If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   "Sarah Palin has adopted a brazen approach to countering Pres. Barack Obama's proposed healthcare reforms: outright fabrication and unscrupulous lying" Sunday's Soylent Flavor: Down's Syndrome Red   (casavaria.com) divider line 953
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

4595 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Aug 2009 at 7:15 PM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



953 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-08-10 04:46:12 AM  
alostpacket: kyoryu: (I mean, really, my employer-based coverage is incredibly kick-ass.)

Did you know that if they ever denied a claim and you became further injured or died from the lack of treatment you aren't legally allowed to sue them for damages?

It's all kick ass 'till ya need it.


No, really, my coverage is kick-ass. One of the best in the nation. I get what you're saying, though, trust me. In fact, one of my arguments has been that the increased cost of buying private insurance, vs. employer-provided insurance, allows the private companies to get away with crap like that more than they should be able to.

I only bring it up at all to point out that I'm arguing in favor of things which won't benefit me at all, and will probably cost me in significant ways. Which is kind of the opposite of selfish.
 
2009-08-10 04:50:36 AM  
Action Replay Nick: Palin is corrrect, you idiot libs just dont understand hyperboly.

I may not understand hyperbole, but at least I can spell it...
And while we're at it, her statement may be correct, but in that case she would be right.
 
2009-08-10 05:30:57 AM  
kyoryu: alostpacket: kyoryu: (I mean, really, my employer-based coverage is incredibly kick-ass.)

Did you know that if they ever denied a claim and you became further injured or died from the lack of treatment you aren't legally allowed to sue them for damages?

It's all kick ass 'till ya need it.

No, really, my coverage is kick-ass. One of the best in the nation. I get what you're saying, though, trust me. In fact, one of my arguments has been that the increased cost of buying private insurance, vs. employer-provided insurance, allows the private companies to get away with crap like that more than they should be able to.

I only bring it up at all to point out that I'm arguing in favor of things which won't benefit me at all, and will probably cost me in significant ways. Which is kind of the opposite of selfish.


Blue Cross/Blue Shield?

You missed my point I wasn't calling you selfish just pointing out that if you currently get that benefit from your employer they don't have any real legal deterrent to denying your claim. There is a law that prevents you from suing any employer provided health insurance company for damages

If you don't believe it can happen to you, just google blue cross & blue shield and autism children. You'll find a heart wrenching story about it.
 
2009-08-10 05:38:40 AM  
i190.photobucket.com
 
2009-08-10 05:40:11 AM  
LOL @ the fluoride one
 
2009-08-10 05:42:17 AM  
i190.photobucket.com
 
2009-08-10 06:23:55 AM  
They're funny Hobodeluxe. Just don't fall in the hellbentfor dogwhargblewhatevertehhellhisnamewas trap.
 
2009-08-10 07:12:15 AM  
Those guys are security guards. I know cause I've been one for 40 years. And, it looks like the kid has a switchblade.
 
2009-08-10 07:15:15 AM  
kyoryu: Didn't know about that. Would love to know more.

Just search "Baucus single payer" on Google News.

kyoryu: And your graph shows that part of the loss in wages went to other forms of compensation.

And what it also doesn't convey is that the rise in the COST of those benefits (the upward slope on the graph) is actually accompanied by a loss in the VALUE of those benefits. People and companies have been paying more every year for worse coverage since the turn of the century (and before).

This, more than anything else, undercuts your "Americans demanding more and more" argument.

kyoryu: I generally don't believe that one side is a "victim" and the other side is simply evil.

Good and evil don't enter into it. Right and wrong do. There are no absolutes, here.

kyoryu: And usually, fixing the problem requires seeing the issue from all sides, without trying to demonize any one side.

The only ones I truly condemn (as in my original post) are the willing propagandists pushing arguments they DO NOT THEMSELVES BELIEVE out over the newsfeeds and the airwaves and the internet every single day. If there's anything in this issue I could call "evil" with a good conscience, it's that.

Scum. Of. The. Earth...

That's all I've got time for this morning. I'll check back this evening unless I have something really quick to add.
 
2009-08-10 07:29:25 AM  
Damn, I can't believe you've been here since 2001 and I didn't already have you tagged as a favorite.

Easily fixed...
 
2009-08-10 07:55:52 AM  
'death panel' healthcare rationing is what goes on now at insurance companies, the difference is, if you don't like your insurance company, you can fire them.

You can't fire the socialist regime that will impose it's wishes on you after the democrats pass this facist policy of rationed healthcare, making it illegal to hold your own policy.

They want it to be just like Canada, where you get rationed healthcare from the government (death panel) or pay cash to some pseudo blackmarket 'private' doctor at outrageous prices ($900) for a physical.

And let's understand this, the same people pasing this bill into law will have ZERO change in THEIR healthcare. NONE. This is no longer 'government for the people, by the people' this is now cowherding.

get your guns.
 
2009-08-10 07:59:13 AM  
thrgd456: 'death panel' healthcare rationing is what goes on now at insurance companies, the difference is, if you don't like your insurance company, you can fire them.

You can't fire the socialist regime that will impose it's wishes on you after the democrats pass this facist policy of rationed healthcare, making it illegal to hold your own policy.

They want it to be just like Canada, where you get rationed healthcare from the government (death panel) or pay cash to some pseudo blackmarket 'private' doctor at outrageous prices ($900) for a physical.

And let's understand this, the same people pasing this bill into law will have ZERO change in THEIR healthcare. NONE. This is no longer 'government for the people, by the people' this is now cowherding.

get your guns.


I see someone took their I'm a dumb-fark pill today.
 
2009-08-10 09:17:23 AM  
alostpacket:
JQPublic: I suppose if one is trying to sell socialism to spoiled white suburban brats; a tiny, sparsely populated, all-white, Scandinavian monarchy with hot chicks is a better image than a third-world shiathole.

Aw listen to you all bitter. You're just sore you fell into your own trap.

You pointed to where socialism isn't so peachy and inadvertently proved that socialism doesn't cause dictatorships. The geography, culture, ethnicity and a whole host of other things are involved in dictatorships.


Let's use a REALLY cool example, and eliminate that whole issue. There is a country in which PART of the country went into a Western representative government, and part of it went into a collectivist government. The same people, culturally and genetically on both sides. Ein volk, as it were. Germany was split into West and East, and the East sucked balls by comparison, in every way. West Germany was a top-notch country, with every metric showing vast superiority over the east. You might also check North and South Korea, for further indications about democratic versus collectivist societies.


failblog.files.wordpress.com

One of these countries is not like the others.
 
2009-08-10 09:47:57 AM  
DaSwankOne:
GeneralJim: So, where's the outrage over the huge farking WHOPPER that Obama told, about health care 'savings' to be implemented? The CBO says the plan will cost a farking TRILLION more than now. WTF? None of you partisan droids has a problem with that little misstatement?

We are currently spending $110 billion a year on emergency room care for the uninsured alone. If we just covered this for $1 trillion over the next ten years we would save $100 billion dollars.


And that's because.... erm, insured people never need to go to an emergency room?

Yes, lots of uninsured people go to emergency rooms for cold, flu, and general health care. That's a problem. A problem caused by government interfering in health care. It's ILLEGAL to turn people down at the ER.

What I don't get is why it is simply assumed that the solution to any problem is to socialize the entire system. It worked SO WELL for the USSR, right?

Food is a necessity, too. We, as a society, want to ensure that people have a chance to eat. But we do that by giving people food stamps. We did NOT have the federal government take over all the supermarkets, or set up competing supermarkets.

There are a few easily identifiable problems with health care delivery in this country. Why not address the problems, rather than throw out the system, and institute a dreary public health service?

1. Break the tie between job and insurance; make ALL insurance individual
2. Pass a law outlawing consideration of "prior conditions"
3. Legislate an item-by item approach to insurance, meaning you could buy a cheap policy that did not cover organ transplants, heroic cancer and AIDS treatment, etc.
4. Limit malpractice payouts to actual negligence, and limit the awards to something reasonable.
5. Have the process of FDA approval be at taxpayer expense.
6. Set up free clinics for the uninsured, where doctors and nurses work off their student loans serving for tiny pay.

Do these six things, and the vast majority of problems in this whole field will either fade to obscurity, or disappear entirely. And we'd get to STAY the home of the best research, and the highest level of care.
 
2009-08-10 09:53:10 AM  
GeneralJim: West Germany was a top-notch country, with every metric showing vast superiority over the east.

The government ran all health care in West Germany from the 60s to the present.
 
2009-08-10 09:57:31 AM  
GeneralJim: What I don't get is why it is simply assumed that the solution to any problem is to socialize the entire system. It worked SO WELL for the USSR, right?

It works pretty well for the roads you drive on
It works pretty well for the schools your great grandkids are attending
It works pretty well for your water supply
It works pretty well for your law enforcement agencies
It works pretty well for your medicare

The university system is a fine example of public option / private option. There are state universities in just about every state, and they're generally pretty good. But private schools that go the extra mile are the ones that pull in the big bucks, and if you can afford it, it is worthwhile just to have their name on your diploma.

What's the disconnect?
 
2009-08-10 10:03:51 AM  
unlikely: What's the disconnect?

What you fail to understand is that the only two options are either leaving healthcare exactly as it is, or cloning Stalin and appointing him dictator for life. Once you libtards learn to look at things properly, the answer is clear.
 
2009-08-10 10:23:02 AM  
ra-ra-raw:
ra-ra-raw: Thorndyke Barnhard: Thorndyke Barnhard: Claiming the libs are somehow engineering Palin's attention whoring demoguogery? Uh huh. Nice try. Don't blame the libs for her not shutting up and sparing the Republican's the embarassment.

Gawd, my typing is atrocious.

GawdGod, my typing grammer, spelling and sentence construction skills is are atrocious.
/ftfy

I forgot to say the reason fixed your sentence was to say I found the mistakes humorous in a Palin thread. They seemed right at home.


Personally, I like deeper humor... Such as, I find it amusing that a Palin-hater would correct someone else, while misspelling "grammar." As was said before:

failblog.files.wordpress.com
 
2009-08-10 10:28:35 AM  
ilambiquated:
GeneralJim: The CBO says the plan will cost a farking TRILLION more than now.

Over a ten year period.


Oh, *WHEW* that's a relief. That's only a HUNDRED BILLION a year. I thought we were talking real money.
 
2009-08-10 10:49:09 AM  
I'm tired of the government getting in the way of not having access to health services.
 
2009-08-10 11:03:58 AM  
unlikely:
GeneralJim: West Germany was a top-notch country, with every metric showing vast superiority over the east.

The government ran all health care in West Germany from the 60s to the present.


The point was to compare socialist countries with capitalist ones, without the extra variables of tropic and northern Europe, and rich versus poor, and other genetic and environmental concerns. The Germans were one people. Their country was split into two, socialist and capitalist. Nobody got "the good part" or "the good people" or anything like that. Socialist Germany languished, was a polluted cesspool, and never made any money. Capitalist Germany became a world financial powerhouse, a center of progress and invention. You missed that?
 
2009-08-10 11:15:57 AM  
GeneralJim: But we do that by giving people food stamps. We did NOT have the federal government take over all the supermarkets, or set up competing supermarkets.

Uhmm actually we have the government subsidize the farmers and then manage the food stamps systems, kind of like how the government subsidizes private hospitals and provides insurance. For someone that likes to type a lot, you really don't know jackshiat about the way things work do you?
 
2009-08-10 11:18:03 AM  
GeneralJim: unlikely: GeneralJim: West Germany was a top-notch country, with every metric showing vast superiority over the east.

The government ran all health care in West Germany from the 60s to the present.

The point was to compare socialist countries with capitalist ones, without the extra variables of tropic and northern Europe, and rich versus poor, and other genetic and environmental concerns. The Germans were one people. Their country was split into two, socialist and capitalist. Nobody got "the good part" or "the good people" or anything like that. Socialist Germany languished, was a polluted cesspool, and never made any money. Capitalist Germany became a world financial powerhouse, a center of progress and invention. You missed that?


no, he was politely trying to steer you back to the point of all this: healthcare reform. and maybe to point out that the very evidence you present for your argument inherently disproves it, which is to say, west germany has "socialist" healthcare, and yet thrives as a capitalist society and does not devolve into east german communism because of it.

But of course, you don't care. You live in paranoid fantasy land where even the most innocuous reforms, if "socialist" in the slightest, inevitably ends up at the USSR/NK. And you believe this despite clear evidence to the contrary. Why? Because you're willfully stupid, or a troll. Either way, begone.
 
2009-08-10 11:43:53 AM  
unlikely: GeneralJim: What I don't get is why it is simply assumed that the solution to any problem is to socialize the entire system. It worked SO WELL for the USSR, right?

It works pretty well for the roads you drive on
It works pretty well for the schools your great grandkids are attending
It works pretty well for your water supply
It works pretty well for your law enforcement agencies
It works pretty well for your medicare


Does it really? Compared to... what? I saw an analysis of the Interstate system which proudly stated that a cross-country trip would be shortened by 10% (time) through use of the Interstates. The old system worked just fine, and the new system cost everyone in the country about $2000. To do a real comparison, you need a control.

Education is horrible in this country, and getting worse. (Great-grandkids... heh, heh) It turns out people trained to be factory workers, when that whole type of job is dwindling. It turns out students who have never competed, and can't comprehend the idea of losing at anything. Students who think the racial makeup of a team is more important than whether or not the team does what it is supposed to do. And, it's way more expensive per student than a truly fine education.

Education is a whole system based upon collectivist and statist bureaucracies -- so most students are never exposed to the ideas that suggest that a bureaucracy is not a very efficient way to get things done. Seriously, if schools were all run by employees of Fortune 500 companies, one would not expect any anti-corporation discussions to be encouraged by the teachers. The schools are currently run by government employees, so the idea that overly much government is a bad idea doesn't get much play.

Medicare, I hear, is heading for the cliff at full tilt -- it will be broke before long. The police? Ask people in New York, or Philadelphia. Here, on the Big Island, it's mixed.


The university system is a fine example of public option / private option. There are state universities in just about every state, and they're generally pretty good. But private schools that go the extra mile are the ones that pull in the big bucks, and if you can afford it, it is worthwhile just to have their name on your diploma.

What's the disconnect?


First off, education isn't quite the necessity that health care is. Second, there is not a massive legal structure in place dictating what colleges one can attend.

Everyone seems to be talking about what is in the plan. The first one, that was presented with a couple hours to study it before the vote, totally sucked. It was pretty much full-bore socialized medicine. Most people are rather strongly opposed to that, so the current plan is nowhere near as draconian. But, what they WANTED way to turn it into Cuba's system. They will be pushing to go ever more in that direction. I would point out that once we are all under such a plan, even one that allows private supplemental insurance or care, it only takes a "small change" to make private care illegal.
 
2009-08-10 12:36:32 PM  
You Americans should just let all the red states secede and call it "The United States of Farking Over-Dramatic Retards"

Socialized medicine does not a socialism make. Canada's health care sucks, but at least everyone gets it without going into a shiatton of debt. Plus if you farknozzles switch to socialized medicine it means we get to keep some of our specialized doctors who are wooed off to the United States by the fact that hospitals will pay them a trillion dollars there.
 
2009-08-10 12:48:38 PM  
Tsunami Ditka: MiddleyMcCentrist: What was the over/under on number of minutes before Canis would come to Princess Palin's defense?...

Christ, that guy is so farking predictable. It's as if he sits on Fark all day, just hitting F5 over and over, switches between his Gato Negro account and Canis account, waiting for a thread that's slightly critical of Palin to pop up. I think he honestly believes that she'll reward him with a six-hour beej for coming to her rescue on the internet.

Although, to be fair, from what I've heard lately, maybe that's not as unlikely as I first though.

/keeding


Just added alittle fix there.

Also, apparently the rumor is that he is also Bocanegra, Trap-Door Spider and The Gospel of Thomas.

Dear god, this guy is the purest definition of pathetic. Making multiple accounts to troll like a coward, lie and then act like a smug little biatch every single time he's called out for being wrong (which would be all the time). Maybe he needs mental help.
 
2009-08-10 12:57:46 PM  
alostpacket:
You missed my point I wasn't calling you selfish just pointing out that if you currently get that benefit from your employer they don't have any real legal deterrent to denying your claim. There is a law that prevents you from suing any employer provided health insurance company for damages


Didn't know that - but, again, it's another point towards ending the de-facto monopoly of employer-provided insurance. And replacing it with a monopoly of government-run insurance (which isn't what's being suggested, just pointing this out) ain't better. Real choice is good. It's the driving factor behind anything good that comes out of capitalism. (Which doesn't mean that bad things don't come out of capitalism, of course, just that the good things that come out of capitalism are a result of having real choices).

And I don't think you called me selfish, but whidbey did. I'm not too concerned, really, I just like putting the record straight.

Prospero424:
Good and evil don't enter into it. Right and wrong do. There are no absolutes, here.


Cool. That has to be the starting place for any kind of real solution.

The only ones I truly condemn (as in my original post) are the willing propagandists pushing arguments they DO NOT THEMSELVES BELIEVE out over the newsfeeds and the airwaves and the internet every single day. If there's anything in this issue I could call "evil" with a good conscience, it's that.

Scum. Of. The. Earth...


And that, I can't argue with.
 
2009-08-10 01:00:12 PM  

I've posted this before and I'll post it again...


Link (new window)

U.S.A, U.S.A! We're number 37! U.S.A, U.S.A!


Seriously folks, healthcare reform in the current proposed package might not be the best solution but it needs to be fixed and this would be the first step in the right direction.
 
2009-08-10 01:57:22 PM  
seriously.. people respond to winterwhile expecting a discussion?
 
2009-08-10 02:36:55 PM  
Canada's health care does not suck. Yes, people fall through the cracks and that is sad, but if the system was terrible we would be demanding change, and change would be huge on the policy agenda, which it is not.

Health care is in crises in the USA, not Canada. It is all over US news, not Canada's (big story here is Thunderstorms).

Keep Canada out of this debate, this is your issue. Not ours. We decided to go a different path 40 years ago and haven't looked back since.
 
2009-08-10 03:32:03 PM  
Abraham Frohman:
GeneralJim: unlikely: GeneralJim: West Germany was a top-notch country, with every metric showing vast superiority over the east.

The government ran all health care in West Germany from the 60s to the present.

The point was to compare socialist countries with capitalist ones, without the extra variables of tropic and northern Europe, and rich versus poor, and other genetic and environmental concerns. The Germans were one people. Their country was split into two, socialist and capitalist. Nobody got "the good part" or "the good people" or anything like that. Socialist Germany languished, was a polluted cesspool, and never made any money. Capitalist Germany became a world financial powerhouse, a center of progress and invention. You missed that?

no, he was politely trying to steer you back to the point of all this: healthcare reform. and maybe to point out that the very evidence you present for your argument inherently disproves it, which is to say, west germany has "socialist" healthcare, and yet thrives as a capitalist society and does not devolve into east german communism because of it.


Holy Fark.... Talk about rebel without a clue...

Okay, let me see if I have this right. The discussion got a bit side-tracked into a more general capitalism vs. socialism discussion, and discussion of banana republic socialism versus euro-socialism. So I bring up both Germany and Korea, where the same people in almost exactly the same place split into two countries, one capitalist and one socialist, with the same result: the capitalist part takes off, and the socialist part tanks. Now YOU are claiming that because West Germany had, for about half of its existence, somewhat socialized medicine, it proves socialism is okay? WTF are you huffing? Serious logic fail.

In a way this makes a perverted sort of sense. It's the same logic I've seen when describing U.S. history with people with two left eyes. America is a totally capitalist country at its inception. We go from a laughable backwoods campground and prisoner dump to the world's most rich and powerful country. Once there at the top, we start experimenting with socialism, and immediately start to slide back. The problem: capitalism. (See? this is what I meant about crappy education...)


But of course, you don't care. You live in paranoid fantasy land where even the most innocuous reforms, if "socialist" in the slightest, inevitably ends up at the USSR/NK. And you believe this despite clear evidence to the contrary. Why? Because you're willfully stupid, or a troll. Either way, begone.


Oh, the stupid is strong in this one... Don't give up the gay hooker job, "sausage king," 'cause your mind-reading act is teh suck.

Speaking of "clear evidence," we have precisely two countries which have taken a homogeneous population, and done a scientific experiment in comparative economics. Starting with equivalence, both Germany and Korea have followed the same path. The capitalist part has become a world leader in manufacturing and wealth, along with corresponding pleasant conditions for the citizens, and the collectivist part has turned into a nasty, polluted, dirt poor shiathole. The only significant difference? Capitalism versus socialism. Buy a clue, meathead.

For God's sake, man, even the USSR totally failed, and IT had huge oil and gold reserves. Every place socialism has been tried, it has failed. Sure, countries like Sweden can AFFORD to have inefficient medical care, and they "feel better" about socialized medicine.

Let's look at Sweden for a while. I'm going to simplify things a bit, 'cause you probably won't pay any attention anyway... and if the past is precursor, you won't get the point if you DO pay attention.

Gunnar Myrdal is a Nobel Prize-winning economist who helped Sweden take a plunge into pretty full-scale socialism. His contention was that if the country could sit down, in advance, and design a social system that was agreed upon by most, it could be done successfully. He claimed that the force involved in the U.S.S.R. form of socialism polluted the main ideas.

So, working with the Swedish people, a group effort designed a government that was socialist as people WANTED socialism to be. It was explained, refined, and debated until a near consensus was reached, and then the agreed-upon plan was put in place. A few years later, Myrdal, and the Swedes in general, had decided that socialism did not live up to its promise, and they scrapped the whole socialist structure. That is, the whole structure except for the socialized medicine, which they saw as "civilized" if not efficient. Since then, Sweden has, like most European countries, drifted into a euro-socialism.

Where the same people have become both socialist and capitalist, the socialist part has withered, and the capitalist part has grown robustly. The Soviet Union, with gold production trailing only South Africa, and massive oil reserves, still manages to bankrupt itself. Sweden rolls its own socialism, and then backs out of it, mostly, after a test drive.

And, just for grins, can you name a socialist country that has become more prosperous? That is, besides China, which is starting to become capitalist, and therefore richer? The essence is this: Capitalist countries grow and become wealthy, and socialist countries squabble internally over the rules by which the dwindling resources are divided.

And this is what you want? Lay off the paint chips.
 
2009-08-10 03:37:24 PM  
GeneralJim: Holy Fark.... Talk about rebel without a clue...

ah I was waiting for you. we need a new picture:
verbose troll is verbose.
tl;dr;ys;nn
 
2009-08-10 03:47:25 PM  
brainiac-dumdum: /obscure?

No, and it becomes less obscure every time you post these stupid pics. You add nothing to the conversation with these, and you give the impression you are unable to form a coherent thought. Perhaps you could take a moment to write down your own thoughts, instead of reposting whatever bumpersticker you saw on the way to work this morning.
 
2009-08-10 03:57:33 PM  
Leashlaw: blah blah blah NOTHING worth copy/pasta'ing

Grouchy farker, aren't you?
 
2009-08-10 04:55:58 PM  
Abraham Frohman:
GeneralJim: Holy Fark.... Talk about rebel without a clue...

ah I was waiting for you. we need a new picture:
verbose troll is verbose.
tl;dr;ys;nn


Meh, you meant ts;cr;is;g2f
 
2009-08-10 05:03:12 PM  
Jesus christ GeneralJim, you seem pretty proud of how epic your fail is. Way to miss the point of the conversation, ramble on about the failures of soviet communism, lash out at libs, and lace your post with tired old insults, all in an ugly green font.


The point was, socialism isn't the boogey man in and of itself. And that you can't just point at a country and say "look ebil socialist failure!" when all we're talking about here is health insurance and not the centralized redistribution of all resources.

Sweden paints a nice picture but we could have easily used ANY other industrialized western nation.


"The Soviet Union, with gold production trailing only South Africa, and massive oil reserves, still manages to bankrupt itself."


I really love this stupid talking point. So did the Soviets fail because the communism was so unsustainable? Or was it because the beloved Regan defeated them by making them spend so much money on defense? Or, maybe it was pope John Paul II?
 
2009-08-10 05:05:16 PM  
alostpacket: Jesus christ GeneralJim, you seem pretty proud of how epic your fail is. Way to miss the point of the conversation, ramble on about the failures of soviet communism, lash out at libs, and lace your post with tired old insults, all in an ugly green font.


The point was, socialism isn't the boogey man in and of itself. And that you can't just point at a country and say "look ebil socialist failure!" when all we're talking about here is health insurance and not the centralized redistribution of all resources.

Sweden paints a nice picture but we could have easily used ANY other industrialized western nation.


"The Soviet Union, with gold production trailing only South Africa, and massive oil reserves, still manages to bankrupt itself."

I really love this stupid talking point. So did the Soviets fail because the communism was so unsustainable? Or was it because the beloved Regan defeated them by making them spend so much money on defense? Or, maybe it was pope John Paul II?


The phrase "word salad" came up earlier. I think it sums things up nicely.

and my, what a large salad it is.
 
2009-08-10 05:10:29 PM  
GeneralJim: WHARRGARBL

Restructuring the health care industry will save lives and money. Why do you hate America?
 
2009-08-10 05:16:54 PM  
Abraham Frohman: The phrase "word salad" came up earlier. I think it sums things up nicely.

and my, what a large salad it is.


You'd think more salad in a diet was a good thing, but hell naw to this kind.
 
2009-08-10 05:20:57 PM  
I love it...

fark:Palin::4chan:Boxxy

lulz
 
2009-08-10 05:32:51 PM  
GeneralJim: The Onanist: Torgo_of_Manos: So how long before one of our beloved independents come in and try to defend her comments?

Then:

CanisNoir: So while she's exaggerating her rhetoric, she's not exactly lying either

Apparently just under 3 hours.

So, where's the outrage over the huge farking WHOPPER that Obama told, about health care 'savings' to be implemented? The CBO says the plan will cost a farking TRILLION more than now. WTF? None of you partisan droids has a problem with that little misstatement?


We have a problem with people like you deliberately misinforming people by leaving out little facts like this:

That "TRILLION" is over ten years, numbnuts.

Good job in pretending that's an up-front cost.

And considering the industry has promised $2 trillion in savings (new window) over that period...I hope you can do basic arithmetic.
 
2009-08-10 07:39:10 PM  
general jim
tl;dr
bye bye
 
2009-08-10 07:40:25 PM  
whidbey: You've been soundly trounced again, Public. That's why I can't even believe you believe what you post here.

If by trounced, you mean outnumbered by people who avoid debate. I noticed not one of you craven butterbellies had much to say to this fact I posted.

"And to you Sweden worshippers as the bastion of socialism and all that is good need to know that Sweden also does not have a minimum wage either, and all wages are determined through collective bargaining, again my sentiments have merit."

Yeah, trounced = blow ink like a squid and flail away.

/Outnumbered but never outgunned.
 
2009-08-10 08:18:58 PM  
JQPublic: whidbey: You've been soundly trounced again, Public. That's why I can't even believe you believe what you post here.

If by trounced, you mean outnumbered by people who avoid debate. I noticed not one of you craven butterbellies had much to say to this fact I posted.

"And to you Sweden worshippers as the bastion of socialism and all that is good need to know that Sweden also does not have a minimum wage either, and all wages are determined through collective bargaining, again my sentiments have merit."

Yeah, trounced = blow ink like a squid and flail away.

/Outnumbered but never outgunned.


So you are pro union then?
 
2009-08-10 08:37:24 PM  
GeneralJim:
And that's because.... erm, insured people never need to go to an emergency room?


People with proper preventive care generally don't need to go to an emergency room.

It's ILLEGAL to turn people down at the ER.

No, it's only illegal if it's actually a medical emergency. If a medical screening determines your situation is not an emergency, they can legally send you home. Many ERs have begun to do this in response to too many individuals abusing the system, though the majority still voluntarily treat everyone.

What I don't get is why it is simply assumed that the solution to any problem is to socialize the entire system.

Nobody has suggested that, and certainly the legislation under debate doesn't do that at all.

1. Break the tie between job and insurance; make ALL insurance individual

The bill in question enables individuals to buy insurance at the same tax breaks and discount prices as employers, so while employers can still offer insurance, competition increases because choices increase.

2. Pass a law outlawing consideration of "prior conditions"

That's part of the bill.

3. Legislate an item-by item approach to insurance, meaning you could buy a cheap policy that did not cover organ transplants, heroic cancer and AIDS treatment, etc.

That's actually bad for the consumer; the free market works best when you have a large number of equivalent products to choose from. Plus, this just dumps those cancer/AIDS/organ transplant patients back on Medicaid.

4. Limit malpractice payouts to actual negligence, and limit the awards to something reasonable.

Few frivolous cases actually make it through the court system, and they amount for a negligibly small part of our medical costs. And what may be an unreasonably high award for some scenarios might be unreasonably low for others. I mean, a million dollars is way too high if a medical mistake causes you to lose a toe, but it's way too low if a drunken surgeon amputates the wrong leg.

5. Have the process of FDA approval be at taxpayer expense.

Bad idea. It would basically remove any incentive for the drug companies to screen candidate drugs carefully before going through the process, since it would no longer cost them money to go through the trial process on an unsuccessful drug candidate.

6. Set up free clinics for the uninsured, where doctors and nurses work off their student loans serving for tiny pay.

There already is a program, the NHSC, where doctors and nurses work off their loans.
 
2009-08-10 08:37:41 PM  
don't get Cancer or get old

In the Nanny state

otherwise just wait behind the drunk and the druggie for your turn
 
2009-08-10 08:59:16 PM  
Halli: JQPublic: whidbey: You've been soundly trounced again, Public. That's why I can't even believe you believe what you post here.

If by trounced, you mean outnumbered by people who avoid debate. I noticed not one of you craven butterbellies had much to say to this fact I posted.

"And to you Sweden worshippers as the bastion of socialism and all that is good need to know that Sweden also does not have a minimum wage either, and all wages are determined through collective bargaining, again my sentiments have merit."

Yeah, trounced = blow ink like a squid and flail away.

/Outnumbered but never outgunned.

So you are pro union then?


I just want them to follow the law. Currently I see them as an extortion racket that assaults and intimidates people who refuse to join them.
 
2009-08-10 09:23:43 PM  
JQPublic "And to you Sweden worshippers as the bastion of socialism and all that is good need to know that Sweden also does not have a minimum wage either, and all wages are determined through collective bargaining, again my sentiments have merit."

So you're saying the world works in shades of grey and that absolutes are rare? well, that is a shocker.

So what does the minimum wage have to do with public healthcare? Oh, right. It's just another distraction.

"Yeah, trounced"

Trounced, indeed.

/You're cute. Stupid too, but the cutes ones always are.
 
2009-08-10 09:26:48 PM  
JQPublic I just want them to follow the law. Currently I see them as an extortion racket that assaults and intimidates people who refuse to join them.

You should probably hide from them.

Sounds like all of them are up to no good.

/fear!
//FEAR!!
 
2009-08-10 09:47:46 PM  
FootInMouthDisease: JQPublic "And to you Sweden worshippers as the bastion of socialism and all that is good need to know that Sweden also does not have a minimum wage either, and all wages are determined through collective bargaining, again my sentiments have merit."

So you're saying the world works in shades of grey and that absolutes are rare? well, that is a shocker.

So what does the minimum wage have to do with public healthcare? Oh, right. It's just another distraction.

"Yeah, trounced"

Trounced, indeed.

/You're cute. Stupid too, but the cutes ones always are.


Obviously you are a late comer to the thread. And you missed the conversation between whidbey and myself that dealt with the minimum wage.

/thanks for butting in though.

Yeah, labor unions are criminal enterprises, so what else is new?
 
Displayed 50 of 953 comments

First | « | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report