Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by 108, Oct 5, 2013.
Now you just gonna make em mad, they only like children when it's good for their agenda.
I refer you to one of the sites I subscribe to. They are better equip in answering the question on how the ACA will affect the medical community. They're for single-payer national health insurance--something that would be good for businesses and that you should be calling for.
Are you going to answer the question?
I do not be referred to a site to know the statists selfishness. Ironically they are ignorant on this one which unfortunately will negatively affect our business. Then again that is what the selfishness of a statist prefers.
Can you refer me to a site you subscribe to that is equipped to answer the question of how the industries your family members work in charge too much because they refuse to sacrifice so others can more afford the products and services they help provide? Surly single payer nationalized industries are something that will be good for my business since the greed of those currently working in them costs me more than I should pay.
I don't believe it is another's obligation in any absolute sense, but I do believe, we as a society make these judgments and pass laws accordingly....many times there is disagreement on them
I am sure that I disagree with some areas of tax funding that you support
My guess is this wouldn't be an issue if charity was the answer
Naive if you think that would happen today
Here's the link. http://www.pnhp.org/
PNHP is a non-profit research and education organization of 18,000 physicians, medical students and health professionals who support single-payer national health insurance.
The only program in healthcare that is bankrupt is the one redistributing others wealth (our kids) to stay afloat.
You are naive to think government is the only way to take care of others.
Can you provide me the evidence that people were left to die by the healthcare industry before government jumped into healthcare at unprecedented levels?
Are you going to answer the question?
I did not ask for the link. I want to nationalize industries your family members work in to better my business.
I don't think you want to ask a majority of doctors about how to handle healthcare chomp. It won't be what your selfish desires are. Just like a majority of your family and friends would feel nationalizing their industry for my selfish desires would not be a good idea (I agree).
So are you going to answer the question?
Are you ready to tell your family members to sacrifice so we can more easily afford the products/services they help deliver?
What the He'll is "progressive" about the concept of granting rule to your healthcare to a centralized government?
You are actually a "regressive" instead. Looking toward a single government to provide your RIGHTS for you was tried several hundred years ago with kings and other monarchs. And rejected by our Founding Fathers. Oh would they not be proud of the cowardice and sloth their noble experiment has wrought.
You need to take a course in basic economics and the history of economics.
Graduate degree with a specialization in Comparative Economics from IF.
What is your next impotent challenge?
It doesn't show it from your posts.
of those 18,000, probably 8 are doctors, the rest are college students.
No offense, chomp, but medical students are stupid. I voted for Clinton when I was one, but that was back in the days before I ever saw a paycheck, before I ever had the pleasure of filing my own 1040s, before I ever cut my first rent check, before I ever had the government threatening me to pay my student loans back on time. You are going to solidify your beliefs based on what a bunch of dumb kids say?
Gee, the government collects income tax and then threatened someone to pay back their student loans on time? What tyranny!
Lame response. But at least consistent.
You certainly are good at using hyperbole. You must have gotten use to it from watching FNS.
The bold above is the ultimate lie being perpetrated by the Left. There is not a single state in the union that excluded people with pre-existing conditions from purchasing insurance. Not one!!! The difference is that someone with pre-existing conditions had to buy a policy that was a group policy and was more expensive than an individual policy.
That is understandable, as those people cost the insurance company more than an individual without pre-existing conditions.
Continue spreading the lies, libbies. With your mouthpieces in the MSM, you appear to be convincing people with your lies. Sooner or later, those lies will come home to roost.