99 replies to this topic

[Bl!ndf!re]

pretty interesting cartoon i just came across..

I like it but the medical bill isn't a social rights issue



and btw has anyone had to deal with unions lately? I had to as a courtesy clerk at Ralph's and we were fired unless we joined the union (for the meager price of $230 and 3% of our paychecks)

i thought that was fucking retarded, aren't unions supposed to help the worker? not forcibly take his money? And how the hell did the union and the store come into cahoots? the union shouldn't have any right to force the store to fire workers

Sketchy manufacturers? You don't know until you get a bad batch. See: Newegg and it's fake Intel distributor.

thats why you don't deal with china with important stuff like pills

Yes, let's have the healthcare industry gain more power.

you have no idea why the healthcare industry is so powerful

its powerful because of the laws congress has passed to protect it, a free healthcare economy would tear the current medical companies to the ground

To those people working 2 jobs to afford healthcare and/or trying to raise a family?

why would you try to raise a family if you can't afford it?

Or, have a public option keeping all Americans insured and forcing the big companies to lower their prices to be competitive instead of assuming that someone would step up in the place of a public option.

assume? its a gurantee, the profits are incredible when utilizing direct purchases, even if you cut prices in half of insurance companies you will still make more than enough

Wait? It isn't anyone's right to forcibly take my money and distribute it? I should tell that to the IRS.

yeah you should, and i'll go with you, the spending of America is fucking out of control due to the supersized government which should regulate businesses, but in the end only makes them stronger because the politicians need the money

[Some Type Of Badass]

WHAT!?!?!? A BILL PASSED THAT IS TRYING TO MAKE IT SO THAT ME AND MY LOVED ONES DON'T HAVE TO DIE OR GO SICK IF WE CAN'T AFFORD OUR MEDICAL BILLS?!?! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

This.

geez you complain even about the GOOD things.

You ignorant tards really think people in the USA don't get medical attention if they can't afford it?
There is your problem right there, you have no idea what this bill is even about.

I think the bill is going to destroy the current quality of health care and plunge us further into debt. Only time will tell at this point.

[The Colonel]

thats why you don't deal with china with important stuff like pills

Again, you keep saying "they will go for the most competitive". And then come back and say "they won't go to China, easily the most competitive and cheapest source".

you have no idea why the healthcare industry is so powerful

its powerful because of the laws congress has passed to protect it, a free healthcare economy would tear the current medical companies to the ground

What laws are protecting it? The McCarran-Ferguson Act is all I can think of, and that was good-natured. But like any industry, they will find ways to exploit it. Therefore, having a government plan that can protect people instead of relying on the healthcare companies would be best. The current industry was built by consolidation of companies among themselves for more power. "Free healthcare economy" in your system would be many smaller companies forming a conglomerate. They would get away from anti-trust regulation by still having several of these healthcare giants.

why would you try to raise a family if you can't afford it?

My buddy in the Army managed to slip one past the goalie. Even in the Army, he has had to get 2 jobs, plus his guard pay, plus his savings, until he can go active-duty. He has a degree, but the awful job market makes it impossible for him to get a good job.

assume? its a gurantee, the profits are incredible when utilizing direct purchases, even if you cut prices in half of insurance companies you will still make more than enough

Can you rephrase this in English please?

yeah you should, and i'll go with you, the spending of America is fucking out of control due to the supersized government which should regulate businesses, but in the end only makes them stronger because the politicians need the money

Spending is increased because government is larger because they want the money that lobbying businesses give them? I'm sorry, but what? For the past 70 years we've had tons of government spending. That is just the way it is. But you're right, helping out your fellow man leads to the downfall and destruction of nations. Look at Norway man, they just haven't gotten back up since they started doing that.

[way2lazy2care]

Or could it be that healthcare is unreasonably expensive, the rates are hiked all the time, and many workers get shitty pay? If capitalism were truly based off work effort and skill, a fuckton of the ultra-rich in this country would be poor as fuck. Being born on 3rd base != hitting a triple.

they didn't start on the triple. Someone hit the ball that got them there. How is it fair to them? You see paris hilton and think she doesn't deserve that, but what about Conrad Hilton who managed to go from the son of a general store owner to the owner of the first international hotel chain after surviving the great depression.

if they wanted larger health care they should have offered subsidies to american employers that offer health care to their employees.

Also, yay for fucking over a part of the private sector when we should be spending money to get the private sector making money consistently. The private sector is already outsourcing a lot of good jobs that could be used to pay for people's health insurance. How about putting money towards making sure our employees perform at a competitive level.

I don't like democrats because they see symptoms and try to solve them instead of seeing problems and trying to solve them. I hate the public and the media for demanding immediate results that will cause long term failures (original recession durf durf), and I hate republicans for spending to much time being antagonistic to the democrats just because they're across the aisle instead of letting the public know a thing or two about economics.

My buddy in the Army managed to slip one past the goalie. Even in the Army, he has had to get 2 jobs, plus his guard pay, plus his savings, until he can go active-duty. He has a degree, but the awful job market makes it impossible for him to get a good job.

Sorry for double but just saw this.

This is a great example of seeing a symptom instead of the problem. The problem is that there are no good jobs, not that he can't pay his bills. Why doesn't the government pass something that will get more jobs that pay better instead of throwing money at the problem.

AND I DO NOT MEAN RAISING MINIMUM WAGE.

[TheBase]

You ignorant tards really think people in the USA don't get medical attention if they can't afford it?
There is your problem right there, you have no idea what this bill is even about.

I think the bill is going to destroy the current quality of health care and plunge us further into debt. Only time will tell at this point.

Among the industrialized nations (the rich countries), the U.S. is the only one where people go bankrupt because of illnesses. In fact, around 50% of bankruptcies are caused by illnesses. That is fucked up.

We spend around $7000 per capita every year on health and yet the WHO ranks us at 37th. We really need to seriously reform our healthcare system. Not only do we need to make it truly universal, but we also need to manage the fucking budget like them scotch drinking, wine drinking, cheese eating Europeans.

Destroy the current quality of health care? Get the fuck out of here. Our health care system has been incredibly inefficient for too long and we should at least be providing adequate health care for the poor.

Edited by TheBase, 22 March 2010 - 09:48 PM.

[The Colonel]

they didn't start on the triple. Someone hit the ball that got them there. How is it fair to them? You see paris hilton and think she doesn't deserve that, but what about Conrad Hilton who managed to go from the son of a general store owner to the owner of the first international hotel chain after surviving the great depression.

Uhhhh, what I was saying that many of the ultra-rich in this country didn't earn their money as Blindfire said. You didn't disprove my point by saying that some do.

if they wanted larger health care they should have offered subsidies to american employers that offer health care to their employees.

Also, yay for fucking over a part of the private sector when we should be spending money to get the private sector making money consistently. The private sector is already outsourcing a lot of good jobs that could be used to pay for people's health insurance. How about putting money towards making sure our employees perform at a competitive level.

Yay for fucking over 1/6th of the nation so that a few fatcats can keep making piles of cash, while the average worker makes the same amount.

I don't like democrats because they see symptoms and try to solve them instead of seeing problems and trying to solve them. I hate the public and the media for demanding immediate results that will cause long term failures (original recession durf durf), and I hate republicans for spending to much time being antagonistic to the democrats just because they're across the aisle instead of letting the public know a thing or two about economics.

Are you saying that Republicans are the economic masters? LOL. People seem to forget that both Bush and Obama were behind stimulus packages, and the bailouts did happen under Bush.

[TheBase]

they didn't start on the triple. Someone hit the ball that got them there. How is it fair to them? You see paris hilton and think she doesn't deserve that, but what about Conrad Hilton who managed to go from the son of a general store owner to the owner of the first international hotel chain after surviving the great depression.

This notion that social mobility is simply a matter of working hard is a myth. And the story of Conrad Hilton is hardly a "rags to riches" case. His father owned a general store for fuck's sake.

if they wanted larger health care they should have offered subsidies to american employers that offer health care to their employees.

Wait... Am I reading this right? You want the government to give the private sector tax money so that they can cover their workers? How is that any different from the government directly covering the uninsured? Why can't the American people be subsidized without having to deal with a fucking middle man?

Also, yay for fucking over a part of the private sector when we should be spending money to get the private sector making money consistently. The private sector is already outsourcing a lot of good jobs that could be used to pay for people's health insurance. How about putting money towards making sure our employees perform at a competitive level.

The private sector is part of the problem. The government should be in charge of providing health services. Private insurers have very little incentives for covering the sick.

I don't like democrats because they see symptoms and try to solve them instead of seeing problems and trying to solve them. I hate the public and the media for demanding immediate results that will cause long term failures (original recession durf durf), and I hate republicans for spending to much time being antagonistic to the democrats just because they're across the aisle instead of letting the public know a thing or two about economics.

I know right? Those Republicans are so smart...

This is a great example of seeing a symptom instead of the problem. The problem is that there are no good jobs, not that he can't pay his bills. Why doesn't the government pass something that will get more jobs that pay better instead of throwing money at the problem.
AND I DO NOT MEAN RAISING MINIMUM WAGE.

2 questions:

1. How will the government "create" jobs?

2. Why are you against raising the minimum wage? Are you seriously afraid that the CPI will skyrocket so hard your ass will go broke in no time? If this is actually the case, then you are poor my friend. And if you are poor, you should support the higher minimum wage and universal health care. If you are not poor, then you are a cry baby asshole.

Edited by TheBase, 22 March 2010 - 10:20 PM.

[way2lazy2care]

Uhhhh, what I was saying that many of the ultra-rich in this country didn't earn their money as Blindfire said. You didn't disprove my point by saying that some do.

So it's fair for me to work 80 hour weeks for my entire working career so my children don't have to bear any financial burden then have the government come in and say "hai we want you to pay for all the poor people too..."

I understand some good hard working people get screwed, but a lot of impoverished people are just taking advantage of the system. Again. It's

Yay for fucking over 1/6th of the nation so that a few fatcats can keep making piles of cash, while the average worker makes the same amount.

yea. Giving employers a reason to give their employees health insurance and creating more jobs really fucks everyone.

Look at the CEO of GSI commerce. Has more money than any of us ever will. He started his first successful business at 17, become a millionaire by 20 something, then started one of the largest E-commerce companies in the world. He works practically 24/7. Is it fair to go up to him and say, "hey, we're taking some of your money to pay for people who don't want to work" or "We want you to give everyone in your company a raise, and in return we are going to continue giving you sub-standard workers from our failing education system." Not a fucking chance.

And what about the middle class? If you think the middle class won't see a tax increase from public health care you are retarded. Suddenly my family, who makes enough money to get by, will have to start sacrificing the things we work for? Heaven forbid that middle class family have more than 3 kids they have to put through college. They'll have less money when all debts and credits are counted than someone not working, living on the street, with 0 dollars in their pocket. WHERE DOES THAT GET FAIR.

Keep preaching about fair. There is nothing fair about this to 4/6ths of the population so that the uninsured 1/6th can take advantage of us again.

Public health care is 100% the definition of the minority taking advantage of the majority, which is flat out unconstitutional.

Are you saying that Republicans are the economic masters? LOL. People seem to forget that both Bush and Obama were behind stimulus packages, and the bailouts did happen under Bush.

Republicans are a lot better than economics than democrats. And no I never said that. I said they were too busy arguing with democrats to actually focus on solving an actual problem.

[Bl!ndf!re]

Uhhhh, what I was saying that many of the ultra-rich in this country didn't earn their money as Blindfire said. You didn't disprove my point by saying that some do.

hopefully they will have the decency to give some back

Are you saying that Republicans are the economic masters? LOL. People seem to forget that both Bush and Obama were behind stimulus packages, and the bailouts did happen under Bush.

i don't think that, and I dislike republicans as much as democrats

[Racecar]

You ignorant tards really think people in the USA don't get medical attention if they can't afford it?
There is your problem right there, you have no idea what this bill is even about.

I think the bill is going to destroy the current quality of health care and plunge us further into debt. Only time will tell at this point.

Feel free to elaborate. After all you're basing this assumption on one silly jest.

Irrelevant: I've always liked your name.

[way2lazy2care]

Wait... Am I reading this right? You want the government to give the private sector tax money so that they can cover their workers. How is that any different from the government directly covering the uninsured? Why can't the American people be subsidized without having to deal with a fucking middle man?

yes it is different. In one workers get more health insurance and companies have more money to hire more workers who can get more insurance. In the other unemployed people have another reason to stay unemployed.

1. How will the government "create" jobs?

http://en.wikipedia....rnment_spending

2. Why are you against raising the minimum wage? Are you seriously afraid that the CPI will skyrocket so hard your ass will go broke in no time? If this is actually the case, then you are poor my friend. And if you are poor, you should support the higher minimum wage and universal health care. If you are not poor, then you are a cry baby asshole.

BECAUSE MINIMUM WAGE SUCKS ASS! It again fucks the middle class so that the lower class can now afford the same amount they used to be able to afford because bread now costs $2 instead of $1, but the middle class can no afford quite a bit less for the same reason except the companies won't give them a raise because they're in the middle class.


When did people start thinking the government was in any way efficient? have you ever been to a DMV?

[TheBase]

A bunch of shit

Some the hardest working people in this world are poor people. The poor are not poor because they are lazy. They are poor because of systemic/structural reasons. Yes, some people are poor because of personal problems. But poverty for the most part is a social problem.

Let's ask the Europeans about their healthcare system to see what they think about the minority taking advantage of the majority... Just how is the minority taking advantage of the majority?

Name one Republican congressman that is a worthy economist. And I have a good idea about who you are about to name. But I await your dumbass response.

Edited by TheBase, 22 March 2010 - 10:33 PM.

[way2lazy2care]

Some the hardest working people in this world are poor people. The poor are not poor because they are lazy. They are poor because of systemic/structural reasons. Yes, some people are poor because of personal problems. But poverty for the most part is a social problem.

so instead of making sure they have good jobs, we should make sure they have shitty jobs and EVERYONE has shitty health insurance.

SOUNDS GREAT!

I never said making sure working poor were well taken care of was a bad idea. I said public health care was a bad idea. See my argument for subsidized health care to help the working poor, or personal subsidized health care where only people recently unemployed or people with jobs receive government health care.

Name one Republican congressman that is a worthy economist. And I have a good idea about who you are about to name. But I await your dumbass response.

ron paul. A lot of the good economists are moving libertarian though. AND I NEVER CALLED THEM GOOD ECONOMISTS. I said they were better than democrats.

[The Colonel]

So it's fair for me to work 80 hour weeks for my entire working career so my children don't have to bear any financial burden then have the government come in and say "hai we want you to pay for all the poor people too..."

Pay for all the poor people too? No, it is about human decency. What if you worked 80 hours a week and had nothing? Would you be happy about fatcats getting obscene amounts of money that got a free pass through life and don't give back? I am in the upper class, and fine with helping the less fortunate in this country.

I understand some good hard working people get screwed, but a lot of impoverished people are just taking advantage of the system. Again. It's

yea. Giving employers a reason to give their employees health insurance and creating more jobs really fucks everyone.

A lot of hard-working people get screwed.

Look at the CEO of GSI commerce. Has more money than any of us ever will. He started his first successful business at 17, become a millionaire by 20 something, then started one of the largest E-commerce companies in the world. He works practically 24/7. Is it fair to go up to him and say, "hey, we're taking some of your money to pay for people who don't want to work" or "We want you to give everyone in your company a raise, and in return we are going to continue giving you sub-standard workers from our failing education system." Not a fucking chance.

So because our education system is sub-standard, that doesn't give people the right to affordable medical attention? You are saying that all people that can't afford Healthcare "don't want to work". That glosses over a huge portion of the uninsured, those who work and can't afford it.

And what about the middle class? If you think the middle class won't see a tax increase from public health care you are retarded. Suddenly my family, who makes enough money to get by, will have to start sacrificing the things we work for? Heaven forbid that middle class family have more than 3 kids they have to put through college. They'll have less money when all debts and credits are counted than someone not working, living on the street, with 0 dollars in their pocket. WHERE DOES THAT GET FAIR.

Most of the taxing proposed was on the upper class, of which I am in according to the tax bracket. As government spending goes down in other areas AS ALREADY BEING DONE, money would be allocated to healthcare.

Keep preaching about fair. There is nothing fair about this to 4/6ths of the population so that the uninsured 1/6th can take advantage of us again.

Public health care is 100% the definition of the minority taking advantage of the majority, which is flat out unconstitutional.

So what about those roads that I pay for and never use? Or how about Senate getting healthcare FROM MY MONEY?! Or how about those members of the Armed Forces getting housing benefits, medical insurance, college money, etc with MY MONEY?! Man, fuck those minorities taking advantage of those taxpayer's money.

Republicans are a lot better than economics than democrats. And no I never said that. I said they were too busy arguing with democrats to actually focus on solving an actual problem.

Oh clearly, Bush was an economic mastermind.

hopefully they will have the decency to give some back

lol

i don't think that, and I dislike republicans as much as democrats

Check who was quoted.

[TheBase]

yes it is different. In one workers get more health insurance and companies have more money to hire more workers who can get more insurance. In the other unemployed people have another reason to stay unemployed.


http://en.wikipedia....rnment_spending


BECAUSE MINIMUM WAGE SUCKS ASS! It again fucks the middle class so that the lower class can now afford the same amount they used to be able to afford because bread now costs $2 instead of $1, but the middle class can no afford quite a bit less for the same reason except the companies won't give them a raise because they're in the middle class.


When did people start thinking the government was in any way efficient? have you ever been to a DMV?

... Firstly, the unemployed are labeled as such because they are actively seeking jobs. Not many people actually want to be unemployed. Secondly, instead of giving businesses money so that they can choose how to cover their employees, why can't the government set up their own system that is ultimately funded by a truly progressive tax system? An increase in taxes for a universal health care system is worth it.

You're saying we need Keynesian style economic policies to create jobs? Man... The free market sucks ass...

BREAD USED TO COST $1 BUT NOW IT COSTS $2 AND THIS IS ALL BECAUSE OF THE DAMNED MINIMUM WAGE! WAAAAAAAH. Yep. You're just a crybaby asshole. People should be able to make a sustainable income. And everyone who works full time should at least be able to rent the cheapest apartment and afford the basic necessities. People who earn minimum wages have a hard time doing this. Real wages have remained constant for the past 40 years and yet the cost of living has increased tremendously. So quit your whining and just be grateful that your white American ass was born into the middle class.

[Bl!ndf!re]

moving to debate section.

im bailing, im not good at maintaining debates


but i do promise you colonel ill supply you with the names of the medical bills i was referring too

Edited by Bl!ndf!re, 22 March 2010 - 11:00 PM.

[DarkKitchen]

Republicans are a lot better than economics than democrats. And no I never said that. I said they were too busy arguing with democrats to actually focus on solving an actual problem.

HAHAHAHAAHHAAHAHAHAAEHAFH

Since you referenced Ron Paul I'm guessing you aren't a neocon, but those types of conservative economics that Ron Paul promotes haven't been seen for hundreds of years.

But saying any republican president in the past 50 years actually did something useful for the economy is just ludicrous and you need to go look at some history.

Edited by DarkKitchen, 22 March 2010 - 10:56 PM.

[TheBase]

ron paul. A lot of the good economists are moving libertarian though. AND I NEVER CALLED THEM GOOD ECONOMISTS. I said they were better than democrats.

Damn I'm good... Look. I admire his honesty and consistency (a rare trait among politicians), but he is not even close to being a "master" economist. This guy said we should go back to the gold standard... Speaking of the gold standard, let's see how knowledgeable you are.

Question #1. In what year did the U.S. get off the gold standard?

#2. Which president took U.S. off the gold standard? (you should know this if you answered question 1 correctly)

#3. Why did the U.S. get rid of the gold Standard?

#4. What would happen if the U.S. went back to the gold standard?

[way2lazy2care]

cut for economic misunderstanding.

Take a college level macro and micro econ course. If you have already taken one, retake it.

Most of the taxing proposed was on the upper class, of which I am in according to the tax bracket. As government spending goes down in other areas AS ALREADY BEING DONE, money would be allocated to healthcare.

Right now the largest burden is there. Everyone will be paying for this in the long run.

I will say this again. See social security, DMVs, Medicare, medicaid, USPS, etc. for poorly managed companies. A poorly managed government organization comes out of my pocket. A poorly managed private sector company will fail, and I will be left with an efficient company in the long run.

I firmly believe the only acceptable places for the government to spend significant amounts of money is in infrastructure, defense, and education. Investing the money is acceptable because it isn't really spending. They should just get the hell out of everything else.

So what about those roads that I pay for and never use?

Roads give you a financial benefit in lower car wear, higher MPG, faster travel times, etc. to everyone that uses them. Most people that don't use them probably don't make enough money to get taxed on them. I'm not positive, but I think a large amount of the tax comes from gasoline taxes, which means you pay more for driving more. If you don't use roads, feel free to write your senator a letter.

Or how about Senate getting healthcare FROM MY MONEY?! Or how about those members of the Armed Forces getting housing benefits, medical insurance, college money, etc with MY MONEY?! Man, fuck those minorities taking advantage of those taxpayer's money.

You aren't paying for senator's or armed forces medical or anything. You are paying them for their services. They spend your money on those things, but you are paying them for their service.

A public medical system sees me paying for no benefit to myself.