Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Many people who just "take the governments word for it" don't have health insurance, so they don't give a flyin' F what happens. It's easy for them to just go with it. It's actually understandable for people who don't think of the bigger picture. That's why that question. And...if you read my previous posts (not just the parts you want to pick apart), I'm not apposed to reform at all. It's too expensive and is f-ed up. AGREED. That being said, there are things that can be done to alleviate this (make it a win-win) that aren't. Have you noticed that about 50% of the country is standing on one side throwing doo at the other side (flyin' back and forth). If it's so great, why is this the case? This monstrosity of government crap is the reason. I can read pretty fast, but those cats in congress are all apparently speed-readers (squared). The bill itself is evidence of what is to come.
You know, that is why I was talking about corporate shills, who also tend to be anti-government.
Make your point, and thats all is needed for a good discussion. Stop speaking for others. Having said that, you (like everybody else) skipped my post #82. I think response to it would make for a good discussion. Would you mind trying now?
Agree completely. In particular, look at the track record for states that have tried reform. There are NO successes. Period. And this new bill tries many of the same reforms that have been tried on the state level. I'm still waiting for someone to explain why they think it will work on the national level.
I'd like to see an INTELLIGENT answer to that too.
[/b]
Agree completely. In particular, look at the track record for states that have tried reform. There are NO successes. Period. And this new bill tries many of the same reforms that have been tried on the state level. I'm still waiting for someone to explain why they think it will work on the national level.
38 states have implemented tort reform. Yet, we've issues big enough to consider healthcare reform (unless you're one of the few opposed to reforms). Are you talking about that?
Could you be more specific so we can actually have the a discussion? What is it that you think can (or cannot) work at national level (but can, at state level)?
You know, that is why I was talking about corporate shills, who also tend to be anti-government.
Make your point, and thats all is needed for a good discussion. Stop speaking for others. Having said that, you (like everybody else) skipped my post #82. I think response to it would make for a good discussion. Would you mind trying now?
I'm not anti-government. I just want the government to work FOR us and do what's in our BEST interests like they are supposed to. That's not a lot to ask is it?
There is already a shortage of Doctors, but why. It is not because for the last 30 years they looked in their Crystal ball and predicted Obama was going to be elected and thought better not go into that field. No, the reason is that the Medical profession has kept the numbers down to keep the fees up. They have created scarcity to keep higher wages.
Before someone pipes in and says well "you don't want just anybody going to medical school do you", the fact is the turndown rate for medical school is higher now than ever before. There is not a problem with qualified people trying to get into medical school. There is a problem with enough medical school spots.
I'm not anti-government. I just want the government to work FOR us and do what's in our BEST interests like they are supposed to. That's not a lot to ask is it?
But that would be socialism.
What is your solution? Empower the corporations, again? Do you think government should regulate corporations so people benefit? Or, should it stay out and mindless free marketeers take over? What is your thought on anti-trust reform? Do you support it?
What is your solution? Empower the corporations, again?
That's just a stupid, childish answer for someone who apparently likens themselves to a genius. We have elections for reasons don't we? What are they for...just to give these people jobs for no reason? No...they are supposed to work for their people. You are going around in circles and arguing for the sake of doing so then actually think you are saying something profound. When someone brings up a point you disagree with, you have to say something. Now it's socialism. Well...I didn't say that and you know it. Oh...and save this for when you actually say something cool not something grade school.
That's just a stupid, childish answer for someone who apparently likens themselves to a genius. We have elections for reasons don't we? What are they for...just to give these people jobs for no reason? No...they are supposed to work for their people. You are going around in circles and arguing for the sake of doing so then actually think you are saying something profound. When someone brings up a point you disagree with, you have to say something. Now it's socialism. Well...I didn't say that and you know it. Oh...and save this for when you actually say something cool not something grade school.
Since you're the grown up, I expected you to respond to my questions directly. Try again... I will quote myself again:
Quote:
What is your solution? Empower the corporations, again? Do you think government should regulate corporations so people benefit? Or, should it stay out and mindless free marketeers take over? What is your thought on anti-trust reform? Do you support it?
PS. A democratically elected government is a socialistic set up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.