Race for the presidency political discussion thread

[Gulp]

Originally Posted by SuperflyTNT

I guess that if you put my strong moral values on erring on the side of life whenever possible aside I can <<sort of>> understand the argument of choice in a free society.

That being said, I guess my largest fear, being the absolute paranoid when it comes to our bloated, intrusive government, is that since it's legal to destroy one's own flesh and blood anyhow, and since technology/knowledge is advancing at such a pace that the wisdom to apply said technology/knowledge is not yet mature, I am worried about 'engineering' the society. With genetic testing becoming cheaper and more effective at determining so many traits I can see a near future where parents will destroy children that do not live up to their standard or have undesirable traits. This could, if systemic and culturally acceptable, literally extinct certain traits, which make us individuals.

That's my 2c...

That's certainly a valid concern. Hopefully the government that first has to make that choice is comprised of people who value a healthy debate. I hope that exactly the concern you are expressing is what will become the "green movement" [or insert any other possible fad movement] of that time. While those fad movements have their drawbacks, such as the obvious one that people just weren't too serious, they also do well to hyper-educate groups of people on issues. Afterward, it's usually not a back-to-zero move.

Hopefully a balance will be made where we strike the bad stuff from our DNA and decide that choosing traits we personally desire may not be advantageous or desirable. No one wants their child to be a cookie cut from some boring dough. At least I hope not.

[InfinityMax]

Originally Posted by Gulp

This abortion issue is very interesting, and as I said, I'm still trying to figure out where the edges of my reasoning lie. A one month old isn't going to know it's being killed. It doesn't feel right though, and I can definitely see how a religious person could have strong feelings about this (meaning that there is already a good argument that can be built without using religious beliefs; a combo of the two would be very powerful).

If you remove even a secular view of the sanctity of life from the equation, then you start sounding like a cruel futuristic society where fetuses are killed nonchalantly as needed. Perhaps in such a futuristic society there is a completely rational reason for having complete control over reproduction. We're obviously not at such a point yet.

I'm not yet convinced that a 3-week-old fetus has rights that outweigh the mother's, and I'm also not convinced that there's some great vague loss to to society because of it.

I can see the value in a 'free society,' but then again, I don't think abortion has any place in a society that got its start by stating unequivocally that all men are entitled to certain unalienable rights, the first of which is life. I grant that the wording is 'men', which implies adult males, but I also think that we can agree that limiting unalienable rights to adult males was probably not what they meant. However, I did not see 'life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, and no messy babies if you just wanted to get laid.' One of the two documents upon which our nation was founded states that everyone has a right to live; it does NOT presume an unalienable right to avoid discomfort as a consequence of your actions.

As far as sounding like a cruel futuristic society where fetuses are killed nonchalantly as needed - that may be cruel, but it's not futuristic. That's what we have now. A woman can literally go into a clinic, say she doesn't want to have her baby, and it's gone, just like that, with no explanation needed. Sure, the procedure is unpleasant, so 'just like that' may be an exaggeration, but the fact remains that the cruel futuristic society you describe is what we have now.

I'm not arguing this from the standpoint of a loss to society in terms of not having that unwanted baby around. I'm arguing a loss to society where we are willing to accept the death of an unborn child as a form of retroactive birth control. A society where we willingly allow women to abort their baby as needed - or not even as needed, but just 'as wanted' - is already cruel. And worse, such a society has abandoned any pretense of personal responsibility, and it is my belief that forcing people to accept more responsibility for their actions would result in a stronger society. Therefore, the 'loss to society' stems not from the loss of a potential taxpayer, but from the psychological and moral damage that we suffer from allowing what should be untenable to any champion of social justice.

Now, I understand completely the desire to allow a woman to make that choice for herself. As a man, I don't have to carry that baby for nine months, have it screw up my body chemistry and give me stretch marks that I carry to my grave (for that, I have beer). So I don't want to sound like I have any animosity toward people for having an opposing viewpoint. But I still think it's wrong. In my opinion, a woman's right to choose was exercised when she chose to engage in behavior whose sole biological purpose is to create life, and after that, it's too late to choose. That woman made her choice already. If you don't want to be saddled with the child, put it up for adoption. Don't kill it because you don't want to deal with the pregnancy. In fact, I completely fail to understand how it can be OK to kill the baby when adoption exists as an alternative. Having a nagging wife who spends all your money lasts for your whole life, but you don't get to kill her because she's inconvenient (this sentence is completely tongue-in-cheek. Don't bother to include it in a counter-argument, except maybe for humor's sake).

Another clarification-slash-extension of my argument comes from an extension of that right to life. Some people argue that the debate hinges on the point where life begins. However, I say that's irrelevant - even if 'life' hasn't begun, if you abort that fetus, you deny its right to life before it even gets to have a life. Even if the baby doesn't have a heartbeat just yet, it will, and if you terminate that fetus once you know it's there, you are preventing that heartbeat from developing, and thus depriving a human being its right to life. Regardless of the stage of development, once you know life is there (even in the form of a cluster of rapidly growing cells), it is a violation of that life's unalienable right to exist. And before I get called out on it, that life may not be sentient yet, but it will be, and so you shouldn't kill it before it has a chance to be mortally embarrassed for peeing its pants in kindergarten.

One more thing:

The child has no personality, no soul, and no idea that it is even alive.

There is no possible way to verify the lack of personality, soul or self-awareness. Just because the heart has not started beating or the lungs started heaving, does that mean that whatever is there has no soul? How do you know? I don't know that it does have a soul or personality, but I would rather err on the side of caution.

OK, one more thing after that.

I have two kids. I know full well that pregnancy is not simply an 'inconvenience.' It is a genuine, full-blown, unmitigated trainwreck - and that's just for the dude. Women have it bad. Pregnancy is incredibly unpleasant. But unless you were raised by wolves, you know danged well what happens when you do the horizontal no-pants romance dance, and if you're not prepared to accept that end result, you have no business taking your pants off in the first place.

[Gulp]

Originally Posted by InfinityMax

But unless you were raised by wolves

Ahh, there's my misunderstanding.

Question: How easy is it for a woman to obtain birth control? If she has no insurance, how much is it going to cost?

Imax, as my question implies, I am capable of being swayed to the idea that complete easily available birth control with no chance of failing (due to missing a day, etc.) is a strong argument for saying that an abortion is unwarranted due to the ease of avoidance.

However, I think the 'life, liberty' argument is a bit too literalistic for me. I don't know that they were thinking of fetuses. I believe they were thinking of people that have the ability to make choices. Even if they were thinking of fetuses, I don't know that that changes my mind specifically.

[Sweetcurse]

Originally Posted by Fezzikthedoor

Sweet, writing--

and--

sounds an awful lot like you are saying, "I don't know how to open this box, so lets break it and see what happens. If you ask me how I'll actually keep the box together after I break it, you're just trying to trick me and I'm not going to play along because I don't make boxes." SMASH-O!!!

Ok, quite a bit late I agree. So bite me for not having enough time. Either I'm stupid or you're deaf. I didn't say let's implement and then see what happens like idiots. I said, quite honestly and self depreciatingly, that I do not hold the precise answers, that is why I'm no politician. That I don't know the specifics on how, but that I do know this: Providing (through taxes sure so bite me 'small government man') for healthcare, higher education (all the way to university level) fire safety and police services is the very least a government should do with our money. Countries we "hate" like Cuba do, so why not us? That is all I said there buster. Lemme rephrase. I don't know exactly how, but we MUST make sure our taxes cover at least this: healthcare, education and other basic needs. If I knew the specifics on how I probably wouldn't teach during the day and wait tables at night.

Very well. Let's test your commitment to this theory, hey? You're ok with $7,200 dollars. How about 10k? Still good? Alright. How about 15k? 20? What if you're in great health and don't want anything other than "oh s**t" coverage for big stuff because you're happy to sit out the flu without visiting a doc? Still willing to pay 20 grand a year? Maybe you are. Me, not so much.

Gimme a break, you're being silly here and you know it. If taxes to cover health care were that much higher then we wouldn't be the only first world country who doesn't. Now, not only do I pay that, but that much more on copays, deductibles and other nonsense, not to mention I would have to fall on charity should I not be able to cover my yearly premiums.

Truth is, no one knows how much a full-on system in the U.S. would cost, how it would affect the quality of care, nor how it might impact the one great advantage we have over all the socialized systems in the world, which is that of medical technology innovation. According to what you wrote, though, we can't ask you to give us any ideas since we might ridicule said idea or argument.

Except, ALL European first world countries do provide this and aren't bankrupt mister blindman. It's doable...except we didn't come up with it and so we hate to admit it's a great idea.

You say its broken. Agreed. Tell us what you think is good, what is bad, and give some ways to fix it. Then, once we've hammered all this out on the boards, contact your congressman, senators, and local state officials and tell them what you think we should do. Write them an honest-to-god letter, because that impresses them a heck of a lot more than an off-the-cuff e-mail.

PPFFFTTT. So if I don't provide you with evidence that I have pestered my rep with this so my opinions are worthless. Don't be nearsighted, our system sucks and we need something proven to work, like the European model. But yes I know, God forbid we are wrong and the French right huh?

That last bit goes for all of us. Maybe you could go back a few pages to where the campaign finance stuff was and take notes for your letter. Talk is cheap. Do something.

No it isn't. Talk is all I have. We need a heath care reform that covers everyone because providing health to all all is right, and good and Christian to do. And I'm all about that.

[Sweetcurse]

Originally Posted by SuperflyTNT

Sweetcurse, feel free to Negrep me. It would be incredibly painful for me to care any less about those little squares below my board statistics. I'm just calling a spade a spade, no more, no less.

I do apologize if I offended you, and apparently one other person was insulted as well - he came galloping in to tell me not to do it anymore. This was not in any way my intent. I should have rather not stated that YOU are unhinged, but just that your statements are unhinged and completely without merit, for the most part. I do wonder if Aldin has healthcare...if so that's one person you know out of thousands, huh?

You did offend me...and you should be sorry. Sorry because you support an idiotic model that doesn't provide first world health care to all. If it were left to you all those who don't prove worthy would be left to die, and good riddance, you self righteous little boy. What statements by me on healthcare are unhinged? Those that refer to the fact that we all deserve the peace of mind of being fully covered of sickness? Or those that imply that health care for all is a right you "fascist pig?" Hurts huh?

As far as the 9 out of 10, well forgive me for knowing so many people who are poor. Just because you don't want to hear it or your numbers do not allow it doesn't make your fantasy land of insurance true.

I guess you just happen to live in a place where everyone decided that they don't want free services. Check out http://www.hhsc.state.tx.us/medicaid/index.html since there is Medicaid in every state in the union. Don't you work in schools? Try some self-education. It's brilliant:

In Texas, every child under the age of 18 whose household makes 50K or less (with 2 kids) is eligible for CHIP, which is 50$ a year. A family of 2 with an income of 30K is also eligible...for the single parents. Wow, that's a nice little salary, and not poor at all.

Let's talk about ADULTS now. All you need to do in the state of Texas is dial 2-1-1. They can help any TRULY poor people find all kinds of help like:

Food
Shelter
Child care
After-school programs
Senior services
Disaster relief
Tax assistance
And State Benefits like:
Food Stamps
Medicaid
Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families

Wow...that's pretty tough for a TRULY poor family to do, go to a payphone and dial a FREE phone number to get FREE services. Maybe it's because they don't speak english? Maybe its' because they're not even citizens (I know houston WELL). That's OK, because they have bilingual agents on the phone and ALL kids qualify, not just American kids.

So you defend your antiuniversal health care plan ideals by bringing up a wonderful socialist system? You are the saddest being I have ever encountered if so, and the most self centered, regardless of what your tithing says. Yes, Texas has some wonderful socialist programs...now let's extend them to all who pay taxes , like me. You are so blind you don't stop to realize your ideals were so low they de-humanaize good people.

I talk about what I know, what I see, not what I read in some internet portal. I'm talking to you about cold hard facts and you insult me for them.

Um, I'm a salesman and I see at least 20 people every single day. I don't need to see some 'internet portal' (Uh, I think you meant "US Government Sites" but that's splitting hairs) to know what's going on. I don't insult you for having cold, hard facts because I don't believe that you have any. I insulted your arguments for what I believe them to be - false. Not only that, but with just ONE Google Search I both found a ton of ways for your "poor" friends to get relief AND showed that they are all available FREE. I agree our system has many problems, just we disagree on the solution.

Exactly you...sir. There are programs available to those in need and they are wonderfully human, that is why we ALL deserve them, even you you monster.

Like where? Let's hear it! Let's see about all these countries you have such a wealth of knowledge of! If you know nothing about the facts of our system, then how is it you are a veritable cornucopia of facts on other countries? And seeing as there's 50+ third world countries (some of which I've been to..) I would guess that 26 of them must have better programs than here (that would be MOST, right, more than 50%).

MANY 3rd world countries have systems where no one who gets sick with cancer has to worry about medical care.

You're right - they don't have to worry because the conditions are so poor they resign themselves to painful deaths. No worries!

Furthermore, all the countries that rank higher than us in standard of living have some form of socialized health care and they aren't bankrupt.

I had to purchase a separate cancer insurance to be guaranteed coverage if I get sick with cancer. THAT IS WORSE THAN MANY THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES, COUNTRIES WHERE OVER HALF OF THE POPULATION DOESN’T PAY TAXES OFTEN.

Yes, but the likelihood of you getting hacked to death by some native with a machete is also much higher. Here, at least, you can get a JOB and pay taxes rather than sit in a mudhut and wait to die of something other than natural causes (because with the insurance/medical programs there you don't die of them...right?) Seems like a good tradeoff - get to have a job, make a living, and pay for your own insurance (or get it free if you're too poor) -OR- live in a mudhut and live in fear of machetes, druglords, or dysentary. Hey, I have an idea - you're in Houston. If it's so great in 3rd world countries then swim across the Gulf and live it up in Mexico! Oh, wait...people go from there to HERE for a better life...guess they haven't heard about our lack of good medical care! Oh...wait....then why would they come here to have babies?!?!? I just don't get it...

it is the narrow mindedness and selfishness of people like you who can't fathom the idea that we live in a world with others and that we have a moral and ethical responsibility to help each other.

Alright, now you have me. I am just so selfish...I volunteer at my daughter's school, and at Girl Scouts, and at Church (where I tithe), and I help my disabled Vet friend out when I can, and I put money on the books for my friends in prison....man, what a selfish bastard I am. Oh, and I work 2 jobs, raise my family of 4 on my own income, have never taken a DIME of anything since I became an adult...Oh, did I forget that I volunteered in a soup kitchen in Portland for a year? Oh...man. I should go slice my jugular right now. Oh, and I pay 20 Thousand a year it Taxes to boot! WOW! I am such a miscreant.

Look, I agree that everyone should have some form of healthcare. That we can find common ground on.

I'm happy to read that, there may yet be hope for you.

My point is that if it is administered by the government we will have HORRIBLE service, like those other countries with 'higher standards of living' (which I dispute since I'd think the best standard would be keeping what I earn, less fair taxes).



BS and you know it. Every Euro country higher than us in the standard of living chart has proved it...it's doable. Having our taxes pay for it doesn't mean it's auto government run. I simply means they pay for it...not run it.

But I see it, you said it yourself, you have no education and what you have has cost you much so you think only of yourself, otherwise you wouldn’t have survived and be where you are now.

No, I said I dropped out of high school. I have a wonderful education. I was on house arrest for a year and I sat and read 2 sets of encyclopedias as well as an array of classic literature. And comic books.[/quote]


Ok, I admit, usually reading that many funny books auto credits you as smarter than more than 80% of world population.

And economic books. And YES, I earned every single penny I've ever had and I have NEVER taken a thing back from it. Am I to be ashamed that I think my money should go where I want it to go rather than have YOU and your kind tell me where it should go? How about I pay 4000$ a year to my church and they fund a private hospital where everyone is welcome. Why does the government have to take all the dough?

My kind? Don't hate me out of the gate. C'mon. hear me out. Even a heartless ( ) SOB like you can concede that if a person pays his/her taxes he can rest assured he isn't going to die because he hasn't paid his premium right?

With that, I am SO done. The flame war has ended. Truce.[/quote]

I SOOOO want to like you because you're so smart...just admit that we all deserve that piece of mind and I can calmly invite you to Thanksgiving.

Ok, a bit, or rather TOO much about Sweetcurse. Who is Sweetcurse? Man have I been afraid to post this. Mainly because I want to be liked. But also because I fear ridicule. But you know? "Here goes nothing."

Ok, I'm loath to admit this (for my wife, who doesn't approve)...but here goes. Sweetcurse is VERY, VERY AMERICAN. His wife would kill him for saying so but he IS! More so than most here. Why? Because he CHOSE to be. Yes, I CHOSE to be. Gosh darn I love this place. I chose to live here and no ONE made me. Sure I believe God led me here, but in the end I chose to be here. I feel more American than most because I bleed for this country. Want to know why I work two jobs? Because I love the US. Yes, I love it that much that I have put my wife and child through the rigors of immigration. All those of you who easily say "get in line to be legal" have no idea what that means. It means I cannot afford it, yet I do it, even though I keep getting kicked in the groin for trying to stay legal. It is so darn expensive I had to take a second job to cover the expenses. I work 7...yes 7 days a week, 12 hour shifts so I can pay to be legally here. I feel that entitles me to a few words, and some of those are how I loath that back home (Mexico, yes SuperFlyTNT, I admit it though I fear to) I could have been fully covered, as well as in Europe, while here I have to endure the criticism of those like you who seem to would rather die the give up a penny to make sure everyone is provided for, to do the right thing for all.

Why say all this now? Because I have lived...for more than 18 years in a third world country and I know this...and it saddens me.. That I had an exponentially better health care coverage there than I do here...where I do live happier, sure, except for a full health coverage.. Had I that, my life would be fulfilled.

I believe in this country more than any other, hence my efforts, especially after selecting Obama, that it has the capacity to do the right thing; And as far as a health care is concerned, I know what it should be and I DREAM it comes to fruition.

[Agent Minivann]

Originally Posted by SuperflyTNT

That being said, I guess my largest fear, being the absolute paranoid when it comes to our bloated, intrusive government, is that since it's legal to destroy one's own flesh and blood anyhow, and since technology/knowledge is advancing at such a pace that the wisdom to apply said technology/knowledge is not yet mature, I am worried about 'engineering' the society. With genetic testing becoming cheaper and more effective at determining so many traits I can see a near future where parents will destroy children that do not live up to their standard or have undesirable traits. This could, if systemic and culturally acceptable, literally extinct certain traits, which make us individuals.

Unintended consequences are a real possibility with an engineered society. I can't think of which off the top of my head, but there was a very undesirable condition whose gene ended up providing an immunity to a disease. In my mind it could be very possible to have a Gattaca type of situation turn into a massive disaster when some new health condition pops up.

Originally Posted by Gulp

Question: How easy is it for a woman to obtain birth control? If she has no insurance, how much is it going to cost?

As far as buying the birth control, it can be done for $4 at Walmart. We've had $10 and $15 copays with insurance in the past.

[Hahma]

Originally Posted by Sweetcurse

Ok, a bit, or rather TOO much about Sweetcurse. Who is Sweetcurse? Man have I been afraid to post this. Mainly because I want to be liked. But also because I fear ridicule. But you know? "Here goes nothing."

Ok, I'm loath to admit this (for my wife, who doesn't approve)...but here goes. Sweetcurse is VERY, VERY AMERICAN. His wife would kill him for saying so but he IS! More so than most here. Why? Because he CHOSE to be. Yes, I CHOSE to be. Gosh darn I love this place. I chose to live here and no ONE made me. Sure I believe God led me here, but in the end I chose to be here. I feel more American than most because I bleed for this country. Want to know why I work two jobs? Because I love the US. Yes, I love it that much that I have put my wife and child through the rigors of immigration. All those of you who easily say "get in line to be legal" have no idea what that means. It means I cannot afford it, yet I do it, even though I keep getting kicked in the groin for trying to stay legal. It is so darn expensive I had to take a second job to cover the expenses. I work 7...yes 7 days a week, 12 hour shifts so I can pay to be legally here. I feel that entitles me to a few words, and some of those are how I loath that back home (Mexico, yes SuperFlyTNT, I admit it though I fear to) I could have been fully covered, as well as in Europe, while here I have to endure the criticism of those like you who seem to would rather die the give up a penny to make sure everyone is provided for, to do the right thing for all.

Why say all this now? Because I have lived...for more than 18 years in a third world country and I know this...and it saddens me.. That I had an exponentially better health care coverage there than I do here...where I do live happier, sure, except for a full health coverage.. Had I that, my life would be fulfilled.

I believe in this country more than any other, hence my efforts, especially after selecting Obama, that it has the capacity to do the right thing; And as far as a health care is concerned, I know what it should be and I DREAM it comes to fruition.

Hey Sweetcurse, I would certainly hope that nobody would suddenly dislike or ridicule you for being an immigrant and wanting to live here. Myself and very few if any here, honestly don't know what it's like to become a legal citizen here, but I'm sure it's not easy. Many of us came from immigrant parents, grandparents or great grandparents, I would imagine though that the process of becoming a U.S. citizen is more difficult now than it was in the early twentieth century.

I would certainly like a better healthcare system as well. I don't pretend to have the answers but I'm sure that there's a way to come up with a viable universal heathcare system that is better than those in other countries. I would bet that we are already paying in many ways for what we could get in a universal healthcare system. People with insurance pay into that, we pay taxes that help cover some social health programs for children, medicare, and taxes that help cover indigent people. So one way or another we're already paying for others, but I think there should be a way to be more efficient and provide better healthcare for all.

Some hospitals don't have to take indigents or uninsured unless it's life threatening. But there are so many other reasons people need to go to the hospital that aren't on death's doorstep at that moment. The hospital that I started working at a few months ago takes ANYONE, no matter what. We have two main hospitals under one name, with one in a city that not only has a lot of trauma cases (violent crime, expressway accidents, steel mill accidents) as well as a lot of indigents. The one that I work at has less trauma and less indigents, but has it's share. We also have a lot of long-term care patients and we are one of the best neurological care hospitals in the country.

The idea of the government screwing things up if they ran it is easy to say, but may not be true. The place I work at is run by boards of directors and a CEO. We're under new management now because the previous management, mismanaged things to the point that there was rumors of closure several years ago. A new turnaround team was brought in a couple years ago to save it and has recently turned it over to a new CEO and management team. So the government doesn't have exclusivity to mismanaging and screwing things up.

Now part of the problem that our hospital management has to deal with is the fact that we have to take care of so many indigent people. Oh, and believe me, these are mostly wonderful people and deserve the care everyone else gets. Rich or poor, we all look like crap warmed over when we are in a hospital gown and being wheeled through the hallways on a gurney. Anyway, our hospital loses millions a year due to unrecovered expenses due to treating uninsured patients. We get some help from the state (I don't know about federal) in reimbursements, but the state doesn't try to run the hospital just because it's providing some money. We are subject of course to state agencies periodically dropping in for an inspection to make certain that we abide by certain standards of care, including safety, maintenance, nursing procedures and accounting procedures. This isn't like them (the state) running the hospital, it's just making sure that we meet certain standards in order to receive the funding that is required. There are so many ways funds can be mismanaged (on purpose and accidently) in hospitals, that someone needs to make sure that things are done the most efficiently while also providing the best possible care to the patients.

I've talked to doctors at other hospitals that don't deal in the indigent situation that we do, and they say that even their hospitals don't make as much as people think. There's a very fine line sometimes between making and losing money. Projects to improve the hospital are often planned to be started, but sometimes have to be put off to the following year or two because something comes up and there's not money for the planned project.

Anyway, I'm off to work.

I hope things get easier for you Sweetcurse

[SuperflyTNT]

Originally Posted by InfinityMax

There is no possible way to verify the lack of personality, soul or self-awareness. Just because the heart has not started beating or the lungs started heaving, does that mean that whatever is there has no soul? How do you know? I don't know that it does have a soul or personality, but I would rather err on the side of caution.

Sorry, Imax, but you're off on this one . Children in the womb absolutely DO have a personality. My first daughter used to wiggle and kick whenever Bob Marley would be on the stereo, and would stop moving when operatic music was on. My youngest used to 'track' my wife's hand - literally touching where my wife touched, only on the inside. Amazing, but creepy.

So, I wold argue that children in the womb definately have a personality.

[Gulp]

Originally Posted by SuperflyTNT

[
Sorry, Imax, but you're off on this one . Children in the womb absolutely DO have a personality. My first daughter used to wiggle and kick whenever Bob Marley would be on the stereo, and would stop moving when operatic music was on. My youngest used to 'track' my wife's hand - literally touching where my wife touched, only on the inside. Amazing, but creepy.

So, I wold argue that children in the womb definitely have a personality.

I'm talking about when a child is not viable, 2-3 months, for example.

[Fezzikthedoor]

Hey, better late than never, even if your reply does seem testier than my left nut. On to the joy!

Originally Posted by Sweetcurse

That I don't know the specifics on how, but that I do know this: Providing (through taxes sure so bite me 'small government man') for healthcare, higher education (all the way to university level) fire safety and police services is the very least a government should do with our money. Countries we "hate" like Cuba do, so why not us? That is all I said there buster. Lemme rephrase. I don't know exactly how, but we MUST make sure our taxes cover at least this: healthcare, education and other basic needs.

I don't think it has anything to do with avoiding being like countries we hate, but it does come down to the fundamental question, I think, which is whether or not it is the role of a centralized government to provide these things. The thing that I've tried to explain to all my friends across the pond and in other parts of the world is that unlike most of thier countries, our nation was fouded with one of its main principles being that government is a necessary evil, not to be trusted except in a few tightly defined areas, and generally more of an impediment to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness than its provider. If we have decided that the role of our elected officials is to make sure that we are taken care of in this manner, so be it, but to point to other countries, let alone one that is ruled by a thug and where hundreds of thousands have risked life and limb--not to mention their state-provided health care--to get here is a weak argument, I think.

And don't call me buster, please. Fezzik, Mr. Adams, or "hey douchebag" will all do just fine.

Gimme a break, you're being silly here and you know it. If taxes to cover health care were that much higher then we wouldn't be the only first world country who doesn't. Now, not only do I pay that, but that much more on copays, deductibles and other nonsense, not to mention I would have to fall on charity should I not be able to cover my yearly premiums.

As a matter of fact, I am not being silly here, whether you know it or not. All government services are a trade off of either individual freedom or monentary wealth in the form of taxes. As everyone knows, that is the Faustonian bargain made when forming a society--while you no longer have absolute freedom the gains of not having to worry (well, so much)about someone else clubbing you and taking your things outweighs the ability, say, to waggle your junk in front of grandmothers. What I want to know is where you think the balance is struck, because once you take a stand on that we can debate whether or not the cost is too high. If you are unwilling to even look at the potential cost, then no, I can't take you too seriously, because you're just spouting pie-in-the-sky utopian gibberish.

Your other points, though, are valid and I would only answer them by saying that despite the state of our health care system, tens of millions of people are able to get by just fine. That isn't to say that the system doesn't need reform, but we aren't anywhere near Ragnagarok yet, either.

Except, ALL European first world countries do provide this and aren't bankrupt mister blindman. It's doable...except we didn't come up with it and so we hate to admit it's a great idea.

Stunning and elequent--How can my blind ass argue? I guess I'll head down to the pub, pick up a blood pudding with my one and five dollar coins, then walk a meter or two back to my tiny little flat, since everything European works without a hitch here. Yup, everything here is just like everything everywhere else.

PPFFFTTT. So if I don't provide you with evidence that I have pestered my rep with this so my opinions are worthless. Don't be nearsighted, our system sucks and we need something proven to work, like the European model. But yes I know, God forbid we are wrong and the French right huh?

I didn't ask you for evidence, sir, I told you what was the thing to do if you are actually interested in causing change instead of just mentally masturbating on the internet with strangers. You don't like it, fine, but scoffing at the idea of involvement, essentially telling everyone else not to get involved, while reserving the right to moan about it is just about as small a thing as one can do. Nearsighted? Yes, trying to work within the system for positive change, that is just downright foolish. We need us a good dictator to set us right!

Oh, and I dig the French; they've fine desserts but the Italians still have better wine.

No it isn't. Talk is all I have. We need a heath care reform that covers everyone because providing health to all all is right, and good and Christian to do. And I'm all about that.

Talk isn't all we have, as I outlined before, and you just made your closing argument without having anything substanative (man, I think I just misspelled the heck outta that) in the middle by declaring such health care to be the good and Christian thing to do. As before, I still don't have anything approaching a real plan from you, or even any ideas on what would be a good plan other than "let's do what they do!". Forgive me for wanting more.

[Grungebob]

Word of advise here to everyone. Your accomplishments in life... Your perseverence.. The challenges you have personally overcome.. The hardships you've endured.. These things do not prove your point of view and furthermore, are absolutely unnecessary as proof of your stance on subjects.

Every time I read a long post about what trials somebody has endured and how anybody who has an opposing viewpoint must be wrong, because they haven't gone through something similar, I want to pull my eyes out. The next time I hear how somebody "pulled themselves up by bootstraps" and so everybody else should be able to, I'm going to point and groan at them.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE HAD A SPECIAL LIFE EXPERIENCE TO FORM AN OPINION.

[SuperflyTNT]

Oh wow! I didn't see the long overdue response to stuff.. wow! Glad the communist party is back in biz!

Well, all I have to say is that the opinion of someone who has the gall to say that 100% of everyone they know has NO healthcare, yet lives in a neighborhood that looks like this:
pretty much carries no substantial weight.