A little reminder why

[Pawn Power]

My cousin has cancer and must frequently get tumors removed and receive chemotherapy. His parents are hard workers and luckily they have insurance that covers this extremely expensive treatment which is necessary for their son to live.
O yea, but there is one catch; he must continue going to community college in his sickly state or the insurance won’t cover him. His family cannot afford the treatment for him with out the insurance but we do not know how long he can continue to go to class in his poor condition while balancing out is constant treatments. :angry:
I guess that the price one pays living in this great capitalist country. :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

[Y2A]

Kerry plans on creating Universal healthcare in the United States, although, with the house being Republican, I have my doubts if he will be able to do it.

[BuyOurEverything]

Do you advocate Canadian style public health care then Y2A?

[Y2A]

To a certain degree, I do. I never said I was a Republican or right-wing at all. The only Republican I support is John McCain. I think he would have made a better president then Bush, and possibly better then Gore.

[Guerrilla22]

There will be no universal medical coverage in America, so long as giant pharmacuetical companies and insurance companies exist in the US. Their lobbying power is too great.

[Raisa]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 08:12 AM
There will be no universal medical coverage in America, so long as giant pharmacuetical companies and insurance companies exist in the US. Their lobbying power is too great.
psh "lobbying power" ...they just got alot of money now don't they!

When I think of this shit it reminds me of the movie Jonny Q, where Danzel Washington didnt have enough for his sons heart condition and the doctor was going to let the little boy die, so Danzel took over the hospital.

What makes this such a choice?! Democracy my ass, people are dying,and these politcians are like in there talking about it and have still not reached the verdict that we all deserve medical care! That is a siren indicating that their opinion doesnt matter! Not because they dont agree with me, but becuase they turn their back to thousands and thousands of their own countrymen to suffer just because they cant afford insurance. Over a little bit of money. Funds are endless for the vague war on terror, but making sure your own people can get medical treatment they need....no! How patriotic is that? It makes you wonder what they are even doing in our government!?

[Professor Moneybags]

When I think of this shit it reminds me of the movie Jonny Q, where Danzel Washington didnt have enough for his sons heart condition and the doctor was going to let the little boy die, so Danzel took over the hospital.

With all the morals of an armed robber. (See below)


What makes this such a choice?! Democracy my ass, people are dying,and these politcians are like in there talking about it and have still not reached the verdict that we all deserve medical care!

To be provided by who and at who's expense ?

To sum up, what he is suggesting is that someone's else's need (medical or otherwise) should create a duty on the part of others (in this case doctors) to fulfil that need and that his misfortune gives him the right to violate the rights of others and to steal their money (a "right to healthcare" has to be paid for).

[Sabocat]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 08:15 PM
Kerry plans on creating Universal healthcare in the United States, although, with the house being Republican, I have my doubts if he will be able to do it.
Kerry will never bring nationalized Health Care. One of his largest political contributors are the pharmaceutical companies.


Affordable, high-quality health care will keep our families healthy, our businesses competitive, and our country strong.
Over the last three years, family premiums have increased by more than $2,600 and prescription drug prices have grown four times faster than inflation. These skyrocketing costs have hurt our economy and forced many families into bankruptcy.

We deserve a president who understands that in America, regular check-ups shouldn't empty family checkbooks - a president who will put people ahead of insurance and drug companies.

John Kerry and John Edwards have a plan to address soaring premiums and cut Americans a break. Their plan will lower family premiums by up to $1,000 a year, cut waste from the system, lower the cost of prescription drugs to provide real relief to seniors, and use targeted tax cuts to extend affordable, high-quality coverage to 95 percent of Americans, including every child. And because John Kerry and John Edwards believe that everyone's health is equally important, he will provide all Americans with access to the same coverage that members of Congress give themselves.

Link (http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/health_care/)

There is quite a difference between "affordable" and free healthcare to all. Reducing the premium $1000 dollars may seem like a lot, but in reality a family plan health insurance coverage can cost as much as $600-$1000 per month, depending on how much your employer contributes to it. That is of course if you're lucky enough to have an employer that contributes. A lot of service industry, and retail industry companies provide nothing.

It's only "affordable" if you've got the expendable income to pay for it in the first place.

[DaCuBaN]

Kerry will never bring nationalized Health Care. One of his largest political contributors are the pharmaceutical companies

On the contrary, wouldn't this be a great incentive? Nationalised healthcare would (hopefully) mean the drugs get paid for irregardless.


John Kerry and John Edwards have a plan to address soaring premiums and cut Americans a break. Their plan will lower family premiums by up to $1,000 a year, cut waste from the system, lower the cost of prescription drugs to provide real relief to seniors, and use targeted tax cuts to extend affordable, high-quality coverage to 95 percent of Americans, including every child

To be perfectly honest, I'd be inclined to agree that he won't act to nationalise healthcare. There's far too much opposition to it, and he's as much a 'popularity whore' as any other.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 12:59 AM
My cousin has cancer and must frequently get tumors removed and receive chemotherapy. His parents are hard workers and luckily they have insurance that covers this extremely expensive treatment which is necessary for their son to live.
O yea, but there is one catch; he must continue going to community college in his sickly state or the insurance won’t cover him. His family cannot afford the treatment for him with out the insurance but we do not know how long he can continue to go to class in his poor condition while balancing out is constant treatments. :angry:
I guess that the price one pays living in this great capitalist country. :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:
That sucks, no system is perfect.

I would concede that if there is anything that should be socialized in the US, it's healthcare.

But, hey, the bottom line is that he is covered.

I would also add that under a commie regime he may be covered, but they would probably lack the technology or resources to actually give him the same quality of treatment that he is receiving in the US.

[Sabocat]

On the contrary, wouldn't this be a great incentive? Nationalised healthcare would (hopefully) mean the drugs get paid for irregardless.

The only problem is of course, that usually when a government is running a program, they will either cap prices, or they will shop to get the lowest price available. Sometimes that means using products from other countries at substantially lower pricing.

Drug companies hate that, which is of course why they're the loudest opponents of Nationalized health.

[Y2A]

The only reason that Canadian drugs are cheap is because U.S pharmacuetical companies do the R&D.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 05:55 PM
The only reason that Canadian drugs are cheap is because U.S pharmacuetical companies do the R&D.
Very good point. The reason canadian health care is cheap in general is that they leverage volume purchases of Ameircan technology.

[Sabocat]

Yes, the Pharmaceutical Industry in the U.S. is one of the most profitable, with highest return on revenues, because they spend all their money on R&D. :lol:

Canada's drugs are cheaper primarily because of price controls set.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 06:39 PM
Yes, the Pharmaceutical Industry in the U.S. is one of the most profitable, with highest return on revenues, because they spend all their money on R&D. :lol:

Canada's drugs are cheaper primarily because of price controls set.
Price controls agreed to by american companies due to volume sales.

[Sabocat]

Hmmm....I wonder who buys more U.S. made drugs. Canadians or U.S. citizens.

If they can negotiate that price for Canada, why do they still gouge U.S. citizens?Kind of borders on the unethical eh?

Let me tell you a little story. My dad has cancer. For his type of cancer he had to take Thalidomide. Thalidomide was developed in the 50's or 60's to help pregnant women get over the nausea. Research on this drug was done a long time ago. In the mean time, they find that Thalidomide causes horrendous birth defects and they take it off the market. A few years ago, they realize that Thalidomide stops or slows the progression of certain cancers. So they put it back on the market for these cancer patients. Care to take a guess at what the drug companies are charging for a months prescription? $2400. You tell me. What justifies that cost on a drug whose research was done some 30+ years ago?

[Y2A]

So do you guys agree that Americans should be able to buy drugs from the Canucks?

[T_SP]

Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 28 2004, 04:20 PM
I would also add that under a commie regime he may be covered, but they would probably lack the technology or resources to actually give him the same quality of treatment that he is receiving in the US.
Oh yeah that's right, cause we ain't bright enough to think anything up like the Capitalists can! And if it's funding your referring to then that is directly involved with Capitalism in that Capitalist countries oppress Commie one's for fear it may spread!

[gummo]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 07:14 PM
Oh yeah that's right, cause we ain't bright enough to think anything up like the Capitalists can! And if it's funding your referring to then that is directly involved with Capitalism in that Capitalist countries oppress Commie one's for fear it may spread!
You said it.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 07:14 PM
Oh yeah that's right, cause we ain't bright enough to think anything up like the Capitalists can! And if it's funding your referring to then that is directly involved with Capitalism in that Capitalist countries oppress Commie one's for fear it may spread!
Well, actually, per simple history and empirical observation, yes, capitalism and free enterprise are much more conducive to invention, innovation, and progress, bar-none.

As far as blaming capitalism for failures of communism, nice try, but accept responsibility for your own shortcomings.

[Subversive Pessimist]

That is just sick and disgusting, glory! God, I'm begining to weep. :(
I feel sorry for you and your family. I hope your cousing is going to be all right. Best of luck, CS.

[T_SP]

Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 28 2004, 08:55 PM
Well, actually, per simple history and empirical observation, yes, capitalism and free enterprise are much more conducive to invention, innovation, and progress, bar-none.

As far as blaming capitalism for failures of communism, nice try, but accept responsibility for your own shortcomings.
So your saying the U$ has in no way oppressed Cuba, I'm right in saying that aren't I?!?

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 08:17 PM
So your saying the U$ has in no way oppressed Cuba, I'm right in saying that aren't I?!?
No more than communist states have tried to compromise capitalist states!

[Misodoctakleidist]

Why would capitalism make progress any greater? The scientists who do the research don't get paid based on performance, I would suspect that most of them genuinly want to help people.

[gummo]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 09:18 PM
Why would capitalism make progress any greater? The scientists who do the research don't get paid based on performance, I would suspect that most of them genuinly want to help people.
Successful, well educated, scientists do get paid more. I am sure they do like to help people but I am also sure that they are driven by many other things.

[Misodoctakleidist]

I mean within a particular company.

[Osman Ghazi]

No more than communist states have tried to compromise capitalist states!

Not really. I mean, after all, 'communist' states (I won't bother to explain again how this is an obvious contradiction) don't have any initiative. What would drive them to attack capitalists? Unlike the capitalists however, who have profit as a reason (a very persuasive one) to attack commies.


I am sure they do like to help people but I am also sure that they are driven by many other things.

But the desire to help usually drives them more. I mean, would you really go to school for another 8 years just to make money? And not only that; would you pay to go to school for 8 years just to make money? Certainly there are better ways. I mean, if you already have the money to go to university, (which costs about 4 grand/year in Canada, i.e. a country where universities are heavily subsidized by the state) why not just start a business or something?

[Y2A]

No one has answered my question. Do you think Americans should be able to buy drugs from Canada?

[Guerrilla22]

Yes and they still do all the time, I'm from Michigan and hundreds of seniors still cross over into Ontario everyday to buy their prescrition drugs from Canada, everyone knows about it, but it wouldn't look all that great if the government started slapping handcuffs on 80 year olds for trying to save money.

[Raisa]

Originally posted by Professor [email protected] 28 2004, 10:48 AM

With all the morals of an armed robber. (See below)



To be provided by who and at who's expense ?

To sum up, what he is suggesting is that someone's else's need (medical or otherwise) should create a duty on the part of others (in this case doctors) to fulfil that need and that his misfortune gives him the right to violate the rights of others and to steal their money (a "right to healthcare" has to be paid for).
Don't talk to me about rights, you're the one who thinks workers should be left to suffer because they cant afford medical treatment...they made your freedom! The only reason you have anything to enjoy with all your money is because people are working. So don't you put the capitalist spin on me and talk to me about "rights" and stealing people's money!
You're no one to call the people theives for wanting medical treatment, when you're the one who can't bear to pay taxes when you are enjoying this society enough to hold such conservative views on it!
You just want to have your cake and eat it too, YOU'RE the theif! In your opinion people don't deserve medical treatment even though they are working making all the freedom you enjoy.

[Professor Moneybags]

Don't talk to me about rights, you're the one who thinks workers should be left to suffer because they cant afford medical treatment...they made your freedom!

They didn't give me jack. My rights come from nature not other people- rights that they intend to violate.


The only reason you have anything to enjoy with all your money is because people are working.

I am working too, but I don't demand money of others (and I'm not rich either).


So don't you put the capitalist spin on me and talk to me about "rights" and stealing people's money!

Stealing is a violation of rights, no matter how good the cause.


You're no one to call the people theives for wanting medical treatment, when you're the one who can't bear to pay taxes when you are enjoying this society enough to hold such conservative views on it!

This society would be perfectly fine without 80% of the taxation there is today.


You just want to have your cake and eat it too, YOU'RE the theif!
No, I don't want free healthcare and not pay for it (although, I will add, that is precisely what those who have no income are doing), I want to purchase my own. You'll find the price will come down if everyone started to do that and everyone would be able to afford it.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Lets not kid ourselves, the biggest reason that healthcare is so prohibitively expensive is because of malpractice insurance and lawsuits perpetuated by trial lawyers supported by the left.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 01:03 AM
No one has answered my question. Do you think Americans should be able to buy drugs from Canada?
A consortium of buyers should get together and leverage a significant volume discount.

[Osman Ghazi]

Lets not kid ourselves, the biggest reason that healthcare is so prohibitively expensive is because of malpractice insurance and lawsuits perpetuated by trial lawyers supported by the left.


Oh no! My evil plans have been discovered! :ph34r:

[Louis Pio]

Lets not kid ourselves, the biggest reason that healthcare is so prohibitively expensive is because of malpractice insurance and lawsuits perpetuated by trial lawyers supported by the left.

Isn't it moneygrubbing wannabe capitalists that starts the trials? :D

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 07:45 PM

Isn't it moneygrubbing wannabe capitalists that starts the trials? :D
A common misconception.

[Louis Pio]

Aha so people don't start the trials just to get money?
Anyway if malpractice has occured it is ok to start a trial or what in your oppinion?

[Misodoctakleidist]

Originally posted by Professor [email protected] 29 2004, 07:27 PM
They didn't give me jack. My rights come from nature not other people- rights that they intend to violate.

Would you please explain how your supposed "right to property" comes from nature?

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 08:25 PM
Would you please explain how your supposed "right to property" comes from nature?
If I make something, the product is mine. Therfore I have a right to it. Whatever your labour produced, I do not have a right to and if I want it, I must trade you something for it. A man must be allowed to think and work without outside interference; to deviate from that is destructive, because it goes against man's nature. It would be like pulling a tiger's teeth and claws out.

[Never Forget, Never Surrender]

Lawyers don't drive up malpractice insurance. I know it sounds like bullshit, but I worked for one. We didn't make money on malpractice.

We never even TOOK a case w/ malpractice, except one, which we made about 15k on. The whole case took four years. That's not a big payout.

Insurance companies are the arch-capitalists in the US. They say they provide a service, but they barely ever have to. You send them a check whether or not they actually provide a service. Then, when it IS their turn to pay out, they fight like hell and more lawsuits are filed. I worked with them. I've seen what those fuckers do to families.


If I make something, the product is mine. Therfore I have a right to it. Whatever your labour produced, I do not have a right to and if I want it, I must trade you something for it.

So those are our natural rights? Have you looked around America today? When have you EVER had a say in something you made at work? The only people who've fought and died for those rights in America were men who proudly carried the red banner.

[DaCuBaN]

Let's run with this...


If I make something, the product is mine.
OK so far...

Therfore I have a right to it.
Rights are meangingless at the point of a gun, but OK...


Whatever your labour produced, I do not have a right to and if I want it, I must trade you something for it.
You must reach accord with the other; no more. Theft is theft, irregardless of the ideology you promote.


A man must be allowed to think and work without outside interference; to deviate from that is destructive, because it goes against man's nature.
I disagree, outside interference is almost always indictive of abstract thought, to mention just one. I can't comment on your specific job (I'm assuming you are of working age) but in my field, it's often necessary to step back and get another pair of eyes into the mix...

Often, this is enough to spur a moment of epiphany. Similarly, it depends on which analogy of mankind you take. Evidently you follow dumbo Rand's take on this, in that the world is strictly defined, and probably swallow all the 'Alpha Wolf' rubbish too. Evidently you've never worked in enough groups to know that the 'leader' model is defunct.


It would be like pulling a tiger's teeth and claws out.

Big and heavy, but with no bite. Your point?

[Misodoctakleidist]

Originally posted by Professor [email protected] 30 2004, 11:53 PM
If I make something, the product is mine. Therfore I have a right to it. Whatever your labour produced, I do not have a right to and if I want it, I must trade you something for it. A man must be allowed to think and work without outside interference; to deviate from that is destructive, because it goes against man's nature. It would be like pulling a tiger's teeth and claws out.
And what gives you the right to own the raw materials you make it from?

Where does someone get the right to own a tree, or a field, or some oil in the ground, or quarry?

[Professor Moneybags]

Rights are meangingless at the point of a gun, but OK...

Why ? Who is pointing a gun at you ?


Theft is theft, irregardless of the ideology you promote.

Why ? Who's promoting theft ?


Evidently you follow dumbo Rand's take on this, in that the world is strictly defined, and probably swallow all the 'Alpha Wolf' rubbish too. Evidently you've never worked in enough groups to know that the 'leader' model is defunct.


I don't recall Rand promoting any "Alpha Wolf" rubbish (you are evidently not familiar with Rand). And I can't possibly fathom how you got that idea from reading my last post; I don't recall promoting any kind of "leader" model, or what free trade and keeping what you produce has got to do with "leadership".


Big and heavy, but with no bite. Your point?

Taking away one's money destroys one's capacity to live. That is a fact.

-----------------------------------------


And what gives you the right to own the raw materials you make it from?

Where does someone get the right to own a tree, or a field, or some oil in the ground, or quarry?

What gives you the right to even exist ?

[DaCuBaN]

The entire post:

If I make something, the product is mine. Therfore I have a right to it. Whatever your labour produced, I do not have a right to and if I want it, I must trade you something for it. A man must be allowed to think and work without outside interference; to deviate from that is destructive, because it goes against man's nature. It would be like pulling a tiger's teeth and claws out

So...


Why ? Who is pointing a gun at you ?

In reference to not having the right to the fruit of someone's labour - coercion overrides rights - That's a fact.


Why ? Who's promoting theft ?


:lol:
I agree with you and you attack. Well fathomed!


I don't recall Rand promoting any "Alpha Wolf" rubbish

You're losing it PM.... Re-read my sentence. I'll add some emphasis for you ;)


Evidently you follow dumbo Rand's take on this, in that the world is strictly defined, [pause] and probably swallow all the 'Alpha Wolf' rubbish too. Evidently you've never worked in enough groups to know that the 'leader' model is defunct.

Two seperate points in the same sentence! :o :lol:
The former I'm sure does not trouble you, the latter was in reference to this:


A man must be allowed to think and work without outside interference; to deviate from that is destructive, because it goes against man's nature.

Would you not agree that smells of 'lone soldier' ? Leadership is just a step away from there.


Taking away one's money destroys one's capacity to live. That is a fact.


I wondered why you used the analogy. To be perfectly honest, you've got nothing to complain about as far as having the USGovt taking all but the shoes off your feet - Move to the UK, I'd laugh my arse off at your reaction ;)

This one wasn't aimed at me, but I'll cover it anyway:


What gives you the right to even exist ?

Nothing whatsoever - It's a privelege. You nor I should not be 'entitled' to anything by default. Note the emphasis on entitled - where the hell do you think the word comes from? You bet - the idea of being born with a silver spoon in your mouth. We don't deserve anything, and we don't have 'fundamental rights'. We're big monkeys for crying out loud!

Anyway, rant over with. My apologies for the tone.

[Misodoctakleidist]

Originally posted by Professor [email protected] 31 2004, 10:10 AM
What gives you the right to even exist ?
I'll accept that as an admission that your ideology is bullshit.

[Professor Moneybags]

In reference to not having the right to the fruit of someone's labour - coercion overrides rights - That's a fact.

What exactly you are getting at ?


You're losing it PM.... Re-read my sentence. I'll add some emphasis for you


It's not my fault if you can't write a comprehensible sentence (see above).


Would you not agree that smells of 'lone soldier' ? Leadership is just a step away from there.

No, it smells of straw. A straw man, to precise. Still, what individual rights and the NIF has got to do with leadership, I'm sure you'll enlighten me. Then again, maybe not.


We're big monkeys for crying out loud!

Speak for yourself. I'm human.

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2004, 05:34 PM
I'll accept that as an admission that your ideology is bullshit.
Accept it as an example of why you're too dumb to see the contradictions in your own.

[antieverything]

Actually, insurance profits are rising WAY faster than insurance costs. Blaming "trial lawyers" for price gauging on the part of the insurance companies is a silly, rightwing effort to discredit the very idea that corporations should be held accountable to anyone but the market.

[FarfromNear]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 12:59 AM
My cousin has cancer and must frequently get tumors removed and receive chemotherapy. His parents are hard workers and luckily they have insurance that covers this extremely expensive treatment which is necessary for their son to live.
O yea, but there is one catch; he must continue going to community college in his sickly state or the insurance won’t cover him. His family cannot afford the treatment for him with out the insurance but we do not know how long he can continue to go to class in his poor condition while balancing out is constant treatments. :angry:
I guess that the price one pays living in this great capitalist country. :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:
I am sorry to hear about you cousing. It is a shame what this crappy healthcare system does. What I do ask you is to not blame Capitalism for the fucked up Healthcare system that we have today. The very base for the healthcare problem is in fact, contradictory to what Capitalists want.

Healthcare in the US is fucked up. You are basically forced to pay for Insurance, if you dont have it, then the prices are just to high. Why are those prices too high?

Well, take a look at free healthcare. Medicare, for example, basically forces Hospitals to make their money elsewere. Thats why uninsured people will get screwed. Price controls and lawsuits are running screwing doctors and hospitals. You either run them out of the country, like is happening in Canada, or just the biggest Hospitals, that usually have government contracts, survive. They also will be very expensive.

I can go on forever. But I wont. What I want to point out is that you are blaming capitalism for something that isn't its fault. The problem in the US is that the freakin' government makes bad policies that screw people, in the name of free markets. Its all wrong. Understand the simple fundamental ideas of Capitalism, before blaming it for something that is not its fault at all.