IOWA
Mr. Logic Pants
I suggest you watch the videos I posted in this thread:
http://androidforums.com/lounge/33081-real-fall-republic.html
-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
Our (not so) Great president.
- Thread starter IOWA
- Start date
I suggest you watch the videos I posted in this thread:
http://androidforums.com/lounge/33081-real-fall-republic.html
reznorfan0
Member
The fact that these people actually believe health care is a right and not a priveledge scare me. Health care, believe it or not takes money to advance. You don't find "miracle" cures by wishing on rainbows or saviours on unicorns, it takes research and engineering of the highest order. Guess what children, that means money, and lots of it.
Producing medicine on a large scale is also not something that your typical 7-11 attendant can manage either, more money, and lots of it.
This happy little dream world where everything is fair and nice and everybody loves each other (you know, the one the big "O" promoted to get elected) is simply not possible. By stripping away the benefits (benefits translates once again into that inconveniant money thing) of advancement in the interest of making things "fair" you eventually kill the chances that anybody will invest anything to advance that industry. Medical industry included.
What exactly do you cut to bring medical costs down as the great one has claimed so elequently that he do. Costs don't just magincally go away, something has to cut somewhere.
Doctor Pay? Yeah, that sounds like a good idea...they are way too rich anyway.
Drug engineering? Hmm, then we start to wine why we aren't curing things...
Less complicated medical machinery? We'll go back to leaches and weekly blood letting, those are cheap treatments....
It's a business people. Once you turn it into a charity for the poor poor downtrodden unfairly treated poor people that get spat on every day as they just try to make a way for themselves in this cruel cruel country (because people are always being turned away in emergency rooms), quality of health care will go right down the toilet. But then, everybody will get crappy treatment....so maybe that is fair, everybody gets to suffer and die at the same earlier time.
Producing medicine on a large scale is also not something that your typical 7-11 attendant can manage either, more money, and lots of it.
This happy little dream world where everything is fair and nice and everybody loves each other (you know, the one the big "O" promoted to get elected) is simply not possible. By stripping away the benefits (benefits translates once again into that inconveniant money thing) of advancement in the interest of making things "fair" you eventually kill the chances that anybody will invest anything to advance that industry. Medical industry included.
What exactly do you cut to bring medical costs down as the great one has claimed so elequently that he do. Costs don't just magincally go away, something has to cut somewhere.
Doctor Pay? Yeah, that sounds like a good idea...they are way too rich anyway.
Drug engineering? Hmm, then we start to wine why we aren't curing things...
Less complicated medical machinery? We'll go back to leaches and weekly blood letting, those are cheap treatments....
It's a business people. Once you turn it into a charity for the poor poor downtrodden unfairly treated poor people that get spat on every day as they just try to make a way for themselves in this cruel cruel country (because people are always being turned away in emergency rooms), quality of health care will go right down the toilet. But then, everybody will get crappy treatment....so maybe that is fair, everybody gets to suffer and die at the same earlier time.
Nobody said healthcare is cheap. It's one of the UK government's biggest budgets. I'm not advocating the USA uses the UK model (the USA is too big to afford it) but I am saying that you need to do better for the poor and downtrodden in your society. (Not the the lazy of your society before you flame me). It could be done by having compulsory insurance for the employed and extending medicare to people on welfare. That will not destroy your business model - which I do understand is needed for investment in new medicines etc.
On another topic running in this thread: Just because the Mayan calendar does not go past 2012 does not mean that the world is going to end! That's just silly. It just means that they didn't plan any further ahead. Anyway, thier calendar outlived thier civilisation so the world has already 'ended' for them.
On another topic running in this thread: Just because the Mayan calendar does not go past 2012 does not mean that the world is going to end! That's just silly. It just means that they didn't plan any further ahead. Anyway, thier calendar outlived thier civilisation so the world has already 'ended' for them.
IOWA
Mr. Logic Pants
Finally someone who understands the reality of things. Thankyou for your post.
IOWA
Mr. Logic Pants
We *DO* have free clinics, and emergency care is always available at no upfront cost. And if someone can afford 15-20k in payments for a car, they can afford a 2k emergency room bill.
Actually that does not follow that they would have a spare 2K floating around BUT that person who can afford that 15-20K payment plan can afford health insurance. If they have not puchased any then they have thier priorities completely wrong and I personally would have no sympathy. That's why I said compulsory insurance for those in work and medicare for those on welfare. It can be done.
It's a question of priorities, personal priorities and national pririties.
Those who can look after themselves should do so. My argument is that there are people who through no fault of thier own need a helping hand. What's wrong with that?
They bring in millions thanks to their appeal to tourists. They're our version of Disneyland.
Not quite. There have been many socialist governments across the world which haven't led to communist regimes.
Maybe because the US has so much influence on the rest of the world, so it is a concern? Maybe because some of us have an interest in events beyond the end of our own noses?
Right up to here you were doing just fine.
May I remind you that you posted in a public forum, which means that anyone is free to post? Not happy with that? Then don't post in a public forum!
Personally I have no intention of contributing to this so-called debate; I was simply correcting factual inaccuracies.
momoceio
Android Expert
OK, maybe signing "Mephistopheles" was laying it on a bit thick. But it doesn't take much reasoning sense to see the contradiction in worrying about Obama when your religion already tells you the world will end in 2012.
And regarding Einstein, you made a very funny choice of people and statements. Superlative much? Einstein, while very smart, was likely not the smartest man that ever walked the planet. Einstein believed in a very different notion of god than that in which Christians believe. Not that smart people don't believe in gods, many do.
Which religion states that the world will end in 2012? None that I can think of so please tell.
reznorfan0
Member
Holy Moly, politics AND religion in one thread....we really are trying to make freinds here aren't we? 
I think I'm going to check out at this point, while it has been suprisingly civil up to this point, I can see it taking a turn for the worse soon.
I think I'm going to check out at this point, while it has been suprisingly civil up to this point, I can see it taking a turn for the worse soon.
For the last time, I made no judgment on any particular religion. I was just noting the rather silly contradiction in worrying about the president if "the end" is coming.
AndroidConservative
Newbie
All Obama has done is serve us a huge bill of goods. He has barely been able to make any side happy with anything, and this includes those who are for and against government healthcare, *** rights organizations, anti-abortion activists, and others. This supposed era of Hope and Change is turning out to be an era of Alienation and Deceit. I agree, to a point, that both sides are to blame for a lot of what has happened in this country, but the democrats are the ones fighting for more government control, while republicans understand, with the current shady practices within the government, that government control is the exact opposite of what we need. Obama says he wants to end the war; he sends in 30k more troops. He tries to bring in a member of his staff with previous ties to Castro and his regime. And our border policies are some of the poorest ever. Closing Gitmo was also a huge mistake, in that many americans believe it acceptable to do whatever is required to protect our country, me included. What is the proper way of handling a person or persons responsible for terrorism on our land? Shall we hold there hands back to their leaders. Absolutely not. Barack Obama is one of the great failures of our nation, and I say this as a black man who is surrounded by family members who think that I am basically the anti-christ. But in all seriousness, something must be done.
IOWA
Mr. Logic Pants
And like TheBrit said? Where, exactly, does it say in the bible that the world is going to end in 2012?
I haven't seen it. Must have missed that part.
In any of my posts I do not recall advocating the end of the world by 2012.
And sorry if I offended you about the sticking your nose where it doesn't belong thing, thats just my *personal* opinion, and while I myself like to be informed, I believe my political opinion doesn't belong outside that of the United States, as that is the only one that affects me. Although sadly we ARE headed towards the dreaded one-world government. So that statement may be moot.
Revrusty
Newbie
Well, you're right when it comes to proving he is constitutionally qualified to serve as President -- then again his legal team has been very busy doing everything possible on his behalf to successfully cover up his past.
But anyone must admit it's more than nothing to:
==> Reverse the Mexico City policy right off that kept our tax dollars from going to international groups that push abortion.
==> Exaggerate the economic crisis to purposefully scare Americans into quickly and blindly accepting trillion dollar bailouts that he swore had no earmarks but in reality fulfilled deprived arch liberals' decade-long wish list.
==> Drop the term
I'll repeat the question for Revrusty because he needs to answer it (after reading Matthew 25 verse 31 to the end if he takes the Bible seriously):
Those who can look after themselves should do so. My argument is that there are people who through no fault of thier own need a helping hand. What's wrong with that?
Revrusty, you should also ask yourself if you are a sheep or a goat.
Those who can look after themselves should do so. My argument is that there are people who through no fault of thier own need a helping hand. What's wrong with that?
Revrusty, you should also ask yourself if you are a sheep or a goat.
Sorry if you are so offended by any statement that you interpret as critical of your religion that you are forced to misunderstanding my point. The quote was not attributed to you, so make what you will of that. I do not intend to make it any clearer. Either you understand the contradiction that I described or you don't.
IOWA
Mr. Logic Pants
There is no problem with charity, and there are plenty of them. And like I said, there *are* indeed free clinics, and alot of options for those without coverage, it just takes the will to get it done.
Revrusty
Newbie
Do you mean forced redistribution of wealth: From those, according to their ability, to those, according to their need, as Marx urged in defining Communism?
If you want to get personal, please know this: Since being fired for Jesus' sake from a good-paying corporate job with great benefits, I've followed the Lord for little pay and certainly no medical insurance. I've often needed a helping hand medically, including some surgical procedures, yet have never suffered for being uninsured. Others even worse off financially in those waiting rooms were cared for, too. There is no REAL crisis, although it would be good to have tort reform and work with the drub companies, legislative things that can easily be done short of full-fledged socialism.
I need to say one thing more, then I will disappear here again (wasn't gone long, was I?) It ultimately is the church's fault for creating the healthcare vacuum that government is stomping in to fill. God wants His people to provide loving care, not money-minded bureaucrats on "death panels." I know several churches that not only feed and clothe the poor but provide medical care and medicines as well. Unfortunately, they are way too few.
Adios.
Iirc that was in response to a post from me, so I'd just like to say that I was in no way offended.
It's discussions like this that prove, despite a common language and shared history, just how disparate our two nations are. Your definitions of and associations with certain terms are completely different to those accepted over here, which is why I'd never presume to get involved in the debate - I'd find it too confusing.
This isn't a criticism either, just another example of how cultures naturally vary.I don't care who you are ... Democrat, Republican, or Independent ... liberal or conservative ... blue state or red state ... you have to be appalled at the sheer gall of this woman!
This is QUEEN PELOSI'S NEW JET!!! And the Democrats talk about Sarah's dresses???
Queen Pelosi wasn't happy with the small USAF C-20B jet, Gulfstream III, that comes with the Speaker's job ... OH NO! Queen Pelosi was aggravated that this little jet had to stop to refuel, so she ordered a Big Fat, 200-seat, USAF C-32, Boeing 757 jet that could get her back to California without stopping! I understand that a former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, flew commerical most of the time.
Many, many legislators walked by and grinned with glee as Joe informed everyone of what Queen Nancy's Big Fat Jet costs us, the hard working American tax payers, literally thousands of gallons of fuel every week.
Since she only works 3 days a week, this gas guzzling jet gets fueled and she flies home to California every Friday and returns every Monday, at a cost to the taxpayers (YOU and ME are those taxpayers!) of about $60,000, one way!
As Joe put it ..."unfortunately we have to pay to bring her back on Monday night and that costs us another $60,000!" Taxpayers, that is $480,000 per month and that is an annual cost to us of $5,760,000!!!
No wonder she complains about the cost of this war ... it might cramp her style and she is styling on my back and yours. I think of the military families in this country doing without and this woman, who heads up the most do-nothing Congress in the history of our country, keeps fueling that jet while doing nothing.
Queen Pelosi wants you and me to conserve our carbon footprint. She wants us to buy smaller cars and Obama wants us to get a bicycle pump and air up our tires. Who do these people think they are??? Their motto is ... Don't do as I do ... JUST DO AS I SAY!
Keep in mind the figures above do NOT include the cost of plane or crew ... just the fuel!!! One has to wonder what the total package costs us?
And on top of that ... now she wants to tax our IRA's & 401K's!
HAPPY HAPPY JOY JOY!!
I would be outraged if this were true, but it's not. Please try a little fact checking: snopes.com: Nancy Pelosi's Jet
Lucky you. Not only did you recieve the medical care you needed, you managed to get it without being destroyed financially. Meanwhile real research suggests that the leading cause of bankruptcy in this country is medical cost: Study Links Medical Costs and Personal Bankruptcy - BusinessWeek
Er...no. Where did that come from?
Kind of what I have been saying elsewhere.
What are these "Death Panels" you speak of? Maybe that did happen in the communist Soviet Union - I don't know - but this I do know: nothing like that exists in the UK.