Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(The New York Times)   Americans on health care bill: Can we just scrap it and start over with a new one? White House: Yes we can   (prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, health care bill, Mr. Gibbs, press secretary, Blair House, White House, wake  
•       •       •

14604 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Feb 2010 at 7:59 PM (6 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



368 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-02-16 11:50:23 PM  
*wanders off to eat cheese*
 
2010-02-16 11:51:49 PM  

FubarBDilligaf: Indubitably: And you, Mr. Snide?

I do as well, and I can think of a few that really don't have any value, you can start with my wife's ex, then there's a cousin I have you could add to that. Simply being alive doesn't give a person "value", and there are people in our society who actively take value away from the society. As to what they "deserve", I'd agree that you deserve help you can't provide for yourself, I'd disagree to deserving help you refused to provide on your own. Somewhere in all that you've said you've left out the idea of self responsibility. If you could have afforded health insurance, but chose not to get it because you wanted the newer car, or the xbox, or the night out, or cable, or whatever, why then is it the responsibility of others to provide for you what you chose not to have? That's something that I think a lot of others agree with me about, we're willing to help those who can't do it on their own, but we have no interest in paying for people who could have, but chose not to.

Indubitably: Or am I off-base?

Yep. I grew up on red beans and rice, I understand what it's like to be poor, and I'm all for helping those that need it. Just, like I've said, I draw a distinction between those who need, and those who prefer to allow someone else to pay for them.


I read you bra, BUT, these miscreants you allude to still use the system, more than you and I actually, so if they were covered, wouldn't it help us? The strong ones?
 
2010-02-16 11:54:33 PM  

FubarBDilligaf: Indubitably: And you, Mr. Snide?

I do as well, and I can think of a few that really don't have any value, you can start with my wife's ex, then there's a cousin I have you could add to that. Simply being alive doesn't give a person "value", and there are people in our society who actively take value away from the society. As to what they "deserve", I'd agree that you deserve help you can't provide for yourself, I'd disagree to deserving help you refused to provide on your own. Somewhere in all that you've said you've left out the idea of self responsibility. If you could have afforded health insurance, but chose not to get it because you wanted the newer car, or the xbox, or the night out, or cable, or whatever, why then is it the responsibility of others to provide for you what you chose not to have? That's something that I think a lot of others agree with me about, we're willing to help those who can't do it on their own, but we have no interest in paying for people who could have, but chose not to.

Indubitably: Or am I off-base?

Yep. I grew up on red beans and rice, I understand what it's like to be poor, and I'm all for helping those that need it. Just, like I've said, I draw a distinction between those who need, and those who prefer to allow someone else to pay for them.


While smart, you forget things here. You pay anyway. And, yo, insurance costs more than an xbox, yo. Please.
 
2010-02-16 11:55:26 PM  

FubarBDilligaf: Indubitably: And you, Mr. Snide?

I do as well, and I can think of a few that really don't have any value, you can start with my wife's ex, then there's a cousin I have you could add to that. Simply being alive doesn't give a person "value", and there are people in our society who actively take value away from the society. As to what they "deserve", I'd agree that you deserve help you can't provide for yourself, I'd disagree to deserving help you refused to provide on your own. Somewhere in all that you've said you've left out the idea of self responsibility. If you could have afforded health insurance, but chose not to get it because you wanted the newer car, or the xbox, or the night out, or cable, or whatever, why then is it the responsibility of others to provide for you what you chose not to have? That's something that I think a lot of others agree with me about, we're willing to help those who can't do it on their own, but we have no interest in paying for people who could have, but chose not to.


Ed Zackry

I shoveled my handicapped neighbor's sidewalk and driveway because she can't do it herself. I didn't shovel out the 21 year old college kid that waits for the snow to get packed down to solid ice before attempting to get rid of it.
 
2010-02-17 12:00:44 AM  

An-Unnecessarily-Long-Name: You do know more Americans Die each day with insurance than without.


I like this one.

However, I've been known to argue that since sober drivers kill more people in accidents than drunk ones, we all should loosen up and have a drink before we head out on the road.
 
2010-02-17 12:03:04 AM  

Sabyen91: I am a corporate accountant. I am certainly not anti-corporation. I also know the dirty shiat some of them do. To trust them to pay for health care is...really masochistic.


The real tragedy is that partisanship would fall out of favor if we could get people to stand up for what is good for them.

Corporations will do whatever we ask of them, they are not inherently evil. Their tendency to take advantage of people doesn't run as deep as people's tendency to allow themselves to be taken advantage of. Corporations in some ways respond much more decisively to changes in public opinion than government.

We need a public option or single payer not because we want big government or to crush the private sector--we need it because we've gone so incredibly long without stopping the corporate juggernauts from absorbing more and more of our economy. It's simply too late. The doomsday scenarios of the 90's are upon us. What a victory you achieved then, my conservative friends. All hail Newt Grinchtard.
 
2010-02-17 12:04:17 AM  

steveGswine: An-Unnecessarily-Long-Name: You do know more Americans Die each day with insurance than without.

I like this one.

However, I've been known to argue that since sober drivers kill more people in accidents than drunk ones, we all should loosen up and have a drink before we head out on the road.


Both of those arguments suffer from the same flaw: normalization. It's all about ratios, not raw numbers. If you normalize both numbers as ratios of deaths per unit of (insert whatever here), you'll get something you can use for comparison. For example, in the driving example, if you compare the ratio of sober deaths to number of sober drivers with the ratio of drunk driving deaths to the number of drunk drivers, that's where you'll see the inherent danger in drunken driving. Same thing with deaths due to non-insurance. Normalize the damn numbers and then see which is more dangerous.
 
2010-02-17 12:05:33 AM  

brukmann: Corporations will do whatever we ask of them, they are not inherently evil.


I am not sure I agree. They are inherently self-absorbed. They do everything for profit. Some go further than others in gray areas to do that. Every single company I have worked for has had questionable accounting practices. Maybe not illegal but certainly straddling the line.
 
2010-02-17 12:08:32 AM  

00spy: Rarkus I want single payer


than by all means pay for it your self (single payer)


One system farks the poor.

One system pays for all and costs half as much.

I know it's a big leap to assume you can figure out what is the smart choice, but try. Please. Or do some research. Or talk to someone in healthcare (outside of BFE).

They call liberals blind ideologues. Sheesh.
 
2010-02-17 12:09:31 AM  

Sabyen91: brukmann: Corporations will do whatever we ask of them, they are not inherently evil.

I am not sure I agree. They are inherently self-absorbed. They do everything for profit. Some go further than others in gray areas to do that. Every single company I have worked for has had questionable accounting practices. Maybe not illegal but certainly straddling the line.


The trick is you have to ask.
 
2010-02-17 12:10:37 AM  

nmemkha: Gato Negro: MrEricSir: How about we make private health insurance illegal?

culebra: This right here is the real answer. The need for such middlemen has long since disappeared.


Why stop there, comrade?

Why not make private EVERYTHING illegal and eliminate all forms of 'privilege'?

Please get a terminal disease and have your insurance drop you. On your deathbed, think of me ...


Nothing terminal, something just really painful that can be cured but leaves him completely broke.
 
2010-02-17 12:10:47 AM  

Sabyen91: No, the inference is humans don't deserve to live unless Fubar says they do.


No, the inference is that there are humans that don't have any real value, I'll start with the ones who offer strawman arguments like yours.

Indubitably: I read you bra, BUT, these miscreants you allude to still use the system, more than you and I actually, so if they were covered, wouldn't it help us? The strong ones?


And if they were covered, wouldn't they use the system MORE, thereby costing more? The arguments I've seen about the whole "preventative" issue seems to say that, in broad use, it would cost more than it would save in prevention. And if you chose not to purchase your own health care, if you have the means to, why should anyone have to provide it for you? As to the cost of an xbox, I've known those who could get insurance, but choose to spend the money on other things, hell, I've been that person. The difference was that when I needed to see the doctor, I paid for it out of my pocket, and, when necessary, made payment arrangements, one of which took 3 years to pay off. I didn't expect somebody else to pay my bill because I chose not to have health insurance. And I've yet to see anybody offer any reasonable reason why somebody else should have to pay the costs for someone who chooses not to buy insurance they can afford, something like a third of those uninsured depending on which source you look at. Tell me, what's your opinion of it? If someone had the means to get insurance, chose not to, and is now going to run up serious bills, do you think it's your responsibility to pay those bills for them? Or shouldn't they have to pay them themselves? Even if it does mean they'll be paying on them for years? There's a world of difference between a hand up, and a hand out, and there's way too many out there who seem to think that because someone isn't interested in paying for hand outs that we're not willing to give a hand up.

So, given that I don't have a problem with a hand up to those who can't do it for themselves, can you give me a reason why there's something wrong with me not wanting to give a hand out to someone not willing to handle their own responsibility? Not willing, mind you, not "not able".

Or do I get another strawman attempting to conflate my opinion of the two very different groups?
 
2010-02-17 12:11:35 AM  

brukmann: Sabyen91: brukmann: Corporations will do whatever we ask of them, they are not inherently evil.

I am not sure I agree. They are inherently self-absorbed. They do everything for profit. Some go further than others in gray areas to do that. Every single company I have worked for has had questionable accounting practices. Maybe not illegal but certainly straddling the line.

The trick is you have to ask.


I have asked before. It doesn't work. :)
 
2010-02-17 12:12:16 AM  
If I was a Democrat supporter I would be supremely pissed right now. The Democrats in the Senate had the infamous Supermajority that was able to stifle all resistance from the Republicans on whatever agenda items that the President wanted to push and they didn't have the balls to use it. Don't blame the Republicans or Teabaggers or whoever else for being obstructionists. The Democrats had their opportunity, they blew it, and they know they blew it. In November, they're going to pay for it by losing a bunch of seats in both Houses. They were going to lose anyway as the midterm elections usually go poorly for the party that holds the White House but now they'll have exactly dick to show for it.
 
2010-02-17 12:13:01 AM  
If I was a Democrat supporter I would be supremely pissed right now. The Democrats in the Senate had the infamous Supermajority (insert fanfare of trumpets here) that was able to stifle all resistance from the Republicans on whatever agenda items that the President wanted to push and they didn't have the balls to use it. Don't blame the Republicans or Teabaggers or whoever else for being obstructionists. The Democrats had their opportunity, they blew it, and they know they blew it. In November, they're going to pay for it by losing a bunch of seats in both Houses. They were going to lose anyway as the midterm elections usually go poorly for the party that holds the White House but now they'll have exactly dick to show for it.
 
2010-02-17 12:13:12 AM  

aaronius: steveGswine: An-Unnecessarily-Long-Name: You do know more Americans Die each day with insurance than without.

I like this one.

However, I've been known to argue that since sober drivers kill more people in accidents than drunk ones, we all should loosen up and have a drink before we head out on the road.

Both of those arguments suffer from the same flaw: normalization. It's all about ratios, not raw numbers. If you normalize both numbers as ratios of deaths per unit of (insert whatever here), you'll get something you can use for comparison. For example, in the driving example, if you compare the ratio of sober deaths to number of sober drivers with the ratio of drunk driving deaths to the number of drunk drivers, that's where you'll see the inherent danger in drunken driving. Same thing with deaths due to non-insurance. Normalize the damn numbers and then see which is more dangerous.


I'm... too dry for the room.

Sorry about that. Let me have a drink, loosen up a little, I'll come back.
 
2010-02-17 12:13:27 AM  

FubarBDilligaf: No, the inference is that there are humans that don't have any real value, I'll start with the ones who offer strawman arguments like yours.


Well, at least I know what your answer will be when you are head of the death panels and my number comes up.
 
2010-02-17 12:15:03 AM  

Pegasus_CAG: f I was a Democrat supporter I would be supremely pissed right now. The Democrats in the Senate had the infamous Supermajority


I am pissed off at the Dems but the Supermajority thing? Myth. When your side has to count on Republicans like Lieberman, the Nelson brothers, and Mary Landrieu, it really isn't a supermajority.
 
2010-02-17 12:19:10 AM  
I am pissed off at the Dems but the Supermajority thing? Myth. When your side has to count on Republicans like Lieberman, the Nelson brothers, and Mary Landrieu, it really isn't a supermajority.

I'm shocked that they couldn't come up with something that would be palatable to them. Kind of in the same way that I'm shocked that the Democrats couldn't find a candidate to be GWB in 2004. He was as ripe for the picking as any President ever was.
 
2010-02-17 12:19:22 AM  

Sabyen91: brukmann: Corporations will do whatever we ask of them, they are not inherently evil.

I am not sure I agree. They are inherently self-absorbed. They do everything for profit. Some go further than others in gray areas to do that. Every single company I have worked for has had questionable accounting practices. Maybe not illegal but certainly straddling the line.


Sabyen91: brukmann: Corporations will do whatever we ask of them, they are not inherently evil.

I am not sure I agree. They are inherently self-absorbed. They do everything for profit. Some go further than others in gray areas to do that. Every single company I have worked for has had questionable accounting practices. Maybe not illegal but certainly straddling the line.


I agree and would go further: corporations are not human entities, and they are not equal to a single, human voice. Giving corporations person-hood is a crime against humanity because corporations are concerned about not humanity, but profit for a humanity. And these are not the same humanities...

These are not the same profits/prophets...

This is oligarchy...
 
2010-02-17 12:20:22 AM  
"be" should be "beat".

/Grumble. Damn 9:00 PM basketball games.
 
2010-02-17 12:22:00 AM  

RockChalkH1N1: MorseCodeNowInHiDef: netcentric: They should rename it, for its second fail. Like Obamawelfarecrap.

So this is what the world looks like when viewed from my asshole!

You should know... since your head is already up there


Simply because it's how you view the world on a daily basis doesn't mean everyone else does as well. Just because you're a hammer doesn't make everything a nail.
 
2010-02-17 12:23:27 AM  

Indubitably: Sabyen91: brukmann: Corporations will do whatever we ask of them, they are not inherently evil.

I am not sure I agree. They are inherently self-absorbed. They do everything for profit. Some go further than others in gray areas to do that. Every single company I have worked for has had questionable accounting practices. Maybe not illegal but certainly straddling the line.

Sabyen91: brukmann: Corporations will do whatever we ask of them, they are not inherently evil.

I am not sure I agree. They are inherently self-absorbed. They do everything for profit. Some go further than others in gray areas to do that. Every single company I have worked for has had questionable accounting practices. Maybe not illegal but certainly straddling the line.

I agree and would go further: corporations are not human entities, and they are not equal to a single, human voice. Giving corporations person-hood is a crime against humanity because corporations are concerned about not humanity, but profit for a humanity. And these are not the same humanities...

These are not the same profits/prophets...

This is oligarchy...


Oh, no doubt. Claiming a corporation should have free speech is ridiculous. It isn't a citizen and it is double free speech for some and totally negating for the rest of the shareholders. Money should NOT be free speech.
 
2010-02-17 12:23:44 AM  

AverageJoe77: nmemkha: Gato Negro: MrEricSir: How about we make private health insurance illegal?

culebra: This right here is the real answer. The need for such middlemen has long since disappeared.


Why stop there, comrade?

Why not make private EVERYTHING illegal and eliminate all forms of 'privilege'?

Please get a terminal disease and have your insurance drop you. On your deathbed, think of me ...

Nothing terminal, something just really painful that can be cured but leaves him completely broke.


Why? So he can bleed the evil government monster dry?
 
2010-02-17 12:27:03 AM  

FubarBDilligaf: Sabyen91: No, the inference is humans don't deserve to live unless Fubar says they do.

No, the inference is that there are humans that don't have any real value, I'll start with the ones who offer strawman arguments like yours.

Indubitably: I read you bra, BUT, these miscreants you allude to still use the system, more than you and I actually, so if they were covered, wouldn't it help us? The strong ones?

And if they were covered, wouldn't they use the system MORE, thereby costing more? The arguments I've seen about the whole "preventative" issue seems to say that, in broad use, it would cost more than it would save in prevention. And if you chose not to purchase your own health care, if you have the means to, why should anyone have to provide it for you? As to the cost of an xbox, I've known those who could get insurance, but choose to spend the money on other things, hell, I've been that person. The difference was that when I needed to see the doctor, I paid for it out of my pocket, and, when necessary, made payment arrangements, one of which took 3 years to pay off. I didn't expect somebody else to pay my bill because I chose not to have health insurance. And I've yet to see anybody offer any reasonable reason why somebody else should have to pay the costs for someone who chooses not to buy insurance they can afford, something like a third of those uninsured depending on which source you look at. Tell me, what's your opinion of it? If someone had the means to get insurance, chose not to, and is now going to run up serious bills, do you think it's your responsibility to pay those bills for them? Or shouldn't they have to pay them themselves? Even if it does mean they'll be paying on them for years? There's a world of difference between a hand up, and a hand out, and there's way too many out there who seem to think that because someone isn't interested in paying for hand outs that we're not willing to give a hand up.

So, given that I don't have a problem with a hand up to those who can't do it for themselves, can you give me a reason why there's something wrong with me not wanting to give a hand out to someone not willing to handle their own responsibility? Not willing, mind you, not "not able".

Or do I get another strawman attempting to conflate my opinion of the two very different groups?


"Hand-up?" "Hand-out?"

Same tired jargon, eh? "Not Willing and Not Able?" Big sigh.

Do you understand the scale of which you condescend?

I don't think you do. Should the dirty masses have coverage, shall they still be downtrodden and needy? Certainly. At yer leisure, Lord Bullshiat...

;)
 
2010-02-17 12:31:44 AM  

Indubitably: FubarBDilligaf: Sabyen91: No, the inference is humans don't deserve to live unless Fubar says they do.

No, the inference is that there are humans that don't have any real value, I'll start with the ones who offer strawman arguments like yours.

Indubitably: I read you bra, BUT, these miscreants you allude to still use the system, more than you and I actually, so if they were covered, wouldn't it help us? The strong ones?

And if they were covered, wouldn't they use the system MORE, thereby costing more? The arguments I've seen about the whole "preventative" issue seems to say that, in broad use, it would cost more than it would save in prevention. And if you chose not to purchase your own health care, if you have the means to, why should anyone have to provide it for you? As to the cost of an xbox, I've known those who could get insurance, but choose to spend the money on other things, hell, I've been that person. The difference was that when I needed to see the doctor, I paid for it out of my pocket, and, when necessary, made payment arrangements, one of which took 3 years to pay off. I didn't expect somebody else to pay my bill because I chose not to have health insurance. And I've yet to see anybody offer any reasonable reason why somebody else should have to pay the costs for someone who chooses not to buy insurance they can afford, something like a third of those uninsured depending on which source you look at. Tell me, what's your opinion of it? If someone had the means to get insurance, chose not to, and is now going to run up serious bills, do you think it's your responsibility to pay those bills for them? Or shouldn't they have to pay them themselves? Even if it does mean they'll be paying on them for years? There's a world of difference between a hand up, and a hand out, and there's way too many out there who seem to think that because someone isn't interested in paying for hand outs that we're not willing to give a hand up.

So, given that I don't have a problem with a hand up to those who can't do it for themselves, can you give me a reason why there's something wrong with me not wanting to give a hand out to someone not willing to handle their own responsibility? Not willing, mind you, not "not able".

Or do I get another strawman attempting to conflate my opinion of the two very different groups?

"Hand-up?" "Hand-out?"

Same tired jargon, eh? "Not Willing and Not Able?" Big sigh.

Do you understand the scale of which you condescend?

I don't think you do. Should the dirty masses have coverage, shall they still be downtrodden and needy? Certainly. At yer leisure, Lord Bullshiat...

;)


As much as the right biatches about death panels I am thinking they would love them if they were in charge.
 
2010-02-17 12:34:15 AM  

Indubitably: FubarBDilligaf: Sabyen91: No, the inference is humans don't deserve to live unless Fubar says they do.

No, the inference is that there are humans that don't have any real value, I'll start with the ones who offer strawman arguments like yours.

Indubitably: I read you bra, BUT, these miscreants you allude to still use the system, more than you and I actually, so if they were covered, wouldn't it help us? The strong ones?

And if they were covered, wouldn't they use the system MORE, thereby costing more? The arguments I've seen about the whole "preventative" issue seems to say that, in broad use, it would cost more than it would save in prevention. And if you chose not to purchase your own health care, if you have the means to, why should anyone have to provide it for you? As to the cost of an xbox, I've known those who could get insurance, but choose to spend the money on other things, hell, I've been that person. The difference was that when I needed to see the doctor, I paid for it out of my pocket, and, when necessary, made payment arrangements, one of which took 3 years to pay off. I didn't expect somebody else to pay my bill because I chose not to have health insurance. And I've yet to see anybody offer any reasonable reason why somebody else should have to pay the costs for someone who chooses not to buy insurance they can afford, something like a third of those uninsured depending on which source you look at. Tell me, what's your opinion of it? If someone had the means to get insurance, chose not to, and is now going to run up serious bills, do you think it's your responsibility to pay those bills for them? Or shouldn't they have to pay them themselves? Even if it does mean they'll be paying on them for years? There's a world of difference between a hand up, and a hand out, and there's way too many out there who seem to think that because someone isn't interested in paying for hand outs that we're not willing to give a hand up.

So, given that I don't have a problem with a hand up to those who can't do it for themselves, can you give me a reason why there's something wrong with me not wanting to give a hand out to someone not willing to handle their own responsibility? Not willing, mind you, not "not able".

Or do I get another strawman attempting to conflate my opinion of the two very different groups?

"Hand-up?" "Hand-out?"

Same tired jargon, eh? "Not Willing and Not Able?" Big sigh.

Do you understand the scale of which you condescend?

I don't think you do. Should the dirty masses have coverage, shall they still be downtrodden and needy? Certainly. At yer leisure, Lord Bullshiat...

;)


AND, hope you never be down-trodden, yo.

HOPE.

Because I suspect you wouldn't last five minutes...

;)
 
2010-02-17 12:37:01 AM  

Indubitably: Do you understand the scale of which you condescend?

I don't think you do. Should the dirty masses have coverage, shall they still be downtrodden and needy? Certainly. At yer leisure, Lord Bullshiat...


Ah, well, now I know you're incapable of rational discussion and aren't worth wasting time on, thanks for clearing that up.

Indubitably: AND, hope you never be down-trodden, yo.

HOPE.

Because I suspect you wouldn't last five minutes...


Been there, done that, and got out of it, mostly because instead of waiting for someone else to come fix it for me I did it for myself, not that I'd expect you to understand someone taking responsibility for their own life.
 
2010-02-17 12:40:00 AM  

Gato Negro: Blah, blah, blah... Americans are fed up.


We are going to have so much health care. Literally metric tones of health care. We are going to have to build hospitals right on the border for all of our Mexican friends to come over and share with us. And while they are here, we might as well enroll their children in our public school system.

It will be awesome. And aside from the fact that I truly believe it would be the righteous thing to do, I equally want it to happen just to cause you harm.
 
2010-02-17 12:44:19 AM  

vartian: Gato Negro: Blah, blah, blah... Americans are fed up.

We are going to have so much health care. Literally metric tones of health care. We are going to have to build hospitals right on the border for all of our Mexican friends to come over and share with us. And while they are here, we might as well enroll their children in our public school system.

It will be awesome. And aside from the fact that I truly believe it would be the righteous thing to do, I equally want it to happen just to cause you harm.


You forgot to mention them taking everyones jobs, too.
 
2010-02-17 12:45:56 AM  

FubarBDilligaf: Indubitably: Do you understand the scale of which you condescend?

I don't think you do. Should the dirty masses have coverage, shall they still be downtrodden and needy? Certainly. At yer leisure, Lord Bullshiat...

Ah, well, now I know you're incapable of rational discussion and aren't worth wasting time on, thanks for clearing that up.

Indubitably: AND, hope you never be down-trodden, yo.

HOPE.

Because I suspect you wouldn't last five minutes...

Been there, done that, and got out of it, mostly because instead of waiting for someone else to come fix it for me I did it for myself, not that I'd expect you to understand someone taking responsibility for their own life.


Really?

You doubt I understand?

You doubt I take responsibility for my life?

Seriously?

You don't know me, clearly. And I don't expect you to, I guess, but fark you, please don't make suppositions about my life or my experiences...

You know not what you do...

Please take responsibility for knowing your life only...

You'll be wiser for it.
 
2010-02-17 12:47:31 AM  
Jesus farking christ.

Will you morons just implement a national insurance program similar to what both Massachusetts and France have already. In a few years you'll have the best system in the world.

I wish Canada would do this instead of the farking stupid system we have.
 
2010-02-17 12:48:30 AM  
DEY TOOK R JERBS!!

/whatever, they did too...
 
2010-02-17 12:49:49 AM  

whidbey: UNC_Samurai: Difficulty: Must include single-payer system.

It really should.

Everyone:

Send your representatives a message:

Senate

House

Send a scathing e-mail telling them you're sick of their sh*t, that they need to stop being afraid to lead, that we need to adopt single-payer like the rest of the industrialized world and that they are very likely going to lose their majority if they continue on their present compromise-ridden path.

Do it.


I've tried. My Congressman and one of my Senators sends me form letters about how they passed bills in their respective houses even when I was telling my Congressman not to support any final bill without at the minimum public option. (The Senate bill and House bill are different and would have needed to be negotitated (sp?) to come up with the same bill to be voted on in each house.) My other Senator does not even provide me the decency of a form letter. I need to look up their office phone numbers and actual mailing addresses.

/ Sorry if that doesn't make 100% sense.
// I'm tired and need to go to bed.
 
2010-02-17 12:57:48 AM  

Indubitably: FubarBDilligaf: Indubitably: Do you understand the scale of which you condescend?

I don't think you do. Should the dirty masses have coverage, shall they still be downtrodden and needy? Certainly. At yer leisure, Lord Bullshiat...

Ah, well, now I know you're incapable of rational discussion and aren't worth wasting time on, thanks for clearing that up.

Indubitably: AND, hope you never be down-trodden, yo.

HOPE.

Because I suspect you wouldn't last five minutes...

Been there, done that, and got out of it, mostly because instead of waiting for someone else to come fix it for me I did it for myself, not that I'd expect you to understand someone taking responsibility for their own life.

Really?

You doubt I understand?

You doubt I take responsibility for my life?

Seriously?

You don't know me, clearly. And I don't expect you to, I guess, but fark you, please don't make suppositions about my life or my experiences...

You know not what you do...

Please take responsibility for knowing your life only...

You'll be wiser for it.


Oh, and the world will be better off too, asshole.

P.S. Dissing yer opponent works. Check. ;)
 
2010-02-17 01:10:32 AM  

Gato Negro: Blah, blah, blah... Americans are fed up. Political cartoons tell me what I think.


Fixed that for ya.
 
2010-02-17 01:54:59 AM  
Can we make a provision that if Congress doesn't fix our system and makes sure everybody can get affordable health insurance then Congress loses theirs for life?

I'm sick of those crooked self absorbed elected millionaires playing politics with our economy and national health just get some campaign contributions from the billionaires running the health insurance industry. If we can't have decent affordable health care neither should they.
 
2010-02-17 02:01:23 AM  
EwoksSuck: Can we make a provision that if Congress doesn't fix our system and makes sure everybody can get affordable health insurance then Congress loses theirs for life?

Better solution, everyone gets their insurance.
 
2010-02-17 02:06:14 AM  

Lundah: Sure, it's not like there's not an existing bill that already has bipartisan support (pops) collecting dust in committee or anything.


From your link: "* Making employer-provided insurance portable by converting the current tax exclusion for health benefits into a tax deduction for individuals; for example, the deduction that a typical family of four would receive would be $19,000 nearly 50% more than the $13,000 they spent on health care;[2]
* The establishment or identification of a "State Health Help Agency" in each U.S. state government which would administer the HAPI plans in each state, help its citizens evaluate the options available, oversee enrollment, and help with the transition from Medicaid and CHIP, among other responsibilities;
* The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and State Children's Health Insurance Program would be replaced;[3]
* Medicaid participants are transitioned out of that program...

So...
no more Medicaid,
no more CHIP,
no more FEHP or SCHIP,
push everything onto the states, which would now be their own little kingdoms,
and a "tax deduction" instead of today's tax exclusion...
in other words, PRIVATIZE EVERYTHING, GIVE IT TO THE INSURANCE COMPANIES, AND IF YOU'RE TOO OLD OR TOO POOR TO PAY, FARK YOU.

Gee, I wonder why this POS is still gathering dust?
/a dozen co-sponsors does not make this "bipartisan"
//old and poor people do vote, ya know
///single-payer/universal FTW
 
2010-02-17 02:18:25 AM  

scalpod: There are wolves, there are sheep and there are sheepdogs. And then there are sheepdogs who've gotten the taste of sheep's blood.


I think you forgot the wolf in sheep's clothing...

img651.imageshack.us
 
2010-02-17 02:28:19 AM  
Demand Single Payer!

/victim of US Health Care
 
2010-02-17 02:40:59 AM  

farkuufarkinfark: lennavan: farkuufarkinfark: Perhaps we never really had a crisis after all.

You sound like someone with health care. You're a 20 something self centered douche who cannot possibly imagine being denied health insurance for a pre-existing condition or coming down with a terribly expensive health condition like cancer where you max out your insurance, or lose your job and cannot afford to pay for your own insurance, aren't you?

Wanna know how I knew?

Sure. How do you know?

Actually, I'm 40, and my medical insurance is $115.44/month. A $4 million lifetime benefit and a $2000/yr deductible.

/self-employed and bootstrappy.


So that's not medical insurance. That's catastrophe insurance. Unless something major goes wrong, you're paying for everything out-of-pocket, and you're paying $115.44 a month for the privilege.

And what does that NOT cover? Does it cover chiropractic, dental and vision?
 
2010-02-17 03:13:03 AM  

farkuufarkinfark: lennavan: farkuufarkinfark: Perhaps we never really had a crisis after all.

You sound like someone with health care. You're a 20 something self centered douche who cannot possibly imagine being denied health insurance for a pre-existing condition or coming down with a terribly expensive health condition like cancer where you max out your insurance, or lose your job and cannot afford to pay for your own insurance, aren't you?

Wanna know how I knew?

Sure. How do you know?

Actually, I'm 40, and my medical insurance is $115.44/month. A $4 million lifetime benefit and a $2000/yr deductible.

/self-employed and bootstrappy.


Sounds like you can afford it, sounds like you're bootstrappy and could never imagine paying for health care without a job or ever be denied health care insurance.

Good for you. Sorry you're such a self centered douchebag. When you realize other people exist and it is on their backs that you are entitled to being so rich, you'll shut your mouth. But guess what? That will never happen, see you are so sheltered that you will never wake up. Good for you, congrats you win at life by being born in to victory! Woo!!!!
 
2010-02-17 03:52:17 AM  

Tarkus: I want single payer


I'll bite. You think it will cost you nothing, right?
 
2010-02-17 03:54:50 AM  

stizz: Demand Single Payer!

/victim of US Health Care


you and your victim status can kiss my arse. Give up cable, cell service, etc., and buy some damn health insurance you in-prioritizing leach.
 
2010-02-17 04:02:24 AM  

lennavan: farkuufarkinfark: lennavan: farkuufarkinfark: Perhaps we never really had a crisis after all.

You sound like someone with health care. You're a 20 something self centered douche who cannot possibly imagine being denied health insurance for a pre-existing condition or coming down with a terribly expensive health condition like cancer where you max out your insurance, or lose your job and cannot afford to pay for your own insurance, aren't you?

Wanna know how I knew?

Sure. How do you know?

Actually, I'm 40, and my medical insurance is $115.44/month. A $4 million lifetime benefit and a $2000/yr deductible.

/self-employed and bootstrappy.

Sounds like you can afford it, sounds like you're bootstrappy and could never imagine paying for health care without a job or ever be denied health care insurance.

Good for you. Sorry you're such a self centered douchebag. When you realize other people exist and it is on their backs that you are entitled to being so rich, you'll shut your mouth. But guess what? That will never happen, see you are so sheltered that you will never wake up. Good for you, congrats you win at life by being born in to victory! Woo!!!!


You gotta come with more than this. Get a farking job already!! I don't care if the employer provides HC or not, make some money and buy some damn insurance. You sound like you want it for free, which is not what either house is proposing.
 
2010-02-17 04:08:35 AM  

lennavan: Actually, I'm 40, and my medical insurance is $115.44/month. A $4 million lifetime benefit and a $2000/yr deductible.

/self-employed and bootstrappy.

Sounds like you can afford it, sounds like you're bootstrappy and could never imagine paying for health care without a job or ever be denied health care insurance.

Good for you. Sorry you're such a self centered douchebag. When you realize other people exist and it is on their backs that you are entitled to being so rich, you'll shut your mouth. But guess what? That will never happen, see you are so sheltered that you will never wake up. Good for you, congrats you win at life by being born in to victory! Woo!!!!


I'm not done here, the guy pays 115 bucks a month for insurance and is not complaining, a lot of biatch about having to pay anything out of pocket. You are the real "douchebag" for thinking people with a job don't pay anything for HC. And your attitude and obvious envy of anyone doing better than you is apparent, but you'll never sell the old "win at life".

/nope
//not gonna happen
///you want more slashies? leach?
 
2010-02-17 05:48:44 AM  
If you don't earn it, you don't deserve it.

Governments only responsibility should be keeping order as to permit the economy to grow, creating opportunity. The trickle-down economics work for everyone smart enough to get a bucket.

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."

- Alexander Tyler, 1787

Makes alot of sense, kind of contains my views of liberal/socialism, opportunistic, promising the masses free stuff.

Kind of doomed to go this way,

CEOs will have managers
Managers will have employees
Employees will always out number the rest.

When a democracy values the employee as much as the CEO, as each counts towards 1 vote, whichever politician promises more money to the employee will be a favorite. Maybe those CEOs will shrug and let everything fall apart.
 
2010-02-17 06:00:37 AM  
If you don't earn it, you don't deserve it.

I'm always baffled about how 'enlightened liberals' will giggle at the silly creationists beliefs, but fail to see the parallels between capitalism and evolution. Both at the core are "Sink or swim."

It's the single greatest way to govern a society, by letting-make.

"when the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."

-Benjamin Franklin
 
2010-02-17 06:07:06 AM  
Not to mention how many will whine about over-population and those dang Duggars, but jump at the chance to bemoan rich folk for being rich. If you're serious about over-population, the first logical choice would be to quit helping those who can't help themselves.
 
Displayed 50 of 368 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | 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