- #36
Cyrus
- 3,238
- 16
rockytriton said:I would never vote for a Texan or a fundamentalist christian, I will only vote for an American.
Is that statement supposed to mean anything?
rockytriton said:I would never vote for a Texan or a fundamentalist christian, I will only vote for an American.
jimmysnyder said:I looked for the words pray and religion in that document. Pray does not occur at all. Religion appears once, but does not say that the Boy Scouts are allowed to hold religious ceremonies in schools. I don't think your phrase 'regardless of the ceremony they're performing' was supported in that article, but I didn't read it thoroughly. My guess is that the document changes nothing in this regard, you still can't spend tax money on religious ceremonies.
This is a straw man argument. The only activities barred are religious ones.
Paul said:Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view. The justification is always that someone, somewhere, might possibly be offended or feel uncomfortable living in the midst of a largely Christian society, so all must yield to the fragile sensibilities of the few.
As was mentioned many times after Sicko was released, US health care is difficult to fund because there are no price caps on anything. Places like Canada and UK don't have a problem funding health care for those same numbers of old people because each person costs less than half as much. If drugs will cost $100 in the US, it will be more like $10-20 in Canada, UK, France, Australia, etc.
I can't speak for Ron, but he's probably talking about preventative measures with alternative medicine. Yoga (stretching) is generally a good idea; I don't think any good doctor will tell you not to stretch. Tai chi is exercise for fat and old people, so that's a good idea. Chiropractors can fix minor back problems for a lot less than what an osteopath will charge. Magnet therapy cures hypochondria (lol). Herbs are very strong placebos.
As was mentioned many times after Sicko was released, US health care is difficult to fund because there are no price caps on anything. Places like Canada and UK don't have a problem funding health care for those same numbers of old people because each person costs less than half as much. If drugs will cost $100 in the US, it will be more like $10-20 in Canada, UK, France, Australia, etc.
Moridin said:Please. Health care is not about drugs. Or the cost of drugs. The reason the US health care / public health system is in such a disarray is because of Republican cut backs and their attempts to limit federal funding of basic public health. We are not talking expensive drugs or even expensive procedures, but preventive public health, health education.
Democrats have massive health education campaigns planned? I haven't heard any. What has a liberal congress done so far? I don't think health education would do much for genetic problems. Also personally speaking I never got much out of sex ed or health class in school. It should come from parental teaching and examples in the household, not the government.
Moridin said:People who are uncovered is steadily increasing. More and more people are falling under the poverty line.
Mostly because of poor life choices. Why should the government bail them out? Moreover, why should I bail them out.
Moridin said:http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/alternativemedicine.html
Homeopathy, for instance, is 'alternative medicine'. It is basically about drinking diluted substances (almost water) and is nothing more than pseudoscience. Yoga is not alternative medicine. Neither is any form of exercise. The Placebo effect is just a way of ripping people off most of the time. What is needed is actual public health, focusing on prevention and education.
He didn't say "all", he said "most". And the fact of the matter is that a very high fraction of poor people are poor by their own bad choices. The most telling sign is the extremely high corellation between education and income. Most poor people are poor simply because they chose not to finish high school.Moridin said:Yes, I'm sure that all poor and sick people are just trying to rip you off, personally. All poor people living in misery are doing so by their own free will. How delusional can you get? Your own experience (and probably cognitive bias) is nothing compared with statistics. Try backing up your argument with statistics please.
russ_watters said:He didn't say "all", he said "most". And the fact of the matter is that a very high fraction of poor people are poor by their own bad choices. The most telling sign is the extremely high corellation between education and income. Most poor people are poor simply because they chose not to finish high school.
ShawnD said:I can't speak for Ron, but he's probably talking about preventative measures with alternative medicine. Yoga (stretching) is generally a good idea; I don't think any good doctor will tell you not to stretch. Tai chi is exercise for fat and old people, so that's a good idea. Chiropractors can fix minor back problems for a lot less than what an osteopath will charge. Magnet therapy cures hypochondria (lol). Herbs are very strong placebos.
Alternative medicine is not a bad idea when you're talking about an expensive system that accounts for the majority of personal bankruptcies. If your problem can be prevented with a bit of stretching and slow movements, that's probably a lot cheaper than having heart bypass or prescription pain killers.
russ_watters said:He didn't say "all", he said "most". And the fact of the matter is that a very high fraction of poor people are poor by their own bad choices. The most telling sign is the extremely high corellation between education and income. Most poor people are poor simply because they chose not to finish high school.
Weekend Edition Saturday, September 1, 2007 · Republican political departures are keeping Washington in the spotlight during what is often a quiet time for politics. Idaho Sen. Larry Craig is expected to resign Saturday in the wake of a sex scandal and Virginia Sen. John Warner announced Friday he will not run for a sixth term.
. . .
But the image of the party that heralds decency, family values and faith-based initiatives has become sorely tarnished lately. Mostly recently, Sen. David Vitter, a Republican from Louisiana, apologized in July for his use of a D.C. "escort service."
. . .
I like your bell curve statement, interesting. However, job promotions stating requirements are usually completely off base. This is extremely apparent in the tech industry, where if you goto monster.com you'll see tech job ad with about 20 tech acronyms requirements. When I was in high school, I got summer intern jobs at very nice tech companies, but if you looked at the ads you'd think I needed to be Bill Gates. Most job ads are made by HR who just plug in trendy words.ShawnD said:Job requirements are on a bell curve, just like everything else at life. If suddenly 100% of the population had finished high school and had a bachelor degree, jobs would start requiring masters and PhDs. Just look at current job requirements and you can see how this is true; entry level jobs for analytical chemistry often require 5-10 years of experience or they won't even look at you. Engineering is a bit better, requiring maybe 2+ years of experience. Anything IT related practically needs a PhD because the market is so heavily saturated. Employers never care about absolute, they always want relative. They want the top 10% of people no matter what.
ShawnD said:Greg has a point when he says poor people have cell phones and RIMZ, but that doesn't change the fact that not everybody can have a good paying job. I can't think of any economic model that would "fix" that problem, except for communism, but that doesn't really bring up the bottom as much as it cuts down the top.
Does not matter because there was no evidence that back it up.
Greg Bernhardt said:I live downtown in a major US city with one of the largest poor populations. I have several social worker friends and regularly walk/drive through neighborhoods where shooting occur daily. I also have first hand experience being in the Big Brother program.
Moridin said:'Saying that something is true because someone told me it is' is not a strong argument, especially when you have been faced with credible statistics.
Let me guess: you are a young, single male without any preexisting conditions. If I am correct, you have the cheapest health insurance in existence, and it will only continue to rise.I am a small business owner and have to pay for my own health insurance. It's only $70/m.
Manchot said:Let me guess: you are a young, single male without any preexisting conditions. If I am correct, you have the cheapest health insurance in existence, and it will only continue to rise.
The problem isn't just the disabled: it's all people with preexisting conditions. Many are simply uninsurable, and thus cannot have affordable health care regardless of how much they are willing to pay. Ultimately, this is where the market-based system fails: past events, many of which are beyond your control, can affect your ability to get health care.drankin said:This is true. I'm paying for health insurance for my family and the monthly amount is substantial. But, I'm not complaining (I'm not saying you are, Manchot, just making a statement). I can pick who my health insurance provider is and find the best deal. Just like auto, life, and home insurance. I can choose to have it or not. Unless you are disabled (in which case the American community is responsible for taking care of the individual IMO), Americans are capable of taking care of it themselves and their families if they choose to.
Manchot said:The problem isn't just the disabled: it's all people with preexisting conditions. Many are simply uninsurable, and thus cannot have affordable health care regardless of how much they are willing to pay. Ultimately, this is where the market-based system fails: past events, many of which are beyond your control, can affect your ability to get health care.
With auto insurance, your driving record determines your rates, so personal responsibility plays the dominant role. With life insurance, you can only die once, so the question is moot. With home and property insurance, past events do not really play an important role in determining your rates. (Unless, of course, you have a history of burning down your houses to collect the insurance money.) The health insurance "market" simply goes against basic notions of fairness, because there are a multitude of ways in which something beyond your control can adversely affect you. Do you have Type 1 diabetes? You were at a hospital when someone stuck you with an AIDS- or hepatitis-infected needle? You've had cancer? You're a woman whose entire maternal line has developed breast cancer? You have asthma? It doesn't matter whether any of those things were your fault or not: you're either going to pay exorbitant rates, or you're not going to be able to get insurance at all. It doesn't matter how much you shop around.
drankin said:So, what would prevent you from working at a company that provides these kinds of benefits?
cyrusabdollahi said:I am paying attention to Senator Ron Paul and I *LOVE* this guy.
Everyone should go out and vote for him and get rid of the hacks like Giuliani :yuck:.
I hate Giuliani .
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1420110230915641061&q=ron+paul&total=6192&start=10&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6323231741178568391&q=ron+paul&total=6192&start=10&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4
Id vote for this guy any day of the week.
I don't know about you, but I have a severe problem with someone's preexisting conditions dictating whether they can be self-employed or not. It's unproductive and un-American.drankin said:Well, if you start working at a company that offers insurance, you fall into their program regardless of your pre-existing condition. You pay what your coworkers pay. If you work for the city or state, you get even better benefits. So, what would prevent you from working at a company that provides these kinds of benefits?
Manchot said:I don't know about you, but I have a severe problem with someone's preexisting conditions dictating whether they can be self-employed or not. It's unproductive and un-American.
I take issue with that statement. First of all, whether you like it or not, it is your financial responsibility. When the uninsured require health care, who ends up paying for it? The hospitals, who in turn pass on the costs to the consumer. In many cases, people go without basic treatment because they can't afford it, leading to much worse complications later on. This is well-documented as a reason for our high costs. Secondly, I'd argue from a moral standpoint that it is wrong for someone's career options to be limited because of a health condition. That's the "un-American" quality I was referring to.drankin said:Your health is your responsibility, not mine.
Manchot said:I take issue with that statement. First of all, whether you like it or not, it is your financial responsibility. When the uninsured require health care, who ends up paying for it? The hospitals, who in turn pass on the costs to the consumer. In many cases, people go without basic treatment because they can't afford it, leading to much worse complications later on. This is well-documented as a reason for our high costs. Secondly, I'd argue from a moral standpoint that it is wrong for someone's career options to be limited because of a health condition. That's the "un-American" quality I was referring to.
While I'm at it, let's expand beyond preexisting conditions. What about all the low-end jobs which don't offer health insurance? You can opine all you want about how they could educate themselves and get a better one, but let's face it: there is a segment of our society which will always be in the bottom 10% intelligence-wise, and that's not going to change. Education cannot make someone smarter. At the same time, the job market for these people is being squeezed out of existence. Do they not deserve health care?
Some costs in society are best shared for the common good and IMO public health should be one of them.drankin said:You make it seem like since you are breathing everyone owes you your health. BS. Own your own life. Noone owes you health insurance regardless of your condition. If you are disabled, then the community will take care of you. If you aren't TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF!. If you can't afford it, then get to where you can. THAT'S AMERICAN. You don't have to be a college grad to work at most government jobs (for example) and a myriad of other places. If you are a good worker, regardless of trade, employers will offer what it takes to get you on. If you work for yourself, then you should have your business in order enough to afford your own insurance. If you feel you are uninsurable then pay for your own meds and care. If you are that bad off that you can do neither, you are disabled, IMO.
All Things Considered, September 10, 2007 · Sen. Chuck Hagel, the anti-war Republican from Nebraska, made it clear Monday that he will not seek the presidency in 2008. He also confirms he will not seek re-election to the Senate.