The whining...The whining

[asterism]

Why would anyone want a system where your employer gets to make your healthcare decisions?

Good point. Why would anyone want a system where the government gets to make your healthcare decisions?

 

[asterism]

Why would anyone want a system where your employer gets to make your healthcare decisions?

I remember having to put knee surgery off for a month because my employer wouldn't sign off on a one day outpatient surgery.

Bullshit, that's illegal and has been for decades.

What you mean to say is that you couldn't get immediate time off for surgery that was not immediately necessary. Employers have no role in the details of anyone's healthcare beyond choosing which coverage options the company offers.

 

[mudwhistle]

[

How do you know he wasn't invited? Maybe he told them thanks but no thanks. Bush is done with politics. Sorry you didn't get the memo.

Nice try, guy, but ex-presidents are ALWAYS invited to conventions as long as they are physically able. Reagan spoke at the 92 convention and Nancy stood in for him at the 96 convention. The only time they don't invite former presidents is when these guys prove to be a reminder of why you voted their asses out to start with. (Nixon, Carter, Bush-43.)

[
And it's small wonder that Bill Clinton showed up at their convention. He wants to prove that his impeachment wasn't justified. He also is trying to get back into the WhiteHouse through Hillary.

I'm sure he does. Doesn't take away from the fact that he gave a really good speech that was an unqualified rallying cry for Obama. (In fact, made Obama's case better than Obama did in his speech.)

I think everyone had something to do with your mortgage being underwater. The guy currently in office wasn't an innocent bystander like he always claims to be. He was in the Senate after all, and what happens in government is the responsibility of all of them, not just the President.

Yes, both parties contributed, but bush was in the leadership position. Come on, guy, you were in the miltiary. When a unit fucks up, they go after the CO, not Corporal Snuffy and Private Tentpeg. Bush was ulitmately the guy in charge. He appointed the bureucrats and he set the tone. He ignored the warnings that the banks were taking too many risks and properties were overvalued.

Yet you seem to have the same double-standards as Democrats, so it's no small wonder you ether gravitated to them because you can relate to them, or you always have been a Democrat.

Here's the thing, guy. If I were a better person, I'd have turned on Bush the moment we all realized he lied about WMD's. I'd have turned on him the moment we watched bodies floating down the Mississippir River from Katrina. But I didn't. Those fuckups were really bad, but they didn't effect me personally, and up until about 2008, I was still sticking up for Bush and still making excuses for him.

I really only turned on the guy when his incompetence and cronyism had an effect on my life. When the economy went south, and I discovered just how badly Bush and some of his predecessors had weakened working folks rights in this country in favor of the employers and the banks.

And honestly, shame on me.

Bush has remained silent. That includes conventions. Anyone with half a brain wants to get as far away from politics today as possible.

Obama and the Clintons have turned politics in this country into a cesspool. Nothing gets done. Nasty people doing nasty things to each other. The good of the country gives way to a never-ending political struggle. Bush was about as apolitical as you can get. I don't blame him for washing his hands of it. Clinton hasn't the class to walk away from it. It's what he lives for.

 

[asterism]

Why would anyone want a system where your employer gets to make your healthcare decisions?

I remember having to put knee surgery off for a month because my employer wouldn't sign off on a one day outpatient surgery.

Our employers are in business to make money

Where does the employees healthcare fit into that?

It's part of the compensation, and it's a very inefficient one. Most of the problems plaguing our healthcare system are caused by the lack of individual power in the system.

 

[rightwinger]

Why would anyone want a system where your employer gets to make your healthcare decisions?

Good point. Why would anyone want a system where the government gets to make your healthcare decisions?

Well, I'll tell you why

We get to vote on who represents us in the government. If we do not like our healthcare, we take it out in the polls. The government is also not in it for a profit. Your employer wants to make a profit, your insurance company wants to make a profit

The government also has the advantage of volume. Millions of people in a pool. Your employer may have a large insurance pool, it may have no insurance pool

Another advantage of the government is transportability. Millions of Americans are tied to jobs they don't like or jobs that don't pay well because they need the insurance coverage. They are unable to be competitive in the job market because they can't transfer their insurance

Another advantage of the government is from the business perspective. Business is tied to providing for their employees healthcare. Too generous and it affects your bottom line, too cheap and you lose employees. Providing healthcare to employees is a liability and it affects your competitiveness

 

[Vox]

Was Stalin an asshole? Yup. Absolutely.

But he probably saved the world from a bigger asshole, namely Hitler.

The problem is, most of the "Liberated" areas after WWII were the countries that threw in with Hitler, who was probably just measuring most of them up to be lampshades. .

No, he did not.
It was actually vice versa. Hitler saved Europe from the liberation by Stalin.
And Stalin was MUCH WORSE than Hitler.
Just by murder numbers. Exponentially worse.

I kind of don't have a lot of sympathy for any of the Warsaw Pact nations except for the Poles. The rest of them all joined the Axis and kind of got what they deserved

wow, aren't you ignorant. Extremely.
half of them were "liberated" by stalin and when Stain and Hitler TOGETHER started WWII by dividing Poland, part of the Warsaw pact nations were ALREADY under Hitler, annexed by him in 1938. Stalin proceeded by "liberation" of the Baltic states but got his teeth kicked in Finland ( GOOD).
Nevertheless he planed to stab his best buddy Hitler in the back and proceed with his plan of soviet liberation until La Manche, but too bad, 2 weeks before his megalomaniac plans Hitler started the war on Soviet front ( he had no choice) and therefore signed his death warrant.

So, technically Western Europe should be grateful to Hitler that they had eventually Western troops defending them from Hitler but not "liberation" by Stalin's troops which was the original plan from the Stalin's viewpoint.

Holy Fucking Shit, did you try to call HItler a "Liberator"?

Seriously?

Okay, everyone, if you want to see what Right Wing Crazy looks like, we have it right here.

Here's the problem with your claims about Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact. Stalin didn't take anything that hadn't been taken away from Russia in the Treaty of Brest-Listov. The Baltic States, Eastern Poland, Moldava ALREADY belonged to Russia. They just took back their stuff.

Meanwhile, Hungary, Slovakia, ROmania, Bulgaria, Croatia and Albania all threw in with the Axis, so it's really kind of hard to feel bad for them.

you idiot, comparing to Stalin Hitler WAS a "liberator" for those who had tasted both.

And that is NOT what I have written - do you have ANY comprehension abilities left whatsoever?

You are so incredibly ignorant and STUPID that it is beyond reparable.

Which is not surprising as if you would have ANY rain you won't be a leftard.

 

[asterism]

Why would anyone want a system where your employer gets to make your healthcare decisions?

Good point. Why would anyone want a system where the government gets to make your healthcare decisions?

Well, I'll tell you why

We get to vote on who represents us in the government. If we do not like our healthcare, we take it out in the polls. The government is also not in it for a profit. Your employer wants to make a profit, your insurance company wants to make a profit

The government also has the advantage of volume. Millions of people in a pool. Your employer may have a large insurance pool, it may have no insurance pool

Another advantage of the government is transportability. Millions of Americans are tied to jobs they don't like or jobs that don't pay well because they need the insurance coverage. They are unable to be competitive in the job market because they can't transfer their insurance

Another advantage of the government is from the business perspective. Business is tied to providing for their employees healthcare. Too generous and it affects your bottom line, too cheap and you lose employees. Providing healthcare to employees is a liability and it affects your competitiveness

You're making the case for individual health coverage, not government plans. As the current ACA debacle shows, the government has no incentive to perform or improve. While you decry the profit motive, profit provides an incentive to be efficient and effective.

 

[Vox]

No, I just see rich people as a bigger threat to my well-being than the government.

that is typical mistake stupid people make before they are crashed by the government machine

but that is more of the story how Hitler closed his grip on the throat of his people which also started to hate rich people and loved the government

I thought you just said Hitler was a "Liberator" of Europe and we should all be grateful to him.

For the record, your Hero Adolf was totally in bed with Germany's rich.

stop lying you ignorant POS.

I know it's the only tactic you leftards are used to, but stop LYING if you want to have any molecule of integrity remained

 

[Vox]

Sure joe any lying thing you say.

exactly

 

[rightwinger]

Good point. Why would anyone want a system where the government gets to make your healthcare decisions?

Well, I'll tell you why

We get to vote on who represents us in the government. If we do not like our healthcare, we take it out in the polls. The government is also not in it for a profit. Your employer wants to make a profit, your insurance company wants to make a profit

The government also has the advantage of volume. Millions of people in a pool. Your employer may have a large insurance pool, it may have no insurance pool

Another advantage of the government is transportability. Millions of Americans are tied to jobs they don't like or jobs that don't pay well because they need the insurance coverage. They are unable to be competitive in the job market because they can't transfer their insurance

Another advantage of the government is from the business perspective. Business is tied to providing for their employees healthcare. Too generous and it affects your bottom line, too cheap and you lose employees. Providing healthcare to employees is a liability and it affects your competitiveness

You're making the case for individual health coverage, not government plans. As the current ACA debacle shows, the government has no incentive to perform or improve. While you decry the profit motive, profit provides an incentive to be efficient and effective.

As we have seen, the problem with individual health coverage is that you compete as an individual and not as a pool.
Why do we need insurance companies? All they add is overhead to the healthcare process. What is the value added from an insurance company?

 

[asterism]

Well, I'll tell you why

We get to vote on who represents us in the government. If we do not like our healthcare, we take it out in the polls. The government is also not in it for a profit. Your employer wants to make a profit, your insurance company wants to make a profit

The government also has the advantage of volume. Millions of people in a pool. Your employer may have a large insurance pool, it may have no insurance pool

Another advantage of the government is transportability. Millions of Americans are tied to jobs they don't like or jobs that don't pay well because they need the insurance coverage. They are unable to be competitive in the job market because they can't transfer their insurance

Another advantage of the government is from the business perspective. Business is tied to providing for their employees healthcare. Too generous and it affects your bottom line, too cheap and you lose employees. Providing healthcare to employees is a liability and it affects your competitiveness

You're making the case for individual health coverage, not government plans. As the current ACA debacle shows, the government has no incentive to perform or improve. While you decry the profit motive, profit provides an incentive to be efficient and effective.

As we have seen, the problem with individual health coverage is that you compete as an individual and not as a pool.
Why do we need insurance companies? All they add is overhead to the healthcare process. What is the value added from an insurance company?

The problem with individual health coverage recently is that regulations bar the industry from building large risk pools in the individual market. Selling insurance across state lines would fix this, as it has in employer and union plans (unions are exempted from anti-trust laws in this situation). The value added by insurance companies is that they use relatively small contributions from policyholders to manage the risk of large financial expenses. The concept works when the proper regulations and oversight are applied. The system is now falling apart due to government micromanagement, lack of individual underwriting for anything but tobacco use, location, age, and family size to be covered.

 

[rightwinger]

You're making the case for individual health coverage, not government plans. As the current ACA debacle shows, the government has no incentive to perform or improve. While you decry the profit motive, profit provides an incentive to be efficient and effective.

As we have seen, the problem with individual health coverage is that you compete as an individual and not as a pool.
Why do we need insurance companies? All they add is overhead to the healthcare process. What is the value added from an insurance company?

The problem with individual health coverage recently is that regulations bar the industry from building large risk pools in the individual market. Selling insurance across state lines would fix this, as it has in employer and union plans (unions are exempted from anti-trust laws in this situation). The value added by insurance companies is that they use relatively small contributions from policyholders to manage the risk of large financial expenses. The concept works when the proper regulations and oversight are applied. The system is now falling apart due to government micromanagement, lack of individual underwriting for anything but tobacco use, location, age, and family size to be covered.

Individual underwriting has failed because they only want to cover low risk individuals. They do not want to cover a cancer patient or diabetic. They do not want to cover the elderly. They have established a rate structure which forces people to gamble with their lives

 

[mudwhistle]

As we have seen, the problem with individual health coverage is that you compete as an individual and not as a pool.
Why do we need insurance companies? All they add is overhead to the healthcare process. What is the value added from an insurance company?

The problem with individual health coverage recently is that regulations bar the industry from building large risk pools in the individual market. Selling insurance across state lines would fix this, as it has in employer and union plans (unions are exempted from anti-trust laws in this situation). The value added by insurance companies is that they use relatively small contributions from policyholders to manage the risk of large financial expenses. The concept works when the proper regulations and oversight are applied. The system is now falling apart due to government micromanagement, lack of individual underwriting for anything but tobacco use, location, age, and family size to be covered.

Individual underwriting has failed because they only want to cover low risk individuals. They do not want to cover a cancer patient or diabetic. They do not want to cover the elderly. They have established a rate structure which forces people to gamble with their lives

So Obama offers them a deal. (Insurance companies)

Join Obamacare and when it fails I'll bail you out.

 

[rightwinger]

The problem with individual health coverage recently is that regulations bar the industry from building large risk pools in the individual market. Selling insurance across state lines would fix this, as it has in employer and union plans (unions are exempted from anti-trust laws in this situation). The value added by insurance companies is that they use relatively small contributions from policyholders to manage the risk of large financial expenses. The concept works when the proper regulations and oversight are applied. The system is now falling apart due to government micromanagement, lack of individual underwriting for anything but tobacco use, location, age, and family size to be covered.

Individual underwriting has failed because they only want to cover low risk individuals. They do not want to cover a cancer patient or diabetic. They do not want to cover the elderly. They have established a rate structure which forces people to gamble with their lives

So Obama offers them a deal. (Insurance companies)

Join Obamacare and when it fails I'll bail you out.

We will see

I hope it is used as an incentive to move to Government healthcare

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Individual underwriting has failed because they only want to cover low risk individuals. They do not want to cover a cancer patient or diabetic. They do not want to cover the elderly. They have established a rate structure which forces people to gamble with their lives

So Obama offers them a deal. (Insurance companies)

Join Obamacare and when it fails I'll bail you out.

We will see

I hope it is used as an incentive to move to Government healthcare

Why do you want government run healthcare? What will it's benefit be for you?
Are you to lazy to make your own choice? Can't pay your own bills? What exactly does this do for you?

 

[mudwhistle]

Individual underwriting has failed because they only want to cover low risk individuals. They do not want to cover a cancer patient or diabetic. They do not want to cover the elderly. They have established a rate structure which forces people to gamble with their lives

So Obama offers them a deal. (Insurance companies)

Join Obamacare and when it fails I'll bail you out.

We will see

I hope it is used as an incentive to move to Government healthcare

Not from this government.

 

[JoeB131]

[

You salivate everything obama speaks don't you?
Do you also get that tingle up your leg?

The only guy I see who lets Obama dictate his life is you, man.

The guy occupies a lot of space in your head rent free.

My question is, why are you so obsessed with him?

Deflections is a good gauge to show how you lean politically
So why do you continually campaign for him?

Guy, you are kind of sounding like a retard who got his question answered and didn't understand the answer.

 

[JoeB131]

[

you idiot, comparing to Stalin Hitler WAS a "liberator" for those who had tasted both.

And that is NOT what I have written - do you have ANY comprehension abilities left whatsoever?

You are so incredibly ignorant and STUPID that it is beyond reparable.

Which is not surprising as if you would have ANY rain you won't be a leftard.

Yeah, unless you are like 80, you don't know what you are talking about.

My Dad liberated a concentration camp.... you could talk to him about Hitler being a "liberator".... dumbass...

Is there anyone on this thread who hasn't gone full retard.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Bush has remained silent. That includes conventions. Anyone with half a brain wants to get as far away from politics today as possible.

Obama and the Clintons have turned politics in this country into a cesspool. Nothing gets done. Nasty people doing nasty things to each other. The good of the country gives way to a never-ending political struggle. Bush was about as apolitical as you can get. I don't blame him for washing his hands of it. Clinton hasn't the class to walk away from it. It's what he lives for.

Sorry, I seem to remember (and unfortunately trying to defend) the comparing of Max Cleland (triple amputee in Vietnam) to Bin Laden and Saddam because he didn't think DHS employees should be completely stripped of their collective bargaining rights. That's NASTY.

Bush has stayed away because he reminds everyone how badly the GOP fucked up... everything.

 

[Vox]

[

you idiot, comparing to Stalin Hitler WAS a "liberator" for those who had tasted both.

And that is NOT what I have written - do you have ANY comprehension abilities left whatsoever?

You are so incredibly ignorant and STUPID that it is beyond reparable.

Which is not surprising as if you would have ANY rain you won't be a leftard.

Yeah, unless you are like 80, you don't know what you are talking about.

My Dad liberated a concentration camp.... you could talk to him about Hitler being a "liberator".... dumbass...

Is there anyone on this thread who hasn't gone full retard.

I know perfectly well what I am talking about.

My family experienced BOTH as I am from the part of Europe which is at crossroads of the armies going back and forth from the Huns and Goths and Vandals and Sarmatians starting.

It is you who has no idea except to parrot the idiocy of the brainwashing machine while living in the comfort of isolation from the evil empires of all kinds you know only from your leftard media.

And if your dad would liberate the Gulag camp you would hear about much worse atrocities than the ones Hitler regime performed.