Jo... can you rephrase your last post just a little so Revera doesn't come in and slap a padlock on it?

I know we're all passionate about the election, just askin nicely, I can't make you cuz we all equal

Again...these "corps" (such as Americorp and the Peace Corps) are NOT getting the "same weapons and training as our military". They are NOT civilian MILITARY operations (though the snipet, when intentionally taken out of context attempts to imply it). They will be carrying shovels, hammers, and saws...not guns. They are altruistic organizations that have been supported by republican and democrat adminstrations for years. Obama just wants to expand them.

We enhance our "NATIONAL DEFENSE" through the diplomacy and good will generated by these organizations in our country and abroad.

Service is such volunteer organizations is beneficial to the minds of those who undertake to "enlist" as well. For years now, there has been competition to get these volunteer slots.

Everyone should be skeptical of everything you read just prior to an election. Read carefully and between the lines. This snipet is obviously being spread just days before the election to illicit FEAR because Karl Rove (and Reagan way before him) proved that FEAR, as a motivator, works very efficiently on the electorate.

Fortunately, it doesn't seem to be working this time around.

Mr. Wondering

Which "Jo" Dude? JoJo or me?

And if me, where? I've been a good little TOS-compliant poster.

Good job on keeping it respectful and civilized. Carry on!

***edit***

Ummm...I didn't read it, I was watching Barak's speeches trying to make up my mind for sure.

JoJo [in black] wrote:

What EXACLY is that an admission of?? That if you're a LAZY ***edit*** drain on society that the LIBERAL LEFT doesnt see anything wrong with it and want's the same thing for themselves at the sacrifice of ANYONE in their way....including anyone that works in that industry???

I'll pay for it. I'll pay taxes and instead of paying the immoral health insurance industry that's skimming 30% off the top AND making me cover the cost of the uninsured (and taking 30% of that too) for coverage that may or may not cover me should I actually get sick (because they are legally mandated to maximize shareholder profits and thus motivated to deny me coverage or find ANY means to get my sick butt off their client list) all because I fear that IF I get do get really sick I would otherwise lose my life savings (which is merely the paying of protection money) I'll be paying the government's insurance agency to process my medical care payments. I'll get the "same care, same doctors, same hospitals" without deductibles or copays (even though I wouldn't mind SOME copays and deductibles) without the 30% middleman. As a bonus...I'll get an elected official to decide whether I truly need a procedure or not instead of some profit driven promotion seeking corporate schmuck


You should have said something, I would have admitted to that earlier.


****edit**** of the health insurance industry aren't you?? I bet you also scream and complain about how much the oil companies make without any thought to how much they pay in taxes....DON'T YOU??

If you say so. I've never received any actual medical care from the medical insurance cartel (HMO's differ...but the doctors and nurses can surely retain their jobs as only the insurance portion of the business truly needs eliminated). They just take my money and I've never come close to needing anywhere near the amount of money I've paid into their system. Health insurance is a zero-added benefit to health care. It's USURY (over-profiting on the use of money) plain and simple and usury is unbiblical, unethical, illegal and immoral.

As far as the oil industry. I wouldn't have supported it's consolidation years ago. The lack of real competition in the industry begets scrutiny. They make more money than many countries and like public utilities need some real oversight. I don't begrudge profits, only illegal profiteering and manipulations of markets which, no doubt occur. If they can get away with it...they will. Corporations have no duty or soul. Maximize profits is their only concern. If they can cheat and not get caught...they will



Here's a thought...while you wait for your boy wonder to make your life wonderful, go apply for MEDICAID so that you ALSO can have all the benefits that they have. I'm sure with the way the MEDICAID system is now, you could probably fib your way through and get coverage. Then you'd no longer be able to complain about what YOU have to pay in insurance premiums.

No thank you. For now I'll just have to keep paying my protection money to the Blue Cross Blue Shield mafia. Fortunately, here in Michigan we still have an insurance provider of last resort. It's expensive but as individuals with pre-existing conditions, we can't be rated out of such policy [but we can't move out of state].

edited to add: my last point. The health insurance racket is BAD for capitalism because people make important decisions about their jobs based solely upon the ability to obtain OR retain health insurance coverage. With single payer health insurance people would be free to work whereever they want. Taking risks would be more conceivable if everyone had health coverage. Innovation and invention would result. More people would be working in jobs they LOVE versus being chained to the corporation or agency that pays their health insurance that they otherwise could never afford. Finally, people could reliably retire on their savings as they could more easily predict their future non-medical needs (thus opening up positions for younger people to advance)

[quote=RMX} Ummm...I didn't read it, I was watching Barak's speeches trying to make up my mind for sure. [/quote]


Then I encourage you to watch the ENTIRE speech instead of the snippet that was posted at the top of this thread as you clearly inferred what was pathetically and politically implied (that these were scary organizations Obama intended to outfit with guns/weapons that could and would supplement our police and military on the streets of our nation).



I was just trying to help you out.

No worries.

Mr. W

Then I encourage you to watch the ENTIRE speech instead of the snippet that was posted at the top of this thread as you clearly inferred what was pathetically and politically implied (that these were scary organizations Obama intended to outfit with guns/weapons that could and would supplement our police and military on the streets of our nation).



I was just trying to help you out.

No worries.

Mr. W [/quote]


Could you find a link to the whole speech? I keep finding just the same snippet.

RMX,

Here's the link to the entire speech by Obama.

Barack Obama - July 2, 2008 - Colorado Springs, CO

Want2Stay

**EDIT**

If you have a question for the moderators email us directly. Do not post it here.

I'm going to assume that your question is sincere and perhaps based in "ignorance" of the system.

Hospitals, for example, lose money (payment versus cost required to provide a given service) on every Medicare, Medicaid, and Indigent patient they treat. The ONLY thing "keeping the doors open" to be able to provide ANY healthcare treatment IS Private Insurance (either of the Group or Individual variety).

MANY Doctors have already stopped practicing, or "cut back" their practices (i.e. OB/GYN Doctors stopping the OB part) because of soaring Medical Malpractice premiums for insurance against greedy Lawyers and patients willing to sue over anything.

IF you DON'T believe any of this, then look at the PPS/DRG system that has been imposed on Doctors, Hospitals, Nursing Homes, etc. In this case method, the Government "decides" how much they will pay for something and the "only" choice a provide has is whether or not they WILL "accept" what the Government establishes, NOT what the true of cost of service is.

But I can tell you that an increasing number of Physicians, as just one example, are SERIOUSLY considering restricting their PRIVATE PRACTICE (it IS their BUSINESS) to NO LONGER accepting Medicare as a "payor source."

There ARE limits, and there IS a COST for everything. And that cost is what the "nationalized healthcare" advocates refuse to understand.

So when you ask; Precisely who would lose their jobs if we had some more single-payer medicine? , I would respond with a LOT of healthcare providers AND their employees. In addition, ACCESS to healthcare services would be extremely limited.

Don't believe me? Okay, that's your right. But I would suggest perhaps a lot more actual research into this area before coming to a conclusion as implicated by that question.



You wrote: "To a large extent, we already have socialized medicine today.

The military, state, and federal employee's all enjoy single-payer health benefits and most consider it a wonderful essential perk of the job.

The uninsured get "free" emergency room care.

Medicaid operates at a 3% overhead rate.

Welfare moms get state funded healthcare though it's coverage is wholly inadequate in most states."

Mr. W, I work in the "insurance business" (specifically health insurance) every day. You are 100% correct that we already DO have some forms of Socialized Medicine. And it doesn't work very well. Yes, for SOME people, it DOES help them, but the COSTS are paid for by restricting payment and by charging OTHERS for the cost of the system (i.e. taxpayers).

Health problems ARE expensive, but "nationalized healthcare" is NOT the answer. But I'm much too tired to go into the idea that "capitalism" IS what has given us a such a "world-wide envied" healthcare system that HAS made tremendous strides. From chartitable places like St. Judes Medical Center to advances in Medical Treatment and Pharmaceuticals based on Return Of Investment and in getting PAID for the services offered. WHO is going to fund the research and development when the Government decides what IS and what IS NOT paid for, and HOW MUCH is paid?

What you are advocating here is not much different than, say, you NEED a $50,000 car or truck to BE ABLE TO WORK, but you only want to give the Auto Company $10,000 for that "NEEDED" vehicle.

WHO pays the difference? Why would the Auto Company not simply get out of the business and provide NO vehicles regardless of anyone else's "need" if it costs more to MAKE the product than they will receive in payment FOR the product?

Healthcare is NO different. PEOPLE provide the services, NOT "buildings" and "plants." (hospitals, medical practices, etc.)

Mr W. - You are fortunate that you have enjoyed "good health."

But you are "incredibly naive" in your reasoning here. And I'll bet you've never "come close" to needing the coverage you pay for to insure your house or car either.

I'm betting you've never used your Social Security fund or your Medicare Fund either, yet you pay a HIGH portion of your income for them...to fund others who DO use them to the tune of WAY MORE than they have ever "contributed" into the system.

And if you think that the level of taxation is NOT "usury" itself, then you have an interesting concept of what "usury" is.

To claim that the Personal Responsibility action of actually paying for insurance (which is NOTHING more than attempting to shift the responsibility for PAYING for things you need to someone else, i.e. the insurance company (you give them a premium and they give you a TON of money 'in the bank' to use should YOU actually need it, rather than you reaching into YOUR pocket to get the money)) is "unbiblical, unethical, illegal and immoral" is simply an UNTRUTH.




There is nothing wrong with "oversight, but there is a LOT wrong with confiscatory policies, especially when the government has done everything it can to RESTRICT and PREVENT new resources from becoming available.

And if you think that "Government" has a "duty or soul," you are wrong. Goverment, too, is made up of many individuals who also cheat and do "wrong things," primarily just to "keep their jobs" and not for the good of the people. Most of those "self-serving" individuals are called "politicians," not "career employees working within the "business of Goverment."




Why do you think that "insurance provider of last resort" IS so expensive?

Why do you think that employer based "group" insurance tends to be much more expensive than a private individual insurance policy?

Why do you think that DENTAL Insurance is "high cost" and strictly limited in the annual maximum that it will pay out (and even that is on a 50/50 basis with you paying half before you have have to 100% of anything over the maximum pay out per year)?

Could it be that the insurers KNOW that people who take Dental Insurance ARE GOING TO USE IT?

Why DOESN'T insurance pay for Cosmetic Surgery? After all, it helps people "look better" and we all want to "look better?"

Why DOESN'T the Goverment pay for anything that THEY don't think is "medically necessary?" After all, if THEY are to be the Single Payor Source, you'd think that they SHOULD "cover everything," right?

And if you truly THINK that "people could reliably retire on their savings as they could more easily predict their future non-medical needs (thus opening up positions for younger people to advance)" then you don't understand what a confiscatory TAX policy is or it's affect on the ability of people to SAVE FOR THEMSELVES and their heirs.

Have you, for example, ever heard of what happens to all the money you paid into Social Security or Medicare if you DIE?

Have you, for example, ever heard about the "Death Tax?"

Have you, for example, ever heard of the "Inheritance Tax?"

Have you, for example, ever heard that the Government WILL NOT pay for any Long Term Care needs beyond "Acute Care," and of that, they will only pay for 20 days without you paying any copay and UP TO only another 80 days WITH a LARGE copayment from you?

Mr. W, you are ranting about a system you seem to know very little about and are "knee-jerking" a response based on an apparent emotional response.

If you truly want to do something to lower the COSTS of healthcare IMMEDIATELY, then support TORT Reform and slap huge limits on the LAWYERS. Make the LAWYERS represent their clients Pro Bono, or at some low fee rate of, say, $5.00 per day.

Last thought: You CAN work for any company you want to work for and you DO NOT HAVE TO take the offered insurance. You CAN take the money (less the additional taxes the goverment will take) and BANK your money to pay for your own medical costs if they arise. That IS called "personal responsibility" and I would support your decision to do so. Just DON'T come clammoring for ME to pay for YOUR healthcare costs when, and if, the need arises.

Mr. Wondering - here's another thought to go along with your idea that the government should provide your healthcare and you not have to pay for it yourself:

Why stop there?

Why not have the government also provide everyone with a car?
Why not TWO or MORE cars if people in the household NEED a car to get to work, the grocery store, etc.?

In fact, why not just have government grocery stores where you can just go get whatever food you think you need, regardless of what it costs?

Oh, the heck with it, why not just have the government give everyone a house of whatever "size" they want and pay for anything that is needed should the house need repair or replacement?

Just WHERE do you see the "limits" on what the government should "provide" for everyone and WHERE will the government get the money to PAY for those things so that you no longer have any responsibility for paying for anything you want or need?

This is a serious flaw in the plan though. Trying to reason (diplomacy) with Iran, N Korea, and the rest of them is like trying to reason with a 2 year old.

These people DO NOT like the USA, they DO NOT like our way of life. They pray on our moral way of thinking....ie killing innocent people, etc.

Do you TRULY believe that you can reason with a Muslim extremest?? DO you TRULY believe just because you are politically correct that the rest of the world is going to be the same?

I think it's me, but I didn't see anything wrong with what I said. There were no personal attacks in any of my posts

FH you said that you had somethings you wanted to discuss about my earlier post. If you have the time I would love to see your perspective.

Good grief...one minute conservatives are afraid that we're all going to die by Al Qaeda's hand if a *gasp!* liberal is elected, then they cry when a *gasp!* liberal proposes increasing our national security.

If McCain had proposed it, you'd probably be crying tears of joy.

To the Man formerly Known as Medc. I would like to apologize. I am sorry if I was being disrespectful to you yesterday. That was not my intention.I have since come to realize that I don't really understand what a DJ is can someone please elaborate on that for. The last thing I want to do is sound self righteous. So want to know what qualifies as a DJ. I can and do admit I am wrong. However admitting am a wrong is not the end, I would like to know how not to repeat my mistake. Thank you.

Few things are more dangerous than underestimating your opponent. Most 2 year olds I've been around haven't developed nuclear capability.



It's hard to imagine not liking another country, or another country's way of life, isn't it? Why is it that only foreigners hate other cultures and kill innocent people?



You're right. Let's do the right thing.

Kill 'em all & let God sort 'em out.