__________________
February is PALIN-FREE month. Whatever you do, don't mention Sarah Palin's name. Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin.
While suturing a laceration on the hand of a 70-year-old Texas rancher (whose hand had caught in a gate while working cattle), a doctor and the old man were talking about George W. Bush being in the White House.
The old Texan said, "Well, ya know, Bush is a 'post turtle'."
Not knowing what the old man meant, the doctor asked him what a post turtle was.
The old man said, "When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a post turtle."
The old man saw a puzzled look on the doctor's face, so he continued to explain, "You know he didn't get there by himself, he doesn't belong there, he doesn't know what to do while he's up there, and you just want to help the poor stupid guy get down."
While I don't think redjeep is a post turtle, there is the element of troll that seems to crop up pretty often IMO.
__________________
February is PALIN-FREE month. Whatever you do, don't mention Sarah Palin's name. Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin.
Brian I figured out I was trying to discuss some thing with a post turtle,But You sure gave it one he(( of a try!!
I defended my position and actually argued it, instead of just saying "this is too much work, I'll ignore what he said and post a red herring". oh and trying to defeat the censor is against forum rules, also hell is not a banned word on this forum
post turtle = no, troll =no
someone who generally goes with logic and reality over what's popular within any particular political group = yeah
A great example of a post turtle would be brian's claims of healthcare across state lines, sounds great at first glance but once someone goes into the details of why it currently is the case and shouldn't change you realize you had no footing to stand on, also the same with the whole mcdonald's coffee thing, you made the statement, presented it as something it wasn't and then refused to back away from your initial argument even after I pointed out the reasons it was clearly a bad argument. Once cornered you either refused to reply or ignore my posts or place a red herring out there to change the subject entirely, that sounds an aswful lot like "post turtling" to me.
See, when you call my friend an idiot for wanting to get the care necessary to keep his daughter alive and refusing to push the cost to someone else, that doesn't smack of logic.
When you say "there is no law against being fair NOW", it doesn't seem you're arguing your point particularly well in light of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act which does indeed compel hospitals to provide care to those who can't pay.
You advocate nationalizing an industry which is illegal and precedent-setting and anathema to the free market system that made this country its wealth. You advocate setting price controls, yet there is no precedent for that either. You SAY it'll be cheaper, but there's no evidence to support that. (And even if it were, I'd still be against it because the premise is illegal.) I could have cited the tax cost versus level of care regarding the Canadian health system and the UK's National Health System, but I expect you don't particularly care.
"Proof by vehement assertion" doesn't constitute sound arguing.
You're welcome, by the way, to address my comments in the Palin thread with regard to the very real fiscal crisis. Now, if you want to say that "crisis" is a subjective term and what we're experiencing, unprecedented as it is and involving some awfully big numbers, as being something other than a crisis, that's cool. Pedantic, but cool. From where I sit, it's a crisis. And there are a bunch of people smarter than either of us who concur.
__________________
February is PALIN-FREE month. Whatever you do, don't mention Sarah Palin's name. Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin.
See, when you call my friend an idiot for wanting to get the care necessary to keep his daughter alive and refusing to push the cost to someone else, that doesn't smack of logic.
not what I said
what I had said was referring to the way you wrote that as if he was paying a million dollar hospital bill off, and it wasn't saying he was an idiot for saving his daughter either, but if he really was paying a million dollars off and wasn't some very wealthy executive then yes because likely that bill is inflated by the hospital and still he would be wasting his life to someday have it paid off. But I bet he paid the amount over 1 million which changes it a bit, YOU NEVER CLARIFIED IT where I asked you
Quote:
When you say "there is no law against being fair NOW", it doesn't seem you're arguing your point particularly well in light of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act which does indeed compel hospitals to provide care to those who can't pay.
and you choose irrelevant points, yes the hospitals have to treat them, but there is still nothing preventing hospitals from listing their prices in an honest fashion, if the vet can do this why can't hospitals?
Quote:
You advocate nationalizing
I never recommended nationalizing anything, I assume because I want some government regulation you do the standard GOP thing to label that as "nationalisation", what in the heck are you referring to? post?
Quote:
an industry which is illegal and precedent-setting and anathema to the free market system that made this country its wealth.
if you think our health care has been "free" you are quite mistaken, it has been truly free for about half a century when we regulated some parts due to issues from abuse of the free market
Quote:
You advocate setting price controls, yet there is no precedent for that either. You SAY it'll be cheaper, but there's no evidence to support that. (And even if it were, I'd still be against it because the premise is illegal.) I could have cited the tax cost versus level of care regarding the Canadian health system and the UK's National Health System, but I expect you don't particularly care.
you can say you can but can you?
I didn't advocate price controls, ever. I did advocate companies be UP FRONT with their pricing and be required to do so, those two things are worlds apart
Quote:
You're welcome, by the way, to address my comments in the Palin thread with regard to the very real fiscal crisis. Now, if you want to say that "crisis" is a subjective term and what we're experiencing, unprecedented as it is and involving some awfully big numbers, as being something other than a crisis, that's cool. Pedantic, but cool. From where I sit, it's a crisis. And there are a bunch of people smarter than either of us who concur.
again gdp verse debt we are not in a crisis, a situation to fix, yes but to act like it's so critical our government is about to fail is absolutely absurd and a convenient scare tactic
yes you ranted a lot about inflation and stuff irrelevant to my argument, my argument was it was not the end of this country, something to address but not something to scream the "the sky is falling" about, it fits the republican agenda to push this now, and yes in a recession our debt will go up
a lot about inflation and stuff irrelevant to my argument, my argument was it was not the end of this country, something to address but not something to scream the "the sky is falling" about, it fits the republican agenda to push this now, and yes in a recession our debt will go up
My post was to point out several things. First, was to illustrate the nature of the cartel of private banks that comprise the Federal Reserve and their crony buddies on Wall Street (JPMorgan, Goldman-Sachs, etc.) and how their antics have enriched them but resulted in significant inflation for us. (Did you even bother with the G. Edward Griffin videos, or are those "irrelevant"?)
Also, I pointed out that the debt:GDP ratio is based on some of the nation's debt but that not all government debt is taken into account. In illustrating there is a great deal more debt, the ratio is meaningless. It bears mentioning that our debt:GDP ratio is worse now than it has been since before 1950. So implying there's nothing out of the ordinary is not correct.
In fact, our debt:GDP ratio is as bad as it was during the post-WWII recovery. But we had a thriving manufacturing sector then which we lack today.
Here's a chart over the past decade that more clearly shows we are over 90% of GDP:
Two top American economists - Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff - wrote:
Quote:
The relationship between government debt and real GDP growth is weak for debt/GDP ratios below a threshold of 90 percent of GDP. Above 90 percent, median growth rates fall by one percent, and average growth falls considerably more.
Finally, I tried to illustrate that the method by which GDP is calculated is flawed insofar as it contains "government spending" as a major factor and the government has spent a great deal of money over the last several years in ways that don't improve infrastructure or spur growth. That spending artificially inflates the final GDP number.
If you don't want to acknowledge the degree to which inflation has set in or the rise in prices in staples, that's fine. I'm not suggesting the government will fail or the country is toast. But the probability is significantly higher than zero that there will be serious fallout from our debt accrual, particularly when Obama is talking about increasing spending (sorry, the term's "investing" now, isn't it?). The situation we're in has many very bright economists extremely concerned.
You may regard the facts any way you want. Others might find this information useful and noteworthy. In my opinion and in the opinion of many others, this is a fiscal crisis.
Getting back to the original point of my post, I would hate to see anyone get the potential fallout of this mess dropped in their lap. Palin, I don't believe, would have any idea how to go about mitigating or fixing the problems.
__________________
February is PALIN-FREE month. Whatever you do, don't mention Sarah Palin's name. Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin Sarah Palin.
Linear Mode
