|
Merry Christmas Seniors...
"thunder" wrote in message t... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:42:30 -0800, Jack wrote: On Dec 26, 11:15 am, thunder wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:12:54 -0800, Jack wrote: "His boy?" I think you mean *our* President. You can live in denial, but I'll point out Obama's main legislative agenda, health care reform, looks to be on track for passage. The recession is over and jobs *will* rebound. Not at all bad for his *first* year in office. I'm thinking Obama is becoming unstoppable. You'd better start working harder to get the word out. Your opinion is now in the overwhelming minority. LOL, more denial from the right. LOL yourself... "Overall, 44% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. The President's overall approval has stayed between 44% and 46% every day for thirteen days. Prior to that, it had stayed between 46% and 50% every day for more than two months. Fifty- six percent (56%) now disapprove of the President's performance." That bears repeating... "Fifty-six percent (56%) now disapprove of the President's performance." A 45% approval rating is not an "overwhelming minority." Republican approval ratings are approaching an overwhelming minority. http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm But then, who cares about poll numbers. At about this time in his Presidency, Reagan's approval ratings were less than 50%. He served two full terms, and many consider him to be one of the great presidents. Why is it that Dems always take their surveys at the exit points of fund raisers or free meals? Hey, just wondering. Steve |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Dec 26, 11:57*am, thunder wrote:
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:42:30 -0800, Jack wrote: On Dec 26, 11:15*am, thunder wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:12:54 -0800, Jack wrote: "His boy?" *I think you mean *our* President. *You can live in denial, but I'll point out Obama's main legislative agenda, health care reform, looks to be on track for passage. *The recession is over and jobs *will* rebound. *Not at all bad for his *first* year in office. *I'm thinking Obama is becoming unstoppable. You'd better start working harder to get the word out. *Your opinion is now in the overwhelming minority. LOL, more denial from the right. LOL yourself... "Overall, 44% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. The President’s overall approval has stayed between 44% and 46% every day for thirteen days. Prior to that, it had stayed between 46% and 50% every day for more than two months. Fifty- six percent (56%) now disapprove of the President’s performance." That bears repeating... "Fifty-six percent (56%) now disapprove of the President’s performance." A 45% approval rating is not an "overwhelming minority." *Republican approval ratings are approaching an overwhelming minority. As are the Demoncrats numbers in congress... so? We're talking about your boy, not congresscritters. Stay focused. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Dec 26, 10:54Â*am, Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 26, 10:15Â*am, "D.Duck" wrote: Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 26, 8:34 am, John H wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:21:51 -0500, Jim wrote: Harry wrote: On 12/26/09 12:20 AM, Steve B wrote: Â*wrote in message om... On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 20:23:51 -0800, "Steve B" Â*wrote: "John Â*wrote in message news:b5laj5hrbqgpego8r6tiulf9jca9k39aig@4ax .com... ...Change is coming! The NYTimes is giving seniors a Christmas present to ponder. http://tinyurl.com/yl9vumo "Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director and a disciple of the Dartmouth data, has noted. "We can no longer afford an overall health care system in which the thought is more is always better, because it's not."" Another - "Because Dartmouth's analysis focuses solely on patients who have died, a case like Mr. Putrus's would not show up in its data. That is why critics say Dartmouth's approach takes an overly pessimistic view of medicine: if you consider only the patients who die, there is really no way to know whether it makes sense to spend more on one case than another." A preview of things to come? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H If they were serious about saving money, wouldn't they just all get on a conference call instead of flying their jets to Denmark to schmooze around? Barry has some expensive tastes, and so does Michelle. Steve Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as Germany so nobody had to share a ride. Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. Â*It's just not done. I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was spent on that extravaganza. BTW, what's a caviar wedge? Â*I understand they ate a lot of caviar. Â*That would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters. I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too. Nothing too good for our tax dollars. Steve Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time? Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled higher than republican/conservative b.s. Nothing except the burgeoning public debt. Did someone justify Obama's spending using Bush as a rationale? How silly. -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Ever hear of the word "precedent"? It's used legally binding all of the time. Can you clarify?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes: precâ‹…eâ‹…dent  /n. ˈprÉ›sɪdÉ™nt; adj. prɪˈsidnt, ˈprÉ›sɪdÉ™nt/ Â*Show Spelled Pronunciation [n. pres-i-duhnt; adj. pri-seed-nt, pres-i-duhnt] Â*Show IPA –noun 1. Law. a legal decision or form of proceeding serving as an authoritative rule or pattern in future similar or analogous cases.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So if the person in front of you jumps off a cliff, then it's OK for you to do it too? |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
Jack wrote:
On Dec 26, 11:57 am, thunder wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:42:30 -0800, Jack wrote: On Dec 26, 11:15 am, thunder wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:12:54 -0800, Jack wrote: "His boy?" I think you mean *our* President. You can live in denial, but I'll point out Obama's main legislative agenda, health care reform, looks to be on track for passage. The recession is over and jobs *will* rebound. Not at all bad for his *first* year in office. I'm thinking Obama is becoming unstoppable. You'd better start working harder to get the word out. Your opinion is now in the overwhelming minority. LOL, more denial from the right. LOL yourself... "Overall, 44% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. The President’s overall approval has stayed between 44% and 46% every day for thirteen days. Prior to that, it had stayed between 46% and 50% every day for more than two months. Fifty- six percent (56%) now disapprove of the President’s performance." That bears repeating... "Fifty-six percent (56%) now disapprove of the President’s performance." A 45% approval rating is not an "overwhelming minority." Republican approval ratings are approaching an overwhelming minority. http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm But then, who cares about poll numbers. At about this time in his Presidency, Reagan's approval ratings were less than 50%. He served two full terms, and many consider him to be one of the great presidents. And Obama has fallen in the polls farther and faster than any other president in recent memory, including Carter. But to define "overwhelming", I'm just using the liberal's definition. After all, you guys called a 2 - 3 % victory for Obama in the popular vote overwhelming. You're not allowed to change the definition now just because your boy looks bad. Too bad. After this recession falters along, then the tax hikes start kicking in for *all* Americans, and the stagflation is the top story, it won't matter how loudly you guys shout that it's Bush's fault. The public has a short memory, and it's your boy in charge. Obama will be Carter redux... another Dem one-hit-wonder. It's already in the cards. Enjoy it while you can. I don't think obama can hold off on the tax hikes for two more years. I'm betting they will begin shortly after the 2010 election. By then his popularity will be in the 10% approval range. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
"John H" wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 22:44:40 -0500, Gene wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:56:19 -0500, John H wrote: However, I believe you should have the choice. What choice? Dying with dignity or being kept alive, with extraordinary means, in a persistent vegetative state? Indefinitely? And, there's always the chance that the extra little amount of medical care would add another ten fruitful years to your life. I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. Let's recap, per your link: ".... has earned a reputation as a place where doctors will go to virtually any length and expense to try to save a patient's life. " This sounds great until you have to admit that an insurance policy isn't an unlimited blank check. Sooner or later, whoever is "the deep pockets" is going to start "rationing health care." But let's get real and evaluate the next sentence..... "If you come into this hospital, we're not going to let you die...." Holy Crap, what incredible impertinence! That is just NOT their decision. But wait, if you are in a persistent vegetative state, and they keep your heart beating by extraordinary means..... uh..... you haven't "died" yet..... right? At least not until the money runs out and they have to start rationing...... trust me.... there is NO FREE LUNCH.... and this has NOTHING to do with humanitarian feelings toward you.... this is a cold, hard, business decision..... You missed this: "Take the case of Salah Putrus, who at age 71 had a long history of heart failure. After repeated visits to his local hospital near Burbank, Calif., Mr. Putrus was referred to U.C.L.A. this year to be evaluated for a heart transplant. Some other medical centers might have considered Mr. Putrus too old for the surgery. But U.C.L.A.'s attitude was "let's see what we can do for him," said his physician there, Dr. Tamara Horwich. Indeed, Mr. Putrus recalled, Dr. Horwich and her colleagues "did every test." They changed his medicines to reduce the amount of water he was retaining. They even removed some teeth that could be a potential source of infection. His condition improved so much that more than six months later, Mr. Putrus has remained out of the hospital and is no longer considered in active need of a transplant. " -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill Hell of a difference between 71 and 85 or 90 years old. A 94 year old with congestive heart failure and you are going to spend a 100k or so to prolong life a month? |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On 26/12/2009 12:50 PM, Gene wrote:
On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 23:17:46 -0600, wrote: Our medical technology sector, already top of the world, could provide export dollars. Good point, but we are so ridiculously overpriced, nobody is interested.... unless the devalued dollar is greatly in their favor. Americans are pouring out of the country for affordable medical care. Destinations include Israel, Jordan, UAE, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, Panama, China, Hong Kong, India, New Zealand, Singapore, Thailand and others.... American's don't come to Canada for government health care, if they did they would be sadly disappointed. Canadians often go to Costa Rica but hear Panama is increasingly better. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
|
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On 26/12/2009 12:47 PM, Bill McKee wrote:
"John wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 22:44:40 -0500, Gene wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:56:19 -0500, John wrote: However, I believe you should have the choice. What choice? Dying with dignity or being kept alive, with extraordinary means, in a persistent vegetative state? Indefinitely? And, there's always the chance that the extra little amount of medical care would add another ten fruitful years to your life. I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. Let's recap, per your link: ".... has earned a reputation as a place where doctors will go to virtually any length and expense to try to save a patient's life. " This sounds great until you have to admit that an insurance policy isn't an unlimited blank check. Sooner or later, whoever is "the deep pockets" is going to start "rationing health care." But let's get real and evaluate the next sentence..... "If you come into this hospital, we're not going to let you die...." Holy Crap, what incredible impertinence! That is just NOT their decision. But wait, if you are in a persistent vegetative state, and they keep your heart beating by extraordinary means..... uh..... you haven't "died" yet..... right? At least not until the money runs out and they have to start rationing...... trust me.... there is NO FREE LUNCH.... and this has NOTHING to do with humanitarian feelings toward you.... this is a cold, hard, business decision..... You missed this: "Take the case of Salah Putrus, who at age 71 had a long history of heart failure. After repeated visits to his local hospital near Burbank, Calif., Mr. Putrus was referred to U.C.L.A. this year to be evaluated for a heart transplant. Some other medical centers might have considered Mr. Putrus too old for the surgery. But U.C.L.A.'s attitude was "let's see what we can do for him," said his physician there, Dr. Tamara Horwich. Indeed, Mr. Putrus recalled, Dr. Horwich and her colleagues "did every test." They changed his medicines to reduce the amount of water he was retaining. They even removed some teeth that could be a potential source of infection. His condition improved so much that more than six months later, Mr. Putrus has remained out of the hospital and is no longer considered in active need of a transplant. " -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill Hell of a difference between 71 and 85 or 90 years old. A 94 year old with congestive heart failure and you are going to spend a 100k or so to prolong life a month? So who gets to play god? I am sure your health care would be cheaper if you were to sign a binding orrevokable document that says you will never require an operation over $100K and they are under no obligation to provided it. You cannot sue, whine, bitch, contemplate or whatever when your term is up. This is irrevocable in your lifetime. Don't worry, Americans just subscribed to this. Read up on how government saves on health care. Old farts looking for a free lunch, guess what, you might find you are too old to qualify for the by-pass or whatever.... http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/Canada.pdf A lot of truth under this title: Rationing : “Everything is Free but Nothing is Readily Available” (Frogue et al, 2001) |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:49:48 -0500, Harry wrote:
On 12/26/09 12:20 AM, Steve B wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 20:23:51 -0800, "Steve B" wrote: "John wrote in message ... ...Change is coming! The NYTimes is giving seniors a Christmas present to ponder. http://tinyurl.com/yl9vumo "Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director and a disciple of the Dartmouth data, has noted. "We can no longer afford an overall health care system in which the thought is more is always better, because it's not."" Another - "Because Dartmouth's analysis focuses solely on patients who have died, a case like Mr. Putrus's would not show up in its data. That is why critics say Dartmouth's approach takes an overly pessimistic view of medicine: if you consider only the patients who die, there is really no way to know whether it makes sense to spend more on one case than another." A preview of things to come? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H If they were serious about saving money, wouldn't they just all get on a conference call instead of flying their jets to Denmark to schmooze around? Barry has some expensive tastes, and so does Michelle. Steve Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as Germany so nobody had to share a ride. Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. It's just not done. I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was spent on that extravaganza. John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill BTW, what's a caviar wedge? I understand they ate a lot of caviar. That would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters. I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too. Nothing too good for our tax dollars. Steve Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time? Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled higher than republican/conservative b.s. Stevie is fresh meat to Usenet. Note how he is so impolite as to change the whole meaning of the thread without missing a beat or changing the subject line. From dead patients to jets to Denmark in the blink of an eye. He wasn't familiar with the high jacking of a thread until now and showed no style at it either. I would say John took one to the groin. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On 26/12/2009 2:08 PM, RLM wrote:
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill Churchill was a wise man. Never saw that written so well. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/12/2009 12:47 PM, Bill McKee wrote: "John wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 22:44:40 -0500, Gene wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:56:19 -0500, John wrote: However, I believe you should have the choice. What choice? Dying with dignity or being kept alive, with extraordinary means, in a persistent vegetative state? Indefinitely? And, there's always the chance that the extra little amount of medical care would add another ten fruitful years to your life. I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. Let's recap, per your link: ".... has earned a reputation as a place where doctors will go to virtually any length and expense to try to save a patient's life. " This sounds great until you have to admit that an insurance policy isn't an unlimited blank check. Sooner or later, whoever is "the deep pockets" is going to start "rationing health care." But let's get real and evaluate the next sentence..... "If you come into this hospital, we're not going to let you die...." Holy Crap, what incredible impertinence! That is just NOT their decision. But wait, if you are in a persistent vegetative state, and they keep your heart beating by extraordinary means..... uh..... you haven't "died" yet..... right? At least not until the money runs out and they have to start rationing...... trust me.... there is NO FREE LUNCH.... and this has NOTHING to do with humanitarian feelings toward you.... this is a cold, hard, business decision..... You missed this: "Take the case of Salah Putrus, who at age 71 had a long history of heart failure. After repeated visits to his local hospital near Burbank, Calif., Mr. Putrus was referred to U.C.L.A. this year to be evaluated for a heart transplant. Some other medical centers might have considered Mr. Putrus too old for the surgery. But U.C.L.A.'s attitude was "let's see what we can do for him," said his physician there, Dr. Tamara Horwich. Indeed, Mr. Putrus recalled, Dr. Horwich and her colleagues "did every test." They changed his medicines to reduce the amount of water he was retaining. They even removed some teeth that could be a potential source of infection. His condition improved so much that more than six months later, Mr. Putrus has remained out of the hospital and is no longer considered in active need of a transplant. " -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill Hell of a difference between 71 and 85 or 90 years old. A 94 year old with congestive heart failure and you are going to spend a 100k or so to prolong life a month? So who gets to play god? I am sure your health care would be cheaper if you were to sign a binding orrevokable document that says you will never require an operation over $100K and they are under no obligation to provided it. You cannot sue, whine, bitch, contemplate or whatever when your term is up. This is irrevocable in your lifetime. Don't worry, Americans just subscribed to this. Read up on how government saves on health care. Old farts looking for a free lunch, guess what, you might find you are too old to qualify for the by-pass or whatever.... http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/Canada.pdf A lot of truth under this title: Rationing : “Everything is Free but Nothing is Readily Available” (Frogue et al, 2001) obama has not yet appointed a god czar. We are anxioully awaiting his choice. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Dec 26, 2:47*pm, "Bill McKee" wrote:
"John H" wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 22:44:40 -0500, Gene wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:56:19 -0500, John H wrote: However, I believe you should have the choice. What choice? Dying with dignity or being kept alive, with extraordinary means, in a persistent vegetative state? Indefinitely? And, there's always the chance that the extra little amount of medical care would add another ten fruitful years to your life. I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. Let's recap, per your link: ".... has earned a reputation as a place where doctors will go to virtually any length and expense to try to save a patient's life. " This sounds great until you have to admit that an insurance policy isn't an unlimited blank check. Sooner or later, whoever is "the deep pockets" is going to start "rationing health care." But let's get real and evaluate the next sentence..... "If you come into this hospital, we're not going to let you die...." Holy Crap, what incredible impertinence! That is just NOT their decision. But wait, if you are in a persistent vegetative state, and they keep your heart beating by extraordinary means..... uh..... you haven't "died" yet..... right? At least not until the money runs out and they have to start rationing...... trust me.... there is NO FREE LUNCH.... and this has NOTHING to do with humanitarian feelings toward you.... this is a cold, hard, business decision..... You missed this: "Take the case of Salah Putrus, who at age 71 had a long history of heart failure. After repeated visits to his local hospital near Burbank, Calif., Mr. Putrus was referred to U.C.L.A. this year to be evaluated for a heart transplant. Some other medical centers might have considered Mr. Putrus too old for the surgery. But U.C.L.A.'s attitude was "let's see what we can do for him," said his physician there, Dr. Tamara Horwich. Indeed, Mr. Putrus recalled, Dr. Horwich and her colleagues "did every test." They changed his medicines to reduce the amount of water he was retaining. They even removed some teeth that could be a potential source of infection. His condition improved so much that more than six months later, Mr. Putrus has remained out of the hospital and is no longer considered in active need of a transplant. " -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill Hell of a difference between 71 and 85 or 90 years old. *A 94 year old with congestive heart failure and you are going to spend a 100k or so to prolong life a month?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yep, and that's just because it's Obama's plan. If GWB had of done the same (as with counseling sick vets) John would have uttered nary a word. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Dec 26, 4:21*pm, Jim wrote:
Canuck57 wrote: On 26/12/2009 12:47 PM, Bill McKee wrote: "John *wrote in message . .. On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 22:44:40 -0500, Gene *wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:56:19 -0500, John wrote: However, I believe you should have the choice. What choice? Dying with dignity or being kept alive, with extraordinary means, in a persistent vegetative state? Indefinitely? And, there's always the chance that the extra little amount of medical care would add another ten fruitful years to your life. I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. Let's recap, per your link: ".... has earned a reputation as a place where doctors will go to virtually any length and expense to try to save a patient's life. " This sounds great until you have to admit that an insurance policy isn't an unlimited blank check. Sooner or later, whoever is "the deep pockets" is going to start "rationing health care." But let's get real and evaluate the next sentence..... "If you come into this hospital, we're not going to let you die...." Holy Crap, what incredible impertinence! That is just NOT their decision. But wait, if you are in a persistent vegetative state, and they keep your heart beating by extraordinary means..... uh..... you haven't "died" yet..... right? At least not until the money runs out and they have to start rationing...... trust me.... there is NO FREE LUNCH.... and this has NOTHING to do with humanitarian feelings toward you.... this is a cold, hard, business decision..... You missed this: "Take the case of Salah Putrus, who at age 71 had a long history of heart failure. After repeated visits to his local hospital near Burbank, Calif., Mr. Putrus was referred to U.C.L.A. this year to be evaluated for a heart transplant. Some other medical centers might have considered Mr. Putrus too old for the surgery. But U.C.L.A.'s attitude was "let's see what we can do for him," said his physician there, Dr. Tamara Horwich. Indeed, Mr. Putrus recalled, Dr. Horwich and her colleagues "did every test." They changed his medicines to reduce the amount of water he was retaining. They even removed some teeth that could be a potential source of infection. His condition improved so much that more than six months later, Mr. Putrus has remained out of the hospital and is no longer considered in active need of a transplant. " -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill Hell of a difference between 71 and 85 or 90 years old. *A 94 year old with congestive heart failure and you are going to spend a 100k or so to prolong life a month? So who gets to play god? I am sure your health care would be cheaper if you were to sign a binding orrevokable document that says you will never require an operation over $100K and they are under no obligation to provided it. You cannot sue, whine, bitch, contemplate or whatever when your term is up. *This is irrevocable in your lifetime. Don't worry, Americans just subscribed to this. *Read up on how government saves on health care. *Old farts looking for a free lunch, guess what, you might find you are too old to qualify for the by-pass or whatever.... http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/Canada.pdf A lot of truth under this title: Rationing : �Everything is Free but Nothing is Readily Available� (Frogue et al, 2001) obama has not yet appointed a god czar. We are anxioully awaiting his choice.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hey, Ronnie Raygun had a clairavoyant czar so why in hell not? |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Dec 26, 3:15*pm, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/12/2009 12:50 PM, Gene wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 23:17:46 -0600, wrote: Our medical technology sector, already top of the world, could provide export dollars. Good point, but we are so ridiculously overpriced, nobody is interested.... unless the devalued dollar is greatly in their favor. Americans are pouring out of the country for affordable medical care. Destinations include Israel, Jordan, UAE, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, Panama, China, Hong Kong, India, New Zealand, Singapore, Thailand and others.... American's don't come to Canada for government health care, if they did they would be sadly disappointed. Canadians often go to Costa Rica but hear Panama is increasingly better. Lemme see. You whine about what's happening in the U.S., you whine about what's happening in Canada, where you going next? |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
wrote in message
... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:48:15 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Thunder, they're really embarassed by Palin... the normal, sane ones. The ones who think she's actually presidential material are not normal. It really ****es them off (the latter), who can't understand why normal folks aren't willing to follow them down the path to destruction. If the jobs situation turns around before the next Congressional election, the Dems will likely increase their lead in the House and perhaps even the Senate. If the economy continues to rebound, Obama will be reelected in another landslide. So far, I haven't seen a viable presidential-level Rep., but of course it's way early. I think the GOP is well placed to take the Senate back in 2010 and make a dent in the house majority. People will be going to the polls just about the time the 2011 health care options period closes and people will still be stinging from the sticker shock of the inevitable increases that will be here from "free health care". I am sure the deficit will be going up more and employment will still be grim. We are not going to replace all those UAW jobs and construction will still be dead. The "commercial construction" shoe is just starting to drop. All those new strip malls they built to serve the houses they didn't sell are sitting empty. It will be a target rich environment. The real question is whether they can soften this whacko position they seem to be taking with Palin, Beck and Limbaugh. The winners will probably be the ones who can stay fiscally conservative but distance themselves from the cliff some have been leaping off. The problem I see is they have not really found a voice that isn't simply a huckster, making money off of the vacuum in the party leadership. How so? Which states/seats do you think are borderline? The Dems would have to lose quite a few, and the Senate is typically pretty stable. There's no "free health care" in the current or expected bill, so that's just your musing or right-wing fear-induced. The deficit isn't a bread and butter issue with most people. You're talking about the budget deficit and not the trade deficit right? Just checking. There's no way in my view that they can "soften" the wacko view. Wacko is wacko. Most people don't listen to their lies, although a big number do, unfortunately. Not sure what cliff you're referring to.. Jobs will be an issue. If they continue to turn around, then the Dems don't have much to worry about. Totally agree with the huckster comment. I don't see anyone out there who truly represents a thinking Republican party voter. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 14:15:52 -0700, Canuck57 wrote:
On 26/12/2009 2:08 PM, RLM wrote: "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill Churchill was a wise man. Never saw that written so well. John understands socialism so well. He was a paid member of the largest socialist organisation in the country for years and after retirement he joined another socialist organisation, teacher. Churchill's just dead. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 09:02:00 -0600, thunder
wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 09:54:54 -0500, John H wrote: "His boy?" I think you mean *our* President. You can live in denial, but I'll point out Obama's main legislative agenda, health care reform, looks to be on track for passage. The recession is over and jobs *will* rebound. Not at all bad for his *first* year in office. I'm thinking Obama is becoming unstoppable. As for Palin, I was recently talking to a diehard Republican who is convinced she is working for the Democrats. In his opinion, nothing else explains the damage she is doing the Republican Party. Obama gets my vote as Messiah of the year! Your boy can do no wrong. http://tinyurl.com/y8ov56y Yup, it sure is starting to look that way. Sure does suck to be a Republican these days, doesn't it? No worse than it sucks being a Democrat. At least I can say I didn't vote for him. -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:59:00 -0800 (PST), Jack
wrote: On Dec 26, 10:54*am, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 26, 10:15*am, "D.Duck" wrote: Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 26, 8:34 am, John H wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:21:51 -0500, Jim wrote: Harry wrote: On 12/26/09 12:20 AM, Steve B wrote: *wrote in message om... On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 20:23:51 -0800, "Steve B" *wrote: "John *wrote in message news:b5laj5hrbqgpego8r6tiulf9jca9k39aig@4ax .com... ...Change is coming! The NYTimes is giving seniors a Christmas present to ponder. http://tinyurl.com/yl9vumo "Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director and a disciple of the Dartmouth data, has noted. "We can no longer afford an overall health care system in which the thought is more is always better, because it's not."" Another - "Because Dartmouth's analysis focuses solely on patients who have died, a case like Mr. Putrus's would not show up in its data. That is why critics say Dartmouth's approach takes an overly pessimistic view of medicine: if you consider only the patients who die, there is really no way to know whether it makes sense to spend more on one case than another." A preview of things to come? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H If they were serious about saving money, wouldn't they just all get on a conference call instead of flying their jets to Denmark to schmooze around? Barry has some expensive tastes, and so does Michelle. Steve Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as Germany so nobody had to share a ride. Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. *It's just not done. I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was spent on that extravaganza. BTW, what's a caviar wedge? *I understand they ate a lot of caviar. *That would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters. I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too. Nothing too good for our tax dollars. Steve Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time? Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled higher than republican/conservative b.s. Nothing except the burgeoning public debt. Did someone justify Obama's spending using Bush as a rationale? How silly. -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Ever hear of the word "precedent"? It's used legally binding all of the time. Can you clarify?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes: prec?e?dent??/n. ?pr?s?d?nt; adj. pr??sidnt, ?pr?s?d?nt/ *Show Spelled Pronunciation [n. pres-i-duhnt; adj. pri-seed-nt, pres-i-duhnt] *Show IPA –noun 1. Law. a legal decision or form of proceeding serving as an authoritative rule or pattern in future similar or analogous cases.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So if the person in front of you jumps off a cliff, then it's OK for you to do it too? Hey, they set a precedent. There's good ones and bad ones. According to Loogy, they should all be emulated just 'cause they're precedents. Liberal judges in New Hampshire and elsewhere set precedents when they let child rapists off with a one year sentence. Those precedents leads to things like this: http://tinyurl.com/yd8s8yf -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
|
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:22:38 -0500, John H
wrote: "Living wills are a good thing." Great words. The choice is yours to make, not some money advisor to the President. Keep your finances in order so your survivors can keep as much of your money as possible, so their time here is eased. Forget about hating politicians and think more about God. His arms are open, warm, and welcoming. Life here is a fleeting time, and should be enjoyed by loving and being loved. Arguing about politicians in a hellish manner only predicts your future and eternal place of residence. Even a hell filled with golfers is better than one filled with politicians. But only slightly. --Vic |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
|
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 18:15:18 -0600, Vic Smith wrote:
Seems that most of Obama's loss in the polls is because there's way too much "same old." Maybe, or, "It's the economy, stupid." When the economy is south, the President generally takes the heat. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 23:17:46 -0600, thunder
wrote: You mention a "business decision". It seems to me tying health insurance to business, was a faulty paradigm from the beginning, competitively and socially. However, health care has the potential of reviving this entire economy. Health care jobs are well paying and *local*. IMO, they could provide a replacement for the manufacturing jobs we have lost. Our medical technology sector, already top of the world, could provide export dollars. In the public debate, we've been looking at health care as a drain on the economy. I'm thinking it could save the economy. It's basic economics, manufacture something of value, and the whole world values life, at least in theory. You're right and as far as it goes, it would be a boon. Unfortunately, that requires a free market approach to keep costs competitive and we just got a crap sandwich of a "health care" bill. This is gonna be a diaster and the more the details are being exposed, it's becoming apparent that it's nothing more than a Chavez style take over of a major industry - confiscatory and restrictive. Hopefully, 2010 will bring a reversal of this boondoogle. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:42:17 -0500, Tom Francis wrote:
You're right and as far as it goes, it would be a boon. Unfortunately, that requires a free market approach to keep costs competitive and we just got a crap sandwich of a "health care" bill. This is gonna be a diaster and the more the details are being exposed, it's becoming apparent that it's nothing more than a Chavez style take over of a major industry - confiscatory and restrictive. Hopefully, 2010 will bring a reversal of this boondoogle. For different reasons, like you, I'm not overly happy with the proposed health care bill, but we've been trying, without success, to get health care legislation for 60 years. Regardless, of this bill's quality, that sacred cow has been slaughtered. Now, fine tuning, in the future, will be considerably easier to accomplish. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
|
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On 12/26/09 7:54 PM, thunder wrote:
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:42:17 -0500, Tom Francis wrote: You're right and as far as it goes, it would be a boon. Unfortunately, that requires a free market approach to keep costs competitive and we just got a crap sandwich of a "health care" bill. This is gonna be a diaster and the more the details are being exposed, it's becoming apparent that it's nothing more than a Chavez style take over of a major industry - confiscatory and restrictive. Hopefully, 2010 will bring a reversal of this boondoogle. For different reasons, like you, I'm not overly happy with the proposed health care bill, but we've been trying, without success, to get health care legislation for 60 years. Regardless, of this bill's quality, that sacred cow has been slaughtered. Now, fine tuning, in the future, will be considerably easier to accomplish. I view what will emerge in January as a start, as you do. I also believe the Obama admin learned a few lessons, the most important being that it doesn't matter whether you listen to the republicans. Best policy, just ignore the Republicans whenever possible, and end up with better legislation. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Dec 26, 6:42*pm, Tom Francis
wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 23:17:46 -0600, thunder wrote: You mention a "business decision". *It seems to me tying health insurance to business, was a faulty paradigm from the beginning, competitively and socially. *However, health care has the potential of reviving this entire economy. *Health care jobs are well paying and *local*. *IMO, they could provide a replacement for the manufacturing jobs we have lost. *Our medical technology sector, already top of the world, could provide export dollars. *In the public debate, we've been looking at health care as a drain on the economy. *I'm thinking it could save the economy. *It's basic economics, manufacture something of value, and the whole world values life, at least in theory. You're right and as far as it goes, it would be a boon. Unfortunately, that requires a free market approach to keep costs competitive and we just got a crap sandwich of a "health care" bill. LOL! That reminds me of the saying that "Life is a crap sandwich, but the more bread you got, the less crap you gotta eat!" Seems there's a lot of truth to that. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
wrote in message
... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 13:39:25 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: I think the GOP is well placed to take the Senate back in 2010 and make a dent in the house majority. How so? Which states/seats do you think are borderline? The Dems would have to lose quite a few, and the Senate is typically pretty stable. I just think there will be some buyer's remorse, as there usually is the first mid term after a presidential election. That's true, but these are unusual times. We'll see I suppose. There's no "free health care" in the current or expected bill, so that's just your musing or right-wing fear-induced. This is what most fans think it is supposed to be and the models they have been spinning (Canada, Japan, Scandinavia) reinforce that. Actually the expansion of Medicaid from 133% to 150% of the poverty level (house and senate versions) will make it free for a lot of people. Fans? No one I've heard of is spinning those systems. If you're talking France (rated #1) or Germany or perhaps the UK, even then, no one is spinning those, and they are much closer to ours, including what the bill appears to do. The people who pay will be paying a lot more and a lot of people who choose not to buy insurance will have to buy it. That will be a sticker shock for them Which people? Those who don't have it, mostly want it. Sure, there are always a few who choose or can afford not to have it. The deficit isn't a bread and butter issue with most people. You're talking about the budget deficit and not the trade deficit right? Just checking. It will become a bread and butter issue when bread and butter become more expensive (the carbon tax). Actually in the late 80s and early 90s, the deficit was an election issue (Ross Perot). It brought us about 3 years of sound fiscal policy with the help of the 104th congress. I don't think you can credit Perot with "sound fiscal policy." He was another wacko, smart business man that he was. There's no way in my view that they can "soften" the wacko view. Wacko is wacko. Most people don't listen to their lies, although a big number do, unfortunately. Not sure what cliff you're referring to.. Unfortunately the Arbitron of talk radio and the Neilsons of news TV dispute that "most people" claim , at least for people who watch news and listen to talk.The cliff is the GOP believing 20% is enough. 20% doesn't win elections. They're being shunted to the side of the mainstream, as they should be for their racism and fear-based propaganda. Jobs will be an issue. If they continue to turn around, then the Dems don't have much to worry about. I am just not sure what these people are going to do. We have exported most manufacturing and we have several years worth of built and unsold houses, condos and commercial buildings. Yes, but the jobs situation is starting to turn around. If that continues... Totally agree with the huckster comment. I don't see anyone out there who truly represents a thinking Republican party voter. The GOP lost me around 1989-90 but the Democrats never appealed that much to me either. I self-identify as a Democrat, but that's mainly because there's no other rational alternative. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
|
Merry Christmas Seniors...
"John H" wrote in message
... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:59:00 -0800 (PST), Jack wrote: On Dec 26, 10:54 am, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 26, 10:15 am, "D.Duck" wrote: Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 26, 8:34 am, John H wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:21:51 -0500, Jim wrote: Harry wrote: On 12/26/09 12:20 AM, Steve B wrote: wrote in message om... On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 20:23:51 -0800, "Steve B" wrote: "John wrote in message news:b5laj5hrbqgpego8r6tiulf9jca9k39aig@4ax .com... ...Change is coming! The NYTimes is giving seniors a Christmas present to ponder. http://tinyurl.com/yl9vumo "Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director and a disciple of the Dartmouth data, has noted. "We can no longer afford an overall health care system in which the thought is more is always better, because it's not."" Another - "Because Dartmouth's analysis focuses solely on patients who have died, a case like Mr. Putrus's would not show up in its data. That is why critics say Dartmouth's approach takes an overly pessimistic view of medicine: if you consider only the patients who die, there is really no way to know whether it makes sense to spend more on one case than another." A preview of things to come? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H If they were serious about saving money, wouldn't they just all get on a conference call instead of flying their jets to Denmark to schmooze around? Barry has some expensive tastes, and so does Michelle. Steve Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as Germany so nobody had to share a ride. Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. It's just not done. I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was spent on that extravaganza. BTW, what's a caviar wedge? I understand they ate a lot of caviar. That would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters. I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too. Nothing too good for our tax dollars. Steve Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time? Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled higher than republican/conservative b.s. Nothing except the burgeoning public debt. Did someone justify Obama's spending using Bush as a rationale? How silly. -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Ever hear of the word "precedent"? It's used legally binding all of the time. Can you clarify?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes: prec?e?dent??/n. ?pr?s?d?nt; adj. pr??sidnt, ?pr?s?d?nt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [n. pres-i-duhnt; adj. pri-seed-nt, pres-i-duhnt] Show IPA -noun 1. Law. a legal decision or form of proceeding serving as an authoritative rule or pattern in future similar or analogous cases.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So if the person in front of you jumps off a cliff, then it's OK for you to do it too? Hey, they set a precedent. There's good ones and bad ones. According to Loogy, they should all be emulated just 'cause they're precedents. Liberal judges in New Hampshire and elsewhere set precedents when they let child rapists off with a one year sentence. Those precedents leads to things like this: http://tinyurl.com/yd8s8yf -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill And liberal governors like Huckabee... oh wait.... -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message ... On Dec 25, 7:14 pm, John wrote: ...Change is coming! The NYTimes is giving seniors a Christmas present to ponder. http://tinyurl.com/yl9vumo "Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director and a disciple of the Dartmouth data, has noted. We can no longer afford an overall health care system in which the thought is more is always better, because it s not. " Another - "Because Dartmouth s analysis focuses solely on patients who have died, a case like Mr. Putrus s would not show up in its data. That is why critics say Dartmouth s approach takes an overly pessimistic view of medicine: if you consider only the patients who die, there is really no way to know whether it makes sense to spend more on one case than another." A preview of things to come? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H John, couldn't you, at least during the holidays stop your stupid and inane everything Obama is bad bull****? He can't help it. He and Rob are truly losers. Rob is obnoxious, so I've decided to just ignore his posts.. call it a New Year resolution. Rob had nothing to do with this post. Kill file and run is so typical of those who can't debate. Peace |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On 12/26/09 10:20 PM, Rob wrote:
nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Dec 25, 7:14 pm, John wrote: ...Change is coming! The NYTimes is giving seniors a Christmas present to ponder. http://tinyurl.com/yl9vumo "Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director and a disciple of the Dartmouth data, has noted. We can no longer afford an overall health care system in which the thought is more is always better, because it s not. " Another - "Because Dartmouth s analysis focuses solely on patients who have died, a case like Mr. Putrus s would not show up in its data. That is why critics say Dartmouth s approach takes an overly pessimistic view of medicine: if you consider only the patients who die, there is really no way to know whether it makes sense to spend more on one case than another." A preview of things to come? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H John, couldn't you, at least during the holidays stop your stupid and inane everything Obama is bad bull****? He can't help it. He and Rob are truly losers. Rob is obnoxious, so I've decided to just ignore his posts.. call it a New Year resolution. Rob had nothing to do with this post. Kill file and run is so typical of those who can't debate. Peace Debate? With a worthless piece of **** like you? What's the point? You don't know anything. You don't stand for anything. You're just an argumentative, nasty piece of right-wing ****. You were more likable when you pretended to be freddy krueger's brother. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
wrote in message
... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 18:46:08 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 13:39:25 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: There's no "free health care" in the current or expected bill, so that's just your musing or right-wing fear-induced. This is what most fans think it is supposed to be and the models they have been spinning (Canada, Japan, Scandinavia) reinforce that. Actually the expansion of Medicaid from 133% to 150% of the poverty level (house and senate versions) will make it free for a lot of people. Fans? No one I've heard of is spinning those systems. If you're talking France (rated #1) or Germany or perhaps the UK, even then, no one is spinning those, and they are much closer to ours, including what the bill appears to do. Canada gets mentioned every time this comes up and if you say France, you are talking about "Free" medical care ... unless you pay taxes. The problem is that level of taxation is politically impossible here so it would just be rampaging debt. Canada gets mentioned as a unlikely and not viable example for the US. The French med system isn't free. Umm... most people pay taxes, except maybe the very, very rich, and the very, very poor. The people who pay will be paying a lot more and a lot of people who choose not to buy insurance will have to buy it. That will be a sticker shock for them Which people? Those who don't have it, mostly want it. Sure, there are always a few who choose or can afford not to have it. It is mostly young people in mediocre jobs who don't buy insurance. Those are the ones we need in the system if this is actually going to be insurance. Yes, but they could afford it if it's set up properly, which is where we need to be. Otherwise it is just a medical brokerage. Nobody wants to buy insurance until they think their medical bills will be more than their premium. Nobody wants to buy car ins., but we're generally required by law to do that. The deficit isn't a bread and butter issue with most people. You're talking about the budget deficit and not the trade deficit right? Just checking. It will become a bread and butter issue when bread and butter become more expensive (the carbon tax). Actually in the late 80s and early 90s, the deficit was an election issue (Ross Perot). It brought us about 3 years of sound fiscal policy with the help of the 104th congress. I don't think you can credit Perot with "sound fiscal policy." He was another wacko, smart business man that he was. He was a whacko who drove the fiscal policy of Gingrich/Clinton that got us close to even for a year or two. You could criticize Perot for being an egotistical jerk but his charts were right on. Gingrich?? His "Contract on America" was just a rehash of the same bs. Clinton mostly got things under control. Perot was unwilling to listen to anyone. Having a good chart means very little. I actually saw Perot once at EDS in Rockville Md, and he fired me for having hair on my face. Too bad I didn't work for him. Jobs will be an issue. If they continue to turn around, then the Dems don't have much to worry about. I am just not sure what these people are going to do. We have exported most manufacturing and we have several years worth of built and unsold houses, condos and commercial buildings. Yes, but the jobs situation is starting to turn around. If that continues... The problem is, guys who used to be making $60,000 and up, building cars and houses are now back working... but for half that at some menial job. Ok, so what's your solution? -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
"Rob" wrote in message
... nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Dec 25, 7:14 pm, John wrote: ...Change is coming! The NYTimes is giving seniors a Christmas present to ponder. http://tinyurl.com/yl9vumo "Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director and a disciple of the Dartmouth data, has noted. We can no longer afford an overall health care system in which the thought is more is always better, because it s not. " Another - "Because Dartmouth s analysis focuses solely on patients who have died, a case like Mr. Putrus s would not show up in its data. That is why critics say Dartmouth s approach takes an overly pessimistic view of medicine: if you consider only the patients who die, there is really no way to know whether it makes sense to spend more on one case than another." A preview of things to come? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H John, couldn't you, at least during the holidays stop your stupid and inane everything Obama is bad bull****? He can't help it. He and Rob are truly losers. Rob is obnoxious, so I've decided to just ignore his posts.. call it a New Year resolution. Rob had nothing to do with this post. Kill file and run is so typical of those who can't debate. Peace I'm going to respond to this one post, then you can go do your own thing. You've consistently tried to put me down, especially commenting about my looks as though that's some major point you're trying to make, spout completely regurgitate right-wing crap, and seem to be incapable of carrying on a civil discussion. I'm a fairly tolerant person, and I've tried to humor you, to be nice, and I hoped you'd get the message and start acting like an adult. My mistake. You're just like Jim, if not the same person, someone incapable of acting older than your shoe size. Peace yourself. You can have the last word, and I won't be responding going forward. Oh, and you're a jerk. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
wrote in message
... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:32:12 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 18:46:08 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message m... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 13:39:25 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Canada gets mentioned every time this comes up and if you say France, you are talking about "Free" medical care ... unless you pay taxes. The problem is that level of taxation is politically impossible here so it would just be rampaging debt. Canada gets mentioned as a unlikely and not viable example for the US. The French med system isn't free. Umm... most people pay taxes, except maybe the very, very rich, and the very, very poor. In the US 43% of the low end pay no income tax and the high end up paying around 15%. I don't see that changing anytime soon since the congress is well bribed by the rich. Nope... http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html The people who pay will be paying a lot more and a lot of people who choose not to buy insurance will have to buy it. That will be a sticker shock for them Which people? Those who don't have it, mostly want it. Sure, there are always a few who choose or can afford not to have it. It is mostly young people in mediocre jobs who don't buy insurance. Those are the ones we need in the system if this is actually going to be insurance. Yes, but they could afford it if it's set up properly, which is where we need to be. "Afford" is a relative term. They don't want to pay anything unless they are sick and they think a couple hundred a month is too much for something they don't plan on using. I don't believe that most people who are uninsured prefer to stay that way. Can you cite the source for this? Otherwise it is just a medical brokerage. Nobody wants to buy insurance until they think their medical bills will be more than their premium. Nobody wants to buy car ins., but we're generally required by law to do that. ... But they have convinced us driving a car is not a right, it is just from the kindness of the government that we are allowed to drive. Why do you think it's a right? Is it written into the Constitution? It's a privilege that needs to be earned. The deficit isn't a bread and butter issue with most people. You're talking about the budget deficit and not the trade deficit right? Just checking. It will become a bread and butter issue when bread and butter become more expensive (the carbon tax). Actually in the late 80s and early 90s, the deficit was an election issue (Ross Perot). It brought us about 3 years of sound fiscal policy with the help of the 104th congress. I don't think you can credit Perot with "sound fiscal policy." He was another wacko, smart business man that he was. He was a whacko who drove the fiscal policy of Gingrich/Clinton that got us close to even for a year or two. You could criticize Perot for being an egotistical jerk but his charts were right on. Gingrich?? His "Contract on America" was just a rehash of the same bs. Clinton mostly got things under control. You can't underestimate the contribution Gingrich made for Clinton's surplus. Ways and Means is a House function and that is where the money comes from. They also control spending. Gingrich did very little that he wasn't forced to do. Clinton called his bluff as I recall. Perot was unwilling to listen to anyone. Having a good chart means very little. Perot got the public ready to accept the fiscal responsibility represented by the largest tax increase in history. That is how Clinton managed a surplus. He also pointed out the problem we have now, the amount of short term debt the government is carrying. If your debt is mostly in short term paper you have no idea what the interest rate will be when you have to roll it over ... or even if anyone will buy it. If China suddenly decided to just go somewhere else with their money and not renew their US paper we couldn't pay them what was due. That is a lot more of a problem for us than global warming, terrorism and the health care crisis combined. China calling in their cash would be about as bad as that planet killing comet we are overdue for. Oh come on... Perot never got much public support, and he quit and then changed his mind. I actually saw Perot once at EDS in Rockville Md, and he fired me for having hair on my face. Too bad I didn't work for him. Jobs will be an issue. If they continue to turn around, then the Dems don't have much to worry about. I am just not sure what these people are going to do. We have exported most manufacturing and we have several years worth of built and unsold houses, condos and commercial buildings. Yes, but the jobs situation is starting to turn around. If that continues... The problem is, guys who used to be making $60,000 and up, building cars and houses are now back working... but for half that at some menial job. Ok, so what's your solution? Send about 5 million people to Navy Corpsman school and set them up in storefront clinics doing triage for doctors, actually taking care of about 20% of the patients. You don't need 8 years of college to patch up wounds, give shots and hand out a bottle of pills. That's going to solve our economic woes? Hardly. And, yes our economy and the heathcare crisis are interlinked. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
|
Merry Christmas Seniors...
Harry wrote:
On 12/26/09 10:20 PM, Rob wrote: nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Dec 25, 7:14 pm, John wrote: ...Change is coming! The NYTimes is giving seniors a Christmas present to ponder. http://tinyurl.com/yl9vumo "Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director and a disciple of the Dartmouth data, has noted. We can no longer afford an overall health care system in which the thought is more is always better, because it s not. " Another - "Because Dartmouth s analysis focuses solely on patients who have died, a case like Mr. Putrus s would not show up in its data. That is why critics say Dartmouth s approach takes an overly pessimistic view of medicine: if you consider only the patients who die, there is really no way to know whether it makes sense to spend more on one case than another." A preview of things to come? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H John, couldn't you, at least during the holidays stop your stupid and inane everything Obama is bad bull****? He can't help it. He and Rob are truly losers. Rob is obnoxious, so I've decided to just ignore his posts.. call it a New Year resolution. Rob had nothing to do with this post. Kill file and run is so typical of those who can't debate. Peace Debate? With a worthless piece of **** like you? What's the point? You don't know anything. You don't stand for anything. You're just an argumentative, nasty piece of right-wing ****. You were more likable when you pretended to be freddy krueger's brother. I will carry on lively debate with anyone who is 100% with me on the issues. My past performances prove it. So come on. Anyone who hates bush and Palin, lets debate. -- It's flattering to see so many of you turds spoofing me. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 18:54:00 -0600, thunder
wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:42:17 -0500, Tom Francis wrote: You're right and as far as it goes, it would be a boon. Unfortunately, that requires a free market approach to keep costs competitive and we just got a crap sandwich of a "health care" bill. This is gonna be a diaster and the more the details are being exposed, it's becoming apparent that it's nothing more than a Chavez style take over of a major industry - confiscatory and restrictive. Hopefully, 2010 will bring a reversal of this boondoogle. For different reasons, like you, I'm not overly happy with the proposed health care bill, but we've been trying, without success, to get health care legislation for 60 years. Regardless, of this bill's quality, that sacred cow has been slaughtered. Now, fine tuning, in the future, will be considerably easier to accomplish. You're right - it's not "slaughtered" as you say. Unfortunately, nothing is going to be able to be "fine tuned". The basic premise is false, the concept is totally foreign to the way Americans think (well, the majority anyway) and there is literally nothing we can do about it now other than repeal the entire bill and start over again. On the other hand, the lake is calling and I'm going fishing. :) Save the debate for another day. :) |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 17:40:43 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote: On Dec 26, 6:42*pm, Tom Francis wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 23:17:46 -0600, thunder wrote: You mention a "business decision". *It seems to me tying health insurance to business, was a faulty paradigm from the beginning, competitively and socially. *However, health care has the potential of reviving this entire economy. *Health care jobs are well paying and *local*. *IMO, they could provide a replacement for the manufacturing jobs we have lost. *Our medical technology sector, already top of the world, could provide export dollars. *In the public debate, we've been looking at health care as a drain on the economy. *I'm thinking it could save the economy. *It's basic economics, manufacture something of value, and the whole world values life, at least in theory. You're right and as far as it goes, it would be a boon. Unfortunately, that requires a free market approach to keep costs competitive and we just got a crap sandwich of a "health care" bill. LOL! That reminds me of the saying that "Life is a crap sandwich, but the more bread you got, the less crap you gotta eat!" Seems there's a lot of truth to that. Tim's a closet Commie - Tim's a closet Commie. :) |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:03 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com