Don't take it personally, everyone who can't give up the government tit is threatened by someone who isn't afraid to go into the world and make something happen.langeweile said:
OTB
Bush
- Thread starter screwge
- Start date
OTB
Blah blah blah. Public education, social security, and even the notion of subsidized health care for those who can't afford their own......thinking those are bad things is idiocy. You can spend your money better? Altogether now "Cut my taxes". Go ahead, say it. You want your taxes cut and if people suffer because of it, that's their damn problem. Go ahead say it, you'll feel much better.langeweile said:
Being rich doesn't make America great. It's only great if it uses it's vast wealth to do great things. How much money we spend to "liberate" the Iraqi's? That's fine, i'd have no problem with that if that were the reason we were actually there. And you seem all for every damn penny of it. But goodness, trying to make sure a fellow countryman can go see a doctor? Frick that. Piss on 'em. That's your attitude.
Notice you took a cheap shot at me but then ignored my responce - go take your meds.Ickabod said:
OTB
Not true alot of Christians will use God in this way ,which is wrong,forgive me.I vote after praying for whom i beleive will do the best job.Plus im a middle class person who cares more for the less fortunate,in which i dont see Bush has shown any commpassion for these people.Peace4u said:
Altogether now "Cut my taxes".
Could you please point out the passage were i said or implied that??
But goodness, trying to make sure a fellow countryman can go see a doctor? Frick that. Piss on 'em. That's your attitude.
And please while you searching, find this passage too.
You are so blind and so locked in to your little box, that you don't even read what i said.
You put words in my mouth i have never said.
You assume that because I am against a goverment run health plan i am automatically don't care about anybody that needs to see a doctor. WHERE DID I SAY THAT.
Assumption is the religion of the stupid, and I nominate you as their president.
Unless people like you are able to see beyond party lines a serious discussion on healthcare will not be possible.
France and England have seen the light. After years of trying to finance a national healthcare system, they have realized that it can't be financed and have now opted for a two tier system.
I am not a healthcare specialist and I am not a professor of economics. All we (North America) have to do is to take a look at Europe and evaluate waht is hapening over there to find out what is working and what is not.
The mantra of the "nanny state' has to stop and give way to honest discussion on what is feasible and what isn't.
If you just keep going to the wallet to the ones that work, without any regard for their concerns, you will create two things:
1) You will dampen the spirit of those who want more and want to do better. The result will be less entrpreneurship and a lessend willingness to take risk.
In effect you are creating a country of lemmings. Again listen to some of the news coming out of Europe. The biggest block for growth, is over taxation. This over taxation is a direct result of social programms getting out of control. There is a push by the SPD(the socialist party of Germany) to reverse some of those programs.
2) Class warfare, between those who play by the rules and those that are the leeches of society.
I will never turn my back on somebody that needs help. Everyone that is sick should ahve the opportunity to get help. Everyone that loses his/her job should get TEMPORARY help until he/she is back on track again.
What I am against are those that take advantage of the sysytem by just being plain lazy. They are out there. Again this does not come from me reading a book. In my own extended family I know of some that just don't want to work, and have been living on wellfare for the past 8 years.
Is it fair that these people should get a free ride??And live on the expense of those who drag their ass in to work every morning? Not in my book.
If you, because of this, want to make me out as privileged or heartless. You are either just an agitator or you are part of the problem and are trying to defend your lifestyle.
Could you please point out the passage were i said or implied that??
But goodness, trying to make sure a fellow countryman can go see a doctor? Frick that. Piss on 'em. That's your attitude.
And please while you searching, find this passage too.
You are so blind and so locked in to your little box, that you don't even read what i said.
You put words in my mouth i have never said.
You assume that because I am against a goverment run health plan i am automatically don't care about anybody that needs to see a doctor. WHERE DID I SAY THAT.
Assumption is the religion of the stupid, and I nominate you as their president.
Unless people like you are able to see beyond party lines a serious discussion on healthcare will not be possible.
France and England have seen the light. After years of trying to finance a national healthcare system, they have realized that it can't be financed and have now opted for a two tier system.
I am not a healthcare specialist and I am not a professor of economics. All we (North America) have to do is to take a look at Europe and evaluate waht is hapening over there to find out what is working and what is not.
The mantra of the "nanny state' has to stop and give way to honest discussion on what is feasible and what isn't.
If you just keep going to the wallet to the ones that work, without any regard for their concerns, you will create two things:
1) You will dampen the spirit of those who want more and want to do better. The result will be less entrpreneurship and a lessend willingness to take risk.
In effect you are creating a country of lemmings. Again listen to some of the news coming out of Europe. The biggest block for growth, is over taxation. This over taxation is a direct result of social programms getting out of control. There is a push by the SPD(the socialist party of Germany) to reverse some of those programs.
2) Class warfare, between those who play by the rules and those that are the leeches of society.
I will never turn my back on somebody that needs help. Everyone that is sick should ahve the opportunity to get help. Everyone that loses his/her job should get TEMPORARY help until he/she is back on track again.
What I am against are those that take advantage of the sysytem by just being plain lazy. They are out there. Again this does not come from me reading a book. In my own extended family I know of some that just don't want to work, and have been living on wellfare for the past 8 years.
Is it fair that these people should get a free ride??And live on the expense of those who drag their ass in to work every morning? Not in my book.
If you, because of this, want to make me out as privileged or heartless. You are either just an agitator or you are part of the problem and are trying to defend your lifestyle.
Then i'll say it. What the fark are you talking about? Are you sure you're posting in the right thread?langeweile said:
Why am I not surprised?Ickabod said:
Any idea or thought that is not part of "Das Capital" just doesn't register with you.
someone asked
1. You must be Quebecois-French to be PM. Exceptions to this do more to prove the
rule than disprove it (Joe Clarke, Kim Cambell, John Turner?...)
2. Like him or don't- Chretien was a born politician and a serious political ass-kicker.
He was a cabinet minister before most of his recent rivals were out of school, let
alone in politics. When his career ended, he was the most senior leader of any member
nation of the Francophonie or the Brit. Commonwealth. He still gets more face-time
with world leaders (think Putin) that Paul Martin.
3. He came after Mulroney's Conservatives...'nuff said.
Also: Chretien was all for listening to Blix and letting the inpectors do their jobs...
Chretien always had good pol. instincts & intuition.
OK- Back to our American friends on the Red Team Leader v. Blue Team Leader question.
Sure thing...
1. You must be Quebecois-French to be PM. Exceptions to this do more to prove the
rule than disprove it (Joe Clarke, Kim Cambell, John Turner?...)
2. Like him or don't- Chretien was a born politician and a serious political ass-kicker.
He was a cabinet minister before most of his recent rivals were out of school, let
alone in politics. When his career ended, he was the most senior leader of any member
nation of the Francophonie or the Brit. Commonwealth. He still gets more face-time
with world leaders (think Putin) that Paul Martin.
3. He came after Mulroney's Conservatives...'nuff said.
Also: Chretien was all for listening to Blix and letting the inpectors do their jobs...
Chretien always had good pol. instincts & intuition.
OK- Back to our American friends on the Red Team Leader v. Blue Team Leader question.
If national healthcare is soo great, how come Canadians go down to the USA for serious treatment.bbking said:
NO this is not from a book. This is my two neighbours. The one had breast cancer and was tolsd she had to wait for chemo for 6 month???
The other had some sort of a immune disease and she was not able to get treatment in Canada. She ended up going to Rochester NY
If this is the result of free national healthcare, than thanks, but no thanks.
1)Just out of curiosity, which country has a higher mortality rate?langeweile said:
2)Why does anyone assume that government beaurocrats (sp?) would be any worse than HMO beaurocrats when it comes to getting treatments? I'm currently sitting around waiting for my HMO to approve an MRI on my back so my doctor can determine how to make my freakin' agony go away. Don't tell me, Mr Langewile, that the government would be any worse. I'm living it.
3)Also, why does one assume that the country that can fund a $270 billion quagmire in Iraq would have the same difficulties as other "socialized" healthcare systems?
Asterix said:
Best way to ensure helhcare coverage is with good paying jobs.
Welfare, medicaid or even national coverage is no answer.
Full employment is the key. promoting company growth and jobs is the surest way to cover Americans.
Most of the civilized industrialized world in Europe including Canada have universal healthcare and it works well. Yet the USA the richest country of them all can't find a way to do the same?!?!?
The problem is the massive greed in the US healthcare system is allowed to run free and unfettered. Until this greed factor is reigned in there is no hope of things getting better here.
Full employment has nothing to do with it. Companies now are screaming bloody murder about healthcare premiums shooting up every year way beyond that of inflation and it will continue to get worse until it is stopped by the only one that can the US Government.
The present USA situation is akin to putting Dracula in charge of the Blood Bank........Happy Halloween........
The problem is the massive greed in the US healthcare system is allowed to run free and unfettered. Until this greed factor is reigned in there is no hope of things getting better here.
Full employment has nothing to do with it. Companies now are screaming bloody murder about healthcare premiums shooting up every year way beyond that of inflation and it will continue to get worse until it is stopped by the only one that can the US Government.
The present USA situation is akin to putting Dracula in charge of the Blood Bank........Happy Halloween........
I assume you meant health care, not hell care.papasmerf said:
I have a small business in the US with seven employees. My lowest paid employee makes just under double the minimum wage, my highest paid employee double that. All of them have kids, most of them more than a few, so making sure they have a living wage has been my main priority. I've looked into it, and there's no way I can offer them and their families health care without drastically reducing their wage. I actually had one employee decline a raise so that his kids could continue to receive minimal coverage in my state by the government. How sad is that.
