Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
August 23, 2014, 04:30:29 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 11   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!  (Read 9627 times)
Tapeworm
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 18678


Still crazy after all these years


View Profile
« Reply #150 on: September 11, 2008, 09:55:09 AM »

My country Australia has some of the lowest taxes in the developed world and we have a great healthcare system.

My cousin had a severe wrist injurie resulting severd tendons and arteries the poor bastard had have all his tendon micro surgery to rejoin them, he was airlifted by helicopter and many return visits to his surgeon.Moneytry costs zero.Had he been in the states with no insurance i hate to think.

Lol.  Lies, lies, lies KM!  I registered a Pty Ltd so I'd have to pay only 30%.  Upper level wages and individual earnings are taxed at nearly 50%.  Anyone from another country agree that's low?

Also, Aus is moving more and more toward privatization.  When I got here in '99, almost no one had private coverage.  Now, almost everyone has it.

However, the US needs to pull it's finger out when it comes to health care.  A government which allows a large portion of its people to die unnecessarily because they're poor is basically an aristocracy.  It's fucking medieval.  It's certainly not what the founding fathers had in mind when they said "for the people."  

Some of these "patriots" of capitalism love their wallet more than their countrymen.  That's fine, just have the sack to admit it.
Report to moderator   Logged
tu_holmes
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15817


With a keen eye for details, one truth prevails.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #151 on: September 11, 2008, 10:02:03 AM »

Borderline communism Chimps, he want you and to depend on the Government for everything, he want to dictate where and who my money goes to, he wants to tell me and you what health care system to use and so and so on. I understand the difference but its not much.

The government already does that Coach... They tell you to give them their money and then they send it to Iraq.

You're already in a Socialist state... That's what the bailouts of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac prove.

Your taxes are already going to Social Programs Coach... The biggest one going right now is this place called Iraq.

Your current leaders don't even keep the money at home where it can benefit our economy... They send it across to a fucking desert.
Report to moderator   Logged
shootfighter1
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 5552

Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ


View Profile
« Reply #152 on: September 11, 2008, 10:49:46 AM »

Kucinich TA?  I respect your opinions bro as you post sources & defend your statements...but Kucinich is a lunatic.  He is the rep for our district and has the worst attendance record for representitives.  The only issues he addresses in the district are the ones that get him TV time.  Horrible leader.
Report to moderator   Logged

-John
shootfighter1
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 5552

Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ


View Profile
« Reply #153 on: September 11, 2008, 10:52:00 AM »

While Damon has some legit concerns, his assertion that McCain has a 1 in 3 chance of dying in his presidency is unfounded.  McCain probably has some unusual genetics in that his mom is a very healthy 96.  Longevity over age 90 is most predicted by genes (more than lifestyle).
Also, while Palin talks about being a hocky mom, thats just to identify with common women.  Being a govenor of Alaska with 83% approval ratings is not just being a 'hocky mom'.
Report to moderator   Logged

-John
240 is Back
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 82545


Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com


View Profile WWW
« Reply #154 on: September 11, 2008, 10:57:31 AM »

While Damon has some legit concerns, his assertion that McCain has a 1 in 3 chance of dying in his presidency is unfounded.  McCain probably has some unusual genetics in that his mom is a very healthy 96.  Longevity over age 90 is most predicted by genes (more than lifestyle).

I dunno...

his father passed away at 70.  Mccain also suffered from all sorts of physical ailments due to vietnam torture - but he does have seriously good health care, due to being senator, and a millionaire.

I'm sure he'll be fine, but there is more of an urgency to look at VP nominee, when Dem party has a healthy 47-year old who plays basketball with college kids each day, and is in better shape than 98% of the people his age.
Report to moderator   Logged

chester_bbb
Time Out
Getbig III
*
Posts: 977


#1 Shawn Ray fan!


View Profile
« Reply #155 on: September 11, 2008, 11:38:54 AM »

Roll Eyes  You're officially an idiot! Here's a quote from a guy who was around while the dinosaurs roamed the earth. Read it and start learning:

"It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle."  - Sun Tzu

Di d he kill any dinos? Grin
Report to moderator   Logged
Bodvar
Getbig II
**
Posts: 168


View Profile
« Reply #156 on: September 11, 2008, 12:58:47 PM »

There's a lot of plausible-sounding bullshit being regurgitated as reasoned and informed opinion in this thread...


Some simple FACTS:

America currently ranks 37th for healthcare in the world, it is far from the best healthcare system around.

What criteria was used to make this list? Just because the WHO says something doesn't mean it's correct.

For example, I'm from one of the 20 countries on this list. My grandfather was diagnosed with a particularly aggressive form of glaucoma, he was put on a waiting list for, get this: 1 YEAR. This is standard procedure in Europe, here in America he would have been seen the following week. Which one would you consider to be health care?

Infant mortality in the US is comparable to that of non-industrial Third World country.

Ok, all it took was short trip to Wikipedia to refute that pile of bullshit. America has 6.3 deaths per 1000 births, compare this to 4.7 for the Netherlands, 4.8 for the UK, and 5.0 for New Zealand. Now compare actual third world countries such as Sierra Leone (160.3 per 1000), Afghanistan (157), and Somalia (110.97). Not even close, where do you get this nonsense? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate

HMOs are run for PROFIT... that profit costs lives: denial of coverage; denial of service; denial of drugs.

You think people in Universal Health Care systems aren't denied treatment? Think again http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/health/2512639/Kidney-patients-denied-too-expensive-life-extending-drugs.html

Who is denied anything in the US? It it ILLEGAL to deny people health care in the US. Just look at the millions of illegal aliens who are abusing the system.

Not for profit government departments are NOT inefficient, they are in fact far more efficient cost-wise than the private sector has ever been... the inefficiencies seen in these fields are caused by chronic underfunding, which in part is promoted by private-sector lobbyists eager to benefit from the privatization of these same sectors.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Are you insane? Have you ever been to the DMV, dealt with Social Services, anything? The private sector is MUCH more efficient than the government. Inefficiency in government is because it is almost impossible to fire anyone, and government bureaucracies cannot go bankrupt. They have no incentive to be efficient, all they have to do is claim their piss poor performance is because of "lack of funding" and demand more money. If a private business is inefficient then it goes out of business and is replaced by a business that is more efficient.

Just look at Jack Welch, the guy took over GE and began a policy of flushing out the bottom 10% of performers annually, the result was a super efficient corporate machine. The government needs a policy like this, big time.

Statistics for cancer survival rates pushed by small-government Republicans and HMOs (Giuliani just made up the figures he quoted in the Republican debates for example) are patently FALSE!


US cancer survival studies do NOT include:
-the 1% of Americans that are homeless
-the 2-3% of Americans that are illegal immigrants
-the 50 million (16%) of Americans who are not insured
-the huge disparity in life expectancy between whites and minorities (black males don't get cancer as often as they only live to be 58 or so on average)
-the insured who are denied coverage as a profiteering strategy by HMOs

Why is that? Because you say so? This is something you have to back up for it to have any credibility. Oh and I see one festering pile of horseshit in that laundry list already. The life expectancy of African American males is 70 years not 58 http://www.webmd.com/news/20080611/life-expectancy-reaches-new-record

...and the most important FACT of all:
Americans currently pay considerably more per capita (nearly twice) for their 37th best healthcare system in the world than the French pay for their best healthcare system in the world.

First of all it's about 1.5 times as much. French doctors are also paid a lot less than American doctors (1/3). But your right, American health care expenses are ballooning out of control. But this is because the American health industry is the most regulation industry in the world. What it needs is to give people more choices about their health care, and make common sense changes that could make health care more efficient and affordable. Making Medicaid and Medicare a mandatory nationwide system is NOT the answer.

Socialised/universal American government funded healthcare WOULD mean a tax increase... but that increase would be something on the order of 20% of what the insured are currently paying in premiums... and for that tax-increase/cost-decrease Americans would get:

Do you actually research this stuff or do you just make it up as you go along? America has one of the highest tax rates in the industrial world and you think jacking it up 20% would be no big deal? A 20% increase on someone making 60 grand a year would be an increase of 12,000 dollars a year. I don't know anyone who's paying that high of a premium.

Plus, the thing is that the top earners here pay most of the taxes, so the top 10% is going to foot most of the bill. Raising taxes on the top earners is just increasing the tax burden on American businesses, small and large. If you believe that huge tax hikes won't have a negative effect on the American economy I have a bridge to sell you.

-truly universal healthcare
-a first world healthcare system
-treatment for the homeless (mentally-ill homeless cause crime)
-treatment for poor drug addicts (less crime)
-treatment for immigrants (again, less crime)
-considerably less bankruptcy among the middle class
-considerably less divorce/domestic violence/child physical abuse etc as all these things are fueled by monetary pressures such as medical bills

- American healthcare system is a first world system
- The homeless are treated
- Drug addicts are treated
- Illegal immigrants are treated
- Any less bankruptcy due to socialized medicine will be offset by an increase in unemployment due to higher taxes
- Medical bills are responsible for divorce, domestic violence, and child abuse? Where do you get this crap from?


Arguing AGAINST socialised healthcare is just plain ignorant and stooopid.


The Luke

No arguing against something without backing your points up and using false statistics is stoooopid.

[/quote]
Report to moderator   Logged
shootfighter1
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 5552

Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ


View Profile
« Reply #157 on: September 11, 2008, 01:18:25 PM »

"The private sector is MUCH more efficient than the government. Inefficiency in government is because it is almost impossible to fire anyone, and government bureaucracies cannot go bankrupt. They have no incentive to be efficient, all they have to do is claim their piss poor performance is because of "lack of funding" and demand more money. If a private business is inefficient then it goes out of business and is replaced by a business that is more efficient".

This is exactly how it is.  I have had the experience of small personally ran companies and working as a contractor for the gov.  Its blatantly obvious when you've had experience with both.  More direct gov control is not good.  I understand regulation in some circumstances, but not full gov control.

Luke, where the hell did you get those figures?  Lots of that info is incorrect.
Report to moderator   Logged

-John
The Luke
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3017

What's that in the bushes?


View Profile
« Reply #158 on: September 11, 2008, 02:01:43 PM »

Bodvar,

I suppose I should link each and every piece of info I post so I'm not at the mercy of google-fu experts such as yourself... but then again, you dismiss a WHO report (WTF?!) so what would be the point.

But I'll give you some pointers so you can do a little more research...


-America HAS the 37th ranked healthcare system (look-up the 2007 WHO Report)

-America's 6.3 deaths per 1,000 DOES put America in contention with Third World countries
...UN report: 32 countries beat the US (the USA only barely beat Croatia... which was a war zone in the early 90's)
...CIA report: 42 countries beat the US
   ...add to this the fact that it is generally agreed that US figures are grossly UNDER REPORTED

-people are in fact denied treatment in most European countries, but the denial rate is several orders of magnitude lower than it is in the US (and that's among the insured US citizens, the uninsured are denied coverage routinely)

-if you don't think government-run social services are efficient then doesn't that equate to criticism of your socialized Armed Forces? Are you not supporting the troops?

-the life expectancy of Black males is actually 58ish (that might be out of date though). The figure you got (70) was a life expectancy from a medical site... that doesn't factor in the homicide rate, does it?

-you contend Americans only pay 1.5 times as much as the French for healthcare per capita... well, you are comparing the wrong figures:
You should factor in not only government funding per capita, but also government spending per capita and also include the per capita PRIVATE spending on insurance premiums, medications, and uninsured health spending... then the figure is actually substantially more than twice what the French pay.

-the 20% tax increase I referred to is a 20% increase in the amount of tax that Americans CURRENTLY spend via taxes on healthcare... NOT a 20% increase in tax, NOT a 20% income tax.
As it stands now Americans pay almost as much healthcare tax as the French do... but then they have to go spend roughly the same amount AGAIN from their own pockets in private insurance premiums in order to be properly covered. (Guess I should have been clearer)

That's tantamount to paying 80% of the cost of French-style universal healthcare in taxes and then paying the same amount again to be (almost) fully covered... all the while being terrified of the government offering universal healthcare for the same price the French pay in taxes? Aren't the French getting much better value for money?  



You see Bodvar, I disagree with your viewpoint because I'm more informed than you are... not because I am uninformed.

You're starting from the assumption that I'm wrong... then have to go searching for conflicting data. Why not just do lots of research and come around to my viewpoint (reality).


The Luke
Report to moderator   Logged
CigaretteMan
Getbig III
***
Posts: 647


Yum, yum, give me some!


View Profile
« Reply #159 on: September 11, 2008, 05:04:42 PM »

First of all, not my country, I'm European.

  Then you're even worst than I first suspected...

Quote
Which legislatures have considered banning evolutions?

  Several states of the south.

Quote
What stopped them from doing so?

  It ended in the Supreme Court, and they ruled that they don't have the right to stop evolution from being taught at schools.

Quote
Please show some statistics that compare Swiss and Norwegian Caucasians to American Caucasians. You realize Americans Caucasians ARE German and Swiss and Norwegian and Dutch Caucasians right?

  "Sigh"

   No, Americans of Swiss, Norwegian and Dutch ancestry are not Swiss, Norwegian and Duth: they are Americans. We are comparing nationality here, and not ethnicity. I said that white Americans compare very poorly in terms of education, scholarships and culture to their Caucasian brethen in Switzerland and Norway, which is true.
Report to moderator   Logged
TerminalPower
Getbig III
***
Posts: 641



View Profile
« Reply #160 on: September 11, 2008, 05:10:48 PM »

If Matt Damon had an original thought, it would be lonely.
Report to moderator   Logged

1
CigaretteMan
Getbig III
***
Posts: 647


Yum, yum, give me some!


View Profile
« Reply #161 on: September 11, 2008, 05:12:55 PM »

  I don't know why this argument went towards universal health care. My posts having nothing to do with universal health care in any way, shape or form. In fact, as a libertarian, I am against universal health care because everyone should pay their own medical bills and not expect others to. The whole argument over universal health care is slly because, ultimately, you will be paying for it either way. The only difference is that in a universal health care system you are allowing the government to decide how to spend your money to take care of your health. Does that make any sense?
Report to moderator   Logged
lovemonkey
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 7706


Two kinds of people; Those that can extrapolate


View Profile
« Reply #162 on: September 11, 2008, 05:42:06 PM »

 I don't know why this argument went towards universal health care. My posts having nothing to do with universal health care in any way, shape or form. In fact, as a libertarian, I am against universal health care because everyone should pay their own medical bills and not expect others to. The whole argument over universal health care is slly because, ultimately, you will be paying for it either way. The only difference is that in a universal health care system you are allowing the government to decide how to spend your money to take care of your health. Does that make any sense?

Yes an awesome idea, it is working real fine. Really fine to say the least, I mean you only have 50 million people without a health insurance!!
But everyone to their own. We wouldn't want to step on your precious freedom.
Report to moderator   Logged

from incomplete data
CigaretteMan
Getbig III
***
Posts: 647


Yum, yum, give me some!


View Profile
« Reply #163 on: September 11, 2008, 07:55:13 PM »

Yes an awesome idea, it is working real fine. Really fine to say the least, I mean you only have 50 million people without a health insurance!!
But everyone to their own. We wouldn't want to step on your precious freedom.

  Gentleman, someone has to pay for it. Money and resources don't come out ex nihilo. Suppose you are wealthy and have $100,000 a year to spend on medical needs if you need it. Now suppose that the government, through taxes, robs $50,000 of you, and provides you with the equivalent of $10,000 in medical care a year. This means that the government is stealing from you $40,000 a year and using it to take care of the medical needs of other people. How is this fair? How is this ethical? So a person who is shiftless and wastful and never cared saving for the eventuality of a disease gets their medical bills taken care of with your money. Again, how is this fair? Not only will the government be stealing $40.000 from you, but the $10.000 that it will be giving you back will be of very low quality care, in some public hospital with poor equipment and the worst doctors - the best doctors work for themselves in the private sector.
Report to moderator   Logged
240 is Back
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 82545


Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com


View Profile WWW
« Reply #164 on: September 11, 2008, 07:58:44 PM »

funniest part - we're not bowwoing 800 bil a year to build factories.

we're borrowing that much to consume.  it's not getting invested in anything.

only being spent on lead toys and smart bombs and $600 toilet seats from haliburton.
Report to moderator   Logged

CigaretteMan
Getbig III
***
Posts: 647


Yum, yum, give me some!


View Profile
« Reply #165 on: September 11, 2008, 08:14:44 PM »

funniest part - we're not bowwoing 800 bil a year to build factories.

we're borrowing that much to consume.  it's not getting invested in anything.

only being spent on lead toys and smart bombs and $600 toilet seats from haliburton.

  The U.S.A is in an irreversible spiral of decadence. Go read "History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire" and you will see that the same colossal historical forces that brought Rome to it's knees are clearly showing themselves when it comes to the U.S. These include:

  - Loss of power from the nucleus that built the empire's greatness to multi-polar political groups that catter to the particular interests of their own ethnicity and not the country's interests - Latin patricians in the case of Rome, Anglo-Saxon Notheastern elite in the case of the U.S

  - Ultimately invincible barbarians at the gate - Germanics and Turanid tribes in the case of Rome, Mexicans and Latin-Americans in the case of the U.S.

  - World status dependent on prohibitively expensive and unsustainable military might - military budget outstrips GNP capacity in the long-run.

  - The inevitable decline in status that follows from having a smaller and smaller % of the World's population - the U.S is currently only 4% of the World's population, and despite mass immigration it will shring to 2% by 2050.

   No matter who gets elected, they will only hasten or slow the decline process, but the process itself is irreversible. McCain might boost the economy by lowering taces and envouraging self-reliance, and Obama might decrease interracial tensions from being the first non-white president, but ultimately either of them will only be able to slow the decline process, which is utterly irreversible.
Report to moderator   Logged
TerminalPower
Getbig III
***
Posts: 641



View Profile
« Reply #166 on: September 11, 2008, 09:32:11 PM »

Enjoy Smiley

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anxkrm9uEJk" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anxkrm9uEJk</a>

Maybe Dumb fuck Matt will promise to move to Canada when she becomes president, one can only hope for both.  Notice how this mental midget refers to her as a hockey mom in a demeaning way. 

I sense some sexism in his comments or did he forget WE DON'T KNOW SHIT ABOUT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA EITHER?  HE HAS NO RECORD!
Report to moderator   Logged

1
SquatAss
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1019

Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #167 on: September 11, 2008, 11:25:18 PM »

  Gentleman, someone has to pay for it. Money and resources don't come out ex nihilo. Suppose you are wealthy and have $100,000 a year to spend on medical needs if you need it. Now suppose that the government, through taxes, robs $50,000 of you, and provides you with the equivalent of $10,000 in medical care a year. This means that the government is stealing from you $40,000 a year and using it to take care of the medical needs of other people. How is this fair? How is this ethical? So a person who is shiftless and wastful and never cared saving for the eventuality of a disease gets their medical bills taken care of with your money. Again, how is this fair? Not only will the government be stealing $40.000 from you, but the $10.000 that it will be giving you back will be of very low quality care, in some public hospital with poor equipment and the worst doctors - the best doctors work for themselves in the private sector.

It's fair because everybody is paying exactly the same amount for basic health insurance. From the low to the high incomes. From single moms to lawyers with a ridiculous hourly rate, everybody pays. And because of that the amount is low. Medical care in the countries where the system is set up in this way (Holland, Denmark, Germany, France to name a few) doesn't vary very much in terms of quality (which according to some statistics mentioned here is better than in the States) from hospital to hospital. How the hell is that not fair?

Report to moderator   Logged
tu_holmes
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15817


With a keen eye for details, one truth prevails.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #168 on: September 11, 2008, 11:46:42 PM »

Maybe Dumb fuck Matt will promise to move to Canada when she becomes president, one can only hope for both.  Notice how this mental midget refers to her as a hockey mom in a demeaning way. 

I sense some sexism in his comments or did he forget WE DON'T KNOW SHIT ABOUT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA EITHER?  HE HAS NO RECORD!

He has more of a record than she does... Plus he makes himself available to the Press every single day... She's so scared she only had one interview in 2 weeks.

Not to mention she had no idea what the Bush Doctrine was... How does she not know this when I know this?
Report to moderator   Logged
TerminalPower
Getbig III
***
Posts: 641



View Profile
« Reply #169 on: September 11, 2008, 11:51:34 PM »

He has more of a record than she does... Plus he makes himself available to the Press every single day... She's so scared she only had one interview in 2 weeks.

Not to mention she had no idea what the Bush Doctrine was... How does she not know this when I know this?

Tu, she was the governor of Alaska not some punk actor.  Obama was a community organizer if we are taking that route.
Report to moderator   Logged

1
tu_holmes
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15817


With a keen eye for details, one truth prevails.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #170 on: September 11, 2008, 11:53:08 PM »

Tu, she was the governor of Alaska not some punk actor.  Obama was a community organizer if we are taking that route.

He was a state senator, and then a US senator.

If you want to go THAT route... She was the runner up in a beauty pageant.
Report to moderator   Logged
TerminalPower
Getbig III
***
Posts: 641



View Profile
« Reply #171 on: September 11, 2008, 11:58:25 PM »


If you want to go THAT route... She was the runner up in a beauty pageant.


Barak voted "present" over a 160 times, not much of  a senator.
Report to moderator   Logged

1
CigaretteMan
Getbig III
***
Posts: 647


Yum, yum, give me some!


View Profile
« Reply #172 on: September 12, 2008, 12:00:44 AM »

It's fair because everybody is paying exactly the same amount for basic health insurance. From the low to the high incomes. From single moms to lawyers with a ridiculous hourly rate, everybody pays. And because of that the amount is low. Medical care in the countries where the system is set up in this way (Holland, Denmark, Germany, France to name a few) doesn't vary very much in terms of quality (which according to some statistics mentioned here is better than in the States) from hospital to hospital. How the hell is that not fair?

  Really? What about all those poor people with AIDS and other ailments that require expensive medication year-round? Obviously, the money to pay for 99% of their medical expenses is not coming from their pockets, but from other people's pockets.

  The reason why it is unfair is because regardless the government is taking away your money and spending it on other people. Lots of poor people who get universal care are those who need it and wouldn't be able to afford it on their own, so the government steals a little bit of money from everyone and uses a disproportional amount of it on a small percentage of the poor population who has incredible medical bills.

  Even if everyone paid the same for universal health care - which is not the case in many countries where the rich pay far more -, it still would only be fair if everyone had the exact same yearly medical expense, which is not the case. Why should I give $10.000 of my money every year to the government for health care if I am going to use practically none of it and the $10.000 will be used on other people? I could save the money and use it for myself when I got sick and actually needed medical care. The whole thing is a sham. It is robbery, plain and simple. The dowtrodden of the Society should learn to take care of themselves instead of expecting mommy - the upper classes - and daddy - the state - to pay their way through life.
Report to moderator   Logged
tu_holmes
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15817


With a keen eye for details, one truth prevails.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #173 on: September 12, 2008, 12:04:10 AM »

Barak voted "present" over a 160 times, not much of  a senator.

What did she vote for?

Let's see... She ask for money for  a bridge to nowhere. No vote there.
She didn't have a US passport until 2007... No vote and absolutely no foreign exposure.

Hell dude... I've had a passport for over 13 years and I'm not a politician... Christ how backwoods is this bitch?

She has requested 750 Million in earmarks... The most per capita in the nation. Still not a vote but unbelievable considering there's not even 700,000 people in that state.

She has made the state a per diem for the 312 nights she has spent at home ($16,951 in total allowances) and for her family's travel expenses ($43,490, an additional $93,000 for Palin herself)

She makes her constituents pay for her family's travel!

This is just what I DO know about her... which, because she refuses to say anything on a daily basis, I'll admit isn't much.
Report to moderator   Logged
SquatAss
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1019

Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #174 on: September 12, 2008, 03:32:47 AM »

 Really? What about all those poor people with AIDS and other ailments that require expensive medication year-round? Obviously, the money to pay for 99% of their medical expenses is not coming from their pockets, but from other people's pockets.

  The reason why it is unfair is because regardless the government is taking away your money and spending it on other people. Lots of poor people who get universal care are those who need it and wouldn't be able to afford it on their own, so the government steals a little bit of money from everyone and uses a disproportional amount of it on a small percentage of the poor population who has incredible medical bills.

  Even if everyone paid the same for universal health care - which is not the case in many countries where the rich pay far more -, it still would only be fair if everyone had the exact same yearly medical expense, which is not the case. Why should I give $10.000 of my money every year to the government for health care if I am going to use practically none of it and the $10.000 will be used on other people? I could save the money and use it for myself when I got sick and actually needed medical care. The whole thing is a sham. It is robbery, plain and simple. The dowtrodden of the Society should learn to take care of themselves instead of expecting mommy - the upper classes - and daddy - the state - to pay their way through life.

You should learn to look a little further. In my country I'm cosidered 'right wing'. But I, as do many other people on the right here, recognise the need for a social security net (of which the universal care is a part). How do you think an economy fairs when a significant amount of the population is in debt? What about crime rates when people can't even afford the most basic necessities? All these things will influence your quality of life too. And a lot of them can be minimalised by setting up a social security net.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 11   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!