Universal care

[Lindsey 0]

It'd be easy to earn enough money for health insurance just by dedicating the time spent postwhoring to earning a few extra dollars. A novel concept for sure, but it could probably be done without giving up the internet or cell phone (though dropping those would probably pay the bill without getting an extra job).

:)
linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[Nomad 0]

wait.. are we asking someone to alter their lifestyle, and give up a precious commodity of post whoring in order to provide what they deem a basic need? The audacity!!

All that is gold does not glitter, Not all who wander are lost.

[Lindsey 0]

Quote

wait.. are we asking someone to alter their lifestyle, and give up a precious commodity of post whoring in order to provide what they deem a basic need? The audacity!!

OF COURSE NOT!!! I would never ask another person to do anything he/she didn't want to do. BUT I'd like to be given the same consideration. I already work plenty long hours (how's that for the King's English), and pay $2500/month for health insurance for me, my son, and my employees. I'd like to not alter my lifestyle further in order to pay for OTHER people's health insurance who don't see fit to get up and earn it for themselves.

Nothing wrong with a little elbow grease. And sometimes you've just gotta put your back into it....

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

No. Community is the basis of communism. Redistribution of resources is what virtually every government does, including the US government since its inception.

Wrong. What the U.S. government does (BTW, not the "US" government--please ) is TAX citizens to pay for the things that government, it is agreed, is supposed to provide.

That is, by definition, resource distribution.

Quote

It is NOT in the business of flattening out the amounts of wealth that everyone has.

I don't believe anyone said it was.


You are dead wrong about that. But COMMUNISM WOULD do that. (Except, human nature being what it is will never in a hundred thousand years allow for that to happen in a real-world practical sense.)

Quote

You are correct, "communism" does not imply a totalitarian government, but in order to make communism actually work, one has to have a totalitarian system of government.

Communism (with little c) will never work, except on paper, same as capitalism w/o government regulation. Having said that, it would not require a totalitarian government. A democracy would work equally well (or badly) as a totalitarian system.

Are you ever going to pay back that money you owe me, or are you going to continue giving excuses?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Nomad 0]

Absolutely agree... previous post was sarcasm. If you want health care alter your own personal lifestyle an it can be easily achieved; don't ask others to provide for you what you can provide yourself.

All that is gold does not glitter, Not all who wander are lost.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So... what countries have you lived in with universal health care? And did you ever have to use such health care, because i've been there, done that, and I don't want it here. Second largest city in a industrial European nation and the care was awful.

When leftist, big-government fans want to pass gun bans, they trot out the survivors of those who have been shot to death by criminals who got ahold of guns.

Yet when we trot out people (like you, Nomad) who say they have lived how bad government-run health care is to show why it should be opposed, they will dismiss these "anecdotes" as irrelevant.

Right, and when the neo-con, blood-thirsty machine wants to convict people, they wave pictures of dead kids.

Funny, that's the sort of grave-dancing that the anti-gunners do when they are trying to ban guns! That and the filling a parking lot with empty shoes.

Why are you restating the very thing I replied to?

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Then you have a few options 1) Drop your cell phone and internet, and/or expensive hobbies, and buy decent health care. Between $175 to $300 should do it. Or switch jobs, even career fields, to a company who provides full benefits. Starbucks give medical for all full time and certain part time positions.

2) Or live a healthy lifestyle and don't go to doctor except in major medical situations. Save money every month, or buy a major medical plan...

So see the solution to your problem is quite simple. You'd like to make it a complex social issue but it truly is not. Personal responsibility, along with a bit of protectiveness, and all is well.

If you truly feel you are owed medical care then please explain who hurt you/gave you an illness and lets go find them and make them pay for your treatment.

>>>>>>>>>>>>Then you have a few options 1) Drop your cell phone and internet, and/or expensive hobbies, and buy decent health care. Between $175 to $300 should do it.


Yea, and that will get me HMO care that allows me to pay thousands in co-pays.... NICE. So 300 a month doesn't get me heathcare, just the resemblance of it.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Or switch jobs, even career fields, to a company who provides full benefits.


That provides HMO care that requires huge copays. I really haven;t gotten anywhere from above, have I? Unless I;m some corporate elite, that buys 100% insurance.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Starbucks give medical for all full time and certain part time positions.


Let me guess, the co-pays are so hjgh that you could get the same thing off the street for $50 month. BFD.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>2) Or live a healthy lifestyle and don't go to doctor except in major medical situations. Save money every month, or buy a major medical plan...


Yea, I could live every second for corporate America.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.So see the solution to your problem is quite simple. You'd like to make it a complex social issue but it truly is not.


Yea, simple issue, yet 50 million Americans aren't that smart, according to you. Love it, not a complex issue, yet the 2nd or 3rd most compelling issue in the US. BRILLIANT!!! Isn't that what McSame said about the economy, people are just whiners? I'm sure he got the same support from that as youjust did, 20% agree, 80% vomit.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.Personal responsibility,....


Never got a job from a poor guy, better there than here......I didn't realize we were to the rhetoric phase of our argument.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>If you truly feel you are owed medical care then please explain who hurt you/gave you an illness and lets go find them and make them pay for your treatment.


Owed. Whatever. It is the duty of a government to care for its people, unless you are a member of the Nazi-fascist, pig-loving US of A. The rest of the industrialized world is wrong and we are right. Given to you by the party that spends as much on the military as therest of the world. FUCKING BRILLIANT.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

It'd be easy to earn enough money for health insurance just by dedicating the time spent postwhoring to earning a few extra dollars. A novel concept for sure, but it could probably be done without giving up the internet or cell phone (though dropping those would probably pay the bill without getting an extra job).

:)
linz

Or perhaps use that time to murder a few small animlas and sell their pelts for insurance, then call myself a good person.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Absolutely agree... previous post was sarcasm. If you want health care alter your own personal lifestyle an it can be easily achieved; don't ask others to provide for you what you can provide yourself.

Then why do our representatives provide >1/2 trilliion $/yr for coprorate welfare via Miltary indust complex......... kinda fucks your argument when you don't bitch about that too.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

I have never read you decrying military spending.

Perhaps not. BEcause I decry "spending." Whether "military" or "health care" or a "bridge to nowhere." Get it? I rarely pick and choose. I'm an equal opportunity decrier. Capice?

Quote

I served in the military before and during fascist Ronnie, just as you did..... oh wait, you didn't serve, did you?

I didn't serve under Ronnie. I was commissioned in 1996 - under Clinton. I served under him and GWB. US Army. 90A. 88A. A REMF. And I was cool with that.

And I don't look at my service as anything that makes me better or worse than anybody. I tend not to hold people's choices of profession against them. They have their reasons, and your reason for serving and mine may have been dramatically different. Or even the same. I needed a way to pay for college, and Uncle Sam did so. And he asked for 8 years in return.

Quote

could it be Fascist Ronnie's economic nightmare comming to fruition? Uh.huh.

Could have been. Much like 2000-2001 was CLinton's economic and foreign policy nightmare come to fruition. I'm not saying that's the case, but I'm an equal opportunity decrier. If logic is selective, it usually doesn't work. (Nerdgirl and billvon have earned enough respect from me that if they tell me I'm wrong, I'll usually just take their word for it.)

Quote

I think if you have money you should be able to opt out of uni care and even get a credit to upgrade. I, in no way think a person s/b compelled to stick with one method.

I respect that view. But I also think that "if you have enough money" is like the wicked stepmother telling Cinderella, "If you get all of your work done you can go to the ball."

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Lucky... 0]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Perhaps not. BEcause I decry "spending." Whether "military" or "health care" or a "bridge to nowhere." Get it? I rarely pick and choose. I'm an equal opportunity decrier. Capice?


No capice, you don't, or I haven't seen you drag into some big argument about military spending. Inferrence: you have no issue with it.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And I don't look at my service as anything that makes me better or worse than anybody. I tend not to hold people's choices of profession against them. They have their reasons, and your reason for serving and mine may have been dramatically different. Or even the same. I needed a way to pay for college, and Uncle Sam did so. And he asked for 8 years in return.


Nor do I, I was just explaining my term of service under fascist Ronnie.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Could have been. Much like 2000-2001 was CLinton's economic and foreign policy nightmare come to fruition. I'm not saying that's the case, but I'm an equal opportunity decrier.


Oh please, elaborate. Oh, was 911 his fault, please don't be that desperate. Again, I was talking about your hero, fascist Ronnie and his economic meltdown.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>If logic is selective, it usually doesn't work. (Nerdgirl and billvon have earned enough respect from me that if they tell me I'm wrong, I'll usually just take their word for it.)

Ok, a plug for Bill and Nerdgirl...I don;t get it; is this some kind of heirarchy pecking order? I let the evidence establish my correctness/incorrectness, not the person delivering it.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I respect that view. But I also think that "if you have enough money" is like the wicked stepmother telling Cinderella, "If you get all of your work done you can go to the ball."


No, your system is like that, essentially the US system. You can't get medical care, other than emergency which you have to eventually pay for unless you have money, so the current system, your system is exclsionary, just as Cinderellas stepmother.

Now, more about fascist Ronnie and his legacy, the one that will be revealed as data is sought by even the ignorant when the dollar falls.

[Lindsey 0]

You can't get medical care, other than emergency which you have to eventually pay for unless you have money,

but for very little money you can purchase health insurance, which will get you medical care just about anywhere. For people who are truly incapable of working, there are social programs in place that help. Most of the people who "can't afford" health insurance still find a way to afford many of the luxuries that they WANT to afford.

But too many people don't WANT to spend their money on something as so emotionally unfulfilling as health insurance. It's much easier to ask those of us who choose to pay our own way to pay theirs too. I suppose if selling pelts does it for you, then have at it. It'd be more admirable than sitting on your duff complaining about what's not being given to you at someone else's expense. There are other ways to earn a living, though, that might not seem so icky to you.

Peace~
linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[birdlike 0]

Quote

Quote

wait.. are we asking someone to alter their lifestyle, and give up a precious commodity of post whoring in order to provide what they deem a basic need? The audacity!!

OF COURSE NOT!!! I would never ask another person to do anything he/she didn't want to do. BUT I'd like to be given the same consideration. I already work plenty long hours (how's that for the King's English)

linz

It's far from, quote, "standard" but we knew what you meant so it's all good, yo.
Why you said dat, anywayz?

Spirits fly on dangerous missions
Imaginations on fire

[birdlike 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So... what countries have you lived in with universal health care? And did you ever have to use such health care, because i've been there, done that, and I don't want it here. Second largest city in a industrial European nation and the care was awful.

When leftist, big-government fans want to pass gun bans, they trot out the survivors of those who have been shot to death by criminals who got ahold of guns.

Yet when we trot out people (like you, Nomad) who say they have lived how bad government-run health care is to show why it should be opposed, they will dismiss these "anecdotes" as irrelevant.

Right, and when the neo-con, blood-thirsty machine wants to convict people, they wave pictures of dead kids.

Funny, that's the sort of grave-dancing that the anti-gunners do when they are trying to ban guns! That and the filling a parking lot with empty shoes.

Why are you restating the very thing I replied to?

What, you can't discern the difference between "survivors" and "VICTIMS"?

Spirits fly on dangerous missions
Imaginations on fire

[Nomad 0]

"Yea, and that will get me HMO care that allows me to pay thousands in co-pays.... NICE. So 300 a month doesn't get me heathcare, just the resemblance of it."

Actually no, full benefits, $50 co-pay. At 21 years old I had a job that gave me Anthem Blue cross with a $25 co-pay and $500 deductible on major medical. I can certainly give you the name of this company and maybe they can hire you and solve your problem. Once again, if you are in poor health already and can not obtain medical care then you can deal with the mistake of your past. And if you are still in good health blue cross has wonderful plans with small co-pays and full coverage if you choose to spend you money on such. This is still and always will be, an issue of chose.

Plenty of people live without advanced medical care, they might not live as long, or they might live longer, but it is a personal chose how to treat and approach illness. You choose to want medical coverage and to see a doctor for small and large issues, correct? I chose not to.

And i'm sorry but aren't you on a skydivers forum... if you can't afford thousands of dollars in medical you deem necessary for your survival how did you afford $3,000plus dollar to get into our sport, and the hundreds it take to maintain reserve packs and lift tickets? You have money then, but once again, you CHOOSE not to spend it on health care.



"Owed. Whatever. It is the duty of a government to care for its people, unless you are a member of the Nazi-fascist, pig-loving US of A. The rest of the industrialized world is wrong and we are right. Given to you by the party that spends as much on the military as therest of the world. FUCKING BRILLIANT."

Amazing... I have intimate knowledge, as all Americans should, of the principles and charters our country stand on and it says nothing about providing health care. You are OWED the right to be safe and to pursue a fulfilling life; Nothing else.
So let me ask you this, other than whining on a forum what have you done to remedy this situation you seem to find so appalling. You haven't left for a country with universal care that you agree with, so how are you changing the system here, please tell us?

All that is gold does not glitter, Not all who wander are lost.

[lawrocket 3]

No. I haven't been dragged into a long argument, because I actually believe that we are spending too much. So while facts may get in the way of your subjective beliefs, I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen. This is the same guy who inferred that I haven't served, simply because I don't use my service as a way to gain credibility.

Let me in on some more of your inferences.

------

And no, I am not inferring 9/11 was Clinton's fault. My thoughts? It's the fault of the terrorists. Oh, no! I didn't blame Clinton. I didn't blame Bush. I didn't even blame Reagan! I blamed the people who did it. Inference? I look for the undeniable fact. Neither of them hijacked planes.

Further inference? My thoughts? The real estate boom and bust was the result of government policies. Saying the last 8 years sucked for America is ignorant partisan bullshit - not even THEY believe it, but say it enough and they will. The last 2 years have sucked for plenty. My house is worth less than when I bought it. But I knew the risks.

Saying the Clinton years sucked for America is ignorant partisan bullshit. The first two years were a complete failure. From about 95 to 1999 were unprecedented economic growth. Then THAT bubble (from the economic policies of happy times and lots of money). Same with Reagan.

As to billvon and nerdgirl? And kallend. And many others - they have built my respect. There IS a pecking order that is earned. It is earned through reason. They are far more reasonable in many ways than am I. They are trustworthy and approach things in a reasonable manner. I don't believe that you do - as the repeated "fascist" statements point out.

These are people with whom I disagree regularly. But I respect the hell out of them because of the nature of these disagreements. "Capice?"

By the way - ALL systems are exclusionary. Rationed in one way or another. Ours is a system where winners and losers are not picked by anyone. You favor a system where a Republican administration may be put in charge of it. Is this something you really want?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kelpdiver 2]

Yes, what are your preexisting conditions? 300/mo should get you a rather nice medical policy - that's what I paid in 2006 at age 34 for COBRA when I left the company at the time for a contract job. That was a 90% PPO plan with a 500 deductable. 2000 annual out of pocket. An HMO would have been cheaper, both monthly, and annually, but I wanted the ability to move about, and it worked well for me when I had the motorcycle accident.

Earlier in the decade I had a more emergency style PPO with a $1000 deductable that was $60/mo until I turned 30, got up to $118/mo in 2005 when I went to work for a company with a group plan.

The vast majority of skydivers in theirs 20s and 30s can easily afford health insurance in the US.

[birdlike 0]

Quote

Quote

You are correct, "communism" does not imply a totalitarian government, but in order to make communism actually work, one has to have a totalitarian system of government.

Communism (with little c) will never work, except on paper, same as capitalism w/o government regulation. Having said that, it would not require a totalitarian government. A democracy would work equally well (or badly) as a totalitarian system.

The quantum difference between the two is that it doesn't take a government forcing people to go against human nature to get them to accept a capitalist system, because a capitalist system operates on the very principle that people want more, and will work to obtain it.

Communism operates contrary to major human drives, and thus requires a government to FORCE people to accept it, and would require this coercion in perpetuity, because it requires people to suppress the innate desire for ownership, and for "more."

Spirits fly on dangerous missions
Imaginations on fire

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

As is the military spending. It keeps people employed. So, by that logic, neither social spending nor military spending are any different. I can actually see that point.

Military spending also supports major researches which otherwise would be very difficult to achieve. Space flight, cellular phones, Internet is just top of iceberg

Quote

I think that military spending, like everything except debt repayment, should be cut dramatically. Take 15% off of everything. Use the money saved and put it into debt repayment.

On a government level debt repayment has nothing to do with budget deficit, as government could always print more dollars. Even a 10% inflation run over 10 years would cut our current debt twice (making creating future debt more expensive though).

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[billvon 2,400]

>The quantum difference between the two is that it doesn't take a
>government forcing people to go against human nature to get them to accept a
>capitalist system, because a capitalist system operates on the very principle
>that people want more, and will work to obtain it.

Yep. But again, capitalism requires a LOT of government intervention to prevent that very drive from destroying the system. (Witness Enron, Standard Oil, the Waistcoat Shirt Factory, the mines of Wittenoom, Donora, slavery etc.)

>Communism operates contrary to major human drives . . .

Capitalism operates on greed, communism on compassion. It's easy to lose sight of compassion in capitalism, easy to lose sight of competitiveness in communism. They both operate on major human drives - but in the long run, greed appears to be more common and effective a driver.

That's not to say that they don't have their place. We have a pretty strong system here because we draw from all sorts of economic systems. National parks? 100% communistic. Roads, education, police, air traffic control, the CDC? Socialist. Consumer goods and services? Capitalist. Basic services? Very very heavily regulated capitalist.

[birdlike 0]

Quote

>The quantum difference between the two is that it doesn't take a
>government forcing people to go against human nature to get them to accept a
>capitalist system, because a capitalist system operates on the very principle
>that people want more, and will work to obtain it.

Yep. But again, capitalism requires a LOT of government intervention to prevent that very drive from destroying the system. (Witness Enron, Standard Oil, the Waistcoat Shirt Factory, the mines of Wittenoom, Donora, slavery etc.)

It requires that ORDER be kept, sure, but it doesn't require that the government, daily, stay clamped down hard enough on the people that they aren't free to be PEOPLE!

Quote

>Communism operates contrary to major human drives . . .

Capitalism operates on greed, communism on compassion.

Communism demands "compassion" to a degree that is not within human nature to provide.

Where has there ever been a communist system that was run by people who, themselves, lived under its strictures? NOWHERE.

And is it human nature to wish to live under rulers who won't live as they insist we live, without our resenting them to the point of disobedience, yea, insurrection?

Quote

It's easy to lose sight of compassion in capitalism...

Our country was founded on capitalist ideals, and we are some of the most compassionate people in the fucking world! Who sends more aid overseas to distraught people than the U.S.?

Spirits fly on dangerous missions
Imaginations on fire

[birdlike 0]

Quote

Capitalism operates on greed, communism on compassion.

Capitalism does not actually "operate on greed." Greed is just an extreme degree of a desire to possess some wealth. It's like a person with a compulsive eating disorder compared with someone who eats normal amounts of food.

You take a guy who owns and runs a hardware store. He is not necessarily operating based on GREED. Just a desire to do business to earn a living! Calling it unmitigated "GREED" that drives capitalism is simply wrong.

Spirits fly on dangerous missions
Imaginations on fire

[billvon 2,400]

>It requires that ORDER be kept, sure, but it doesn't require that
>the government, daily, stay clamped down hard enough on the people
>that they aren't free to be PEOPLE!

Tell that to the drone who has to spend ten hours a day at a job he despises, only to face a two hour commute to his cruddy condo.

Like I said, communism is not an ideal system. Neither is capitalism. Our system works out OK because we

>And is it human nature to wish to live under rulers who won't live as
>they insist we live, without our resenting them to the point of
>disobedience, yea, insurrection?

You are doing it right now.

>Our country was founded on capitalist ideals, and we are some of the
>most compassionate people in the fucking world! Who sends more aid
>overseas to distraught people than the U.S.?

We do - yet our foreign aid is almost entirely socialist. Sounds like you're arguing for socialism! And there's nothing wrong with that - socialism is indeed part of our economy.

>Capitalism does not actually "operate on greed."

It does indeed. If people were content with what they had, and did not wish to make more than they needed, then capitalism would rapidly collapse. It is the desire for more, better and higher class stuff (goods, real estate, travel, education, housing, food) that drives the consumer economy, which is the largest part of our (mostly capitalist) economy.

>Greed is just an extreme degree of a desire to possess some wealth.
>It's like a person with a compulsive eating disorder compared with
>someone who eats normal amounts of food.

Good example. Given that we are the fattest nation on the planet, with the great majority of americans eating far more than the 'normal' amount of food, then yes - we treat our economy the same way as we treat food. Indeed, it is what drives it. In the words of Gordon Gecko - "Greed is good. Greed works."

>You take a guy who owns and runs a hardware store. He is not
>necessarily operating based on GREED.

Then Wal-Mart outcompetes him and he fails; his store is torn down and becomes a parking lot. Why? Because Wal-Mart's greed drove them to win the competition for customers - and the next property owner's greed drove him to make more money with the land.

And if Wal-Mart isn't greedy enough, then Target will be. Or Sears, or Costco.

Or the owner might be lucky enough to be in an area where there is no competition whatsoever, in which case someone who does not care about outcompeting anyone else might survive. But if that is the case, then you have left the realm of capitalism.

>Calling it unmitigated greed is simply wrong.

I didn't call it unmitigated greed.

[Lucky... 0]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Our country was founded on capitalist ideals, and we are some of the most compassionate people in the fucking world! Who sends more aid overseas to distraught people than the U.S.?


OH please. Ya, with strings attached. They call that Imperialism. We're so compassionate, yet we don't ensure our own have basic medical care? Brilliant.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It requires that ORDER be kept, sure, but it doesn't require that the government, daily, stay clamped down hard enough on the people that they aren't free to be PEOPLE!


Right, you're free to be what you want as long as you can afford to. You're free to get medical care, as long as you can afford it, if not, you're free not to get it. There are holes all over it and it has its advantages.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Communism demands "compassion" to a degree that is not within human nature to provide.


Altho I'm not a fan of Communism, your Commrade is your brother, in Capitalism your Commrade is your competitor.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Where has there ever been a communist system that was run by people who, themselves, lived under its strictures? NOWHERE.


And in US Capitialism the people who design and run the rules of the system aren't subject to many of the nuances of it. For example, the court/penal system, has different rules for the rich who write the system than the poor.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Capitalism operates on greed, communism on compassion.

Capitalism does not actually "operate on greed." Greed is just an extreme degree of a desire to possess some wealth. It's like a person with a compulsive eating disorder compared with someone who eats normal amounts of food.

You take a guy who owns and runs a hardware store. He is not necessarily operating based on GREED. Just a desire to do business to earn a living! Calling it unmitigated "GREED" that drives capitalism is simply wrong.

It operates on competiton, greed is just the automatic byproduct.