OT health care
 

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 10:29:11 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Which has little to do with the argument that tort reform is going to save
the healthcare system.

Tort reform would save the whole economic system. The lawyers tax is a
drag on the whole economy, producing absolutely nothing.



?? Come on. More nonsense. Most lawyers are honest and hardworking. Lawyers
founded this country. We have nothing to be ashamed of.

--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

On 17/04/2010 3:46 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 15:37:50 -0600,
wrote:

On 17/04/2010 3:21 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 15:01:19 -0600,
wrote:

of course, he's NOT...except to make it a bit more cost effective...

You mean less coverage to conserve cash for a bloated overspending
debt-spend government.

no one knows what 'less coverage' means.

Less than medicare/medicaid or whatever they call it these days?

and how much coverage do you have if you cant get ANY coverage?

No such thing as free.

kinda forgot about that, didn't you?

Nope.

Hey, why cut the pork when you can slash what the people really need to
justify higher taxes eh?

as opposed to higher insurance premiums?

Or higher taxes.

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/...harmacies.html

Read the above story carefully. Ontario taxes people about 25% more on
gross than the US on average. Here is the deal, they are almost
bankrupt offering bonds on the loan market at 4% above the Bank of
Canada rate, and the bond offerings still don't fill, no one wants to
lend to them. In fact, their credit rating is at risk just like Greece.
Too many years of corruption and overspending by leftist governments.

So what the politicians do is squeeze a chosen victim, this time
pharmacies. They already provide a cost competative service to the US
as US people actually come to Ontario to buy the products. But that
isn't the point, government is making noise on cutting services is the
point. Blackmail of the taxpayer if you will as this part of government
spending is less than GM bailouts by a long shot.

This will go on for 3-6 months. Then the government will cave and jack
the sales taxes or income taxes or both. Probably in the fall session
tax increases will be tabled as it is a real sin to cut governemnt waste.

As what is really going on is to condition the people that higher taxes
are better than less services and to make out that a competative phama
business is the problem. Well manged PR to deflect blame. Especially
if you are working taxed poor.

So look at the health care hammer over the head as justification of
higher taxes to fund corrupt auto and pork spending.

Insanity is how you can spend less and get better services with a
presidential BS line like Obama has for you.

except, of course, the deficit is smaller this year than projected AND
obama's plans have been demonstrated to be at LEAST deficiit neutral
and may evenb REDUCE the deficit.

You haven't looked at the latest release of Congressional budget and
predictions have you. How can the government be spending 60% more in 3
short years and be saving money?

Obama must have been pretty bad at math or just singing more BS. I
really got a kick out of his $30M savings touting on a $1.7 trillion
deficit budget. Sucking you in like a bass does to a worm.

That is also why
they wanted to jam it through congress/senate so fast,

HHAhAHAHAAHAH!!!!

it took a YEAR to get through!! BWHAHAHAHAH!!!!

For the lethargic geriatrics in DC, that is fast. Just enough time to
pork it up.

IOW it's fast only if you say it's fast.

golly. i had no idea you had a govt job determining what 'fast' is.


Think, Obama is playing you for a fool.

and you're the king of fools

Time will tell. But forgve me if I start laughing now.

wait a year. you seem to think that's fast

Yep. See if you own up to this in a year when you finally learn there
is no such thing as free. If you are capable of learning that is.

--
Time to ask ask, is our government serving us or are we serving the
government?

OT health care
 

On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 17:26:25 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 17/04/2010 3:46 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 15:37:50 -0600,
wrote:

On 17/04/2010 3:21 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 15:01:19 -0600,
wrote:

of course, he's NOT...except to make it a bit more cost effective...

You mean less coverage to conserve cash for a bloated overspending
debt-spend government.

no one knows what 'less coverage' means.

Less than medicare/medicaid or whatever they call it these days?

less in what sense?

and how much coverage do you have if you cant get ANY coverage?

No such thing as free.

i repeat: how much coverage do you have if you have NO coverage?

dodging the question is not an answer. and why do right wingers want
to balance the heathcare budget on the backs of the poor?


kinda forgot about that, didn't you?

Nope.

Hey, why cut the pork when you can slash what the people really need to
justify higher taxes eh?

as opposed to higher insurance premiums?

Or higher taxes.

or lower taxes.


http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/...harmacies.html

Read the above story carefully. Ontario taxes people about 25% more on
gross than the US on average.

US healthcare is more expensive than anywhere in the world

you right wingers have NO evidence to support your position. none.
none. none

Here is the deal, they are almost
bankrupt offering bonds on the loan market at 4% above the Bank of
Canada rate, and the bond offerings still don't fill, no one wants to
lend to them. In fact, their credit rating is at risk just like Greece.
Too many years of corruption and overspending by leftist governments.

and the US spends 17% of GDP on healthcare

how much does canada spend? i'll tell you:

about 10%.

you want a 70% increase in taxes like we have?


Insanity is how you can spend less and get better services with a
presidential BS line like Obama has for you.

except, of course, the deficit is smaller this year than projected AND
obama's plans have been demonstrated to be at LEAST deficiit neutral
and may evenb REDUCE the deficit.

You haven't looked at the latest release of Congressional budget and
predictions have you. How can the government be spending 60% more in 3
short years and be saving money?

because that money was going to be spent WITHOUT OBAMA'S INCREASES.
obama's budget deficit this year is about 30B less than projected

you right wingers have NO evidence. none.


Obama must have been pretty bad at math or just singing more BS. I
really got a kick out of his $30M savings touting on a $1.7 trillion
deficit budget. Sucking you in like a bass does to a worm.

says the guy who wants a 70% increase in his taxes



wait a year. you seem to think that's fast

Yep. See if you own up to this in a year when you finally learn there
is no such thing as free. If you are capable of learning that is.

says the guy who wants a 70% increase in his taxes to support wall
street

OT health care
 

nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...

On 16/04/2010 11:16 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:

Here's my question. We all know that the present system can't go on
working. We can't have 15% of the population not have some way to pay
for health care and at the same time pass laws that force hospitals to
care for them anyway. That's like having a law that a restaurant has
to serve you even though you are obviously not going to pay. Hey, you
could be starving. Do both sides agree that what we have now isn't
going to go on working forever? If so then at the end of the day
don't we really just have 2 options.

Option 1, figure out some way to get those people back into the system
with some minimal benefits as the rest of us.

Option 2, no tickey, no laundry. You can't pay the the hospital is
within it's rights to turn you away.

I'm not advocating one or the other with this post. I'm just asking
at the 20,000 foot level is there a 3rd choice I'm missing?

Yes.

3) Tax everyone 25% of their gross income from all sources, it can only be
deducted if you can show you and all of your dependants are insured to a
government minimum. Next, government will insure the rest provided they
are legal residents with a valid social security number and not in arrears
with taxes. No more illegal care unless charity funds it. Then hike
taxes to cover the costs where the 25% does not cover it. Government care
will be minimum care, no exotic or super expensive stuff. It may be
rrationed and cannot be used to fix stuff like botched implants or sex
changes. Revenue for health care goes to health care, it cannot be skimed
or reallocated by corrupt congress.

Either a tough and realistic 3) or do 2). 1) Is a blankj check to screw
taxpayers.

--
The Liberal way, take no responsibility.


You're proving to be more of an idiot than first meets the eye. I don't know
about you, but I don't really want really sick people roaming the streets.
Everyone who's sick needs to get care, as it is now, except that now it's
way too expensive.

Botched implants? Like a penile implant? Or, like a sex change operation
you'd be planning?


Right now it's free for those who can't pay - including illegal aliens.
Hospitals aren't refusing life-saving treatment.

OT health care
 

On 17/04/2010 5:36 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 17:26:25 -0600,
wrote:

On 17/04/2010 3:46 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 15:37:50 -0600,
wrote:

On 17/04/2010 3:21 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 15:01:19 -0600,
wrote:

of course, he's NOT...except to make it a bit more cost effective...

You mean less coverage to conserve cash for a bloated overspending
debt-spend government.

no one knows what 'less coverage' means.

Less than medicare/medicaid or whatever they call it these days?

less in what sense?

and how much coverage do you have if you cant get ANY coverage?

No such thing as free.

i repeat: how much coverage do you have if you have NO coverage?

dodging the question is not an answer. and why do right wingers want
to balance the heathcare budget on the backs of the poor?

Dodging nothing you little twirp.

I pay abut 50% of my income into taxes of civic, provincial and federal
taxes of one kind or another. For this I get basic health care.

Because it is "basic", does not cover such things a travel, ward care
only, no extras, it is rationed... I have supplimentry insurance as many
Canadians do, which I and my employer pay extra for.

And that is before I get to the gas pumps.

Any sane idiot wants to balance a budget if they want a sustainable
anything. You cannot charge it into perpetuity without a chattle on the
future and we be expected to pay for this massive debt for losers.

Otherwise you are just a snake oil salesment stiring up the discontent
of dumb**** voters looking for a free ride. Because when the government
is broke, and can't pay for it they will get the tax bill without the
benefits.

kinda forgot about that, didn't you?

Nope.

Hey, why cut the pork when you can slash what the people really need to
justify higher taxes eh?

as opposed to higher insurance premiums?

Or higher taxes.

or lower taxes.


http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/...harmacies.html

Read the above story carefully. Ontario taxes people about 25% more on
gross than the US on average.

US healthcare is more expensive than anywhere in the world

you right wingers have NO evidence to support your position. none.
none. none

Here is the deal, they are almost
bankrupt offering bonds on the loan market at 4% above the Bank of
Canada rate, and the bond offerings still don't fill, no one wants to
lend to them. In fact, their credit rating is at risk just like Greece.
Too many years of corruption and overspending by leftist governments.

and the US spends 17% of GDP on healthcare

how much does canada spend? i'll tell you:

about 10%.

you want a 70% increase in taxes like we have?


Insanity is how you can spend less and get better services with a
presidential BS line like Obama has for you.

except, of course, the deficit is smaller this year than projected AND
obama's plans have been demonstrated to be at LEAST deficiit neutral
and may evenb REDUCE the deficit.

You haven't looked at the latest release of Congressional budget and
predictions have you. How can the government be spending 60% more in 3
short years and be saving money?

because that money was going to be spent WITHOUT OBAMA'S INCREASES.
obama's budget deficit this year is about 30B less than projected

you right wingers have NO evidence. none.


Obama must have been pretty bad at math or just singing more BS. I
really got a kick out of his $30M savings touting on a $1.7 trillion
deficit budget. Sucking you in like a bass does to a worm.

says the guy who wants a 70% increase in his taxes



wait a year. you seem to think that's fast

Yep. See if you own up to this in a year when you finally learn there
is no such thing as free. If you are capable of learning that is.

says the guy who wants a 70% increase in his taxes to support wall
street



--
Time to ask ask, is our government serving us or are we serving the
government?

OT health care
 

On 17/04/2010 5:20 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 17/04/2010 11:30 AM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 17/04/2010 9:38 AM, hk wrote:
On 4/17/10 11:28 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 17/04/2010 7:19 AM, mmc wrote:

Our problem is that our government and government contracting has
become a
huge social program, we make jobs where no one breaks a sweat and get
little
in return.
Bingo. Which makes us tax paying producers just slaves for the
government and associated lard.


Tax paying producer? You're unemployed, remember? What the hell do you
produce, other than poop out your exhaust pipe?

Not yet, but planning on retiring in this decade some time, maybe sooner
than later. Depends when I have had enough of working for other people.
Ready to drop off the producer tread mill.

That way our leaders can borrow more.

--
The Liberal way, take no responsibility.


Meta message from Canuck: I'm about to be fired.

Sure more lucrative than quitting. Recent pension contributions vests
sooner too. My attitude is make my day. But unfortunately not going to
happen that way. I pretty much at least have to quit before 54 3/4 as I
don't want my pension locked in where I am at.

Plus I don't have to pay for the liberal increases in taxes a coming.
Added bonus.
--
The Liberal way, take no responsibility.


Yeah, and now you'll tell us your employee of the year. You're a joke! Why
would anyone want you around as an employee.

Said the unemployed unemployable looking for "free" healthcare on
someone elses dime.

--
Time to ask, is our government serving us or are we serving the government?

OT health care
 

Odd, how the government is basically dumping NASA saying private industry
can do it better and cheaper. But government can do healthcare better and
cheaper. Just seems odd.
All NASA does these days is administer contracts. The current shuttle design
has been in service for damn near 30 years with a planned lifespan something
like 20 years and a goal of a low cost delivery system to near earth orbit.
It has proven to be the most expensive delivery system available and is more
sensitive than a teenage girl. And more dangerous. NASA has had 30 years to
come up with a replacement and has fallen on it's collective ass.
A good friend and former Air Force Commander once told me that "the current
NASA generation couldn't put a man on the moon to save thier lives and we're
spending $4 billion a year (mid 90s, 8 launches @ $500 million per) to light
fires in an oxygen rich environment and watch rats f*ck".
Check out a crew list. Aside from the pilots, you'll see a gaggle of people
who have no friggin clue as to what they're supposed to be doing up there,
that's why they go thru so much training. If you really wanted to get the
job done, NASA would send Navy mud divers instead of engineers and school
teachers. Divers already know how to work in a weightless environment, they
know life support systems and how to work with tools
NASA, like FEMA have become stagnent social programs that cannot perform
thier missions. Flush them and start over.

OT health care
 

On 17/04/2010 5:22 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 10:29:11 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Which has little to do with the argument that tort reform is going to save
the healthcare system.

Tort reform would save the whole economic system. The lawyers tax is a
drag on the whole economy, producing absolutely nothing.



?? Come on. More nonsense. Most lawyers are honest and hardworking. Lawyers
founded this country. We have nothing to be ashamed of.

The only explaination I have is lawyers back then were more honest and
under a lot more scruteny on the issue of governance. Probably because
many of their peers were NOT lawyers and they had to get acceptance from
the people.

"We the people..." founded the USA. Otherwise the residents would have
hung the idiots as traitors to the crown, and they were traitors to the
British. But victors write the history books.

BTW, I think they did a good job. Just an observation that they were
British subjects before they were Americans.

--
Time to ask ask, is our government serving us or are we serving the
government?

OT health care
 

On 16/04/2010 10:07 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 16/04/2010 11:16 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:
Here's my question. We all know that the present system can't go on
working. We can't have 15% of the population not have some way to pay
for health care and at the same time pass laws that force hospitals to
care for them anyway. That's like having a law that a restaurant has
to serve you even though you are obviously not going to pay. Hey, you
could be starving. Do both sides agree that what we have now isn't
going to go on working forever? If so then at the end of the day
don't we really just have 2 options.

Option 1, figure out some way to get those people back into the system
with some minimal benefits as the rest of us.

Option 2, no tickey, no laundry. You can't pay the the hospital is
within it's rights to turn you away.

I'm not advocating one or the other with this post. I'm just asking
at the 20,000 foot level is there a 3rd choice I'm missing?

Yes.

3) Tax everyone 25% of their gross income from all sources, it can only be
deducted if you can show you and all of your dependants are insured to a
government minimum. Next, government will insure the rest provided they
are legal residents with a valid social security number and not in arrears
with taxes. No more illegal care unless charity funds it. Then hike
taxes to cover the costs where the 25% does not cover it. Government care
will be minimum care, no exotic or super expensive stuff. It may be
rrationed and cannot be used to fix stuff like botched implants or sex
changes. Revenue for health care goes to health care, it cannot be skimed
or reallocated by corrupt congress.

Either a tough and realistic 3) or do 2). 1) Is a blankj check to screw
taxpayers.

--
The Liberal way, take no responsibility.


You're proving to be more of an idiot than first meets the eye. I don't know
about you, but I don't really want really sick people roaming the streets.
Everyone who's sick needs to get care, as it is now, except that now it's
way too expensive.

Botched implants? Like a penile implant? Or, like a sex change operation
you'd be planning?

Nope, just citing that some people have been known to get a $5K plastic
surgery, it goes wrong and they need $100K of publically funded health
care to fix it. Stupid abuse really.

Nope, keeping my parts and adding nothing. But it is clear you are
beyond hope, no medical cure for you exists at any price.

--
Time to ask, is our government serving us or are we serving the government?

OT health care
 

On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 19:00:55 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 17/04/2010 5:36 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 17:26:25 -0600,
wrote:


and how much coverage do you have if you cant get ANY coverage?

No such thing as free.

i repeat: how much coverage do you have if you have NO coverage?

dodging the question is not an answer. and why do right wingers want
to balance the heathcare budget on the backs of the poor?

Dodging nothing you little twirp.

says the guy who thinks if you have no health insurance, you should be
happy because it's more money for wall street


I pay abut 50% of my income into taxes of civic, provincial and federal
taxes of one kind or another. For this I get basic health care.

who cares? again, the US spends 17% of GDP on healthcare. canada,
about 10%

what do we get for that? you refuse to even ADDRESS the issue.

all you do is bitch about your free market religion. no one cares
about your failed religion. it's like believing in zeus.


And that is before I get to the gas pumps.

Any sane idiot wants to balance a budget if they want a sustainable
anything. You cannot charge it into perpetuity without a chattle on the
future and we be expected to pay for this massive debt for losers.

the losers are wall street and their puppets like you who believe the
free market is god.


Otherwise you are just a snake oil salesment stiring up the discontent
of dumb**** voters looking for a free ride. Because when the government
is broke, and can't pay for it they will get the tax bill without the
benefits.

our govt IS broke and we pay MORE than you do for healthcare

so, go ahead. continue dodging the issue. continue bleating your
ignorant faith in wall street's gods.

if you want a 70% increase in your healthcare taxes

go with the former american system

wall street will love you