Pre Existing Conditions?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Let�??�??�??�?�¢??s see I quit working file for welfare and get free Medical care and a monthly check and food stamps, or I could get a job that might not have medical care and might not pay enough for me to afford food or health care. Which should I choose stay at home, live a modest life or go to work and live in poverty? Oh such a tough decision.

The system is a disincentive to work… [/quote]

Confession is the first step toward rehabilitation. It’s good to see this out of you.

Liberals/progressives created this “system.” Now you, one of this board’s most vocal liberal/progressive members, complain about it? How gallant of you to be the spearhead of this wave of hypocrisy.[/quote]

I am not complaining, I am stating facts. We are not going to let people starve, no matter how lazy they may be. So we must pay all workers above a standard set by the welfare system.

I know I have a liberal streak, but I am by no means a big liberal, I am not all that vocal either. I just can not tolerate all the free marker fairy tales touted here on these forums

[/quote]

You mean like, the last people starving in a free market was in the Irish famine, whereas people regularily starve in planned economies?

That healthcare makes enormous progress and becomes cheaper and cheaper for everyone in those areas not heavily regulated whereas its prices explode in those areas that are heavily regulated?

I would think that cheap food and healthcare benefits the “poor” the most, but maybe I am wrong.

[/quote]
The only thing i understand is cheap food and health care benafit the poor , which I agree with the rest , I do not understand[/quote]

The last famine in a capitalist society was the Irish famine over 100 years ago. The SU as well as China managed to produce mass famines simply by state run agriculture.

In those areas where the consumers pay the bills, like Lasik surgery or breast implants services get better and cheaper year after year whereas in the more heavily regulated areas prices go up.

So it seems to me that government interference only does one thing, making thing expensive and less available.

[/quote]

America susidises our farm industry, why is it not causing us to go to bed hungry

83

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Let�??�??�??�??�?�¢??s see I quit working file for welfare and get free Medical care and a monthly check and food stamps, or I could get a job that might not have medical care and might not pay enough for me to afford food or health care. Which should I choose stay at home, live a modest life or go to work and live in poverty? Oh such a tough decision.

The system is a disincentive to work… [/quote]

Confession is the first step toward rehabilitation. It’s good to see this out of you.

Liberals/progressives created this “system.” Now you, one of this board’s most vocal liberal/progressive members, complain about it? How gallant of you to be the spearhead of this wave of hypocrisy.[/quote]

I am not complaining, I am stating facts. We are not going to let people starve, no matter how lazy they may be. So we must pay all workers above a standard set by the welfare system.

I know I have a liberal streak, but I am by no means a big liberal, I am not all that vocal either. I just can not tolerate all the free marker fairy tales touted here on these forums

[/quote]

You mean like, the last people starving in a free market was in the Irish famine, whereas people regularily starve in planned economies?

That healthcare makes enormous progress and becomes cheaper and cheaper for everyone in those areas not heavily regulated whereas its prices explode in those areas that are heavily regulated?

I would think that cheap food and healthcare benefits the “poor” the most, but maybe I am wrong.

[/quote]
The only thing i understand is cheap food and health care benafit the poor , which I agree with the rest , I do not understand[/quote]

The last famine in a capitalist society was the Irish famine over 100 years ago. The SU as well as China managed to produce mass famines simply by state run agriculture.

In those areas where the consumers pay the bills, like Lasik surgery or breast implants services get better and cheaper year after year whereas in the more heavily regulated areas prices go up.

So it seems to me that government interference only does one thing, making thing expensive and less available.

[/quote]

America susidises our farm industry, why is it not causing us to go to bed hungry[/quote]

Well it does make it more expensive just not for the direct customers which leads to agricultural products that are used in a way that would not be economically feasable if the customers would have to bear the costs themselves.

Have state run farms and you get the same results like with public schools and public housing.

You do not have socialism yet in America. at least not in agriculture, but fascism, the results are a little bit better.

No good, but better than abysmal.

84

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Let�??�??�??�??�??�?�¢??s see I quit working file for welfare and get free Medical care and a monthly check and food stamps, or I could get a job that might not have medical care and might not pay enough for me to afford food or health care. Which should I choose stay at home, live a modest life or go to work and live in poverty? Oh such a tough decision.

The system is a disincentive to work… [/quote]

Confession is the first step toward rehabilitation. It’s good to see this out of you.

Liberals/progressives created this “system.” Now you, one of this board’s most vocal liberal/progressive members, complain about it? How gallant of you to be the spearhead of this wave of hypocrisy.[/quote]

I am not complaining, I am stating facts. We are not going to let people starve, no matter how lazy they may be. So we must pay all workers above a standard set by the welfare system.

I know I have a liberal streak, but I am by no means a big liberal, I am not all that vocal either. I just can not tolerate all the free marker fairy tales touted here on these forums

[/quote]

You mean like, the last people starving in a free market was in the Irish famine, whereas people regularily starve in planned economies?

That healthcare makes enormous progress and becomes cheaper and cheaper for everyone in those areas not heavily regulated whereas its prices explode in those areas that are heavily regulated?

I would think that cheap food and healthcare benefits the “poor” the most, but maybe I am wrong.

[/quote]
The only thing i understand is cheap food and health care benafit the poor , which I agree with the rest , I do not understand[/quote]

The last famine in a capitalist society was the Irish famine over 100 years ago. The SU as well as China managed to produce mass famines simply by state run agriculture.

In those areas where the consumers pay the bills, like Lasik surgery or breast implants services get better and cheaper year after year whereas in the more heavily regulated areas prices go up.

So it seems to me that government interference only does one thing, making thing expensive and less available.

[/quote]

America susidises our farm industry, why is it not causing us to go to bed hungry[/quote]

Well it does make it more expensive just not for the direct customers which leads to agricultural products that are used in a way that would not be economically feasable if the customers would have to bear the costs themselves.

Have state run farms and you get the same results like with public schools and public housing.

You do not have socialism yet in America. at least not in agriculture, but fascism, the results are a little bit better.

No good, but better than abysmal.

[/quote]

Why are most Countries that have good roads have public FREEWAYs ? Why do the most educated countries have public education ? Name one country that is at the top in education that does not have public education setting the standards .

Section eight is a pretty good program in America

85

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Why are most Countries that have good roads have public FREEWAYs ? Why do the most educated countries have public education ? Name one country that is at the top in education that does not have public education setting the standards .

Section eight is a pretty good program in America [/quote]

Well there is Belgium for example.

The government pays the tuition costs but the schools themselves are private.

They do better than the US year after year after year.

86

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Why are most Countries that have good roads have public FREEWAYs ? Why do the most educated countries have public education ? Name one country that is at the top in education that does not have public education setting the standards .

Section eight is a pretty good program in America [/quote]

Well there is Belgium for example.

Sounds like a good plan ,

The government pays the tuition costs but the schools themselves are private.

They do better than the US year after year after year.

[quote]

Monopoly Kills Innovation and Cheats Kids

Chavis’s charter school is an example of how a little innovation can create a school that can change kids’ lives. You don’t get innovation without competition.

To give you an idea of how competitive American schools are and how U.S. students performed compared with their European counterparts, we gave parts of an international test to some high school students in Belgium and in New Jersey.

Belgian kids cleaned the American kids’ clocks, and called them “stupid.”

We didn’t pick smart kids to test in Europe and dumb kids in the United States. The American students attend an above-average school in New Jersey, and New Jersey’s kids have test scores that are above average for America.

Lov Patel, the boy who got the highest score among the American students, told me, “I’m shocked, because it just shows how advanced they are compared to us.”

The Belgian students didn’t perform better because they’re smarter than American students. They performed better because their schools are better. At age 10, American students take an international test and score well above the international average. But by age 15, when students from 40 countries are tested, the Americans place 25th.

American schools don’t teach as well as schools in other countries because they are government monopolies, and monopolies don’t have much incentive to compete. In Belgium, by contrast, the money is attached to the kids – it’s a kind of voucher system. Government funds education – at many different kinds of schools – but if a school can’t attract students, it goes out of business.

Belgian school principal Kaat Vandensavel told us she works hard to impress parents.

She told us, “If we don’t offer them what they want for their child, they won’t come to our school.” She constantly improves the teaching, saying, “You can’t afford 10 teachers out of 160 that don’t do their work, because the clients will know, and won’t come to you again.”

[/quote][/quote]