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.

(Think Progress)   Uninsured conservative blogger in hospital with liver failure. Liberal and conservative bloggers band together to raise money for his medical bills. Good job guys, now just 45 million more to go   (thinkprogress.org) divider line 441
    More: Hero, liver failure, medical bills, RedState, Blogging  
•       •       •

3715 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Aug 2013 at 9:04 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



441 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-08-01 11:51:32 PM  
Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

That would be nice, right?
 
2013-08-02 12:01:37 AM  
cdn.ebaumsworld.com
 
2013-08-02 12:22:29 AM  
img84.imageshack.us
 
2013-08-02 01:57:36 AM  
How about we all start sending him his own quotes about Roger Ebert?

http://www.sarawakreport.org/2011/07/taib-blogger-insults-islam/
 
2013-08-02 02:08:02 AM  
After reading what this asshole said about cancer-stricken Roger Ebert three years ago, I couldn't care less about his suffering.

RedState blogger Howe mocks Roger Ebert's cancer, adds, "So f**k him"

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2010/05/08/redstate-blogger-howe-mocks-r o ger-eberts-cancer/164397

[Link is posted separately because for some reason, I can't post it using HTML]

Karma's a biatch.
 
2013-08-02 02:11:59 AM  

Lorelle: After reading what this asshole said about cancer-stricken Roger Ebert three years ago, I couldn't care less about his suffering.

RedState blogger Howe mocks Roger Ebert's cancer, adds, "So f**k him"

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2010/05/08/redstate-blogger-howe-mocks-r o ger-eberts-cancer/164397

[Link is posted separately because for some reason, I can't post it using HTML]

Karma's a biatch.



 This exactly.  Good people who are a benefit to the world die every day, and that's sad.  This guy on the other hand - not so much.
 
2013-08-02 02:34:04 AM  
Liver failure? He's pretty much farked. :(
 
2013-08-02 02:49:56 AM  

themindiswatching: Liver failure? He's pretty much farked. :(


Larry Hagman, Mickey Mantle...  just a few I can think of with jacked up livers who made it quite a while longer.
 
2013-08-02 04:29:02 AM  
Some more from this POS:

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2010/02/09/redstate-editor-howe-on-f-ing - traitor-murtha-go/160256
 
2013-08-02 07:06:11 AM  

NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.


Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care. Relying on your neighbors and people who genuinely care for you to help you, that's no way to go through life, I tells ya. Gov't assistance... now that's dignified.

It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.
 
2013-08-02 07:07:27 AM  

NewportBarGuy: ...like some homeless person.


Oh... and could you explain for me what makes homeless people, bad people?
 
2013-08-02 07:18:04 AM  

Mrbogey: It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.


  Why don't you go read some of his tweets laughing at the dying Roger Ebert or being thankful for Murtha dying.  This guy's death should be celebrated, not mourned.
 
2013-08-02 07:30:03 AM  
He looks kind of young to have liver failure. Bummer. WTF is he doing without health insurance though?
 
2013-08-02 07:39:16 AM  

Mugato: He looks kind of young to have liver failure. Bummer. WTF is he doing without health insurance though?


  I can't find any tweets or anything else from this guy for 3 years.  You can do a lot of damage if you drop off the grid and do little else but drink for 3 years.
 
2013-08-02 07:40:57 AM  

Mrbogey: Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care.


You know how I know you have no idea what you're talking about?
 
2013-08-02 07:42:49 AM  
Well that was nice of them.

Mugato: WTF is he doing without health insurance though?


Well, I doubt RedState offered insurance to their bloggers. Might have been one of those folks who think "I'm young and in relatively good health, why do I need insurance?" too.
 
2013-08-02 07:43:28 AM  

themindiswatching: Liver failure? He's pretty much farked. :(


Depends on what the cause is. Depending on what's causing the liver failure it may be treatable and he'll regain liver function or yeah unless he gets a transplant he's farked. Just depends on what's causing it.
 
2013-08-02 07:47:37 AM  

Aarontology: Well, I doubt RedState offered insurance to their bloggers. Might have been one of those folks who think "I'm young and in relatively good health, why do I need insurance?" too.


Yeah but he has kids, that's pretty irresponsible.

CPT Ethanolic: Larry Hagman, Mickey Mantle...  just a few I can think of with jacked up livers who made it quite a while longer.


They're called transplants and they can be a little hard to get if you're not Larry Hagman or Mickey Mantle.
 
2013-08-02 07:47:59 AM  

WhyteRaven74: themindiswatching: Liver failure? He's pretty much farked. :(

Depends on what the cause is. Depending on what's causing the liver failure it may be treatable and he'll regain liver function or yeah unless he gets a transplant he's farked. Just depends on what's causing it.



The guy was an alcoholic.  Many tweets from him involving vodka.
 
2013-08-02 07:49:56 AM  

Mugato: They're called transplants and they can be a little hard to get if you're not Larry Hagman or Mickey Mantle.


... or David Crosby...  sadly, very true.
 
2013-08-02 07:54:37 AM  

CPT Ethanolic: The guy was an alcoholic. Many tweets from him involving vodka.


Yeah that's not good then. Especially since I don't think he's very old either.
 
2013-08-02 08:10:25 AM  
nice headline subby.
 
2013-08-02 08:18:30 AM  
A conservative blogger needs health insurance.

encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-02 08:32:11 AM  

NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.


Not bootstrappy enough.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-02 08:33:17 AM  
If he lives long enough he can just get some insurance through his states Obamacare exchange.

Unless he would rather be a pan handler.
 
2013-08-02 08:37:07 AM  

Mrbogey: Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care


He should have given Aetna or Aflac, or Providence, or Humana thousands of his bootstrappy dollars over the years so some faceless corporate accountant could rescind his policy for not disclosing he had acne in high school.
 
2013-08-02 08:46:19 AM  
Hopefully, he'll learn a lesson about what it's like to have no health insurance in America when sudden illness strikes.

But, no. He'll probably learn the default "libertarian" lesson of "Hey, there's no need for government healthcare because if you get sick, charities and kind strangers will take care of it all!"
 
2013-08-02 08:50:18 AM  

Mrbogey: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care. Relying on your neighbors and people who genuinely care for you to help you, that's no way to go through life, I tells ya. Gov't assistance... now that's dignified.

It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.


A handout is a handout.  This man sits in harsh judgement of others, yet takes no responsibility for himself.
 
2013-08-02 09:09:57 AM  
Too bad he didn't just smoke weed
 
2013-08-02 09:10:20 AM  
See, why can't every other person in the country follow his lead and rely upon charity for their basic needs
 
2013-08-02 09:10:52 AM  
If medical costs weren't so inflated and docs were allowed to compete across state-lines, maybe his treatment would have been affordable.
 
2013-08-02 09:11:32 AM  

Diogenes: Mrbogey: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care. Relying on your neighbors and people who genuinely care for you to help you, that's no way to go through life, I tells ya. Gov't assistance... now that's dignified.

It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.

A handout is a handout.  This man sits in harsh judgement of others, yet takes no responsibility for himself.


Sic semper derpis
 
2013-08-02 09:12:41 AM  
I hope the more conservative people of the country will eventually realize that helping to pay or the healthcare of another person is the basis of socialized medicine.

If you donate money to an uninsured person, you are literally practicing the system you abhor.
 
2013-08-02 09:12:45 AM  
Way to become a mooching parasite, Captain Bootstrap.
Next time, learn how to hold your liquor.
 
182
2013-08-02 09:12:49 AM  

NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

That would be nice, right?


done in one.
 
2013-08-02 09:13:11 AM  
Maybe he can get RON PAUL to help and....oh wait.
 
2013-08-02 09:13:22 AM  
I assume he's going to get a party transplant while he's in the hospital?

Oh, sorry, I'm sure he'll receive double down as a treatment.

//Republicanism- what you suffer from until you actually suffer and then you suffer denial
 
2013-08-02 09:17:05 AM  

Diogenes: Mrbogey: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care. Relying on your neighbors and people who genuinely care for you to help you, that's no way to go through life, I tells ya. Gov't assistance... now that's dignified.

It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.

A handout is a handout.  This man sits in harsh judgement of others, yet takes no responsibility for himself.



This.  It's the cognitive dissonance that kills me.  So this guy is being helped by the generosity of strangers.  But what about a person who doesn't have presence on the internet, or a network of wealthy friends to raise money for them?  They're just screwed AND they deserve to be screwed?

How can he celebrate the generosity of strangers in this situation, but condemn similarly situated people (who weren't so lucky) as an "irresponsible" person who "doesn't take responsibility for their own life" and therefore deserves to not have medical treatment?
 
2013-08-02 09:18:21 AM  

Diogenes: Mrbogey: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care. Relying on your neighbors and people who genuinely care for you to help you, that's no way to go through life, I tells ya. Gov't assistance... now that's dignified.

It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.

A handout is a handout.  This man sits in harsh judgement of others, yet takes no responsibility for himself.


Well, he IS a Republican...

Also - I hope his suffering and death get televised on FOX, so All Republicans can see the inevitable end result of their beliefs.

Hey Republicans (e.g. Teabaggers, Libertarians, birthers, Birchers, KKK, fundamentalists, etc): The suffering and death of those who cannot afford health care is at the very core of your beliefs. Enjoy the Hell you have knowingly and willingly brought on yourselves.
 
2013-08-02 09:19:17 AM  

stoli n coke: Way to become a mooching parasite, Captain Bootstrap.

 
2013-08-02 09:20:15 AM  

pigeonstopper: I hope the more conservative people of the country will eventually realize that helping to pay or the healthcare of another person is the basis of socialized medicine.

If you donate money to an uninsured person, you are literally practicing the system you abhor.



Giving to charitable causes does kind of undermine the whole "government handouts create a society of makers and takers" mantra, doesn't it?  But then again t I forgot, rich people are way more reliable, high-minded, and compassionate than "the government."
 
2013-08-02 09:20:52 AM  
No insurance? No problem. Right up until it becomes a problem, of course. Then the rest of us get to pick up the slack.
 
2013-08-02 09:21:05 AM  

Chummer45: How can he celebrate the generosity of strangers in this situation, but condemn similarly situated people (who weren't so lucky) as an "irresponsible" person who "doesn't take responsibility for their own life" and therefore deserves to not have medical treatment?


If you don't have family and friends wealthy enough or internet savvy enough to raise money for your care you just made poor life choices, breh... so conscience clear, booyah! suck it libs!
 
2013-08-02 09:21:06 AM  

NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

That would be nice, right?


Imagine if he and his coworkers joined together in some kind of union for the purpose of negotiating with RedState to get health insurance added as a pay benefit.
 
2013-08-02 09:21:27 AM  
No man is an island,
Entire of itself,
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thy friend's
Or of thine own were:
Any man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind,
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
 
2013-08-02 09:21:35 AM  

vernonFL: A conservative blogger needs health insurance.

[encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com image 259x194]


He should have sold those ten thousand spoons.
 
2013-08-02 09:23:37 AM  

Aristocles: If medical costs weren't so inflated and docs were allowed to compete across state-lines, maybe his treatment would have been affordable.


And if he'd had insurance, he'd have spent his own money on the care he's now getting. (I know that's not how it works - the premium I pay today goes mostly to other peoples' claims tomorrow, and when I file a claim, their premia come to me. I'm simplifying.)

Libertarian moocher is a mooch.

Let's say he's been without insurance for the last 3 years. His portion of an employer's plan premium would have been about $951/year, or $79.25/month. For 3 years or 36 months, he chose to spend $2,853 on everything but planning for this kind of contingency. $2800 wouldn't be near enough to cover this illness, sure, but the insurance he bought with it would have, even if you figure in a $10k deductible (his goal was $25k).

Everyone who donated has financed his awful planning. Shouldn't a father of two young girls be a better life-planner? Isn't that the responsible, "family-oriented" thing to do, Libertarians?
 
2013-08-02 09:24:35 AM  
You know, I'm glad that people were inspired to help.  I don't wish a painful, miserable death for anyone, much less young parents just because I disagree with their blowhard politics.  Yes, there is some karmic justice in him suffering so after openly mocking others' suffering, although he was just being a good Christian, perfectly in line with the Republican Bible.

However, what this will inevitably lead to is his charitable salvation being touted as the true way for this country, and that if he can get others to save him out of the goodness of their hearts, why can't everyone?  And that will be a god damned shame.
 
2013-08-02 09:26:38 AM  
What a uniquely American story - people pitching in to help because we refuse to pitch in to help.
 
2013-08-02 09:26:43 AM  
Bloggers should never get charity.
 
2013-08-02 09:28:03 AM  

CPT Ethanolic: The guy was an alcoholic. Many tweets from him involving vodka.


Good.  They're hesitant to give transplants to people that have substance abuse problems.

Karma, with a side of personal responsibility irony.  I like it.
 
2013-08-02 09:28:43 AM  
ppffffft.....I wish him well, but will save my assistance to those who do not have the luxury of writing blog posts that seek to exclude and marginalize others. Besides, I am sure the Koch Brothers, Sean Hannity, Josh Trevino, Ben Domenech or Mike Krempasky will be right at his side with open wallets and schmoopy conservative love. Yes?

/eyeroll.jpg
 
2013-08-02 09:29:21 AM  

Dr Dreidel: Aristocles: If medical costs weren't so inflated and docs were allowed to compete across state-lines, maybe his treatment would have been affordable.

And if he'd had insurance, he'd have spent his own money on the care he's now getting. (I know that's not how it works - the premium I pay today goes mostly to other peoples' claims tomorrow, and when I file a claim, their premia come to me. I'm simplifying.)

Libertarian moocher is a mooch.

Let's say he's been without insurance for the last 3 years. His portion of an employer's plan premium would have been about $951/year, or $79.25/month. For 3 years or 36 months, he chose to spend $2,853 on everything but planning for this kind of contingency. $2800 wouldn't be near enough to cover this illness, sure, but the insurance he bought with it would have, even if you figure in a $10k deductible (his goal was $25k).

Everyone who donated has financed his awful planning. Shouldn't a father of two young girls be a better life-planner? Isn't that the responsible, "family-oriented" thing to do, Libertarians?



Libertarians aren't exactly known for consistency. Hell, Ayn Rand, the patron saint of those assholes, died with Social Security and Medicare paying for her lung cancer treatment.

This is just another classic example of "IT'S DIFFERENT WHEN I DO IT!"
 
2013-08-02 09:29:38 AM  

born_yesterday: CPT Ethanolic: The guy was an alcoholic. Many tweets from him involving vodka.

Good.  They're hesitant to give transplants to people that have substance abuse problems.

Karma, with a side of personal responsibility irony.  I like it.


Siskel & Ebert give this post two thumbs up!
 
2013-08-02 09:30:02 AM  

qorkfiend: No insurance? No problem. Right up until it becomes a problem, of course. Then the rest of us get to pick up the slack.


How is mandatory insurance not making everyone pickup the slack for those who get sick?
What you pay in covers for what the insurers pay out on those who got sick. We're simply debating whether payment is done by voluntary charity or an automatic deduction from our wages.

The problem is it isn't just the lack of insurance, but the outrageous pricing.  Insurance would be easier to afford (and you could sooner cover the bills without it) if we could drag the costs of hospitalization back down to reasonable levels.

I'd rather see a conversation about that than one for how best to give the middlemen their money.
 
2013-08-02 09:30:28 AM  
Private handouts are ok and bootstrappy, public ones are not and turn you into a moocher. Got it.
 
2013-08-02 09:31:18 AM  

Dr Dreidel: Aristocles: If medical costs weren't so inflated and docs were allowed to compete across state-lines, maybe his treatment would have been affordable.

And if he'd had insurance, he'd have spent his own money on the care he's now getting. (I know that's not how it works - the premium I pay today goes mostly to other peoples' claims tomorrow, and when I file a claim, their premia come to me. I'm simplifying.)

Libertarian moocher is a mooch.

Let's say he's been without insurance for the last 3 years. His portion of an employer's plan premium would have been about $951/year, or $79.25/month. For 3 years or 36 months, he chose to spend $2,853 on everything but planning for this kind of contingency. $2800 wouldn't be near enough to cover this illness, sure, but the insurance he bought with it would have, even if you figure in a $10k deductible (his goal was $25k).

Everyone who donated has financed his awful planning. Shouldn't a father of two young girls be a better life-planner? Isn't that the responsible, "family-oriented" thing to do, Libertarians?


Wait, you mean actually practice what you preach? nah, that sounds like too much work. Now, give me free stuff cuz it's different when it's for me...
 
2013-08-02 09:31:47 AM  

CPT Ethanolic: Mugato: They're called transplants and they can be a little hard to get if you're not Larry Hagman or Mickey Mantle.

... or David Crosby...  sadly, very true.


Um, no.

Liver transplants aren't a "wait in line for your turn" allocation system. People with high MELD scores (MELD = composite indicator of liver function) rise to the top of the list. The fact that some people get liver transplants faster than others has almost* nothing to do with fame or money.

*'Almost' only because people with a lot of money can go to regions (donation service areas) where the wait time within a given MELD score is shorter, increasing their odds. But there's no real way to game the system within a region and get your patient a liver transplant ahead of the system without all the transplant surgeons in nearby hospitals yelling their heads off to UNOS and their senators.
 
2013-08-02 09:32:23 AM  

way south: I'd rather see a conversation about that than one for how best to give the middlemen their money.


By removing the middlemen, and going straight to government-paid healthcare.

That would greatly reduce the costs of health care. Sort of like how we have government paid police and fire departments: When the elasticity of a good can get to "Buy this good, right now, or you will die", free market theory doesn't really work.
 
2013-08-02 09:32:39 AM  

stoli n coke: Dr Dreidel: Aristocles: If medical costs weren't so inflated and docs were allowed to compete across state-lines, maybe his treatment would have been affordable.

And if he'd had insurance, he'd have spent his own money on the care he's now getting. (I know that's not how it works - the premium I pay today goes mostly to other peoples' claims tomorrow, and when I file a claim, their premia come to me. I'm simplifying.)

Libertarian moocher is a mooch.

Let's say he's been without insurance for the last 3 years. His portion of an employer's plan premium would have been about $951/year, or $79.25/month. For 3 years or 36 months, he chose to spend $2,853 on everything but planning for this kind of contingency. $2800 wouldn't be near enough to cover this illness, sure, but the insurance he bought with it would have, even if you figure in a $10k deductible (his goal was $25k).

Everyone who donated has financed his awful planning. Shouldn't a father of two young girls be a better life-planner? Isn't that the responsible, "family-oriented" thing to do, Libertarians?


Libertarians aren't exactly known for consistency. Hell, Ayn Rand, the patron saint of those assholes, died with Social Security and Medicare paying for her lung cancer treatment.

This is just another classic example of "IT'S DIFFERENT WHEN I DO IT!"


As for what should happen to this guy, the libertarian answer is probably: accept the charity if it is offered, but "charity" shouldn't be forced so if it doesn't come in, start selling off your shait.

As for Ayn Rand, did she pay into Social Security and Medicare when she paid taxes?
 
2013-08-02 09:32:42 AM  

way south: The problem is it isn't just the lack of insurance, but the outrageous pricing. Insurance would be easier to afford (and you could sooner cover the bills without it) if we could drag the costs of hospitalization back down to reasonable levels.


So long as people can still turn a profit on health insurance, AMIRITE?
 
2013-08-02 09:33:17 AM  
Shame on him for using his daughters to guilt people into giving him money. If he loved them so much he would have put down the bottle and bought them some health insurance.
 
2013-08-02 09:33:29 AM  
And let's not forget Ron Paul's chief of staff, uninsured and dead of the flu, or some such.

But COMMUNISM.
 
2013-08-02 09:35:03 AM  
They should have let him die. Compassion isn't a Real American value.
 
2013-08-02 09:36:14 AM  

HotIgneous Intruder: And let's not forget Ron Paul's chief of staff, uninsured and dead of the flu, or some such.

But COMMUNISM.


Communism is well-intended, and the road to hell is paved with good intentions.  The road to heaven is paved with the bootstraps of patriots.

Checkmate.
 
2013-08-02 09:38:13 AM  
He sounds like a socialist or communist! Why should we have to pay for his bills?!
 
2013-08-02 09:39:39 AM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: He sounds like a socialist or communist! Why should we have to pay for his bills?!


Hey, if dying for lack of insurance is good enough for a vet, then it's good enough for this libstain!
 
2013-08-02 09:40:56 AM  
Let him walk the walk, let him and his family be financially ruined.
 
2013-08-02 09:41:34 AM  
This sort of thing makes absolutely no sense... unless, as I've long maintained, kindness is hardwired into human genes.

Empathy - the ability to perceive the emotional state of another; especially, to feel his suffering.
Compassion - the urge to do something about another's suffering, because it's making you suffer.
Kindness - the act of doing something about another's suffering, with no ROI from the one helped.

These three things fit together in a feedback loop that forms and strengthens societal bonds. Acts of kindness build social capital, if they are known, or at least expectations of reciprocity if they are known only to oneself.

A person with a reputation for kindness generally receives support from society when he needs it, because his kindness is useful to others.  Religions teach people to have faith that kindness, especiallyif done anonymously, will be rewarded by God.  So important is kindness that both secular and religious institutions place enormous value upon it and encourage it mightily.

Behavior which enhances survival prospects may, over many generations, result in a biofeedback mechanism that gives an organism a neurochemical reward for such behavior.  In short, acts of kindness make you feel better, inclining you to be kind more often.

It's always about feeling better.
 
2013-08-02 09:42:21 AM  

way south: qorkfiend: No insurance? No problem. Right up until it becomes a problem, of course. Then the rest of us get to pick up the slack.

How is mandatory insurance not making everyone pickup the slack for those who get sick?
What you pay in covers for what the insurers pay out on those who got sick. We're simply debating whether payment is done by voluntary charity or an automatic deduction from our wages.

The problem is it isn't just the lack of insurance, but the outrageous pricing.  Insurance would be easier to afford (and you could sooner cover the bills without it) if we could drag the costs of hospitalization back down to reasonable levels.

I'd rather see a conversation about that than one for how best to give the middlemen their money.


Okay. Let's start with the fact that every other developed country on the planet spends less money on health care than we in America do. Are there any common denominators there? It turns out there are; every single one of those countries uses government power to set prices for health care services.
 
2013-08-02 09:43:28 AM  
Seems to me the bootstrappy thing to do would be to run up enormous medical bills and simply not pay them.  BK out if you have to.  It's the American way.
 
2013-08-02 09:44:44 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: This sort of thing makes absolutely no sense... unless, as I've long maintained, kindness is hardwired into human genes.

Empathy - the ability to perceive the emotional state of another; especially, to feel his suffering.
Compassion - the urge to do something about another's suffering, because it's making you suffer.
Kindness - the act of doing something about another's suffering, with no ROI from the one helped.


I disagree that the three are tied up together. One can show empathy and do nothing to help. Others can feel no empathy at all but act in what will be perceived from an observer to be compassion or kindness.
 
2013-08-02 09:45:22 AM  
Liver failure, so is this guy a drunk, a doper or did he get Hepatitis from some random sex encounter?


I am just asking questions here.
 
2013-08-02 09:48:39 AM  

RexTalionis: BarkingUnicorn: This sort of thing makes absolutely no sense... unless, as I've long maintained, kindness is hardwired into human genes.

Empathy - the ability to perceive the emotional state of another; especially, to feel his suffering.
Compassion - the urge to do something about another's suffering, because it's making you suffer.
Kindness - the act of doing something about another's suffering, with no ROI from the one helped.

I disagree that the three are tied up together. One can show empathy and do nothing to help. Others can feel no empathy at all but act in what will be perceived from an observer to be compassion or kindness.


They may not be, but I think he's right about cooperation being an evolved behavior that helps our genes survive and thrive.
 
2013-08-02 09:49:45 AM  
There are 45 million Uninsured conservative bloggers in the US?!!

I think I found one of our problems
 
2013-08-02 09:49:59 AM  
After reading a bit about this douchebag I think they should keep his liver and transplant the rest of him.  Christ, what a shiatstain.
 
2013-08-02 09:50:05 AM  
As a staunch conservative capitalist, I have to tell this fellow that he represents a terrible investment.
 
2013-08-02 09:50:22 AM  
Uninsured conservative blogger in hospital with liver failure. = 47%er

//some people are just takers and always will be, the GOP is not concerned with them we are concerned with the middle class who works to provide for themselves. - Mittens
 
2013-08-02 09:52:25 AM  

spongeboob: Liver failure, so is this guy a drunk, a doper or did he get Hepatitis from some random sex encounter?


I am just asking questions here.


Or cancer. Or accidental Tylenol overdose. Or a number of other causes which do not point to personal moral failings on his part.
 
2013-08-02 09:52:50 AM  

Chummer45: No man is an island,
Entire of itself,
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thy friend's
Or of thine own were:
Any man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind,
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.


And a rock feels no pain,
And an island never cries.

That song is one of the greatest trolls ever.  Millions bought it and listened to it just to vehemently disagree with it. :-)
 
2013-08-02 09:53:18 AM  
Should've let him die. So long as we keep bailing out failed conservative policies, they're never going to learn. Sure there's a chance that this guy will take this situation, learn from it, and come out with an empathetic mindset that understands that relying on charity for basic medical care is untenable, but most likely he's going internalize his derp using the rationale that he deserved saving over everyone else or have an "I've been on welfare and food stamps and nobody helped me" moment.

Let conservatives lie in their bed for once.
 
2013-08-02 09:53:33 AM  
"He'll be dead really, really soon, so fark him!"

Is what Caleb Howe said about Roger Ebert when he was dying of cancer.


I know it's morally the right thing to do and all and we're supposed to act better than drunken d-bags who behave horribly towards other human beings, but I'm still having a hard time with this one.  :/
 
2013-08-02 09:54:28 AM  
Hey, It's God's will and the human nature.
 
2013-08-02 09:55:02 AM  
I offered to share some of my Health Care a couple weeks ago...

I rescind.

Does this not remind you of how the right-wing opened their eyes to stem-cells after Saint Reagan started to go downhill?
 
2013-08-02 09:55:53 AM  
Oh, the sweet rush of schadenfreude.
 
2013-08-02 09:56:03 AM  

BunkoSquad: What a uniquely American story - people pitching in to help because we refuse to pitch in to help.


It's the difference between being kind or mugged.
 
2013-08-02 09:56:16 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: As a staunch conservative capitalist, I have to tell this fellow that he represents a terrible investment.


Doesn't he have a whole bunch of perfectly good organs he could sell?  Shouldn't he have to sell those to avoid going into bankruptcy first?

I bet he still has a refrigerator, too.

/Tired of America-haters like this mooching off of people
 
2013-08-02 09:57:19 AM  
I can't wait until he recovers from his transplant enough to start blogging about how people who can't pay their own way through life are trash who deserve utter scorn, and how medical bankruptcy is a myth because hey, he got a liver transplant and doesn't owe jack shiat but a smile and a hug.
 
2013-08-02 09:58:26 AM  
This reminds me a little of the GOPers that are staunchly against gay rights . . . until a family member turns out to be gay.  Then, they change their position overnight.  It seems to be par for the course for these conservatives - unable to back something that doesn't affect them personally, until it affects them personally.
 
2013-08-02 09:58:27 AM  
Everybody begging everybody for money is a realistic solution to the rising cost of healthcare.

Or, you know, we all just chip in via taxes and let the government handle the payments to healthcare providers.

Nah, then I wouldn't get the pleasure of ignoring someone's pleas for money and knowing that I helped kill them.
 
2013-08-02 09:59:23 AM  

BSABSVR: I can't wait until he recovers from his transplant enough to start blogging about how people who can't pay their own way through life are trash who deserve utter scorn, and how medical bankruptcy is a myth because hey, he got a liver transplant and doesn't owe jack shiat but a smile and a hug.


If he's an alcoholic, unless he's very rich or famous, the odds of him getting a transplant are pretty slim.
 
2013-08-02 09:59:37 AM  

LL316: Bloggers should never get charity.


They don't.  They get tips for services rendered.

I ran a blog once upon a time, and at the bottom  of each post was a simple pitch:    "If you liked what you've read, please leave a tip."  A tip jar icon led to my Paypal account. I got tons of derisive comments and a couple hundred bucks a month, on average.
 
2013-08-02 10:00:47 AM  
Alcoholic conservative blogger?  Sir, you are no P. J. O'Rourke.
 
2013-08-02 10:00:54 AM  
Also reminds me a little of this: http://www.savewalterwhite.com/
 
2013-08-02 10:01:45 AM  

stoli n coke: If he's an alcoholic, unless he's very rich or famous, the odds of him getting a transplant are pretty slim.


How can they prove he's an alcoholic?

/may be relevant to my interests someday
 
2013-08-02 10:02:02 AM  
So why didn't this bootstrappy fellow have insurance?
 
2013-08-02 10:04:13 AM  

qorkfiend: No insurance? No problem. Right up until it becomes a problem, of course. Then the rest of us get to pick up the slack.


He has insurance and has been paying premiums for it.  His insurance is the reputation he has built with his labor.  Reputation is social capital.  It can be converted to money at need.
 
2013-08-02 10:05:38 AM  

Mrbogey: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care. Relying on your neighbors and people who genuinely care for you to help you, that's no way to go through life, I tells ya. Gov't assistance... now that's dignified.

It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.


Because it's totally practical to have your medical coverage by begging for donations.  I suggest you do this for the lulz.
 
2013-08-02 10:06:15 AM  

Aristocles: As for what should happen to this guy, the libertarian answer is probably: accept the charity if it is offered, but "charity" shouldn't be forced so if it doesn't come in, start selling off your shait.


The problem here is it wasn't his Rich Uncle Pennybags who set up this charity for him, he did it for himself when his plan of "I won't get sick, I'm a healthy young man with two photogenic daughters!" failed. He'd have had much better results paying into a PRIVATE health care plan for the last 3 years (or even more!), and wouldn't have had to rely on the kindness of strangers.

Of course, maybe this is a call to action. Perhaps people should pool their money together to plan for such health eventualities, their individual contributions based on some calculation of their expected health versus expected treatment costs. Then, when someone needs to draw from this pool, they submit an application for some funds, and after the request gets approved they are disbursed directly to the care provider (to minimize the work required of the afflicted person). That way, everyone's got "skin in the game", and everyone has access to the care they might need without resorting to forcing care through EMTALA or begging for charity.

That seems like an appropriately bootstrappy way of providing care, don't you think?
 
2013-08-02 10:06:40 AM  

Mugato: stoli n coke: If he's an alcoholic, unless he's very rich or famous, the odds of him getting a transplant are pretty slim.

How can they prove he's an alcoholic?

/may be relevant to my interests someday


They don't prove you have an uncontrollable urge to drink.  They just prove that you've drunk a lot by looking at physical evidence.
 
2013-08-02 10:06:57 AM  

Mugato: stoli n coke: If he's an alcoholic, unless he's very rich or famous, the odds of him getting a transplant are pretty slim.

How can they prove he's an alcoholic?

/may be relevant to my interests someday



Well, according to some farkers, he seemed to have more than a few blogs about his enjoyment of heavy drinking. That won't help his case if doctors get wind of it.
 
2013-08-02 10:07:22 AM  

draypresct: spongeboob: Liver failure, so is this guy a drunk, a doper or did he get Hepatitis from some random sex encounter?


I am just asking questions here.

Or cancer. Or accidental Tylenol overdose. Or a number of other causes which do not point to personal moral failings on his part.


I don't believe that the original poster was being judgmental, but rather mocking the judgmentalism that is so common amongst conservative bloggers.

I don't care why he got sick.  I want to know why he did not have health insurance especially since he has young children.
 
2013-08-02 10:07:35 AM  
I have known two really decent human beings who have dropped dead before the age of 35. Both had families and took good care of themselves. One of them could of possible lived if he had insurance. My question is, would this guy have compassion and sympathy for a liberal in his shoes. I'm not so sure.

I'll use my money here ( great guy, had rare heart abnormality and died after exercising) -

http://cadmf.org/events/
 
2013-08-02 10:08:01 AM  

Fart_Machine: Because it's totally practical to have your medical coverage by begging for donations.  I suggest you do this for the lulz.


I'm sick of getting 70 million emails each day asking me to contribute to a stranger's healthcare.  It's really inefficient if you ask me.
 
2013-08-02 10:08:07 AM  

Graffito: So why didn't this bootstrappy fellow have insurance?


He has insurance:  his reputation, which can be funded without money and converted to money at need.

Don't you watch evangelical TV?  You can see it in action there.
 
2013-08-02 10:08:14 AM  

Chummer45: No man is an island,
Entire of itself,
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thy friend's
Or of thine own were:
Any man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind,
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.


We are Donne here.
 
2013-08-02 10:08:47 AM  

doyner: Mrbogey: Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care

He should have given Aetna or Aflac, or Providence, or Humana thousands of his bootstrappy dollars over the years so some faceless corporate accountant could rescind his policy for not disclosing he had acne in high school.


Flawless victory.
 
2013-08-02 10:09:32 AM  

Mrbogey: It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.


Or maybe those on the left just aren't raging sociopaths.  Maybe the Tea Baggers have spent so much time defining empathy as a vice that they don't recognize genuine human compassion.
 
2013-08-02 10:10:18 AM  

Rann Xerox: We are Donne here.


every man is an island

-john derppe
 
2013-08-02 10:10:56 AM  

tricycleracer: Fart_Machine: Because it's totally practical to have your medical coverage by begging for donations.  I suggest you do this for the lulz.

I'm sick of getting 70 million emails each day asking me to contribute to a stranger's healthcare.  It's really inefficient if you ask me.


Much more efficient to pass a law that takes your money.  I'm serious, it is more efficient.
 
2013-08-02 10:11:51 AM  
By helping him this is just going to validate his anti-single payer screed.  I say we treat him like a conservative and ask him to pray, pay and/or GTFO of the hospital if he can't afford treatment for his illness.
 
2013-08-02 10:12:33 AM  

Mentat: Mrbogey: It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.

Or maybe those on the left just aren't raging sociopaths.  Maybe the Tea Baggers have spent so much time defining empathy as a vice that they don't recognize genuine human compassion.


Whoever misuses that word first loses.  Take a seat over there.
 
2013-08-02 10:12:34 AM  

stoli n coke: BSABSVR: I can't wait until he recovers from his transplant enough to start blogging about how people who can't pay their own way through life are trash who deserve utter scorn, and how medical bankruptcy is a myth because hey, he got a liver transplant and doesn't owe jack shiat but a smile and a hug.

If he's an alcoholic, unless he's very rich or famous, the odds of him getting a transplant are pretty slim.


True, but dumb tweets about vodka don't make you an alcoholic.
 
2013-08-02 10:13:15 AM  

BSABSVR: stoli n coke: BSABSVR: I can't wait until he recovers from his transplant enough to start blogging about how people who can't pay their own way through life are trash who deserve utter scorn, and how medical bankruptcy is a myth because hey, he got a liver transplant and doesn't owe jack shiat but a smile and a hug.

If he's an alcoholic, unless he's very rich or famous, the odds of him getting a transplant are pretty slim.

True, but dumb tweets about vodka don't make you an alcoholic.


They  do if you read enough of them.
 
2013-08-02 10:13:43 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: tricycleracer: Fart_Machine: Because it's totally practical to have your medical coverage by begging for donations.  I suggest you do this for the lulz.

I'm sick of getting 70 million emails each day asking me to contribute to a stranger's healthcare.  It's really inefficient if you ask me.

Much more efficient to pass a law that takes your money.  I'm serious, it is more efficient.


You think single-payer is less efficient than dozens of little health insurance fiefdoms?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-02 10:14:59 AM  

Aristocles: If medical costs weren't so inflated and docs were allowed to compete across state-lines, maybe his treatment would have been affordable.


Docs aren't allowed to compete across state lines?  Where did you get that?
 
2013-08-02 10:15:03 AM  
Because Howe doesn't have health insurance, he and his family are worried that they won't be able to handle the impending bills

Not very bootstrappy, if you ask me....

Sure, this seems like a nice story about people putting aside their differences and helping out a fellow human being. First, though, I think we need to circulate a few of the things he has said, most notable what he had to say about Roger Ebert when HE was dying of cancer. These need to go directly to his family, so that they will personally know what it's like. After that, MAYBE the "Socialists" of the country could help this guy out. Apparently he got faulty bootstraps...

Seriously, what a farking douche.

Yeah, let's lob a couple of these around(With the name changed), and then see how long until the Conservative Blogosphere starts whining about "attacks" on this "poor man". Then we could RE-circulate them with the original names thrown in and enjoy the crickets...

www.sarawakreport.org

This is why the professional bloggers need to think a little more deeply about what they say. I'll give as many shiats for his suffering as he gave for someone else's.
 
2013-08-02 10:18:13 AM  
Prediction: this blogger will conclude that it was his hard work that got him those donations. After all, had he not been a prominent conservative blogger but instead some homeless person, even liberals wouldn't have banded together to save him.
 
2013-08-02 10:18:29 AM  

Jackson Herring: Rann Xerox: We are Donne here.

every man is an island

-john derppe


And, when the bell tolls, who the hell cares?  It wasn't me.
 
2013-08-02 10:21:57 AM  
www.sarawakreport.org

Donate 20 dollars and get a framed printout of his hateful posts!
 
2013-08-02 10:22:36 AM  

vygramul: Prediction: this blogger will conclude that it was his hard work that got him those donations. After all, had he not been a prominent conservative blogger but instead some homeless person, even liberals wouldn't have banded together to save him.


It's the free market at work.
 
2013-08-02 10:22:39 AM  
Waste of money.
 
2013-08-02 10:24:05 AM  

Mikey1969: This is why the professional bloggers need to think a little more deeply about what they say. I'll give as many shiats for his suffering as he gave for someone else's.


After reading those, I'm kinda hoping his caretakers "misplace" his painkillers.

And his chemotherapeutics.

And give his transplant liver to the new resident surgeon, Dr. Lecter
 
2013-08-02 10:24:13 AM  

Mrbogey: It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.


Having read what this guy wrote about Roger Ebert when HE was dying from cancer, this guy can fark off.

/And die...
//He gets THAT much "sympathy", the same amount that he was willing to give. It's only fair.
 
2013-08-02 10:24:49 AM  

way south: The problem is it isn't just the lack of insurance, but the outrageous pricing


Do you have a citation for this, and how do you think it should be fixed?

And lack of insurance or under insurance is one of the components of why pricing is high, especially with hospitals.
A person with no insurance and no means of paying for health care negelects treating a simple health matter and ends up in the ER, the person can't pay and the hospital has to absorb that, but the hospital can't just eat that expense the next person in line pays more to help defray the uninsured's cost.  The only way you can stop that is to be okay with people letting people drop dead in the street.

What about other ways to constrain cost, well then you are going to have to talk about Real Honest to God Death Panels.  The majority of health care costs are at the end of life, should we be doing EVERYTHING to keep granny alive for one more Christmas?

How about miracle stories, a baby born at 24 weeks is going to require a buttload of expensive medical care.  How about some 24 year old who is involved in a major trauma and is saved when a few years ago they would have died.  The miracle drug/operation/therapy that saved them requires not only the sigificant expense of the current treatment but R&D costs.  And both of theses examples will probably have significant residual costs.
 
2013-08-02 10:24:50 AM  
As if I needed any more reason to loathe this farker, he's a filthy hypocrite, as well.

http://www.redstate.com/absentee/2009/08/28/respect-the-dead/
 
2013-08-02 10:27:29 AM  
My friend's dad had liver failure and a liver replacement.  Lucky enough to have a donor (motorcycle accident) before it was too late.

It cost him and his family absolutely nothing.  Nice thing about living in Canada.
 
2013-08-02 10:29:17 AM  

Headso: [www.sarawakreport.org image 506x376]

Donate 20 dollars and get a framed printout of his hateful posts!


I was all set to punch the cirrhosis out of Howe's fat liver, but then I remembered. And I was like ... sweet!
 
2013-08-02 10:29:20 AM  

vernonFL: A conservative blogger who badmouthed another person dying of cancer just a few short years ago is now dying of cancer and needs health insurance.

[encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com image 259x194]


FTFY, I just think it rounds out the whole thing better.
 
2013-08-02 10:29:34 AM  

Dr Dreidel: Everyone who donated has financed his awful planning. Shouldn't a father of two young girls be a better life-planner? Isn't that the responsible, "family-oriented" thing to do, Libertarians?


I now wonder where his daughters get their insurance from.
 
2013-08-02 10:29:53 AM  
Is there any way we can get the tax man involved here? Treat this as bonus income.
 
2013-08-02 10:31:39 AM  
He's probably blaming Obamacare for not having insurance.
 
2013-08-02 10:32:19 AM  

tricycleracer: BarkingUnicorn: tricycleracer: Fart_Machine: Because it's totally practical to have your medical coverage by begging for donations.  I suggest you do this for the lulz.

I'm sick of getting 70 million emails each day asking me to contribute to a stranger's healthcare.  It's really inefficient if you ask me.

Much more efficient to pass a law that takes your money.  I'm serious, it is more efficient.

You think single-payer is less efficient than dozens of little health insurance fiefdoms?


You cannot read more than one sentence at a time, apparently.
 
2013-08-02 10:34:24 AM  
Here is where I stop and wonder about the mandate to buy insurance. One of my biggest beefs with Obamacare is that it requires you to buy health insurance. Outside of a basic set of what's covered, you could be boned on things like this, anyway. You still pick what your coverage outside of the basics are covered, especially since the states get to decide a lot of what should be covered within their borders.

Hit depression? Sorry, your insurance doesn't cover that kind of mental health issue because your state hates you. Start drinking from the depression and kill your liver? Sorry, that's "personal responsibility" because your state hates you.

This could, conceivably, happen to a Liberal blogger who would delight in the horrible death of Glenn Beck when it happened. See, that's the scary part. Even if this blogger had done everything right, he still might be up a crick without a paddle and need to turn to blogger friends to pay for it.

I wish the Republicans would follow through with the threatened repeal of Obamacare so that a real health-care payment (only) system could be implemented.
 
2013-08-02 10:34:33 AM  

Lorelle: After reading what this asshole said about cancer-stricken Roger Ebert three years ago, I couldn't care less about his suffering.

RedState blogger Howe mocks Roger Ebert's cancer, adds, "So f**k him"

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2010/05/08/redstate-blogger-howe-mocks-r o ger-eberts-cancer/164397

[Link is posted separately because for some reason, I can't post it using HTML]

Karma's a biatch.


I read that stuff.  Thanks. I think he has to be one or the most horrible people ever.  Even at that, I don't wish him death/suffering.  As a rule I don't do this because of karma and stuff.  However, I would not be surprised by others not giving a shiat about him.
 
2013-08-02 10:34:36 AM  
So, if everybody chips in a little bit for people they don't' even know, people in need will get the services they need without bankrupting themselves.   Interesting concept.
 
2013-08-02 10:34:59 AM  

born_yesterday: Mikey1969: This is why the professional bloggers need to think a little more deeply about what they say. I'll give as many shiats for his suffering as he gave for someone else's.

After reading those, I'm kinda hoping his caretakers "misplace" his painkillers.

And his chemotherapeutics.

And give his transplant liver to the new resident surgeon, Dr. Lecter


Yep... I'm all for helping out, even those I dislike or disagree with. I can't be as charitable when Karma has driven up in an Abrams tank to have a conversation with that person though...
 
2013-08-02 10:35:33 AM  

Mikey1969: This is why the professional bloggers need to think a little more deeply about what they say. I'll give as many shiats for his suffering as he gave for someone else's.


In a just world, he'd get the care he needs, followed by someone presenting him with that record, on-camera, and waiting for his tearful apology. Either that, or tell him that his care was paid for by "Friends of Ebert".

Of course, Ebert's already dead, so apologize to his tombstone and see if you get forgiveness. Ass.
 
2013-08-02 10:35:41 AM  

BSABSVR: I can't wait until he recovers from his transplant enough to start blogging about how people who can't pay their own way through life are trash who deserve utter scorn, and how medical bankruptcy is a myth because hey, he got a liver transplant and doesn't owe jack shiat but a smile and a hug.


You don't really recover form a liver transplant, it is a daily diet of anti-rejection medications that have other side effects. Some people afterwards wish they had just gone gently into that good night.

draypresct: spongeboob: Liver failure, so is this guy a drunk, a doper or did he get Hepatitis from some random sex encounter?


I am just asking questions here.

Or cancer. Or accidental Tylenol overdose. Or a number of other causes which do not point to personal moral failings on his part.


Do you white knight everyone or just conservative bloggers?
 
2013-08-02 10:35:54 AM  

Great_Milenko: So, if everybody chips in a little bit for people they don't' even know, people in need will get the services they need without bankrupting themselves. Interesting concept.


Yeah, but apparently that's the same as going around and mugging everyone or something
 
2013-08-02 10:36:19 AM  
ts1.mm.bing.net
 
2013-08-02 10:37:22 AM  

pigeonstopper: I hope the more conservative people of the country will eventually realize that helping to pay or the healthcare of another person is the basis of socialized medicine.

If you donate money to an uninsured person, you are literally practicing the system you abhor.


The only difference is for-profit oversight versus democratic not-for-profit oversight.
 
2013-08-02 10:37:38 AM  

NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

That would be nice, right?


He'd be dead, Jim.
 
2013-08-02 10:39:10 AM  

Lorelle: After reading what this asshole said about cancer-stricken Roger Ebert three years ago, I couldn't care less about his suffering.

RedState blogger Howe mocks Roger Ebert's cancer, adds, "So f**k him"

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2010/05/08/redstate-blogger-howe-mocks-r o ger-eberts-cancer/164397

[Link is posted separately because for some reason, I can't post it using HTML]

Karma's a biatch.


It's okay.  They said liberal sites carried the story, not that they gave anything.  Sort of like taxes, donations are for the rich.
 
2013-08-02 10:40:14 AM  
Why is no one thinking of the children here?

Are they better off being raised by an apparent alcoholic with now chronic health problems or would they be better off if dad dies and their mom marries some healthy guy or maybe we should just offer them up for adoption to a traditional family.  There are stated to be beatiful in the article and this dude looks white so it shouldn't be hard to find a good family for them.
 
2013-08-02 10:41:30 AM  

spongeboob: Why is no one thinking of the children here?

Are they better off being raised by an apparent alcoholic with now chronic health problems or would they be better off if dad dies and their mom marries some healthy guy or maybe we should just offer them up for adoption to a traditional family.  There are stated to be beatiful in the article and this dude looks white so it shouldn't be hard to find a good family for them.


Send them to a FEMA camp for reeducation.
 
2013-08-02 10:41:57 AM  

Three Crooked Squirrels: Also reminds me a little of this: http://www.savewalterwhite.com/


Wow... I don't even watch the show and I found this to be awesome. Who set this up, is it a cool spoof by AMC?
 
2013-08-02 10:43:25 AM  

spongeboob: Why is no one thinking of the children here?

Are they better off being raised by an apparent alcoholic with now chronic health problems or would they be better off if dad dies and their mom marries some healthy guy or maybe we should just offer them up for adoption to a traditional family.  There are stated to be beatiful in the article and this dude looks white so it shouldn't be hard to find a good family for them.


Somebody should have sex with his wife during her husband's painful recovery. She's probably lonely.
 
2013-08-02 10:44:42 AM  

spongeboob: Why is no one thinking of the children here?


Indeed. How much could they fetch on the open market? That would go a long way towards paying these bills that their deadbeat dad is racking up.
 
2013-08-02 10:45:03 AM  

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: spongeboob: Why is no one thinking of the children here?

Are they better off being raised by an apparent alcoholic with now chronic health problems or would they be better off if dad dies and their mom marries some healthy guy or maybe we should just offer them up for adoption to a traditional family.  There are stated to be beatiful in the article and this dude looks white so it shouldn't be hard to find a good family for them.

Somebody should have sex with his wife during her husband's painful recovery. She's probably lonely.


I hear Newt Gingrich is available
 
2013-08-02 10:45:43 AM  

Great_Milenko: So, if everybody chips in a little bit for people they don't' even know, people in need will get the services they need without bankrupting themselves.   Interesting concept.


Inorite? That almost sounds like (wait for it)

Single-payer!
 
2013-08-02 10:46:01 AM  

vpb: Aristocles: If medical costs weren't so inflated and docs were allowed to compete across state-lines, maybe his treatment would have been affordable.

Docs aren't allowed to compete across state lines?  Where did you get that?


Obamao, that's who.

/just kidding, I meant to say, insurers.
 
2013-08-02 10:47:24 AM  

Dr Dreidel: In a just world, he'd get the care he needs, followed by someone presenting him with that record, on-camera, and waiting for his tearful apology. Either that, or tell him that his care was paid for by "Friends of Ebert".


I really think that they need to recirculate his own words, but phrased so they belittle HIS suffering, and as soon as his family gets biatchy, show them whose words they REALLY are. THEN pay for the surgery, doesn't even need the 'Friends of Ebert' tag at that point. It would be a bitter pill to swallow either way.
 
2013-08-02 10:47:32 AM  

Serious Black: Okay. Let's start with the fact that every other developed country on the planet spends less money on health care than we in America do. Are there any common denominators there? It turns out there are; every single one of those countries uses government power to set prices for health care services.


Every other country has cheaper fighters than we do, and we use the government power to purchase our fighters.  It doesn't mean what they have is good enough for us or that we could get it done here cheaper just because government is involved.

I will, however, risk my newly minted libertarian card to ask for a close up look at why things have to cost so much.  When it comes to fighters its mostly unexpected technical issues, corruption, and a "too big to fail" attitude for how our programs are run.
Yes, we could do alot better if we tried. We could still rule the sky for a quarter of the money.

I have the same attitude about health care.  There is alot of money on the table and a lack of interest in how to save it. We keep starting this discussion with how best to buy insurance (which is no mystery, since insurance companies are one of the biggest lobby groups) and ignore why its costing people a hundred bucks when the doctor puts aspirin in a ketchup cup.

If government is to be involved then I don't want it telling me how to spend my money, or spending it for me. I first want them figuring out and fixing the reasons for why I have to spend so much.
 
2013-08-02 10:48:15 AM  
Typical libtards, forcing socialism on a defensless american
 
2013-08-02 10:48:37 AM  

Diogenes: Mrbogey: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care. Relying on your neighbors and people who genuinely care for you to help you, that's no way to go through life, I tells ya. Gov't assistance... now that's dignified.

It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.

A handout is a handout.  This man sits in harsh judgement of others, yet takes no responsibility for himself.


It's one thing to be too proud to take a handout. It's quite another to mock people who do, then try and hit them up for money.

But he'll be dead really, really soon, so fark him.*

/*This is what he said about Roger Ebert.
 
2013-08-02 10:49:27 AM  
A bunch of people pooling their resources to accomplish something sounds a whole lot like evil socialism to me.
 
2013-08-02 10:50:50 AM  

spongeboob: way south: The problem is it isn't just the lack of insurance, but the outrageous pricing

Do you have a citation for this, and how do you think it should be fixed?

And lack of insurance or under insurance is one of the components of why pricing is high, especially with hospitals.
A person with no insurance and no means of paying for health care negelects treating a simple health matter and ends up in the ER, the person can't pay and the hospital has to absorb that, but the hospital can't just eat that expense the next person in line pays more to help defray the uninsured's cost.  The only way you can stop that is to be okay with people letting people drop dead in the street.

What about other ways to constrain cost, well then you are going to have to talk about Real Honest to God Death Panels.  The majority of health care costs are at the end of life, should we be doing EVERYTHING to keep granny alive for one more Christmas?

How about miracle stories, a baby born at 24 weeks is going to require a buttload of expensive medical care.  How about some 24 year old who is involved in a major trauma and is saved when a few years ago they would have died.  The miracle drug/operation/therapy that saved them requires not only the sigificant expense of the current treatment but R&D costs.  And both of theses examples will probably have significant residual costs.


We shouldn't do this with insurance, we should charge an across the board tax rate on the income tax method(with rebate to the poor) and pay for this via the government. 5 years old and break a leg? Fixed. 35 years old and break a leg? Fixed. Everyone pays, everyone gets healed.

R&D should be included in this rate, too. Give grants to teaching hospitals to have a team of researchers researching how to tear a body apart and put it back together, again.

And, while we are in fantasy land, we should also setup pay rules that are based on cost of living for their area plus a set amount of money. For instance, GPs may get COL + $50K. None of this "$200 per visit, fit 12 people in a day to maximize my take home!" stuff that can go on, now.

I know. Too much corporate money at stake to try and do something sane. My apologies.
 
2013-08-02 10:51:31 AM  
$25k is not going to cover a liver transplant. If he wanted to live by his blog he should lose his home and retirement savings to his medical costs. If you want to assume the risk for your health then you should be prepared to pay up with what resources you have.

//His kids are probably on some state funded CHIP program
 
2013-08-02 10:51:42 AM  
No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.
 
2013-08-02 10:52:02 AM  
way south:

I will, however, risk my newly minted libertarian card to ask for a close up look at why things have to cost so much.  When it comes to fighters its mostly unexpected technical issues, corruption, and a "too big to fail" attitude for how our programs are run.
Yes, we could do alot better if we tried. We could still rule the sky for a quarter of the money.

I have the same attitude about health care.  There is alot of money on the table and a lack of interest in how to save it. We keep starting this discussion with how best to buy insurance (which is no mystery, since insurance companies are one of the biggest lobby groups) and ignore why its costing people a hundred bucks when the doctor puts aspirin in a ketchup cup.

If government is to be involved then I don't want it telling me how to spend my money, or spending it for me. I first want them figuring out and fixing the reasons for why I have to spend so much.


Per capita, the U.S has about 2-3x the number of MRI machines per capita than European countries with single payer.  (the only machine I have data for).  All those machines are used and set by demand.  How come the discrepancy?
 
2013-08-02 10:53:20 AM  

way south: Serious Black: Okay. Let's start with the fact that every other developed country on the planet spends less money on health care than we in America do. Are there any common denominators there? It turns out there are; every single one of those countries uses government power to set prices for health care services.

Every other country has cheaper fighters than we do, and we use the government power to purchase our fighters.  It doesn't mean what they have is good enough for us or that we could get it done here cheaper just because government is involved.

I will, however, risk my newly minted libertarian card to ask for a close up look at why things have to cost so much.  When it comes to fighters its mostly unexpected technical issues, corruption, and a "too big to fail" attitude for how our programs are run.
Yes, we could do alot better if we tried. We could still rule the sky for a quarter of the money.

I have the same attitude about health care.  There is alot of money on the table and a lack of interest in how to save it. We keep starting this discussion with how best to buy insurance (which is no mystery, since insurance companies are one of the biggest lobby groups) and ignore why its costing people a hundred bucks when the doctor puts aspirin in a ketchup cup.

If government is to be involved then I don't want it telling me how to spend my money, or spending it for me. I first want them figuring out and fixing the reasons for why I have to spend so much.


The reason why you have to spend so much is that the powerful insurance lobby made sure there are no consumer-friendly laws regulating insurance coverage, policy and price caps.

Then, insurance, doctors, and the government (again, paid for by powerful lobbies) got together and started an arms race on pricing. It's why Americans pay so much: on the books, doctors charge a lot for procedures and tests. Insurance companies then negotiate lower "bulk" prices, but government health plans pay it out. Doctors get rich, insurance companies get mega rich, and both contribute to government officials' bottom lines, so they get rich.

If you want to pay less for health care, you increase the amount of people paying in by levying a new tax and putting us all on the same health insurance plan -- Medicare. A larger base of "customers" plus less chance for the three-way collusion and democratic oversight of the people in charge is what is best for the average person.

But it's not good for insurance executives, who profit off your misery.
 
2013-08-02 10:54:45 AM  

Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.


fark morals, the goal is results.
 
2013-08-02 10:54:46 AM  

spongeboob: way south: The problem is it isn't just the lack of insurance, but the outrageous pricing

Do you have a citation for this, and how do you think it should be fixed?



How's this?
 
2013-08-02 10:54:54 AM  

Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.


I actually saw an Anarcho-Capitalist person arguing that it is their right to sell themselves into slavery.  It was so weird.
 
2013-08-02 10:55:11 AM  
As someone that has lived through a liver transplant I have to say this guy is proper farked. Most likely outcome is he does not survive and his family is left destitute. 25k doesn't even get started on keeping him alive long enough to even be considered to be put on the list.

First off it seems he has a history of drinking. Even if it is not the primary cause of liver failure no transplant team will even start the workup until he has demonstrated 6 months of sobriety. There are no shortcuts on this. Transplant teams have heard it all and seen it all. You will not fool them and they will gladly let you die if you continue to drink. Same for smoking. Same for not following Dr's orders.

Now during that 6 month period he's going to have a lot of Dr's appointments. Mine were weekly. Let's not forget weekly bloodwork that runs about 2k per week.

Now that's just routine stuff. He is in the hospital so I am going to guess ICU because when your liver puts you in the hospital its always farking critical. Lots of fun things can happen. Like when my kidneys said fark it we feel like failing too. Ah yes multi organ failure is a grand old time. It put me in ICU for 16 days at around 80k/day. Or he could have his esophageal varices burst. Super fun time. I lost consciousness when it happened to me. My wife tells me the ambulance crew was busy dropping IV's into me anywhere tehy could get a vein because I had already lost 5 liters of blood and the plasma was leaking out of me as fast as they could drop it in. MUCHO THANKS TO BLOOD DONORS EVERYWHERE!!!!! About then my doctors started thinking I was death proof. I did not feel like it. That was not the end either but it was the worst of it. Well except for the time TB decided to setup camp in the fluid in my belly that was supposed to be there so My body really didn't know how to fight it.

When I wasn't in the hospital trying to die I had a miserable existence. Most days I was just hoping I would piss or shiat. Sounds like a simple thing but when you don't life is hell. Spikes in the ammonia levels in my blood were always fun too. It made me more belligerent and unbearable than booze ever did.

Anyway, I had outstanding insurance for the entire experience. I also have to say My docs in NJ specifically UMDNJ were freaking rock stars of what they do.

This douchewaffle that likes to cheer on cancer when its people he does not like suffering from it is farked. Sure he can get longterm/permanent disability. That's going to take him some time to put together. Once he gets that he can file his paperwork for medicaid. He will get it eventually. If he is still alive.

Good luck asshole. If you survive it you won't be cheering on anyone elses illness. I know for a fact you're world view will change.
 
2013-08-02 10:55:36 AM  

Aristocles: Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.


It's We the People, not Me the Person. Your grievance doesn't supersede the Constitution you claim to worship.
 
2013-08-02 10:56:27 AM  

Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.


I am sure you write to the government daily about the injustice of paying into medicare/medicaid.
 
2013-08-02 10:56:55 AM  

Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.


Except everyone knows he's not going to get what he needs by the charity of others.
 
2013-08-02 10:57:03 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.

fark morals, the goal is results.


But morality is what separates us from the lower animals. If we give up our freedom to be moral creatures, we give up our humanity.

PAUL/PAUL 2016!!!
 
2013-08-02 10:57:27 AM  

way south: Every other country has cheaper fighters than we do, and we use the government power to purchase our fighters. It doesn't mean what they have is good enough for us or that we could get it done here cheaper just because government is involved.


Because we develop the fighters, and the rest of the world buys them once they are in full production and cheaper? We pay extra because we want it first, and best.
 
2013-08-02 10:57:45 AM  
I'll be donating here:
The Ebert Foundation, a nonprofit organization supporting arts and education programs. Donations can be be mailed to Northern Trust, 50 S. LaSalle St., Chicago, IL 60603.


Of course, in this bloggers name.
 
2013-08-02 10:57:46 AM  

sammyk: As someone that has lived through a liver transplant I have to say this guy is proper farked. Most likely outcome is he does not survive and his family is left destitute. 25k doesn't even get started on keeping him alive long enough to even be considered to be put on the list.

First off it seems he has a history of drinking. Even if it is not the primary cause of liver failure no transplant team will even start the workup until he has demonstrated 6 months of sobriety. There are no shortcuts on this. Transplant teams have heard it all and seen it all. You will not fool them and they will gladly let you die if you continue to drink. Same for smoking. Same for not following Dr's orders.

Now during that 6 month period he's going to have a lot of Dr's appointments. Mine were weekly. Let's not forget weekly bloodwork that runs about 2k per week.

Now that's just routine stuff. He is in the hospital so I am going to guess ICU because when your liver puts you in the hospital its always farking critical. Lots of fun things can happen. Like when my kidneys said fark it we feel like failing too. Ah yes multi organ failure is a grand old time. It put me in ICU for 16 days at around 80k/day. Or he could have his esophageal varices burst. Super fun time. I lost consciousness when it happened to me. My wife tells me the ambulance crew was busy dropping IV's into me anywhere tehy could get a vein because I had already lost 5 liters of blood and the plasma was leaking out of me as fast as they could drop it in. MUCHO THANKS TO BLOOD DONORS EVERYWHERE!!!!! About then my doctors started thinking I was death proof. I did not feel like it. That was not the end either but it was the worst of it. Well except for the time TB decided to setup camp in the fluid in my belly that was supposed to be there so My body really didn't know how to fight it.

When I wasn't in the hospital trying to die I had a miserable existence. Most days I was just hoping I would piss or shiat. Sounds like a sim ...


/The esouphageal varices had me on full life support in a chemical coma for 8 days.
//100k+/day
///My co-pay $50
 
2013-08-02 10:58:04 AM  

Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.


I find it funny that Libertarians are content to have people pay taxes to kill people but the idea of paying taxes to care for people is so abhorrent to them.

Perhaps I would be more willing to accept  Liberatarianism  if wars were also funded by charities.
 
2013-08-02 10:58:38 AM  

Mrbogey: It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.


The point being that you don't badmouth people's suffering and laugh at their pain, lest you get cancer yourself down the road and suddenly want people to be compassionate?

The "point" is that this guy farked himself.
 
2013-08-02 11:00:08 AM  

mrshowrules: Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.

I find it funny that Libertarians are content to have people pay taxes to kill people but the idea of paying taxes to care for people is so abhorrent to them.

Perhaps I would be more willing to accept  Liberatarianism  if wars were also funded by charities.


and abortions, too.

/too easy
 
2013-08-02 11:00:24 AM  
Uninsured conservative blogger in hospital with liver failure

FTFY, subs
 
2013-08-02 11:00:36 AM  

spongeboob: draypresct: spongeboob: Liver failure, so is this guy a drunk, a doper or did he get Hepatitis from some random sex encounter?


I am just asking questions here.

Or cancer. Or accidental Tylenol overdose. Or a number of other causes which do not point to personal moral failings on his part.

Do you white knight everyone or just conservative bloggers?


Do you believe that it's the sick person's fault if they get sick? That being sick is a sign of personal moral failings? That perhaps we should think twice before treating them, since they're so corrupt? How about their politics - should that come into play?

Personally I believe in trying to treat people who get sick. I'm glad we're trying to move past figuring out the relative moral worth of two sick people in order to decide who lives.
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2009-08-23/opinions/36822973_1_wi ll em-kolff-artificial-kidney-first-dialysis
 
2013-08-02 11:00:38 AM  

Mentat: Mrbogey: It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.

Or maybe those on the left just aren't raging sociopaths.  Maybe the Tea Baggers have spent so much time defining empathy as a vice that they don't recognize genuine human compassion.


This thread is filled with people taking delight in the suffering of another because he acted like an ass at some point in his life. And you say they're not sociopaths?

I tend not to enjoy the suffering of another person. Them being an asshole still doesn't cause me joy to see them die or suffer
 
2013-08-02 11:01:24 AM  

FarkedOver: Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.

I actually saw an Anarcho-Capitalist person arguing that it is their right to sell themselves into slavery.  It was so weird.


Why would a capitalist want to join the Communist Party? That is weird.
 
2013-08-02 11:01:25 AM  

Arsten: I wish the Republicans would follow through with the threatened repeal of Obamacare so that a real health-care payment (only) system could be implemented.


All they care about is repealing Obamacare... not replacing it. What has been their alternative to Obamacare? Let's not forget that the essence of Obamacare was a Republican idea. They are trying to repeal a Republican idea.

The solution is single payer... or at the very least, a public option... and I'm sure the GOP would considered those two options if they somehow successfully repealed Obamacare.
 
2013-08-02 11:01:52 AM  

MindStalker: Because we develop the fighters, and the rest of the world buys them once they are in full production and cheaper? We pay extra because we want it first, and best.


...so they can hurry up and collect dust. Why does everything in the military cost more for us and why do we build so much military shiat that we know we'll never use? Do you want to be the congressman who suggests we cut military spending? You don't want to switch careers in today's job market.
 
2013-08-02 11:01:56 AM  
He can do what the people I know who don't have insurance do, throw the bills away.
 
2013-08-02 11:02:25 AM  
How do libertarians deal with the fact that we elect people specifically to enact laws that we agree with? I'm confused on why taxes are theft if we collectively, as a country, elect people who want to tax us. It's not like the government is some foreign, uncontrollable overlord that is hijacking trucks.

How is coercive if we have agreed as a country that some things we should pay for?
 
2013-08-02 11:02:54 AM  

Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.


I thought the other side of that was being a responsible consumer - the "personal responsibility" they're always going on about. What's responsible about shirking your duties to your family to save a few bucks, and then relying on charity? That's about as moochey as you can get, and even though it's not compulsory, it's not responsible in the slightest.

Yes, a libertarian paradise would have this man die of an easily-treatable liver condition. Is this the preferable alternative? Well, problem is people are just too damned compassionate - when it's someone they know or someone "of status" (like a well-known assbag politiblogger). This guy won't learn the right lesson because people came to HIS aid, why couldn't they come to someone else's? Never mind that most people necessarily won't have access to the same platforms as he does. Erick Erickson isn't on most people's speed dial (thankfully?).

It wouldn't be moral to let him die, but it is moral for him to rely solely on donations (in excess of what he'd have spent otherwise)? He shouldn't be proactive in insuring his health, and it's totally cool for him to use his daughters as leverage to get him care? (To a Libertarian, emotional arguments are the domain of bleeding hearts and socialists.)

If all those people paid for his care, do they get to dictate that he get a real job once he's recovered? Can they peer into the rest of his health record now and prevent his wife from seeing a reproductive specialist or an end-of-life counselor if his health turns bad again? (Do the same strings the GOP want to put on public-funded health care get to be put on crowd-funded care?)

He's publicly dedicated to living the Libertarian ideal, and happy to be a liberal/socialist when it suits his needs. Heal him, but fark him.
 
2013-08-02 11:03:25 AM  
I feel bad for his daughters, but they're probably better off with him dead.
 
2013-08-02 11:03:33 AM  
It's less like rain on your wedding day than it is like the good advice that you just didn't take.  But either way, it's ironic.
 
2013-08-02 11:03:47 AM  
He knew what he was getting into when he didn't buy insurance. I say let him crash.
 
2013-08-02 11:03:53 AM  
Look, I'm never going to hope some one gets denied medical care and I think this is a great example of why the system needs to be fixed, but I can think of other people who won't get this kind of crowd funding bump because they don't have access or the ability to raise this sort of media awareness. My wife's uncle has struggled with kidney failure for about four years now, having been unable to work and exhausting COBRA after 36 months of paying out of pocket, so the last year of dialysis and hospital stays have all been uncovered expenses. He basically did everything you're supposed to. Had a job, had savings, had health insurance, but once you're so sick you can't work and you lose employer provided insurance you're sort of screwed, especially before the pre-exisitng condition modification of Obamacare. He's finally at the point where he can get a kidney transplant and just recently got on the national list, but all his savings are gone and he's carrying tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills.

Our healthcare system works fine until you get really sick. It's crazy there's so many people okay with the status-quo to me, but I guess whatever.
 
2013-08-02 11:04:15 AM  

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: How do libertarians deal with the fact that we elect people specifically to enact laws that we agree with? I'm confused on why taxes are theft if we collectively, as a country, elect people who want to tax us. It's not like the government is some foreign, uncontrollable overlord that is hijacking trucks.

How is coercive if we have agreed as a country that some things we should pay for?


I think it's pretty clear that the government should subsidize boostraps and then people can do the rest like privatize roads, bridges, other infrastructure and healthcare insurance.
 
2013-08-02 11:04:40 AM  

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: How do libertarians deal with the fact that we elect people specifically to enact laws that we agree with? I'm confused on why taxes are theft if we collectively, as a country, elect people who want to tax us. It's not like the government is some foreign, uncontrollable overlord that is hijacking trucks.

How is coercive if we have agreed as a country that some things we should pay for?


Libertarians are dumber than boxes of wet hair.
 
2013-08-02 11:04:49 AM  
Shouldn't churches be doing this in order to earn their tax-exempt status?
 
2013-08-02 11:05:23 AM  

tbeatty: Per capita, the U.S has about 2-3x the number of MRI machines per capita than European countries with single payer.  (the only machine I have data for).  All those machines are used and set by demand.  How come the discrepancy?


I've pegged this as "marketing". Every hospital just HAS to have one, even if it's only used half the time. Plus, the hospital can make big money by having your in-house doctors order an MRI for everything, even if you don't need one.

CSB, my wife gave me niacin as part of her "we need to be healthy!" kick and it gave me an allergic reaction. A rash everywhere on my skin. I went to the ER because rashes aren't cool and they gave me a prednisone injection. A few minutes later, the rash was more or less gone/going away. ER Doctor #2 walks in and goes "I want to get you into an MRI to make sure it wasn't something more serious."

I declined because 15 minutes before that ER Doctor #1 said "Well, this is a textbook reaction to niacin, so it's not a big deal unless the steroid doesn't work. Don't go home and take anymore niacin, though." But I have to wonder how many people will go "Okay." get an MRI and have their insurance get charged for $2,000 for what I consider no reason.
 
2013-08-02 11:05:23 AM  

RexTalionis: BarkingUnicorn: This sort of thing makes absolutely no sense... unless, as I've long maintained, kindness is hardwired into human genes.

Empathy - the ability to perceive the emotional state of another; especially, to feel his suffering.
Compassion - the urge to do something about another's suffering, because it's making you suffer.
Kindness - the act of doing something about another's suffering, with no ROI from the one helped.

I disagree that the three are tied up together. One can show empathy and do nothing to help. Others can feel no empathy at all but act in what will be perceived from an observer to be compassion or kindness.


Empathy does not show; it is experienced as an emotion, internally.  Compassion may be expressed ("I feel sorry for him") or not, but it doesn't show.  Only outward action - kindness - shows.

The inability to experience empathy is the hallmark of that trendy bogeyman, the sociopath.  Such people terrify society because they are uncontrollable and unpredictable.  True sociopaths cannot experience empathy.  (I don't buy the recently Farked study suggesting that sociopaths can turn empathy on and off at will.) They should not be confused with those who do but choose not to act upon it.

Yes, one can resist compassion, the urge to act kindly; that happens when one perceives that an act of kindness will not make one feel as good as refraining from the act.  But it is a struggle to resist compassion, a source of suffering. Even when refraining from kindness is objectively the rational, most self-beneficial choice, refraining from kindness still gives rise to suffering.

Some people hide this suffering, others express it ("I feel sorry for him but I'm broke").  Lack of expression does not mean empathy and compassion are absent.

Those who fake expressions of compassion or perform acts of kindness for motivations other than empathy/compassion are deemed untrustworthy;  but anyone can be trusted!

Trust is the belief that one can predict another's behavior with an acceptable degree of confidence.  It is entirely possible to trust a sociopath to be kind to you; if you understand his true motivations, you can easily manipulate him into being kind.  Do you know anyone you can trust 100% to screw you over every chance he gets?  That's another way to trust the "untrustworthy."  Do you risk only small losses in dealings with certain people?  Then the acceptable degree of confidence in your prediction of their behavior is lessened, and you can  trust them.
 
2013-08-02 11:06:01 AM  

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: How do libertarians deal with the fact that we elect people specifically to enact laws that we agree with? I'm confused on why taxes are theft if we collectively, as a country, elect people who want to tax us. It's not like the government is some foreign, uncontrollable overlord that is hijacking trucks.

How is coercive if we have agreed as a country that some things we should pay for?


The problem is that the sheeple haven't been exposed to a pure Libertarian system in action, which will answer all their questions about Libertarianism and show them the light of the only workable system of government.

/there, I saved some actual Libertarian 23 seconds of typing out that blarney as if they believed it
 
2013-08-02 11:07:00 AM  

Mrbogey: Relying on your neighbors and people who genuinely care for you to help you, that's no way to go through life, I tells ya. Gov't assistance... now that's dignified.


If only there was a way to allow everyone in the country (we're all neighbors, right?) to pay a small amount, which would go toward providing some kind of assurance that, if you get sick, you won't die because you can't come up with $25k. Hell, they could even spread the cost over a long period of time so these "neighbors" aren't out the entire cost all at once. I'm shocked someone hasn't thought of this already.
 
2013-08-02 11:07:19 AM  

Dr Dreidel: Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.

I thought the other side of that was being a responsible consumer - the "personal responsibility" they're always going on about. What's responsible about shirking your duties to your family to save a few bucks, and then relying on charity? That's about as moochey as you can get, and even though it's not compulsory, it's not responsible in the slightest.

Yes, a libertarian paradise would have this man die of an easily-treatable liver condition. Is this the preferable alternative? Well, problem is people are just too damned compassionate - when it's someone they know or someone "of status" (like a well-known assbag politiblogger). This guy won't learn the right lesson because people came to HIS aid, why couldn't they come to someone else's? Never mind that most people necessarily won't have access to the same platforms as he does. Erick Erickson isn't on most people's speed dial (thankfully?).

It wouldn't be moral to let him die, but it is moral for him to rely solely on donations (in excess of what he'd have spent otherwise)? He shouldn't be proactive in insuring his health, and it's totally cool for him to use his daughters as leverage to get him care? (To a Libertarian, emotional arguments are the domain of bleeding hearts and socialists.)

If all those people paid for his care, do they get to dictate that he get a real job once he's recovered? Can they peer into the rest of his health record now and prevent his wife from seeing a reproductive specialist or an end-of-life counselor if his health turns bad again? (Do the same strings the GOP want to put on public-funded health ...


I don't know what sort of propaganda you've been reading, but, contrary to popular Farklib belief, there is such a thing as charity in a libertarian world view.
 
2013-08-02 11:08:56 AM  

Aristocles: mrshowrules: Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.

I find it funny that Libertarians are content to have people pay taxes to kill people but the idea of paying taxes to care for people is so abhorrent to them.

Perhaps I would be more willing to accept  Liberatarianism  if wars were also funded by charities.

and abortions, too.

/too easy


Abortions are already funded by charity.
 
2013-08-02 11:09:02 AM  
To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.
 
2013-08-02 11:09:04 AM  

Mrbogey: Mentat: Mrbogey: It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.

Or maybe those on the left just aren't raging sociopaths.  Maybe the Tea Baggers have spent so much time defining empathy as a vice that they don't recognize genuine human compassion.

This thread is filled with people taking delight in the suffering of another because he acted like an ass at some point in his life. And you say they're not sociopaths?

I tend not to enjoy the suffering of another person. Them being an asshole still doesn't cause me joy to see them die or suffer


So not donating money to a know sociopath makes you a sociopath? We're through the looking glass people!
 
2013-08-02 11:11:39 AM  

hugram: Arsten: I wish the Republicans would follow through with the threatened repeal of Obamacare so that a real health-care payment (only) system could be implemented.

All they care about is repealing Obamacare... not replacing it. What has been their alternative to Obamacare? Let's not forget that the essence of Obamacare was a Republican idea. They are trying to repeal a Republican idea.

The solution is single payer... or at the very least, a public option... and I'm sure the GOP would considered those two options if they somehow successfully repealed Obamacare.


I'm not saying the Republicans would implement single-payer, I'm saying I wish they would actually repeal Obamacare I don't care if we are left floating for a few years on universal coverage, but this is going to do nothing but entrench a huge lobby presence in Washington for ever more. Once it's fully embraced, we will never get single payer.
 
2013-08-02 11:11:46 AM  
So, if I understand the position of the FarkDerpCons here, if you live in a small town of 120 people and you don't have insurance, you are just supposed to hope your neighbors, who in this case happen to be poor, can help you pay for your cancer treatments?

WINNING!
 
2013-08-02 11:11:51 AM  

tbeatty: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

That would be nice, right?

He'd be dead, Jim.


Oh right. The Dead Panels at the FEMA Camps.
 
2013-08-02 11:12:35 AM  

mrshowrules: pigeonstopper: I hope the more conservative people of the country will eventually realize that helping to pay or the healthcare of another person is the basis of socialized medicine.

If you donate money to an uninsured person, you are literally practicing the system you abhor.

The only difference is for-profit oversight versus democratic not-for-profit oversight.


From consumers' standpoint, profit is as wasteful as government inefficiency.  Business and government fight over the money that's going to be skimmed off what consumers pay.  Make no mistake:  business and government want to skim as much as they can get away with. Neither is your friend or champion.
 
2013-08-02 11:12:44 AM  

Jairzinho: tbeatty:

He'd be dead, Jim.

Oh right. The Death Panels at the FEMA Camps.


FTFM
 
2013-08-02 11:15:00 AM  
So he wants a handout instead of dealing with the situation he himself choose?
 
2013-08-02 11:15:42 AM  
 
2013-08-02 11:15:56 AM  

Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.


Good Morning Friend,

I've added your comment to my Profile, just in case you miss a thread that I'm in. :)

Also, Socrates was the one who said something along the lines of all I know is that I know nothing.
 
2013-08-02 11:15:59 AM  

error 303: Look, I'm never going to hope some one gets denied medical care and I think this is a great example of why the system needs to be fixed, but I can think of other people who won't get this kind of crowd funding bump because they don't have access or the ability to raise this sort of media awareness. My wife's uncle has struggled with kidney failure for about four years now, having been unable to work and exhausting COBRA after 36 months of paying out of pocket, so the last year of dialysis and hospital stays have all been uncovered expenses. He basically did everything you're supposed to. Had a job, had savings, had health insurance, but once you're so sick you can't work and you lose employer provided insurance you're sort of screwed, especially before the pre-exisitng condition modification of Obamacare. He's finally at the point where he can get a kidney transplant and just recently got on the national list, but all his savings are gone and he's carrying tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills.

Our healthcare system works fine until you get really sick. It's crazy there's so many people okay with the status-quo to me, but I guess whatever].


That's like saying that auto insurance works well unless you are in a major accident.  The only real purpose of auto insurance is major accidents.  Fender benders could be managed without insurance.

I like Americans and so wish you guys could also have single payer.  Single payer would be great even if it cost more.  The fact that it costs half as much just makes it incomprehensible as to why Americans wouldn't adopt it.  Actually the insurance companies owning politicians makes it understandable.
 
2013-08-02 11:16:40 AM  

Jairzinho: tbeatty: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

That would be nice, right?

He'd be dead, Jim.

Oh right. The Dead Panels at the FEMA Camps.


Much like how Stephen Hawking was left to die by the British Healthcare System. Oh...
 
2013-08-02 11:18:24 AM  

Aristocles: Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.

Good Morning Friend,

I've added your comment to my Profile, just in case you miss a thread that I'm in. :)

Also, Socrates was the one who said something along the lines of all I know is that I know nothing.


Bah, you're right, I farked up since Aristocles refers/can refer to *PLATO*, who I've got associated with Socrates in my head.

And eh. I suppose I just don't like it when people argue completely dishonestly. Admit to playing devil's advocate? That's cool! But trolling just really rubs me the wrong way.
 
2013-08-02 11:19:24 AM  

Fart_Machine: Jairzinho: tbeatty: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

That would be nice, right?

He'd be dead, Jim.

Oh right. The Dead Panels at the FEMA Camps.

Much like how Stephen Hawking was left to die by the British Healthcare System. Oh...


HE SAID BLACK HOLES SHOULD RADIATE INTO NOTHINGNESS, WHY SHOULDN'T HE!!???!!!

/A weak joke
//From a sad man
 
2013-08-02 11:20:04 AM  

MayoSlather: A bunch of people pooling their resources to accomplish something sounds a whole lot like evil socialism to me.


It depends on whether business or government siphons off some off the resources for its own sustenance.
 
2013-08-02 11:20:06 AM  

way south: and ignore why its costing people a hundred bucks when the doctor puts aspirin in a ketchup cup.


Because the insurance companies CONSTANTLY fark over the healthcare providers. Not only that, the "$100" in your example gets billed as $100, but then they insurance company has a manged rate that they pay at, $30, for example, and you pay no more. Occasionally, you get a bill, but that is different than the $100 aspirin getting paid out at $30, that's when stuffed is billed to the Ins company that they didn't cover in the first place, or that they only cover a certain percentage of. It really IS the insurance companies farking it all up. I had a chiropractor that used to give a discount for paying cash precisely because of his issues with insurance companies. He once supported this by showing me my initially approved 9 visits A YEAR LATER that were pre approved, yet unpaid, in violation of AZ law... They just kept ignoring his request for payment, and he is far from alone.
 
2013-08-02 11:20:09 AM  

Fart_Machine: Jairzinho: tbeatty: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

That would be nice, right?

He'd be dead, Jim.

Oh right. The Dead Panels at the FEMA Camps.

Much like how Stephen Hawking was left to die by the British Healthcare System. Oh...


Sorta.  The IBD article was about how Stephen Hawking wouldn't be alive today if was in the UK health care system.
 
2013-08-02 11:20:39 AM  

BunkoSquad: What a uniquely American story - people pitching in to help because we refuse to pitch in to help.


farkING this!

I have never understood why people here are against single payer health. All the "arguments" just fall flat.

This nation is turning into a place where one of the best ways to get ahead is to profit off of other people's suffering. Personally, I find this notion to be very alarming. There are things in this world that you cannot refuse. Health care is one of them. I'm sure there might be some kind of obscure example but, I have never heard of anyone saying "no, that's too expensive, I think I would rather die."

There should be no such thing as:
for profit health insurance
for profit health care
for profit prisons
for profit intelligence gathering
for profit "security" contractors (mercenaries)

Every one of those makes crazy money from situations mostly out of our individual control.


Also...

Capitalist:
If I focus on myself I will benefit a lot at a potential cost to others

Socialist:
If we all contribute to each other, we will all benefit to a lesser degree

I ask you, which one is the moral ideology?
 
2013-08-02 11:20:43 AM  

Somacandra: [upload.wikimedia.org image 220x281]

'I don't see what the big problem is. Uninsured people can get the care they need at the Emergency Room.'


Man, the 2012 Presidential Election is like some kind of Outrage of the Month club. Every once in a while you get this reminder of how close we were to having the cartoon personification of Monty Burns as leader of the free world.
 
2013-08-02 11:22:02 AM  

Mrbogey: Mentat: Mrbogey: It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.

Or maybe those on the left just aren't raging sociopaths.  Maybe the Tea Baggers have spent so much time defining empathy as a vice that they don't recognize genuine human compassion.

This thread is filled with people taking delight in the suffering of another because he acted like an ass at some point in his life. And you say they're not sociopaths?

I tend not to enjoy the suffering of another person. Them being an asshole still doesn't cause me joy to see them die or suffer


Enjoying another's suffering requires the ability to feel his suffering, a. k. a. empathy.  Sociopaths cannot feel empathy.  Please stop misusing that term.
 
2013-08-02 11:22:10 AM  

Mrbogey: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care. Relying on your neighbors and people who genuinely care for you to help you, that's no way to go through life, I tells ya. Gov't assistance... now that's dignified.

It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.


yes, because there are no faceless bureaucrats in private insurance who make life and death decisions about anyone's healthcare.  No, none at all.
 
2013-08-02 11:24:51 AM  

MayoSlather: spongeboob: way south: The problem is it isn't just the lack of insurance, but the outrageous pricing

Do you have a citation for this, and how do you think it should be fixed?

How's this?


Can't read at work will take a look at tonight.
 
2013-08-02 11:26:08 AM  

Mrbogey: Mentat: Mrbogey: It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.

Or maybe those on the left just aren't raging sociopaths.  Maybe the Tea Baggers have spent so much time defining empathy as a vice that they don't recognize genuine human compassion.

This thread is filled with people taking delight in the suffering of another because he acted like an ass at some point in his life. And you say they're not sociopaths?

I tend not to enjoy the suffering of another person. Them being an asshole still doesn't cause me joy to see them die or suffer


Says the guy who threatens people on the internet. BTW, have you seen the latest evidence on fracking?
 
2013-08-02 11:28:53 AM  
I hope he gets ass cancer to go with his liver failure.

/fark him, that's why.
 
2013-08-02 11:29:29 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: tricycleracer: BarkingUnicorn: tricycleracer: Fart_Machine: Because it's totally practical to have your medical coverage by begging for donations.  I suggest you do this for the lulz.

I'm sick of getting 70 million emails each day asking me to contribute to a stranger's healthcare.  It's really inefficient if you ask me.

Much more efficient to pass a law that takes your money.  I'm serious, it is more efficient.

You think single-payer is less efficient than dozens of little health insurance fiefdoms?

You cannot read more than one sentence at a time, apparently.


My sarcasm meter was off the charts.
 
2013-08-02 11:29:51 AM  
Do they sell bootstraps in the hospital gift shop?
 
2013-08-02 11:30:00 AM  

Mrbogey: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care. Relying on your neighbors and people who genuinely care for you to help you, that's no way to go through life, I tells ya. Gov't assistance... now that's dignified.

It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.


Kinda like how my mother donated her kidney to save her sister's life, only to have the GOVERNMENT drop her coverage -- into which she had paid thousands and thousands of dollars over the years -- just because she was classified as having "chronic kidney disease" as a result of her single-kidney status.

Oh, wait. That was a HUMANA bureaucrat, not a government bureaucrat.
 
2013-08-02 11:30:10 AM  
Felgraf:

Bah, you're right, I farked up since Aristocles refers/can refer to *PLATO*, who I've got associated with Socrates in my head.

And eh. I suppose I just don't like it when people argue completely dishonestly. Admit to playing devil's advocate? That's cool! But trolling just really rubs me the wrong way.


He's gotten a lot better at it the last few days.  He is really honing his craft.  His first few efforts were unconvincing, now he is moving into the "somewhat plausible" category.
 
2013-08-02 11:30:44 AM  

draypresct: spongeboob: draypresct: spongeboob: Liver failure, so is this guy a drunk, a doper or did he get Hepatitis from some random sex encounter?


I am just asking questions here.

Or cancer. Or accidental Tylenol overdose. Or a number of other causes which do not point to personal moral failings on his part.

Do you white knight everyone or just conservative bloggers?

Do you believe that it's the sick person's fault if they get sick? That being sick is a sign of personal moral failings? That perhaps we should think twice before treating them, since they're so corrupt? How about their politics - should that come into play?

Personally I believe in trying to treat people who get sick. I'm glad we're trying to move past figuring out the relative moral worth of two sick people in order to decide who lives.
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2009-08-23/opinions/36822973_1_wi ll em-kolff-artificial-kidney-first-dialysis


Is the sick person's fault they get sick? Sometimes absolutely is, see chronic smoker especially those who continue to smoke on oxygen and multiple hospital amittance, I went down that road with my mom for 2 years before she died.

You are glad that we moved beyond moral worth before choosing who to treat between two sick people.
Okay one is serving life in prison and one is 14, if we only have money for one operation do you flip a coin, pay for half the operation for both or give neither the operation?
 
2013-08-02 11:31:02 AM  

Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.


And if there had been no charity who would have paid for it? That's right. You and me. This isn't charity. It's still compelled because in the end, someone is paying for it and it's not HIM.
 
2013-08-02 11:31:13 AM  

Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.



Hey new account created at the time of the height of the Zimmerman trial for trolling purposes,

Are you BojanglesPaladin's new squire?

He's our resident White Knight of Ayn Rand.
 
2013-08-02 11:32:38 AM  

BarkingUnicorn:   Sociopaths cannot feel empathy.  Please stop misusing that term.


There was an article on BBC a few days ago about a recent study showing that psychopaths have the ability to selectively emphathize with others. This may lead to some breakthrough treatment programs in the future.

Looks like this is it.
 
2013-08-02 11:32:43 AM  

Mrbogey: because he acted like an ass at some point in his life.


It was not a single incident of him acting like an ass. It was him making a career out of being an ass.

How is THAT not sociopathic behavior?
 
2013-08-02 11:33:47 AM  

mrshowrules: I like Americans and so wish you guys could also have single payer.  Single payer would be great even if it cost more.  The fact that it costs half as much just makes it incomprehensible as to why Americans wouldn't adopt it.


We don't care if it works better. It's socialism, and socialism sucks because it never works, even when it does.
 
2013-08-02 11:33:56 AM  
He should have just pulled himself up by his bootstraps and gotten a job that paid more so he could pay his own medical bills. Or maybe borrow $20,000 from his parents and start a business and provide healthcare for himself!

Sounds like a lazy taker to me.
 
2013-08-02 11:34:12 AM  

Aristocles: I don't know what sort of propaganda you've been reading, but, contrary to popular Farklib belief, there is such a thing as charity in a libertarian world view.


And I'm not sure what politicians you've voted for, but gaming the system - even a system of charity - is frowned upon by most. This guy failed to take the basic steps to insure his health, and for a cost far below what he's paying now. Libertarian government (NOT charity - that comes from people, not governments) would ignore the fark out of his medical problems.

"Bootstraps? What are those? I'll lift myself up once I've squeezed every penny from donors who are saddened by my family's state of affairs, but to pre-plan and buy insurance for $100/month? What am I a communist?"
 
2013-08-02 11:35:13 AM  

coeyagi: So, if I understand the position of the FarkDerpCons here, if you live in a small town of 120 people and you don't have insurance, you are just supposed to hope your neighbors, who in this case happen to be poor, can help you pay for your cancer treatments?

WINNING!


Or you can get someone to launch an online fundraiser for you.

I was friends with a street shoe-shiner in Denver.  His mother died; at her funeral, his brother dropped dead. Neither had life insurance.  Claude was stuck with $7600 in funeral expenses (the dumbass).

I wrote a blog post about Claude and his predicament with a Paypal donation link, tweeted the post's URL to my followers, and within 72 hours most of his problem  was solved.  I imagine today's fundraising sites would have let him retire

He's really a wonderful man, and I'm a helluva salesman. But most of all, I surround myself with kind people.  Do that and you need not fear.
 
2013-08-02 11:35:34 AM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.

And if there had been no charity who would have paid for it? That's right. You and me. This isn't charity. It's still compelled because in the end, someone is paying for it and it's not HIM.


Yep. The only difference between donations and taxes is that we can choose who's worthy of our donations.

/At the end of the day, I'd rather my tax dollars go to a hateful bigot who's dying of cancer than to see my friend have to choose between dying of cancer and dying of starvation.
 
2013-08-02 11:35:51 AM  

Dr Dreidel: Aristocles: If medical costs weren't so inflated and docs were allowed to compete across state-lines, maybe his treatment would have been affordable.

And if he'd had insurance, he'd have spent his own money on the care he's now getting. (I know that's not how it works - the premium I pay today goes mostly to other peoples' claims tomorrow, and when I file a claim, their premia come to me. I'm simplifying.)

Libertarian moocher is a mooch.

Let's say he's been without insurance for the last 3 years. His portion of an employer's plan premium would have been about $951/year, or $79.25/month. For 3 years or 36 months, he chose to spend $2,853 on everything but planning for this kind of contingency. $2800 wouldn't be near enough to cover this illness, sure, but the insurance he bought with it would have, even if you figure in a $10k deductible (his goal was $25k).

Everyone who donated has financed his awful planning. Shouldn't a father of two young girls be a better life-planner? Isn't that the responsible, "family-oriented" thing to do, Libertarians?


An employer group plan costs far less than an individually purchased plan for the same coverage, even if the person purchasing it is a young, healthy individual.  He was probably unable to get decent coverage without spending a huge chunk of his salary on it.  And the cost of covering the rest of his family?  Fuggedaboutit.

Obamacare will help folks just like him.

/Single payer would be better
//Your point about piss-poor planning is a great one
///shoulda got a jerb with benefits
 
2013-08-02 11:37:13 AM  
Raharu:
Are you BojanglesPaladin's new squire?

He's our resident White Knight of Ayn Rand.


Who wouldn't jerk off to this?

media.npr.org
 
2013-08-02 11:37:36 AM  

Dr Dreidel: Libertarian government (NOT charity - that comes from people, not governments) would ignore the fark out of his medical problems.


This is true. But, under a Libertarian philosophy there's nothing wrong with giving or receiving charity, as long as it's not something compulsory.
 
2013-08-02 11:37:43 AM  
thinkprogress.org

No one likes you, Caleb Howe.

edwardg.files.wordpress.com

Everyone but Caleb Howe likes him.

EABOD and DIAF, Caleb Howe.

//bootstraps, however, may save you from munching on those cocks and escaping that fire, so get pulling!
 
2013-08-02 11:38:02 AM  

Perlin Noise: This nation is turning into a place where one of the best ways to get ahead is to profit off of other people's suffering.


I've remarked for years that the commodity being priced/traded/purchased in the current system is not health care, it is the patients themselves.  The consumers are the insurance companies and health care providers, the commodity are the patients.  It is an aberration of capitalism.
 
2013-08-02 11:38:26 AM  
25.media.tumblr.com
"This blogger goes to the hospital and the blogger community foots the bill.
Did anyone help him out? NO!"
 
2013-08-02 11:39:54 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: coeyagi: So, if I understand the position of the FarkDerpCons here, if you live in a small town of 120 people and you don't have insurance, you are just supposed to hope your neighbors, who in this case happen to be poor, can help you pay for your cancer treatments?

WINNING!

Or you can get someone to launch an online fundraiser for you.

I was friends with a street shoe-shiner in Denver.  His mother died; at her funeral, his brother dropped dead. Neither had life insurance.  Claude was stuck with $7600 in funeral expenses (the dumbass).

I wrote a blog post about Claude and his predicament with a Paypal donation link, tweeted the post's URL to my followers, and within 72 hours most of his problem  was solved.  I imagine today's fundraising sites would have let him retire

He's really a wonderful man, and I'm a helluva salesman. But most of all, I surround myself with kind people.  Do that and you need not fear.


Funeral expenses < Medical expenses.

Did not read the rest, no need going down the rabbit hole of derp further.  The point is, what the f*ck is the big deal?  Everyone pay into a god damn system and we'll be fine.  Those evil socialist countries (with higher standards of living) seem to be doing just fine.
 
2013-08-02 11:40:11 AM  

tbeatty: Per capita, the U.S has about 2-3x the number of MRI machines per capita than European countries with single payer.  (the only machine I have data for).  All those machines are used and set by demand.  How come the discrepancy?


Because people live two or three times closer together in tiny little European countries, and thus don't need as many machines to have one close enough to travel to?
 
2013-08-02 11:40:58 AM  

steveGswine: tbeatty: Per capita, the U.S has about 2-3x the number of MRI machines per capita than European countries with single payer.  (the only machine I have data for).  All those machines are used and set by demand.  How come the discrepancy?

Because people live two or three times closer together in tiny little European countries, and thus don't need as many machines to have one close enough to travel to?


They're also healthier.
 
2013-08-02 11:42:20 AM  

MSFT: BarkingUnicorn:   Sociopaths cannot feel empathy.  Please stop misusing that term.

There was an article on BBC a few days ago about a recent study showing that psychopaths have the ability to selectively emphathize with others. This may lead to some breakthrough treatment programs in the future.

Looks like this is it.


I read it via Fark earlier; I don't buy it.  Subjects have empathy and feel compassion (the urge to act upon empathy to relieve another's suffering).  They are not sociopaths; they simply resist the urge to express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better, e. g,  get some strokes from the researchers, and express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better.  Standard normal behavior, not sociopathic. Researchers are  misinterpreting their observations.
 
2013-08-02 11:42:34 AM  
coeyagi:  Everyone pay into a god damn system and we'll be fine.  Those evil socialist countries (with higher standards of living) seem to be doing just fine.

I have you tagged as "sane".
It may not seem like much, but you should see what some of the others are tagged as.
 
2013-08-02 11:44:09 AM  

coeyagi: BarkingUnicorn: coeyagi: So, if I understand the position of the FarkDerpCons here, if you live in a small town of 120 people and you don't have insurance, you are just supposed to hope your neighbors, who in this case happen to be poor, can help you pay for your cancer treatments?

WINNING!

Or you can get someone to launch an online fundraiser for you.

I was friends with a street shoe-shiner in Denver.  His mother died; at her funeral, his brother dropped dead. Neither had life insurance.  Claude was stuck with $7600 in funeral expenses (the dumbass).

I wrote a blog post about Claude and his predicament with a Paypal donation link, tweeted the post's URL to my followers, and within 72 hours most of his problem  was solved.  I imagine today's fundraising sites would have let him retire

He's really a wonderful man, and I'm a helluva salesman. But most of all, I surround myself with kind people.  Do that and you need not fear.

Funeral expenses < Medical expenses.

Did not read the rest, no need going down the rabbit hole of derp further.  The point is, what the f*ck is the big deal?  Everyone pay into a god damn system and we'll be fine.  Those evil socialist countries (with higher standards of living) seem to be doing just fine.


I can't be bother with people who can't be bothered.  Next, please!
 
2013-08-02 11:45:06 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: coeyagi: BarkingUnicorn: coeyagi: So, if I understand the position of the FarkDerpCons here, if you live in a small town of 120 people and you don't have insurance, you are just supposed to hope your neighbors, who in this case happen to be poor, can help you pay for your cancer treatments?

WINNING!

Or you can get someone to launch an online fundraiser for you.

I was friends with a street shoe-shiner in Denver.  His mother died; at her funeral, his brother dropped dead. Neither had life insurance.  Claude was stuck with $7600 in funeral expenses (the dumbass).

I wrote a blog post about Claude and his predicament with a Paypal donation link, tweeted the post's URL to my followers, and within 72 hours most of his problem  was solved.  I imagine today's fundraising sites would have let him retire

He's really a wonderful man, and I'm a helluva salesman. But most of all, I surround myself with kind people.  Do that and you need not fear.

Funeral expenses < Medical expenses.

Did not read the rest, no need going down the rabbit hole of derp further.  The point is, what the f*ck is the big deal?  Everyone pay into a god damn system and we'll be fine.  Those evil socialist countries (with higher standards of living) seem to be doing just fine.

I can't be bother with people who can't be bothered.  Next, please!


I just read the rest.  My original point stands that your analogy seemed to be derived from copious usage of crack-cocaine.
 
2013-08-02 11:46:09 AM  
So instead of paying for insurance, he's begging other people to pay it for him?

Sounds like a conservative to me.
 
2013-08-02 11:47:06 AM  

Aristocles: Dr Dreidel: Libertarian government (NOT charity - that comes from people, not governments) would ignore the fark out of his medical problems.

This is true. But, under a Libertarian philosophy there's nothing wrong with giving or receiving charity, as long as it's not something compulsory.


But whence "personal responsibility"? That's my point - why should anyone want to help him if he won't help himself?
 
2013-08-02 11:49:10 AM  
Surely his liver has bootstraps? If it doesn't, well, it's just God's will.
 
2013-08-02 11:49:57 AM  

coeyagi: BarkingUnicorn: coeyagi: BarkingUnicorn: coeyagi: So, if I understand the position of the FarkDerpCons here, if you live in a small town of 120 people and you don't have insurance, you are just supposed to hope your neighbors, who in this case happen to be poor, can help you pay for your cancer treatments?

WINNING!

Or you can get someone to launch an online fundraiser for you.

I was friends with a street shoe-shiner in Denver.  His mother died; at her funeral, his brother dropped dead. Neither had life insurance.  Claude was stuck with $7600 in funeral expenses (the dumbass).

I wrote a blog post about Claude and his predicament with a Paypal donation link, tweeted the post's URL to my followers, and within 72 hours most of his problem  was solved.  I imagine today's fundraising sites would have let him retire

He's really a wonderful man, and I'm a helluva salesman. But most of all, I surround myself with kind people.  Do that and you need not fear.

Funeral expenses < Medical expenses.

Did not read the rest, no need going down the rabbit hole of derp further.  The point is, what the f*ck is the big deal?  Everyone pay into a god damn system and we'll be fine.  Those evil socialist countries (with higher standards of living) seem to be doing just fine.

I can't be bother with people who can't be bothered.  Next, please!

I just read the rest.  My original point stands that your analogy seemed to be derived from copious usage of crack-cocaine.


I can't be bothered with people who don't know what an analogy is, either.  Move along, I have customers waiting...
 
2013-08-02 11:50:05 AM  
draypresct:
By the way my initial post was just pointing out the typical right wing pundit would be saying something like what I posted if it was a left wing blogger you know the whole "just asking questions"

I want single payer, but I also think we do need to make some choices about what we will pay for, do we really do heroic measures on someone who is in multilple system failure or do we maybe give one hundred other people keflex for a simple infection that might keep them from losing their toe or life.

You just hit a nerve.
 
2013-08-02 11:50:57 AM  

Aristocles: Dr Dreidel: Libertarian government (NOT charity - that comes from people, not governments) would ignore the fark out of his medical problems.

This is true. But, under a Libertarian philosophy there's nothing wrong with giving or receiving charity, as long as it's not something compulsory.


So you can choose who's "deserving" of your money, and everyone else can fark off?

I can see why libertarianism is so attractive to Republicans.
 
2013-08-02 11:51:08 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: MSFT: BarkingUnicorn:   Sociopaths cannot feel empathy.  Please stop misusing that term.

There was an article on BBC a few days ago about a recent study showing that psychopaths have the ability to selectively emphathize with others. This may lead to some breakthrough treatment programs in the future.

Looks like this is it.

I read it via Fark earlier; I don't buy it.  Subjects have empathy and feel compassion (the urge to act upon empathy to relieve another's suffering).  They are not sociopaths; they simply resist the urge to express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better, e. g,  get some strokes from the researchers, and express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better.  Standard normal behavior, not sociopathic. Researchers are  misinterpreting their observations.


So your contention is that every one of the criminals used in the study, locked up and previously evaluated as psychopaths, are all actually mislabeled as psychopaths? If this is true then we really have no accurate testing for psychopathy then do we?
 
2013-08-02 11:51:14 AM  
What is it with asshole alcoholic conservative bloggers?

Is this guy going to get a portrait made of him in armor, standing in front of Valhalla?

Can we just start lining up at his gravesite with very full bladders instead?
 
2013-08-02 11:51:24 AM  

Free Radical: Shouldn't churches be doing this in order to earn their tax-exempt status?


They are busy paying off legal settlements for that whole buggering little boys thing.
 
2013-08-02 11:52:12 AM  

Mrbogey: Mentat: Mrbogey: It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.

Or maybe those on the left just aren't raging sociopaths.  Maybe the Tea Baggers have spent so much time defining empathy as a vice that they don't recognize genuine human compassion.

This thread is filled with people taking delight in the suffering of another because he acted like an ass at some point in his life. And you say they're not sociopaths?

I tend not to enjoy the suffering of another person. Them being an asshole still doesn't cause me joy to see them die or suffer


l3.yimg.com
 
2013-08-02 11:52:20 AM  

TheShavingofOccam123: Surely his liver has bootstraps? If it doesn't, well, it's just God's will.


Why should society be punished because one person didn't pray hard enough?
 
2013-08-02 11:52:38 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: coeyagi: BarkingUnicorn: coeyagi: BarkingUnicorn: coeyagi: So, if I understand the position of the FarkDerpCons here, if you live in a small town of 120 people and you don't have insurance, you are just supposed to hope your neighbors, who in this case happen to be poor, can help you pay for your cancer treatments?

WINNING!

Or you can get someone to launch an online fundraiser for you.

I was friends with a street shoe-shiner in Denver.  His mother died; at her funeral, his brother dropped dead. Neither had life insurance.  Claude was stuck with $7600 in funeral expenses (the dumbass).

I wrote a blog post about Claude and his predicament with a Paypal donation link, tweeted the post's URL to my followers, and within 72 hours most of his problem  was solved.  I imagine today's fundraising sites would have let him retire

He's really a wonderful man, and I'm a helluva salesman. But most of all, I surround myself with kind people.  Do that and you need not fear.

Funeral expenses < Medical expenses.

Did not read the rest, no need going down the rabbit hole of derp further.  The point is, what the f*ck is the big deal?  Everyone pay into a god damn system and we'll be fine.  Those evil socialist countries (with higher standards of living) seem to be doing just fine.

I can't be bother with people who can't be bothered.  Next, please!

I just read the rest.  My original point stands that your analogy seemed to be derived from copious usage of crack-cocaine.

I can't be bothered with people who don't know what an analogy is, either.  Move along, I have customers waiting...


I know what an analogy is --- yours was incredibly sh*tty.  You are comparing medical expenses to funeral expenses.  I am trying to bother with educating you but you are doubling down like a typical conservative who is called out on his failings.
 
2013-08-02 11:53:38 AM  

Mrbogey: Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care. Relying on your neighbors and people who genuinely care for you to help you, that's no way to go through life, I tells ya. Gov't assistance... now that's dignified.

It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.


It depends how you design the single payer program. As someone with family in cancer care under a single-payer system, I can attest to the fact that he's gotten exceptional care and expects to live another 10 or 20 years.

And 'faceless bureaucrat' ?  Are you saying that those without friends and family and neighbors who love you should DIE?

Oh wait, that is what you're saying: You can live if you're nice AND know lots of well-off people OR if you have money. If you're Poor or unfortunate enough to only know poor people or a bastard, then you deserve to die? Nice to see we have a candidate for a death panel right here.

What happens when a person's illness burns through the extra resources of a whole town because they need to match the payments offered by the guy who spent his whole life taking 20% of all the money they earned ? What if they've never had health care because they've been adopting puppies and babies and taking care of others, never thinking of themselves? should they only take care of those who are going to 'pay off' by being able to support them in their illness (which we ALL will have?)

And if the Insurance company decides to fight you every step of the way, should only those young and strong enough to partake in the adversarial process survive?

/Fark you
 
2013-08-02 11:58:49 AM  
Libertarianism: the belief the government shouldn't help people because they are vile moochers that don't deserve it. Also, we are totally willing to give to charity to help these vile moochers that don't deserve it.
 
2013-08-02 11:59:08 AM  

coeyagi: What is it with asshole alcoholic conservative bloggers?

Is this guy going to get a portrait made of him in armor, standing in front of Valhalla?

Can we just start lining up at his gravesite with very full bladders instead?


If you think of extreme Conservatives as being effectively fear based piss pants, it is not surprising that they drink so much alcohol.  Think about it, if you are terrified of life, what is a better treatment than a stiff drink.
 
2013-08-02 11:59:23 AM  

Dr Dreidel: Aristocles: Dr Dreidel: Libertarian government (NOT charity - that comes from people, not governments) would ignore the fark out of his medical problems.

This is true. But, under a Libertarian philosophy there's nothing wrong with giving or receiving charity, as long as it's not something compulsory.

But whence "personal responsibility"? That's my point - why should anyone want to help him if he won't help himself?


For any number of reasons that we may or may not know. It's up to individuals themselves to decide to help him, if he's a shaitbag to everyone, then chances are he won't receive much help. Planning for this sort of thing is his personal responsibility but should he fail to adequately plan that doesn't mean he has to refuse any outside help.
 
2013-08-02 12:00:52 PM  
It's so sad that some people just cannot force themselves to be decent to others.

I've never heard of this guy. But, reading some of the things he tweeted to Ebert made me want to vomit. How positively dreadful and cruel.

I hope he has some kind of enlightenment from this experience. It's okay to disagree - even poke wise a bit - with people who sit opposite of you and your opinions. It's never okay to inflict cruelty on others.

Jesus, politics isn't life.
 
2013-08-02 12:01:18 PM  

Aristocles: Planning for this sort of thing is his personal responsibility but should he fail to adequately plan that doesn't mean he has to refuse any outside help.


Then he should not be criticizing others for getting outside help, or supporting the government in providing that outside help.
 
2013-08-02 12:02:31 PM  

Aristocles: If medical costs weren't so inflated and docs were allowed to compete across state-lines, maybe his treatment would have been affordable.


SO MUCH FAIL IN THIS STATEMENT!!!!... Do you even realize and understand why medical costs are so expensive to begin with????

Its because people who don't have insurance get emergency care and wind up defaulting on thier bill... and you better believe Healthcare facilities are not a charity so they have to make up the money they lost somehow... what better way than to pass along the cost to people who can afford it.
 
2013-08-02 12:03:49 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Aristocles: Planning for this sort of thing is his personal responsibility but should he fail to adequately plan that doesn't mean he has to refuse any outside help.

Then he should not be criticizing others for getting outside help, or supporting the government in providing that outside help.


Except that the government uses money that they obtain via compulsion (taxes).
 
2013-08-02 12:04:28 PM  
Karma's a biatch, isn't it?
 
2013-08-02 12:05:03 PM  

rubi_con_man: Mrbogey: Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care. Relying on your neighbors and people who genuinely care for you to help you, that's no way to go through life, I tells ya. Gov't assistance... now that's dignified.

It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.

It depends how you design the single payer program. As someone with family in cancer care under a single-payer system, I can attest to the fact that he's gotten exceptional care and expects to live another 10 or 20 years.

And 'faceless bureaucrat' ?  Are you saying that those without friends and family and neighbors who love you should DIE?

Oh wait, that is what you're saying: You can live if you're nice AND know lots of well-off people OR if you have money. If you're Poor or unfortunate enough to only know poor people or a bastard, then you deserve to die? Nice to see we have a candidate for a death panel right here.

What happens when a person's illness burns through the extra resources of a whole town because they need to match the payments offered by the guy who spent his whole life taking 20% of all the money they earned ? What if they've never had health care because they've been adopting puppies and babies and taking care of others, never thinking of themselves? should they only take care of those who are going to 'pay off' by being able to support them in their illness (which we ALL will have?)

And if the Insurance company decides to fight you every step of the way, should only those young and strong enough to partake in the adversarial process survive?

/Fark you


What I don't understand is that even if a person is greedy son of biatch who only cares only about themselves, why wouldn't you want a single-payer health care system.  If costs half as much for superior health outcomes on average.

It is like you can pay $2,000 a year on health care insurance and your poor neighbour won't have health care coverage.  Or, you can pay $1,000 a year in taxes and you and your neighbour will have health care.  It is like people are willing to pay more so long as their fellow man can suffer.  That is the most farked up part of it.
 
2013-08-02 12:07:11 PM  
How about banding together to get rid of our piece of shiat health insurance system to make sure everyone has easy access to decent levels of health care? That would be fantastic. I guess that would infringe on our FREEDOM to die of preventable, treatable, and chronic illnesses, though. Can't be infringing on all that freedom we have. This is AMERICA, after all.
 
2013-08-02 12:07:32 PM  

valar_morghulis: Mrbogey: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

Instead he'd have to hope for the compassion of a faceless bureaucrat properly filing and approving his request and then receive bottom tier care. Relying on your neighbors and people who genuinely care for you to help you, that's no way to go through life, I tells ya. Gov't assistance... now that's dignified.

It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.

Kinda like how my mother donated her kidney to save her sister's life, only to have the GOVERNMENT drop her coverage -- into which she had paid thousands and thousands of dollars over the years -- just because she was classified as having "chronic kidney disease" as a result of her single-kidney status.

Oh, wait. That was a HUMANA bureaucrat, not a government bureaucrat.


Jeez.  How selfish can you be?  Couldn't you spare one, tiny second, to think of the poor, Humana execs and stockholders?
 
2013-08-02 12:08:02 PM  

spongeboob: You don't really recover form a liver transplant, it is a daily diet of anti-rejection medications that have other side effects. Some people afterwards wish they had just gone gently into that good night.


My uncle had a liver transplant, and while he isn't 100%, and can no longer drink, his quality of life allows him to hunt, fish, boat and do carpentry work around the house, he just has to be more careful.  Even if this guy only is 50% of what he was, I'm sure he can still threaten to punch dying men on twitter a few hours a day.
 
2013-08-02 12:09:50 PM  

Mugato: He looks kind of young to have liver failure. Bummer. WTF is he doing without health insurance though?


Well, dying of liver failure, for one.
 
2013-08-02 12:11:18 PM  

Aristocles: cameroncrazy1984: Aristocles: Planning for this sort of thing is his personal responsibility but should he fail to adequately plan that doesn't mean he has to refuse any outside help.

Then he should not be criticizing others for getting outside help, or supporting the government in providing that outside help.

Except that the government uses money that they obtain via compulsion (taxes).


And?
 
2013-08-02 12:11:23 PM  

coeyagi: What is it with asshole alcoholic conservative bloggers?

Is this guy going to get a portrait made of him in armor, standing in front of Valhalla?

Can we just start lining up at his gravesite with very full bladders instead?


So I just want to verify you're really mad at this guy because he said mean things on the Internet about Ebert right?

That's why you're here in this thread on the Internet wishing for his death and hoping to piss on his grave right? He said mean things on the Internet? Just want to make that clear. If that is it could you maybe say something like "This conservative blogger said mean things about Robert Eber so I hate him and hope he dies a horrible death so I can piss on his grave." That would be great, thanks.
 
2013-08-02 12:11:41 PM  
Not being in pain is a business in a time when it is easily managed but requires money to do so.

fark this species called homo sapiens, I hope it farking dies off.
 
2013-08-02 12:13:17 PM  

js34603: coeyagi: What is it with asshole alcoholic conservative bloggers?

Is this guy going to get a portrait made of him in armor, standing in front of Valhalla?

Can we just start lining up at his gravesite with very full bladders instead?

So I just want to verify you're really mad at this guy because he said mean things on the Internet about Ebert right?

That's why you're here in this thread on the Internet wishing for his death and hoping to piss on his grave right? He said mean things on the Internet? Just want to make that clear. If that is it could you maybe say something like "This conservative blogger said mean things about Robert Eber so I hate him and hope he dies a horrible death so I can piss on his grave." That would be great, thanks.


That and he's a conservative blogger who says stupid things that thousands of idiots believe on RedState.com, a notorious drivel site that further ruins the political discourse of this country.  But you forgot to point that piece out too...
 
2013-08-02 12:14:19 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: MSFT: BarkingUnicorn:   Sociopaths cannot feel empathy.  Please stop misusing that term.

There was an article on BBC a few days ago about a recent study showing that psychopaths have the ability to selectively emphathize with others. This may lead to some breakthrough treatment programs in the future.

Looks like this is it.

I read it via Fark earlier; I don't buy it.  Subjects have empathy and feel compassion (the urge to act upon empathy to relieve another's suffering).  They are not sociopaths; they simply resist the urge to express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better, e. g,  get some strokes from the researchers, and express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better.  Standard normal behavior, not sociopathic. Researchers are  misinterpreting their observations.


I don't know. If you look at human medicine, the brain is largely unknown, and we don't find things mainly because we don't think about things outside our own experience. But, we already know that empathy and kindness can be turned off by other emotions. If you fly into a rage and start beating a guy on the street, you won't feel a whole lot of empathy for him. You may regret it for other reasons (Oh, no! Going to jail!), but you probably won't feel empathy for his messed up face. Usually when you fly into a rage and do that, your brain justifies it. You'll walk away and go "That's what you  deserve" instead of "Oh fark, I really screwed up your face. I'm sorry, bro."

I mean, look at empathy: You have people who feel almost nothing for other people or animals ("sociopath") and you have others that cry and bemoan when they see a guy get shot int he nuts with a baseball on the news or watch ol' yeller take one to the dome, and everything in between those two extremes.

I personally believe that most of this contradictory evidence about mental abilities is that mental states are more fluid than most people accept. So instead of "He's a sociopath and she's not a sociopath" it's more like "He has 5% empathy and she has 100% empathy and that guy is 50% empathy, and this guy is 23% empathy" and so forth.
 
2013-08-02 12:15:18 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: As a staunch conservative capitalist, I have to tell this fellow that he represents a terrible investment.

this right here is one of the reasons why i can't frickin stand conservatives.... he is a human being not something for you to exploit so you can get some kind of profit!

 
2013-08-02 12:19:18 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Aristocles: cameroncrazy1984: Aristocles: Planning for this sort of thing is his personal responsibility but should he fail to adequately plan that doesn't mean he has to refuse any outside help.

Then he should not be criticizing others for getting outside help, or supporting the government in providing that outside help.

Except that the government uses money that they obtain via compulsion (taxes).

And?


And, as moral animals, human beings need the moral freedom to give charity and help people on their own accord.

With every cent the government coerces from a man by means of taxation, a little piece of that man's humanity dies.
 
2013-08-02 12:21:10 PM  
Surely america's best satirist?
 
2013-08-02 12:21:12 PM  

Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.


Repeating this. Stop feeding the admitted troll.

And as for you, specifically, troll: cut this shiat out. How is this useful or entertaining? Wouldn't it be nicer to put together some coherent, genuine thought and sit at the grown-ups table where we might be able to talk about things reasonably?
 
2013-08-02 12:21:21 PM  

Aristocles: With every cent the government coerces from a man by means of taxation, a little piece of that man's humanity dies.


i.imgur.com
 
2013-08-02 12:22:47 PM  

amiable: Felgraf:

Bah, you're right, I farked up since Aristocles refers/can refer to *PLATO*, who I've got associated with Socrates in my head.

And eh. I suppose I just don't like it when people argue completely dishonestly. Admit to playing devil's advocate? That's cool! But trolling just really rubs me the wrong way.

He's gotten a lot better at it the last few days.  He is really honing his craft.  His first few efforts were unconvincing, now he is moving into the "somewhat plausible" category.


I'm tired of trolling as a concept. I want honest, spirited debates, none of this weird psychological playground shiat.
 
2013-08-02 12:22:52 PM  

Bloody William: Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.

Repeating this. Stop feeding the admitted troll.

And as for you, specifically, troll: cut this shiat out. How is this useful or entertaining? Wouldn't it be nicer to put together some coherent, genuine thought and sit at the grown-ups table where we might be able to talk about things reasonably?


You're a racist / troll for pointing out he's a racist / troll!

This is what the GOP / MODs actually believes.
 
2013-08-02 12:22:56 PM  

Aristocles: And, as moral animals


reads like this guy is more animal than moral...
www.sarawakreport.org
 
2013-08-02 12:24:04 PM  

Aristocles: And, as moral animals, human beings need the moral freedom to give charity and help people on their own accord.


Do we not have that? Also by what evidence are human beings "moral"?
 
2013-08-02 12:24:08 PM  

factoryconnection: You know, I'm glad that people were inspired to help.  I don't wish a painful, miserable death for anyone, much less young parents just because I disagree with their blowhard politics.  Yes, there is some karmic justice in him suffering so after openly mocking others' suffering, although he was just being a good Christian, perfectly in line with the Republican Bible.

However, what this will inevitably lead to is his charitable salvation being touted as the true way for this country, and that if he can get others to save him out of the goodness of their hearts, why can't everyone?  And that will be a god damned shame.


He's no different than the uninsured that use emergency rooms as their doctor's office. Someone else is picking up the tab.
 
2013-08-02 12:24:36 PM  

Aristocles: With every cent the government coerces from a man by means of taxation, a little piece of that man's humanity dies.


good

Humans should help humans for virtually no reason what so ever, it should just happen without feeling.
 
2013-08-02 12:24:43 PM  
You know, I'd be happy to contribute to this guy's medical costs... through my taxes, under a single payer system, where we as a society recognize that every person is entitled to basic medical care, regardless of whether people like them, what choices they make in life, or how wealthy they are.
 
2013-08-02 12:24:50 PM  

qorkfiend: Dr Dreidel: Everyone who donated has financed his awful planning. Shouldn't a father of two young girls be a better life-planner? Isn't that the responsible, "family-oriented" thing to do, Libertarians?

I now wonder where his daughters get their insurance from.


The regret-filled wife.
 
2013-08-02 12:26:44 PM  
This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.
 
2013-08-02 12:27:03 PM  
Eh, he might be a bad person, but he still deserves free health care, and I still think that it's nice that people are helping him to get health care even though they shouldn't have to in this way.
 
2013-08-02 12:27:36 PM  

Headso: Aristocles: And, as moral animals

reads like this guy is more animal than moral...
[www.sarawakreport.org image 506x376]


They should make him read those tweets out loud over and over in front of his children as he's getting his treatment.
 
2013-08-02 12:28:07 PM  

orclover: fark this species called homo sapiens, I hope it farking dies off.


Don't worry, it will. If not by our own hand then probably by a marauding Orc war fleet.

wh40k.lexicanum.com
 
2013-08-02 12:28:17 PM  

MSFT: BarkingUnicorn: MSFT: BarkingUnicorn:   Sociopaths cannot feel empathy.  Please stop misusing that term.

There was an article on BBC a few days ago about a recent study showing that psychopaths have the ability to selectively emphathize with others. This may lead to some breakthrough treatment programs in the future.

Looks like this is it.

I read it via Fark earlier; I don't buy it.  Subjects have empathy and feel compassion (the urge to act upon empathy to relieve another's suffering).  They are not sociopaths; they simply resist the urge to express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better, e. g,  get some strokes from the researchers, and express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better.  Standard normal behavior, not sociopathic. Researchers are  misinterpreting their observations.

So your contention is that every one of the criminals used in the study, locked up and previously evaluated as psychopaths, are all actually mislabeled as psychopaths? If this is true then we really have no accurate testing for psychopathy then do we?


No, we don't have any way to tell what's going on in a person's mind.  That's why conjecture and conclusions about such things and polygraph tests are inadmissible in courts. A shrink's "evaluation" is merely his opinion, unsupported by any direct experience.  It consists of assumptions derived from observations of behavior, and behavior is neither emotion nor mentation.
 
2013-08-02 12:28:46 PM  

Chummer45: You know, I'd be happy to contribute to this guy's medical costs... through my taxes, under a single payer system, where we as a society recognize that every person is entitled to basic medical care, regardless of whether people like them, what choices they make in life, or how wealthy they are.


I think this is the part that rubs people the wrong way more than anything else.  They're fiscal conservatives who think that it's terrible they have to pay for someone's smoking habit, but of course they're also not thinking that ACA does have provisions for preventive care not to mention it's cheaper than paying for the uninsured in the ER.  But hey, they've been lapping up the dogsh*t from this guy's cohorts for 3 years now about ACA, so would it be the Christian thing to do to let them die from E. Coli found in said dogsh*t.  Libertarian Jesus says yes!
 
2013-08-02 12:29:44 PM  

Smelly McUgly: Eh, he might be a bad person, but he still deserves free health care, and I still think that it's nice that people are helping him to get health care even though they shouldn't have to in this way.


On the flip side, it is nice to choose not to subsidize him and his antics...though I'd rather let my taxes be able to save him and my neighbor than have both die of treatable illnesses.
 
2013-08-02 12:30:22 PM  

Headso: Aristocles: And, as moral animals

reads like this guy is more animal than moral...
[www.sarawakreport.org image 506x376]


Hey, c'mon now! Animals don't act like that.  That's clearly his moral side.
 
2013-08-02 12:30:30 PM  

Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.


He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. But no one deserves liver failure.
 
2013-08-02 12:32:01 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Aristocles: And, as moral animals, human beings need the moral freedom to give charity and help people on their own accord.

Do we not have that? Also by what evidence are human beings "moral"?


We do not have that freedom absolutely, however, with whatever pennies Uncle Sam leaves us we do have the freedom to do as we see fit.

Your second question is very good! I'd like to think that human beings are moral creatures who can make decisions based on what is Good rather than being passive automatons.
 
2013-08-02 12:33:36 PM  

Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.


Question is, why hasn't an admitted troll been banhammered?

It's in the goddamn FAQ.




Oh wait...never mind.



i865.photobucket.com
 
2013-08-02 12:33:37 PM  

Mugato: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.

He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. But no one deserves liver failure.


Here's to hoping he gets better, realizes the folly of his previous beliefs, recants previous stances publicly and becomes a more centrist/left-of-center blogger.
 
2013-08-02 12:33:54 PM  

Aristocles: We do not have that freedom absolutely, however, with whatever pennies Uncle Sam leaves us we do have the freedom to do as we see fit.


Why do we not have that freedom? Do charities not exist?

Aristocles: I'd like to think that human beings are moral creatures who can make decisions based on what is Good rather than being passive automatons.


So, your entire philosophy is based on fantasy and wishful thinking. Well, I guess everyone has their thing. Yours is being completely wrong.
 
2013-08-02 12:33:59 PM  

Mugato: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.

He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. handed a bill for the services and setup with a payment plan.


As the commercial said; you can pay me now or you can pay me later.
 
2013-08-02 12:34:58 PM  

Maud Dib: Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.

Question is, why hasn't an admitted troll been banhammered?It's in the goddamn FAQ.


Oh wait...never mind.

[i865.photobucket.com image 400x495]


Well, maybe he's an admitted ALT too.  Remember that one time at Fark camp, the moderator came in and said ALTing is fine.  So, maybe in the Fark deck of cards, being an admitted ALT trumps being an admitted TROLL?

I dunno, I'm just asking questions!
 
2013-08-02 12:38:55 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Let's say he's been without insurance for the last 3 years. His portion of an employer's plan premium would have been about $951/year, or $79.25/month. For 3 years or 36 months, he chose to spend $2,853 on everything but planning for this kind of contingency. $2800 wouldn't be near enough to cover this illness, sure, but the insurance he bought with it would have, even if you figure in a $10k deductible (his goal was $25k).


This is one argument I never like.  I mean, what if that $2,800 went to food, or house payments, or car payments, or car upkeep, or any of a bajillion needs that were more immediate at the time?  That's why it's a bad argument for a mandate, but a good one for universal healthcare: with UHC, he wouldn't have to choose between dying of liver failure and dying of starvation, or pneumonia because he didn't have anywhere but an alley to sleep.  But with a mandate, that forces him to be dying of starvation.

/I'd rather he not have to choose.
 
2013-08-02 12:40:18 PM  
BarkingUnicorn:
  Subjects have empathy and feel compassion (the urge to act upon empathy to relieve another's suffering).  They are not sociopaths; they simply resist the urge to express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better, e. g,  get some strokes from the researchers, and express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better.  Standard normal behavior, not sociopathic. Researchers are  misinterpreting their observations.

...

No, we don't have any way to tell what's going on in a person's mind.  That's why conjecture and conclusions about such things and polygraph tests are inadmissible in courts. A shrink's "evaluation" is merely his opinion, unsupported by any direct experience.  It consists of assumptions derived from observations of behavior, and behavior is neither emotion nor mentation.


You go from telling us exactly what is their mind to telling us that the researchers, psychologists, etc. have no way to tell what is happening. You can't have it both ways. You also imply in your first paragraph that there is such a thing as a true psychopath but then back track on that in your followup post.

No offense, but you might want to stay out of science in general and research altogether.
 
2013-08-02 12:40:49 PM  
So he was an alcoholic who isn't taking responsibly for himself...and made fun of dying people and Muslims...and right now there are thousands of other people with mounting medical bills who don't get a fund online that went viral. Seriously?
 
2013-08-02 12:40:49 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Why do we not have that freedom? Do charities not exist?


I said we do not have that freedom absolutely, as we are deprived from making charitable decisions ourselves when the government takes our money.

cameroncrazy1984: So, your entire philosophy is based on fantasy and wishful thinking. Well, I guess everyone has their thing. Yours is being completely wrong.


Just because I said "I'd like to think that x is true" doesn't mean that "x" is not true.
 
2013-08-02 12:41:33 PM  

coeyagi: Maud Dib: Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.

Question is, why hasn't an admitted troll been banhammered?It's in the goddamn FAQ.


Oh wait...never mind.

[i865.photobucket.com image 400x495]

Well, maybe he's an admitted ALT too.  Remember that one time at Fark camp, the moderator came in and said ALTing is fine.  So, maybe in the Fark deck of cards, being an admitted ALT trumps being an admitted TROLL?

I dunno, I'm just asking questions!


I am an admitted alt.
 
2013-08-02 12:41:56 PM  

coeyagi: js34603: coeyagi: What is it with asshole alcoholic conservative bloggers?

Is this guy going to get a portrait made of him in armor, standing in front of Valhalla?

Can we just start lining up at his gravesite with very full bladders instead?

So I just want to verify you're really mad at this guy because he said mean things on the Internet about Ebert right?

That's why you're here in this thread on the Internet wishing for his death and hoping to piss on his grave right? He said mean things on the Internet? Just want to make that clear. If that is it could you maybe say something like "This conservative blogger said mean things about Robert Eber so I hate him and hope he dies a horrible death so I can piss on his grave." That would be great, thanks.

That and he's a conservative blogger who says stupid things that thousands of idiots believe on RedState.com, a notorious drivel site that further ruins the political discourse of this country.  But you forgot to point that piece out too...


Cool cool, you can toss the I disagree with him politically part in there. So now I just want you to say "This guy I disagree with politically said mean things on the Internet so I want him to die a terrible death, and I want to piss on his grave."
 
2013-08-02 12:42:10 PM  

EmmaLou: So he was an alcoholic who isn't taking responsibly for himself...and made fun of dying people and Muslims...and right now there are thousands of other people with mounting medical bills who don't get a fund online that went viral. Seriously?


Well, maybe they should have been a just a little more publicly hateful of dying people and Muslims if they wanted public sympathy!
 
2013-08-02 12:42:26 PM  

Bloody William: I'm tired of trolling as a concept. I want honest, spirited debates, none of this weird psychological playground shiat.


If anyone in charge is reading, let me second this. If it's about finances I would gladly pay $10 a month for what BW just described.
 
2013-08-02 12:43:51 PM  

Mugato: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.

He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. But no one deserves liver failure.


As a Buddhist even I would vote for this option.
 
2013-08-02 12:44:34 PM  

sammyk: As someone that has lived through a liver transplant I have to say this guy is proper farked. Most likely outcome is he does not survive and his family is left destitute. 25k doesn't even get started on keeping him alive long enough to even be considered to be put on the list.

First off it seems he has a history of drinking. Even if it is not the primary cause of liver failure no transplant team will even start the workup until he has demonstrated 6 months of sobriety. There are no shortcuts on this. Transplant teams have heard it all and seen it all. You will not fool them and they will gladly let you die if you continue to drink. Same for smoking. Same for not following Dr's orders.

Now during that 6 month period he's going to have a lot of Dr's appointments. Mine were weekly. Let's not forget weekly bloodwork that runs about 2k per week.

Now that's just routine stuff. He is in the hospital so I am going to guess ICU because when your liver puts you in the hospital its always farking critical. Lots of fun things can happen. Like when my kidneys said fark it we feel like failing too. Ah yes multi organ failure is a grand old time. It put me in ICU for 16 days at around 80k/day. Or he could have his esophageal varices burst. Super fun time. I lost consciousness when it happened to me. My wife tells me the ambulance crew was busy dropping IV's into me anywhere tehy could get a vein because I had already lost 5 liters of blood and the plasma was leaking out of me as fast as they could drop it in. MUCHO THANKS TO BLOOD DONORS EVERYWHERE!!!!! About then my doctors started thinking I was death proof. I did not feel like it. That was not the end either but it was the worst of it. Well except for the time TB decided to setup camp in the fluid in my belly that was supposed to be there so My body really didn't know how to fight it.

When I wasn't in the hospital trying to die I had a miserable existence. Most days I was just hoping I would piss or shiat. Sounds like a sim ...


Damn.  I can't think of anything worse than that.  Glad you made it.
 
2013-08-02 12:45:17 PM  

Aristocles: Except that the government uses money that they obtain via compulsion (taxes).


Your're not compelled to live here. Feel free to emigrate. I hear Somalia is almost regulation-free.
 
2013-08-02 12:47:38 PM  
js34603:
Cool cool, you can toss the I disagree with him politically part in there. So now I just want you to say "This guy I disagree with politically said mean things on the Internet so I want him to die a terrible death, and I want to piss on his grave."

You trot this out in every thread. Is hyperbole on the Internet such a difficult concept for you?
 
2013-08-02 12:48:41 PM  

coeyagi: What is it with asshole alcoholic conservative bloggers?


Well, think of how much self-loathing the average wingnut must feel. I mean, that is not a group with which emotionally healthy people associate. Now multiply that self-loathing by about 10, and that is where the the typical wingnut media personality lives (Limbaugh, Coulter, Beck ,etc.). They recognize that their entire world-views are utterly without merit, devoid of even the tiniest scrap of truth or virtue. And every time they look in the mirror they see the faintest glimmer of the innocent children they once were, before Republican ideology turned their hearts to ignorance, bitterness and hate. And they have to live with that knowledge; that they are utterly without worth or merit, and there is no possibility that that will ever change.

Would you want to face that kind of life sober?

The alcoholism is a deliberate, slow suicide. But that's all wingnuts are capable of, because they aren't brave enough to suck a shotgun to orgasm.
 
2013-08-02 12:50:05 PM  

Mugato: stoli n coke: If he's an alcoholic, unless he's very rich or famous, the odds of him getting a transplant are pretty slim.

How can they prove he's an alcoholic?

/may be relevant to my interests someday


One thing doctors automatically assume is that you are completely lowballing them on how much you drink. They are going to factor up whatever you tell them by a certian amount...
 
2013-08-02 12:50:07 PM  

Arsten: BarkingUnicorn: MSFT: BarkingUnicorn:   Sociopaths cannot feel empathy.  Please stop misusing that term.

There was an article on BBC a few days ago about a recent study showing that psychopaths have the ability to selectively emphathize with others. This may lead to some breakthrough treatment programs in the future.

Looks like this is it.

I read it via Fark earlier; I don't buy it.  Subjects have empathy and feel compassion (the urge to act upon empathy to relieve another's suffering).  They are not sociopaths; they simply resist the urge to express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better, e. g,  get some strokes from the researchers, and express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better.  Standard normal behavior, not sociopathic. Researchers are  misinterpreting their observations.

I don't know. If you look at human medicine, the brain is largely unknown, and we don't find things mainly because we don't think about things outside our own experience. But, we already know that empathy and kindness can be turned off by other emotions. If you fly into a rage and start beating a guy on the street, you won't feel a whole lot of empathy for him. You may regret it for other reasons (Oh, no! Going to jail!), but you probably won't feel empathy for his messed up face. Usually when you fly into a rage and do that, your brain justifies it. You'll walk away and go "That's what you  deserve" instead of "Oh fark, I really screwed up your face. I'm sorry, bro."

I mean, look at empathy: You have people who feel almost nothing for other people or animals ("sociopath") and you have others that cry and bemoan when they see a guy get shot int he nuts with a baseball on the news or watch ol' yeller take one to the dome, and everything in between those two extremes.

I personally believe that most of this contradictory evidence about mental abilities is that mental states are more fluid t ...


In short, we don't know and we can't know.  So we spin whatever delusions make us feel better ("make sense," because "sense" enables the delusion of predictability, and the ego desperately desires to predict that it will continue to exist even it never did).
 
2013-08-02 12:51:32 PM  

coeyagi: Maud Dib: Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.

Question is, why hasn't an admitted troll been banhammered?It's in the goddamn FAQ.


Oh wait...never mind.

[i865.photobucket.com image 400x495]

Well, maybe he's an admitted ALT too.  Remember that one time at Fark camp, the moderator came in and said ALTing is fine.  So, maybe in the Fark deck of cards, being an admitted ALT trumps being an admitted TROLL?

I dunno, I'm just asking questions!


Interestingly, some mods feel that the reason Fark is lacking in reasonable conservatives is not because of alts like that who make conservatives look bad with every post, but the REAL fault lies with the ones who call them out on their lies and bullshiat.

Spreading and spamming debunked BS lies is OK.
Debunking said lies is bad and you should feel bad.
 
2013-08-02 12:52:54 PM  

cubic_spleen:  they aren't brave enough to suck a shotgun to orgasm.


What a terrible, beautiful phrase. I'll definitely be stealing that one.
 
2013-08-02 12:54:04 PM  

Mugato: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.

He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. But no one deserves liver failure.


Not all that long ago, I would have agreed with you but the bagger crowd has expended any goodwill from me. These animals do everything they can to hurt people for nothing more than the sake of hurting people. I hope he has a long and painful go of it, which ends with him dying in a pile of his own piss and shiat for the whole world to see. I hope his daughters' lives are destroyed by it and his wife ends up sucking diseased dick in an alley to fund her crack habit when the banks and insurance companies take everything they have. It's sad, but the only thing to get them to learn is if they experience the agony they so gleefully celebrate when other people endure it.
 
2013-08-02 12:54:22 PM  

MSFT: BarkingUnicorn:
  Subjects have empathy and feel compassion (the urge to act upon empathy to relieve another's suffering).  They are not sociopaths; they simply resist the urge to express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better, e. g,  get some strokes from the researchers, and express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better.  Standard normal behavior, not sociopathic. Researchers are  misinterpreting their observations.

...

No, we don't have any way to tell what's going on in a person's mind.  That's why conjecture and conclusions about such things and polygraph tests are inadmissible in courts. A shrink's "evaluation" is merely his opinion, unsupported by any direct experience.  It consists of assumptions derived from observations of behavior, and behavior is neither emotion nor mentation.

You go from telling us exactly what is their mind to telling us that the researchers, psychologists, etc. have no way to tell what is happening. You can't have it both ways. You also imply in your first paragraph that there is such a thing as a true psychopath but then back track on that in your followup post.

No offense, but you might want to stay out of science in general and research altogether.


Believe me, I will.  I prefer the delightful wonderment of not knowing, and the cynical comfort of knowing that I don't know.

I suppose I should  have prefaced my remarks with, "IMHO," but it seems obvious to me that everything about Mind is just someone's opinion.
 
2013-08-02 12:54:34 PM  

Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win. We need to stop helping conservatives. This man deserves whatever disease he has.


I disagree. I don't know much about this man other than what's been posted in this thread. But I know I don't want to emulate his life or his lack of compassion. I'm better than that.
 
2013-08-02 12:54:55 PM  

NeverDrunk23: Interestingly, some mods feel that the reason Fark is lacking in reasonable conservatives is not because of alts like that who make conservatives look bad with every post, but the REAL fault lies with the ones who call them out on their lies and bullshiat.


I don't think there are any "reasonable" conservatives, they all have the exact same arguments some just use crazy hyperbole and poor spelling and others use prettier verbiage.
 
2013-08-02 12:54:57 PM  

The Why Not Guy: Bloody William: I'm tired of trolling as a concept. I want honest, spirited debates, none of this weird psychological playground shiat.

If anyone in charge is reading, let me second this. If it's about finances I would gladly pay $10 a month for what BW just described.



Seriously, what do the moderators even do around here besides say "Moderators can't greenlight articles!"? I get the feeling that half the trolls are just admin alts. Look at JWP, it's impossible to get that many freaking greenlights unless you either A. don't work at all for 7+ years or B. greenlight your own headlines.
 
2013-08-02 12:56:32 PM  
I'm sure that the conservative blogger will completely miss the whole message and try to use this as a way to prove that all government programs are worthless and that only private charities are needed.
 
2013-08-02 12:56:34 PM  

Riothamus: The Why Not Guy: Bloody William: I'm tired of trolling as a concept. I want honest, spirited debates, none of this weird psychological playground shiat.

If anyone in charge is reading, let me second this. If it's about finances I would gladly pay $10 a month for what BW just described.


Seriously, what do the moderators even do around here besides say "Moderators can't greenlight articles!"? I get the feeling that half the trolls are just admin alts. Look at JWP, it's impossible to get that many freaking greenlights unless you either A. don't work at all for 7+ years or B. greenlight your own headlines.


Real news. Real funny. Perhaps this mission statement has something to do with it.
 
2013-08-02 12:56:48 PM  

Godscrack: [cdn.ebaumsworld.com image 639x385]


Oh Lawd!
 
2013-08-02 12:58:00 PM  

MSFT: js34603:
Cool cool, you can toss the I disagree with him politically part in there. So now I just want you to say "This guy I disagree with politically said mean things on the Internet so I want him to die a terrible death, and I want to piss on his grave."

You trot this out in every thread. Is hyperbole on the Internet such a difficult concept for you?


Trot this out in every thread? Hard to believe since I'm not in every thread and the threads I'm in very seldom have anything to do with people dying.

Also, hyperbole is the calling card of a weak position. If you have an opinion state it, don't exaggerate it for effect. He had an opportunity to say "oh I'm just exaggerating I don't wish death on this person I disagree with", instead he did, oh what's it called, doubling down on the derp.

What's a difficult concept for me is the incredible cognitive dissonance of people who say "this guy said mean things about Roger Ebert on the Internet, so I hope he dies a horrible death and I want to piss on his grave"...on the Internet. That level of ridiculousness just kind of bugs me. I guess maybe I could attribute it to hyperbole and ignore it because we're on the same side (I have no farking idea who this blogger is, sounds like a jerk, and I doubt I agree with him politically either) like you seem to be doing, but instead I just want our angry friend there and the rest of the derpers in this thread to acknowledge the incredible stupidity of reacting to a blogger acting like a jerk by acting Ike jerks themselves.
 
2013-08-02 12:58:39 PM  
BarkingUnicorn:
Believe me, I will.  I prefer the delightful wonderment of not knowing, and the cynical comfort of knowing that I don't know.

I suppose I should  have prefaced my remarks with, "IMHO," but it seems obvious to me that everything about Mind is just someone's opinion.


Which is perfectly fine - but try not to confuse you not knowing things with other people's ability to discover, test and then know things. Just because you have opted out doesn't mean the rest of us have, nor does it invalidate the findings of science that are reproducible and testable.
 
2013-08-02 01:00:35 PM  

Riothamus: The Why Not Guy: Bloody William: I'm tired of trolling as a concept. I want honest, spirited debates, none of this weird psychological playground shiat.

If anyone in charge is reading, let me second this. If it's about finances I would gladly pay $10 a month for what BW just described.


Seriously, what do the moderators even do around here besides say "Moderators can't greenlight articles!"? I get the feeling that half the trolls are just admin alts. Look at JWP, it's impossible to get that many freaking greenlights unless you either A. don't work at all for 7+ years or B. greenlight your own headlines.


It certainly doesn't endear me to fork over $$ for TotalFark, that's for goddamn sure.
 
2013-08-02 01:00:42 PM  

Three Crooked Squirrels: This reminds me a little of the GOPers that are staunchly against gay rights . . . until a family member turns out to be gay.  Then, they change their position overnight.  It seems to be par for the course for these conservatives - unable to back something that doesn't affect them personally, until it affects them personally.


Classic conservative story along those lines.  Back in the late 60's/early 70's Paul Harvey was probably the best known conservative voice on radio (he was Limbaugh before there was a Limbaugh) with an average of 22 million listeners daily and had a syndicated column that was published in thousands of newspapers across the country.  The toast of the town in conservative circles, you could always count on Harvey to be the echo if not the source of everything "pro-conservative" in regards to politics, society, religion, etc.  A staunch supporter of Nixon, he was constantly voicing his opinion that we needed to go all out in Vietnam, he supported Curtis LeMay's position we should drop a nuke or two on North Vietnam, or as LeMay famously put it:  "Bomb them back to the Stone Age."

One day in 1970, Harvey went on the air and completely reversed himself on the subject of Vietnam, declaring that the US should disengage themselves from the war and bring the troops home immediately. Conservatives were in a tizzy trying to figure out why their best known spokesperson had completely abandoned them on this issue.  The answer arrived the next day when Paul, Jr. filed for conscientious objector status with his local draft board.

BTW, Harvey had changed his name early in his radio career and then lied about it for several years following.  The reason why?  He himself had been drafted during WWII and was sent to aviation school (flight training), he stole a plane and went for a "joy ride" in order to feign mental illness and get a Section 8 Discharge from the military and it worked.  In the face of all those millions of veterans who had served, he didn't want the truth to get out that Mr. All-American Conservative was a coward who didn't want to fight for his country in WWII.  This (draft dodging) of course, seems to be another somewhat familiar trait among many conservatives; see:  Gingrich, Cheney, Limbaugh, Romney, Nugent, O'Reilly, Kristol, et al)
 
2013-08-02 01:00:44 PM  

js34603: What's a difficult concept for me is the incredible cognitive dissonance of people who say "this guy said mean things about Roger Ebert on the Internet, so I hope he dies a horrible death and I want to piss on his grave"


And he advocates that people not have access to healthcare if they can't afford it, don't forget about that piece of the douchepuzzle.
 
2013-08-02 01:02:50 PM  

Jairzinho: tbeatty: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

That would be nice, right?

He'd be dead, Jim.

Oh right. The Dead Panels at the FEMA Camps.


No, the long wait for care and the lack of insight to know whether it could be improved is waht will kill people.  Don't worry though, it's fringy enough that overall mortality will be unaffected as the numbers the press reports are overwhelmed by infant mortality and they'll just change the standard like Japan did if it ever looks worse.  Single payer isn't a panacea that makes care affordable.  It is a way, however, to eliminate the "keeping up with the Jones's" mentality that pervades capitalist society.  That mentality is what highlights disparity and drives innovation as well as overall improvement.  When everyone get's the same, no one knows if it's crappy or not and a stagnate crappy will become the standard.  It doesn't take a PhD in economics to understand that single payer + finite budget = rationed care.  If the system isn't based on risk/payout, it's not insurance and will not reflect an overall push for improvement.   There's no incentive.
 
2013-08-02 01:03:30 PM  

MSFT: Raharu:
Are you BojanglesPaladin's new squire?

He's our resident White Knight of Ayn Rand.

Who wouldn't jerk off to this?

[media.npr.org image 850x637]


The thing about sharks, they have these black, dead eyes...........
 
2013-08-02 01:03:45 PM  

impaler: Libertarianism: the belief the government shouldn't help people because they are vile moochers that don't deserve it. Also, we are totally willing to give to charity to help these vile moochers that don't deserve it.


I am going to school and jobless so I am super in debt at this point and  basically have my own problems to deal with...  I was walking to my class and I came a lady who said "excuse me my nephew is sick can you please spare some change" I looked at her gave her an apologetic smile and replied "I am sorry" and continued walking ...she looked at me and said "Ohh wow really? okay" as if it was my responsibility to help out. I came super close to yelling at her but i just kept walking

If i did give her money I probably would have received an insincere thank you and she would probably be thinking "thats all i get?"

I normally love to help others when I can but I will probably never ever give another a begger my spare change again!

few years back there was this older guy who was homeless living in a parking, I use to always leave bottled water and half my sandwich by his sleeping bag.
 
2013-08-02 01:04:57 PM  

Aristocles: as we are deprived from making charitable decisions ourselves when the government takes our money.


No we are not. The government does not take our money. If your statement were true, we couldn't pay for anything at all.

Aristocles: Just because I said "I'd like to think that x is true" doesn't mean that "x" is not true


Correct, however what you'd like to be true is proven empirically to be wrong. Humans are demonstrably immoral beings.
 
2013-08-02 01:05:32 PM  

TV's Vinnie: I'm sure that the conservative blogger will completely miss the whole message and try to use this as a way to prove that all government programs are worthless and that only private charities are needed.


I feel that in the end, he'll go right back to how he was before this happened and the irony and hypocrisy will never click with him.
 
2013-08-02 01:06:25 PM  

Headso: js34603: What's a difficult concept for me is the incredible cognitive dissonance of people who say "this guy said mean things about Roger Ebert on the Internet, so I hope he dies a horrible death and I want to piss on his grave"

And he advocates that people not have access to healthcare if they can't afford it, don't forget about that piece of the douchepuzzle.


So? This is where the issue gets confused because you can't tell someone to stop acting ridiculous without someone saying "he started it!" Is this 1st grade?

The guy writes things you don't like on the Internet. He acts like a jerk. I know how I'll respond, by acting like a jerk too! Truly that's how our problems will be solved.

Hey don't donate to him. I'm not going to. Don't cry when he dies, I know I won't (unless I think about his kids too much). But stop trying to out asshole him and acting self righteous about it when you're behaving just like he would if you were the one laid up with no insurance. (Not you specifically, but quite a few others).
 
2013-08-02 01:06:54 PM  

TV's Vinnie: I'm sure that the conservative blogger will completely miss the whole message and try to use this as a way to prove that all government programs are worthless and that only private charities are needed.


The Paul-Cruz healthcare plan calls for all uninsured Americans to create a conservative blog and solicit donations in the event of illness or injury.
 
2013-08-02 01:08:55 PM  
You know, I've considered myself a liberal simply out of practical means, not because I'm some "bleeding-heart" or have a ton of empathy to give around.  So when I hear stories like this one, I will admit to having a bit of schadenfruede. Not that much to see him die or hate him, because I don't need that on my ledger, but being that he is conservative, he probably threw out that 47% number like it was candy. Probably a "I'm a self made man, I don't need any government helping ME out" type. Well guess what buddy, you ARE now that 47% that you despised so much, congratulations, moocher!

But it doesn't surprise me about people like him. If it was a liberal dying of cancer, he'd probably gloat endlessly until said individual died, and from the way he ranted at Roger Ebert, he definitely was. Now like I said, I don't want him to die at all. I hope he lives until his 80s in the best of health. But do I have compassion for him? No. If people want to contribute to him, that's fine, but call his ass out publicly about how he can't live up to his own standards. Make him a household name on Fark and other sites about the failures of conservatism.
 
2013-08-02 01:09:18 PM  

js34603: But stop trying to out asshole him


Based on his comments and him being a modern conservative in general I don't think that is possible, so don't worry he will always hold the lowest ground.
 
2013-08-02 01:11:01 PM  

js34603: MSFT: js34603:
Cool cool, you can toss the I disagree with him politically part in there. So now I just want you to say "This guy I disagree with politically said mean things on the Internet so I want him to die a terrible death, and I want to piss on his grave."

You trot this out in every thread. Is hyperbole on the Internet such a difficult concept for you?

Trot this out in every thread? Hard to believe since I'm not in every thread and the threads I'm in very seldom have anything to do with people dying.

Also, hyperbole is the calling card of a weak position. If you have an opinion state it, don't exaggerate it for effect. He had an opportunity to say "oh I'm just exaggerating I don't wish death on this person I disagree with", instead he did, oh what's it called, doubling down on the derp.

What's a difficult concept for me is the incredible cognitive dissonance of people who say "this guy said mean things about Roger Ebert on the Internet, so I hope he dies a horrible death and I want to piss on his grave"...on the Internet. That level of ridiculousness just kind of bugs me. I guess maybe I could attribute it to hyperbole and ignore it because we're on the same side (I have no farking idea who this blogger is, sounds like a jerk, and I doubt I agree with him politically either) like you seem to be doing, but instead I just want our angry friend there and the rest of the derpers in this thread to acknowledge the incredible stupidity of reacting to a blogger acting like a jerk by acting Ike jerks themselves.


I understand your position on the hypocritical aspect, but don't necessarily agree with you 100%. But for this and future Limbaugh threads you may want to just cut and paste a concise statement along the lines of "It seems hypocritical to damn a person for hateful speech by the use of hateful speech".
 
2013-08-02 01:11:36 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Aristocles: as we are deprived from making charitable decisions ourselves when the government takes our money.

No we are not. The government does not take our money. If your statement were true, we couldn't pay for anything at all.

Aristocles: Just because I said "I'd like to think that x is true" doesn't mean that "x" is not true

Correct, however what you'd like to be true is proven empirically to be wrong. Humans are demonstrably immoral beings.


To the first point, I'm saying that any money taxed away from an individual cannot be used by him or her as he or she feels fit. I'm not saying that all of our money is taxed away.

To the second point, when I say "moral," I oppose it to "amoral" not "immoral." Human beings have moral freedom, meaning they are free to act morally or immorally.
 
2013-08-02 01:11:37 PM  

Headso: js34603: But stop trying to out asshole him

Based on his comments and him being a modern conservative in general I don't think that is possible, so don't worry he will always hold the lowest ground.


Shrug probably, but that doesn't mean we should have a race to see if the modern liberals here can meet him down there.
 
2013-08-02 01:13:10 PM  
mrshowrules:

I find it funny that Libertarians are content to have people pay taxes to kill people.


You've been talking to psuedo-Libertarians.  Real libertarians are opposed to forcing people to pay for wars they oppose.
 
2013-08-02 01:14:30 PM  

NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

That would be nice, right?


I do believe we're done here...

/glad the story has a happy ending
//but seriously, it's not socialism when I'M the one in need
 
2013-08-02 01:15:24 PM  

MSFT: js34603: MSFT: js34603:
Cool cool, you can toss the I disagree with him politically part in there. So now I just want you to say "This guy I disagree with politically said mean things on the Internet so I want him to die a terrible death, and I want to piss on his grave."

You trot this out in every thread. Is hyperbole on the Internet such a difficult concept for you?

Trot this out in every thread? Hard to believe since I'm not in every thread and the threads I'm in very seldom have anything to do with people dying.

Also, hyperbole is the calling card of a weak position. If you have an opinion state it, don't exaggerate it for effect. He had an opportunity to say "oh I'm just exaggerating I don't wish death on this person I disagree with", instead he did, oh what's it called, doubling down on the derp.

What's a difficult concept for me is the incredible cognitive dissonance of people who say "this guy said mean things about Roger Ebert on the Internet, so I hope he dies a horrible death and I want to piss on his grave"...on the Internet. That level of ridiculousness just kind of bugs me. I guess maybe I could attribute it to hyperbole and ignore it because we're on the same side (I have no farking idea who this blogger is, sounds like a jerk, and I doubt I agree with him politically either) like you seem to be doing, but instead I just want our angry friend there and the rest of the derpers in this thread to acknowledge the incredible stupidity of reacting to a blogger acting like a jerk by acting Ike jerks themselves.

I understand your position on the hypocritical aspect, but don't necessarily agree with you 100%. But for this and future Limbaugh threads you may want to just cut and paste a concise statement along the lines of "It seems hypocritical to damn a person for hateful speech by the use of hateful speech".


Would save me time and probably have the same exact effect, which is none. But hey maybe one person in a Limbaugh thread or some other hate thread will have a moment of clarity and realize the hypocrisy and stop doing that.

But probably not.
 
2013-08-02 01:16:05 PM  

tbeatty: That mentality is what highlights disparity and drives innovation as well as overall improvement. When everyone get's the same, no one knows if it's crappy or not and a stagnate crappy will become the standard. It doesn't take a PhD in economics to understand that single payer + finite budget = rationed care. If the system isn't based on risk/payout, it's not insurance and will not reflect an overall push for improvement. There's no incentive.


No, what tends to drive innovation and overall improvement, in medicine and most forms of research, is grants (mostly government funded) to universities.

Because, and I'm going to give you a big hint here: RESEARCH WILL NOT ATTRACT INVESTORS IN TODAY'S INSTANT-PROFIT-NOW MENTALITY. Because most of the interesting research will not be able to guarantee a return, or even guarantee it can be used for *anything* for *decades*. If we knew the outcome in advance, we wouldn't call it research, we'd call it engineering.(Not to belittle engineers: They are HIGHLY important, especially at translating research into real-world applications).
 
2013-08-02 01:16:10 PM  

knobmaker: mrshowrules:

I find it funny that Libertarians are content to have people pay taxes to kill people.


You've been talking to psuedo-Libertarians.  Real libertarians are opposed to forcing people to pay for wars they oppose.


I have yet to see two libertarians agree on anything, ever. Because of that, no one can really know what a REAL libertarian is.

Besides an anarchist with a trust fund.
 
2013-08-02 01:18:14 PM  

JAGChem82: You know, I've considered myself a liberal simply out of practical means, not because I'm some "bleeding-heart" or have a ton of empathy to give around.


One of the greatest political blunders of the last few decades is how the left has allowed the word liberal to take on so many bad connotations.  Somewhere along the way, a narrative was adopted that liberals listen to their hearts, while conservatives use their heads.  It's a patently ridiculous concept.

While it's true that policies that call for the survival of the fittest do appeal to the lizard brain in a lot of ways, thousands of years of history have shown that cooperation yields far better results for a society.   Pooling resources to take on large problems faced by a community is the very basis of civilization.  You don't have to empathize with the poor to realize that improving their situation is going to improve society as a whole.  Liberalism comes from both the heart and the brain.  Modern conservatism is pulled out of people's asses.
 
2013-08-02 01:19:42 PM  

MSFT: BarkingUnicorn:
Believe me, I will.  I prefer the delightful wonderment of not knowing, and the cynical comfort of knowing that I don't know.

I suppose I should  have prefaced my remarks with, "IMHO," but it seems obvious to me that everything about Mind is just someone's opinion.

Which is perfectly fine - but try not to confuse you not knowing things with other people's ability to discover, test and then know things. Just because you have opted out doesn't mean the rest of us have, nor does it invalidate the findings of science that are reproducible and testable.


Try not to let your elaborate self-delusions convince you that you "know" anything.  The greatest scientists eventually realize that they know nothing.  They relax into wonder and enlightenment.

"A specialist is someone who learns more and more about less and less, until finally he knows everything about nothing."  Then he escapes the cycle of death and rebirth... and reproducible results. :-)
 
2013-08-02 01:23:42 PM  
There are people who die every day because they couldn't afford proper medical treatment. People like Caleb Howe have contributed to that state of affairs. I can think of quite a few people who are also in dire medical straits, with children, who didn't spend their time and effort attempting to harm society.

So f*ck him. He'll die soon.
 
2013-08-02 01:25:12 PM  

spongeboob: draypresct:
By the way my initial post was just pointing out the typical right wing pundit would be saying something like what I posted if it was a left wing blogger you know the whole "just asking questions"

I want single payer, but I also think we do need to make some choices about what we will pay for, do we really do heroic measures on someone who is in multilple system failure or do we maybe give one hundred other people keflex for a simple infection that might keep them from losing their toe or life.

You just hit a nerve.



I apologize for hitting a nerve. I reacted because I thought you actually were implying that people with liver failure must inherently have moral failings.

We used to try to take moral differences into account, such as the "prisoner v. child" situation you described in your other post, and we used to withhold care based on these differences. The link I used earlier describes the kidney dialysis "God panels" that used these to decide who lived and who died. You could argue that some sort of decision process was necessary back then, but I don't agree that moral factors should have come into the process. You really don't want to have to worry about whether the doctor will withhold care from you if you're immoral. There are many, many ethical and practical reasons this was and would be a bad idea. One strictly practical reason: taking moral considerations into account incentivises patients to conceal things that might make them look bad. You want a patient who comes in with hepatitis (for example) to provide their entire sexual history, even if it involves adultery.

The question "we have $X; do we use it for 1 very sick person or for preventative care for 100 people" is a very different question, and one I think we're in agreement about. I say use limited resources to provide the best overall benefit, such as vaccinations, free diabetes test strips (they're much cheapter than an ambulance ride), etc. Many in the medical care professions would rather use hospice care than try to extend their lives 2-3 months.
 
2013-08-02 01:26:45 PM  
I'm just waiting for Bill O'Riely and Rush Limbaugh to make pleas on their shows to help him   Nothing like multi-millionaires asking other people for money.  They will probably even use Caleb Howe's illness to show how compassionate conservatives are.

It will be so heartfelt listening to Limbaugh making request for people to help Caleb in the hopes of raising what he makes in 1 hour.
 
2013-08-02 01:27:47 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: MSFT: BarkingUnicorn:
Believe me, I will.  I prefer the delightful wonderment of not knowing, and the cynical comfort of knowing that I don't know.

I suppose I should  have prefaced my remarks with, "IMHO," but it seems obvious to me that everything about Mind is just someone's opinion.

Which is perfectly fine - but try not to confuse you not knowing things with other people's ability to discover, test and then know things. Just because you have opted out doesn't mean the rest of us have, nor does it invalidate the findings of science that are reproducible and testable.

Try not to let your elaborate self-delusions convince you that you "know" anything.  The greatest scientists eventually realize that they know nothing.  They relax into wonder and enlightenment.

"A specialist is someone who learns more and more about less and less, until finally he knows everything about nothing."  Then he escapes the cycle of death and rebirth... and reproducible results. :-)


I hate to break this to you, but even Buddhists - and the Dalai Lama - believe in science.

But hey - you're obviously too enlightened to deal with the rest of us caught up in this cycle of samsara, so thanks for taking the time to drop some self-masturbatory meta unknowledge on us.
 
2013-08-02 01:28:05 PM  

MSFT: I understand your position on the hypocritical aspect, but don't necessarily agree with you 100%. But for this and future Limbaugh threads you may want to just cut and paste a concise statement along the lines of "It seems hypocritical to damn a person for hateful speech by the use of hateful speech".


I also like "One must be tolerant of the vociferously intolerant", but I usually save that one for racists.
 
2013-08-02 01:28:13 PM  

The Why Not Guy: Bloody William: I'm tired of trolling as a concept. I want honest, spirited debates, none of this weird psychological playground shiat.

If anyone in charge is reading, let me second this. If it's about finances I would gladly pay $10 a month for what BW just described.


Count me in - just because someone's mommy and daddy didn't pay enough attention (or swat their behinds enough) when they were children and now they've grown into disfunctional adults with "issues" doesn't mean I want to read their troll posts.
 
2013-08-02 01:30:48 PM  

The Why Not Guy: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win. We need to stop helping conservatives. This man deserves whatever disease he has.

I disagree. I don't know much about this man other than what's been posted in this thread. But I know I don't want to emulate his life or his lack of compassion. I'm better than that.


Fine.  Donate money to your local health clinic.  Talk to your teabagger neighbour about what's actually in Obamacare (talk slowly and use monosyllabic words), donate blood, register for your local bone marrow DNA matching service.  Do something good for someone who isn't a complete and total POS.  There's literally not one good reason to send money to this pusbag.  He brought his ailment on himself, he mercilessly taunted people who were in similar situations, he chose not to get insured, he's anti-Obamacare/pro-Obamascare, and conservative bloggers are already attacking the same people who are helping this sack o' crap.  Fark him.
 
2013-08-02 01:34:23 PM  

yeegrek: The Why Not Guy: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win. We need to stop helping conservatives. This man deserves whatever disease he has.

I disagree. I don't know much about this man other than what's been posted in this thread. But I know I don't want to emulate his life or his lack of compassion. I'm better than that.

Fine.  Donate money to your local health clinic.  Talk to your teabagger neighbour about what's actually in Obamacare (talk slowly and use monosyllabic words), donate blood, register for your local bone marrow DNA matching service.  Do something good for someone who isn't a complete and total POS.  There's literally not one good reason to send money to this pusbag.  He brought his ailment on himself, he mercilessly taunted people who were in similar situations, he chose not to get insured, he's anti-Obamacare/pro-Obamascare, and conservative bloggers are already attacking the same people who are helping this sack o' crap.  Fark him.


I'm almost positive you don't have to worry about anyone in this thread sending him money.
 
2013-08-02 01:36:35 PM  
I remember when I found out about Andrew Breitbart's death.

On the side, I write comedy sketches in Philly and many of them have been political.  But I've never written about what I HATE about people I disagree with, only what is absurd about them.

After the sketch, "GOP Debate:  The Musical", I felt genuinely awful because I actually felt GOOD that Breitbart had died.  This was someone who didn't care about doing any good for anyone.  All he wanted was to hate and destroy.  And mostly, it seemed, because he hated his adoptive parents and wanted to get back at them for unknown reasons.

The reason I felt so awful is because I didn't want him to die.  I wanted him to learn.  I get that not everyone is going to come to think exactly the way I do.  As George W. Bush said "It would be easier if it were a dictatorship, but only if I was the dictator."

Even if this blogger doesn't learn from this experience, someone will.  I doubt it will be a groundswell of progressivism, but as long as SOMEone who generally disagrees with me and says "Maybe we really DO need to work together on this," that will be enough.

Eh, usually I try to be a lot funnier in these posts.  *shrug*
 
2013-08-02 01:37:26 PM  

Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.



THIS.

If you are forced to contribute, it is theft, or at best, a tax.  Charity cannot be forced.  If it is, it is no longer charity.
 
2013-08-02 01:39:05 PM  

born_yesterday: MSFT: I understand your position on the hypocritical aspect, but don't necessarily agree with you 100%. But for this and future Limbaugh threads you may want to just cut and paste a concise statement along the lines of "It seems hypocritical to damn a person for hateful speech by the use of hateful speech".

I also like "One must be tolerant of the vociferously intolerant", but I usually save that one for racists.


There is arguably a difficult line to walk in the real world when it comes to tolerance and how we socialize others by condemning their behavior. I just don't expect the socialization aspect to be finely tuned and moderated on an anonymous internet message board, especially when comes to any public, highly-polarizing figure.
 
2013-08-02 01:41:58 PM  

born_yesterday: MSFT: I understand your position on the hypocritical aspect, but don't necessarily agree with you 100%. But for this and future Limbaugh threads you may want to just cut and paste a concise statement along the lines of "It seems hypocritical to damn a person for hateful speech by the use of hateful speech".

I also like "One must be tolerant of the vociferously intolerant", but I usually save that one for racists.


Think of tolerance as something that makes you feel better, rather than something that benefits the tolerated.  When facing the choice of being annoyed being amused, which will make you feel better?
 
2013-08-02 01:46:03 PM  

PanicMan: When I wasn't in the hospital trying to die I had a miserable existence. Most days I was just hoping I would piss or shiat. Sounds like a sim ...

Damn.  I can't think of anything worse than that.  Glad you made it.


As much as I think this guy is a total tool he does not deserve to have what is headed his way. To be perfectly honest I considered emptying the bank account on the best bottle of scotch I could buy and ending it all. Its a living hell and your family gets to watch helplessly as your heath goes down the toilet and the ammonia turns you into a farking moron. Everybody involved gets to turn into horrible people too. I remember the start of the 4th of July week thinking my odds were considerably better for getting a donor.
 
2013-08-02 01:46:35 PM  

yeegrek: There's literally not one good reason to send money to this pusbag.  He brought his ailment on himself, he mercilessly taunted people who were in similar situations, he chose not to get insured, he's anti-Obamacare/pro-Obamascare, and conservative bloggers are already attacking the same people who are helping this sack o' crap.  Fark him.


I understand what you're saying, and I'm not planning on sending money to his fund (mostly because I have none, but even if I did, you're right, there are other more deserving charities out there) I guess I'm reacting more to the "this man deserves whatever disease he has" part. Even if I can't - or won't - help this particular man, I don't see any reason to wish him ill or enjoy his suffering. It wasn't a good look for Caleb and it's not a good look for me, either.

I realize this can come off as holier than thou and truly, that's not how I mean it. If others want to indulge in shauden-whatever that word is, I can understand it even if I choose a different path.
 
2013-08-02 01:52:03 PM  

Cagey B: There are people who die every day because they couldn't afford proper medical treatment. People like Caleb Howe have contributed to that state of affairs. I can think of quite a few people who are also in dire medical straits, with children, who didn't spend their time and effort attempting to harm society

who are far more deserving of charitable giving.

FTFY

Completely agree, I only have so much money for charitable contributions, but faced with deciding to GIVE to help someone who may need immediate medical assistance, I am going to break it down like this:

1. Did the person suffer a medical emergency due in whole or part to their own choices or actions?; or: Are they suffering due to accident or facing an illness due to no fault of their own?

(Guy with liver problem brought on by excess consumption of alcohol, or the diabetic who weighs 450 lbs with a 6 pack a day sugary cola habit used to wash down cookies and cakes is FAR less compelling case for charity to me than:  Person gets hit by drunk driver or person who faces repeated hospitalization because of genetic or inherited disposition to some disease or illness.)

2.  Ability to pay (or have insurance.)

(Person who lost their job and their cobra benefits and is living hand and mouth while trying to get another job is in a much better position for consideration for my giving than person who has/had a high paying job and pissed/pisses much of it away routinely on jet-set type vacations, high dollar cars all the while either not either saving or securing a decent insurance policy.)

3.  Person's Contribution to Society

(The teacher or fireman or the woman who spends lots of time volunteering at her local Meals on Wheels is far more worthy of my charity than the local wannabe gang-banger or conservative blogger who spews so much hate in a public forum where he takes great joy in the suffering and death of those with whom he disagrees and is basically a "leach" and "drag" on society, and not just in an economic way.)


Sorry, while I understand and empathize the potential plight of his wife and young daughters, there's basically not a single thing in this story that I cannot point to and say: "You basically brought this upon your self and while what you constantly demanded of others, and whom you attacked, criticized and wished ill-will and death upon for failing to meet your standards, you were not willing or able to do for yourself."

Using my 3 step analysis above, there's simply no way in hell that I find this guy deserving of a single dime.  I guarantee you I can find dozens of completely innocent and deserving people in my own community who truly are deserving of charitable giving.   Let him reap what he has sown.
 
2013-08-02 01:57:07 PM  

IlGreven: Dr Dreidel: Let's say he's been without insurance for the last 3 years. His portion of an employer's plan premium would have been about $951/year, or $79.25/month. For 3 years or 36 months, he chose to spend $2,853 on everything but planning for this kind of contingency. $2800 wouldn't be near enough to cover this illness, sure, but the insurance he bought with it would have, even if you figure in a $10k deductible (his goal was $25k).

This is one argument I never like.  I mean, what if that $2,800 went to food, or house payments, or car payments, or car upkeep, or any of a bajillion needs that were more immediate at the time?  That's why it's a bad argument for a mandate, but a good one for universal healthcare: with UHC, he wouldn't have to choose between dying of liver failure and dying of starvation, or pneumonia because he didn't have anywhere but an alley to sleep.  But with a mandate, that forces him to be dying of starvation.

/I'd rather he not have to choose.


Oh, I'd rather he not have to choose as well. TFA implies this was a choice made not for economics, but for politics. If he was too strapped for cash to pony up $80/month, maybe he shoulda asked Mr Erickson for a raise, or gotten out of the oh-so-lucrative blogging game, or started moonlighting as a fry cook or putting the two daughters to work sweeping school floors or some shiat.

Does he have a refrigerator he can sell in the home he's mortgaged from the bank? Does he have an PS/XBox, a cable TV subscription, a cell phone, a car, kids he can't afford, or significant capital assets (like a laptop) he can sell?

// hell, maybe an enterprising conservative will pay him to blog about how Obamacare's Fartmerica is bankrupting our previous bodily fluids to cover the cost of his care
 
2013-08-02 02:01:26 PM  

The Why Not Guy: yeegrek: There's literally not one good reason to send money to this pusbag.  He brought his ailment on himself, he mercilessly taunted people who were in similar situations, he chose not to get insured, he's anti-Obamacare/pro-Obamascare, and conservative bloggers are already attacking the same people who are helping this sack o' crap.  Fark him.

I understand what you're saying, and I'm not planning on sending money to his fund (mostly because I have none, but even if I did, you're right, there are other more deserving charities out there) I guess I'm reacting more to the "this man deserves whatever disease he has" part. Even if I can't - or won't - help this particular man, I don't see any reason to wish him ill or enjoy his suffering. It wasn't a good look for Caleb and it's not a good look for me, either.

I realize this can come off as holier than thou and truly, that's not how I mean it. If others want to indulge in shauden-whatever that word is, I can understand it even if I choose a different path.


Actually, this is why I have you favorited. Everyone has to walk their own path.
 
2013-08-02 02:01:59 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: In short, we don't know and we can't know.  So we spin whatever delusions make us feel better ("make sense," because "sense" enables the delusion of predictability, and the ego desperately desires to predict that it will continue to exist even it never did).


.....Makes sense.

I just think it's a bad thing to dismiss new discoveries out of hand because we don't fully understand it right now. Or, for that matter, jumping overboard on new discoveries because we don't fully understand it right now.
 
2013-08-02 02:04:07 PM  

Arsten: BarkingUnicorn: In short, we don't know and we can't know.  So we spin whatever delusions make us feel better ("make sense," because "sense" enables the delusion of predictability, and the ego desperately desires to predict that it will continue to exist even it never did).

.....Makes sense.

I just think it's a bad thing to dismiss new discoveries out of hand because we don't fully understand it right now. Or, for that matter, jumping overboard on new discoveries because we don't fully understand it right now.


I guarantee you his sentiments on the internet don't make their way in to the doctors office or the emergency room.
 
2013-08-02 02:12:28 PM  

Chummer45: pigeonstopper: I hope the more conservative people of the country will eventually realize that helping to pay or the healthcare of another person is the basis of socialized medicine.

If you donate money to an uninsured person, you are literally practicing the system you abhor.


Giving to charitable causes does kind of undermine the whole "government handouts create a society of makers and takers" mantra, doesn't it?  But then again t I forgot, rich people are way more reliable, high-minded, and compassionate than "the government."


You hear a lot about the millions rich people donate to "charity," but those charities usually turn out to be things like art museums, symphonies, and other things that benefit the rich socially. Can't remember the last time I heard some billionaire donating a few million to a food bank or job training.
 
2013-08-02 02:16:32 PM  
But that won't stop him and his circle jerk blog form bashing us mean ole' libtards I'm gonna guess as early as Monday. If positions were reversed he would have just them die so lets just not lose sight of who we are actually talking about here. A dirtbag right wing shill.
 
2013-08-02 02:18:01 PM  

ScaryBottles: But that won't stop him and his circle jerk blog form bashing us mean ole' libtards I'm gonna guess as early as Monday. If positions were reversed he would have just them die so lets just not lose sight of who we are actually talking about here. A dirtbag right wing shill.


He'll thank God for saving his life, then write an article bashing Obamacare as soshulisms.
 
2013-08-02 02:28:09 PM  
Kill him with kindness
 
2013-08-02 02:31:25 PM  

CorporatePerson: Kill him with kindness


You mean, like, with this kind of pillow? Just turn it over see it's the last thing he sees....

allysonsplace.com
 
2013-08-02 02:32:53 PM  

MSFT: Arsten: BarkingUnicorn: In short, we don't know and we can't know.  So we spin whatever delusions make us feel better ("make sense," because "sense" enables the delusion of predictability, and the ego desperately desires to predict that it will continue to exist even it never did).

.....Makes sense.

I just think it's a bad thing to dismiss new discoveries out of hand because we don't fully understand it right now. Or, for that matter, jumping overboard on new discoveries because we don't fully understand it right now.

I guarantee you his sentiments on the internet don't make their way in to the doctors office or the emergency room.


Oh, ffs!  Do you think I give a shiat whether medical treatment is based on knowledge or delusion, as long as it works?  I keep telling you, the only  reason anyone does anything is to FEEL BETTER!
 
2013-08-02 02:34:43 PM  

imontheinternet: He'll thank God for saving his life, then write an article bashing Obamacare as soshulisms.


You're probably right, especially given his already proven difficulty with logic or compassion. But maybe an onlooker will see this and say "wow, those Godless Libs did the Christian thing even though that Conservative was being a twat" and re-examine their own beliefs.
 
2013-08-02 02:35:06 PM  

Nytfall: Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.


THIS.

If you are forced to contribute, it is theft, or at best, a tax.  Charity cannot be forced.  If it is, it is no longer charity.


So the hospitals in the Libertarian world would not be forced to provide services to the uninsured or the ones who cannot pay cash or it would be considered theft or a tax?
 
2013-08-02 02:39:58 PM  

monoski: Nytfall: Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.


THIS.

If you are forced to contribute, it is theft, or at best, a tax.  Charity cannot be forced.  If it is, it is no longer charity.

So the hospitals in the Libertarian world would not be forced to provide services to the uninsured or the ones who cannot pay cash or it would be considered theft or a tax?


It is extortion.  NTTAWWT, but call it what it is.
 
2013-08-02 02:46:02 PM  

CPT Ethanolic: Mrbogey: It's nice to know that the compassion some people feel towards him exists only as far as they want to prove a point.

  Why don't you go read some of his tweets laughing at the dying Roger Ebert or being thankful for Murtha dying.  This guy's death should be celebrated, not mourned.


Which means that from here forward, with every breath he takes, he takes it with the certain knowledge, that the people he hates and despises, are demonstrably, better people than him.
/justice, of a sorts
 
2013-08-02 02:46:31 PM  
tbeatty:  Single payer isn't a panacea that makes care affordable.  It is a way, however, to eliminate the "keeping up with the Jones's" mentality that pervades capitalist society.  That mentality is what highlights disparity and drives innovation as well as overall improvement.

Hahahaha! Oh, you weren't serious about that, were you? You know what drives innovation - people having a basic level of education, health, a comfortable place to sleep and enough food so they don't have to worry about basic survival and can instead focus on their other talents and skills to be productive members of a society. You know what else drives innovation - funding for long term and important research that isn't just based on turning a profit each quarter or churning out more widgets that just get thrown in landfills every few months.
 
2013-08-02 02:46:59 PM  
Always do the right thing. This guy is a piece of shiat but if you treat him as he has treated others you're just contributing to the vicious cycle.

The Why Not Guy: imontheinternet: He'll thank God for saving his life, then write an article bashing Obamacare as soshulisms.

You're probably right, especially given his already proven difficulty with logic or compassion. But maybe an onlooker will see this and say "wow, those Godless Libs did the Christian thing even though that Conservative was being a twat" and re-examine their own beliefs.


It's nice to dream. Republicans don't learn from other people, only from their own experiences. It takes empathy to look at a situation someone is in and put yourself in their shoes.

Most Republicans will simply look at this guy and consider him a traitor for even accepting help from liberals, even if he didn't ask for it.
 
2013-08-02 02:50:42 PM  

sammyk: PanicMan: When I wasn't in the hospital trying to die I had a miserable existence. Most days I was just hoping I would piss or shiat. Sounds like a sim ...

Damn.  I can't think of anything worse than that.  Glad you made it.

As much as I think this guy is a total tool he does not deserve to have what is headed his way. To be perfectly honest I considered emptying the bank account on the best bottle of scotch I could buy and ending it all. Its a living hell and your family gets to watch helplessly as your heath goes down the toilet and the ammonia turns you into a farking moron. Everybody involved gets to turn into horrible people too. I remember the start of the 4th of July week thinking my odds were considerably better for getting a donor.


Your story scares the crap out of me. I'm glad you made it and I just wish we had a system where, when people are that ill or injured, their primary focus could be on getting well again...not having to worry about volumes of paperwork, jumping through hoops with their insurance provider, or begging for charity and setting up donation sites as they're prepping to go into surgery. How much longer are we going to be stupid about how we handle health care for the citizens of our country?
 
2013-08-02 02:51:02 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: monoski: Nytfall: Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.


THIS.

If you are forced to contribute, it is theft, or at best, a tax.  Charity cannot be forced.  If it is, it is no longer charity.

So the hospitals in the Libertarian world would not be forced to provide services to the uninsured or the ones who cannot pay cash or it would be considered theft or a tax?

It is extortion.  NTTAWWT, but call it what it is.



I think I'd rather pay for my neighbor's vaccinations, influenza treatment, and psychiatric medication. Even if we're ignoring ethical issues entirely, I think the benefits to me personally outweigh the risks. I would personally rather live in a society where these things are universally provided, paid for by everyone who can contribute.

Is your position on this that I should be able to pay for these things, but you'd rather not do so? Or that you'd like to be able to opt out of paying your share of these expenses?
 
2013-08-02 02:52:49 PM  
BarkingUnicorn:
Oh, ffs!  Do you think I give a shiat whether medical treatment is based on knowledge or delusion, as long as it works?  I keep telling you, the only  reason anyone does anything is to FEEL BETTER!

You might want to yell louder because you're still not making sense. And if you're going to spout sudo-Buddhist BS then you might want to learn the concept of equanimity, because son, you just don't got it.
 
2013-08-02 02:52:51 PM  

mpirooz: It's nice to dream. Republicans don't learn from other people, only from their own experiences. It takes empathy to look at a situation someone is in and put yourself in their shoes.


Alas, that's likely true, but if the onlooker isn't a Republican we might have a shot.

Most Republicans will simply look at this guy and consider him a traitor for even accepting help from liberals, even if he didn't ask for it.

See, I grew up having a brother so for me this is a giant WIN. I do the right thing AND piss him off at the same time? That's the best day ever.
 
2013-08-02 03:01:35 PM  

draypresct: BarkingUnicorn: monoski: Nytfall: Aristocles: No one here seems to understand that accepting charity is perfectly compatible with libertarianism. Libertarians simply believe that people shouldn't be compelled or forced to contribute to fund the health care of others.

In fact, if you think about, charity without compulsion is the only moral option. Because if you're forced to contribute, that's not a moral decision at all.


THIS.

If you are forced to contribute, it is theft, or at best, a tax.  Charity cannot be forced.  If it is, it is no longer charity.

So the hospitals in the Libertarian world would not be forced to provide services to the uninsured or the ones who cannot pay cash or it would be considered theft or a tax?

It is extortion.  NTTAWWT, but call it what it is.


I think I'd rather pay for my neighbor's vaccinations, influenza treatment, and psychiatric medication. Even if we're ignoring ethical issues entirely, I think the benefits to me personally outweigh the risks. I would personally rather live in a society where these things are universally provided, paid for by everyone who can contribute.

Is your position on this that I should be able to pay for these things, but you'd rather not do so? Or that you'd like to be able to opt out of paying your share of these expenses?


The solution to mental illness is more guns silly.
 
2013-08-02 03:06:04 PM  

MSFT: Says the guy who threatens people on the internet.


You seem stuck on an analogy. You should feel bad. You should feel bad that you can't get over getting debunked on Fark.
 
2013-08-02 03:09:10 PM  

Fart_Machine: So not donating money to a know sociopath makes you a sociopath?


The issue wasn't over donating money. It's over people laughing at his suffering and being happy about it.
 
2013-08-02 03:09:24 PM  

draypresct: I would personally rather live in a society where these things are universally provided, paid for by everyone who can contribute.


I agree, and the fact that some of the people who benefit from these policies are assholes is irrelevant. I think "slippery slope" are two of the most overused words in our language but determining who "deserves" to be cared for and who doesn't is my idea of a slippery slope.
 
2013-08-02 03:09:31 PM  

Maud Dib: Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.

Question is, why hasn't an admitted troll been banhammered?It's in the goddamn FAQ.


Oh wait...never mind.


Calling out admitted trolls will get you banned. That's just how they roll.
 
2013-08-02 03:15:45 PM  

Mrbogey: MSFT: Says the guy who threatens people on the internet.

You seem stuck on an analogy. You should feel bad. You should feel bad that you can't get over getting debunked on Fark.


Ah, so you finally started fracking in your own back yard? Good for you!
So how does that well water taste these days? It must be really impressive these days when you light your farts.
 
2013-08-02 03:20:09 PM  

Mrbogey: Fart_Machine: So not donating money to a know sociopath makes you a sociopath?

The issue wasn't over donating money. It's over people laughing at his suffering and being happy about it.


I'm sure you were just as butthurt when this guy was publically celebrating the deaths of prominent liberals.
 
2013-08-02 03:23:00 PM  

Fart_Machine: Mrbogey: Fart_Machine: So not donating money to a know sociopath makes you a sociopath?

The issue wasn't over donating money. It's over people laughing at his suffering and being happy about it.

I'm sure you were just as butthurt when this guy was publically celebrating the deaths of prominent liberals.


Like Chuck Norris, Bogey doesn't get upset... but his fists do:
images.sodahead.com
 
2013-08-02 03:29:56 PM  

JAGChem82: You know, I've considered myself a liberal simply out of practical means, not because I'm some "bleeding-heart" or have a ton of empathy to give around.  So when I hear stories like this one, I will admit to having a bit of schadenfruede. Not that much to see him die or hate him, because I don't need that on my ledger, but being that he is conservative, he probably threw out that 47% number like it was candy. Probably a "I'm a self made man, I don't need any government helping ME out" type. Well guess what buddy, you ARE now that 47% that you despised so much, congratulations, moocher!

But it doesn't surprise me about people like him. If it was a liberal dying of cancer, he'd probably gloat endlessly until said individual died, and from the way he ranted at Roger Ebert, he definitely was. Now like I said, I don't want him to die at all. I hope he lives until his 80s in the best of health. But do I have compassion for him? No. If people want to contribute to him, that's fine, but call his ass out publicly about how he can't live up to his own standards. Make him a household name on Fark and other sites about the failures of conservatism.


Private charitable donations is a conservative principle.    If his church wants to have a carwash or help him out with his bills, more power to him.  If private people donate money to him, again, more power to him.  The only thing to rail on him about would be if he took money from taxpayers.  It's the same with Detroit.  If Democrats want to hold carwashes across the country and donate the money to Detroit, go do it.  But don't make a federal program to bail people out of problems that do little to fix the problem.

Think of it this way:  he lives and decides to use the federal health care exchanges to get health insurance.  He needs a liver transplant for his now pre-existing condition that can't be refused or charged higher premiums.  The other people in his plan are now paying higher premiums for this and they don't have a choice like they did when they drove by the carwash.

The reality is that responsible people take care of their own needs and they nanny government also makes responsible people take care of the needs of the irresponsible.  This is acceptable up to a point.  Eventually the responsible people will get no value out of being responsible and everyone will be living in a proletariat pit of despair.

It's like having a society of people where some are blind, some have one good eye and other's have two good eyes.  The liberal solution is to poke  everybody's eyes out and make the one-eyed people kings.   Everyone who is blind thinks there is nothing better and the one-eyed kings couldn't be happier.
 
2013-08-02 03:31:08 PM  

Fart_Machine: I'm sure you were just as butthurt when this guy was publically celebrating the deaths of prominent liberals.


I didn't know who this guy was then. Nor do I really know much about him other than him being pretty angry and callous.

How can I be angry about something I'm unaware of? Do you expect me to walk around in a general state of anger?
 
2013-08-02 03:40:38 PM  
Even if he did have a HDHP insurance $25,000 isn't gonna cover the deductible and co-insurance for a liver transplant, medications etc. He'll be on a transplant wait list so 5 months from now when his insurance resets he would need to start all over with both the deductible and co-insurance and continue medications. Blogging isn't high on the pay-scale. He's farked. Bloggin' ain't easy.

\ 'murica.

\\ I bet he'll have a different view of healthcare policy in this country once the bills start rolling in.
 
2013-08-02 03:43:38 PM  

Urbn: sammyk: PanicMan: When I wasn't in the hospital trying to die I had a miserable existence. Most days I was just hoping I would piss or shiat. Sounds like a sim ...

Damn.  I can't think of anything worse than that.  Glad you made it.

As much as I think this guy is a total tool he does not deserve to have what is headed his way. To be perfectly honest I considered emptying the bank account on the best bottle of scotch I could buy and ending it all. Its a living hell and your family gets to watch helplessly as your heath goes down the toilet and the ammonia turns you into a farking moron. Everybody involved gets to turn into horrible people too. I remember the start of the 4th of July week thinking my odds were considerably better for getting a donor.

Your story scares the crap out of me. I'm glad you made it and I just wish we had a system where, when people are that ill or injured, their primary focus could be on getting well again...not having to worry about volumes of paperwork, jumping through hoops with their insurance provider, or begging for charity and setting up donation sites as they're prepping to go into surgery. How much longer are we going to be stupid about how we handle health care for the citizens of our country?


It was a scary experience. It's by far the toughest thing I have ever gone through and it fundamentally changed the man I am. But really do not have a insurance horror story to tell. I had BCBS of NJ. After the first disaster(kidneys shutting down) they got a bill for 1 million+. A week after I got home I got a call from them and they assigned a manager to my case. Any bill collectors I sent her way. They never really tried to deny care or drop me.

This all happened in 2008. The ACA is obviously something I support strongly. For a long time I wondered if I would be able to keep insurance longterm. For the rest of my life I am going to be a lose for them and nothing will ever change that.
 
2013-08-02 03:46:05 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: Oh, ffs! Do you think I give a shiat whether medical treatment is based on knowledge or delusion, as long as it works? I keep telling you, the only reason anyone does anything is to FEEL BETTER!


Um, yes, I do care.  Because if it's based on knowledge, we can figure out WHY it works and try to refine it further.

And if that's true, then why are you posting on here, if it causes you such frustration?
 
2013-08-02 03:53:26 PM  
The tragedy here is that a useful liver might be wasted on this bag of hateful gas.

So, fark him.
 
2013-08-02 03:57:04 PM  

Felgraf: BarkingUnicorn: Oh, ffs! Do you think I give a shiat whether medical treatment is based on knowledge or delusion, as long as it works? I keep telling you, the only reason anyone does anything is to FEEL BETTER!

Um, yes, I do care.  Because if it's based on knowledge, we can figure out WHY it works and try to refine it further.

And if that's true, then why are you posting on here, if it causes you such frustration?


Because he doesn't actually understand the Buddhist philosophy he's trying to regurgitate.
 
2013-08-02 04:00:00 PM  

tbeatty: The only thing to rail on him about would be if he took money from taxpayers.


Which is what is going to happen since he doesn't have insurance.  $25K isn't going to cover his medical expenses and he certainly doesn't have the rest so guess who the costs are going to get passed on to.

tbeatty: Think of it this way: he lives and decides to use the federal health care exchanges to get health insurance. He needs a liver transplant for his now pre-existing condition that can't be refused or charged higher premiums. The other people in his plan are now paying higher premiums for this and they don't have a choice like they did when they drove by the carwash.


Sure they do.  Go find another provider who charges lower premiums.  Of course the large pool size is precisely what will offset his costs as well as everyone else's so the one guy who needs a transplant isn't going to raise costs anymore than if he was part of a large corporate plan.
 
2013-08-02 04:13:07 PM  

tbeatty: Private charitable donations is a conservative principle.


So why does the headline say Liberals and Conservatives are banding together to help this man? Are the Conservatives donating all the money and the Liberals are just standing there thinking of ways to raise your taxes? Crap. Watch and see, in about 3 days I'll get a forwarded email from my uncle that says just that.
 
2013-08-02 04:19:43 PM  

The Why Not Guy: tbeatty: Private charitable donations is a conservative principle.

So why does the headline say Liberals and Conservatives are banding together to help this man? Are the Conservatives donating all the money and the Liberals are just standing there thinking of ways to raise your taxes? Crap. Watch and see, in about 3 days I'll get a forwarded email from my uncle that says just that.


tbeatty: It's okay. They said liberal sites carried the story, not that they gave anything.


Looks like he got that e-mail already.
 
2013-08-02 04:27:51 PM  

MSFT: Felgraf: BarkingUnicorn: Oh, ffs! Do you think I give a shiat whether medical treatment is based on knowledge or delusion, as long as it works? I keep telling you, the only reason anyone does anything is to FEEL BETTER!

Um, yes, I do care.  Because if it's based on knowledge, we can figure out WHY it works and try to refine it further.

And if that's true, then why are you posting on here, if it causes you such frustration?

Because he doesn't actually understand the Buddhist philosophy he's trying to regurgitate.


This is the scientific method:  observe phenomena, speculate as to their causes, reach a totally unfounded conclusion that makes sense so you feel better. :-)

Profanities and caps are not only used to express frustration.  Surely, you have seen boisterous, profane laughter.
 
2013-08-02 04:36:58 PM  
BarkingUnicorn:
This is the scientific method:  observe phenomena, speculate as to their causes, reach a totally unfounded conclusion that makes sense so you feel better. :-)


No.
 
2013-08-02 04:53:49 PM  
Ahhh, conservative hypocrisy at it's finest.  I would feel bad for him, but I can't.  I'm in my early thirties, by all rights, I shouldn't need insurance, right?  But I'm responsible, so I do and thankfully so, blood cancer would have wiped me out last year without it.  If you don't realize your just one accident or illness from bankruptcy without it, you're a damned fool.

Reminds me of my friends who had to have a shotgun wedding when we were in our late teens due to a unexpected package in the oven.  He got critically ill a few years back and was forced into medical bankruptcy.  I used to feel bad for him and his wife and kids, but I can't anymore... even after all that, he refuses to admit he would benefit from having a social safety net.  The local hospital/government FORCED him to enroll his family in the (free) state insurance pool last year and refused them care until they did (rightfully so).  Now he's angry because he's got "too much insurance"?  WTF!!!!!!
 
2013-08-02 06:06:33 PM  

Fart_Machine: tbeatty: The only thing to rail on him about would be if he took money from taxpayers.

Which is what is going to happen since he doesn't have insurance.  $25K isn't going to cover his medical expenses and he certainly doesn't have the rest so guess who the costs are going to get passed on to.


No, that's not how it works.  The hospital might send him a bill and eat the cost.  Which means they pass it on to the insured.  If he's not covered by medicare or the states system, the hospital still treats and sends him a bill.  Because this is the system and people without insurance are using hospital emergency rooms as primary care physicians, the plan is to make everyone insured, expand the medicare system and send people to primary care physicians.  But right now, hospitals would not be reimbursed for his expenses by the government unless he qualified for care and they simply calculate that cost into their structure when they negotiate with private  insurance companies.
 
2013-08-02 06:13:29 PM  

tbeatty: The hospital might send him a bill and eat the cost. Which means they pass it on to the insured.


So in other words rate payers absorb the cost and pay for him.  Whereas with the ACA at least he is covered and paying into the system.
 
2013-08-02 06:27:20 PM  

tbeatty: Private charitable donations is a conservative principle.

cop out.

Any excuse to not appear to be the soulless bastards they are.
 
2013-08-02 06:27:50 PM  

tbeatty: Which means they pass it on to the insured.


Including people on Medicare and Medicaid (paid for by... wait for it... taxpayers). As health care costs rise, Medicare/Medicaid costs rise as well, and/or taxpayers get less for the money we're spending.
 
2013-08-02 06:44:18 PM  

The Why Not Guy: tbeatty: Which means they pass it on to the insured.

Including people on Medicare and Medicaid (paid for by... wait for it... taxpayers). As health care costs rise, Medicare/Medicaid costs rise as well, and/or taxpayers get less for the money we're spending.


And guess, of all the insurance groups, sets their rates without negotiation?  Why do you think Doctors are now refusing to accept new medicare/medicaid patients?  wait for it. ..... because they don't reimburse at the rate necessary to cover overall costs.  Medicare/medicaid are the worst and health care will only decline if it moves to more involvement.  Right now, I know my private insurance is better than the local and state government and it's better than medicare.  A single payer system would eliminate the ability to compare and get better plans.
 
2013-08-02 06:57:02 PM  

tbeatty: A single payer system would eliminate the ability to compare and get better plans.


That isn't necessarily true. My Canadian cousins are fairly well off. They have the standard government health insurance paid for by their tax dollars, and they supplement it with private coverage. I'm pretty sure if we ever went to single payer we'd be able to do the same.
 
2013-08-02 07:42:03 PM  

tbeatty: Why do you think Doctors are now refusing to accept new medicare/medicaid patients?  wait for it. ..... because they don't reimburse at the rate necessary to cover overall costs.


Prove it.
 
2013-08-02 07:57:33 PM  
I hope he gets the personal responsibility transplant he so desperately needs.
 
2013-08-02 08:16:38 PM  
Hopefully he'll survive thanks to the help, thereby looking like a total hypocrite and living to see it, then get eaten by a runaway liger while waiting in line at Chik-Fil-A.

/good sandwiches
 
2013-08-02 10:04:26 PM  

Mrbogey: NewportBarGuy: ...like some homeless person.

Oh... and could you explain for me what makes homeless people, bad people?


Homeless people beg. That's the analogy. Do I need to draw a picture for you in crayon?
 
2013-08-03 12:12:46 AM  

tbeatty: Per capita, the U.S has about 2-3x the number of MRI machines per capita than European countries with single payer.  (the only machine I have data for).  All those machines are used and set by demand.  How come the discrepancy?


Because the entirety of Europe fits inside an area about the size of Texas.

And the distance between my home and Texas alone is farther than from one end of Europe to the other.
 
2013-08-03 12:15:54 AM  

Aristocles: For any number of reasons that we may or may not know. It's up to individuals themselves to decide to help him, if he's a shaitbag to everyone, then chances are he won't receive much help. Planning for this sort of thing is his personal responsibility but should he fail to adequately plan that doesn't mean he has to refuse any outside help.


LOL, you say this like he and his family aren't asking for money. Face it, he's begging for money.
 
2013-08-03 12:18:26 AM  

Mugato: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.

He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. But no one deserves liver failure.


Even the ones who glory in the slow suffering from similar diseases in others?
 
2013-08-03 12:24:12 AM  

Wadded Beef: Mugato: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.

He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. But no one deserves liver failure.

Here's to hoping he gets better, realizes the folly of his previous beliefs, recants previous stances publicly and becomes a more centrist/left-of-center blogger.


Shiat, he can even be a far right blogger. I don't give a fark, it's the total over the top asshole part that pisses me off. Yes, people can be far right without being total assholes. It's the rip into a dying man type of shiat that gets him no sympathy from me, not the politics itself.
 
2013-08-03 12:25:28 AM  

Aristocles: coeyagi: Maud Dib: Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.

Question is, why hasn't an admitted troll been banhammered?It's in the goddamn FAQ.


Oh wait...never mind.

[i865.photobucket.com image 400x495]

Well, maybe he's an admitted ALT too.  Remember that one time at Fark camp, the moderator came in and said ALTing is fine.  So, maybe in the Fark deck of cards, being an admitted ALT trumps being an admitted TROLL?

I dunno, I'm just asking questions!

I am an admitted alt.


WHy would ANYONE need an alt? Fark isn't one of those sites where there is a 10 minute waiting period between posts. There's no reason for an alt, other than to hide your identity.
 
2013-08-03 12:28:21 AM  

NeverDrunk23: Interestingly, some mods feel that the reason Fark is lacking in reasonable conservatives is not because of alts like that who make conservatives look bad with every post, but the REAL fault lies with the ones who call them out on their lies and bullshiat.


Which would be why you can get banned by mentioning another poster by name, I guess. It's the only explanation that makes sense.
 
2013-08-03 12:33:49 AM  

js34603: What's a difficult concept for me is the incredible cognitive dissonance of people who say "this guy said mean things about Roger Ebert on the Internet, so I hope he dies a horrible death and I want to piss on his grave"...on the Internet.


I don't think these words mean what you think they mean.

The people who are saying this are just pointing out that Karma is a biatch and this guy is in a great position to learn that. He's getting 100% what he dished out, except it's confined to fark message boards, rather than being posted as a blog on a major website. To truly give this guy his due, someone needs to get the same tweets, except with his name in place of Ebert's, splashed across the internet, and in the main news cycle for day on end. His parents, wife and daughters need to see these, and then when they finally get butthurt and try to speak out, the internet needs to show them the content of his ORIGINAL tweets as context. Maybe when they realize that he asked for that with his wn farking actions, they will be the pressure he needs not to be a total prick.

Then he can get his cancer cured, I don't give a fark.
 
2013-08-03 12:38:43 AM  

Mikey1969: tbeatty: Per capita, the U.S has about 2-3x the number of MRI machines per capita than European countries with single payer.  (the only machine I have data for).  All those machines are used and set by demand.  How come the discrepancy?

Because the entirety of Europe fits inside an area about the size of Texas.

And the distance between my home and Texas alone is farther than from one end of Europe to the other.


It's per capita and usage percentage is the same.  In other words, the u.S. patients get 2-3x the number of MRI's than European patients.

Put that in perspective to professional sports teams where every injury is MRI'd and their care is much better than average.  It's fairly reasonable to argue that access to diagnostic equipment is a fairly good indicator of the quality of care (and it's more expensive too).
 
2013-08-03 12:46:04 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: tbeatty: Why do you think Doctors are now refusing to accept new medicare/medicaid patients?  wait for it. ..... because they don't reimburse at the rate necessary to cover overall costs.

Prove it.


Your google machine is broken or are you logically impaired not to understand why Drs. would opt-out of government insurance?

Just one of about a million references, dingo.
http://www.planprescriber.com/medicare-insurance-news/doctors/
Medicare Doctor Fee ChangesThe fact that Medicare reimbursement rates are significantly lower than other private insurers, many doctors are opting out of Medicare, making the availability of doctors even more complicated for Medicare beneficiaries. All beneficiaries should double check to see if their current doctors are still enrolled with Medicare either as a participating or nonparticipating provider. If your provider is no longer enrolled in Medicare or you would like to explore other healthcare provider options, visit <a data-cke-saved-href="http://www.medicare.gov/find-a-doctor/provider-se arch.aspx" target="_blank">Medicare's healthcare provider directory for doctors taking Medicare payments in your area.
 
2013-08-03 12:48:40 AM  

tbeatty: It's per capita and usage percentage is the same.  In other words, the u.S. patients get 2-3x the number of MRI's than European patients.


Because sometimes there are hundreds and hundreds of miles between towns, so a lot of times, each little town will have one so people don't have to drive 4 hours to get an MRI. You have 5 cities of 100,000 people, and each one has8 places with MRI's, that's 40 MRI's for 500,000 people, but if you have onecity of 500,000 people, you might only have 15 or so. Same concept. People are located closer to each other in EUrope, so one MRI will support a larger sampling of the population.

We have empty parts inside our country that are larger than individual European countries, meaning that people in EUrope could possibly end up driving across an entire country to get to the next possible place with an MRI, not even necessarily one that HAS one. We simply have more because of how big our country is geographically and how far it is between places.
 
2013-08-03 01:09:22 AM  

Mikey1969: tbeatty: It's per capita and usage percentage is the same.  In other words, the u.S. patients get 2-3x the number of MRI's than European patients.

Because sometimes there are hundreds and hundreds of miles between towns, so a lot of times, each little town will have one so people don't have to drive 4 hours to get an MRI. You have 5 cities of 100,000 people, and each one has8 places with MRI's, that's 40 MRI's for 500,000 people, but if you have onecity of 500,000 people, you might only have 15 or so. Same concept. People are located closer to each other in EUrope, so one MRI will support a larger sampling of the population.

We have empty parts inside our country that are larger than individual European countries, meaning that people in EUrope could possibly end up driving across an entire country to get to the next possible place with an MRI, not even necessarily one that HAS one. We simply have more because of how big our country is geographically and how far it is between places.


I can't explain it any better than utilization of the machines is the same (say 60% of the time, each machine being used).  If your theory of demographics was correct,  U.S machines would be underutilized and European machines would be running 24/7..  They are not.  It's the same.   An average U.S. citizen gets 2-3x the number of MRI's as an average European.  A professional athlete probably gets 10x the number of MRI's as an average U.S. citizen.  Who has the best health care?
 
2013-08-03 02:43:07 AM  

tbeatty: Mikey1969: tbeatty: It's per capita and usage percentage is the same.  In other words, the u.S. patients get 2-3x the number of MRI's than European patients.

Because sometimes there are hundreds and hundreds of miles between towns, so a lot of times, each little town will have one so people don't have to drive 4 hours to get an MRI. You have 5 cities of 100,000 people, and each one has8 places with MRI's, that's 40 MRI's for 500,000 people, but if you have onecity of 500,000 people, you might only have 15 or so. Same concept. People are located closer to each other in EUrope, so one MRI will support a larger sampling of the population.

We have empty parts inside our country that are larger than individual European countries, meaning that people in EUrope could possibly end up driving across an entire country to get to the next possible place with an MRI, not even necessarily one that HAS one. We simply have more because of how big our country is geographically and how far it is between places.

I can't explain it any better than utilization of the machines is the same (say 60% of the time, each machine being used).  If your theory of demographics was correct,  U.S machines would be underutilized and European machines would be running 24/7..  They are not.  It's the same.   An average U.S. citizen gets 2-3x the number of MRI's as an average European.  A professional athlete probably gets 10x the number of MRI's as an average U.S. citizen.  Who has the best health care?


You're really using professional athletes as an example? Organizations that have health care actually placed in their bylaws due to the potential for catastrophic injury? These MRIs are covered by the team/league, and have nothing at all to download with the healthcare debate at all. That's like pointing out that office workers in the US sit at desks, while restaurant workers in Poland have tons and up and claiming that it's because US workers are coddled.

As for the rest of your statement, some citations would help, and we also tend to have Drs who over-prescribe everything from medicine to specialty procedures. On top of that, we are a nation of hypochondriacs.

Besides, we don't have a health care 'system', we have some good hospitals that are kept in business by constantly dancing around with a for-profit that wants to bleed its demographic completely dry before discarding them like so much trash at the end of the day. We have medical practitioners who spend well into 6 figures to get into their field only to discover that the only way to make any money is to play ball with the insurance companies who in turn down everything they can to avoid actually paying out on a claim in any way. We don't have a system, we have multiple systems which just barely work together, and we, the end user, are left to discover that we're at the bottom of the pile when it comes to our own health.

If we had a 'system' then a new job wouldn't be a crap shoot as to whether or not we could afford to keep our kids alive, and we wouldn't work for tears at jobs that drained us spiritually, physically and emotionally just because they happen to have a halfway decent health insurance plan.
 
2013-08-03 08:02:37 AM  

Mikey1969: Mugato: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.

He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. But no one deserves liver failure.

Even the ones who glory in the slow suffering from similar diseases in others?


As I said, he could use a good ass kicking but not liver failure.
 
2013-08-03 08:31:25 AM  

Mikey1969: tbeatty: Per capita, the U.S has about 2-3x the number of MRI machines per capita than European countries with single payer.  (the only machine I have data for).  All those machines are used and set by demand.  How come the discrepancy?

Because the entirety of Europe fits inside an area about the size of Texas.

And the distance between my home and Texas alone is farther than from one end of Europe to the other.


What the hell are you talking about?

Area of Texas: 268,581 mi2
Area of Europe: 3,930,000 mi2

Hell, France alone is nearly the size of Texas.

Area of France: 248,429 mi2

And Germany is 50% bigger again

Area of Germany: 357,022mi2
 
2013-08-03 08:35:42 AM  

tbeatty: cameroncrazy1984: tbeatty: Why do you think Doctors are now refusing to accept new medicare/medicaid patients?  wait for it. ..... because they don't reimburse at the rate necessary to cover overall costs.

Prove it.

Your google machine is broken or are you logically impaired not to understand why Drs. would opt-out of government insurance?

Just one of about a million references, dingo.
http://www.planprescriber.com/medicare-insurance-news/doctors/
Medicare Doctor Fee ChangesThe fact that Medicare reimbursement rates are significantly lower than other private insurers, many doctors are opting out of Medicare, making the availability of doctors even more complicated for Medicare beneficiaries. All beneficiaries should double check to see if their current doctors are still enrolled with Medicare either as a participating or nonparticipating provider. If your provider is no longer enrolled in Medicare or you would like to explore other healthcare provider options, visit <a data-cke-saved-href="http://www.medicare.gov/find-a-doctor/provider-se arch.aspx" target="_blank">Medicare's healthcare provider directory for doctors taking Medicare payments in your area.


Where's the proof in that citation? All it did is make the same assertion you did. You literally just said "my proof is this guy who agrees with me"
 
2013-08-03 09:01:38 AM  

Mikey1969: Mugato: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.

He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. But no one deserves liver failure.

Even the ones who glory in the slow suffering from similar diseases in others?


Offering compassion to those that clearly don't deserve it makes some people feel better about themselves.  Good.  I can only hope this guy survives and in some twist of fate, negatively impacts their lives, or the lives of someone they care about (like he's spent an entire career trying to do).  Then they can pucker up and suck the turd out of his ass and call themselves angels.

By his own farking ideology, he farking deserves liver cancer.

By his own farking ideology, he deserves abject farking poverty for the medical costs.

By his OWN farking IDEOLOGY,  he is getting what he DESERVES because he didn't pray hard enough, or save enough, or know the right people.

I haven't seen a better example of justice in years.

I'll save my compassion for someone that isn't an asshole.
 
2013-08-03 10:55:29 AM  

tbeatty: It's fairly reasonable to argue that access to diagnostic equipment is a fairly good indicator of the quality of care (and it's more expensive too).


Not really.  It's a better indicator that hospitals will be happy to over-utilize these machines to inflate your bill.  There is no evidence that Europeans are dying due to lack of MRI machines.
 
2013-08-03 11:38:20 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: tbeatty: cameroncrazy1984: tbeatty: Why do you think Doctors are now refusing to accept new medicare/medicaid patients?  wait for it. ..... because they don't reimburse at the rate necessary to cover overall costs.

Prove it.

Your google machine is broken or are you logically impaired not to understand why Drs. would opt-out of government insurance?

Just one of about a million references, dingo.
http://www.planprescriber.com/medicare-insurance-news/doctors/
Medicare Doctor Fee ChangesThe fact that Medicare reimbursement rates are significantly lower than other private insurers, many doctors are opting out of Medicare, making the availability of doctors even more complicated for Medicare beneficiaries. All beneficiaries should double check to see if their current doctors are still enrolled with Medicare either as a participating or nonparticipating provider. If your provider is no longer enrolled in Medicare or you would like to explore other healthcare provider options, visit <a data-cke-saved-href="http://www.medicare.gov/find-a-doctor/provider-se arch.aspx" target="_blank">Medicare's healthcare provider directory for doctors taking Medicare payments in your area.

Where's the proof in that citation? All it did is make the same assertion you did. You literally just said "my proof is this guy who agrees with me"


That's the best you'll get on the internet, son. All anyone here has is teh google and some other jerks' stuff that's been posted online.
 
Displayed 441 of 441 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
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