So....how many posters do we have who have heard of this INCEL Movement?

[WinterBorn]

Health insurance is required now. Why would they bring the prices down when they can make more profits?

And, as I said, the health insurance need to be in place when the program starts.

The point is, insurance can afford better products at lower cost with more rather than less market participation by more people.

Not at a lower cost to the patient. Medicare/Medicaid can provide the same care. Don't pretend you are worried about tax money spent on this, when wasting tax dollars has been the problem with your entire plan.

Yes, that is exactly where some of the cost savings should show up, with Any competition under Any form of capitalism.

And if those insurance companies won't treat patients with pre-existing conditions?
And if those insurance companies have high deductibles?

Plus the fact that it will take time for the costs to drop. It will not be immediate.

Why is it that you want to get paid yourself, by the gov't, for quitting a job, but you want the private sector to help the homeless (the poorest of the poor) rather than having welfare programs do it? Oh yeah, I forgot. You want unemployment compensation for everyone, regardless of whether it is the best thing for them.

dear, the Point is, with recourse to an Income, more people can consume those products and services they may need. good capitalists know how to take advantage not Only of demand deposit relationships with cute bankers, but also time deposit relationships as well to save for some out of pocket expenses.

Right, because homeless people are smart consumers and know how to take advantage of banking practices ect.

And, with money in their pocket, they will no longer be a slave to the addictions that made them homeless to begin with?
And the mentally ill, without treatment, will be good stewards of their money.

Absolute bullshit. The homeless need a combination of welfare programs (welfare checks, low cost housing, food stamps and healthcare) in order to reenter the work force.

And unemployment compensation cannot offer all that they need. Just giving them money, without addressing the other issues, will likely do more harm than good.

 

[WinterBorn]

Daniel, I know I have asked you this numerous times. But you have never answered it.

You don't want to work. It is not as if you are incapable of working. You just don't want to.

Why do you think that tax money, taken from those who earned it, should be used to pay you so that you can have the luxuries you want?

What makes you so special?

lol. Because i am seeking redress of grievances.

A redress of grievances? You don't have any grievances. You QUIT your job. You haven't looked for another job. Why is that a grievance that the gov't should address?

The law is employment at the will of either party, even for unemployment compensation; that IS equality.

No, it is not. The equality is that you or your employer can end the relationship at any time. You want to get more and not allow the employer anything additional. That is NOT equality.

Yes, dear, it is. Employment is at the will of either party, no questions asked.

Wrong. There are all sorts of questions to be asked, by both parties.

And if you want equality in that relationship, either both get something from the gov't when you quit or neither do. Same when you are fired for cause.

 

[danielpalos]

The point is, insurance can afford better products at lower cost with more rather than less market participation by more people.

Not at a lower cost to the patient. Medicare/Medicaid can provide the same care. Don't pretend you are worried about tax money spent on this, when wasting tax dollars has been the problem with your entire plan.

Yes, that is exactly where some of the cost savings should show up, with Any competition under Any form of capitalism.

And if those insurance companies won't treat patients with pre-existing conditions?
And if those insurance companies have high deductibles?

Plus the fact that it will take time for the costs to drop. It will not be immediate.

Why is it that you want to get paid yourself, by the gov't, for quitting a job, but you want the private sector to help the homeless (the poorest of the poor) rather than having welfare programs do it? Oh yeah, I forgot. You want unemployment compensation for everyone, regardless of whether it is the best thing for them.

dear, the Point is, with recourse to an Income, more people can consume those products and services they may need. good capitalists know how to take advantage not Only of demand deposit relationships with cute bankers, but also time deposit relationships as well to save for some out of pocket expenses.

Right, because homeless people are smart consumers and know how to take advantage of banking practices ect.

And, with money in their pocket, they will no longer be a slave to the addictions that made them homeless to begin with?
And the mentally ill, without treatment, will be good stewards of their money.

Absolute bullshit. The homeless need a combination of welfare programs (welfare checks, low cost housing, food stamps and healthcare) in order to reenter the work force.

service providers could bill them for as long as it takes, at lower cost.

 

[danielpalos]

lol. Because i am seeking redress of grievances.

A redress of grievances? You don't have any grievances. You QUIT your job. You haven't looked for another job. Why is that a grievance that the gov't should address?

The law is employment at the will of either party, even for unemployment compensation; that IS equality.

No, it is not. The equality is that you or your employer can end the relationship at any time. You want to get more and not allow the employer anything additional. That is NOT equality.

Yes, dear, it is. Employment is at the will of either party, no questions asked.

Wrong. There are all sorts of questions to be asked, by both parties.

And if you want equality in that relationship, either both get something from the gov't when you quit or neither do. Same when you are fired for cause.

That is no longer employment at the will of either party and should be challenged by Labor, every time it comes up.

 

[WinterBorn]

Not at a lower cost to the patient. Medicare/Medicaid can provide the same care. Don't pretend you are worried about tax money spent on this, when wasting tax dollars has been the problem with your entire plan.

Yes, that is exactly where some of the cost savings should show up, with Any competition under Any form of capitalism.

And if those insurance companies won't treat patients with pre-existing conditions?
And if those insurance companies have high deductibles?

Plus the fact that it will take time for the costs to drop. It will not be immediate.

Why is it that you want to get paid yourself, by the gov't, for quitting a job, but you want the private sector to help the homeless (the poorest of the poor) rather than having welfare programs do it? Oh yeah, I forgot. You want unemployment compensation for everyone, regardless of whether it is the best thing for them.

dear, the Point is, with recourse to an Income, more people can consume those products and services they may need. good capitalists know how to take advantage not Only of demand deposit relationships with cute bankers, but also time deposit relationships as well to save for some out of pocket expenses.

Right, because homeless people are smart consumers and know how to take advantage of banking practices ect.

And, with money in their pocket, they will no longer be a slave to the addictions that made them homeless to begin with?
And the mentally ill, without treatment, will be good stewards of their money.

Absolute bullshit. The homeless need a combination of welfare programs (welfare checks, low cost housing, food stamps and healthcare) in order to reenter the work force.

service providers could bill them for as long as it takes, at lower cost.

And if they don't pay the bill? If they spend the money on something else, like...oh I don't know.....drugs or alcohol?

 

[WinterBorn]

A redress of grievances? You don't have any grievances. You QUIT your job. You haven't looked for another job. Why is that a grievance that the gov't should address?

The law is employment at the will of either party, even for unemployment compensation; that IS equality.

No, it is not. The equality is that you or your employer can end the relationship at any time. You want to get more and not allow the employer anything additional. That is NOT equality.

Yes, dear, it is. Employment is at the will of either party, no questions asked.

Wrong. There are all sorts of questions to be asked, by both parties.

And if you want equality in that relationship, either both get something from the gov't when you quit or neither do. Same when you are fired for cause.

That is no longer employment at the will of either party and should be challenged by Labor, every time it comes up.

Sure there is. You are just mad because you don't get paid if you don't work. Makes me wonder if you didn't quit the job thinking you could draw unemployment and found out you screwed up.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, that is exactly where some of the cost savings should show up, with Any competition under Any form of capitalism.

And if those insurance companies won't treat patients with pre-existing conditions?
And if those insurance companies have high deductibles?

Plus the fact that it will take time for the costs to drop. It will not be immediate.

Why is it that you want to get paid yourself, by the gov't, for quitting a job, but you want the private sector to help the homeless (the poorest of the poor) rather than having welfare programs do it? Oh yeah, I forgot. You want unemployment compensation for everyone, regardless of whether it is the best thing for them.

dear, the Point is, with recourse to an Income, more people can consume those products and services they may need. good capitalists know how to take advantage not Only of demand deposit relationships with cute bankers, but also time deposit relationships as well to save for some out of pocket expenses.

Right, because homeless people are smart consumers and know how to take advantage of banking practices ect.

And, with money in their pocket, they will no longer be a slave to the addictions that made them homeless to begin with?
And the mentally ill, without treatment, will be good stewards of their money.

Absolute bullshit. The homeless need a combination of welfare programs (welfare checks, low cost housing, food stamps and healthcare) in order to reenter the work force.

service providers could bill them for as long as it takes, at lower cost.

And if they don't pay the bill? If they spend the money on something else, like...oh I don't know.....drugs or alcohol?

they have that problem now; you keep missing point. More people means more revenue.

 

[danielpalos]

The law is employment at the will of either party, even for unemployment compensation; that IS equality.

No, it is not. The equality is that you or your employer can end the relationship at any time. You want to get more and not allow the employer anything additional. That is NOT equality.

Yes, dear, it is. Employment is at the will of either party, no questions asked.

Wrong. There are all sorts of questions to be asked, by both parties.

And if you want equality in that relationship, either both get something from the gov't when you quit or neither do. Same when you are fired for cause.

That is no longer employment at the will of either party and should be challenged by Labor, every time it comes up.

Sure there is. You are just mad because you don't get paid if you don't work. Makes me wonder if you didn't quit the job thinking you could draw unemployment and found out you screwed up.

No, it isn't. Labor should still qualify for unemployment compensation at the will of either party; that IS, equal protection of the law.

 

[WinterBorn]

And if those insurance companies won't treat patients with pre-existing conditions?
And if those insurance companies have high deductibles?

Plus the fact that it will take time for the costs to drop. It will not be immediate.

Why is it that you want to get paid yourself, by the gov't, for quitting a job, but you want the private sector to help the homeless (the poorest of the poor) rather than having welfare programs do it? Oh yeah, I forgot. You want unemployment compensation for everyone, regardless of whether it is the best thing for them.

dear, the Point is, with recourse to an Income, more people can consume those products and services they may need. good capitalists know how to take advantage not Only of demand deposit relationships with cute bankers, but also time deposit relationships as well to save for some out of pocket expenses.

Right, because homeless people are smart consumers and know how to take advantage of banking practices ect.

And, with money in their pocket, they will no longer be a slave to the addictions that made them homeless to begin with?
And the mentally ill, without treatment, will be good stewards of their money.

Absolute bullshit. The homeless need a combination of welfare programs (welfare checks, low cost housing, food stamps and healthcare) in order to reenter the work force.

service providers could bill them for as long as it takes, at lower cost.

And if they don't pay the bill? If they spend the money on something else, like...oh I don't know.....drugs or alcohol?

they have that problem now; you keep missing point. More people means more revenue.

No, I am not missing the point. You are ignoring the point in favor of trying to be right.

The overwhelming majority of homeless people have mental health issues or substance abuse issue. That is the main reason they are where they are. Expecting them to suddenly act like regular people because they are getting a check is insane. The issues MUST be treat from the beginning. Having them on programs that offer a limited amount of money, food stamps to insure they eat, and healthcare that will insure treatment for the root cause of their homelessness is what they need.

Your insistence that the healthcare industry will lower its rates, that homeless people can take advantage of direct deposits and save money, and that they will pay their bills in a timely fashion, is simple wrong. Your plan is not about helping the homeless, but about you not wanting to admit being wrong. On this you are absolutely wrong.

 

[WinterBorn]

No, it is not. The equality is that you or your employer can end the relationship at any time. You want to get more and not allow the employer anything additional. That is NOT equality.

Yes, dear, it is. Employment is at the will of either party, no questions asked.

Wrong. There are all sorts of questions to be asked, by both parties.

And if you want equality in that relationship, either both get something from the gov't when you quit or neither do. Same when you are fired for cause.

That is no longer employment at the will of either party and should be challenged by Labor, every time it comes up.

Sure there is. You are just mad because you don't get paid if you don't work. Makes me wonder if you didn't quit the job thinking you could draw unemployment and found out you screwed up.

No, it isn't. Labor should still qualify for unemployment compensation at the will of either party; that IS, equal protection of the law.

Ok, so you want the employee to get paid if he works and still get paid if he quits and no longer provides his labor to the employer.
But the employer, who was willing to pay for the labor, gets nothing at all? Meanwhile, his taxes go up to pay for the employee who quit?

No, that is not equality. Equality requires that BOTH parties get something if either gets it.

 

[danielpalos]

dear, the Point is, with recourse to an Income, more people can consume those products and services they may need. good capitalists know how to take advantage not Only of demand deposit relationships with cute bankers, but also time deposit relationships as well to save for some out of pocket expenses.

Right, because homeless people are smart consumers and know how to take advantage of banking practices ect.

And, with money in their pocket, they will no longer be a slave to the addictions that made them homeless to begin with?
And the mentally ill, without treatment, will be good stewards of their money.

Absolute bullshit. The homeless need a combination of welfare programs (welfare checks, low cost housing, food stamps and healthcare) in order to reenter the work force.

service providers could bill them for as long as it takes, at lower cost.

And if they don't pay the bill? If they spend the money on something else, like...oh I don't know.....drugs or alcohol?

they have that problem now; you keep missing point. More people means more revenue.

No, I am not missing the point. You are ignoring the point in favor of trying to be right.

The overwhelming majority of homeless people have mental health issues or substance abuse issue. That is the main reason they are where they are. Expecting them to suddenly act like regular people because they are getting a check is insane. The issues MUST be treat from the beginning. Having them on programs that offer a limited amount of money, food stamps to insure they eat, and healthcare that will insure treatment for the root cause of their homelessness is what they need.

Your insistence that the healthcare industry will lower its rates, that homeless people can take advantage of direct deposits and save money, and that they will pay their bills in a timely fashion, is simple wrong. Your plan is not about helping the homeless, but about you not wanting to admit being wrong. On this you are absolutely wrong.

they only have those issues because they don't have any money to afford help under our form of Capitalism.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, dear, it is. Employment is at the will of either party, no questions asked.

Wrong. There are all sorts of questions to be asked, by both parties.

And if you want equality in that relationship, either both get something from the gov't when you quit or neither do. Same when you are fired for cause.

That is no longer employment at the will of either party and should be challenged by Labor, every time it comes up.

Sure there is. You are just mad because you don't get paid if you don't work. Makes me wonder if you didn't quit the job thinking you could draw unemployment and found out you screwed up.

No, it isn't. Labor should still qualify for unemployment compensation at the will of either party; that IS, equal protection of the law.

Ok, so you want the employee to get paid if he works and still get paid if he quits and no longer provides his labor to the employer.
But the employer, who was willing to pay for the labor, gets nothing at all? Meanwhile, his taxes go up to pay for the employee who quit?

No, that is not equality. Equality requires that BOTH parties get something if either gets it.

Employment is at the will of either party, i am not talking about alleged, "right to work" States.

 

[WinterBorn]

Right, because homeless people are smart consumers and know how to take advantage of banking practices ect.

And, with money in their pocket, they will no longer be a slave to the addictions that made them homeless to begin with?
And the mentally ill, without treatment, will be good stewards of their money.

Absolute bullshit. The homeless need a combination of welfare programs (welfare checks, low cost housing, food stamps and healthcare) in order to reenter the work force.

service providers could bill them for as long as it takes, at lower cost.

And if they don't pay the bill? If they spend the money on something else, like...oh I don't know.....drugs or alcohol?

they have that problem now; you keep missing point. More people means more revenue.

No, I am not missing the point. You are ignoring the point in favor of trying to be right.

The overwhelming majority of homeless people have mental health issues or substance abuse issue. That is the main reason they are where they are. Expecting them to suddenly act like regular people because they are getting a check is insane. The issues MUST be treat from the beginning. Having them on programs that offer a limited amount of money, food stamps to insure they eat, and healthcare that will insure treatment for the root cause of their homelessness is what they need.

Your insistence that the healthcare industry will lower its rates, that homeless people can take advantage of direct deposits and save money, and that they will pay their bills in a timely fashion, is simple wrong. Your plan is not about helping the homeless, but about you not wanting to admit being wrong. On this you are absolutely wrong.

they only have those issues because they don't have any money to afford help under our form of Capitalism.

Absolutely wrong. They are almost always homeless because of those issues.

 

[WinterBorn]

Wrong. There are all sorts of questions to be asked, by both parties.

And if you want equality in that relationship, either both get something from the gov't when you quit or neither do. Same when you are fired for cause.

That is no longer employment at the will of either party and should be challenged by Labor, every time it comes up.

Sure there is. You are just mad because you don't get paid if you don't work. Makes me wonder if you didn't quit the job thinking you could draw unemployment and found out you screwed up.

No, it isn't. Labor should still qualify for unemployment compensation at the will of either party; that IS, equal protection of the law.

Ok, so you want the employee to get paid if he works and still get paid if he quits and no longer provides his labor to the employer.
But the employer, who was willing to pay for the labor, gets nothing at all? Meanwhile, his taxes go up to pay for the employee who quit?

No, that is not equality. Equality requires that BOTH parties get something if either gets it.

Employment is at the will of either party, i am not talking about alleged, "right to work" States.

Yes it is. And if you voluntarily quit, there are consequences. One of which is no money. You don't get paid for "opting out of work". You have no right to other people's money for no reason.

 

[danielpalos]

service providers could bill them for as long as it takes, at lower cost.

And if they don't pay the bill? If they spend the money on something else, like...oh I don't know.....drugs or alcohol?

they have that problem now; you keep missing point. More people means more revenue.

No, I am not missing the point. You are ignoring the point in favor of trying to be right.

The overwhelming majority of homeless people have mental health issues or substance abuse issue. That is the main reason they are where they are. Expecting them to suddenly act like regular people because they are getting a check is insane. The issues MUST be treat from the beginning. Having them on programs that offer a limited amount of money, food stamps to insure they eat, and healthcare that will insure treatment for the root cause of their homelessness is what they need.

Your insistence that the healthcare industry will lower its rates, that homeless people can take advantage of direct deposits and save money, and that they will pay their bills in a timely fashion, is simple wrong. Your plan is not about helping the homeless, but about you not wanting to admit being wrong. On this you are absolutely wrong.

they only have those issues because they don't have any money to afford help under our form of Capitalism.

Absolutely wrong. They are almost always homeless because of those issues.

i don't take story tellers seriously under Any form of Capitalism, when capital is involved.

 

[danielpalos]

That is no longer employment at the will of either party and should be challenged by Labor, every time it comes up.

Sure there is. You are just mad because you don't get paid if you don't work. Makes me wonder if you didn't quit the job thinking you could draw unemployment and found out you screwed up.

No, it isn't. Labor should still qualify for unemployment compensation at the will of either party; that IS, equal protection of the law.

Ok, so you want the employee to get paid if he works and still get paid if he quits and no longer provides his labor to the employer.
But the employer, who was willing to pay for the labor, gets nothing at all? Meanwhile, his taxes go up to pay for the employee who quit?

No, that is not equality. Equality requires that BOTH parties get something if either gets it.

Employment is at the will of either party, i am not talking about alleged, "right to work" States.

Yes it is. And if you voluntarily quit, there are consequences. One of which is no money. You don't get paid for "opting out of work". You have no right to other people's money for no reason.

stop being frivolous, story teller.

employment is at the will of either party for unemployment compensation not just the employer.

 

[WinterBorn]

And if they don't pay the bill? If they spend the money on something else, like...oh I don't know.....drugs or alcohol?

they have that problem now; you keep missing point. More people means more revenue.

No, I am not missing the point. You are ignoring the point in favor of trying to be right.

The overwhelming majority of homeless people have mental health issues or substance abuse issue. That is the main reason they are where they are. Expecting them to suddenly act like regular people because they are getting a check is insane. The issues MUST be treat from the beginning. Having them on programs that offer a limited amount of money, food stamps to insure they eat, and healthcare that will insure treatment for the root cause of their homelessness is what they need.

Your insistence that the healthcare industry will lower its rates, that homeless people can take advantage of direct deposits and save money, and that they will pay their bills in a timely fashion, is simple wrong. Your plan is not about helping the homeless, but about you not wanting to admit being wrong. On this you are absolutely wrong.

they only have those issues because they don't have any money to afford help under our form of Capitalism.

Absolutely wrong. They are almost always homeless because of those issues.

i don't take story tellers seriously under Any form of Capitalism, when capital is involved.

Ok. But I have posted 2 links concerning homeless people. You should have read them.

 

[WinterBorn]

Sure there is. You are just mad because you don't get paid if you don't work. Makes me wonder if you didn't quit the job thinking you could draw unemployment and found out you screwed up.

No, it isn't. Labor should still qualify for unemployment compensation at the will of either party; that IS, equal protection of the law.

Ok, so you want the employee to get paid if he works and still get paid if he quits and no longer provides his labor to the employer.
But the employer, who was willing to pay for the labor, gets nothing at all? Meanwhile, his taxes go up to pay for the employee who quit?

No, that is not equality. Equality requires that BOTH parties get something if either gets it.

Employment is at the will of either party, i am not talking about alleged, "right to work" States.

Yes it is. And if you voluntarily quit, there are consequences. One of which is no money. You don't get paid for "opting out of work". You have no right to other people's money for no reason.

stop being frivolous, story teller.

employment is at the will of either party for unemployment compensation not just the employer.

Employment is at the will of either party. Unemployment compensation has simple rules.

 

[danielpalos]

they have that problem now; you keep missing point. More people means more revenue.

No, I am not missing the point. You are ignoring the point in favor of trying to be right.

The overwhelming majority of homeless people have mental health issues or substance abuse issue. That is the main reason they are where they are. Expecting them to suddenly act like regular people because they are getting a check is insane. The issues MUST be treat from the beginning. Having them on programs that offer a limited amount of money, food stamps to insure they eat, and healthcare that will insure treatment for the root cause of their homelessness is what they need.

Your insistence that the healthcare industry will lower its rates, that homeless people can take advantage of direct deposits and save money, and that they will pay their bills in a timely fashion, is simple wrong. Your plan is not about helping the homeless, but about you not wanting to admit being wrong. On this you are absolutely wrong.

they only have those issues because they don't have any money to afford help under our form of Capitalism.

Absolutely wrong. They are almost always homeless because of those issues.

i don't take story tellers seriously under Any form of Capitalism, when capital is involved.

Ok. But I have posted 2 links concerning homeless people. You should have read them.

means nothing if they can't apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed in our at-will employment States.

 

[danielpalos]

No, it isn't. Labor should still qualify for unemployment compensation at the will of either party; that IS, equal protection of the law.

Ok, so you want the employee to get paid if he works and still get paid if he quits and no longer provides his labor to the employer.
But the employer, who was willing to pay for the labor, gets nothing at all? Meanwhile, his taxes go up to pay for the employee who quit?

No, that is not equality. Equality requires that BOTH parties get something if either gets it.

Employment is at the will of either party, i am not talking about alleged, "right to work" States.

Yes it is. And if you voluntarily quit, there are consequences. One of which is no money. You don't get paid for "opting out of work". You have no right to other people's money for no reason.

stop being frivolous, story teller.

employment is at the will of either party for unemployment compensation not just the employer.

Employment is at the will of either party. Unemployment compensation has simple rules.

equal protection of the law to simplify even further, those simple rules.