Rich Countries Like Japan & Switzerland Control Health Care Costs
Bret Cahill
If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
controls health care costs.
Bret Cahill
jheard
If government is better at providing health care services, then it
should provide all necessaryservices. Oh wait, that would be
communism and we know how well that worked out.
Get lost
The only way to control costs in any aging population is to deny
services, which is what they do.
hal
Conservatives have quite this dichotomy on their hands, they claim to
be "libertarian", and into free markets and small government and such,
but gladly allow the ultra wealthy elite to have total control over
everything. I don't get it. Could it because they're stupid?
>
>
>Bret Cahill
>
Bret Cahill
> > If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
> > controls health care costs.
> The only way to control costs in any aging population is to deny
> services, which is what they do.
Rightards prefer to deny services to those who can't pay?
Bret Cahill
Bret Cahill
>
> > If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
> > controls health care costs.
>
> > Bret Cahill
>
> If government is better at providing health care services,
In Japan and Switzerland the gummint controls costs.
Now if you prefer the libertarian model, feel free to move to low tax
Somalia.
Take your gun and write us a letter and tell us how well your new job
as a pirate is working out.
> then it
> should provide all necessaryservices.
Health care isn't like other products or services. No one wants the
services of health care. No one wants to get sick.
People only use health care when they have to.
> Oh wait, that would be
> communism and we know how well that worked out.
Switzerland and Japan are communist?
If those 2 countries, both richer than the U. S., are communist then
we need to become communist.
Let the liberdopes move to low tax Somalia and become a pirate.
Bret Cahill
Bret Cahill
>
> > If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
> > controls health care costs.
>
> > Bret Cahill
>
> The only way to control costs in any aging population is to deny
> services, which is what they do.
They live longer which is all that matters.
Bret Cahill
Bret Cahill
>
> >If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
> >controls health care costs.
>
> Conservatives have quite this dichotomy on their hands, they claim to
> be "libertarian", and into free markets and small government and such,
> but gladly allow the ultra wealthy elite to have total control over
> everything. I don't get it. Could it because they're stupid?
Rightards are stuck on stoopid.
Rich Repugs and their minions have these idiots without health care
who are so confused that they are dizzy running around fighting health
care.
Bret Cahill
chazwin
Drugs companies sell dugs at the amount the market can stand. It is
not related to costs of production. New drugs are very expensive for
this reason as they want to retrieve costs od development as well as
maximise profits in the shortest period of time.
It is therefore in the interests of these companies to restrict
supply as much as possible whilst pitching the price as high as
possible.
The other incentive is to create palliative treatments rather than
curative treatments as cured patients no longer buy drugs.
This is why there is a massive increase in very expensive palliative
treatments in cancer that are deliberately priced at an amount that is
just acceptable to the world's largest market for drugs: the NHS.
Werner
They live longer because they eat less and exercise more. Japan has
even more debt than we do.
Werner
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:33:35 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
>
>
> Conservatives have quite this dichotomy on their hands, they claim to
> be "libertarian", and into free markets and small government and such,
> but gladly allow the ultra wealthy elite to have total control over
> everything. I don't get it. Could it because they're stupid?
>
>
Libertarians are not conservatives. Libertarians are liberals in
everything.
The really stupid people are those who delude themselves into
believing BigGovernment will protect them from rich people. How has
that been working out for you?
Werner
Werner
> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>
No, libertarians want limited government because BigGovernment always
runs out of other people's money.
> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
> controls health care costs.
>
How has that been working out in Medicare and Medicaid which has been
bankrupting gummints?
Michael Coburn
more debt than we do", said Werner the weenie.
You wonder at the sort of "mentality" it takes to string those two
sentences together.
--
"Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson
Michael Coburn
Repeal the 17th amendment and quadruple the membership of the House and
it will all work out just fine.
Werner
> Sadly the 'market' controls the health care costs.
> Drugs companies sell dugs at the amount the market can stand. It is
> not related to costs of production.
This is the case with everything. Neither is it limited to private
companies which explains the relentless rise in taxes. But there is a
difference. If Enron could have simply raised prices like government
can raise taxes it would not have gone bankrupt. If government were
more like Enron it would have gone bankrupt long ago.
...
Werner
...
>
> Switzerland and Japan are communist?
>
> If those 2 countries, both richer than the U. S., are communist then
> we need to become communist.
>
>
Really?
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html
hal
wrote:
>On Nov 21, 1:54=A0pm, hal wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:33:35 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
>>
>...
>>
>> Conservatives have quite this dichotomy on their hands, they claim to
>> be "libertarian", and into free markets and small government and such,
>> but gladly allow the ultra wealthy elite to have total control over
>> everything. =A0I don't get it. =A0Could it because they're stupid?
>>
>>
>
>
>Libertarians are not conservatives. Libertarians are liberals in
>everything.
If you ask ANY conservative what it means to them to be a
conservative, they will tell you smaller government and greater
individual freedom. Proof that conservatives are too stupid to even
understand what a conservative is.
>
>The really stupid people are those who delude themselves into
>believing BigGovernment will protect them from rich people. How has
>that been working out for you?
>
Better than it was under George Bush. Now if we could only get the
conservatives to stop obstructing everything the progressives want to
do.
Werner
Yes, that and the 16th have really done a job destroying limited
government and bankrupting the country.
Werner
You have to be able to connect the dots, Mike. Government health
care......debt. A bankrupt nation can't provide anything but grief.
That's where we are headed.
Michael Coburn
> On Nov 21, 1:33 pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote:
>> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>>
>>
>
> No, libertarians want limited government because BigGovernment always
> runs out of other people's money.
Liar. There are Libertarians that actually understand the definition of
"economic rent" and who realize that the taxation of (reclamation and
redistribution of) economic rent is fair and just, and that such taxation
DOES NOT adversely effect the real economy. Such individuals are called
geolibertarians.
>> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
>> controls health care costs.
>>
>>
>
> How has that been working out in Medicare and Medicaid which has been
> bankrupting gummints?
LIAR. No government has ever gone bankrupt or is even close to going
bankrupt because of Medicare or Medicaid.
Michael Coburn
Nothing wrong with the 16th amendment if government is of, by, and for
the people.
Werner
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:18:47 -0800 (PST), Werner <whetz...@mac.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Nov 21, 1:54=A0pm, hal wrote:
> >> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:33:35 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
>
> >...
>
> >> Conservatives have quite this dichotomy on their hands, they claim to
> >> be "libertarian", and into free markets and small government and such,
> >> but gladly allow the ultra wealthy elite to have total control over
> >> everything. =A0I don't get it. =A0Could it because they're stupid?
>
> >Libertarians are not conservatives. Libertarians are liberals in
> >everything.
>
> If you ask ANY conservative what it means to them to be a
> conservative, they will tell you smaller government and greater
> individual freedom. Proof that conservatives are too stupid to even
> understand what a conservative is.
>
>
The is in your face.
lib⋅er⋅tar⋅i⋅an [lib-er-tair-ee-uhn] Show IPA
Use libertarian in a Sentence
–noun
1. a person who advocates liberty, esp. with regard to thought or
conduct.
2. a person who maintains the doctrine of free will (distinguished
from necessitarian ).
–adjective
3. advocating liberty or conforming to principles of liberty.
4. maintaining the doctrine of free will.
>
> >The really stupid people are those who delude themselves into
> >believing BigGovernment will protect them from rich people. How has
> >that been working out for you?
>
> Better than it was under George Bush. Now if we could only get the
> conservatives to stop obstructing everything the progressives want to
> do.
Evidently progressives have a problem with the notion of liberty.
Wasn’t America supposed to be about limited government?If you think
liberty is better than forced obedience help get people back their
ability to make choices for themselves instead of having them imposed.
Laws steal choices. They make you obey. It’s like being told where to
sit on the bus. Laws make you do things you would not want to do if
you were free. In today’s political environment all other political
parties legislate to prohibit and limit choices for some people and
mandate the choices of others. Was it meant to be this way? What can
be more valuable than choice? What do you have when you have no
choice?
www.ny.lp.org/choice
Beam Me Up Scotty
If government has been the answer to the question, why has government
never succeeded at this "diapers to Depends" total life support before?
Michael Coburn
There is no reason for government administered health care to create debt.
Debt is created by lack of proper taxation:
The problem with our tax system is that it is not progressive and
improperly designed to encourage true capital development. In 1936 the
marginal rate on entrepreneurial income of what is now $250K was 15%
while the rate on 3 million was 64%. In 1941 the marginal rates were made
more progressive and the 3 million was taxed at 71% while the $250K was
taxed at 39%. The tax rate on normal working people who earned what would
now be $50k was 13%. Meanwhile, the capital gains tax rate was simply
half the ordinary rate. So the tax on "capital gains" of 3 million was
36%.
So if you want to fix the tax code just reinstate the code from 1941 that
understood "economic rent", and that taxation of economic rent DOES NOT
adversely affect true production. Homes are not capital because they are
not used in production. They are durable goods. And LAND according to any
real economist is LAND. As such these do not qualify for "capital" gains
treatment. Capital is trains and trucks and producing enterprises. And
since money is also not capital then banks and insurance company stocks
do not qualify for capital gains tax treatment either. If you want a
capital gains tax break then build a productive enterprise. Even "UPS",
and "Safeway" would qualify. "AIG" need not apply.
Werner
There is if The People want to bankrupt the country, or steal from
others for themselves.
"
In crafting the Bill of Rights, the framers were careful to
acknowledge implicitly and explicitly two key truths:
The first is that government does not grant rights it acknowledges
them. They exist independently of government. They're part of who and
what we are. And, as Jefferson noted in the Declaration of
Independence, the only legitimate function of government is to secure
them.
The second is that government is a servant to whom we delegate powers,
not a master who dispenses privileges. The Constitution carefully
enumerates the powers we, the people, delegate to our government and
it specifically denies that government any powers not so delegated.
Our rights lie beyond the pale of that delegation. They are
sacrosanct. Any government which infringes upon them is engaged in an
intolerable usurpation.
"
www.badnarik.org
-----
A "right" as envisioned by the Founders meant that the government
was not permitted to interfere with your pursuit of them, i.e.,
your pursuit of happiness was to be unhindered by government.
The "right" of free speech means that government cannot interfere
with your free speech. The "right" of gun ownership means that the
government cannot infringe your gun ownership. What does "right"
to health care mean? It means that the government cannot stand in
the way of your pursuit of health care, or impede your
obtaining health care. The "right" to an attorney means that the
government cannot prevent you obtaining an attorney to represent
you.
Of course, "right" has incorrectly come to mean that someone must
supply you with something. If your "right" to housing means that
some slave must supply you with housing, and your "right" to health
care means that some slave must supply you with health care, and your
"right" to an attorney means that some slave must supply you with an
attorney, does your "right" to free speech mean that some slave must
supply you with a loudspeaker, or TV air time? Does your "right" to
own guns mean that some slave must supply you with guns?
http://www.capitaldistrict-lp.org/Rights.shtml
Dollars in the common treasury are like fish in the common sea -
anyone who can will harvest to extinction. That is why socialism is
fundamentally corrupting and can not work. The Fed is making a lot of
paper fish. This is an illusion of wealth. The real fish are gone.
----
http://www.capitaldistrict-lp.org/how.shtml
Governing has become a way to get privileges for some at the expense
of others.
http://www.capitaldistrict-lp.org/what.shtml
http://www.investmentu.com/IUEL/2008/August/the-national-debt.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp8ZmQMCtqA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FSoXKapKQs&feature=related
Michael Coburn
It has. Europe has not sunk into the sea as the city of Atlantis.
Werner
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:22:48 -0800, Werner wrote:
> > On Nov 21, 1:33 pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>
> > No, libertarians want limited government because BigGovernment always
> > runs out of other people's money.
>
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
http://home.att.net/~mwhodges/debt.htm
> >> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
> >> controls health care costs.
>
> > How has that been working out in Medicare and Medicaid which has been
> > bankrupting gummints?
>
> LIAR. No government has ever gone bankrupt or is even close to going
> bankrupt because of Medicare or Medicaid.
>
Medicare and Medicaid for the old an poor are bankrupting governments
right now.
http://capitaldistrict-lp.org/HealthCare.shtml
What will universal Medicare/Medicaid do? It will lead to tragedy.
http://capitaldistrict-lp.org/how.shtml
http://www.ppinys.org/reports/medicd99.htm
http://govhealthit.com/articles/2006/04/mining-medicaid.aspx
http://government.cce.cornell.edu/doc/summary.asp?id=savas1992-3
http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/pubs/research/medicaid.htm
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/01/01/2009-01-01_want_a_fast_stimulus_have_feds_pick_up_m.html
Rod Speed
> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that controls health care costs.
Not if its rich enough to pay any health care costs.
Rod Speed
> Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote
>> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that controls health care costs.
> If government is better at providing health care services,
> then it should provide all necessaryservices.
Mindlessly silly. All services aint the same, stupid.
Rod Speed
> Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote
>> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that controls health care costs.
> The only way to control costs in any aging population is to deny services,
Wrong. Japan doesnt deny any health care services,
in fact you dont even need a referral for a specialist.
> which is what they do.
Just another lie.
Werner
> ...
>
> --
> "Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson
I don't want them.
Werner
Yours is bankrupt.
Rod Speed
>>> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that controls health care costs.
>> If government is better at providing health care services,
> In Japan and Switzerland the gummint controls costs.
Switzerland is second worst as far as the percentage of GDP spent on health care costs.
> Now if you prefer the libertarian model, feel free to move to low tax Somalia.
> Take your gun and write us a letter and tell us how well your new job as a pirate is working out.
>> then it should provide all necessary services.
> Health care isn't like other products or services. No one
> wants the services of health care. No one wants to get sick.
A few do. Only a small minority tho. They call them hypocondriacs etc.
> People only use health care when they have to.
Utterly mangled all over again.
>> Oh wait, that would be communism and we know how well that worked out.
> Switzerland and Japan are communist?
> If those 2 countries, both richer than the U. S., are communist then we need to become communist.
> Let the liberdopes move to low tax Somalia and become a pirate.
Rod Speed
> Sadly the 'market' controls the health care costs.
Not in countrys with a clue.
> Drugs companies sell dugs at the amount the market can stand.
Not in countrys with a clue.
> It is not related to costs of production. New drugs are very expensive
> for this reason as they want to retrieve costs od development as well
> as maximise profits in the shortest period of time.
And countrys with a clue dont let them get away with that.
> It is therefore in the interests of these companies to restrict supply
> as much as possible whilst pitching the price as high as possible.
And countrys with a clue dont let them get away with that.
> The other incentive is to create palliative treatments rather than
> curative treatments as cured patients no longer buy drugs.
And countrys with a clue dont let them get away with that.
> This is why there is a massive increase in very expensive palliative
> treatments in cancer that are deliberately priced at an amount that
> is just acceptable to the world's largest market for drugs: the NHS.
Another bare faced lie.
Rod Speed
> Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote
>>>> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>>>> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that controls health care costs.
>>> The only way to control costs in any aging population is to deny services, which is what they do.
>> They live longer which is all that matters.
> They live longer because they eat less and exercise more.
Not in the case of Japan, its genetics, stupid.
> Japan has even more debt than we do.
And isnt richer than the US on any sensible measure for say an employed engineer or doctor etc.
Michael Coburn
> On Nov 21, 3:01 pm, Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:22:48 -0800, Werner wrote:
>> > On Nov 21, 1:33 pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>>
>> > No, libertarians want limited government because BigGovernment always
>> > runs out of other people's money.
>>
>> Liar. ..
>
>
> http://www.usdebtclock.org/
> http://home.att.net/~mwhodges/debt.htm
>
>
>> >> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
>> >> controls health care costs.
>>
>> > How has that been working out in Medicare and Medicaid which has been
>> > bankrupting gummints?
>>
>> LIAR. No government has ever gone bankrupt or is even close to going
>> bankrupt because of Medicare or Medicaid.
>>
>>
>
>
> Medicare and Medicaid for the old an poor are bankrupting governments
> right now.
<<<<<<<<< stoooopid trash deleted as totally pointless >>>>>>>>>
The creator of money cannot run out of money any more than the sea can
run out of salt. Money is what the kings men will take instead of taking
your chickens. And taxation is what gives money its value.
Rod Speed
> hal wrote
>> Conservatives have quite this dichotomy on their hands, they claim
>> to be "libertarian", and into free markets and small government and
>> such, but gladly allow the ultra wealthy elite to have total control
>> over everything. I don't get it. Could it because they're stupid?
> Libertarians are not conservatives.
They are on 'liberty'
> Libertarians are liberals in everything.
Wrong, as always.
> The really stupid people are those who delude themselves into
> believing BigGovernment will protect them from rich people.
> How has that been working out for you?
Its working fine for me. They dont get to have slaves anymore,
they dont get to have little kids in coal mines anymore. They
dont get to have monopolys anymore. Etc etc etc.
Rod Speed
> Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote
>> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
> No, libertarians want limited government because
> BigGovernment always runs out of other people's money.
Australia didnt. It had no nett federal govt debt whatever until the
US completely imploded the entire world financial system, AGAIN.
>> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that controls health care costs.
> How has that been working out in Medicare and Medicaid which has been bankrupting gummints?
Just another of your bare faced lie.
Clearly it didnt bankrupt the australian govt.
Werner
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=yfp-t-701-s&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF8&rd=r2&p=europe%20economic%20crisis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulk9OnOCTuw&feature=PlayList&p=BF378770B74C660E&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4yz4HULE5c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9pM8K3H2jY
Werner
You will be happy to know Zimbabwe has your opinon. Try to understand
the difference between money and wealth. They are not the same.
Werner
I don't know a thing about the Australian government. Do you know
anything about the US government?
Werner
Government is a monopoly. To the degree you have to do things you
would not want to do you are a slave.
Michael Coburn
You are a lying pig according to wikipedia. Zimbabwe has been very hard
hit by drought and human rights violations over the last 10 years. As
such, the people are destitute.
Rod Speed
> Werner wrote
>> hal wrote
>>> Bret Cahill wrote
>>> Conservatives have quite this dichotomy on their hands, they claim
>>> to be "libertarian", and into free markets and small government and
>>> such, but gladly allow the ultra wealthy elite to have total control
>>> over everything. I don't get it. Could it because they're stupid?
>> Libertarians are not conservatives. Libertarians are liberals in everything.
>> The really stupid people are those who delude themselves into
>> believing BigGovernment will protect them from rich people.
>> How has that been working out for you?
> Repeal the 17th amendment and quadruple the membership of the House
> and it will all work out just fine.
How odd that it didnt in Britain which has done that last.
Rod Speed
> Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote
>> Switzerland and Japan are communist?
>> If those 2 countries, both richer than the U. S.,
>> are communist then we need to become communist.
> Really?
Yep.
> https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html
> https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html
GDP per capita aint richer, stupid.
hal
wrote:
>Evidently progressives have a problem with the notion of liberty.
Not at all, but when liberty means we have to put up with rat parts in
our meat products, then it is time for The People to take control of
food production. Free markets cannot mean corporations have the right
to exploit people to any extent they find profitable.
>
>Wasn=E2=80=99t America supposed to be about limited government?If you think
>liberty is better than forced obedience help get people back their
>ability to make choices for themselves instead of having them imposed.
>Laws steal choices.=C2=A0 They make you obey. It=E2=80=99s like being told =
>where to
>sit on the bus. Laws make you do things you would not want to do if
>you were free. In today=E2=80=99s political environment all other political
>parties legislate to prohibit and limit choices for some people and
>mandate the choices of others. Was it meant to be this way? What can
>be more valuable than choice? What do you have when you have no
>choice?=C2=A0
>www.ny.lp.org/choice=C2=A0
Capitalists have proven repeatedly that government intervention is
required for the well being of The People. There is no refuting the
evil that capitalism will bring on citizens all in the name of
profits, and that government regulation of industry is absolutely
essential.
Rod Speed
> Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote
> Yes, that and the 16th have really done a job destroying
> limited government and bankrupting the country.
You wouldnt know what a real bankrupt country was if one bit you on your lard arse.
Rod Speed
>>>>>> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>>>>>> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that controls health care costs.
>>>>> The only way to control costs in any aging population is to deny
>>>>> services, which is what they do.
>>>> They live longer which is all that matters.
>>> They live longer because they eat less and exercise more. Japan has even more debt than we do.
>> "They live longer because they eat less and exercise more.
>> Japan has even more debt than we do", said Werner the weenie.
>> You wonder at the sort of "mentality" it takes to string those two sentences together.
> You have to be able to connect the dots, Mike. Government health care......debt.
Another bare faced pig ignorant lie. Australia has govt health care and
ended up with NO nett federal govt debt whatever just before the GFC.
> A bankrupt nation can't provide anything but grief.
You wouldnt know what a real bankrupt nation was if one bit you on your lard arse.
> That's where we are headed.
Another bare faced pig ignorant lie. The US had a MUCH higher debt due to WW2 and handled that fine.
Rod Speed
>>>> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>>> No, libertarians want limited government because BigGovernment
>>> always runs out of other people's money.
>> Liar. ..
> http://www.usdebtclock.org/
> http://home.att.net/~mwhodges/debt.htm
The US had MUCH higher debt as a result of WW2 and survived that fine.
>>>> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
>>>> controls health care costs.
>>> How has that been working out in Medicare and Medicaid which has
>>> been bankrupting gummints?
>> LIAR. No government has ever gone bankrupt or is even close to going
>> bankrupt because of Medicare or Medicaid.
> Medicare and Medicaid for the old an poor are bankrupting governments right now.
Another lie. Australia has the equivalent of both and its universal as well
and ended up with NO nett federal govt debt just before the GFC, liar.
> http://capitaldistrict-lp.org/HealthCare.shtml
> What will universal Medicare/Medicaid do? It will lead to tragedy.
> http://capitaldistrict-lp.org/how.shtml
Another lie. Australia has the equivalent of both and its universal as well
and ended up with NO nett federal govt debt just before the GFC, liar.
> http://www.ppinys.org/reports/medicd99.htm
> http://govhealthit.com/articles/2006/04/mining-medicaid.aspx
> http://government.cce.cornell.edu/doc/summary.asp?id=savas1992-3
> http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/pubs/research/medicaid.htm
> http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/01/01/2009-01-01_want_a_fast_stimulus_have_feds_pick_up_m.html
Just because some fuckwit claims something, doesnt make it gospel.
Rod Speed
> Yours is bankrupt.
You're lying, as always.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> Werner wrote
>>> Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote
>>>> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>>> No, libertarians want limited government because
>>> BigGovernment always runs out of other people's money.
>> Australia didnt. It had no nett federal govt debt whatever until the
>> US completely imploded the entire world financial system, AGAIN.
>>>> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint
>>>> that controls health care costs.
>>> How has that been working out in Medicare and Medicaid which has been bankrupting gummints?
>> Just another of your bare faced lies.
>> Clearly it didnt bankrupt the australian govt.
> I don't know a thing about the Australian government.
Or anything else at all either.
> Do you know anything about the US government?
Hell of a lot more than you do about anything, thanks.
Rod Speed
>>>> Conservatives have quite this dichotomy on their hands, they claim
>>>> to be "libertarian", and into free markets and small government and
>>>> such, but gladly allow the ultra wealthy elite to have total control
>>>> over everything. I don't get it. Could it because they're stupid?
>>> Libertarians are not conservatives.
>> They are on 'liberty'
>>> Libertarians are liberals in everything.
>> Wrong, as always.
>>> The really stupid people are those who delude themselves into
>>> believing BigGovernment will protect them from rich people.
>>> How has that been working out for you?
>> Its working fine for me. They dont get to have slaves anymore,
>> they dont get to have little kids in coal mines anymore. They
>> dont get to have monopolys anymore. Etc etc etc.
> Government is a monopoly.
Another bare faced pig ignorant lie. You are always free to fuck
off to any country that will have you that you prefer the govt of.
> To the degree you have to do things you would not want to do you are a slave.
You wouldnt know what real slaves were if they all bit you on your lard arse.
> Laws steal choices.
They actually reduce choice.
> They make you obey.
Another bare faced pig ignorant lie, I flout laws I dont agree with.
> It�s like being told where to sit on the bus.
Nothing like in fact. And the voters get to decide the detail of the law as well.
> Laws make you do things you would not want to do if you were free.
Yes. And if you dont like that, you are always free to fuck off
to Somalia etc where the laws arent enforced, any time you like.
> In today�s political environment all other political
> parties legislate to prohibit and limit choices for
> some people and mandate the choices of others.
You quite sure you aint one of those rocket scientist bare faced pig ignorant pathological liars ?
> Was it meant to be this way?
Yep, because every other alternative works a lot worse.
> What can be more valuable than choice?
The capacity to exercise that choice.
> What do you have when you have no choice?
That never happens.
Just another completely mindless steaming turd.
You're always free to fuck off to Somalia etc where you will have much more choice.
You wont get a lot of choice on how you end up dead tho.
Mumia W.
Stop. It is NOT legitimate for government to "print" more money every
time it encounters some fiscal problem. Argentina tried that, and it
resulted in runaway inflation. The money supply should increase if the
resources available to the country increase, and the money supply should
decrease if the resources are reduced.
Unfortunately, we have a central bank that can presumably "print" money
at a whim, and our government's perception that such an ability gave it
unlimited potential income has resulted in the massive indebtedness we
see today.
Our failure as Americans to abandon, audit or even censure the FED will
likely lead to the demise of the country. Perpetual government fiscal
flagrancy is an accident produced by creating the FED, but you seem to
want to make flagrancy policy.
No, the FED will not produce enough money to keep the government going,
and if it does, everything we own will become virtually worthless. The
only long-term solution is for the government to do less for the
American people (a lot less) while asking more of them (a lot more).
Mumia W.
>
> Libertarians are not conservatives. Libertarians are liberals in
> everything.
>
> that been working out for you?
>
I agree that notion isn't smart. Government and corporations are linked
in America. You can't shrink the size of corporations while expanding
the size of government and vice versa.
Mumia W.
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:58:23 -0800, Werner wrote:
>
>> On Nov 21, 2:25 pm, Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:14:29 -0800, Werner wrote:
>>>> On Nov 21, 2:04 pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia
>>>>>>> model.
>>>>>>> that controls health care costs.
>>>>>> The only way to control costs in any aging population is to deny
>>>>>> services, which is what they do.
>>>>> They live longer which is all that matters.
>>>> They live longer because they eat less and exercise more. Japan has
>>>> even more debt than we do.
>>> "They live longer because they eat less and exercise more. Japan has
>>> even more debt than we do", said Werner the weenie.
>>>
>>> You wonder at the sort of "mentality" it takes to string those two
>>> sentences together.
>>>
>>
>> You have to be able to connect the dots, Mike. Government health
>> That's where we are headed.
>
What!
> Debt is created by lack of proper taxation:
>
Yes, but don't forget the other side of the equation. Debt is also
created by excessive expenses. If the government decides to become
responsible for people's healthcare (and not to ration such healthcare),
it takes on some rather hefty expenses.
> The problem with our tax system is that it is not progressive and
> improperly designed to encourage true capital development.
I don't mind progressive taxes so long as they are only /slightly/
progressive.
> In 1936 the
> marginal rate on entrepreneurial income of what is now $250K was 15%
> while the rate on 3 million was 64%.
Wow.
> In 1941 the marginal rates were made
> more progressive and the 3 million was taxed at 71% while the $250K was
> taxed at 39%. The tax rate on normal working people who earned what would
> now be $50k was 13%. Meanwhile, the capital gains tax rate was simply
> half the ordinary rate. So the tax on "capital gains" of 3 million was
> 36%.
>
> So if you want to fix the tax code just reinstate the code from 1941 that
> understood "economic rent", and that taxation of economic rent DOES NOT
> adversely affect true production. Homes are not capital because they are
> not used in production. They are durable goods. And LAND according to any
> real economist is LAND.
Agreed.
> As such these do not qualify for "capital" gains
> treatment. Capital is trains and trucks and producing enterprises. And
> since money is also not capital then banks and insurance company stocks
> do not qualify for capital gains tax treatment either. If you want a
> capital gains tax break then build a productive enterprise. Even "UPS",
> and "Safeway" would qualify. "AIG" need not apply.
>
Agreed.
Sean
"Bret Cahill" <BretC...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:363df88a-852c-4f33...@g22g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>
> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
> controls health care costs.
>
>
> Bret Cahill
>
NO no no ... YOU want a Government, a Public Service, and Democratic
Institutions that are all rationally committed to, and then ACT to Protect
the Constitutional Rights and the Human Rights of the Individual against the
ABUSE of POWER be it by Government, Corporate, Minority Interest Groups,
Political Parties, or Individual Actors.
It would also be a positive step to change the mind-set from the misguided
delusions that Amercia needs to Control, Manipulate or Micro-manage the rest
of the world according to your American Myths and collective BELIEFS alone.
Applying such an attitude would automatically filter down to create a
cost-effective, efficient, highly Productive and equitable Heath Care System
for all.
<smile>
None4U
"Sean" <he...@home.net> wrote in message
news:4b087bfd$0$14606$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Japan is not rich. They are poor Socialist who make half the wages of
Americans and measure their houses by how many 3 by 6 ft mats it has in
floor space. A 6 mat house is huge to them. And unaffordable. They have no
heat or ac in their homes. Or insulation. And live on miso soup , and are
in fact , robots who work and die and do nothing.
the only thing they got going for them is their women are quiet and peacable
, and family oriented. Unlike American women who are chaotic , and dont
figure out how the world works uintil they are too old to be wanted by
anyone.
None4U
You hit the nail on the head. We wont get decent healthcare because the
corrupt political parties want it corupted to their whims.
Its never been about healthcare ,. its about Control.
Beam Me Up Scotty
> On 11/21/2009 02:29 PM, Michael Coburn wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:15:26 -0800, Werner wrote:
>>
>>> On Nov 21, 3:01 pm, Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:22:48 -0800, Werner wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 21, 1:33 pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>>>>> No, libertarians want limited government because BigGovernment always
>>>>> runs out of other people's money.
>>>> Liar. ..
>>>
>>> http://www.usdebtclock.org/
>>> http://home.att.net/~mwhodges/debt.htm
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
>>>>>> controls health care costs.
>>>>> How has that been working out in Medicare and Medicaid which has been
>>>>> bankrupting gummints?
>>>> LIAR. No government has ever gone bankrupt or is even close to going
>>>> bankrupt because of Medicare or Medicaid.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Medicare and Medicaid for the old an poor are bankrupting governments
>>> right now.
>>
>> <<<<<<<<< stoooopid trash deleted as totally pointless >>>>>>>>>
>>
>> The creator of money cannot run out of money any more than the sea can
What they run out of is confidence and that makes all that they print,
worthless.
>> run out of salt. Money is what the kings men will take instead of
>> taking your chickens. And taxation is what gives money its value.
The kings money won't buy my chickens, I'll hide them from the world.
Beam Me Up Scotty
Sean
"None4U" <nos...@nospam.none> wrote in message
news:CcmdnTjqYK2fFJXW...@centurytel.net...
Yes, and that was a much better reply than the Japan mis-information. :)
Bret is an issues focused activist, which is fine. Today's flavour is heath
care, and why it;s the GOP that is the problem. Of course this is not
actually true, and any reading of History shows this with distinct clarity.
THE real issue is of course the TWO *corrupt political parties* in America,
and how they have *corrupted the entire political process* over decades.
Both are snakes in the grass .. to put an emotional spin onto it, despite
any self-deluded *good intentions*.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions ... so says Satan at the
greet and meet door. LOL
Heath care, and every other issue from war-mongering to Guantanamo Bay and
the acceptance of the spohists arguments that attempt to justify Torture in
the name of Freedom and Liberty is an outocme of the corrupted Political
system of the USA and everything that sustains that.
The mythical belief in the Amercian version of the two-party system is at
the core of this deceipt upon the Amercian people, and the rest of the world
as well.
There are many ways to fix it, but the first key ingredient is of course a
healthy dose of Integrity.
Some creative changes would include things *like* the following - not the
details, but the *attitudinal changes* in the current beliefs of what is
said works and why it actually does NOT work at all.
For example:
1) Elections to be held once every 4 years, and not 2.
2) The entire House of Representatives to be up for election each 4 year
election cycle. This ensures the entire lot of them in the House are forced
back to the polls and the people to be re-elected or kicked out as
individuals by their own Local constituents. iow set 4 year terms for each
member.
3) Each HoR's Electorate to be no larger than 100,000 people of voting
ge - whether they are registered voters or not. This is the community that
each Representative is responsible to REPRESENT. HoR's members are suposed
to Represent ALL the people who live in their eclectorate, whether they Vote
or not, registered or not. This IS THEIR KEY responsibility here, and it is
on their shoulders to make sure they Vote accordingly.
3a) A proportional Voting system to be applied, so that no Rep can be elcted
to offcie wihtout having the first or second preference of at least 50% of
the actual voters on the day. This means that if the GOP gains 45% of the
primary vote, but the Democrats 38%, and the Greens 14% together gain 52% of
the vote, then the Democrat is elected to Office because 52% of the voters
do NOT want the GOP party to represent them.
4) A Fed. Govt funded but totally Independent Org - an Electoral Commission
sworn to uphold their responsibilities to the People and not the Politcal
parties to be responsible for setting these Electorates, and to be funded to
be able to actually DO the work required.
5) This Electoral Commission is to be SOLELY repsonsible for the organising
of Voter Registrations - and the running of all Elections with NO political
party involvment bar allowing independent "observers" to view the Election
processes are free and fair.
6) The Senate is the biggest bottle neck. It to be expanded to at least 6
Senators elected from each State ie 300 all up. [ yes you need a bigger
building - it is not 1865 anymore ]
7) Senators are to be elected for a fixed 8 year term, and then need to go
back to the people for re-election.
8) Half the Senate is up for election every 4 years .... similar to how it
works now, but the details and affects WILL be different than now for other
reasons.
9) Senators are to be elected also under a Proportional Voting system
similar to most other modern Democracies, and not a "first past the post
system". See the Australian Senate as one example that works better than the
current US electoral system does.
10) Therefore 3 Senators to be elected at each 4 year cycle -- and by
implementing a proportional system it will BREAK the BACK of the two party
Monopoly in the Senate, and therefore their control over the entire system
as well. So, in a GOP state, you will end up with 2 GOP guys and either one
Democrat or Independent also getting a gig at DC.
10a) so over time ... one will find that NEITHER the GOP, nor the DEMOCRATS
will be able to hold a clear majority in the Senate - EVER. Together they
can come to a bi-partisan agreement and get laws passed in the senate, but
they will not be able to do it alone. But more than this .. the Democrats
can go to the Independents, the Greens, and others who will enter the
senate over time, to seek suport for their Legislation without ANY recourse
to the ideologically opposed GOP, and Vice-Versa.
10b) On top of this, rather than having 100% of the senators being
represented by either the GOP or the DEmocrats ... the Senate will be More
Representative of the beliefs, ideals and values of ALL people across the
nation which are now and have been forever IGNORED by the Two Party system
.. Why? because they COULD ignore it.
10c) And even more than this ... by changing the system the Amercian people
will begin to HEAR about a much braoder range of ideas and solutions to the
nations problems without the GOP/DEms controlling the entire PUBLIC DEBATE
about what is true, what is real, and what people really want -- eg for over
30 years history tells me that the clear majority of people of the US have
been crying out for a reformed health care system that serves the needs of
The People and which includes a Universal health care cover component. But
for 30 years the GOP/Dems have been avoiding this issue completely, instead
preferring to prevaricate and drive the system into a ditch relative to ALL
other Civilised nations on the planet.
11) ALL Laws to be passed in BOTH Houses of Congress on a purely simple
Majority of Votes. No more this archane irrational 60% requirement which is
anti-democratic, anti-freedom, anti-good Governance --- and merely another
deceptive tool for control by special interest groups ie the Political
parties and their Lobbyist/Funders.
12) The removal of the restriction against individuals from serving more
than two terms as President - this is a GROSS infirngement on the liberty of
the individual running for office, and the people who WOULD vote for them if
they were up for office. This current situation was put inplace by partisan
operatives for THEIR OWN benefit it has nothing to do with the fear of a
president becomein g a Dictator at all .... if the system works, if the
Congress works and fulfills IT's responsibilities [ which it abandined
entirely during GW Bush's time], then NO Preseident can ever become a
Dictator. IOW it was a LIE, and they chnaged the Constituion without any
recourse to The People.
13) The removal of the restriction that a president running for office MUST
be an American Born Citizen -- this too is anti-democratic, and another
GROSS infringement on the Liberty of individuals. The current condition was
imposed in 1789 due to the then *state of the world* in particualr the fear
of the Founding fathers that their nation could be influenced by powerfully
rich Monarchists and others from Europe which may undermine their *fledgling
Democracy*. It is NO longer the case, and therefore THIS restriction should
be removed outright. A nation needs it's BEST person for the position .. to
continue in the current course places the USA back into the era of the Birth
Right of Kings .. but in reverse. It is just as UNJUST, insideous and
irrationally based.
14) The current GOP/DEM system means that they have total control over the
rules and adminsitration of what indivudals and parties need to go through
in order to put up people to run in the House, the Senate and for the
Presidency. These control mechanisms have been HIJACKED to cause the
restriction of the entry of new participants into the POLITICAL Process of
the USA. The reasoning has always been a lie to maintian their own power
base, and control. The processes need to be rationally based, and shifted to
the Electoral Commission - a group of Public Servants sworn to abide by that
org .. and not be beholding to partisan self-interests. NO Political party
can be alowed to be a "cog" in the Electoral processes whatsoever, bar
handing someone a Voter Registration card, or a How to Vote flyer. That's
it. Untill this is fixed, and recognised for what it is *a tyranny of power
by the elite over the people* the nothing will ever chnage bar the current
direction of the nation .. ie into a ditch and a total breakdown of civil
society.
and lastly ...
15) Any changes to the US Constitution are to be Voted upon By Referrendum
by the entire body politic of the nation ... ie The People by a Yes/No Vote.
A majority of the Voters across the nation PLUS a majority of voters in over
60% of the individual States and territories must vote YES for the change to
be effective [ to ensure regional self-interest is balanced out , and that
populated States/regions can't control the outcome ] .. Such Votes on
Constituional changes shall be put to the people Via the Congress, and be
ratifyied by Congress and signed into law by the then President who CANNOT
REFUSE the will of the People on such foundational matters. NO State
legislature, or Governor has a say in this whatsoever ... the entire people
of the nation decides.
=========
<smile>
Well that pretty much covers the basics, the simple bits to be adjusted asap
.... fix all the above, and Health Care will almost FIX ITSELF .. and you
will NEVER ever get another Idiot like GW Bush as President, nor incompetant
fools like Sarah Palin being chosen to run for Vice-president. Therefore it
will be a guaranteed Win_win for everyone but the Powers that Be ... who
have given you the Global Financial Crisis, and endless Wars since WW2
whuilst they piss up all your tax dollars against the wall for no benefit
whatsoever.
The other alternative is of course to simple show some common sense and
break up America into 3 or 4 new separtate independent Soveirgn Nations that
more closely reflect the Vlaues of each region of the USA. such as N/East,
West Coast, the South, and Central North. regions
It would have been a,ot easier though and less expensive if the South had
won the Civil War, or the North had never bothered to fight it, and justy
accept the hugely DIVERGENT values were entirely different- are STILL
different too, ... as different as the Amercian Colonies values were from
the powers that be in Monarchist Europe in 1776.
But that's is another story. <smile>
Bret Cahill
> > > If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
> > > If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that controls health care costs.
>
>
> Yours is bankrupt.
Dumbya bankrupted every country involved with his quagmires of mass
distraction.
Bret Cahill
Sean
One thing i give you all the time bret, is that you sure are pretty good at
illiciting a major reaction from your posts ... sheesh this thrread has
goner ballistic, and you hardly said a word, <smile>
"Bret Cahill" <BretC...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:363df88a-852c-4f33...@g22g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>
> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
> controls health care costs.
>
>
> Bret Cahill
>
Fact Attack
Bret Cahill
>
> > > > If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
> > > > controls health care costs.
>
> > > > Bret Cahill
>
> > > services, which is what they do.
>
> > They live longer which is all that matters.
>
> > Bret Cahill
>
> They live longer because they eat less and exercise more. Japan has
> even more debt than we do.
They don't need the FDA to regulate fat and sugar.
We do.
Bret Cahill
Dave Heil
> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>
> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
> controls health care costs.
You keep presenting either/or scenarios. Americans don't need to make
such a choice.
Dave Heil
>>> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>>> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that
>>> controls health care costs.
>> If government is better at providing health care services,
>
> In Japan and Switzerland the gummint controls costs.
I don't give a damn what they do there. I don't want to live in either
place.
> Now if you prefer the libertarian model, feel free to move to low tax
> Somalia.
How about if, as a free American citizen, I tell you to shove it. You
don't give orders or offer me choices.
> Take your gun and write us a letter and tell us how well your new job
> as a pirate is working out.
Us? Are you in charge of something?
Werner
>
> ...
>
> Capitalists have proven repeatedly that government intervention is
> required for the well being of The People. There is no refuting the
> evil that capitalism will bring on citizens all in the name of
> profits, and that government regulation of industry is absolutely
> essential.
Without profit people wouldn't have industry. And if government was
any good at regulating why is the country in such bad shape? Start by
looking at government schools for poor examples of regulation. Then
pick something else government does. Post office, AMTRAK, Medicare,
welfare, and the list goes on.
Mason C
The Post Office does an excellent job of delivering mail to *everybody.*
This requires a subsidy of taxes as do almost all government functions.
The same for Amtrak -- an effort to keep rail passenger service alive.
Medicare, like Social Security, is a blessing for old age people.
"Welfare" -- i.e. charity for the poor and disabled and unemployed is
essential for the survival of any society.
Yes, all have flaws. Do you have flaws?
Clave
news:s0hhg5h1eckmeh5jn...@4ax.com...
<...>
> Yes, all have flaws. Do you have flaws?
I used to think so, but I was wrong.
Jim
miles
> The Post Office does an excellent job of delivering mail to *everybody.*
It has lost money for years and is well known to be inefficient and full
of waste.
Rod Speed
Fools ran the same line during the great depression.
> Perpetual government fiscal flagrancy is an accident produced by creating the FED,
How odd that its worked for so long.
> but you seem to want to make flagrancy policy.
> No, the FED will not produce enough money to keep the government going,
Its just done just that.
> and if it does, everything we own will become virtually worthless.
How odd that that hasnt happened already.
> The only long-term solution is for the government to do less for the American people (a lot less)
Pure fantasy.
> while asking more of them (a lot more).
Another silly little fantasy.
A decent health care funding system HALVES the percentage of
GDP spent on health care and that works fine in every other modern
first and second world country and achieves a better result on every
measure that matters, longevity and years in good health too.
Rod Speed
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
Rod Speed
Fools ran the same line during the great depression.
How can HALVING the percentage of GDP spent on health care possibly bankrupt a country anyway ?
Rod Speed
> you are all going to die
You've always been dead from the shoulders up.
Michael Gordge
> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
No ewe stupid commie cunt, a libertarian would want ewe to have the
health care that ewe can organize and can afford all by yourself,
without the use of initiated force or fraud, without ewe demanding via
a threat of death, (The Rule Of Law) that others sacrifice their
values and or their life for yours.
MG
Clave
news:FM3Om.55361$gg6....@newsfe25.iad...
It wasn't designed as a profit center.
Jim
Rod Speed
Medicare and the VA system works fine.
Michael Gordge
>
> THE real issue is of course the TWO *corrupt political parties* in America,
> and how they have *corrupted the entire political process* over decades.
Ewe stupid commie cunt, its not possible to corrupt evil, the left's
ideology is as evil and as corrupt today as it ever has been, or ever
will or can be.
The problem in the US is the total abandoment of its founding
principle, that the human individual has a right to exist for his own
sake.
MG
Sean
"Michael Gordge" <mikeg...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:be976fa2-805c-45a1...@u16g2000pru.googlegroups.com...
MG
======
Mike, it is OBVIOUS you neveer read the piece ... you don;t deserve a reply.
but here's a cut and paste from the thread, I wrote it ...
a Government, a Public Service, and Democratic
>> Institutions that are all rationally committed to, and then ACT to
>> Protect the Constitutional Rights and the Human Rights of the Individual
>> against the ABUSE of POWER be it by Government, Corporate, Minority
>> Interest Groups, Political Parties, or Individual Actors.
and elsewhere on this topic I have said ::
It is about how these two special interest political groups have allowed the
*corrupting* of the original ideals of the Founding Fathers that has
infiltrated the entire political processes in the USA, particularly over the
most recent decades.
=====
Anytime you want to grow up is fine by me, really.
I look forward to it, you can do it Mike!
You can do it! I belive in you Mike, go hard me young lad ... ;-)
Sean
I also wrote this Mikey .... please don;t choke on your apology, and stop
FFS being such a god-damned moron of a CONTROL FREAK .. you are everything
you say you oppose.
Get a life, or STFU
=============
another way to put your pov, which i agree with is to emphsaise the pouint
that non-human entities such as Corporations have NO RIGHTS to participate
in the Political Process IN ANY FORM WHATSOEVER.
That the only "entities" that in reality do possess any RIGHTS under the US
Constitution is as clearly articulated in the Declaration of Independence
namely ::
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, "
On this basis, I see no need to adjust the Bill of Rights, but a recognition
that Corporations, banks, and every other organisation in the Land including
Polital parties .. have absolutely NO RIGHTS under the current Constituion
lorad
> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>
> controls health care costs.
>
> Bret Cahill
Somalia also controls health care costs... it doesn't have health care.
Rod Speed
> Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote
>> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that controls health care costs.
> Somalia also controls health care costs...
Yes.
> it doesn't have health care.
It does actually.
chazwin
> On Nov 21, 2:13 pm, chazwin <chazwy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Sadly the 'market' controls the health care costs.
> > Drugs companies sell dugs at the amount the market can stand. It is
> > not related to costs of production.
>
> This is the case with everything.
Not true (or not as true) with public industries.
Neither is it limited to private
> companies which explains the relentless rise in taxes. But there is a
> difference. If Enron could have simply raised prices like government
> can raise taxes it would not have gone bankrupt. If government were
> more like Enron it would have gone bankrupt long ago.
Thankfully it is not.
>
> ...
chazwin
> On Nov 21, 2:50 pm, hal wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:18:47 -0800 (PST), Werner <whetz...@mac.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >On Nov 21, 1:54=A0pm, hal wrote:
> > >> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:33:35 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
>
> > >...
>
> > >> Conservatives have quite this dichotomy on their hands, they claim to
> > >> be "libertarian", and into free markets and small government and such,
> > >> but gladly allow the ultra wealthy elite to have total control over
>
> > >Libertarians are not conservatives. Libertarians are liberals in
> > >everything.
>
> > conservative, they will tell you smaller government and greater
> > individual freedom. Proof that conservatives are too stupid to even
> > understand what a conservative is.
>
> The is in your face.
>
> lib⋅er⋅tar⋅i⋅an [lib-er-tair-ee-uhn] Show IPA
> Use libertarian in a Sentence
> –noun
> 1. a person who advocates liberty, esp. with regard to thought or
> conduct.
> 2. a person who maintains the doctrine of free will (distinguished
> from necessitarian ).
> –adjective
> 3. advocating liberty or conforming to principles of liberty.
> 4. maintaining the doctrine of free will.
None of these categories are sufficient to epitomise that which they
seek to define, and none of them come close to the definition of
Libertarianism which is a political movement.
>
>
>
> > >The really stupid people are those who delude themselves into
> > >believing BigGovernment will protect them from rich people. How has
> > >that been working out for you?
>
> > Better than it was under George Bush. Now if we could only get the
> > conservatives to stop obstructing everything the progressives want to
> > do.
>
> Evidently progressives have a problem with the notion of liberty.
>
> Wasn’t America supposed to be about limited government?If you think
> liberty is better than forced obedience help get people back their
> ability to make choices for themselves instead of having them imposed.
> Laws steal choices. They make you obey. It’s like being told where to
> sit on the bus. Laws make you do things you would not want to do if
> you were free. In today’s political environment all other political
> parties legislate to prohibit and limit choices for some people and
> mandate the choices of others. Was it meant to be this way? What can
> be more valuable than choice? What do you have when you have no
> choice? www.ny.lp.org/choice
chazwin
> jheard wrote
>
> > Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote
> >> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
> >> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint that controls health care costs.
>
> Mindlessly silly. All services aint the same, stupid.
What he implies about the link between Somalia and Libertarianism is
true.
IN a richer country such as the USA a comparison between ancient Rome
might be more appropriate. No tax, massive polarisation of wealth,
privatised everything including the army, ability to sell yourself and
others - hence slavery, total free market, thus rich move to control
all resources. - Nice!
chazwin
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:15:26 -0800, Werner wrote:
> >> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:22:48 -0800, Werner wrote:
> >> > On Nov 21, 1:33 pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> >> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>
> >> > runs out of other people's money.
>
> >> Liar. ..
>
> >http://www.usdebtclock.org/
> >http://home.att.net/~mwhodges/debt.htm
>
> >> >> controls health care costs.
>
> >> > bankrupting gummints?
>
> >> LIAR. No government has ever gone bankrupt or is even close to going
> >> bankrupt because of Medicare or Medicaid.
>
> > Medicare and Medicaid for the old an poor are bankrupting governments
> > right now.
>
> <<<<<<<<< stoooopid trash deleted as totally pointless >>>>>>>>>
>
> The creator of money cannot run out of money any more than the sea can
> run out of salt. Money is what the kings men will take instead of taking
> your chickens. And taxation is what gives money its value.
But you can make money from anything. Let's look at Zimbabwe. Mugabe
has answered the dreams of all his countrymen. In fact he has exceeded
their wildest dreams. They all wanted to be millionaires. Mugabe has
gone further and made them all trillionaires !!!
Does that count as "running out of money"?
>
> --
> "Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson
chazwin
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:41:40 -0800, Werner wrote:
> > On Nov 21, 3:29 pm, Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:15:26 -0800, Werner wrote:
> >> > On Nov 21, 3:01 pm, Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> >> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:22:48 -0800, Werner wrote:
> >> >> > On Nov 21, 1:33 pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>
> >> >> > No, libertarians want limited government because BigGovernment
> >> >> > always runs out of other people's money.
>
> >> >> Liar. ..
>
> >> >http://www.usdebtclock.org/
> >> >http://home.att.net/~mwhodges/debt.htm
>
> >> >> >> If you prefer living in a rich country then you want a gummint
> >> >> >> that controls health care costs.
>
> >> >> > How has that been working out in Medicare and Medicaid which has
> >> >> > been bankrupting gummints?
>
> >> >> LIAR. No government has ever gone bankrupt or is even close to
> >> >> going bankrupt because of Medicare or Medicaid.
>
> >> > Medicare and Medicaid for the old an poor are bankrupting governments
> >> > right now.
>
> >> <<<<<<<<< stoooopid trash deleted as totally pointless >>>>>>>>>
>
> >> The creator of money cannot run out of money any more than the sea can
> >> run out of salt. Money is what the kings men will take instead of
> >> taking your chickens. And taxation is what gives money its value.
>
> >> "Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson
>
> > the difference between money and wealth. They are not the same.
>
> You are a lying pig according to wikipedia. Zimbabwe has been very hard
> hit by drought and human rights violations over the last 10 years. As
> such, the people are destitute.
I think you are missing out on the key reason for the economic
decline; that is turfing off the 4000 experienced famers from their
lands and giving to the people without any help training of advice;
this has led to it becoming a net importer of grain where once it
exported it; tobacco production has dropped by a third as has many
other crops other the last eight years since the land 'reform'.
chazwin
> "Sean" <h...@home.net> wrote in message
>
> news:4b087bfd$0$14606$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Bret Cahill" <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:363df88a-852c-4f33...@g22g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> >> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>
> >> controls health care costs.
>
>
> > NO no no ... YOU want a Government, a Public Service, and Democratic
> > Institutions that are all rationally committed to, and then ACT to Protect
> > the Constitutional Rights and the Human Rights of the Individual against
> > the ABUSE of POWER be it by Government, Corporate, Minority Interest
> > Groups, Political Parties, or Individual Actors.
>
> > delusions that Amercia needs to Control, Manipulate or Micro-manage the
> > rest of the world according to your American Myths and collective BELIEFS
> > alone.
>
> > Applying such an attitude would automatically filter down to create a
> > cost-effective, efficient, highly Productive and equitable Heath Care
> > System for all.
>
> > <smile>
>
> Japan is not rich.
no just 4th purchasing power parity!
And a per capita GDP comparable with the EU France , Spain, UK Denmark
etc..
They are poor Socialist who make half the wages of
> Americans
Did you make that up?
and measure their houses by how many 3 by 6 ft mats it has in
> floor space.
That is because it has one of the highest population densities on
earth cramming 127 million into an area of 364,000sq km.
Whereas the USA has only 307million across 9,800,000 sqkm.
A 6 mat house is huge to them. And unaffordable. They have no
> heat or ac in their homes. Or insulation. And live on miso soup , and are
> in fact , robots who work and die and do nothing.
Yes and they have to eat gravel off the road for breakfast. WHen they
get up in the morning they are killed by their parents and then are
expected to work 25 hours per day 8 days a week and then clean the
septic tanks with their tongues whist eating broken glass for dinner,
and when they go to bed, 4 hours before they wake up, the police kill
them again then jump up and down on their graves singing Banzai!!!!!
chazwin
> you are all going to die
true
chazwin
> On Nov 21, 5:02 pm, hal wrote:
>
>
>
> > ...
>
> > Capitalists have proven repeatedly that government intervention is
> > required for the well being of The People. There is no refuting the
> > evil that capitalism will bring on citizens all in the name of
> > profits, and that government regulation of industry is absolutely
> > essential.
>
> Without profit people wouldn't have industry.
That is not indispute.
And if government was
> any good at regulating why is the country in such bad shape?
That is because the USA has failed to deal with foreign competition.
serives
Start by
> looking at government schools for poor examples of regulation. Then
> pick something else government does. Post office, AMTRAK, Medicare,
> welfare, and the list goes on.
Most examples of gov. control provide excellent examples of good
services provided with minimal cost. If you choose to judge them by
the profit motive then they are all shit including the army and fire-
service.
chazwin
Wrong. The reason it is slammed is because it is run as a service but
not for profit.
Any twat can double or triple the cost of postage, and cut the number
of staff to 20% of its former size, but don't expect to get any letter
through your door if you live at the top of a hill, live out of town
or on the other side of a river.
The government postal services have had to compete with a myriad of
courier companies that have taken all the best and most profitable
routes, whilst continuing to deliver to hard to get to places for the
price of a stamp. At the same time the Internet and other electronic
services have lowered the bulk of their supply.
chazwin
Mickey is rich enough to buy his own personal MRI scanner, and
surgical team.
John Galt
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:33:35 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
>> controls health care costs.
>
> be "libertarian", and into free markets and small government and such,
> but gladly allow the ultra wealthy elite
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/paranoia
JG
to have total control over
> everything. I don't get it. Could it because they're stupid?
>
>>
>> Bret Cahill
>>
>
hal
AHA ! Screwed up, eh?
>
>Jim
>
>
miles
> Wrong. The reason it is slammed is because it is run as a service but
> not for profit.
Up until the 1970's the postal service most certainly did run maintain
itself through its own revenues. It's own revenues were used to improve
equipment and service and sustain itself. Todays postal service is run
amok. It can't come close to compete with FedEx and UPS for package
service and standard mail has been largely replaced with email and other
electronic means cutting into revenues. Private industry is far more
efficient.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> jheard wrote
>>> Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote
>>>> If you are a libertarian then you want the low tax Somalia model.
>>>> If you prefer living in a rich country then you
>>>> want a gummint that controls health care costs.
>>> If government is better at providing health care services,
>>> then it should provide all necessaryservices.
>> Mindlessly silly. All services aint the same, stupid.
> What he implies about the link between Somalia and Libertarianism is true.
Yes, which is why I didnt comment on that bit. I only commented on the later silly claim by someone else.
> IN a richer country such as the USA a comparison between ancient Rome might be more appropriate.
Nope, its nothing even remotely resembling anything like that now.
> No tax,
Clearly nothing like the US now.
> massive polarisation of wealth,
Arguable.
> privatised everything including the army,
Mindlessly silly. The army and medicare and social security and
the cops and the judiciary and public schools aint been privatised.
> ability to sell yourself and others - hence slavery,
Even sillier.
> total free market,
Nothing like reality. Even HongKong before it was handed back to China wasnt that.
> thus rich move to control all resources.
Like hell they do today.
> - Nice!
Just a silly little fantasy.
Beam Me Up Scotty
And yet they fight to keep you out...?
I wonder why that is?
Rod Speed
> Werner <whetz...@mac.com> wrote
>> hal wrote
>>> Capitalists have proven repeatedly that government intervention is
>>> required for the well being of The People. There is no refuting the
>>> evil that capitalism will bring on citizens all in the name of profits,
>>> and that government regulation of industry is absolutely essential.
>> Without profit people wouldn't have industry.
> That is not indispute.
>> And if government was any good at regulating why is the country in such bad shape?
> That is because the USA has failed to deal with foreign competition.
Nope. Because there wasnt adequate regulation of the banking industry.