chuckakers

Did I mention I love living here? Due to the popularity of the "Survivor" shows, Texas is planning to do one entitled, "Survivor," Texas-Style. The contestants will all start in Dallas, then drive to Waco, Austin, San Antonio, over to Houston and down to Brownsville. They will then proceed up to Del Rio, El Paso, Midland, Odessa, Lubbock and Amarillo. From there they will go on to Abilene, Fort Worth and finally back to Dallas. Each will be driving a pink Volvo with bumper stickers that read: "I Love the Dixie Chicks," "Boycott Beef," "I Voted for Obama," "George Strait Sucks," "Hillary in 2012" and "I'm here to confiscate your guns." The first one to make it back to Dallas alive wins. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Not at all. Research simply indicates that US healthcare isn't that great compared to the rest of the developed world. Denying that our health care system is broken isn't going to help matters. So, why is it that so many Americans go abroad for health care? Is it also because "the quality of care sucks in their country"? If we are to have an intelligent conversation on the issue, you'll have to let me know what "so many Americans" are. Is that a million people a year going out of country, or 1,000? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

HEY.. STOP IT Just who the fuck do you think you are.. bringing facts to support blowing the shit out of another sacred right wing phallacy Nice try, but....http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_threaded;post=3490356;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC; Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

The high cost of medical care in the U.S. is driven largely by our screwy third party payer system and the huge hole left in hospitals pocketbooks from treating people who can't or don't pay their tab. You know, the people the libs say can't get health care. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I have no doubt that the very best care available in the US is comparable to the very best care available in any country. However, if we only look at the quality of the best care the US has to offer, and the wealthy recipients of that care, we get no useful information about the average care that the average recipient receives, which is far more useful information. You're reaching. I've also been in hospitals and medical facilities in poor small towns and in the heart of urban areas. From what I've seen, the quality of care is pretty similar across the board, without respect to who's walking in the door. Sure the super-facilities have technologies that smaller one don't, but that's to be expected. It makes no sense to have some zillion dollar gizmo and world-class whateverologist at a facility that only treats a small population or in a tiny urban clinic. People who need more care than is available are simply and routinely referred to places that do. People come to our state-of-the-art medical centers because the quality of care sucks in their country, not ours. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

About time. And at the expense of how many trees and how much CO2 spewed into the air to produce, transport, and dispose of that dead tree waste called bulk mailing? Try this: Fascinating way you have of admitting that you were WRONG. Have you been taking lessons from mnealtx? You cited one year of results. Look at history. Even in the article you cite the author stresses that the Postal Service "managed" to post a net profit. Nice jab at mnealtx, though. That's really becoming - or at least revealing - of you. If you bothered to do just a tiny teeny bit of research you would find that the USPS has averaged over $1Billion/yr in profits over the past 10 years. 2008, the year Bill cited, was actually down because of the economy, 2008 was down because the USPS had to Pre-Pay $5 Billion in Retirement Benefits: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5870048&page=1 Here's your tiny teeny bit of research, which can be found at http://www.usps.com/financials/ar/welcome.htm and looks like this: Net Income (in millions) 2008 - (2,806) 2007 - (5,142) 2006 - 900 2005 - 1,445 2004 - 3,065 2003 - 3,868 2002 - (676) 2001 - (1,680) 2000 - (199) 1999 - (447) 1998 - (810) 1998 - (1360) Net total (3842) / 12 years = (320.1666) annually. That's a $3,201,666 average annual LOSS over the past 12 years (as far back as the USPS website reports) Double and a too. As I said, as a business model, the USPS sucks. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Just douse the address area with lighter fluid before lighting. That should do the trick. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Not much of a pilot if he didn't FAR105 before conducting parachuting ops. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

That's what a google search looked like. Then they were illegal jumps. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Would you prefer that postal workers read your mail before delivering it, and deciding for you what is important and what is not? I'm pretty sure that it's capitalism that encourages companies to advertise to potential customers. Are you suggesting that we eliminate capitalism so you won't be inconvenienced when you check your mail? Agreed. What do you suggest should be done about the problem? Should we ban hard copy advertisement? I suspect that would only serve to increase email based spam and telemarketing. It might even cause television networks to cram 40 minutes of programming into each hour instead of 44. Should we just make it illegal to use the USPS for advertising? I suspect that would lead to more flyers on my windshield and front door. I don't suggest do we anything, except stop subsidizing the USPS. I could care less if they double the amount of crap in the system, beyond the inconvenience of having to fill my trash with it. That aspect is indeed free market capitalism at work. I was just pointing out the irony in the situation. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

About time. And at the expense of how many trees and how much CO2 spewed into the air to produce, transport, and dispose of that dead tree waste called bulk mailing? Try this: Fascinating way you have of admitting that you were WRONG. Have you been taking lessons from mnealtx? You cited one year of results. Look at history. Even in the article you cite the author stresses that the Postal Service "managed" to post a net profit. Nice jab at mnealtx, though. That's really becoming - or at least revealing - of you. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

The US is far from having the "best medical care in the world." It's only the most expensive. So people from around the world come to our state-of-art medical centers for second-rate treatment. That makes perfect sense. Have you ever visited the Houston Medical Center? It looks like there's a United Nations meeting in town. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

About time. And at the expense of how many trees and how much CO2 spewed into the air to produce, transport, and dispose of that dead tree waste called bulk mailing? Try this: from http://www.newdream.org/junkmail/facts.php * More than 100 million trees’ worth of bulk mail arrive in American mail boxes each year – that’s the equivalent of deforesting the entire Rocky Mountain National Park every four months. (New American Dream calculation from Conservatree and U.S. Forest Service statistics) * In 2005, 5.8 million tons of catalogs and other direct mailings ended up in the U.S. municipal solid waste stream – enough to fill over 450,000 garbage trucks. Parked bumper to bumper these garbage trucks would extend from Atlanta to Albuquerque. Less than 36% of this ad mail was recycled. (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) * The production and disposal of direct mail consumes more energy than 3 million cars. (New American Dream calculation from U.S. Department of Energy and the Paper Task Force statistics) * Citizens and local governments spend hundreds of millionsof dollars per year to collect and dispose of all the bulk mail that doesn’t get recycled. (New American Dream estimate from EPA statistics) * California's state and local governments spend $500,000 each year collecting and disposing of AOL’s direct mail disks alone. (California State Assembly) * U.S. companies sent 35 billion pieces of direct postal mail in 1980, 64 billion pieces in 1990, 90 billion pieces in 2000, and 100 billion pieces in 2005. That’s more than 300 pieces of bulk mail for every man, woman, and child! (U.S. Postal Service) * One study says Americans throw away 44% of bulk mail unopened, yet still spend 8 months per lifetime opening bulk mail. (Consumer Research Institute) * Fifty-five percent of Americans “dislike” and 26% “despise” getting internet disks in the mail, while 1.9% “really appreciate” them. (June 2002 Opinion Research Corporation International Poll commissioned by New American Dream) * Ninety-one percent of all U.S. adults have heard of the National Do Not Call Registry. More than half of all adults report that they signed up and now receive far fewer telemarketing calls or none at all. (February 2002 Harris Poll) Artificial profits from a horrific eco-practice. Now that's success. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Do you mean are people entitled to health care, or do mean are people entitled to FREE health care? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Do you mean are people entitled to health care, or do mean are people entitled to FREE health care? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

If that was done in the U.S. those were illegal jumps. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Damn girl, you are far too interested in what I think. Ya might wanna re-read my post you replied to. I wasn't "observing" what you think I was. And have a drink. You sound like you could use one....or six. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89242 Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Just lean a little - and don't over-think it. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Don't you mean Alah? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

OK, I decided. "zzzzzzzzzzz" Over my head. I get it. You a funny man. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I'm tossed between "??????????" and "zzzzzzzzzz". Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

The USPS may provide good service - in fact, my local 77377 does a good job - but the value you see is a perception, not reality. The USPS loses money and your federal government extracts money from me and the rest of the taxpayers to make it up. Those tax dollars aren't just making up losses, either. They are also subsidizing all non-taxpayers who use the USPS, since prices are artificially low. That's backdoor welfare and it's wrong. The point I was making is that as a business, the USPS sucks. It can not sustain itself. And speaking of service, I don't feel very well served when I have to sift through pounds of advertising fliers to find the mail I actually need. Your low prices are also subsidized by the USPS allowing - hell, encouraging & marketing - bulk mail advertising. And whether we like it or not, most of those (dare I say) billions of pounds of paper - those millions of earth-saving trees - will end up in a dump, where a bulldozer burning fossil fuel will have to stack it up in piles to rot and pollute. That's not really serving anyone, especially the greenies that should be picketing naked over it. OK, rant complete, mostly. Now back on subject. I understand your position on thinking the government - or some (presumable government controlled) entity in the not-for-profit realm - should handle certain basic citizen needs. My question is where do you believe that ends? What industry could not eventually be called a basic need? Everyone needs a furnace. Everyone needs groceries. What all do you believe should be provided on a not-for-profit basis? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Well, may be you're willing to fuck with an alien, but I'm not. For all you know, he could have a phaser that could take out half the building. I'm not even sure what you just said or why. Have another drink. Wait. I'll have one and re-read your post....hold on......................................................................................................................................................... ..................nope, didn't help. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Given a choice between the government and insurance companies, I'll take the government. At least we would actually get some healthcare, instead of being denied because of a wart on our left toe, or something equally ludicrous. I wouldn't bet on better care from the government. Socialized health care in other countries is a disaster. For example, in the UK, the government won't even allow patients with macular degeneration to get the drugs needed to treat it until they go blind in one eye. Seems they won't justify the money until a person is down to their last good eye. The story is the same elsewhere. People with illnesses needing immediate attention are told they have to wait, because there are too many people in front of them. Conversely, here in the U.S. an illegal alien can walk into any emergency room and be treated in short order FREE. Let's try this. How about some input from folks that live in countries WITH socialized medicine. What's your system like??? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX