Look Out, It's On It's Way!

Figure this out...

Lucas McCain wrote:

Can any one tell me anything good about this bill?? If you agree with the bill, WHY??

Thanks for all the references Luke. I tend to read something, interpret it the best I can and then make comments. I rarely consider copying the source or web page for posting. I assume we post things we read, not what we make up. I don't get why some MUST have your source. Any source could be wrong. Other than Congress, who could make this stuff up anyway?

I can't find a single thing about the bill I like. What's on page 16 should be enough to turn 95% of Americans away. This bunch is gagging on a gnat while trying to swallow a camel. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer but I don't care how much money it saves me or you, my freedom/liberty has no price. I see it as another hold government can get on it's citizens...Nothing more.

Call your Congressmen and tell them to vote NO!

Don't worry Skinny. We live in a republican state. They will vote no because they are the party of no.....
I did call all of mine already and tell them I supported it. Not everybody is falling for the propaganda being pumped out by the insurance companies right now. I love the job killer memo the republicans seem to have got. OH NO, it's a job killer. The sky is falling. BOOO HOOO. Seems that is all they do anymore. Glad they finally noticed. I guess they don't care that people not having insurance is a people killer. All they care about is corporate America, not the average Joe dying of cancer or the average Jane filing for bankruptcy because she can't pay her million dollar medical bills. And guess who does pay for that???? HMMMMM??? We all do pay for it in those precious taxes that so many complain about. Some people need to turn off the cable news channels and turn off their talk radio and go and meet some people who are living without insurance..... Go meet some people who aren't as blessed as you are and see what it's like. People who deserve health insurance simply because they are Americans. We're the only industrializes country in the world that doesn't offer it and it's completely pathetic that we don't. Everybody in this country should have access to the same sort of insurance that those suckers up in Washington DC have. ALL OF US. If they don't want to support medicare for everyone, they need to turn in their cards and start paying their own medical bills.

SKINNYPIG wrote:

Lucas McCain wrote:

Can any one tell me anything good about this bill?? If you agree with the bill, WHY??

Thanks for all the references Luke. I tend to read something, interpret it the best I can and then make comments. I rarely consider copying the source or web page for posting. I assume we post things we read, not what we make up. I don't get why some MUST have your source. Any source could be wrong. Other than Congress, who could make this stuff up anyway?

I can't find a single thing about the bill I like. What's on page 16 should be enough to turn 95% of Americans away. This bunch is gagging on a gnat while trying to swallow a camel. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer but I don't care how much money it saves me or you, my freedom/liberty has no price. I see it as another hold government can get on it's citizens...Nothing more.

Call your Congressmen and tell them to vote NO!

As for the sources link, many people (myself included) like to read and interpret articles for ourselves, so including a link is good etiquette.

Annie Oakley wrote:

[quote="SKINNYPIG]Thanks for all the references Luke. I tend to read something, interpret it the best I can and then make comments. I rarely consider copying the source or web page for posting. I assume we post things we read, not what we make up. I don't get why some MUST have your source. Any source could be wrong. Other than Congress, who could make this stuff up anyway?

I can't find a single thing about the bill I like. What's on page 16 should be enough to turn 95% of Americans away. This bunch is gagging on a gnat while trying to swallow a camel. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer but I don't care how much money it saves me or you, my freedom/liberty has no price. I see it as another hold government can get on it's citizens...Nothing more.

Call your Congressmen and tell them to vote NO!

As for the sources link, many people (myself included) like to read and interpret articles for ourselves, so including a link is good etiquette.

I think it is beyond good etiquette.. If something is going to be posted that isn't original thought then the source should be cited so that it can be scrutinized, most particularly if citing specific numbers.

As to the chart, the crux of the chart - that consumers pay for health services through third party insurance - is oddly simple. In fact, the chart is remarkably similar to what the present situation in healthcare is, with a few exceptions. If a Republican wanted to diagram the present situation and propose their solutions I would give it infinitely more weight.

I'll link a similar chart created by liberals to make the point that it is merely perpsective:

Ja'far wrote:

Annie Oakley wrote:

[quote="SKINNYPIG]Thanks for all the references Luke. I tend to read something, interpret it the best I can and then make comments. I rarely consider copying the source or web page for posting. I assume we post things we read, not what we make up. I don't get why some MUST have your source. Any source could be wrong. Other than Congress, who could make this stuff up anyway?

I can't find a single thing about the bill I like. What's on page 16 should be enough to turn 95% of Americans away. This bunch is gagging on a gnat while trying to swallow a camel. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer but I don't care how much money it saves me or you, my freedom/liberty has no price. I see it as another hold government can get on it's citizens...Nothing more.

Call your Congressmen and tell them to vote NO!

As for the sources link, many people (myself included) like to read and interpret articles for ourselves, so including a link is good etiquette.

I think it is beyond good etiquette.. If something is going to be posted that isn't original thought then the source should be cited so that it can be scrutinized, most particularly if citing specific numbers.

I agree.

Ja'far wrote:

Annie Oakley wrote:

[quote="SKINNYPIG]Thanks for all the references Luke. I tend to read something, interpret it the best I can and then make comments. I rarely consider copying the source or web page for posting. I assume we post things we read, not what we make up. I don't get why some MUST have your source. Any source could be wrong. Other than Congress, who could make this stuff up anyway?

I can't find a single thing about the bill I like. What's on page 16 should be enough to turn 95% of Americans away. This bunch is gagging on a gnat while trying to swallow a camel. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer but I don't care how much money it saves me or you, my freedom/liberty has no price. I see it as another hold government can get on it's citizens...Nothing more.

Call your Congressmen and tell them to vote NO!

As for the sources link, many people (myself included) like to read and interpret articles for ourselves, so including a link is good etiquette.

I think it is beyond good etiquette.. If something is going to be posted that isn't original thought then the source should be cited so that it can be scrutinized, most particularly if citing specific numbers.

You guys are making an awful big deal about posting sources when we all know there's not a source in existence that will change your mind...No matter what it says.

After posting on this type of message board for many years it's become obvious to me that it doesn't matter what source is cited for scrutinizing of those that disagree. Anything short of Jesus returning and saying it, it will be either disproved or countered by another "source". I have yet to see a link or source change ones mind yet. It's a total waste of time to post sources when 99% of the time they will be ignored anyway. Right?

From what source would I have to reference a stat or fact from that would change your mind on health care reform? And what stat/fact would it have to be? I'm betting there's not one. That's my point, plus I'm lazy.

Oh! What is original thought...And what good is it?

SKINNYPIG wrote:

Ja'far wrote:

Annie Oakley wrote:

[quote="SKINNYPIG]Thanks for all the references Luke. I tend to read something, interpret it the best I can and then make comments. I rarely consider copying the source or web page for posting. I assume we post things we read, not what we make up. I don't get why some MUST have your source. Any source could be wrong. Other than Congress, who could make this stuff up anyway?

I can't find a single thing about the bill I like. What's on page 16 should be enough to turn 95% of Americans away. This bunch is gagging on a gnat while trying to swallow a camel. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer but I don't care how much money it saves me or you, my freedom/liberty has no price. I see it as another hold government can get on it's citizens...Nothing more.

Call your Congressmen and tell them to vote NO!

As for the sources link, many people (myself included) like to read and interpret articles for ourselves, so including a link is good etiquette.

I think it is beyond good etiquette.. If something is going to be posted that isn't original thought then the source should be cited so that it can be scrutinized, most particularly if citing specific numbers.

You guys are making an awful big deal about posting sources when we all know there's not a source in existence that will change your mind...No matter what it says.

After posting on this type of message board for many years it's become obvious to me that it doesn't matter what source is cited for scrutinizing of those that disagree. Anything short of Jesus returning and saying it, it will be either disproved or countered by another "source". I have yet to see a link or source change ones mind yet. It's a total waste of time to post sources when 99% of the time they will be ignored anyway. Right?

From what source would I have to reference a stat or fact from that would change your mind on health care reform? And what stat/fact would it have to be? I'm betting there's not one. That's my point, plus I'm lazy.

Oh! What is original thought...And what good is it?

No one's making a big deal about it except you. It's generally understood that political discussions are more academic in nature, that those participating aren't just sheep that are going to accept someone else's opinions, and that links to sources of information are to be given.

As far as changing minds, you might want to read the "sticky" in this forum called "notes from a mod."

SKINNYPIG wrote:

You guys are making an awful big deal about posting sources when we all know there's not a source in existence that will change your mind...No matter what it says.

After posting on this type of message board for many years it's become obvious to me that it doesn't matter what source is cited for scrutinizing of those that disagree. Anything short of Jesus returning and saying it, it will be either disproved or countered by another "source". I have yet to see a link or source change ones mind yet. It's a total waste of time to post sources when 99% of the time they will be ignored anyway. Right?

From what source would I have to reference a stat or fact from that would change your mind on health care reform? And what stat/fact would it have to be? I'm betting there's not one. That's my point, plus I'm lazy.

I think you are wrong across the board on this one. I've certainly had my opinions influenced, if not altogether changed through argument. I'm not pretentious enough to believe that I have all the answers or knowledge on any topic or to believe that my opinion is always the correct one. If I'm presented with facts or logic that challenge my thoughts on an issue I will either have to accept that view or re-work my own beliefs in light of it. This is why sources will be scrutinized and thus why primary sources are invaluable. In the instance here, showing that a relatively small number of Americans are uninsured would absolutely need to be considered going forward, whether it totally flips a person's opinion or not, thus the source is very important - the raw numbers would be vastly superior to a pundit's interpretation of them. The latter can be dissected while the former cannot.

To me, this is the point of debating: learning new things, challenging views, and sharpening your understanding. If not this then I see no point in it.

SKINNYPIG wrote:

Oh! What is original thought...And what good is it?

This is fairly obvious. At any rate, using another person's words without citing them is plagiaristic and dishonest.

Ja'far wrote:

To me, this is the point of debating: learning new things, challenging views, and sharpening your understanding. If not this then I see no point in it.

This is exactly how I feel, too.

Back to the subject.... What does anyone like about this bill??

Ja'far wrote:

SKINNYPIG wrote:

You guys are making an awful big deal about posting sources when we all know there's not a source in existence that will change your mind...No matter what it says.

After posting on this type of message board for many years it's become obvious to me that it doesn't matter what source is cited for scrutinizing of those that disagree. Anything short of Jesus returning and saying it, it will be either disproved or countered by another "source". I have yet to see a link or source change ones mind yet. It's a total waste of time to post sources when 99% of the time they will be ignored anyway. Right?

From what source would I have to reference a stat or fact from that would change your mind on health care reform? And what stat/fact would it have to be? I'm betting there's not one. That's my point, plus I'm lazy.

I think you are wrong across the board on this one. I've certainly had my opinions influenced, if not altogether changed through argument. I'm not pretentious enough to believe that I have all the answers or knowledge on any topic or to believe that my opinion is always the correct one. If I'm presented with facts or logic that challenge my thoughts on an issue I will either have to accept that view or re-work my own beliefs in light of it. This is why sources will be scrutinized and thus why primary sources are invaluable. In the instance here, showing that a relatively small number of Americans are uninsured would absolutely need to be considered going forward, whether it totally flips a person's opinion or not, thus the source is very important - the raw numbers would be vastly superior to a pundit's interpretation of them. The latter can be dissected while the former cannot.

To me, this is the point of debating: learning new things, challenging views, and sharpening your understanding. If not this then I see no point in it.

SKINNYPIG wrote:

Oh! What is original thought...And what good is it?

This is fairly obvious. At any rate, using another person's words without citing them is plagiaristic and dishonest.

"ll keep acting like a big baby on this one. Are you insinuating I used another persons words in my post, are you insinuating I'm dishonest or are you insinuating nothing?

If you would like to get back on subject...Why would you support the bill after reading page 16 (previously posted on this thread) in regards to loosing your choice to choose?

Annie Oakley wrote:

Ja'far wrote:

To me, this is the point of debating: learning new things, challenging views, and sharpening your understanding. If not this then I see no point in it.

This is exactly how I feel, too.

To me, it's having pointless arguments. But what the heck, I enjoy it. You can't be having more fun than I am.

SKINNYPIG wrote:

"ll keep acting like a big baby on this one. Are you insinuating I used another persons words in my post, are you insinuating I'm dishonest or are you insinuating nothing?

Just explaining original work and why citing sources is needed when not dealing with original work.

SKINNYPIG wrote:

If you would like to get back on subject...Why would you support the bill after reading page 16 (previously posted on this thread) in regards to loosing your choice to choose?

As I previously stated, page 16 doesn't remove private insurance plans or force everyone to have the government's option.

More lost jobs and higher costs according to CBO... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts821

Last week, Douglas Elmendorf, the director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) sent shockwaves through Washington when he told Congress that the Democrats’ plans would make health care more costly. Throughout this debate, President Obama has spoken of the need to “bend the cost curve” or drive health care costs down. During a congressional hearing, however, Mr. Elmendorf testified that the Democrats’ plans would have the opposite effect, saying that under their proposals, “The curve is being raised” and costs would “significantly expand.” That’s because the Democrats’ plan adds a new layer of taxes, mandates, and bureaucracy on top of the current system. If that’s not bad enough, the Democrats’ plan cuts Medicare and takes away choices for millions of seniors. What does all of this mean? Higher costs for the medicine and treatments you need.

Thank God.. More time to hammer out a better deal... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090723/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_overhaul