|
Living longer? Not in US
Living longer? Not in US By Derrick Z. Jackson Globe Columnist / June 28, 2011 ONE FALSEHOOD must end in the raging debates on Medicare, Medicaid, and health reform. In their denunciation of reform, Republicans from House Speaker John Boehner to Tea Party presidential candidate Michele Bachmann boast we already have the world’s best health system. Last week Representative Scott DesJarlais of Tennessee spiced up the rhetoric by saying reform is “destroying the greatest health care system the world’s ever known.’’ No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. As Republicans continue to demonize what little reform we have agreed to, life expectancy for American women is dropping as never before in some sections of the nation. Researchers at the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation this month published a county-by-county analysis of life expectancy. From 1987 to 1997, there were 227 counties where female life expectancy dropped. From 1997 to 2007, the number of counties where women’s life expectancy dropped exploded to 737. Comparisons with the rest of the developed world are more appalling. Of the nation’s 3,147 counties, nearly two-thirds — 2,054 — fell further behind life expectancies for women in the 10 longest-living countries. This is despite the United States having the world’s highest per-capita health spending. Christopher Murray, the director of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, said his research team expected to find regional and racial disparities, but the overall breadth of the backward movement was stunning. He said that several negative trends were hitting American women all at once. “Men were big smokers in the 1950s and have cut back since,’’ Murray said. “Women started later and we are now seeing the damage done by this wave of women smokers. Obesity also hits women harder than men, and this is a huge factor nationwide. With high blood pressure, we know from previous studies that women are not being diagnosed or treated at the same level.’’ for mo http://tinyurl.com/3g66bov |
Living longer? Not in US
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, Harryk
wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. |
Living longer? Not in US
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:13:35 -0400, Wayne B wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, Harryk wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. Now see...there you go riling up the pack. For shame, for shame. But, your statement's most definitely correct. If you took out the illegal aliens, you'd help our statistics also. Taking out a few thousand of the monthly shootings in our Democratic run cities would *greatly* help our statistics. |
Living longer? Not in US
On 6/28/11 2:13 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. It certainly has nothing to do with the fact that 50 million people in this country do not have ready access to health care, and than around 80 million do not have ready access to dental care. Naw. That couldn't have anything to do with it. -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Living longer? Not in US
On 6/28/2011 2:52 PM, Harryk wrote:
On 6/28/11 2:13 PM, Wayne B wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. It certainly has nothing to do with the fact that 50 million people in this country do not have ready access to health care, and than around 80 million do not have ready access to dental care. Naw. That couldn't have anything to do with it. Thought Bam Bam fixed that problem. |
Living longer? Not in US
In article , naled24511
@mypacks.net says... Living longer? Not in US By Derrick Z. Jackson Globe Columnist / June 28, 2011 What quality of life is there in being a basement dweller? I would assume that you would want to get it over with sooner Harry. |
Living longer? Not in US
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, Harryk
wrote: Living longer? Not in US By Derrick Z. Jackson Globe Columnist / June 28, 2011 ONE FALSEHOOD must end in the raging debates on Medicare, Medicaid, and health reform. In their denunciation of reform, Republicans from House Speaker John Boehner to Tea Party presidential candidate Michele Bachmann boast we already have the world’s best health system. Last week Representative Scott DesJarlais of Tennessee spiced up the rhetoric by saying reform is “destroying the greatest health care system the world’s ever known.’’ praise jesus! this is america at its best 1. the ric h are getting richer 2. the poor are gettng screwed 3. and the places where people are dying are pro life!!! just what god wants |
Living longer? Not in US
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:13:35 -0400, Wayne B
wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, Harryk wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. \\ sorry sport. the south aint democratic\ |
Living longer? Not in US
On 28/06/2011 7:58 AM, Harryk wrote:
Living longer? Not in US By Derrick Z. Jackson Globe Columnist / June 28, 2011 Funny how we talk about health and all the nuts talk about food. What about debt-slavery stress? Stress is the #1 killer but we spend so little time on it. Stress works differently too, some people ear to relieve stress. A "In Debt We Trsut!" nation is going to get a lot of society stress. See Greece. -- Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem. |
Living longer? Not in US
On 28/06/2011 6:20 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:13:35 -0400, Wayne B wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. \\ sorry sport. the south aint democratic\ For once, for the most part your right. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states But if you look closely there is a pattern. More union, more up your ass government, more dysfunctional the non-government economy, more state taxes, more likely it is a fleabagger state. -- Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem. |
Living longer? Not in US
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 21:27:19 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 28/06/2011 6:20 PM, wf3h wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:13:35 -0400, Wayne B wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. \\ sorry sport. the south aint democratic\ For once, for the most part your right. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states But if you look closely there is a pattern. More union, more up your ass government, more dysfunctional the non-government economy, more state taxes, more likely it is a fleabagger state. we have no unions in the US. only well run, rich countries have unions |
Living longer? Not in US
On 6/28/11 10:14 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 28/06/2011 7:58 AM, Harryk wrote: Living longer? Not in US By Derrick Z. Jackson Globe Columnist / June 28, 2011 Funny how we talk about health and all the nuts talk about food. What about debt-slavery stress? Stress is the #1 killer but we spend so little time on it. Stress works differently too, some people ear to relieve stress. A "In Debt We Trsut!" nation is going to get a lot of society stress. See Greece. Let's see... You don't know anything about economics... You don't know anything about history... You think Egypt under Mubarak was a democracy... You support the dictator of Libya... You don't know the meanings of common words, so you misuse them... You don't know anything about public health, but you use your prejudices to rationalize it... Basically, you've replaced Scott Ingersoll as the most prolific fool posting here. -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Living longer? Not in US
|
Living longer? Not in US
In article , naled24511
@mypacks.net says... On 6/29/11 9:01 AM, iBoat v2.0 wrote: In , says... On 6/28/11 10:14 PM, Canuck57 wrote: On 28/06/2011 7:58 AM, Harryk wrote: Living longer? Not in US By Derrick Z. Jackson Globe Columnist / June 28, 2011 Funny how we talk about health and all the nuts talk about food. What about debt-slavery stress? Stress is the #1 killer but we spend so little time on it. Stress works differently too, some people ear to relieve stress. A "In Debt We Trsut!" nation is going to get a lot of society stress. See Greece. Let's see... You don't know anything about economics... You don't know anything about history... You think Egypt under Mubarak was a democracy... You support the dictator of Libya... You don't know the meanings of common words, so you misuse them... You don't know anything about public health, but you use your prejudices to rationalize it... Basically, you've replaced Scott Ingersoll as the most prolific fool posting here. In other words, you couldn't debate his post so you insult and call names, doing exactly what you banned over at your new google group. What a piece of low life trash. Oohhh...the loogy offal has changed his handle again. How exciting. I know *this* is a concept you don't have the brain power to comprehend, loogy offal, but the positions in most of Canuck's posts aren't worth debating. They're not based upon fact, science, or reality, and are usually nothing more than manifestations of his blind adherence to racism and teabaggerism. He proves every single day he doesn't understand the real world, so what would be the point in "debating" the merit of his positions with him. And now, down you go with your new handle into the bozo septic tank. Bye bye. Now I'm "loogy"?? You ARE stupid! Why don't you take that insulting **** back to your own group, asshat? |
Living longer? Not in US
John H wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:13:35 -0400, Wayne wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. Now see...there you go riling up the pack. For shame, for shame. But, your statement's most definitely correct. If you took out the illegal aliens, you'd help our statistics also. Taking out a few thousand of the monthly shootings in our Democratic run cities would *greatly* help our statistics. Notice he didn't respond? The truth hurts. |
Living longer? Not in US
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:13:35 -0400, Wayne B
wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, Harryk wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. So, if someone lives in a bad neighborhood, is a law-abiding citizen, but is a victim of gun violence, it's that's person's fault? Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. |
Living longer? Not in US
On Jul 2, 1:31*am, wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:13:35 -0400, Wayne B wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, Harryk wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. *Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. So, if someone lives in a bad neighborhood, is a law-abiding citizen, but is a victim of gun violence, it's that's person's fault? Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. No D'Plume. It is all YOUR fault. YOUR fault for allowing the armed person to prey on the law-abiding citizen due to economic strife or what ever else you can blame on society to put the person into a league of criminal activity due to desperate circumstances. It is also YOUR fault that people can't control their poor eating habits due to you not setting up education and health food services for them. Not counting inviting them into your home and cooking for them. Poor D'Plume. You are a toad in society. You are not, and will not do enough for the poor, helpless, and needy.. |
Living longer? Not in US
|
Living longer? Not in US
On Jul 2, 6:41*am, Jay wrote:
On 7/2/2011 2:31 AM, wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:13:35 -0400, Wayne B *wrote: If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. *Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. So, if someone lives in a bad neighborhood, is a law-abiding citizen, but is a victim of gun violence, it's that's person's fault? Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. Read it again you dumb cluck. D'Plume can read? |
Living longer? Not in US
On Jul 2, 1:31*am, wrote:
Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. So, if a store is local it has only cheap food and is poorly stocked? Is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only found in poorly stocked, local stores. Is that what you are saying? So, Only the local stores are stocked poorly, and will only carry cheap food, is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only affordable from the local, and poorly stocked stores, is that what you are saying? |
Living longer? Not in US
On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 04:07:00 -0700 (PDT), TopBassDog
wrote: On Jul 2, 1:31*am, wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:13:35 -0400, Wayne B wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, Harryk wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. *Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. So, if someone lives in a bad neighborhood, is a law-abiding citizen, but is a victim of gun violence, it's that's person's fault? Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. No D'Plume. It is all YOUR fault. YOUR fault for allowing the armed person to prey on the law-abiding citizen due to economic strife or what ever else you can blame on society to put the person into a league of criminal activity due to desperate circumstances. It is also YOUR fault that people can't control their poor eating habits due to you not setting up education and health food services for them. Not counting inviting them into your home and cooking for them. Poor D'Plume. You are a toad in society. You are not, and will not do enough for the poor, helpless, and needy.. Trying to engage Ms. D'Parrot in an intelligent and reasoned debate is an excercise in futility. Her mind is firmly made up and is not about to be easily confused by the facts. That said, store owners in poor neighborhoods, like store owners everywhere, know their customers and stock what sells. If people are buying vegetables and dairy products, they'll stock vegetables and dairy products. If people are buying Hostess Twinkies and malt liquor, they'll stock that instead. It is a tribute to our wonderfully enlightened policies that people can actually use government food stamps to buy junk food, and it sells very well. |
Living longer? Not in US
On 7/2/2011 8:03 AM, TopBassDog wrote:
On Jul 2, 6:41 am, wrote: On 7/2/2011 2:31 AM, wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:13:35 -0400, Wayne B wrote: If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. So, if someone lives in a bad neighborhood, is a law-abiding citizen, but is a victim of gun violence, it's that's person's fault? Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. Read it again you dumb cluck. D'Plume can read? She sees words but her brain can't quite figure them out. |
Living longer? Not in US
On 7/2/2011 8:14 AM, TopBassDog wrote:
On Jul 2, 1:31 am, wrote: Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. So, if a store is local it has only cheap food and is poorly stocked? Is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only found in poorly stocked, local stores. Is that what you are saying? So, Only the local stores are stocked poorly, and will only carry cheap food, is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only affordable from the local, and poorly stocked stores, is that what you are saying? Don't try to make sense of what she is saying. And never argue with her. That is, if you want to maintain your sanity. |
Living longer? Not in US
On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 05:14:32 -0700 (PDT), TopBassDog wrote:
On Jul 2, 1:31*am, wrote: Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. So, if a store is local it has only cheap food and is poorly stocked? Is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only found in poorly stocked, local stores. Is that what you are saying? So, Only the local stores are stocked poorly, and will only carry cheap food, is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only affordable from the local, and poorly stocked stores, is that what you are saying? 'Basically', I'm LMAO! |
Living longer? Not in US
On 7/2/11 10:55 AM, John H wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 05:14:32 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 2, 1:31 am, wrote: Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. So, if a store is local it has only cheap food and is poorly stocked? Is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only found in poorly stocked, local stores. Is that what you are saying? So, Only the local stores are stocked poorly, and will only carry cheap food, is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only affordable from the local, and poorly stocked stores, is that what you are saying? 'Basically', I'm LMAO! Your lack of compassion for the poor is exceeded only by your selfishness and racism. -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Living longer? Not in US
On 29/06/2011 3:58 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 21:27:19 -0600, wrote: On 28/06/2011 6:20 PM, wf3h wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:13:35 -0400, Wayne B wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. \\ sorry sport. the south aint democratic\ For once, for the most part your right. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states But if you look closely there is a pattern. More union, more up your ass government, more dysfunctional the non-government economy, more state taxes, more likely it is a fleabagger state. we have no unions in the US. only well run, rich countries have unions Actually not. But you go think so. -- Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem. ------ In Debt We Trust! -- Obama and the democrats, world record in debt incursion. |
Living longer? Not in US
|
Living longer? Not in US
On 02/07/2011 9:05 AM, Harryk wrote:
On 7/2/11 10:55 AM, John H wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 05:14:32 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 2, 1:31 am, wrote: Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. So, if a store is local it has only cheap food and is poorly stocked? Is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only found in poorly stocked, local stores. Is that what you are saying? So, Only the local stores are stocked poorly, and will only carry cheap food, is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only affordable from the local, and poorly stocked stores, is that what you are saying? 'Basically', I'm LMAO! Your lack of compassion for the poor is exceeded only by your selfishness and racism. Always the pathetic harryk a slandering. -- Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem. ------ In Debt We Trust! -- Obama and the democrats, world record in debt incursion. |
Living longer? Not in US
On Sat, 02 Jul 2011 09:37:14 -0400, Wayne B
wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 04:07:00 -0700 (PDT), TopBassDog wrote: On Jul 2, 1:31*am, wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:13:35 -0400, Wayne B wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, Harryk wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. *Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. So, if someone lives in a bad neighborhood, is a law-abiding citizen, but is a victim of gun violence, it's that's person's fault? Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. No D'Plume. It is all YOUR fault. YOUR fault for allowing the armed person to prey on the law-abiding citizen due to economic strife or what ever else you can blame on society to put the person into a league of criminal activity due to desperate circumstances. It is also YOUR fault that people can't control their poor eating habits due to you not setting up education and health food services for them. Not counting inviting them into your home and cooking for them. Poor D'Plume. You are a toad in society. You are not, and will not do enough for the poor, helpless, and needy.. Trying to engage Ms. D'Parrot in an intelligent and reasoned debate is an excercise in futility. Her mind is firmly made up and is not about to be easily confused by the facts. That said, store owners in poor neighborhoods, like store owners everywhere, know their customers and stock what sells. If people are buying vegetables and dairy products, they'll stock vegetables and dairy products. If people are buying Hostess Twinkies and malt liquor, they'll stock that instead. It is a tribute to our wonderfully enlightened policies that people can actually use government food stamps to buy junk food, and it sells very well. So, basically you agree with your right-wing buddy's racist nonsense. We get it Wayne. Now all we have to do is wait for John to tell you to stop. I have a feeling it'll be a long wait, since he's a known liar. |
Living longer? Not in US
On Sat, 02 Jul 2011 11:05:31 -0400, Harryk
wrote: On 7/2/11 10:55 AM, John H wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 05:14:32 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 2, 1:31 am, wrote: Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. So, if a store is local it has only cheap food and is poorly stocked? Is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only found in poorly stocked, local stores. Is that what you are saying? So, Only the local stores are stocked poorly, and will only carry cheap food, is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only affordable from the local, and poorly stocked stores, is that what you are saying? 'Basically', I'm LMAO! Your lack of compassion for the poor is exceeded only by your selfishness and racism. And, you notice how he told his buddies to stop putting others down right? We wouldn't want to miss that! As usual, he's a liar. |
Living longer? Not in US
On Sat, 02 Jul 2011 10:46:25 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 02/07/2011 12:31 AM, wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:13:35 -0400, Wayne B wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:12 -0400, wrote: No one doubts we have some of the most advanced medical technologies, research, and facilities. But if you measure systems by life expectancy, the United States, at 37th in the world for both men and women, is not even close to having the best. If you leave out the 20 to 30% of the US population with unhealthy lifestyles (drugs, alcohol, violence, etc.), the numbers look quite different. Yes I know, it's really not fair to leave out all of those democrats, but it is what it is. So, if someone lives in a bad neighborhood, is a law-abiding citizen, but is a victim of gun violence, it's that's person's fault? Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. No, you visit Amazon or some book store, instead of a lid of crack or pot, you buy and read a book to better yourself. Take evening course instead of looking for hookers....work out of your whiner dysfunctional attitude and learn to think like a winner. Work out of it. Like I did. I started out being one of 4 kids, wrong side of the tracks, drugs in the hood and all. Now, I live in a neighborhood with bankers, CEOs next door. Self made honestly all the way, most even tax paid as I do use IRA/RRSP to shelter. Trouble with you is your LAZY and truly stupid. Just an undiciplined MFer looking to screw someone else. You're a little moronic guy who can't get it up and has no financial resources whatsoever. |
Living longer? Not in US
On 7/2/11 1:01 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 02 Jul 2011 11:05:31 -0400, wrote: On 7/2/11 10:55 AM, John H wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 05:14:32 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 2, 1:31 am, wrote: Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. So, if a store is local it has only cheap food and is poorly stocked? Is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only found in poorly stocked, local stores. Is that what you are saying? So, Only the local stores are stocked poorly, and will only carry cheap food, is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only affordable from the local, and poorly stocked stores, is that what you are saying? 'Basically', I'm LMAO! Your lack of compassion for the poor is exceeded only by your selfishness and racism. And, you notice how he told his buddies to stop putting others down right? We wouldn't want to miss that! As usual, he's a liar. Herring is trash. -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Living longer? Not in US
On Sat, 02 Jul 2011 13:09:25 -0400, Harryk
wrote: On 7/2/11 1:01 PM, wrote: On Sat, 02 Jul 2011 11:05:31 -0400, wrote: On 7/2/11 10:55 AM, John H wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 05:14:32 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 2, 1:31 am, wrote: Or, if all they can afford to buy is cheap food from the local, poorly stocked store, it's their fault. Basically, that's what you're saying. So, if a store is local it has only cheap food and is poorly stocked? Is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only found in poorly stocked, local stores. Is that what you are saying? So, Only the local stores are stocked poorly, and will only carry cheap food, is that what you are saying? So, cheap food is only affordable from the local, and poorly stocked stores, is that what you are saying? 'Basically', I'm LMAO! Your lack of compassion for the poor is exceeded only by your selfishness and racism. And, you notice how he told his buddies to stop putting others down right? We wouldn't want to miss that! As usual, he's a liar. Herring is trash. I can only judge by the words he uses. He claims lots of things, but when the rubber meets the road, he proves he lies. |
Living longer? Not in US
On Jul 2, 8:37*am, Wayne B wrote:
That said, store owners in poor neighborhoods, like store owners everywhere, know their customers and stock what sells. *If people are buying vegetables and dairy products, they'll stock vegetables and dairy products. *If people are buying Hostess Twinkies and malt liquor, they'll stock that instead. *It is a tribute to our wonderfully enlightened policies that people can actually use government food stamps to buy junk food, and it sells very well. That's pretty well how it works in my area too. just go through any convenience store. Pizza, beer and chips is the fare of the day. |
Living longer? Not in US
On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 11:54:42 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote: On Jul 2, 8:37*am, Wayne B wrote: That said, store owners in poor neighborhoods, like store owners everywhere, know their customers and stock what sells. *If people are buying vegetables and dairy products, they'll stock vegetables and dairy products. *If people are buying Hostess Twinkies and malt liquor, they'll stock that instead. *It is a tribute to our wonderfully enlightened policies that people can actually use government food stamps to buy junk food, and it sells very well. That's pretty well how it works in my area too. just go through any convenience store. Pizza, beer and chips is the fare of the day. And you know this because you live in the inner city? Doubtful. I guess the NY Times is, as usual, just wrong, because it's not a right-wing publication? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/04/he...on/04well.html |
Living longer? Not in US
On 7/2/11 3:25 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 11:54:42 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 2, 8:37 am, Wayne wrote: That said, store owners in poor neighborhoods, like store owners everywhere, know their customers and stock what sells. If people are buying vegetables and dairy products, they'll stock vegetables and dairy products. If people are buying Hostess Twinkies and malt liquor, they'll stock that instead. It is a tribute to our wonderfully enlightened policies that people can actually use government food stamps to buy junk food, and it sells very well. That's pretty well how it works in my area too. just go through any convenience store. Pizza, beer and chips is the fare of the day. And you know this because you live in the inner city? Doubtful. I guess the NY Times is, as usual, just wrong, because it's not a right-wing publication? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/04/he...on/04well.html Rightis think everyone has the wherewithal for good food, good shelter, decent housing, decent clothing, good health care and decent schools for the kids. Thanks to the rape of the economy and the middle class by the rich, the United States no longer is a country of rising expectations for the majority of people. After all, it's more important that the rich have subsidies for their private airplanes than poor and middle class children have access to reasonably sized classes at their schools. -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
Living longer? Not in US
On Sat, 02 Jul 2011 15:31:29 -0400, Harryk
wrote: On 7/2/11 3:25 PM, wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 11:54:42 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 2, 8:37 am, Wayne wrote: That said, store owners in poor neighborhoods, like store owners everywhere, know their customers and stock what sells. If people are buying vegetables and dairy products, they'll stock vegetables and dairy products. If people are buying Hostess Twinkies and malt liquor, they'll stock that instead. It is a tribute to our wonderfully enlightened policies that people can actually use government food stamps to buy junk food, and it sells very well. That's pretty well how it works in my area too. just go through any convenience store. Pizza, beer and chips is the fare of the day. And you know this because you live in the inner city? Doubtful. I guess the NY Times is, as usual, just wrong, because it's not a right-wing publication? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/04/he...on/04well.html Rightis think everyone has the wherewithal for good food, good shelter, decent housing, decent clothing, good health care and decent schools for the kids. Thanks to the rape of the economy and the middle class by the rich, the United States no longer is a country of rising expectations for the majority of people. After all, it's more important that the rich have subsidies for their private airplanes than poor and middle class children have access to reasonably sized classes at their schools. And, they have time, in between their two or three jobs just to make ends meet, to cook a healthy meal for their kids who, of course, just got home from the excellent day-care that is provided by the company. Those execs with the corporate jets have such a rough life! Of course, the argument that the righties give is that "it won't make much difference" for the debt situation, since it's only $10B over 10 years, but of course, if you add up all the little loopholes, right away you get a big number. But, even $100B over 10 years, we shouldn't bother. I guess they don't have a problem taking a $100 bill out of their wallet and tearing it up then? (Assuming they actually have $100, which is a big assumption...) |
Living longer? Not in US
On Jul 2, 2:25*pm, wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 11:54:42 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: On Jul 2, 8:37 am, Wayne B wrote: That said, store owners in poor neighborhoods, like store owners everywhere, know their customers and stock what sells. If people are buying vegetables and dairy products, they'll stock vegetables and dairy products. If people are buying Hostess Twinkies and malt liquor, they'll stock that instead. It is a tribute to our wonderfully enlightened policies that people can actually use government food stamps to buy junk food, and it sells very well. That's pretty well how it works in my area too. just go through any convenience store. Pizza, beer and chips is the *fare of the day. And you know this because you live in the inner city? Doubtful. I guess the NY Times is, as usual, just wrong, because it's not a right-wing publication? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/04/he...on/04well.html I live in a small town surrounded by small towns.It doesn't matter what the NY Times has to say.But if you think it's "just wrong, as usual* I won't be the judge. I don't live in the 'inner city' and I'll repeat what i said: "That's pretty well how it works in my area too. just go through any convenience store. Pizza, beer and chips is the fare of the day. " |
Living longer? Not in US
On 7/2/11 4:05 PM, Tim wrote:
On Jul 2, 2:25 pm, wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 11:54:42 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 2, 8:37 am, Wayne wrote: That said, store owners in poor neighborhoods, like store owners everywhere, know their customers and stock what sells. If people are buying vegetables and dairy products, they'll stock vegetables and dairy products. If people are buying Hostess Twinkies and malt liquor, they'll stock that instead. It is a tribute to our wonderfully enlightened policies that people can actually use government food stamps to buy junk food, and it sells very well. That's pretty well how it works in my area too. just go through any convenience store. Pizza, beer and chips is the fare of the day. And you know this because you live in the inner city? Doubtful. I guess the NY Times is, as usual, just wrong, because it's not a right-wing publication? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/04/he...on/04well.html I live in a small town surrounded by small towns.It doesn't matter what the NY Times has to say.But if you think it's "just wrong, as usual* I won't be the judge. I don't live in the 'inner city' and I'll repeat what i said: "That's pretty well how it works in my area too. just go through any convenience store. Pizza, beer and chips is the fare of the day. " Most convenience stores don't have the staff to handle any variety of fresh produce or poultry, meat, fish products. In the inner city, the situation is even worse because there's no one to go to the large wholesale markets or produce wholesalers willing to deliver. Most of what the stores sell is stuff with a long shelf life. The convenience store exception seems to be WaWa, which carries a much larger variety of reasonably healthy food, but it is not an inexpensive place to shop. Good food is expensive. Poor people can't afford much of it. We have our priorities upside down in this country, which is why we are going down the tubes. -- Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where personal insults are not allowed? http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:16 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com