Re: OT Clinton: Get educated, drop the rhetoric
GoMavs
" dbu.," <n...@alllegal.com> wrote in message
news:nps-E78A72.0...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> <http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/09/harsh-words-get-educated-d
> rop-the-rhetoric/#more-1363>
>
> LAS VEGAS, Nevada (CNN) I almost fell off my chair.
> Pleasantries and politeness were off the table. It took the moderator
> nearly 30 seconds to calm down the crowd the same length of time Sen.
> Hillary Clinton was supposed to take to answer the question. But the New
> York Senator took more than five times as long setting the record
> straight on her health care plan at the National Association of Black
> Journalists Presidential Forum Thursday.
> I would find out later that the audience question came from a freelance
> writer named Kiara Ashanti, who wanted to know why the Democratic White
> House hopeful was pushing for, what he called, łsocialized medicine.˛
> łWhy are you still insisting upon moving that system in here when
> particularly it will hurt African American communities more than anyone
> else?˛ Ashanti asked.
> łOh, man that was a string of misrepresentations about me and the
> systems in other countries,˛ Clinton began her response. łNumber one, I
> have never advocated socialized medicine, and I hope all the journalists
> hear that loudly and clearly because that has been a right-wing attack
> on me for 15 years, and it is wrong.˛
> LISTEN to the Clinton exchange yourself.
> From there, the two of them hammered it out, back and forth: łDo you
> think Medicare is socialized medicine?˛ she challenged him. łTo a degree
> it is,˛ Ashanti said. łWell, then you are in a small minority in America
> because Medicare has literally saved the lives and saved the resources
> of countless generations of seniors in our country.˛
> Clinton went on to champion Medicare, but criticize the U.S. as the only
> ładvanced country˛ to have łso many of its citizens without health
> care.˛ She punctuated her answer with a stinging, yet cordial invitation
> to Ashanti: łI donąt know who you are. But you come introduce yourself
> to my staff and we will try to give you some information if youąre
> interested in being educated instead of being rhetorical.˛
> It was an audacious move the audience could have gone either way but
> it paid off. The masses, largely, clamored around Clinton.
> So, did Ashanti chase down Clintonąs staff and łget educated˛? No, but I
> chased him down. I had to know who he was, and whether Clintonąs łtough
> love˛ resonated.
> Ashanti said he was a freelance writer from Orlando, Florida, with his
> own political blog, and who has written for Black Enterprise, BET.com,
> and the Active Trader.
> What did the writer think of her answer?
> łTypical,˛ he told me. łThis type of forum really works for her because
> thereąs not a lot of time to refute anything she says. Thatąs what I
> expect. Sheąs not looking at the real facts. She wants to do something
> that gains her political points.˛
> Then he added, łShe canąt deal with the fact that I have the knowledge
> to refute everything that sheąs saying.˛
>
> --
> "Fire up a colortini, sit back, relax, and watch the pictures, now,
> as they fly through the air."
> Tom Snyder
GoMavs
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" <nos...@whitehouse.gov> wrote in message
news:Xns99885A607A...@66.250.146.128...
> Bullshit. Government involvement in healthcare KILLS thousands each year
> and increases suffering for MILLIONS because any time - ANY time -
> government starts paying for something, it severely distorts the
> supply/demand curve and pushes prices through the roof (unless you set
> price controls and/or ration care, in which case you end up with fewer
> people getting treatment, which is the case in all countries with
> government-run healthcare systems).
>
> When I am hungry I go to a grocery store and buy food. No government, no
> middleman, minimal red tape. Healthcare needs to work the exact same way.
fuckin-a... i agree!
cut the bullshit..
JoeSpareBedroom
news:Xns99885A607A...@66.250.146.128...
> sprach forth the following:
>
>> From there, the two of them hammered it out, back and forth: ³Do you
>> think Medicare is socialized medicine?² she challenged him. ³To a degree
>> it is,² Ashanti said.
>
> About time we got a smart questioner instead of a snowman. Bravo, sir!
>
>> ³Well, then you are in a small minority in America
>> because Medicare has literally saved the lives and saved the resources
>
> Bullshit. Government involvement in healthcare KILLS thousands each year
> and increases suffering for MILLIONS because any time - ANY time -
> government starts paying for something, it severely distorts the
> supply/demand curve and pushes prices through the roof (unless you set
> price controls and/or ration care, in which case you end up with fewer
> people getting treatment, which is the case in all countries with
> government-run healthcare systems).
>
> When I am hungry I go to a grocery store and buy food. No government, no
> middleman, minimal red tape. Healthcare needs to work the exact same way.
Yeah, it should work the same way. But, what do you propose to do for
families that can't afford to pay $600-$700 a month for health insurance?
GoMavs
"JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:BgZui.13723$ya1....@news02.roc.ny...
> Yeah, it should work the same way. But, what do you propose to do for
> families that can't afford to pay $600-$700 a month for health insurance?
You get don't it you do?
JoeSpareBedroom
I'm waiting for your solution to the problem.
We can't force doctors, hospitals and insurance companies to charge less
because it would be meddling in free enterprise, which is more sacred than
anything. The most common suggestion I've heard is "Well...poor people
should get better jobs so they can afford blah blah blah...", but that idea
only comes from slobs who are too busy watching Oprah to actually come up
with anything of value to say.
Roadrunner NG
there without health insurance getting care for their sore toe. And guess
who pays for that. My friend is a ER Doc, and yes most don/'t have insurance
and the Gov't picks up the bill. The Leftist Socialists just want more
control and Tax authority. Where in the Constitution does it say the Gov't
has to provide health care?
"JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:BgZui.13723$ya1....@news02.roc.ny...
Roadrunner NG
"dbu~`" <n...@alllegal.com> wrote in message
news:nps-27B714.0...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <Xns99885A607A...@66.250.146.128>,
> "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" <nos...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
>
>> In message news:nps-E78A72.0...@comcast.dca.giganews.com,
>> dbu.,
>> sprach forth the following:
>>
>> > From there, the two of them hammered it out, back and forth: ³Do you
>> > think Medicare is socialized medicine?² she challenged him. ³To a
>> > degree
>> > it is,² Ashanti said.
>>
>> About time we got a smart questioner instead of a snowman. Bravo, sir!
>>
>> > ³Well, then you are in a small minority in America
>> > because Medicare has literally saved the lives and saved the resources
>> > of countless generations of seniors in our country.²
>>
>> Bullshit. Government involvement in healthcare KILLS thousands each year
>> and increases suffering for MILLIONS because any time - ANY time -
>> government starts paying for something, it severely distorts the
>> supply/demand curve and pushes prices through the roof (unless you set
>> price controls and/or ration care, in which case you end up with fewer
>> people getting treatment, which is the case in all countries with
>> government-run healthcare systems).
>>
>> When I am hungry I go to a grocery store and buy food. No government, no
>> middleman, minimal red tape. Healthcare needs to work the exact same
>> way.
>
> They call it a debate, but it's nothing more than a soapbox for hillary.
> All the dims play this same game. It is pure BS.
JoeSpareBedroom
news:46bc6d01$0$8052$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
> Try going to a hospital emergency room, there seems to be plenty of folks
> there without health insurance getting care for their sore toe. And guess
> who pays for that. My friend is a ER Doc, and yes most don/'t have
> insurance and the Gov't picks up the bill. The Leftist Socialists just
> want more control and Tax authority. Where in the Constitution does it say
> the Gov't has to provide health care?
>
Has anything about health care changed since 1776 or so? Need your input on
this.
JoeSpareBedroom
news:f9i5ha$hrk$1...@news.albasani.net...
> On 2007-08-10 06:36:49 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
> begin.
>
> Families that are so large that they cannot afford health care are
> analogous to those
> who also cannot feed themselves. They got that way by choice. Unbridled
> reproduction
> does not entitle a family to free <fill in the blank>. No one has a gun
> to their heads
> forcing them to have ever-increasing numbers of children for which they
> cannot pay
> the requisite monies needed for their care.
>
> And the idea of Oprah-watchers coming up with anything of value to say,
> I'm guessing
> you'll find that a majority, if not all of them, who can actually stomach
> her show are
> of the opinion that health care should be free. After all, they've got
> the time to
> watch her, rather than working enough to pay for their reproductive
> habits.
>
> One suggestion would be to start with cigarettes and pizza. It's amazing
> how many
> people my son saw in tenement housing that complained to him about the
> cost
> of the pizza he used to deliver when in high school. "Twenty bucks?!??",
> they
> commonly cry. Imagine how much they could afford if they'd quit smoking
> and
> start using those pizza funds to buy adequate groceries.
>
> He who dances, pays the fiddler. Their OWN fiddler.
>
Tell me what health insurance costs for husband, wife and one child in
Rochester NY. And, I said nothing about large families. If you disagree,
please quote my words below your next response.
Mark
around by the nose, see clearly through Hillary's many times-proven
failed socialist position on healthcare.
On Aug 10, 5:44 am, " dbu.," <n...@alllegal.com> wrote:
> <http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/09/harsh-words-get-educa...
> rop-the-rhetoric/#more-1363>
>
> LAS VEGAS, Nevada (CNN) I almost fell off my chair.
> Pleasantries and politeness were off the table. It took the moderator
> nearly 30 seconds to calm down the crowd the same length of time Sen.
> Hillary Clinton was supposed to take to answer the question. But the New
> York Senator took more than five times as long setting the record
> straight on her health care plan at the National Association of Black
> Journalists Presidential Forum Thursday.
> I would find out later that the audience question came from a freelance
> writer named Kiara Ashanti, who wanted to know why the Democratic White
> House hopeful was pushing for, what he called, ³socialized medicine.²
> ³Why are you still insisting upon moving that system in here when
> particularly it will hurt African American communities more than anyone
> else?² Ashanti asked.
> ³Oh, man that was a string of misrepresentations about me and the
> systems in other countries,² Clinton began her response. ³Number one, I
> have never advocated socialized medicine, and I hope all the journalists
> hear that loudly and clearly because that has been a right-wing attack
> on me for 15 years, and it is wrong.²
> LISTEN to the Clinton exchange yourself.
> From there, the two of them hammered it out, back and forth: ³Do you
> think Medicare is socialized medicine?² she challenged him. ³To a degree
> it is,² Ashanti said. ³Well, then you are in a small minority in America
> because Medicare has literally saved the lives and saved the resources
> of countless generations of seniors in our country.²
> Clinton went on to champion Medicare, but criticize the U.S. as the only
> ³advanced country² to have ³so many of its citizens without health
> care.² She punctuated her answer with a stinging, yet cordial invitation
> to Ashanti: ³I don¹t know who you are. But you come introduce yourself
> to my staff and we will try to give you some information if you¹re
> interested in being educated instead of being rhetorical.²
> It was an audacious move the audience could have gone either way but
> it paid off. The masses, largely, clamored around Clinton.
> So, did Ashanti chase down Clinton¹s staff and ³get educated²? No, but I
> chased him down. I had to know who he was, and whether Clinton¹s ³tough
> love² resonated.
> Ashanti said he was a freelance writer from Orlando, Florida, with his
> own political blog, and who has written for Black Enterprise, BET.com,
> and the Active Trader.
> What did the writer think of her answer?
> ³Typical,² he told me. ³This type of forum really works for her because
> there¹s not a lot of time to refute anything she says. That¹s what I
> expect. She¹s not looking at the real facts. She wants to do something
> that gains her political points.²
> Then he added, ³She can¹t deal with the fact that I have the knowledge
> to refute everything that she¹s saying.²
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 10:02:48 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>
>>> He who dances, pays the fiddler. Their OWN fiddler.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Tell me what health insurance costs for husband, wife and one child in
>> Rochester NY. And, I said nothing about large families. If you disagree,
>> please quote my words below your next response.
>
> this family. About $400.00 per month for a middle-of-the-road plan.
> This is from three examples
>
> There would be co-pays and out-of-pocket deductibles, of course. There
> are in any plan.
>
> If one cannot afford this, one should consider their reproductive
> responsibility.
> This amount, as you well know, is relatively inexpensive when compared to
> other costs in rearing children.
>
By the way, cheapest plan for an individual, no kids, is $657.00 per month.
Family = $1513.00.
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 10:02:48 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
> said:
>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Tell me what health insurance costs for husband, wife and one child in
>> Rochester NY. And, I said nothing about large families. If you disagree,
>> please quote my words below your next response.
>
> this family. About $400.00 per month for a middle-of-the-road plan.
> This is from three examples
>
> There would be co-pays and out-of-pocket deductibles, of course. There
> are in any plan.
>
> If one cannot afford this, one should consider their reproductive
> responsibility.
> This amount, as you well know, is relatively inexpensive when compared to
> other costs in rearing children.
>
This is unusual for you. You're parading a stereotype. Cut it out.
Also: Please tell me what income level a couple should have before you
believe they're responsible enough to have one child.
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 10:24:18 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>
>> By the way, cheapest plan for an individual, no kids, is $657.00 per
>> month.
>> Family = $1513.00.
>
>
I am sure you are speaking with complete lack of knowledge of what is
available here.
JoeSpareBedroom
>
> read), a near
> socialist mentality in the state government. Our welfare rolls and
> give-away programs
> are close to, if not already, bankrupting the treasury.
>
> If you or I ran our personal checkbooks the way our legislature runs
> theirs, we'd be
> thrown in jail. If you want a new car, can you go to your boss and demand
> a raise
> sufficient to pay for it? He'd tell you to live within your means.
>
>> Also: Please tell me what income level a couple should have before you
>> believe they're responsible enough to have one child.
>
> address what
> they do, and how much they need, before buying a new car. Yet the same
> people
> who do this seem to think a child is a lesser decision.
>
> My wife and I decided that we wanted her home until our children were in
> school
> full-time. Even then, she only worked part time so as to have her home
> when
> they arrived in the afternoon.
>
> To do this, we tightened our belt for about eight years. I drove used
> cars that
> cost me no more than $2500.00, and kept them running until they would no
> more. My '79 Olds Cutlass was a limousine compared to previous vehicles.
> Macaroni and cheese with hot dogs, not delivered pizza, was a common
> dinner. Beans, rice, and vegetables were also common on the table, and
> a dinner out was a rare treat indeed. We had a 17" Sony Trinitron that
> kept us entertained at home for 10 years.
>
> Doing this kind of thing, seemingly unheard of nowadays, can enable people
> to do what must be done. Unfortunately materialism is the norm which
> seems to cause people to expect others to pay their way so they can
> have their new toys.
>
> I paid my dues. I'm not paying for someone else's.
>
100% of your comments are based on examples of people who are lousy examples
for the rest of us. Not everyone spends wildly or has "too many children".
Families that budget brilliantly and have just one kid can still find it
impossible to afford insurance.
You know all this. Why are you pretending otherwise?
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 10:43:45 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
> that
> must have pricing close to other areas.
>
> Unless it's so expensive there due to included subsidization of
> freeloaders.
>
It's expensive because there are a limited number of plans available here.
There's also no such thing as straight major medical insurance here, which
is something the public's clamoring for. Let us pay for the cheap stuff,
like the $60 visit to the internist, and have the plan pay for the stuff
that really hurts.
As far as some of the nationwide plans, good luck. Some of them are pretty
shifty, and many doctors won't honor them.
Would you like to see a nice 68 page PDF document from the state of NY,
which explains what's available here?
JoeSpareBedroom
> In message news:BgZui.13723$ya1....@news02.roc.ny, JoeSpareBedroom sprach
> forth the following:
>
>> Yeah, it should work the same way. But, what do you propose to do for
>> families that can't afford to pay $600-$700 a month for health insurance?
>
There's that stereotype again.....
JoeSpareBedroom
> In message news:RRZui.13814$B25....@news01.roc.ny, JoeSpareBedroom
> sprach forth the following:
>
>> The most common suggestion I've heard is "Well...poor people
>> should get better jobs so they can afford blah blah blah...", but that
>> idea only comes from slobs who are too busy watching Oprah to actually
>> come up with anything of value to say.
>
> Oprah instead. And taxpayers will be spending $2 billion so they can
> continue watching her when transmissions cut over to digital.
The news often reports on how many Americans don't have health insurance.
Please go and find me a detailed analysis of the income levels involved.
Your statement is much too general to be of value.
JoeSpareBedroom
> In message news:g7_ui.13726$ya1....@news02.roc.ny, JoeSpareBedroom
> sprach forth the following:
>
>
> 2. Has anything about the Constitution changed to address health care?
>
That doesn't answer my question.
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 11:08:22 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>
>> Would you like to see a nice 68 page PDF document from the state of NY,
>> which explains what's available here?
>
I don't have the link. I have the document, which was downloaded last week.
I can email the file.
>
> But NY is a trainwreck. I'd not use them as a typical state.
Oh well. NY is where I live. And, NYC may as well be a different planet,
compared to the rest of the state, which outsiders know absolutely nothing
about, but claim to know everything about.
JoeSpareBedroom
>
Without stats, your comment is vapor.
JoeSpareBedroom
> In message news:hT1vi.13743$ya1....@news02.roc.ny, JoeSpareBedroom
> sprach forth the following:
>
>> "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" <nos...@whitehouse.gov> wrote in message
>> news:Xns99888FAB63...@66.250.146.128...
>>> In message news:RRZui.13814$B25....@news01.roc.ny, JoeSpareBedroom
>>> sprach forth the following:
>>>
>>>> The most common suggestion I've heard is "Well...poor people
>>>> should get better jobs so they can afford blah blah blah...", but
>>>> that idea only comes from slobs who are too busy watching Oprah to
>>>> actually come up with anything of value to say.
>>>
>>> It's the poor people who aren't trying to get etter jobs who are
>>> watching Oprah instead. And taxpayers will be spending $2 billion so
>>> they can continue watching her when transmissions cut over to digital.
>>
>>
>> The news often reports on how many Americans don't have health
>> insurance. Please go and find me a detailed analysis of the income
>> levels involved.
>
Sounds like your electronic tracking thing is irritating your ankle again.
You made the claim. If you cannot provide proof of your claim, your claim is
worthless.
JoeSpareBedroom
> In message news:CT1vi.13745$ya1....@news02.roc.ny, JoeSpareBedroom sprach
> forth the following:
>
>> "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" <nos...@whitehouse.gov> wrote in message
>> news:Xns99888F648D...@66.250.146.128...
>>> In message news:g7_ui.13726$ya1....@news02.roc.ny, JoeSpareBedroom
>>> sprach forth the following:
>>>
>>>> "Roadrunner NG" <RR...@highlandcraft.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:46bc6d01$0$8052$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>>>>> Try going to a hospital emergency room, there seems to be plenty of
>>>>> folks there without health insurance getting care for their sore toe.
>>>>> And guess who pays for that. My friend is a ER Doc, and yes most
>>>>> don/'t have insurance and the Gov't picks up the bill. The Leftist
>>>>> Socialists just want more control and Tax authority. Where in the
>>>>> Constitution does it say the Gov't has to provide health care?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Has anything about health care changed since 1776 or so? Need your
>>>> input on this.
>>>
>>> 1. The Constitution wasn't ratified in 1776.
>>>
>>> 2. Has anything about the Constitution changed to address health care?
>>>
>>
>> That doesn't answer my question.
>
> Got
> it, cuntwipe?
You need your meds adjusted again.
B A R R Y
>
> Oh well. NY is where I live. And, NYC may as well be a different planet,
> compared to the rest of the state, which outsiders know absolutely nothing
> about, but claim to know everything about.
I live in CT, and know lots about NY (both planets!).
Those who would call it a train wreck really are clueless. NY is a
large, beautiful and diverse state. I'll bet you could support both
sides of almost any argument with an example from somewhere in the state
of NY.
About the only thing NY doesn't have is wild palm trees. <G>
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 11:19:00 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>
Here's your chance. Want the file? It shows high & low policy costs for
various cities around the state.
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 11:20:15 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>
>>>> There's that stereotype again.....
>>>
>>> But it's not, Joe. It's all too common.
>>>
>>
>> Without stats, your comment is vapor.
>
>
Do we need to discuss how large a sample one needs in order for stats to be
relevant? Or, shall we continue to avoid reality because it's convenient?
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 11:34:24 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
> different as night and day compared to California. I'm aware of
> statistical
> sampling, which is why twice I qualified my statements with them being
> anecdotal. If your costs, and I'm not doubting you at all, are as high as
> you say, then there is a great disparity in the nation.
>
http://www.ins.state.ny.us/chealth.htm
4th link below the General Information heading. Enjoy.
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 11:53:17 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>> http://www.ins.state.ny.us/chealth.htm
>>
>> 4th link below the General Information heading. Enjoy.
>
> help
> for those below certain income levels according to family size.
>
If I recall, it's 48K. Even so, there can be situations where honest, hard
working people have problems, so although that number seems high, it often
is not.
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 12:16:27 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>>>> http://www.ins.state.ny.us/chealth.htm
>>>>
>>>> 4th link below the General Information heading. Enjoy.
>>>
>>> I found page eighteen particularly interesting. It seems that there is
>>> help
>>> for those below certain income levels according to family size.
>>>
>>
>> If I recall, it's 48K. Even so, there can be situations where honest,
>> hard
>> working people have problems, so although that number seems high, it
>> often
>> is not.
>
> income
> below $24,000. Fifteen bucks per month per child up to $41,508 per year.
>
> So the structure is hardly prohibitive to people having children.
>
Isn't that the sort of involuntarily charity you don't want to pay for?
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 12:33:51 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>
>>> Actually the hypothetical family of three you mentioned pays no cost
>>> with
>>> income
>>> below $24,000. Fifteen bucks per month per child up to $41,508 per
>>> year.
>>>
>>> So the structure is hardly prohibitive to people having children.
>>>
>>
>> Isn't that the sort of involuntarily charity you don't want to pay for?
>
> afford this care.
>
So?
There has to be a safety net. If an uninsured person ends up in the hospital
with cancer, it's going to eventually hit someone else's wallet one way or
the other. Why not make it an orderly process?
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 14:16:38 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>>> Yes. And if memory serves, you insinuated such people were unable to
>>> afford this care.
>>>
>>
>> So?
>>
>> There has to be a safety net. If an uninsured person ends up in the
>> hospital
>> with cancer, it's going to eventually hit someone else's wallet one way
>> or
>> the other. Why not make it an orderly process?
>
> policies
> can be even cheaper.
>
Yeah, but they're not cheaper, and nobody has any reason to make them so.
As far as catastrophic, even a broken leg can cost a couple grand at the
hospital. You can't say this is an example of a person who should've gone to
an internist.
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 15:32:25 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>> Yeah, but they're not cheaper, and nobody has any reason to make them so.
>>
>> As far as catastrophic, even a broken leg can cost a couple grand at the
>> hospital. You can't say this is an example of a person who should've gone
>> to
>> an internist.
>
>
> The bottom line is that I don't expect help for my medical coverage, nor
> should
> I have to pay for someone else's. For some reason, my Constitution reads
> "...life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", not the guaranty, nor
> any kind
> of handout.
>
Your life depends on an enormous number of people whose income excludes them
from medical insurance. I'll bet you don't like minimum wage increases.
JoeSpareBedroom
news:nps-ABBB3F.1...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <ZH5vi.13754$ya1....@news02.roc.ny>,
> than what you are telling us. You should do a google and I'm sure you
> will find many plans out there that are much less money to fix a broken
> bone that what you say it is. I am of the opinion that either 1. You
> have been brain washed by the DNC/moveon/billary or 2. You are a member
> of same and want to promote their socialized medicine.
>
> AH, you are a work, LOL.
A friend broke his femur in a fall from a high ladder. He felt the best
place to go was the hospital. His insurance covered it, but he still saw
what he WOULD'VE been billed: $2700.00.
You say he could've found someplace to do the work cheaper. Where would you
have looked?
ranto...@mail.com
Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute wrote:
>>³Well, then you are in a small minority in America
>>because Medicare has literally saved the lives and saved the resources
>>of countless generations of seniors in our country.²
>Bullshit. Government involvement in healthcare KILLS thousands each year
>and increases suffering for MILLIONS
There's no evidence for that, and when you start with a faulty premise
anything that follows from it will be wrong.
>because any time - ANY time -
>government starts paying for something, it severely distorts the
>supply/demand curve
True.
>and pushes prices through the roof (unless you set
>price controls and/or ration care, in which case you end up with fewer
>people getting treatment, which is the case in all countries with
>government-run healthcare systems).
False. U.S. health care costs are the highest in the developed
world, but the U.S. has the lowest rate of government involvement in
health coverage.
>When I am hungry I go to a grocery store and buy food. No government, no
>middleman, minimal red tape. Healthcare needs to work the exact same way.
You'll never have an emergency where the food costs for yourself will
suddenly and unexpectedly increase by a factor of 10,000.
ranto...@mail.com
witfal wrote:
>Families that are so large that they cannot afford health care are
>analogous to those who also cannot feed themselves.
Expecting poor people to not have kids is as realistic as expecting
U.S. Marines to maintain their virginity.
ranto...@mail.com
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> There has to be a safety net. If an uninsured person ends up in the hospital
> with cancer, it's going to eventually hit someone else's wallet one way or
> the other. Why not make it an orderly process?
Those people should pull themselves up by their bootstraps and buy
private health insurance for $11,000 a month. It's that simple.
GoMavs
>
> There's so much irony in your last statement, Joe, I don't know where to
> begin.
>
> Families that are so large that they cannot afford health care are
> analogous to those
Ahh, but Democrats typically believe that the average human is not able to
take care of themselves. This goes back to Greek ideals that the smartest
should govern us and make sure we are taken care of.
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 16:15:31 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>
>> Your life depends on an enormous number of people whose income excludes
>> them
>> from medical insurance. I'll bet you don't like minimum wage increases.
>
> business owners,
> and eventually drive them out of business.
>
The point is that society requires certain professions that will NEVER pay
enough for workers to afford health insurance. The neocon solution is for
these people to own nothing more than a toothbrush, and have no children, so
they can afford insurance.
JoeSpareBedroom
> In article <Mx6vi.13760$ya1....@news02.roc.ny>,
> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>> > I think you are exaggerating the broken leg AH. Even cobra is cheaper
>> > than what you are telling us. You should do a google and I'm sure you
>> > will find many plans out there that are much less money to fix a broken
>> > bone that what you say it is. I am of the opinion that either 1. You
>> > have been brain washed by the DNC/moveon/billary or 2. You are a
>> > member
>> > of same and want to promote their socialized medicine.
>> >
>> > AH, you are a work, LOL.
>>
>>
>> A friend broke his femur in a fall from a high ladder. He felt the best
>> place to go was the hospital. His insurance covered it, but he still saw
>> what he WOULD'VE been billed: $2700.00.
>>
>> You say he could've found someplace to do the work cheaper. Where would
>> you
>> have looked?
>
>
> You are a work AH, LOL
You must be drunk again. Here is what you wrote:
"You should do a google and I'm sure you
will find many plans out there that are much less money to fix a broken
bone that what you say it is."
If I misinterpreted that, explain it differently.
n5hsr
> On 2007-08-10 17:52:09 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>
>> The point is that society requires certain professions that will NEVER
>> pay
>> enough for workers to afford health insurance. The neocon solution is for
>> these people to own nothing more than a toothbrush, and have no children,
>> so
>> they can afford insurance.
>
> able to
> afford a basic way of life for their children, at your expense.
>
> Have you ever noticed, Joe, that leftists wanting you to pay for other's
> needs always
> find it so easy to spend YOUR money, while they go unscathed?
>
JoeScott'sBedroom (still hasn't paid the wager, I suspect) has never lived
in Arkansas. There are two or three generations of people that don't think
they ever have to work because "We owes it to them." And they reproduce a
minimum of 7 children with each generation, because we will pay for 7
children. Thanks Lyndon Buttfuckus Johnson and your wonderful War for
Poverty.
Charles of Schaumburg.
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-10 17:52:09 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
> said:
>
>> pay
>> enough for workers to afford health insurance. The neocon solution is for
>> these people to own nothing more than a toothbrush, and have no children,
>> so
>> they can afford insurance.
>
> able to
> afford a basic way of life for their children, at your expense.
We studied socialism in an economics class in college, and I'm almost
positive that its various characteristics never mentioned "unbridled
reproduction". Correct me if I'm wrong.
> Have you ever noticed, Joe, that leftists wanting you to pay for other's
> needs always
> find it so easy to spend YOUR money, while they go unscathed?
>
What is your solution to the health insurance problem? Is there none?
JoeSpareBedroom
> In article <TL7vi.13867$B25....@news01.roc.ny>,
> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>> >> You say he could've found someplace to do the work cheaper. Where
>> >> would
>> >> you
>> >> have looked?
>> >
>> > I never said that AH, look again.
>> >
>> > You are a work AH, LOL
>>
>>
>> You must be drunk again. Here is what you wrote:
>>
>> "You should do a google and I'm sure you
>> will find many plans out there that are much less money to fix a broken
>> bone that what you say it is."
>>
>> If I misinterpreted that, explain it differently.
>
>
> "You say he could've found someplace to do the work cheaper. Where would
> you have looked?"
>
> have looked?.
No such thing.
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-11 05:03:17 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>
>>> Have you ever noticed, Joe, that leftists wanting you to pay for other's
>>> needs always
>>> find it so easy to spend YOUR money, while they go unscathed?
>>>
>>
>> What is your solution to the health insurance problem? Is there none?
>
> which
> country's would you like us to emulate?
>
Greatest in terms of what? Medical results, or how the services are paid
for?
ma...@london.com
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> "witfal" <nos...@all4.me> wrote in message
> news:f9j25h$kq$1...@news.albasani.net...
> >> The point is that society requires certain professions that will NEVER
> >> pay enough for workers to afford health insurance. The neocon solution is for
> >> these people to own nothing more than a toothbrush, and have no children,
> >> so they can afford insurance.
> >
> > And the socialist solution is unbridled reproduction among those least
> > able to afford a basic way of life for their children, at your expense.
>
> We studied socialism in an economics class in college, and I'm almost
> positive that its various characteristics never mentioned "unbridled
> reproduction". Correct me if I'm wrong.
If it was taught, it was probably in the part about Thomas Malthus,
namely the Malthausian Trap.
> What is your solution to the health insurance problem? Is there none?
Pay sick people who volunteer to be sterilized, the biggest bonuses
going to those who have reproduced the least, and eventually this will
give us a super race that won't need health care. I won the
presidency of my local Young Republicans chapter by advocating this.
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-11 11:45:42 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>
I absolutely will not discuss quality of medical care, since it would only
be a diversion from the discussion as YOU set it up earlier: People who are
a drain on the system, and that you don't want to subsidize them.
There are people whose financial planning you would have absolutely no
problem with, and who have the "correct" number of kids, according to you.
According to what I have heard in numerous news stories, these people are
***NOT*** a statistical anomaly. They are more common than you think.
True or false: You (and I mean YOU specifically) believe these people should
be allowed to dangle in the wind without insurance.
larry moe 'n curly
witfal wrote:
> On 2007-08-11 05:03:17 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com> said:
>
> Have you ever noticed, Joe, that leftists wanting you to pay for other's
> needs always find it so easy to spend YOUR money, while they go unscathed?
>
> >
> > What is your solution to the health insurance problem? Is there none?
>
> I'll return the question.
Everybody: Answer the question first (even with a rhetorical
question), then ask your question.
> IF we don't have the greatest health care here, which
> country's would you like us to emulate?
Here are WHO rankings of world health systems:
www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
Here are some of the results:
1 France
2 Italy
3 San Marino
4 Andorra
5 Malta
6 Singapore
7 Spain
8 Oman
9 Austria
10 Japan
...
18 UK
30 Canada
...
37 US
Few rich countries rank lower than the US (some small oil producers,
New Zealand, and South Korea).
All of the foreign health care systems are cheaper than ours, and
among those better than ours, the UK's and Japan's are among the
cheapest, costing about 6-8% of GDP, versus 15% for the US.
Does anybody know where I can find ratings that are more specific,
such as for wait times (both for normal, serious, and emergency
treatment), availability of complex or costly treatments, etc? I used
to have a chart showing this, with ratings from 1-5, but can't find
it. It showed the US leading in lowest wait times for scheduled
surgery, but I think that was the only catagory where the US was rated
#1.
larry moe 'n curly
Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute wrote:
> In message news:1186789459.9...@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com,
> ranto...@mail.com sprach forth the following:
> Government involvement in healthcare KILLS thousands each year
> and increases suffering for MILLIONS
>
> > There's no evidence for that,
>
> Let's start with those who die due to drugs the FDA won't approve.
That's probably not a factor because:
a) the FDA tends to approve drugs faster than governments in other
developed nations do, and this was true even back in the 1990s, when
Newt Gingrich was complaining about the FDA's slowness.
b) most new drugs aren't significant improvements over existing ones
but merely modifications of existing drugs, designed to get around the
existing drugs' patents.
> Let's continue with the drugs and procedures that patients can't afford because
> of the supply/demand curve I also mentioned.
Explain how, in the Phoenix area, the supply of heart treatment
capacity doubled after deregulation, but the mortality rates didn't
fall for either the general population or for heart patients. The
extra supply didn't result in lower treatment costs or even less
inflation than average for heart treatment. Maybe that's because not
only did supply double, but so did demand, and apparently this is
common with health care. Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop
explained that demand isn't really set by patients but by health care
providers.
> Add in the reduced amount of available provider time because of all the
> Medicaid and illegal alien patients who go to the ER for a hangnail.
For legals, incl. US citizens, a universal health care system would
lessen the burden on ERs because everybody would have a regular
doctor, and the vast majority of ER patients aren't illegals but
instead are US citizens. Also but back in the 1990s, it was found
that lower income legals tend to use Medicaid less than higher income
people do, and I do mean Medicaid, the system intended for lower
income people, not Medicare, the system for seniors of all income
levels.
> Let's continue with prohibitions on drug reimportation,
As the US drug industry wants, along with the Medicare drug plan being
prohibited from o negotiating volume discounts with drug makers.
> and let's throw in bans on cannibas as only one
> small example of the suffering.
That won't happen until we get a president who's not a prude and who's
never used drugs because anyone else will have to prove to the Sin
Belt/Bible Belt that he's holier than thou on drugs.
> No evidence? Ha.
You provided 1 or 1 1/2 examples that government involvement in health
care hurts people. The 1/2 is for your marijuana example because
restrictions on drugs also apply to drugs that are harmful to people.
> > You'll never have an emergency where the food costs for yourself will
> > suddenly and unexpectedly increase by a factor of 10,000.
>
> You didn't read my response about catastrophic coverage did you?
Joseph Califano, who was one of the architects of Medicare and
Medicaid, has written a couple of books about the American health
insurance mess and said that catastrophic or major medical coverage
won't do the trick. I don't remember his reasons, but I think one of
them involved ordinary conditions getting escalated so they'd be
covered. BTW if you check his books, check both because in the second
one he refutes a lot of his original thoughts.
larry moe 'n curly
Mark wrote:
> Intelligent people of all colors, at least those not wanting to be led
> around by the nose, see clearly through Hillary's many times-proven
> failed socialist position on healthcare.
Please provide proof that socialized medicine is usually worse than
the American system because the US system ranks low among those in
other developed nations, having higher osts and less coverage.
Also how was Hillary's system socialist when it basically called for
putting everybody into private HMOs, similar to the German system?
larry moe 'n curly
witfal wrote:
> Even easier, and more cost effective:
>
> Stop paying medical care for illegal aliens. Use the money for
> legal U.S. residents.
> Nah. That'd make too much sense.
What are the public health care costs for illegals? Rand Corp. said
illegals cost $6.4B, of which only $1.1B was covered by taxes, based
on an LA study from 2001 and extrapolating the results for 2,400
immigrants living in LA. In the year 2000 (say that with a falsetto),
the overall tax bill for medical care, excluding Medicare, was $88B:
Notice that 32% of the illegals had health insurance.
Information from the anti-immigration group FAIR said that illegals in
California, Texas, and Arizona cost taxpayers $2.65B in health care:
But let's say that the cost is $64B, or a lot higher than either
estimate. $64B amounts to 3% of the $2T annual cost of US health care
spending, both private and public, so your proposal to stop paying the
medical expenses for illegals would directly save only 3%. The
savings actually may be higher if cutting payments stops illegals from
entering the country, but even if it doubles the savings (and I have
no idea what the right number actually is), we'd still have the
world's most costly (in terms of proportion of GDP) health care
system. Therefore I conclude that stopping illegals from getting
taxpayer-funded health care probably won't make a noticeable dent in
our insurance costs.
JoeSpareBedroom
> On 2007-08-11 19:23:22 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com>
>
>>>>> I'll return the question. IF we don't have the greatest health care
>>>>> here,
>>>>> which
>>>>> country's would you like us to emulate?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Greatest in terms of what? Medical results, or how the services are
>>>> paid
>>>> for?
>>>
>>> Both, and where they might overlap.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I absolutely will not discuss quality of medical care, since it would
>> only
>> be a diversion from the discussion as YOU set it up earlier: People who
>> are
>> a drain on the system, and that you don't want to subsidize them.
>>
>> There are people whose financial planning you would have absolutely no
>> problem with, and who have the "correct" number of kids, according to
>> you.
>> According to what I have heard in numerous news stories, these people are
>> ***NOT*** a statistical anomaly. They are more common than you think.
>>
>> True or false: You (and I mean YOU specifically) believe these people
>> should
>> be allowed to dangle in the wind without insurance.
>
>
> I'm also sure I know why.
>
You wanted to lump quality of care and cost management into one question.
That's why I didn't answer it. Quality of care was a complete change of
subject, relative to what we've been discussing since this thread began.
Save quality of care for another thread, and I'll answer your question, even
though you have already answered your question several times.
n5hsr
> In article <Xns998A50C984...@66.250.146.128>,
> "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" <nos...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
>
>> In message news:1186899390.2...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com,
>> larry moe 'n curly sprach forth the following:
>>
>> >
>> > Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute wrote:
>> >
>> >> In message news:1186789459.9...@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com,
>> >> ranto...@mail.com sprach forth the following:
>> >
>> >> Government involvement in healthcare KILLS thousands each year
>> >> and increases suffering for MILLIONS
>> >>
>> >> > There's no evidence for that,
>> >>
>> >> Let's start with those who die due to drugs the FDA won't approve.
>> >
>> > That's probably not a factor because:
>> >
>> > a) the FDA tends to approve drugs faster than governments in other
>> > developed nations do
>>
>>
>>
>> > demand isn't really set by patients but by health care
>> > providers.
>>
>>
>> Remainder of post snipped - nobody as STUPID as you DESERVES a
>> conversation.
>
> larry moe reminds me of someone who is smokes dope.
>
> --
> "Fire up a colortini, sit back, relax, and watch the pictures, now,
> as they fly through the air."
> Tom Snyder
I just call him Joe Besser, that seems to get his goat. He's not Larry
Fein, Moe Howard or Curly Howard, he's just Joe Besser.
Charles of Schaumburg
mysogynist
Scott in Florida
<larrymo...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>witfal wrote:
>
>> On 2007-08-11 05:03:17 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com> said:
>>
>> Have you ever noticed, Joe, that leftists wanting you to pay for other's
>> needs always find it so easy to spend YOUR money, while they go unscathed?
>>
>> >
>> > What is your solution to the health insurance problem? Is there none?
>>
>> I'll return the question.
>
>Everybody: Answer the question first (even with a rhetorical
>question), then ask your question.
>
>> IF we don't have the greatest health care here, which
>> country's would you like us to emulate?
>
>Here are WHO rankings of world health systems:
>
> www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
>
>Here are some of the results:
>
>1 France
I suggest you move to France....
You are already in tune with their surrender mentality....
--
Scott in Florida
There ought to be one day-- just one--
when there is open season on senators.
Will Rogers (1879 - 1935)
Scott in Florida
<larrymo...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>Mark wrote:
>
>> Intelligent people of all colors, at least those not wanting to be led
>> around by the nose, see clearly through Hillary's many times-proven
>> failed socialist position on healthcare.
>
>Please provide proof that socialized medicine is usually worse than
>the American system because the US system ranks low among those in
>other developed nations, having higher osts and less coverage.
The Canadian system sucks.
I don't know the French system, but the last dictator that went there
for care.....died.
>
>Also how was Hillary's system socialist when it basically called for
>putting everybody into private HMOs, similar to the German system?
Scott in Florida
>On 2007-08-12 04:58:15 -0700, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishbo...@yahoo.com> said:
>
>> You wanted to lump quality of care and cost management into one question.
>
>Nope. I just wanted you to illustrate tax costs by listing the
>countries who are
>buckling under their "free" health care.
>
>For example, I have relatives in Germany. This is the country that the
>Clintons so often used as a model
>for their health care desires. Their tax structure illustrates almost
>everything that can go wrong when the
>government has "free" in mind. And they're really not happy with the
>care they receive, nor the waiting
>time to see even a GP.
>
>I don't know about you, but I certainly wouldn't want to see my net
>yearly income reduced by 25 or 30
>percent.
Liberals want the government to take care of everything.
The 'inner cities' are a prime example of what happens when liberals
take over.
New Orleans is another example.
n5hsr
news:gk9ub3liq6qvojipl...@4ax.com...
I was in Hillary's private HMO test system that she put in at Wal-mart in
the 1980's. We had lousy healthcare in the 80's. Basically anyone that
got really sick got fired.
Charles of Schaumburg
n5hsr
> In article <xuudnYhzwpIJgSLb...@comcast.com>,
>
> --
> "Fire up a colortini, sit back, relax, and watch the pictures, now,
> as they fly through the air."
> Tom Snyder
I thought he was just a long-haired maggot-infested dope-smoking FM type.
Along with JoeNoBedroom and the rest.
Charles of Schaumburg
striped...@hotmail.com
<nos...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
> In messagenews:RRZui.13814$B25....@news01.roc.ny, JoeSpareBedroom
> sprach forth the following:
>
> > The most common suggestion I've heard is "Well...poor people
> > should get better jobs so they can afford blah blah blah...", but that
> > idea only comes from slobs who are too busy watchingOprahto actually
> > come up with anything of value to say.
>
> It's the poor people who aren't trying to get etter jobs who are watchingOprahinstead. And taxpayers will be spending $2 billion so they can
> continue watching her when transmissions cut over to digital.
Actually most Oprah fans are rich. Why do you think she has so much
influence over the market and why do you think companies like Pontiac
let her give away hundreds of cars to her audience for free
advertising?