problem areas and convince people for the need to address those problems in stages.

It will be an opportunity to hold republican feet to the fire. They will have to choose either excessive profits for corporate middlemen or controlling costs. They'll have to put up or shut up.

patteeu
03-22-2010, 07:07 PM
I don't think it would have been possible. There was already too much resistance from special interests. With the framework in place I can see it being easier to bring people on board in order to control costs. It will be easier to single out problem areas and convince people for the need to address those problems in stages.

It will be an opportunity to hold republican feet to the fire. They will have to choose either excessive profits for corporate middlemen or controlling costs. They'll have to put up or shut up.

That makes no sense to me.

penchief
03-22-2010, 07:27 PM
That makes no sense to me.

The most effective way to control costs would be to have a public option or just be done with it and implement single-payer. But you and I both know that wasn't going to happen because the insurance companies, the HMOs, and the pharmaceutical companies have too much say at this point.

Cutting costs will require streamlining the process. Which will require limiting the degree to which the corporate establishment can charge a premium for being a middleman. If there isn't going to be a public option or single-payer then cutting costs means regulating the industry in search of finding the right balance.

There is a very good possibility that republicans can be put on the spot by having to choose between controlling costs or continuing to cater to their corporate benefactors. That choice could easily be framed for public consumption in a way that could make it very difficult for republicans to say "no" to cost control.

patteeu
03-22-2010, 09:06 PM
The most effective way to control costs would be to have a public option or just be done with it and implement single-payer. But you and I both know that wasn't going to happen because the insurance companies, the HMOs, and the pharmaceutical companies have too much say at this point.

Cutting costs will require streamlining the process. Which will require limiting the degree to which the corporate establishment can charge a premium for being a middleman. If there isn't going to be a public option or single-payer then cutting costs means regulating the industry in search of finding the right balance.

There is a very good possibility that republicans can be put on the spot by having to choose between controlling costs or continuing to cater to their corporate benefactors. That choice could easily be framed for public consumption in a way that could make it very difficult for republicans to say "no" to cost control.

Again you're not making any sense. Neither the public option nor single payer does anything about the cost curve. At best, if you can realize a savings from streamlining and an economy of scale, it's a one time benefit. Meanwhile, the cost of health care services continues to rise unabated. The problem isn't corporate benefactors. It's not corporate profits that are going up, it's the cost of ever-improving services and technologies.

Chiefshrink
03-22-2010, 11:03 PM
Jesus christ, is this what you honestly really believe?.

Apparently the Founding Fathers believed this as well and drew up the greatest society ever created in World History that apparently you have a difficult time with:rolleyes:

Another atheistic American hating Progressive Marxist malcontent:rolleyes: But oh yeah, thank GOD for the "IN GOD WE TRUST" Founding fathers you have the God given right to express your views:rolleyes:

I pray that you eventually see past the sicle/hammer you worship:shake:

Chiefshrink
03-22-2010, 11:08 PM
What is this pie you speak of? If it is the generalized metaphorical pie that is often used to describe American's and this "dream" they are supposed to follow, if so, then shouldn't he want a piece of said pie?

What if he feels that, in the long run, all Americans possessing a more equal share of the big metaphorical pie is a better thing for America as a whole.

I think I would like to create a hypothetical scenario involving the metaphorical pie in an imaginary Nation.



I really don't know what I set out to type, I'm sorry if you read to here.

Blah, Blah, Blah Blah The Evils of Capitalistic America:rolleyes::rolleyes:

You're just another commie malcontent who wants something for nothing:shake:

Chiefshrink
03-22-2010, 11:16 PM
I think EVERYONE was in agreement that healthcare coverage needed improvement.

No it is not the "care" that needed fixed it was the "cost". This bill has nothing to do with care. This bill is about getting the camels nose under the tent for eventual total control of your life; what to eat, when to piss and shit, etc.................:shake::rolleyes:

bowener
03-22-2010, 11:17 PM
Apparently the Founding Fathers believed this as well and drew up the greatest society ever created in World History that apparently you have a difficult time with:rolleyes:

Another atheistic American hating Progressive Marxist malcontent:rolleyes: But oh yeah, thank GOD for the "IN GOD WE TRUST" Founding fathers you have the God given right to express your views:rolleyes:

I pray that you eventually see past the sicle/hammer you worship:shake:

ROFL

In GOD we Trust was added to our money in the 50's for that its worth...

Also, when you read a little more in depth on the founding fathers you will find out that quite a few were agnostic at best. All I can say is thank god for progressives or else we would be stuck in the feudal era eating the monarchies shit, never mind having the opportunity to rebel against england you simpleton christian twit.

Chiefshrink
03-22-2010, 11:20 PM
Exactly; it's not a "right" when it requires someone else to pay for or provide service to you. This country has an ever-increasing population of people with their hands held out and it's more dangerous than a foreign enemy.

When you create govt entitlements for the people this is what happens. Try repealing Medicare,Medicaid and Social Security and see what happens.:shrug:

FDR was a total MOFO!!!!:cuss: Obama just carryin on the tradition!!!:rolleyes:

bowener
03-22-2010, 11:21 PM
Blah, Blah, Blah Blah The Evils of Capitalistic America:rolleyes::rolleyes:

You're just another commie malcontent who wants something for nothing:shake:

Something for nothing was never mentioned, just your accidental oversight I suppose, that or you are slow. But, I being a somewhat privileged citizen would give for what I get, instead I currently give a shit load (relative to me) and get almost nothing in return for my money (among other things).

You're a funny dude though.

bowener
03-22-2010, 11:26 PM
No it is not the "care" that needed fixed it was the "cost". This bill has nothing to do with care. This bill is about getting the camels nose under the tent for eventual total control of your life; what to eat, when to piss and shit, etc.................:shake::rolleyes:

You are one paranoid mother fucker, dude. Can you please explain to me how a government, any government would go about implementing a program that would tell me what I have to eat? I understand your illogical jump from social health care to them telling us what makes us "unhealthy", but without a government taking over complete and total control of the private markets, there is no way that this would ever happen... especially in the corporate haven of America (not saying that is always a negative either).

I am quite certain that all my bowel movements will remain free forever. Last I checked the fascist-right nazi's didn't even try and control their peoples shits.

Chiefshrink
03-22-2010, 11:27 PM
ROFL

In GOD we Trust was added to our money in the 50's for that its worth...

Also, when you read a little more in depth on the founding fathers you will find out that quite a few were agnostic at best. All I can say is thank god for progressives or else we would be stuck in the feudal era eating the monarchies shit, never mind having the opportunity to rebel against england you simpleton christian twit.

In depth? Apparently you haven't read anything in depth on the Founding Fathers because all you spew is just Liberal propaganda taught to you by our wonderful American hating education system.:rolleyes:

Do your homework and get ready to eat Obama's monarchy shit that is coming which I'm suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure you can't wait for. Pot meet Kettle!! :D

bowener
03-22-2010, 11:36 PM
In depth? Apparently you haven't read anything in depth on the Founding Fathers because all you spew is just Liberal propaganda taught to you by our wonderful American hating education system.:rolleyes:

Do your homework and get ready to eat Obama's monarchy shit that is coming which I'm suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure you can't wait for. Pot meet Kettle!! :D

If mine is liberal than yours is conservative, so please inform me as to what books I should be reading... and no need to list the bible, I can aleady tell you want everyone to read it and acknowledge that it is entirely truth, even if that means dinosaurs and humans used to be best friends...

Oh, and I have the Jefferson Bible... he didn't feel that we hung out all friendly with the behemoth and he felt it necessary to remove all miracles from the bable. And when you see GOD plastered on things, keep in mind that 1/3 of the founding fathers were masons, which means belief in a creator, but not necessarily the god(s) that the bible speaks of.

Chiefshrink
03-22-2010, 11:43 PM
You are one paranoid mother ****er, dude. Can you please explain to me how a government, any government would go about implementing a program that would tell me what I have to eat? I understand your illogical jump from social health care to them telling us what makes us "unhealthy", but without a government taking over complete and total control of the private markets, there is no way that this would ever happen... especially in the corporate haven of America (not saying that is always a negative either).

I am quite certain that all my bowel movements will remain free forever. Last I checked the fascist-right nazi's didn't even try and control their peoples shits.

If you do your in-depth research you will find that Nazis were far left NOT right as painted by Progressives for decades for obvious political purposes.

You are very naive. Do your indepth homework on Obama's cabinet and especially all his Czars and their worldviews and get back to me:thumb: And then we'll see who is a so-called "simpleton":rolleyes:

Chiefshrink
03-22-2010, 11:48 PM
If mine is liberal than yours is conservative, so please inform me as to what books I should be reading... and no need to list the bible, I can aleady tell you want everyone to read it and acknowledge that it is entirely truth, even if that means dinosaurs and humans used to be best friends...

Oh, and I have the Jefferson Bible... he didn't feel that we hung out all friendly with the behemoth and he felt it necessary to remove all miracles from the bable. And when you see GOD plastered on things, keep in mind that 1/3 of the founding fathers were masons, which means belief in a creator, but not necessarily the god(s) that the bible speaks of.

OM Goodness!!!ROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFL

See! This is the progressive propaganda spewed out in order to minimize and eventually to get God out of our society that you have fallen prey to.:rolleyes:

stevieray
03-22-2010, 11:48 PM
If mine is liberal than yours is conservative, so please inform me as to what books I should be reading... and no need to list the bible, I can aleady tell you want everyone to read it and acknowledge that it is entirely truth, even if that means dinosaurs and humans used to be best friends...

Oh, and I have the Jefferson Bible... he didn't feel that we hung out all friendly with the behemoth and he felt it necessary to remove all miracles from the bable. And when you see GOD plastered on things, keep in mind that 1/3 of the founding fathers were masons, which means belief in a creator, but not necessarily the god(s) that the bible speaks of.
...you need to restudy our history dude.

bowener
03-22-2010, 11:50 PM
If you do your in-depth research you will find that Nazis were far left NOT right as painted by Progressives for decades for obvious political purposes.

You are very naive. Do your indepth homework on Obama's cabinet and especially all his Czars and their worldviews and get back to me:thumb: And then we'll see who is a so-called "simpleton":rolleyes:

So you want me to believe you over all "conservative or liberal" educators that label Nazi's as fascist? Please, do tell me who it is I should be listening to. Even Nazi's label themselves as Fascist... so why should I believe you? Please give me a list of books or sources to read (not internet links please).

Chiefshrink
03-22-2010, 11:50 PM
Gotta get to bed.

Chiefshrink
03-22-2010, 11:51 PM
So you want me to believe you over all "conservative or liberal" educators that label Nazi's as fascist? Please, do tell me who it is I should be listening to. Even Nazi's label themselves as Fascist... so why should I believe you? Please give me a list of books or sources to read (not internet links please).

A great book to start with would be Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Facism

Gotta get to bed.

bowener
03-22-2010, 11:52 PM
OM Goodness!!!ROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFL

See! This is the progressive propaganda spewed out in order to minimize and eventually to get God out of our society that you have fallen prey to.:rolleyes:

...you need to restudy our history dude.

Please, both of you inform me exactly what it is I am mistaken about. I wait impatiently for a good source.

bowener
03-22-2010, 11:57 PM
A great book to start with would be Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Facism

Gotta get to bed.

I thought it should be/would be clear that you are a conservative and I am a liberal, and that you need to give me a source that is neither of these. You have given me one of the most conservative sources possible. Mail me a copy that you do not mind me marking in, I will still read it.

Chiefshrink
03-23-2010, 06:35 AM
I thought it should be/would be clear that you are a conservative and I am a liberal, and that you need to give me a source that is neither of these. You have given me one of the most conservative sources possible. Mail me a copy that you do not mind me marking in, I will still read it.

Liberal-You? Duhhhhhhhhhhhhh!! Mail you a copy?ROFL A True lib for sure wanting something for nothing-GO TO THE LIBRARY AND CHECK IT OUT IF YOU CANT AFFORD IT.

It should be clear TRUTH IS TRUTH regardless if written by conservative or liberal and I assure Libs are not held to any standard of truth these days for obvious reasons AND Conservatives ARE HELD IN CONTEMPT by the MSM(Pravada Press) WHEN THE TRUTH IS REPORTED. Just a good rule of thumb to remember when the MSM vehemently goes after a conservative regardless if it is a statement or book, good chance there is major TRUTH being reported.

You know when you are over the target you get the "flak"!

patteeu
03-23-2010, 07:09 AM
So you want me to believe you over all "conservative or liberal" educators that label Nazi's as fascist? Please, do tell me who it is I should be listening to. Even Nazi's label themselves as Fascist... so why should I believe you? Please give me a list of books or sources to read (not internet links please).

Sure they were fascists, but the question is whether "fascist" belongs on the left or the right of the political spectrum. On a spectrum that goes from state control of the economy on the left to unregulated markets based on individual freedom on the right, fascism and socialism both belong on the left. There might be some conception of a political spectrum where socialism is on the left and fascism is on the right, but I'm not sure what it would be. Can you come up with something?

stevieray
03-23-2010, 07:13 AM
Sure they were fascists, but the question is whether "fascist" belongs on the left or the right of the political spectrum. On a spectrum that goes from state control of the economy on the left to unregulated markets based on individual freedom on the right, fascism and socialism both belong on the left. There might be some conception of a political spectrum where socialism is on the left and fascism is on the right, but I'm not sure what it would be. Can you come up with something?

...he made this mistake in the Beck thread also.

the spectrum is tyranny and anarchy, the left or right can take you in either direction...

penchief
03-23-2010, 07:27 AM
Sure they were fascists, but the question is whether "fascist" belongs on the left or the right of the political spectrum. On a spectrum that goes from state control of the economy on the left to unregulated markets based on individual freedom on the right, fascism and socialism both belong on the left. There might be some conception of a political spectrum where socialism is on the left and fascism is on the right, but I'm not sure what it would be. Can you come up with something?

This rewriting of history is getting old. According to this new self-serving logic there could never have been, nor could there ever be, a right wing totalitarian state because all totalitarian states are inherenty left wing.

Well, I call bullshit. Anyone with even half a brain or knowledge of history knows that the Nazis were right wing fascists who despised liberal causes. The Nazis hated socialism and communism. No amount of blathering by right wing idiots like Glen Beck will ever change that.

Furthermore, anyone who understands the reactionary and controlling nature of right wing ideology understands that it naturally lends itself to totalitarian measures.

Those who perpetuate this dishonesty are doing a great disservice to history and to the benefit of understanding history. Enough is enough.

Mr. Kotter
03-23-2010, 07:35 AM
OMG!!!

The world is gonna END!!! Soon!!! Run!!!!

OMG!!!

Jenson71
03-23-2010, 07:47 AM
...you need to restudy our history dude.

Short, showing signs of educated superiority, and not addressing any particular point. Great post.

No, you need to restudy our history dude.

patteeu
03-23-2010, 07:50 AM
This rewriting of history is getting old. According to this new self-serving logic there could never have been, nor could there ever be, a right wing totalitarian state because all totalitarian states are inherenty left wing.

Well, I call bullshit. Anyone with even half a brain or knowledge of history knows that the Nazis were right wing fascists who despised liberal causes. The Nazis hated socialism and communism. No amount of blathering by right wing idiots like Glen Beck will ever change that.

Furthermore, anyone who understands the reactionary and controlling nature of right wing ideology understands that it naturally lends itself to totalitarian measures.

Those who perpetuate this dishonesty are doing a great disservice to history and to the benefit of understanding history. Enough is enough.

*yawn* Sorry, penchief, Hitler is yours. Aside from the Jew killing and the wars of conquest, I think you'd really like him.

penchief
03-23-2010, 08:06 AM
*yawn* Sorry, penchief, Hitler is yours. Aside from the Jew killing and the wars of conquest, I think you'd really like him.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt with all the Dick Cheney love, but now I know you're full of shit.