Mass.acre!
in [Golf]
|
From: dene on 20 Jan 2010 17:38 "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote in message news:911882b2-380f-42f6-aec0-dac3f1519617(a)e16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com... On Jan 20, 2:45 pm, Howard Brazee <how...(a)brazee.net> wrote: > On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:37:09 -0800 (PST), Dinosaur_Sr > > <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > >With respect to reality, about 85% or so of Americans have health > >insurance, and about that same number, 85% are happy with it. About > >10% or so can afford health insurance but choose not to buy it, > >leaving about 5% or so who want the insurance but can't afford it. So > >how much do we sell out the interests of the 95% for the sake of 5%? > >If *YOU* want health insurance, *YOU* can buy it. Who else is supposed > >to pay for your insurance? > > Don't forget that the 10% without health insurance get treated anyway > when they need expensive care, and the hospitals include their costs > in what they charge the rest of us. > So someone gets run over by a bus and we are supposed to leave them on the street? Or somehow we are going to not send them to an emergency room? What fraction of that 10% needs such care per year anyways? It's a very small fraction of the total cost of healthcare, and no reason to sell out the interests of the 90%. IMHO, just pass a law that says you can't bankruptcy your way out of hospital bills and make 'em pay. ----------------------------------------------------------- That would be an excellent law! -Greg
From: R&B on 20 Jan 2010 17:34 On 2010-01-20 14:26:35 -0500, dene said: > You are such a hypocrite. Look at your words toward me, like "douchebag" > for instance. You could have easily brought your points without attack me, > my character, or profession. Now you are whining because I gave it back to > you in spades. Nobody on this board has your track record for being a hater > and wishing death upon people, yet you claim that you're the adult. > > As for my profession of being a broker, I exist for two reasons. > > 1. Health insurance is complicated, therefore most consumers desire a human > touch to explain options and benefits to them > > 2. A commissioned broker is much cheaper to an insurance company than > hiring a sales force. > > I've helped thousands acquire health insurance. My business grows because > people appreciate my honesty and expertise. They tell others about me. > It's a simple equation for success in this great country. > > It's too bad you don't understand this. Instead, your obvious failures are > blamed upon others whom you irrationally hate. Even worse, you feel a sense > of entitlement. Again I repeat....nobody owes you a thing. You are fully > capable of being successful. The only thing stopping you is "stinkin > thinkin." > > Grow up! > > -Greg You keep saying "no one owes you (me) a thing." What have I asked for? NOTHING. I have merely pointed out that your argument, and the argument so many on the right like to make, about how poor people have a "sense of entitlement," is, in fact, nothing more than a projection of your own sense of entitlement upon others. I have no sense of entitlement. Everything I have, I've worked for and earned. I've never asked for a handout, and I never will. You, however, seem to believe that a person who earns more money, and can therefore afford higher quality health insurance, is ENTITLED TO A HIGHER QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE THAN SOMEONE WHO EARNS LESS MONEY. In other words, you believe that a person's wealth ENTITLES THEM to better odds in a life and death battle against disease. That you would believe such a thing tells me everything I need to know about you as a human being. You believe that a person's bank account IS PROPORTIONATE TO THE LEVEL OF HEALTH CARE THEY ARE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE. And if that means that poor people are more likely to die as a result, then so be it. That's what you advocate. Whether you mean to or not, that's what we have in the insurance-based health care system. And that's what you have said time and again must be perpetuated. It is outrageously immoral and unsustainable. I have argued, from the outset, that there are some things in life that we, as a society, have agreed are too important to leave to the whims of the free market. Among those things are fire protection. That's why we have socialized fire departments. I don't hear anybody complaining about the FDNY, do you? And when your house burns down, you don't get a bill in the mail from the FD. We've decided as a society that police protection is too important to leave to the whims of the free market. That's why we have socialized police departments. And while you can certainly retain the services of private security companies, if there is a burglary in your home, who do you call? You call the police. And they don't send you a bill in the mail for solving the crime or getting your stuff back. I have simply argued all along that health care should be considered too important to leave to the whims of the free market. That doesn't make me a socialist any more than my believing in socialized fire department and socialized police departments makes me a socialist. The fact is, there ARE some things that are TOO IMPORTANT to leave to the whims of the free market. And I firmly believe that health care is one such thing. It's not a question of economics. It's a question of life and death. A person's wealth should have NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the quality of health care they should be able to access. If you make $20,000,000 a year and have embezzled a thousand grandmothers to attain your fortune, why should your cancer be better treated than a hard-working mother of three children who earns $30,000 a year? A person's wealth has nothing to do with the quality of health care a person can get in any other industrialized nation in the world. But for some reason, here in America, we as a society have accepted the ridiculous notion that RICH PEOPLE are MORE ENTITLED TO LIVE than anyone else. I find that a repulsive notion and it brings shame upon America. And you absolutely believe in such a system and promote it every day of your life by advocating the perpetuation of an insurance-based health care system, where only the people who can afford the best insurance coverage get the best health care treatment. There is a special place in hell for you. Randy
From: dene on 20 Jan 2010 17:40 "Jack Hollis" <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:3tsel5526evhvn672p8tolufn6togccje0(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:31:19 -0800, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> > wrote: > > >"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote in message > >news:vafel55b07shsrjcaffcatctc8mlltapvb(a)4ax.com... > >> On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 06:27:19 -0800 (PST), Dinosaur_Sr > >> <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > >> > >> >On Jan 20, 8:35=A0am, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote: > >> >> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:26:14 -0800, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > Been watching MessNBC, including your > >> >> >Rachel. > >> >> > >> >> I don't think I ever enjoyed watching MSNBC as much as I did last > >> >> night. > >> > > >> >Some of the best comedy I have ever seen! > >> > >> Poor Rachel looked like her dog just died. > > > >I loved it when they interviewed the feminist, who made snide remarks about > >Brown "giving away his daughters." Borat should pay her a visit. > > > >-Greg > > They tried to work in the angle that sexism was a factor in the loss. Yeah....that was humorous. -Greg
From: R&B on 20 Jan 2010 17:38 On 2010-01-20 14:45:13 -0500, Howard Brazee said: > On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:37:09 -0800 (PST), Dinosaur_Sr > <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > >> With respect to reality, about 85% or so of Americans have health >> insurance, and about that same number, 85% are happy with it. About >> 10% or so can afford health insurance but choose not to buy it, >> leaving about 5% or so who want the insurance but can't afford it. So >> how much do we sell out the interests of the 95% for the sake of 5%? >> If *YOU* want health insurance, *YOU* can buy it. Who else is supposed >> to pay for your insurance? > > Don't forget that the 10% without health insurance get treated anyway > when they need expensive care, and the hospitals include their costs > in what they charge the rest of us. This is one of the great myths out there. Do a little digging. You'll find that the only way it ever happens is if the person first divests himself of all his assets. ALL his assets. Home. Car. Belongings. EVERYTHING. Only then will they take you. You have to be completely destitute before the city (or county) hospital will take you. And there are plenty of other hospitals that simply won't. Meanwhile, if a person is in need of a transplant, I'm not sure exactly how he's going to go through the process of selling everything he owns on eBay and moving (to live under a bridge?) just so the hospital will take him. You guys who keep using this argument don't know the first thing about it. Randy
From: Chris Bellomy on 20 Jan 2010 17:42
dene wrote, On 1/20/10 4:37 PM: > "Chris Bellomy" <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote in message > news:_oednTqscIKbHMrWnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d(a)supernews.com... >> R&B wrote, On 1/20/10 4:10 PM: >> >>> I have no respect for Dene because he shows no one else any respect. >> He deserves a baseline of consideration for being a fellow >> human being. This being MLK week, let me remind you: >> >> "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do >> that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." >> >> I'll add that the only time those words have real meaning >> is when they are uncomfortable and/or difficult. That's >> where the rubber meets the road. So even when I chastise >> Dene, I do it out of hope that he'll let go of pettiness >> and get a sense of perspective. It's a moral imperative >> to me that I do. YMMV and probably does. >> >> cb > > And since you do it respectfully, sometimes I listen. > > I follow a simple set of rules in here. If you want to discuss issues, I'm > game. Throw in demeaning insults, then I return fire. Why? Seriously, dude, that's the ethos of a teenager. Rise above. cb |