Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • olyclimber

      WELCOME TO THE CASCADECLIMBERS.COM FORUMS   02/03/18

      We have upgraded to new forum software as of late last year, and it makes everything here so much better!  It is now much easier to do pretty much anything, including write Trip Reports, sell gear, schedule climbing related events, and more. There is a new reputation system that allows for positive contributors to be recognized,  it is possible to tag content with identifiers, drag and drop in images, and it is much easier to embed multimedia content from Youtube, Vimeo, and more.  In all, the site is much more user friendly, bug free, and feature rich!   Whether you're a new user or a grizzled cascadeclimbers.com veteran, we think you'll love the new forums. Enjoy!
Sign in to follow this  
tvashtarkatena

Health Care

Recommended Posts

This bill is an infected bandaid. The parasitical for-profit healthcare system is still intact (if not strengthened) by this legislation. None of the underlying issues are addressed. Ten years from now, we'll need a universal single-payer system more than ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bill, i'm not going to believe its beautiful 'till it is - i think prole's right in that it'll be, at best, only a step in the right direction - mostly i hope it doesn't end up being like bush prescription drug thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I stated before, I am glad to see an attempt at moving this issue in the right direction; on the other hand I'm not convinced it is really doing much if anything to address the real problem of costs and institutional issues. Therefore what I fear is being forced to buy expensive and inadequate coverage in the future.

 

Before FW chimes in with a "told you so", this sentiment diverges from

the Republican proclamation that the bill stinks because our health care system "is the best in the world" and it works great for those who can afford it and aren't already sick.

 

My hope is that by getting more citizens insured and with continuing debate the reform process will continue to evolve according to what proves to work and what doesn't; this shouldn't by any means be the last word on this and I do hope- probably futile- that the R's will join the reality that the train is moving and will try to contribute meaningful content rather than childish obstruction and hysterical exaggeration and mischief. It won't help them or the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe its time for the posters on this thread to do as ivan suggests and play russian roulette with their posts again... i'm certain that kkk and prole would have extra holes in their heads already. :crazy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't help but to think of J_B when I read this.....

linky

 

First, partisanship undermines clear thinking. Second, it undermines moral integrity. In both cases, the root cause is the same: the conflation of friend and foe with right and wrong.

Consider this pair of poll results cited by Andrew Gelman in his wonderful book Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State. According to a survey conducted in March 2006, nearly 30 percent of Republicans believed not only that Iraq had possessed weapons of mass destruction, but that the U.S. military had actually found them. Meanwhile, in a May 2007 poll, 35 percent of Democrats expressed the view that President Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance.

It's not just that partisans are vulnerable to believing fatuous nonsense. It's that their beliefs, whether sensible or otherwise, about a whole range of empirical questions are determined by their political identity. There's no epistemologically sound reason why one's opinion about, say, the effects of gun control should predict one's opinion about whether humans have contributed to climate change or how well Mexican immigrants are assimilating -- these things have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Yet the fact is that views on these and a host of other matters are indeed highly correlated with each other. And the reason is that people start with political identities and then move to opinions about how the world works, not vice versa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sooooooo...whattaya guys think about health care passing? If you done talking about Prole sucking Hitler's cock, that is.

 

Unfortunately, much like the many congressmen who did not actually read the bill, I fall into the same camp. Still without having read the bill I feel confident in saying this: I think the process was flawed and will lead to an abortion. I rarely see any bill come out of those groups that does the good one thinks it should do. Usually, on even relatively simple bills - after years of litigation, all kinds of things get created that were not actually intended. Given the complexity's of this and how many fingers got put into the pie, I suspect that is again the case here. The process should have been a group of experts examining best practices around the world and incorporating the best of them into a completed plan for us.

 

Once the experts plan was in place, then let the politicians vote yes or no. Instead, what we had was a full carcass tossed out into a pit. The politicians all jumped in and ripped it apart here and there while adding things here and there and then the drug company's and insurance companies picked at the bones and added some excrement here and there, does anyone believe that the final product looks anything like what they started with or wanted?

 

Time will tell. Once a thing like this gets in place, even if billions of dollars are getting transferred from our pockets directly to private companies like drug and insurance concerns while we pay twice as much for half of what we should get, it will be difficult, if not impossible to change it. Maybe this is different that everything else they produce, maybe this is a good thing. Sure.

 

You asked. Have a nice day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I stated before, I am glad to see an attempt at moving this issue in the right direction; on the other hand I'm not convinced it is really doing much if anything to address the real problem of costs and institutional issues. Therefore what I fear is being forced to buy expensive and inadequate coverage in the future.

 

Before FW chimes in with a "told you so", this sentiment diverges from

the Republican proclamation that the bill stinks because our health care system "is the best in the world" and it works great for those who can afford it and aren't already sick.

 

My hope is that by getting more citizens insured and with continuing debate the reform process will continue to evolve according to what proves to work and what doesn't; this shouldn't by any means be the last word on this and I do hope- probably futile- that the R's will join the reality that the train is moving and will try to contribute meaningful content rather than childish obstruction and hysterical exaggeration and mischief. It won't help them or the country.

 

Shit, if we hadn't been typing at the same time, I could have just copied and pasted this. Well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HCR is the republican waterloo

 

When Rush Limbaugh said that he wanted President Obama to fail, he was intelligently explaining his own interests. What he omitted to say – but what is equally true – is that he also wants Republicans to fail. If Republicans succeed – if they govern successfully in office and negotiate attractive compromises out of office – Rush’s listeners get less angry. And if they are less angry, they listen to the radio less, and hear fewer ads for Sleepnumber beds.

 

:lmao:

Edited by rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And is there room for Sarah, Bill O', and Glen? Imagine, Sarah can give Rush a BJ, Rush can give Bill O' and HJ, and Bill O' can give Sarah a ZJ! What about Glen? He will just continue with his closet cocaine habit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And is there room for Sarah, Bill O', and Glen? Imagine, Sarah can give Rush a BJ, Rush can give Bill O' and HJ, and Bill O' can give Sarah a ZJ! What about Glen? He will just continue with his closet cocaine habit.

 

Beck will also be beating off in the lavatory with a picture of Sarah, in between lines. Did you see his creepy interview with her?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the healthcare bill violate the 10th ammendment?

 

Probably not. The 10th Amendment states that "[t]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." The federal government, however, can claim two Constitutional justifications for mandating health care. One is the right to regulate interstate commerce, which includes any business that operates across state lines. (Even if not all health insurance companies operate in more than one state, Congress can still regulate them as long as that regulation is part of a comprehensive interstate scheme, according to the Supreme Court.) Congress also has the Constitutional right to tax. Just as Congress taxes polluting companies for imposing a burden on other people, it could tax Americans who don't buy health insurance for doing the same. As if to emphasize the point, the fine for not buying insurance is levied by the IRS.

 

Suck it, half-assed constitutional "scholars".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't help but to think of J_B when I read this.....

linky

 

First, partisanship undermines clear thinking. Second, it undermines moral integrity. In both cases, the root cause is the same: the conflation of friend and foe with right and wrong.

Consider this pair of poll results cited by Andrew Gelman in his wonderful book Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State. According to a survey conducted in March 2006, nearly 30 percent of Republicans believed not only that Iraq had possessed weapons of mass destruction, but that the U.S. military had actually found them. Meanwhile, in a May 2007 poll, 35 percent of Democrats expressed the view that President Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance.

It's not just that partisans are vulnerable to believing fatuous nonsense. It's that their beliefs, whether sensible or otherwise, about a whole range of empirical questions are determined by their political identity. There's no epistemologically sound reason why one's opinion about, say, the effects of gun control should predict one's opinion about whether humans have contributed to climate change or how well Mexican immigrants are assimilating -- these things have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Yet the fact is that views on these and a host of other matters are indeed highly correlated with each other. And the reason is that people start with political identities and then move to opinions about how the world works, not vice versa.

 

total failure of logic on your part PP. For example, I never assume that the enemies of my enemies are my friends, but it is however what Churchill did (giving him the benefit the doubt by assuming he wasn't an outright fascist himself and was merely an opportunist) when he praised a trifecta of fascist distators because they cracked the lefties' heads. Throughout the 30's fascists showed they were no democrats by perpetrating numerous acts of violence on their political opposition. Churchill's support for the fascists that enginered ww2 has everything to do with his world view that progressives and the left were the foremeost danger at the time, and that they had to be stopped by any means available (including dictatorship, apparently).

 

bonus trivia: guess which president had a bust of Churchill in the White House?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Consider this pair of poll results cited by Andrew Gelman in his wonderful book Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State. According to a survey conducted in March 2006, nearly 30 percent of Republicans believed not only that Iraq had possessed weapons of mass destruction, but that the U.S. military had actually found them. Meanwhile, in a May 2007 poll, 35 percent of Democrats expressed the view that President Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance.

 

Note that these 2 sets of beliefs have a very different relationship to reality despite what the nutjobs at CATO say. The first one, "Iraq had WMD and we found them", has been shown to be false, although right wing media said differently on numerous occasions. The second one, Bush knowing in advance about the 9-11 attack, hasn't been verified and it is merely speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bonus trivia: guess which president had a bust of Churchill in the White House?

 

Well, we know which President sent it back to Britan anyway: INITIALS ARE BO -LINK

 

LOL I missed that! I thought it was a gift but noooo.

 

"when British officials offered to let Mr Obama to hang onto the bust for a further four years, the White House said: "Thanks, but no thanks."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Still without having read the bill I feel confident in saying this: I think the process was flawed and will lead to an abortion.

 

AND YOUR TAXDOLLA WILL PAY FOR KILLING THAT BABY, BABY!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×