Ron 10 #76 October 1, 2004 QuoteMolly works at one. They are laying people off. Some people (spinal cord injury patients) get minimal care. All to be expected - you cut funding, services get cut. And yet you think Kerrys plan to turn Americas health care into a socalistic system is a good idea? See folks...Thats funny people bitch about the VA (Even though they don't experience it themselves) but they want EVERYONE to have it that way."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mardigrasbob 0 #77 October 1, 2004 Anyone who was in the military will tell you that heathcare sucks. Doctor trainees or ones who could not cut it in the world. Often the cure is worse than the disease. Herd mentality and staff who could give a shit less. But it is free! Amazing how the almighty dollar motivates people to do a better job. ------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #78 October 1, 2004 >And yet you think Kerrys plan to turn Americas health care into a >socalistic system is a good idea? We have that now to a large degree. In fact, you have said you frequent socialist hospitals. VA hospitals are socialist; the government pays for them. The government (or more accurately private hospitals/insurance companies) pay for emergency indigent medical care. I think the best system for us would be a formalized two-tier system; a formal baseline emergency care system and a pay-as-you-go system for expensive elective surgery. Note that that's not exactly the same as Kerry's proposal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #79 October 1, 2004 QuoteI think the best system for us would be a formalized two-tier system; a formal baseline emergency care system and a pay-as-you-go system for expensive elective surgery. What do you propose as "emergency care" in this system? - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #80 October 6, 2004 QuoteWe have that now to a large degree. In fact, you have said you frequent socialist hospitals. VA hospitals are socialist; the government pays for them. The government (or more accurately private hospitals/insurance companies) pay for emergency indigent medical care. I think the best system for us would be a formalized two-tier system; a formal baseline emergency care system and a pay-as-you-go system for expensive elective surgery. Note that that's not exactly the same as Kerry's proposal. Bill just admit you want the US to become socalist. You would rather take from those that work hard to give to those who don't."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #81 October 6, 2004 >Bill just admit you want the US to become socalist. The US IS partly socialist. Do you want a space program? Then you want it to be socialist too. >You would rather take from those that work hard to give to those who don't. I'd rather a) take less overall and b) take from everyone. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mardigrasbob 0 #82 October 6, 2004 Quote>Bill just admit you want the US to become socalist. The US IS partly socialist. Do you want a space program? Then you want it to be socialist too. >You would rather take from those that work hard to give to those who don't. I'd rather a) take less overall and b) take from everyone. Perfect example of socialism's failure. Goverment's goal is protection of the status quo. Innovation and cost cutting are unheard of. Free enterprise, whenever it is introduced to a socialist economic system stimulates remarkable positive change and lower costs. Ma Bell, airlines, and the web are great examples. The entrenched are threatened by change, hell I liked paying rent on the dial telephones, one phone book, and having to buy a new encyclopedia everytime I wanted to learn about something new. There are very few examples where socialism is better than free enterprise; military and uh .. uh.. One example! -------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #83 October 6, 2004 QuoteThere are very few examples where socialism is better than free enterprise; military Seems to me that's pretty capitalistic. We're drawing heavily on civilian contractors and mercenaries. Of course for it to really be free enterprise there should be competition. It's more of a free enterprise monopoly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #84 October 6, 2004 >There are very few examples where socialism is better than >free enterprise; military and uh .. uh.. Police Roads Air traffic control The CDC Like I said, the US is partly socialist. The reason we have been successful as a country is that we take the best of each system. Pure democracy? Too hard to implement; we'll use representatives. Pure representative government? Not flexible enough; we'll have a judiciary and an executive. Pure capitalism? Not always the best; we'll use socialism for roads, air traffic control and the police. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
b1jercat 0 #85 October 7, 2004 All built by the low bidder. blues skies jerry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #86 October 7, 2004 QuoteThe US IS partly socialist. Do you want a space program? Then you want it to be socialist too. So you DO want the US to be socialist! Its a shame the founding fathers did not agree with you. NOTHING the Government runs, runs well. I may work, but it in not efficient. Space Program...Can and is being done cheaper by civilians. Police...Scandals and corruption. I can give you the Interstate Roads. Go give your vote to the Socialist Part Bill...I would prefer I do my part in keeping the country Democratic. QuoteI'd rather a) take less overall and b) take from everyone. How are you going to take from those unwilling to work Bill? What you are really wanting is to take from those that do work so those that don't want to work do not have to work."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #87 October 7, 2004 >So you DO want the US to be socialist! It IS partly socialist. You yourself use socialist services. >Its a shame the founding fathers did not agree with you. Here's a little snippet from a document they wrote, you may recognize it: We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE and secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. (emphasis mine.) >NOTHING the Government runs, runs well. And Enron is a shining example of efficiency. >Space Program...Can and is being done cheaper by civilians. There would be no manned spaceflight if we had not had NASA to develop the necessary technologies. It's not that industry can't do it, it is that there is no money in manned spaceflight. Now, if you want to talk about the US funding private industry to, say, get a mission to mars going, then great - but you're still talking about 'socialist' control of a private function (transportation to mars.) >Police...Scandals and corruption. Better than the alternative. For the most part, the police in the US do a good job. >Go give your vote to the Socialist Part Bill...I would prefer I do my >part in keeping the country Democratic. Then vote for Kerry! (joke, that was a joke.) Our country is not democratic. Like I said, it's a hybrid. It's a republic with some democratic features (ballot measures, elections) some socialist features (roads, ATC, police) some degree of anarchy (capitalism, deregulation) and even some features of communism (national parks.) That's why it works - it takes the best of each system and leaves out the worst. But want to prove to everyone you don't support socialism? Don't use sewers. Don't use city water - put in a well or buy all your own water. Don't use public landfills - buy your own land and dump your trash there, or find someone with a private landfill and pay them to take your trash. Don't fly on any aircraft that has an FAA airworthiness certificate or that uses air traffic control. Don't drive a car on any public roads - buy the land you need to get places, or pay your neighbor to allow you to drive through his back yard. I have a feeling, though, that you will continue to do most of those things, but also continue to claim that you don't support socialism. But then hey, some people drive SUV's to pro-environmental rallies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest #88 October 7, 2004 Excellent parry...good form, Bill.... mh . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #89 October 7, 2004 QuoteHere's a little snippet from a document they wrote, you may recognize it: We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE and secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Gee I don't see anything about being socalist.... I don't see anything about giving away the farm to some lazy people. I don't see anything about giving everyone the same health care. It says PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE. That does not say provide welfare. It can be read to allow people the ability to advance through hard work. But you would rather give away what people work hard for. You are a typical liberal. Quote>NOTHING the Government runs, runs well. And Enron is a shining example of efficiency. And the FAA is doing a great job....Or the DOT, or the VA hospitals. QuoteThere would be no manned spaceflight if we had not had NASA to develop the necessary technologies. It's not that industry can't do it, it is that there is no money in manned spaceflight. Now, if you want to talk about the US funding private industry to, say, get a mission to mars going, then great - but you're still talking about 'socialist' control of a private function (transportation to mars.) I don't see a need for the space program. If it is not going to make money, why waste it? Just cause we can? That time is past. QuoteBut want to prove to everyone you don't support socialism? Don't use sewers. Don't use city water - put in a well or buy all your own water. Don't use public landfills - buy your own land and dump your trash there, or find someone with a private landfill and pay them to take your trash. Don't fly on any aircraft that has an FAA airworthiness certificate or that uses air traffic control. Don't drive a car on any public roads - buy the land you need to get places, or pay your neighbor to allow you to drive through his back yard. I have a feeling, though, that you will continue to do most of those things, but also continue to claim that you don't support socialism. But then hey, some people drive SUV's to pro-environmental rallies. Tell ya what, I'll quit using those things if you quit using anything Captalistic...So first quit your job and sell off any stocks you own. Let me know when you get all that done OK?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #90 October 8, 2004 >Gee I don't see anything about being socalist.... I don't see anything > about giving away the farm to some lazy people. I don't see anything > about giving everyone the same health care. Nor do I, nor am I proposing that. >You are a typical liberal. Why thank you! >I don't see a need for the space program. If it is not going to make > money, why waste it? Just cause we can? That time is past. If we did not have a space program, we'd all be speaking russian now. The space program was an outgrowth of the ICBM programs that allowed us to match the threat of the USSR. Everything up until Apollo was basically adaptations of military hardware. Even if we somehow held the russians at bay, we'd all be paying through the nose for every satellite-based data, communications and navigation system we have. Heck, with that much money coming in, the USSR would never have fallen! >Tell ya what, I'll quit using those things if you quit using anything > Captalistic...So first quit your job and sell off any stocks you own. Why? I don't claim to not be a capitalist. That's the beauty of the US - it uses capitalism where it makes sense, socialism where it makes sense, and communism where it makes sense. As a result, you can make a million dollars, drive on roads anywhere in the US, and go spend that money in a national park. You seem unwilling to admit that you benefit from the aspects of the USA that are socialist. Which is fine, but it's not reality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #91 October 8, 2004 Quote>Gee I don't see anything about being socalist.... I don't see anything > about giving away the farm to some lazy people. I don't see anything > about giving everyone the same health care. Nor do I, nor am I proposing that. You want socalist health care. The Constitution says nothing about health care. Quote>You are a typical liberal. Why thank you! You can take that as a complement if ya like....But your communistic ways will never work in the US. QuoteIf we did not have a space program, we'd all be speaking russian now. Got proof? Oh no you don't you just want to make big claims that you can't prove...Like always."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #92 October 8, 2004 >You want socalist health care. We have that now. It can be done in a much better way. >You can take that as a complement if ya like....But your communistic >ways will never work in the US. They are working! Yosemite is magnificent proof of that. Communism is defined as "A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property." We all own the national parks; they are maintained by our taxes for all to use. That is a good thing. Would you like to see Yosemite sold to loggers? >Got proof? Oh no you don't you just want to make big claims that you >can't prove...Like always. Proof that the USSR would have taken us over if we did not have a nuclear deterrent? You're a funny guy. The USSR said they would "bury us." They said several times that they were determined to spread communism throughout the world. They were constantly pushing our limits in China, Afghanistan, Germany etc. Surely you do not claim that the USSR was no threat to us but Saddam Hussein was? You seem to be in denial that the US has some characteristics that you use that are socialist and communist in character. And you will continue to use those services even as you deny they exist. So be it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #93 October 8, 2004 QuoteThey are working! Yosemite is magnificent proof of that. Communism is defined as "A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property." We all own the national parks; they are maintained by our taxes for all to use. That is a good thing. Close, but not right....Communism is defined as "A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of ALL property." The Government owns the Parks, and they let us use them. Just like the Government owns the Aircraft Carriers and the weapons in the Military. Quote>Got proof? Oh no you don't you just want to make big claims that you >can't prove...Like always. Proof that the USSR would have taken us over if we did not have a nuclear deterrent? You're a funny guy. Yes do you have proof? Don't bring Nukes into this, we had them before. There were other methods to deploy them than ICBM's. SALT II removed short range missles. Those were a bigger fear than ICBM's. QuoteThe USSR said they would "bury us." So did Iraq. QuoteThey said several times that they were determined to spread communism throughout the world. They were constantly pushing our limits in China, Afghanistan, Germany etc. And SH wanted to push Islam to all places as well. QuoteSurely you do not claim that the USSR was no threat to us but Saddam Hussein was? I find it funny that you cry about the USSR, but didn't sweat Iraq and that you say Iraq was wrong. I don't see much of a difference. But you still ahve not PROVEN anything...Just like always. QuoteYou seem to be in denial that the US has some characteristics that you use that are socialist and communist in character. And you will continue to use those services even as you deny they exist. So be it. And you seem to ignore that the best parts of this country are CAPITALISTIC, and you enjoy those while trying to eliminate them by moving this country into communism. All the while crying about how bad capitalism is...While you benefit from it. Fine by me...Like I said get rid of all your capitalistic "trappings" and I'll stop using the "socialistic" things you claim. I'll be better off."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #94 October 8, 2004 >Close, but not right....Communism is defined as "A theoretical > economic system characterized by the collective ownership of ALL > property." Right. National parks are communistic, but the US is not a communist country. >The Government owns the Parks, and they let us use them. Just like > the Government owns the Aircraft Carriers and the weapons in the >Military. You get to use aircraft carriers? Party on Ron's boat! >I find it funny that you cry about the USSR, but didn't sweat Iraq >and that you say Iraq was wrong. I'm not crying at all. We won the cold war without bombs. The one way to really win such a war is to not fight it. Now we have a semi-stable, semi-capitalist Russia without a US occupation, without hundreds of thousands dead and without radioactive fallout covering the globe. We won. >I don't see much of a difference. If you can't see a difference between the threat posed Saddam Hussein and the USSR . . . we have nothing more to talk about. Have a good weekend! Have some good jumps, even if they are through airspace controlled by a socialist organization. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #95 October 8, 2004 QuoteRight. National parks are communistic, but the US is not a communist country. No, National parks are Government owned and for our use. WE don't own them....Unless you have a deed hidden somewhere. QuoteYou get to use aircraft carriers? Party on Ron's boat! Ask Kallend...He has played with one. I have jumped Military Aircraft, and used the Military's wind tunnel while I was not in. QuoteI'm not crying at all. We won the cold war without bombs. BS we needed Bombs to win....We just did not have to deploy them...But we needed them. QuoteIf you can't see a difference between the threat posed Saddam Hussein and the USSR . . . we have nothing more to talk about. We never really have anything to talk about. QuoteHave a good weekend! Have some good jumps, even if they are through airspace controlled by a socialist organization. You have a good weekend also. Enjoy jumping at a DZ that exists to MAKE money, and enjoy spending the money you made working in a CAPITALIST company."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites