Korean:
[quote]humanjhawkins wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Obama is out to destroy the middle class. Now, if he tried something directly, people would march on DC with pitchforks and torches. Instead, he (like all libs) uses altruism as a cover. “Don’t you WANT everyone to have decent health care? Are you that greedy and selfish?” That’s how the game works. He doesn’t give a rat’s ass if anyone besides he and his family have health care.
A lot of conservatives feel this way, but I have yet to hear one explain why. So, on what do you base this presumption of ill motives? (Nevermind for a moment whether you disagree with the policy… Why do you hate the man?)[/quote]
If he intended to provide more health care for more people, he would include more funds to provide the training of more doctors. The number of doctors, esp GPs, is declining. So, with an idiot’s crudeness, he intends to expand the patient base, without expanding the number of doctors.
That must lead to rationing and very long waits to see a physician.
It therefore follows that his real intent is not to increase healthcare for all, but to ruin it. Britain → Canada → USA.
So in other words, Obama is indeed a liar, wow, who would have thought.
The US government is a puppet government. No way a person could come in for 4 years and out of the blue be indoctrinated and run the country and have the cycle begin fresh every 4 years. NEVER HAPPENS. Think about it.
The real leader, owner and executors are the people who own and control they money. Is that really that hard to for people to fathom?
Rockscar brings up a good point, for those who think Wilson’s shout was bad, there are other government’s that resemble the WWE.
[quote]NinjaTreeFrog wrote:
orion wrote:
If you cannot convince people with the force of you arguments maybe your arguments are not that good. The answer can hardly be to use government as a weapon to make them do your bidding anyway.
Ha! I think this is an interesting statement considering it can be reversed when it comes to just about ANY point of contention in politics. You’ve attempted to dismiss my arguments as being without any value because I’ve failed to convince YOU. What an ego. Perhaps the issue isn’t that my arguments are not that good, but that you’re closed-minded about the issue and can only resort to these type of statements because you are unable/unwilling to see the world from any other perspective than your own.[/quote]
So far you have not really made that many arguments that could have convinced me but quite frankly I will have already heard most of them.
That was not my point though.
My point was that forcing other people “to do good” always backfires. Prohibition, war on drugs, inquisition, welfare, you name it.
But even if I just was too damn simple and stubborn to get that you really could create the proletarian utopia why does that give you the right to make me if only you can stitch together a makeshift temporary majority?
[quote]Unaware wrote:
humanjhawkins wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Obama is out to destroy the middle class.
A lot of conservatives feel this way, but I have yet to hear one explain why. So, on what do you base this presumption of ill motives? (Nevermind for a moment whether you disagree with the policy… Why do you hate the man?)
The man has degrees from Columbia and Harvard so I’m going to asumme hes not an idiot.
And yet he seemingly can’t perform simple logical deductions or arithmetic, so I have to conclude he is being dishonest.
For example he says hes plan won’t add anything to the deficit. The CBO disagrees with this. Anyone with half a brain must have doubts. And yet the president stadns by that pledge he can’t deliver.
If he came out and admitted that this is going to cost money but he thinks the trade off will be worth it I could at least respect the man. He knows he won’t get it passed if he does this though, so instead he refutes mathematics.
He’s a schemer.[/quote]
That makes sense. Personally, I see the plan to pay for this as highly optimistic and prone to failure. But I don’t think it’s impossible. I think Obama is just a very optimistic person, so I don’t draw the same conclusions as you. But I can see how you would feel that way.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
If he intended to provide more health care for more people, he would include more funds to provide the training of more doctors. The number of doctors, esp GPs, is declining. So, with an idiot’s crudeness, he intends to expand the patient base, without expanding the number of doctors.
[/quote]
Do you know how students are selected for Medical school? I was a waited in a banquet restaurant once. One of the events I worked on was for a bunch of doctors high up in the ranks that make decisions on this kind of thing.
It turns out that there are many times more qualified people who want to become doctors, than are allowed to be. Beyond the top few percent of applicants, it has nothing to do with ability or capacity of the universities. It’s basically a lottery, with a limited number of winners.
The number of winners is chosen (and kept very low) to insure that prices can be kept high. When someone would propose increasing the number of admitted students, another would oppose this based on he fear of competition.
It would take a 4 year lead time (and did you notice that Obama proposed the meat of his plan to start 4 years out?) but you could double the number of doctors easily in the U.S.
[quote]orion wrote:
f you cannot convince people with the force of you arguments maybe your arguments are not that good. The answer can hardly be to use government as a weapon to make them do your bidding anyway.
[/quote]
Wait a minute… So, you are arguing for healthcare? Here are some facts:
-
The president and the congress were elected with pretty good margins. So, are you saying that if you can’t talk them out of this that you should just call it good and let people get what they voted for?
-
The president’s approval on handling this issue has dropped below 50%. It’s close, but below 50%. NOTE: This is on his handling of the issue. Not on the issue itself.
-
When polled on whether they want a public option, the result is 70% in favor still. So, the logic of what you just said supports having a public insurance option if you can’t come up with an argument to convince those 70% of Americans who want one.
What did I get wrong?
[quote]humanjhawkins wrote:
orion wrote:
f you cannot convince people with the force of you arguments maybe your arguments are not that good. The answer can hardly be to use government as a weapon to make them do your bidding anyway.
Wait a minute… So, you are arguing for healthcare? Here are some facts:
-
The president and the congress were elected with pretty good margins. So, are you saying that if you can’t talk them out of this that you should just call it good and let people get what they voted for?
-
The president’s approval on handling this issue has dropped below 50%. It’s close, but below 50%. NOTE: This is on his handling of the issue. Not on the issue itself.
-
When polled on whether they want a public option, the result is 70% in favor still. So, the logic of what you just said supports having a public insurance option if you can’t come up with an argument to convince those 70% of Americans who want one.
What did I get wrong?[/quote]
Well if you can convince people to chip in on their own you do not need a government to make people do it.
If you need government, that is after all nothing but organized violence, to make people do what they would not do on their own, it just might be that you are wrong and are resorting to violence to further your agenda.
Where we possibly disagree is when it comes to the legitimacy of majority rule. I do not think that theft, coercion and murder suddenly are a-ok if you happen to be the majority.
There is a good reason why there are no real democracies, just republics and too much of a democratic element does not equal reason, fairness and equality but mob rule.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Rockscar brings up a good point, for those who think Wilson’s shout was bad, there are other government’s that resemble the WWE.[/quote]
That’s true. But I like to think we are better than those governments.
I wouldn’t have the balls to do it, but I hear you can just wave a $10 bill (Korean… actually 100,000 won) in Korea if you get stopped by the cops, and you won’t get a ticket. I think part of what makes America great is that you could never get away with shit like that here. We have too much respect for the law and the system we live under.
When a guy can get away with breaking congressional rules and showing utter disrespect for both the person and the office of the president, that’s a sad day for America. I pretty much hated Bush, but I would have said the same thing if a democrat pulled that.
[quote]orion wrote:
Well if you can convince people to chip in on their own you do not need a government to make people do it.
If you need government, that is after all nothing but organized violence, to make people do what they would not do on their own, it just might be that you are wrong and are resorting to violence to further your agenda.
Where we possibly disagree is when it comes to the legitimacy of majority rule. I do not think that theft, coercion and murder suddenly are a-ok if you happen to be the majority.
There is a good reason why there are no real democracies, just republics and too much of a democratic element does not equal reason, fairness and equality but mob rule.
[/quote]
Yeah, democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner. I get that. We are a republic that has democratic input, and a democratic veto every 4 years (or sooner if things get wildly out of hand). But we’re not (thank God) a pure democracy.
I also don’t think that theft, coersion, or murder are suddenly ok. But, we are not talking about theft or murder. And as for coersion, this is not so black and white.
We live in a society where , however logical it might be, it is simply unrealistic to allow someone who comes bleeding into an emergency room to die. It would be nice if that was an option, but it isn’t. So what can be done? We can calculate that people are going to do this and they are going to cost us money. So, we can decide to make them chip in. Is this coersion? I would argue that it is theft prevention. Because all those uninsured people are flat out going to steal from society of they are not required to pay their fare share.
Beyond that, this is just long overdue regulation of an industry that has been allowed to violate contracts and manipulate legislation to the point that it is utterly corrupt.
Do you know why the health insurance industry is pushing for this “common sense” provision that would allow them to compete across state lines? Sounds good right? More companies competing all over the states would have to bring down prices. Well, not exactly. It turns out that most states have stricter regulations about what health insurance companies are allowed to do (i.e. under what circumstances they can deny your claims, etc.)
But, New Jersey doesn’t have any of those regulations. So if they are allowed to compete across state lines, they will ALL move to New Jersey where they will be free to become even more corrupt.
It’s all a political game. The republicans and the insurance companies (and many of the democrats who get a lot of money from the insurance companies) are not on your side. They are out to make money. And this new regulation would force them to honor their contracts and pay you fairly. That doesn’t make money. It’s as simple as that.
[quote]humanjhawkins wrote:
orion wrote:
Well if you can convince people to chip in on their own you do not need a government to make people do it.
If you need government, that is after all nothing but organized violence, to make people do what they would not do on their own, it just might be that you are wrong and are resorting to violence to further your agenda.
Where we possibly disagree is when it comes to the legitimacy of majority rule. I do not think that theft, coercion and murder suddenly are a-ok if you happen to be the majority.
There is a good reason why there are no real democracies, just republics and too much of a democratic element does not equal reason, fairness and equality but mob rule.
Yeah, democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner. I get that. We are a republic that has democratic input, and a democratic veto every 4 years (or sooner if things get wildly out of hand). But we’re not (thank God) a pure democracy.
I also don’t think that theft, coersion, or murder are suddenly ok. But, we are not talking about theft or murder. And as for coersion, this is not so black and white.
We live in a society where , however logical it might be, it is simply unrealistic to allow someone who comes bleeding into an emergency room to die. It would be nice if that was an option, but it isn’t. So what can be done? We can calculate that people are going to do this and they are going to cost us money. So, we can decide to make them chip in. Is this coersion? I would argue that it is theft prevention. Because all those uninsured people are flat out going to steal from society of they are not required to pay their fare share.
Beyond that, this is just long overdue regulation of an industry that has been allowed to violate contracts and manipulate legislation to the point that it is utterly corrupt.
Do you know why the health insurance industry is pushing for this “common sense” provision that would allow them to compete across state lines? Sounds good right? More companies competing all over the states would have to bring down prices. Well, not exactly. It turns out that most states have stricter regulations about what health insurance companies are allowed to do (i.e. under what circumstances they can deny your claims, etc.)
But, New Jersey doesn’t have any of those regulations. So if they are allowed to compete across state lines, they will ALL move to New Jersey where they will be free to become even more corrupt.
It’s all a political game. The republicans and the insurance companies (and many of the democrats who get a lot of money from the insurance companies) are not on your side. They are out to make money. And this new regulation would force them to honor their contracts and pay you fairly. That doesn’t make money. It’s as simple as that.
[/quote]
There are basically two points here.
The first is that we need emergency rooms.
Well yes, we do. You might have noticed that most doctors are not against doing pro bono work and I think you will be able to convince a solid amount of people to contribute to such a well funded emergency room. Yes, if you slip on a sidewalk on a Saturday night an emergency room is good. If you want to build one I´ll send you a check, after all that person might be me. That is one of those examples that most definitely need no coercing. Notice that you do not need to convince all people, or even a majority, just enough to keep it running. You think you can find those in a big city, especially if you have a nice self congratulatory dinner each year and stroke their balls a little bit?
The other point seems to be that insurances are out to get you and they only make money by cheating their customers. That is basically the claim that the only way to make a profit is to sell an inferior product. If you put it that way it is blatantly absurd. You would not buy a shitty cell phone or car, why would you buy shitty insurance? So they might want to fuck with you but if they have enough competition they can´t. That does mean though that mandatory insurance is out. You have to be free to not have insurance if none of their offers is good enough for you.
Plus the very idea of a United States is also competition. A lot of Us companies incorporate in Nevada because of their laws, why not insurance companies in NJ? In the end, if their customers don´t like, they no drive Ferrari.
[quote]humanjhawkins wrote:
MaximusB wrote:
Rockscar brings up a good point, for those who think Wilson’s shout was bad, there are other government’s that resemble the WWE.
That’s true. But I like to think we are better than those governments.
I wouldn’t have the balls to do it, but I hear you can just wave a $10 bill (Korean… actually 100,000 won) in Korea if you get stopped by the cops, and you won’t get a ticket. I think part of what makes America great is that you could never get away with shit like that here. We have too much respect for the law and the system we live under.
When a guy can get away with breaking congressional rules and showing utter disrespect for both the person and the office of the president, that’s a sad day for America. I pretty much hated Bush, but I would have said the same thing if a democrat pulled that.[/quote]
Well, see that’s the thing. In 2005 I believe a bunch of democrats out and out booed Bush during his SOTU speech. I don’t remember as much of an outrage then. But at least you’re consistent.
[quote]humanjhawkins wrote:
MaximusB wrote:
Rockscar brings up a good point, for those who think Wilson’s shout was bad, there are other government’s that resemble the WWE.
That’s true. But I like to think we are better than those governments.
I wouldn’t have the balls to do it, but I hear you can just wave a $10 bill (Korean… actually 100,000 won) in Korea if you get stopped by the cops, and you won’t get a ticket. I think part of what makes America great is that you could never get away with shit like that here. We have too much respect for the law and the system we live under.
When a guy can get away with breaking congressional rules and showing utter disrespect for both the person and the office of the president, that’s a sad day for America. I pretty much hated Bush, but I would have said the same thing if a democrat pulled that.[/quote]
It’s tough to say what is worse, calling out the president when he is not being full honest, or the president not being fully honest while addressing the people. Everyone is in a frenzy as to WHY he shouted, rather than if there is any truth to him shouting.
The truth of the matter is, which no one is talking about, is that the president is omitting alot of unspoken and unwritten stuff, and that is nothing new.
Because of the outburst, Kent Conrad and Max Baucus are now open to legislation in the bill which would verify citizenship to those who would seek the public option. Now this would not have happened if Wilson didn’t speak up.
Alot of good things in our history would not have happened if people didn’t speak up, even if it meant being rude or improper. I know Wilson is taking alot of flack for his actions, but he did accomplish something which has much of the Left pissed off.
By the way, do you know who funded the downfall of the Deal and Heller Amendments? The National Council of La Raza, shocking isn’t it.
National Council of THE RACE? Think about that one for awhile, everyone. A lot of people try to pretend that overt Mexican racialism will not affect them. I know that’s certainly not been the case for you in prison, but how does it affect the mostly-white taxpaying classes? As Telles and Ortiz have documented in their groundbreaking “Generations of Exclusion,” the Mexicans by-and-large never make it into the middle class over the generations. So they never pay say, the $100k in taxes people like me have paid over the past 5 years. They GET all of that money with a little help from their friends at MALDEF, LULAC, and National Council of the Race.
Me, I think the obvious racial-spoils system we operate under now is a sure-fire way to have everyone start shooting at one another, especially as wealth collapses in this country due to massive debt obligations.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
By the way, do you know who funded the downfall of the Deal and Heller Amendments? The National Council of La Raza, shocking isn’t it.
National Council of THE RACE? Think about that one for awhile, everyone. A lot of people try to pretend that overt Mexican racialism will not affect them. I know that’s certainly not been the case for you in prison, but how does it affect the mostly-white taxpaying classes? As Telles and Ortiz have documented in their groundbreaking “Generations of Exclusion,” the Mexicans by-and-large never make it into the middle class over the generations. So they never pay say, the $100k in taxes people like me have paid over the past 5 years. They GET all of that money with a little help from their friends at MALDEF, LULAC, and National Council of the Race.
Me, I think the obvious racial-spoils system we operate under now is a sure-fire way to have everyone start shooting at one another, especially as wealth collapses in this country due to massive debt obligations. [/quote]
The power elite don’t care about any of this shit. They want the Americas to be ONE. Hence NAFTA. It benefits everyone except the united states. It’s a done deal.
My point is, that this is the same shit we have seen past years, with hidden agendas and false promises. Why was none of this pointed out, but people have a shit fit because someone shouted at the president. It is the same thing over and over, promise of truth and benefit for Americans, only to be paid off by lobbyists and special interest groups.
Let me paint you a picture…
California State Assemblyman Mike Duvall was bragging to assemblyman Jeff Miller how he fucked some young lobbyist from an energy company to lobby the vote for her company. He whispered to his buddy about how she liked to be spanked, liked her hair pulled, and wore eye-patch underwear (think crotchless). Yet worst of all, she told him that while she was walking up a flight of stairs, his cum started to drip out of her pussy while wearing a skirt LOL. This moron tells his buddy this, the whole time the microphone was on. The assemblyman and lobbyist hooker are both married (for now), but above all, this was the guy who bragged in Sacramento that he could not be paid off. He would not give in to pressure, but the power of the pussy prevailed.
You’re saying it wrong, Max!
It’s “The power of the Poo-SAY!!!” (Gotta’ emphasize that last syllable!)
Man…you really have to love these guy who campaign on “Family Values” and morality…
Mufasa
Mufasa, they have the gone ON TAPE, talking about how he pounded the shit out of her and came inside her, only to have it drip out while she walked up a flight of stairs LOL. All caught on tape. In his press statement, he said his resignation was not an admission of guilt, and that he was only telling “fictitious” stories LOL.
Back to the original post…
Politicians are pretty good at milking their “15 minutes…”
Ole’ Joe has his work cut out for him…because his 15 minutes will have to last all the way to the mid-terms of next year.
Mufasa