Pratt's quote closely links the two things, saying that one will bring about the other, not that they are both symptoms of the same disease. He claims that Kathleen Sibelius will USE health care reform to ban guns. Do you agree, or disagree?

 

Translation: Why don't you argue like me, without any facts at your disposal? It makes it so much easier to say things that aren't true, but that further my argument.

 

Thank you Kimiko.

For several days now I have been asking tenguy several simple questions:

How many people come to the United States every year for health care?

What countries do they come from?

How rich are they?

Who told Harry Truman that the atomic bombing of Japan was necessary?

I have pointed out again and again that the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey, General Eisenhower, General MacArthur and other authoritative sources said it was not.

After calling me a Communist, tenguy said that the grunts on the ground thought it was necessary. Even here, he did not quote any of these grunts. Let us assume that he is correct. Even if Master Sergeant Mike O'Brian said the atomic bomb was necessary, I still think Gen. MacArthur's judgment is more to be trusted.

tenguy seems to be suffering a meltdown. It embarrasses me to acknowledge that I used to respect him.

Even his insults are disappointing. I think I deserve better crafted invective.

 

tenguy, why do you even bother anymore? seriously. https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

 

Awww...that's a bit harsh. I actually enjoy sparring with tenguy, for the most part. But sometimes he seems to take leave of his senses, and goes off on flights of illogic that leave me somewhat disoriented.

 

Funny you should say that. You yourself stated that clip and paste was not the style that you prefer when posting.

The easier to find online critics of any position, than it is to find online support. Critics make their mark by compiling vast arrays of "data" to back up their otherwise weak argument. While the supporters of a position have a more difficult time finding similar "data". Not because it isn't there, but because it has not been compiled for them as it was for the opposition.

If you take the case in point, in Buffalo, NY, medical clinic parking lots have a high percentage of Canadian autos in them. The same is true in Detroit, gee I wonder why that is. In several articles by physicians in Canada, they lament that their patients have to resort to travel outside of Canada to seek timely diagnosis and treatment.

In my own family, my brother died two years ago, while waiting for treatment of a recurrence of polio. My nieces were very outspoken about the horrors of the way he was ignored, for what they think was his age. He served in the RCAF in WWII, worked his entire life in Canada, volunteered to transport neighbors for treatment in Detroit for two decades.

But according to the expert in here, these are all false claims. Because I cannot give a number to the people seeking treatment outside of Canada, the claim must be false. Would it be more acceptable if this number was researched, compiled and published by a care giver. Sometimes you don't need a meteorologist to know that it is raining.

This type of debate is ridiculous. When a debate takes place in the real world, the debaters do not have the luxury of internet access, they must be prepared to debate on their wits alone. Yet the expert in here thinks that he wins debates by posting the opinions of others, how foolish.

 

This isn't a high-school debating society, tenguy. We're not trying to figure out who the best polemicists are. The facts DO matter. And while I might not go to the trouble of cutting and pasting a la Stumbler, I DO often try to find facts in support my position...that is, I do when I'm not just being rude and snide.

 

Kimi, I totally agree on the high school debating society comment. Too bad the other guys haven't figured that out.

Facts are elusive in here, there is no moderator to hold the fabricator accountable, if enough people repeat a snippet of information enough times, it becomes the all encompassing fact.

We love to cheer when an article, a survey or a report gets posted that we agree with, and then with equal vigor condemn anyone who would dare dispute it.

This would never be tolerated in grammar school, yet alone high school.

 

Maybe I can offer a suggestion to end the, "my rhetoric is more cut and paste than your rhetoric," stalemate.

When I first dipped my toe into the argument, I offered my own experiences with health care as a case in point example. I still hang around in the hopes that others of different backgrounds would offer examples of how the health care bill would benefit or break them.

I know the information will be anecdotal and without statistics to prove or disprove anything. Just the same, I would enjoy seeing how many people:

understand their own health insurance coverage,

the parts of the bill that would change their current coverage status,

the current status of how and why they have or don't have any coverage,

what they currently do in place of health care or to keep the coverage they have,

what success or failure they have had in dealing with insurance companies or government agencies.

It would be a bona fide shame to hear all the trumpets and drums of an argument without hearing why they have staked that particular part of the argument battleground.

Go ahead, let'em rip.

 

I disagree. I think the insurance companies will come out with a 'bare bones' package. It'll basically be crap, but people will do it to avoid the fine.

I'm not going to disagree with you that this bill is terrible, though. I also do not agree people should be fined for not having health insurance.

I'm asking the specific criteria.

That still does not produce anything. That is still beside the point: explain to me why it is better the way it is now than if we had a single payer health care system.

Both true and false. They still get money from the federal government and state governments. VF get their money from a little bit of everywhere.

Medical related costs send people into debt. We have the highest health care cost per capita in the world.

You are aware of the fact that private insurance companies still exist in countries with single payer health care systems, correct?


Out of curiosity, do you collect medicare?

No, actually capital is money. I'll prove this to you now. You need capital to start a business. How do you start a business with profit from the business you haven't started yet?

You haven't proven anything, actually. You also demonstrate a severe lack of knowledge about socialism: it's not about profit.

 

distant lover

[FONT=arial,helvetica]Who told Harry Truman that the atomic bombing of Japan was necessary?

I have pointed out again and again that the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey, General Eisenhower, General MacArthur and other authoritative sources said it was not.[/FONT]

Mabey thay refused to surrender? Roadtoad
Distant lover read the Truman libery

[FONT=arial,helvetica][/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica][/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica][/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica]The Japanese resolve to fight had been seriously hampered in the preceding months. Their losses at Iwo Jima and Okinawa had been staggering. Their navy had ceased to exist as an effective fighting force and the air corps had been decimated. American B-29's made bombing runs over military targets on the Japanese mainland an integral part of their air campaign. Japan's lack of air power hindered their ability to fight. The imprecision of bombing and the use of devastating city bombing in Europe eventually swayed United States Pacific theater military leaders to authorize bombing of Japanese mainland cities. Tokyo, Nagoya, Osaka, and Kobe all were decimated by incendiary and other bombs. In all, hundreds of thousands of civilians were killed in these air strikes meant to deter the resolve of the Japanese people. Yet, Japanese resolve stayed strong and the idea of a bloody "house to house" invasion of the Japanese mainland would produce thousands more American and Allied casualties. The Allies in late July 1945 declared at Potsdam that the Japanese must unconditionally surrender. [/FONT][FONT=arial,helvetica] After Japanese leaders flatly rejected the Potsdam Declaration, President Truman authorized use of the atomic bomb anytime after August 3, 1945. On the clear morning of August 6, the first atomic bomb, nicknamed Little Boy, was dropped on the city of Hiroshima. Leveling over 60 percent of the city, 70,000 residents died instantaneously in a searing flash of heat. Three days later, on August 9, a second bomb, Fat Man, was dropped on Nagasaki. Over 20,000 people died instantly. In the successive weeks, thousands more Japanese died from the after effects of the radiation exposure of the blast. [/FONT]

 

Resident of Maryland

I disagree. I think the insurance companies will come out with a 'bare bones' package. It'll basically be crap, but people will do it to avoid the fine.

I'm not going to disagree with you that this bill is terrible, though. I also do not agree people should be fined for not having health insurance.


They do have a student policy my 21 year old has one now $279.00 month same policy as mine same coverage.
so why except crap ? why do something to avoid a fine how about throw away this one sided approach and do it right. The same people will respond that Obo is trying and the republicans did nothing. that is a bunch of crap all they are doing is pushing through shit legislation that was designed to expand their power and ability to steel from the taxpayer. And the taxpayer See's it now and they are trying to save face. This whole healthcare reform is so messed up all the goverment needed to do was pass a law requiring health care company's to offer everyone a cheap bare bones policy and let all small business group together for more buying power with insurance company's. And Evan with cheap insurance many will not buy because they would rather spend their money else ware. Road toad

 

Has this horse of a topic been beat dead? Say it ain't so!

 

No it can't be. But we've been distracted spitting in each others faces elsewhere.

 

Isn't that what made Clinton's previous attempt at health care reform fail, the fact that people got distracted with other issues?

 

Whitey I've never checked this to see if my impression matches the facts. But my recollection of the Clinton Health Care Reform was that Bill and Hillary came on board and you just knew Hillary wanted to do something important.

She dinked around with it. Thought she'd come up with something and then she and Bill walked it out in front of a semi-truck worth of opposition that was already going 100 mph and they never even saw it coming. It was splatto and a good indication the Clinton's were not ready for prime time. But they caught on quick.

But that's just the picture I have of it in my recollection.

 

I can see why you would think this. If I didn't know anything about the real problems with our health care system and know it is actually mathematically unsustainable I might think the "solutions" you mention here might work too.

But I do know and they won't. The health insurance industry is misdirected. While they are supposed to be providing a fund, a mechanism, for the many paying into a common fund to protect against the misfortunes of a few. Instead they exist primarily for benefit of their stock holders, not the people/patients.

 

I swear, I don't know, sometimes its seems to me that this is not only the state of US health care; its also the state of the US.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/01/joaquin-rivera-robbed-whi_n_376116.html

 

Stumbler and Whitey, ya'll must have some kind of Vulcan mind like with me. I was thinking the same exact thoughts when I saw the energy in this thread wane.

Health care is a very real topic to be discussed. I prefer to hear the comments and thoughts of common thinking folks and how this legislation affects them. As opposed to the blovaiting talking heads and the ditto parrots that prefer to quote media whores intead of having to think for themselves.

The sad facts are that this thread has become a parody of the actual law making process. While one side of the argument bargains to pass what little progress they hope to make, the other side obfuscates, stalls, detracts and delays all in the name of partisan politics.

Not that I am trying to embarrass or disrespect anyone on this forum, but I do wonder. What does cut and paste arguments about Harry Truman's thoughts on the atomic bomb have to do with health care?

 

We also do not have a culture that cares about health. Health is not when you have a problem and the doctors fixing it. Health is not having the problem in the first place. And that sometimes means sacrificing some pleasures that are harmful to the body.

-----

Health care is another issue that need repair in our country. Unfortunately, health care is not a problem that stems from our government or our economy, but from our society. The standards of health vary greatly between the rich and poor; but how are we suppose to manage this?

You cant do it by any capitalist standards, any fool would see that the rich are more willing to play for higher quality care.

You cannot do it from a socialist ideal either, because there is always going to be corruption and more inefficiency involved. Nationalized health-care does not even work as a smaller bureaucracy like Medicaid and Medicare (both with tremendous financial stress).

Copying Europe and Japan wont work, because the United States is far too different in its demostic, cultural, and social structure. We are not cool with huge taxes, nor do we have anyone we trust to manage it.

You can set limits and standards like the current system does, but if you were to lower these then the doctors and health-care workers would be angry (thus lowering quality and efficiency).

The only way to repair massive social problems is by revolution, but we dont want that either... It appears the answer to this is just to swallow a pill and hope it cures cancer, or just shoot yourself in the head after thinking too much.