|
The Inherent Problems with Government Controlled Healthcare
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 08:11:41 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 19/04/2011 5:50 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:30:42 -0400, John wrote: A good explanation. This was passed on to my wife by her doctor. At least it came from a disinterested third party! Or not........ If government control of health services is good for society then government control of all services is good for society. Hey, what ever happened to choice? For those that feel the need for government to manage their lives, say at 18 or 21 make an election. Herd animal or independent human being? What ever happened to stupid... oh wait, you're here. |
The Inherent Problems with Government Controlled Healthcare
On 19/04/2011 8:40 AM, Harryk wrote:
I_am_Tosk wrote: In article_vSdnSgaOKjxATDQnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... Canuck57 wrote: On 19/04/2011 5:50 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:30:42 -0400, John wrote: A good explanation. This was passed on to my wife by her doctor. At least it came from a disinterested third party! Or not........ If government control of health services is good for society then government control of all services is good for society. Hey, what ever happened to choice? For those that feel the need for government to manage their lives, say at 18 or 21 make an election. Herd animal or independent human being? In the absence of a national health plan in this country that covers everyone, health insurance should be mandatory. How that health insurance is provided is another question. Unfortunately, we have a private insurance system whose goal is not to provide good coverage at good rates, but to maximize profits, and, as necessary, the patient be damned. Perhaps, someday, we shall outgrow that sort of nonsense. The citizens of most modern countries don't face bankruptcy when a medical crisis arises. Too many Americans do. Since World War II, we've wasted trillions of dollars on maintenance and expansion of our military. If we had saved half that amount and spent it on infrastructure, on investments in our futures, on health care for all our people, we'd be a far stronger country than we are now. You are such a dumb ****... "Infrastructure, investment in our future"? Sure, we have heard all that before, no solutions, just talking points... dumb ****... More investments in infrastructure, on investments in our future (you know, science, technology, factories that produce goods people need, health care), et cetera, leads to a better country for all with more opportunities. I'm not surprised you don't understand that. Free enterprise will supply you with what you need. And if you don't want what they offer, then you don't have to pay for it. But with government, you become a slave because whether you want it or not you will pay for it. Never let anyone or any organization get any more control over you than need be. That includes governments, as governments start wars, tax grab from you for the lazy and the corrupt. In reality, big government is big slavery. After K12, basics roads, sewer and common law, the rest is pure waste and corruption. Pork for the rich and corrupt. With infrastructure, very little of todays taxes goes there. Very very little. Got money for war, got money to meddle in every countries business in the world, got money for corruption and corporate bailouts -- but no money for medicare.... I rest my case. Because government is already out of control and the very thing you worship is the very thing that keeps you down. -- I can assure you that the road to prosperity is not paved with fleabagger debt. |
The Inherent Problems with Government Controlled Healthcare
On 19/04/2011 8:48 AM, Harryk wrote:
I_am_Tosk wrote: In articleKvCdnQH7ePVQAzDQnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... I_am_Tosk wrote: In article_vSdnSgaOKjxATDQnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... Canuck57 wrote: On 19/04/2011 5:50 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:30:42 -0400, John wrote: A good explanation. This was passed on to my wife by her doctor. At least it came from a disinterested third party! Or not........ If government control of health services is good for society then government control of all services is good for society. Hey, what ever happened to choice? For those that feel the need for government to manage their lives, say at 18 or 21 make an election. Herd animal or independent human being? In the absence of a national health plan in this country that covers everyone, health insurance should be mandatory. How that health insurance is provided is another question. Unfortunately, we have a private insurance system whose goal is not to provide good coverage at good rates, but to maximize profits, and, as necessary, the patient be damned. Perhaps, someday, we shall outgrow that sort of nonsense. The citizens of most modern countries don't face bankruptcy when a medical crisis arises. Too many Americans do. Since World War II, we've wasted trillions of dollars on maintenance and expansion of our military. If we had saved half that amount and spent it on infrastructure, on investments in our futures, on health care for all our people, we'd be a far stronger country than we are now. You are such a dumb ****... "Infrastructure, investment in our future"? Sure, we have heard all that before, no solutions, just talking points... dumb ****... More investments in infrastructure, on investments in our future (you know, science, technology, factories that produce goods people need, health care), et cetera, leads to a better country for all with more opportunities. I'm not surprised you don't understand that. Talk, talk, talk... you have no specifics, just what MSNBC/GE told you to say... You are a fat dumb creeper. You should have really finished High School. You know, it isn't necessary for you to demonstrate more than once a day what an empty-headed fool you are, little man. So, you are opposed to spending on infrastructure, R&D, new factories, health care improvements. No surprise. Yes, but your faith and worship of big fat government is going to save the day is a false god. -- I can assure you that the road to prosperity is not paved with fleabagger debt. |
The Inherent Problems with Government Controlled Healthcare
Canuck57 wrote:
On 19/04/2011 8:40 AM, Harryk wrote: I_am_Tosk wrote: In article_vSdnSgaOKjxATDQnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... Canuck57 wrote: On 19/04/2011 5:50 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:30:42 -0400, John wrote: A good explanation. This was passed on to my wife by her doctor. At least it came from a disinterested third party! Or not........ If government control of health services is good for society then government control of all services is good for society. Hey, what ever happened to choice? For those that feel the need for government to manage their lives, say at 18 or 21 make an election. Herd animal or independent human being? In the absence of a national health plan in this country that covers everyone, health insurance should be mandatory. How that health insurance is provided is another question. Unfortunately, we have a private insurance system whose goal is not to provide good coverage at good rates, but to maximize profits, and, as necessary, the patient be damned. Perhaps, someday, we shall outgrow that sort of nonsense. The citizens of most modern countries don't face bankruptcy when a medical crisis arises. Too many Americans do. Since World War II, we've wasted trillions of dollars on maintenance and expansion of our military. If we had saved half that amount and spent it on infrastructure, on investments in our futures, on health care for all our people, we'd be a far stronger country than we are now. You are such a dumb ****... "Infrastructure, investment in our future"? Sure, we have heard all that before, no solutions, just talking points... dumb ****... More investments in infrastructure, on investments in our future (you know, science, technology, factories that produce goods people need, health care), et cetera, leads to a better country for all with more opportunities. I'm not surprised you don't understand that. Free enterprise will supply you with what you need. And if you don't want what they offer, then you don't have to pay for it. - - - Free enterprise has ****ed this country and tens of millions of its workers over royally. And now you want more of the same? |
The Inherent Problems with Government Controlled Healthcare
Canuck57 wrote:
On 19/04/2011 8:48 AM, Harryk wrote: I_am_Tosk wrote: In articleKvCdnQH7ePVQAzDQnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... I_am_Tosk wrote: In article_vSdnSgaOKjxATDQnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... Canuck57 wrote: On 19/04/2011 5:50 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:30:42 -0400, John wrote: A good explanation. This was passed on to my wife by her doctor. At least it came from a disinterested third party! Or not........ If government control of health services is good for society then government control of all services is good for society. Hey, what ever happened to choice? For those that feel the need for government to manage their lives, say at 18 or 21 make an election. Herd animal or independent human being? In the absence of a national health plan in this country that covers everyone, health insurance should be mandatory. How that health insurance is provided is another question. Unfortunately, we have a private insurance system whose goal is not to provide good coverage at good rates, but to maximize profits, and, as necessary, the patient be damned. Perhaps, someday, we shall outgrow that sort of nonsense. The citizens of most modern countries don't face bankruptcy when a medical crisis arises. Too many Americans do. Since World War II, we've wasted trillions of dollars on maintenance and expansion of our military. If we had saved half that amount and spent it on infrastructure, on investments in our futures, on health care for all our people, we'd be a far stronger country than we are now. You are such a dumb ****... "Infrastructure, investment in our future"? Sure, we have heard all that before, no solutions, just talking points... dumb ****... More investments in infrastructure, on investments in our future (you know, science, technology, factories that produce goods people need, health care), et cetera, leads to a better country for all with more opportunities. I'm not surprised you don't understand that. Talk, talk, talk... you have no specifics, just what MSNBC/GE told you to say... You are a fat dumb creeper. You should have really finished High School. You know, it isn't necessary for you to demonstrate more than once a day what an empty-headed fool you are, little man. So, you are opposed to spending on infrastructure, R&D, new factories, health care improvements. No surprise. Yes, but your faith and worship of big fat government is going to save the day is a false god. I'm calling for more investments in what we need. Snotty has nothing to add and your comment is not in response to what I posited. You, Snotty, and the rest of your droogies should find a new country to despoil. |
The Inherent Problems with Government Controlled Healthcare
In article ,
says... On 19/04/2011 8:48 AM, Harryk wrote: I_am_Tosk wrote: In articleKvCdnQH7ePVQAzDQnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... I_am_Tosk wrote: In article_vSdnSgaOKjxATDQnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... Canuck57 wrote: On 19/04/2011 5:50 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:30:42 -0400, John wrote: A good explanation. This was passed on to my wife by her doctor. At least it came from a disinterested third party! Or not........ If government control of health services is good for society then government control of all services is good for society. Hey, what ever happened to choice? For those that feel the need for government to manage their lives, say at 18 or 21 make an election. Herd animal or independent human being? In the absence of a national health plan in this country that covers everyone, health insurance should be mandatory. How that health insurance is provided is another question. Unfortunately, we have a private insurance system whose goal is not to provide good coverage at good rates, but to maximize profits, and, as necessary, the patient be damned. Perhaps, someday, we shall outgrow that sort of nonsense. The citizens of most modern countries don't face bankruptcy when a medical crisis arises. Too many Americans do. Since World War II, we've wasted trillions of dollars on maintenance and expansion of our military. If we had saved half that amount and spent it on infrastructure, on investments in our futures, on health care for all our people, we'd be a far stronger country than we are now. You are such a dumb ****... "Infrastructure, investment in our future"? Sure, we have heard all that before, no solutions, just talking points... dumb ****... More investments in infrastructure, on investments in our future (you know, science, technology, factories that produce goods people need, health care), et cetera, leads to a better country for all with more opportunities. I'm not surprised you don't understand that. Talk, talk, talk... you have no specifics, just what MSNBC/GE told you to say... You are a fat dumb creeper. You should have really finished High School. You know, it isn't necessary for you to demonstrate more than once a day what an empty-headed fool you are, little man. So, you are opposed to spending on infrastructure, R&D, new factories, health care improvements. No surprise. Yes, but your faith and worship of big fat government is going to save the day is a false god. His only argument is to make up something and suggest that the other person "thinks" that.. "So you think (insert any diversion here)... " is all they can say.. -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
The Inherent Problems with Government Controlled Healthcare
I_am_Tosk wrote:
In , says... On 19/04/2011 8:48 AM, Harryk wrote: I_am_Tosk wrote: In articleKvCdnQH7ePVQAzDQnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... I_am_Tosk wrote: In article_vSdnSgaOKjxATDQnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... Canuck57 wrote: On 19/04/2011 5:50 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:30:42 -0400, John wrote: A good explanation. This was passed on to my wife by her doctor. At least it came from a disinterested third party! Or not........ If government control of health services is good for society then government control of all services is good for society. Hey, what ever happened to choice? For those that feel the need for government to manage their lives, say at 18 or 21 make an election. Herd animal or independent human being? In the absence of a national health plan in this country that covers everyone, health insurance should be mandatory. How that health insurance is provided is another question. Unfortunately, we have a private insurance system whose goal is not to provide good coverage at good rates, but to maximize profits, and, as necessary, the patient be damned. Perhaps, someday, we shall outgrow that sort of nonsense. The citizens of most modern countries don't face bankruptcy when a medical crisis arises. Too many Americans do. Since World War II, we've wasted trillions of dollars on maintenance and expansion of our military. If we had saved half that amount and spent it on infrastructure, on investments in our futures, on health care for all our people, we'd be a far stronger country than we are now. You are such a dumb ****... "Infrastructure, investment in our future"? Sure, we have heard all that before, no solutions, just talking points... dumb ****... More investments in infrastructure, on investments in our future (you know, science, technology, factories that produce goods people need, health care), et cetera, leads to a better country for all with more opportunities. I'm not surprised you don't understand that. Talk, talk, talk... you have no specifics, just what MSNBC/GE told you to say... You are a fat dumb creeper. You should have really finished High School. You know, it isn't necessary for you to demonstrate more than once a day what an empty-headed fool you are, little man. So, you are opposed to spending on infrastructure, R&D, new factories, health care improvements. No surprise. Yes, but your faith and worship of big fat government is going to save the day is a false god. His only argument is to make up something and suggest that the other person "thinks" that.. "So you think (insert any diversion here)... " is all they can say.. Has someone accused you of "thinking"? |
The Inherent Problems with Government Controlled Healthcare
On 19/04/2011 12:27 PM, Harryk wrote:
Canuck57 wrote: On 19/04/2011 8:48 AM, Harryk wrote: I_am_Tosk wrote: In articleKvCdnQH7ePVQAzDQnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... I_am_Tosk wrote: In article_vSdnSgaOKjxATDQnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389 @mypacks.net says... Canuck57 wrote: On 19/04/2011 5:50 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:30:42 -0400, John wrote: A good explanation. This was passed on to my wife by her doctor. At least it came from a disinterested third party! Or not........ If government control of health services is good for society then government control of all services is good for society. Hey, what ever happened to choice? For those that feel the need for government to manage their lives, say at 18 or 21 make an election. Herd animal or independent human being? In the absence of a national health plan in this country that covers everyone, health insurance should be mandatory. How that health insurance is provided is another question. Unfortunately, we have a private insurance system whose goal is not to provide good coverage at good rates, but to maximize profits, and, as necessary, the patient be damned. Perhaps, someday, we shall outgrow that sort of nonsense. The citizens of most modern countries don't face bankruptcy when a medical crisis arises. Too many Americans do. Since World War II, we've wasted trillions of dollars on maintenance and expansion of our military. If we had saved half that amount and spent it on infrastructure, on investments in our futures, on health care for all our people, we'd be a far stronger country than we are now. You are such a dumb ****... "Infrastructure, investment in our future"? Sure, we have heard all that before, no solutions, just talking points... dumb ****... More investments in infrastructure, on investments in our future (you know, science, technology, factories that produce goods people need, health care), et cetera, leads to a better country for all with more opportunities. I'm not surprised you don't understand that. Talk, talk, talk... you have no specifics, just what MSNBC/GE told you to say... You are a fat dumb creeper. You should have really finished High School. You know, it isn't necessary for you to demonstrate more than once a day what an empty-headed fool you are, little man. So, you are opposed to spending on infrastructure, R&D, new factories, health care improvements. No surprise. Yes, but your faith and worship of big fat government is going to save the day is a false god. I'm calling for more investments in what we need. Snotty has nothing to add and your comment is not in response to what I posited. You, Snotty, and the rest of your droogies should find a new country to despoil. What you need is to restore faith in the investment community by stopping the ponzi fraud like currency counterfeiting going on. You can't just keep printing money like sand for a byzantine overspending government forever. Sooner or later, someone is going to say hey, government is printing new money dollars faster than Americans consume in toilet paper -- and USDs will become toilet paper. Then see who hurts. It will not be the "rich". Heck, many of them already have a good chunk of their wealth outside of the USA. It is why investment is rather dry, fewer jobs too. All DC has to promise right now is a huge massive debt problem, promise of higher taxation and a depreciating dollar value. Hardly attractive to new investments and jobs that come with them. Cities and states are seeing this now too. Tax greed for statism. Can cut up profits and cut up peoples pay check but can't cut that governmetn corruption and pork spend. Never invest in delinquent debtors for less than a 25% or 35% return to cover excessive risk. -- I can assure you that the road to prosperity is not paved with fleabagger debt. |
The Inherent Problems with Government Controlled Healthcare
On 19/04/2011 12:25 PM, Harryk wrote:
Free enterprise has ****ed this country and tens of millions of its workers over royally. And now you want more of the same? Gee, and I thought it was corruption in government and banking. If business was the problem, how come Obama does not put them in jail? Oh wait, they be Harvard buddies and the golden handshake crowd. -- I can assure you that the road to prosperity is not paved with fleabagger debt. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:38 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com