« Previous You Say “Cute,” I Say “Special” | May The Force Be With You (And Also With You) Next »
Don’t like Healthcare Reform?
NO HEALTHCARE FOR YOU!
(Larry Thomas as The Soup Nazi)
There are some people over here who don’t like healthcare reform (via Pundit Kitchen)
(Caption by: Tijaboo via Advanced Lol Builder
 | Aaron Hong on Dear God, WHY Did I Give Him M… |
 | Nightshift on Lindsay Lohan as Elizabeth Tay… |
 | Oathy on Dear God, WHY Did I Give Him M… |
 | Chibi-chan on Disney’s Hunger Gam… |
 | Iridian on Does “Snow White And The… |
 | Agent Tasmania on Wrong Luna |
 | scottpilgrim on Make a M**a F**ka Say DAM… |
 | Stephie on You’re a Felon Now,… |
 | TheBrigeedaRocks on Dear God, WHY Did I Give Him M… |
 | mm on Make a M**a F**ka Say DAM… |
Cheezburger Company Blog
I Can Has Cheezburger? - Lolcats n Funny Pictures 
Lolcats - Lolcats n' Funny Cat Pictures
I Has A Hotdog - Loldogs n Cute Puppies 
Animal Capshunz - All of the Internet's Animals. Captioned
Animal Videos - Cute and Hilarious Animal Videos
Animal Gifs - Cute and Hilarious Animal Gifs
Daily Squee - So cute your brain might explode. 
Historic LOLs - Captioned Portraits of Yore
My Food Looks Funny - Funny Food Photos
So Much Pun - Visual Puns and Jokes
Totally Looks Like - Stuff That Looks Like Other Stuff
Must Have Cute - See. Want. Must Have!
If Style Could Kill - OMG Style!
Pundit Kitchen - Lol News and Lol Politics Fun 
Lovely Listing - Strange Findings in Real Estate Listings
![\"Quantcast\"/](\"http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-94wNw88f65Rhk.gif?labels=MTVN%20Digital%20Tribes\")
Let the carping begin!
ROFLrazzi turns into Pundit Kitchen style flame fest in 3…2…1…
Prepare the hyperbole, the ad hominem attacks, and arguments that are clearly a proxy for a larger issue!
proxy warrrrrrrrrr! =)
South Ossetia I choose YOU!!!!!!
I’ll start it off!
Anybody else find, President Obama’s “You either vote for this healthcare reform bill, or you are happy with the status quo” statement to be pretty much on par with President GW Bush’s “You are either with us or against us” statement?
What if I don’t like the status quo, but also don’t like THIS healthcare bill? Would it be so bad to ask for a different bill?
Shut up, idiot.
Don’t foget to call him a racist !!!!!
Racist.
I think Obama’s point was, that the Republicans in Congress had no real response other than “maintain the status quo.” Obviously you can be a sane, non-teabagger type person and still have issues with things in (or left out of) the bill.
You don’t actually believe the talking point that they had no alternative do you?
“No real response”? You do realize the Republicans have taken to *waving copies of their plan in Obama’s face* right?
And their plans have no plan to them. “Let’s do tort reform and deregulate the entire medical field” is not a plan.
Sure it is. Deregulating other industries led to better quality of products/services, more availability for consumers, and cheaper prices. But, fine, let’s just go with a plan used by some states that caused massive increases in insurance premiums, lowered the quality of care for nearly everyone, and bankrupted state budgets. Yes, let’s do that. Surely such a thing couldn’t happen on the national level. If you do the same thing over and over, you can get different results, right? It’s the Democratic Party way!
Does deregulating give everyone a pony, too?
Does obamacare give everyone a pony?
Yes, everyone gets a pony, unless you are a paladin, then no pony for you.
Then a charger instead?
Riiiight. And deregulation did SUCH a nice job on making the airlines customer friendly. Uh huh. I’m old enough to remember beforehand, and VERY nostalgic at this point.
I’ll grant to you that Ma Bell (AT&T, the original national phone service for you young pups) was a problem before the change. But the other major industries that deregulated have NOT improved.
Deregulation made it possible for the average person to be able to fly. Maybe you don’t remember very well. And much of the less customer friendly attitude has more to do with current regulation, especially in response to the boogey-men who might blow up airlines all around if Big Brother did not step in to save us all from those nasty ‘terrists.’
Regulation only serves to drive out competition by making emerging it difficult for start-up companies to emerge, it drives out innovation, and it does not allow companies to quickly respond to economic change.
Because DEregulation TOTALLY did ALL those things you just said for the airlines. TOTALLY.
Further deregulation will increase the corporate stranglehold of system where the hunger for profit will lead to even more people excluded and even higher prices.
So you admit they have a plan, you just *don’t like* the plan.
…How this equals “not having a plan” is beyond me.
No, “the same way we’ve been doing it all along” is not a fricking plan and stop trying to pretend it is.
40 million people on foodstamps, how are they going to pay for healthcare if they cant afford food.
failcare bill is fail
Hi dummy.
You’re dumb.
Bye.
I know! Let’s stop funneling money into the bottomless hole of war and into paying healthcare and food stamps.
I agree. The so-called “War on Poverty” is an endless quagmire that’s cost us many times more than both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.
End the quagmire! End the War on Poverty!
You are living proof of the dumbing down of America.
Perhaps it is you instead who are proof. Everytime the US has a “war on (insert term here)” there is more of it, billions get wasted, and the American people are ultimately worse off than before.
Like the war on drugs? The war on terrorism? You’re an idiot.
Idiot? Why don’t you ever actually come up with anything constructive instead of just throwing out “idiot” all the time. Probably because you have no arguments, just insults.
War on Drugs… absolutely. Things are worse now than before the war on drugs. Billions of dollars wasted. Hundreds of thousands in jail… millions of lives destroyed.
Terrorism? Absolutely as well. The root cause of it is our foreign policy. If we’d leave people alone, most would leave us alone as well.
Well said Zod, and you didn’t even point out that barry hussien is a kenyan socialist. The libtards get mad when those things are mentioned.
Hey, think of all the other “businesses” the government runs: Medicare (slated to go broke in a decade)…Social Security (ditto)…the DMV…the Post Office…
It doesn’t help that each of those agencies has no control over their own budget, and that they can’t predict what their income will be from one year to the next. The money ‘paid’ into Social Security and Medicare is NOT sent there, but diverted into other pools.
Medicare… unnecessary. Social Security… ditto.
DMV… have you been to the DMV lately?
Post Office… I HATE IT! They can never manage to do things right… from delivering mail to the wrong address, not delivering my mail at all, and not forwarding my mail when I am away for months because of work.
As a Canadian grad student visiting US, I can’t make a judgment about Medicare. I got my SSN fairly easily and getting an American Driver License was an hour job. Renewing my license plate has also been a breeze. I especially like USPS for their service. It’s a little busier (depends on location) but I have never had a problem with them losing my mail or delivering to the wrong address and they usually beat the price of FedEx and UPS.
I said nothing of getting your SSN easily. They want to give that stuff out like candy. It’s an unnecessary system.
License plate tags and license renewals are handled by private tag agencies. But getting approved for a new license and your tests are done at the DMV itself.
Haven’t had a problem with USPS? Consider yourself lucky. I haven’t found a place where it works very well.
I think a health care reform isn’t needed. Health care is a privilege. If you can’t afford it, too bad. My great grandpa was an orphan with a low-paying job at 10. That’s how old a 5th grader is. He made his own money. He got married. He worked his way up, like Andrew Carnegie [who was slightly corrupt in a way, but still] People now expect benefits. They need to shut up and work. But that’s just me- a Republican.
The government screwed up enough. Don’t let them screw up our health, too.
Ah, the voice of privilege. Gotta love when someone has to hearken back to their GRANDPARENT for a tale of woe.
This is a joke, right?
This just sounds so insane to me, coming from Europe.
Why shouldn’t health care be available to all? And also, just because life sucked for your grandpa, does that mean it should suck for the rest of us as well?
I’ve got news for you. Life is going to suck whether you have “free” health care or not. Just because government dumps large amounts of money into something like health care and makes it “cost less” (=cost more in the long run) does not mean that life is going to get “easier” for people.
And please stop commenting on American politics if you’re European. We don’t care what you think, and it’s just annoying. Most of us don’t want to be involved in your political crises, and we don’t want you involved in ours. The European way is flawed, so forgive us for wanting a better way.
Hello isolationist, where’s your time machine?
Seriously, Europe is the largest buyer of American exports, so they do sort of matter. Plus the whole Alliance thing, which kind of makes it hard to stay out of their politics when you’re strapped to them at the hip.
They do sort of matter … except in domestic policy. We shouldn’t be taking pressure from countries who repeatedly screw themselves and struggle to stay solvent themselves. We’ve been doing that for far too long and it has gotten us nowhere. Seriously, why should it matter to some Eurotrash if we have universal health care paid for and provided by our government? Can you demonstrate how that affects our exports to Europe? Or our NATO alliances? We get nothing from NATO but trouble, and maybe a few troops for our seemingly meaningless wars (and I mean a few, compared to what we tend to provide).
Seriously, do you care which European nations have universal health care? Why does it even matter to us? So why does it matter to them what we do in our own government? This has less to do with alliances and foreign policy and much more to do with European elitism and smug superiority. We get it all of the time, and I’m sick of hearing about what Europeans think. They’ve got plenty of their own problems to deal with, so they should probably do that before sticking their noses where they don’t belong.
“do you care which European nations have universal health care?”
Answer: ALL OF THEM. We are *the* only industrialized nation on Earth who does not have some form of public health care. They all look at us and think, WTF is wrong with them?
You lie! Albania, Montenegro, Macedonia, Monaco, and Andorra do not have universal health coverage. And I was not posing a question as to who has that kind of health care. I was asking IF anyone cared what kind of health care system they have. My point is, why should Americans care whether or not Europeans think there is a problem with our health care system? We should stick to our convictions based on the information we have, and if a European citizen provides good information about it, great. Take it into consideration. If Europeans say, “WTF is wrong with them,” we should shrug it off and realize that Europe isn’t exactly peachy either by our standards.
Personally I think “not dying or being forced into homelessness because I got sick” is somehow better than what we have now.
“Most of us don’t want to be involved in your political crises”
BS. Our country loves to tell other countries that they need to do things differently, often with force. And we’ve been doing it ever since we decided to “fix” things down in Latin America.
Okay … so one of you decides to call me an isolationist because other countries’ problems aren’t our business (just as ours are not theirs), then the next goes on to tell me how we’re screwing things up by getting involved in other countries’ problems. Aren’t you kind of making my point? Most sensible Americans don’t care what other countries do to screw themselves, nor should we.
To the Europeans on this site: please don’t judge us by this arse.
Don’t worry, between Bush and the idiots on tv, the worlds view on most americans is pretty much shot. Sorry.
Hey whateverzz,
I like you!
Since you cite Carnegie as a great example of the “American Way”, let me point out one little detail to you. He loved America so much that he retired, moved back to Scotland, and gave away his fortune on improving Scottish society!
“He loved America so much that he retired, moved back to Scotland, and gave away his fortune on improving Scottish society!” Really? Is that why he passed away in Lenox, Massachusetts (not Scotland) and was burind in North Tarrytown, New York (again, not in Scotland). Carnegie spent his money on philithropic causes in the US, Canada, the United Kingdom and its territories (Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, ect). To say he “moved back to Scotland, and gave away his fortune on improving Scottish society” is far from the truth.
He was pretty much equally divided between Scotland and New York. Quit being a jerk.
Reminds me of the descent into entitlement that the free people of Rome had during the Republic. But the government could not keep up with all the entitlements promised to the people. Eventually, they sold their freedom and their republic for a dictatorship. Hail Caesar!
Oh, but history doesn’t repeat itself. *insert long argument about how wonderful it all is and how it’s fine to have your government force-feed you taxes*
/sarcasm/
Waaaaa I haz to pay taxes like everyone else waaaaaaaa!!! But my mama said I was speshul!!!
No, not all of those people who sit around on their asses all day, having babies and collecting welfare. They’re not paying.
Actually, 50% of households don’t even pay taxes at all, once tax credits and deductions are figured in. So it’s not paying taxes like everyone else. It’s paying taxes like the 50% of citizens who are forced to shoulder their own load and that of the 50% who may or may not be making any effort to be responsible.
Meaningless half-truth.
You make a good point, Matrix. Part of me tends to just think, “Oh well. It’s going to happen anyway, might as well just let the system destroy itself.” Not that I don’t care, it just seems that so many are hell-bent on burying us in deficits that WILL bring economic ruin that my voice seems insignificant (not what we’ve been experiencing – real economic ruin). But someday I’ll be able to look at what this country has become and say, “See. I told you so. But you didn’t listen.” Not very satisfying, but it’s better than being wrong.
“But someday I’ll be able to look at what this country has become and say, ‘See. I told you so. But you didn’t listen.’ Not very satisfying, but it’s better than being wrong.”
…yeah. :/
Doesn’t seem to have done any harm to ***every other industrialized nation on Earth.***
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTT STRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPS!!!
PunditKitchen is two tabs over, dude.
The greatest expansion of American government and the social welfare state since the Great Society passed the House recently. Opponents recognize that this bill violates the most important principles of American government, and as such, is immoral.
In a free society, does one individual’s needs constitute another individual’s obligation to provide? The answer is no; rather, it is the duty of free individuals to decide what and whose needs appear most important to them. In a free society, the individual is of supreme importance and should not to be used as a means to society’s ends. The individual has the right to order his actions and possessions in the manner most consistent with pursuing his own happiness and values. This view is consistent with America’s founding principles. The Declaration of Independence states:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.-That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
The above rights are known as “Natural Rights,” and they protect the individual’s right to freedom, autonomy, and self-government — in other words, to take all the actions required to support the furtherance, fulfillment, and enjoyment of one’s own life. They provide no material assurances or particular opportunities to the individual, but rather set conditions that allow the individual to decide what use he shall make of the circumstances in which he finds himself — to act in his own best interest so long as his actions don’t infringe on the equally protected rights of others.
Based on this logic, government programs that involuntarily transfer or redistribute wealth are immoral because they violate the individual’s natural right to order his own actions and possessions. Theft is immoral. Likewise, theft via the government is immoral.
Karl Marx and Thomas Jefferson highlight the differences between collectivism and individualism. The philosophy of collectivism regards the individual as a means to society’s ends and is thus immoral, whereas individualism respects the freedom and autonomy of each member of society.
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” – Karl Marx, 1875
“A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.” – Thomas Jefferson, 1801
Another important question is: What constitutes a need, and who should decide? Should it be the patient in concert with his or her physician? This seems like the obvious choice. However, if society is paying the cost of whatever service is required to satisfy “the need,” then the provision of that service must be regulated to prevent over-utilization and runaway costs. In other words, it must be rationed. In a free market, prices perform this rationing function. In the absence of a free market, some third party must ration based on a formula other than price.
Rationing by price is moral because this unbiased mechanism allows individuals to maintain complete freedom and autonomy. A patient who cannot afford a service that he deems a “need” is still free if he can pursue any course of action in order to meet that “need.” Likewise, a provider who feels that his patient “needs” a service is free if he can pursue any course of action in order to provide that service.
Some members of society today confuse the concept of true freedom or liberty with the concept of how many options are available to an individual, and this encourages them to advocate for collectivist schemes to help those who may be less fortunate.
“[Liberty] describes the absence of a particular obstacle — coercion by other men … the range of physical possibilities from which a person can choose at a given moment has no direct relevance to freedom. The rock climber on a difficult pitch who sees only one way out to save his life is unquestionably free … if [he] were to fall into a crevasse and were unable to get out of it, he could only figuratively be called ‘unfree,’ and that to speak of him as being “deprived of liberty” or of being ‘held captive’ is to use these terms in a sense different from that in which they apply to social relations.” – F.A. Hayek
Unfortunately, the only alternative to rationing through price is rationing through the government, and this is immoral because the decision of what constitutes a “need” is made by a third party with no personal connection to the individual or his circumstances. Ultimately, these decisions are made by those with the most political influence — a situation that inevitably breeds corruption. These governing bodies do not respect the primacy of the individual, but rather view the individual as a means to society’s ends. Bureaucrats don’t make decisions about health care according to an individual’s “need” or preference, but rather, they ration resources based on a social-driven calculus. As evidence of this, the health care bill under consideration has a Medicare board of unelected officials to determine the program’s treatment protocols as a method of limiting costs.
tl;dr
generally differ more from each other than do the individuals of any one species or variety in a state of nature. And if we reflect on the vast diversity of the plants and animals which have been cultivated, and which have varied during all ages under the most different climates and treatment, we are driven to conclude that this great variability is due to our domestic productions having been raised under conditions of life not so uniform as, and somewhat different from, those to which the parent species had been exposed under nature. There is, also, some probability in the view propounded by Andrew Knight, that this variability may be partly connected with excess of food. It seems clear that organic beings must be exposed during several generations to new conditions to cause any great amount of variation; and that, when the organisation has once begun to vary, it generally continues varying for many generations. No case is on record of a variable organism ceasing to vary under cultivation. Our oldest cultivated plants, such as wheat, still yield new varieties: our oldest domesticated animals are still capable of rapid improvement or modification.
As far as I am able to judge, after long attending to the subject, the conditions of life appear to act in two ways–directly on the whole organisation or on certain parts alone and in directly by affecting the reproductive system. With respect to the direct action, we must bear in mind that in every case, as Professor Weismann has lately insisted, and as I have incidently shown in my work on “Variation under Domestication,” there are two factors: namely, the nature of the organism and the nature of the conditions. The former seems to be much the more important; for nearly similar variations sometimes arise under, as far as we can judge, dissimilar conditions; and, on the other hand, dissimilar variations arise under conditions which appear to be nearly uniform. The effects on the offspring are either definite or in definite. They may be considered as definite when all or nearly all the offspring of individuals exposed to certain conditions during several generations are modified in the same manner. It is extremely difficult to come to any conclusion in regard to the extent of the changes which have been thus definitely induced. There can, however, be little doubt about many slight changes, such as size from the amount of food, colour from the nature of the food, thickness of the skin and hair from climate, etc. Each of the endless variations which we see in the plumage of our fowls must have had some efficient cause; and if the same cause were to act uniformly during a long series of generations on many individuals, all probably would be modified in the same manner. Such facts as the complex and extraordinary out growths which variably follow from the insertion of a minute drop of poison by a gall-producing insect, shows us what singular modifications might result in the case of plants from a chemical change in the nature of the sap.
In definite variability is a much more common result of changed conditions than definite variability, and has probably played a more important part in the formation of our domestic races. We see in definite variability in the endless slight peculiarities which distinguish the individuals of the same species, and which cannot be accounted for by inheritance from either parent or from some more remote ancestor. Even strongly-marked differences occasionally appear in the young of the same litter, and in seedlings from the same seed-capsule. At long intervals of time, out of millions of individuals reared in the same country and fed on nearly the same food, deviations of structure so strongly pronounced as to deserve to be called monstrosities arise; but monstrosities cannot be separated by any distinct line from slighter variations. All such changes of structure, whether extremely slight or strongly marked, which appear among many individuals living together, may be considered as the in definite effects of the conditions of life on each individual organism, in nearly the same manner as the chill effects different men in an in definite manner, according to their state of body or constitution, causing coughs or colds, rheumatism, or inflammation of various organs.
With respect to what I have called the in direct action of changed conditions, namely, through the reproductive system of being affected, we may infer that variability is thus induced, partly from the fact of this system being extremely sensitive to any change in the conditions, and partly from the similarity, as Kolreuter and others have remarked, between the variability which follows from the crossing of distinct species, and that which may be observed with plants and animals when reared under new or unnatural conditions. Many facts clearly show how eminently susceptible the reproductive system is to very slight changes in the surrounding conditions. Nothing is more easy than to tame an animal, and few things more difficult than to get it to breed freely under confinement, even when the male and female unite. How many animals there are which will not breed, though kept in an almost free state in their native country! This is generally, but erroneously attributed to vitiated instincts. Many cultivated plants display the utmost vigour, and yet rarely or never seed! In some few cases it has been discovered that a very trifling change, such as a little more or less water at some particular period of growth, will determine whether or not a plant will produce seeds. I cannot here give the details which I have collected and elsewhere published on this curious subject; but to show how singular the laws are which determine the reproduction of animals under confinement, I may mention that carnivorous animals, even from the tropics, breed in this country pretty freely under confinement, with the exception of the plantigrades or bear family, which seldom produce young; whereas, carnivorous birds, with the rarest exception, hardly ever lay fertile eggs. Many exotic plants have pollen utterly worthless, in the same condition as in the most sterile hybrids. When, on the one hand, we see domesticated animals and plants, though often weak and sickly, breeding freely under confinement; and when, on the other hand, we see individuals, though taken young from a state of nature perfectly tamed, long-lived, and healthy (of which I could give numerous instances), yet having their reproductive system so seriously affected by unperceived causes as to fail to act, we need not be surprised at this system, when it does act under confinement, acting irregularly, and producing offspring somewhat unlike their parents. I may add that as some organisms breed freely under the most unnatural conditions–for instance, rabbits and ferrets kept in hutches–showing that their reproductive organs are not easily affected; so will some animals and plants withstand domestication or cultivation, and vary very slightly–perhaps hardly more than in a state of nature.
Some naturalists have maintained that all variations are connected with the act of sexual reproduction; but this is certainly an error; for I have given in another work a long list of “sporting plants;” as they are called by gardeners; that is, of plants which have suddenly produced a single bud with a new and sometimes widely different character from that of the other buds on the same plant. These bud variations, as they may be named, can be propagated by grafts, offsets, etc., and sometimes by seed. They occur rarely under nature, but are far from rare under culture. As a single bud out of many thousands produced year after year on the same tree under uniform conditions, has been known suddenly to assume a new character; and as buds on distinct trees, growing under different conditions, have sometimes yielded nearly the same variety–for instance, buds on peach- trees producing nectarines, and buds on common roses producing moss-roses– we clearly see that the nature of the conditions is of subordinate importance in comparison with the nature of the organism in determining each particular form of variation; perhaps of not more importance than the nature of the spark, by which a mass of combustible matter is ignited, has in determining the nature of the flames.
For one, “immorality” can’t be used as a fact since it is an opinion. What is immoral to one person can be moral to another. As much as I would LOVE to read your whole rant, I stopped after you introduced Karl Marx since i didn’t want to know how badly you would take quotes out of context after that. So that it isn’t unclear, I believe in socialism as the Swedish have it, where doctors make only a little more than teachers and healthcare is free for all. I shouldn’t have to shell out 8 grand every six weeks for my Remicade treatment as I would if I didn’t have the healthcare that I do. Just because I have it, though, doesn’t make me a prick who can’t see those that would need it and wouldn’t be able to have it. If someone else with Crohn’s didn’t have healthcare, then they wouldn’t be able to get Remicade which is one of the few things that can help the flares from happening. So how about you pull your head out of your ass and start empathizing with those who aren’t in the same position as you are.
Because, there are other, better ways of handling it besides giving the U.S. another excuse to over-expand it’s federal powers. [Can anyone say pull the insurance middle man out of his ass?] Pull YOUR head out of YOUR ass and see that this “Health Care” package has about as much to do with “taking care of us” as Medicare or Social Security ever did. [By the way, Medicare and Social Security hardly do much at all what they promised it would -- the proof? NEEDING TO COME UP WITH YET ANOTHER social-based program for the needy called the national health care plan]
You will soon see. It is only one more excuse for federal power — few will ever truly benefit from it. Good luck with your ailments – whatever they are.
FEDERAL POWERS FEDERAL POWERS AIIEEEEE ::fwoosh:: hair on fire
Oh, you know why we had to come up with “yet another plan,” right?
Well see, FDR wanted public health care BUT THE FRICKING REPUBLICANS STOPPED HIM AND HE HAD TO SETTLE FOR SOCIAL SECURITY INSTEAD.
So shut up about “yet another plan because the other ones failed.” Idiot.
Thank you, voice of reason. It’s nice to know you’re still around, albeit ignored by the general population.
Wow… I *could* have read that whole thing full of big shiny words and stuff, but I already live in a country with good healthcare.
I am sorry, I couldn’t read this rambling post over the sound of my free healthcare.
In what way is it free? It will be paid by TAXES.
No, not TAXES!!!!
Dumbass, we pay taxes anyway. If you don’t like it, move to a country that doesn’t collect taxes. Good luck finding it tho.
Yes, because name-calling makes your argument more valid.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704117304575137370275522704.html
Yes, TAXES. Of course we pay taxes anyway; but where do you think the money is going to come from for your “free” healthcare?
Oh, but we don’t have to worry about it because either the world will end in 2012 or Jesus will come back and solve all of our problems for us!! -sarcasm- (Not insulting Christianity, insulting ignorance)
TAXES! Oh noez!!! How dare the US collect taxes and spend it to benefit it’s citizens instead of throwing it away on needless wars and giving it to corporations!! The horror!
The point was, this new healthcare plan is not FREE. Also, there is such a thing as OVER-TAXATION.
Nothing is free, dumbass. The roads you drive on, the education you (possibly) received, the disease-free food you eat – STFU and get used to it.
Again, I love how the classic fourth-grade level point of naming calling is resorted to. Yeah, nothing is free. Your argument is that we should accept any price whatsoever because nothing is free? So you’d be fine if oil companies decided to charge 150$ a barrel because nothing is free? You’d be fine if milk were 10$ a gallon because nothing is free? Because of the mandates this bill puts on businesses, there will be major inflation.
Let me know if you can come up with a more intelligent argument than “STFU”.
You talk as if we’re happy with the prices of those things.
Say, are you happy with paying $35 for two aspirin when you’re in the hospital being treated for something? ‘Cuz that’s the way it’s always going to be without public health care, because you and me and everybody are going to be paying for all the people that have to go to the emergency room when they get a bad fever and can’t pay for treatment. Hope you’re enjoying that!!
I talk as though I believe the current system is flawed; and this bill is not the answer.
That is what makes a society a society, rather than a group of individuals who happen to live in the same geographical area; the ability and preparedness to to work together for a common goal that benefits them all.
So how do you compare and contrast a so called democracy (take your pick from any country that is considered democratic) with your ideal system that provides “Liberty” (as you defined it) to all individuals? In another word, how do you suggest a government in your ideal system function? Can you make a case on such a system being even possible?
I’m not sure why the comment was posted here but it was a response to “I don’t know on April 8, 2010 at 5:57 pm.
And it is, correctly; it’s called date-time nesting, where new N+1th level comments are posted in date-time order below the Nth level comment they reply to, and also below any N+2th (et seq) comments that reply to earlier N+1th level comments.
So how do you compare and contrast a so called democracy (take your pick from any country that is considered democratic) with your ideal system that provides “Liberty” (as you defined it) to all individuals? In another word, how do you suggest a government in your ideal system function? Can you make a case on such a system being even possible?
Meh, don’t worry about this!
That healthcare reform thing doesn’t kick in for 4 years, but we get taxed now! WIN!
Obviously if you can still afford a computer AND an internet connection, you’re not nearly taxed enough yet.
Yeah, I know. We should be taxed 100% and the omniscient government can give us everything we need… nothing more, nothing less. Just subsistence living! That’s what it should be all about, right? Except for the elite few who are soooooo hard worked that they deserve to have more than the rest of us. Without them, of course, we’d be fending for ourselves. So, instead of some of us being middle class, poor, and rich. Let’s get rid of all of the middle class, some of the rich, and make us all at the same level, except those in control, of course.
Thank you, ignorance, now take your seat. It’s not too hard to tell the fact that he was being sarcastic since you have to be dense to complain about taxes. You WILL be taxed REGARDLESS of how much you might “want” to be. Any addition to taxes that you might have to pay will be slim if not non-existent. Quite frankly, nobody should make over 5 million a year without the government stepping in and taking half of it to help sustain the country. I don’t care how hard you may have worked in the past, there is no reason to become THAT rich. Bill Gates does a lot of good with his money, which is why he is one of the few rich people that shouldn’t be taxed so heavily. Unlike Bush (the more recent one), he is giving the US a good reputation so that if we do have a huge meltdown like what happened with Haiti, there might be a few countries willing to step in and help us out. Just because we think we’re the best doesn’t mean that we are invulnerable to natures worst.
I knew the post was sarcastic, dolt. And you’re talking to me about “ignorance”? Look in the mirror. Free markets, not government interventions lead to innovation, better quality of products/services, and cheaper prices. Who are you to tell people how much money they should make, and what they should do with their own money? Individual liberty means having economic freedom just as much as political and social freedom. You’re nothing but hater of liberty. BTW, how do YOU know what Bush does with his money? Rich people give far more money and do much more to help the poor than the average person. Plus, they employ people and purchase products that are manufactured by employed people.
AAAGGGGHHHH TAXES TAXES TAXES ::hair on fire::
I sure hope this is true! I don’t want health care! I’m perfectly healthy!
Also, rando, I do have to say that “Do nothing” or “Do less” is a plan. It’s not always a GOOD plan, but it’s still a plan. Plans just have to dictate how resources and what actions will be taken to reach a goal.
Do you want your government witholding treatment, or an insurance company witholding treatment?
Take your pick, you’re going to die anyway.
Can you substantiate a case in Europe where someone has been refused treatment for, say, a heart condition because they forgot to say that they’d had childhood acne on a form?
actually, the caption is all wrong, whether we like it or not, we’ll be forced to buy healthcare, whether we want it or not. so, it’s actually healthcare for everyone, which means it will suck, which means all the great doctors will quit (have many who are my friends and don’t like the idea of working for the gov’t). so yeah, hope and change…. whatever!
You’re an idiot and a liar. So are your parents.
Don’t forget to call him a racist too !
Walter beat you to that way up above.
Originality fail.
Nice research fail- healthcare isn’t mandatory at all, the bill didn’t make it mandatory- you can elect not to have healthcare if you so choose.
What the bill did is that, now, the insurance agencies can’t turn you down for a preexisting condition or drop you for getting a nasty condition whilst on their plan.
Also, at this time, there is no public option, meaning the the government does not have an insurance institution of its own; also meaning that beyond state-run hospitals, which have been around for decades, there are not government-run medical institutions, and therefore, no new medical federal employees.
Does no one care that the people who passed the bill are immune to it, as they have their own separate health insurance? Also, I love that not one person here knows that the bill will lower the pay of American soldiers 9%, and completely do-away with special veteran healthcare.
But hey, we’re already sacrificing our soldiers on needless wars, who cares if they don’t get paid for it?
Oh, and to all the Europeans who think they deserve a weigh-in on this, go fix your damn Euro. Then come back and tell us how to work our economy.
Oh yes, because the dollar is just doing AWESOME right now. Oh, and source on the 9% claim or it isn’t real.
Yes, just like everyone in the auto industry quit when the big, bad government made auto insurance mandatory.
That almost sounds sarcastic, which sure makes me feel foolish for riding around in a horse-drawn carriage this whole time.
Any doctor that quits was a doctor for the wrong reason. Doctors should be doctors because they want to help people, not because they want an obscene amount of money to roll in before going to sleep. Quite frankly, if I was to go through all of the college to get a doctorate, I would want just enough to pay off my loans and then I would give any extra money away, only keeping what I need for food, rent (or mortgage), and a little leisure-money. Unfortunately there are too many greedy doctors who will tell you that you have the worst condition possible so that they can give you a whole ton of drugs and get a nice vacation per person that they do that to. Good job!
Do that, then! Why should what YOU want be forced on everyone else? That’s just about as bad as religious extremists wanting to force their sensibilities on the rest of us. You’re no better than them because you hate freedom just as they do. Go to school and be a doctor and do just as you said. Do that now with your own money. No one is stopping you.
What pray tell do you imagine all these great doctors will do if they quit providing health care for their patients? Are you seriously that effing stupid?
I need to majorly poop, but it ain’t coming out. Will health care help me with this?
Under the new health care plan from Obama— here’s a coathanger and a corkscrew. Work it out !
… you’re kind of stupid huh. It’s the republicans that are against a womens right to choose, not the democrats. Idiot.
Can I call ‘em or can I call ‘em?
I live in canada therefore everyone who opposes nationalized health care is retarded.
Hear Hear!
well, yes.
its funny because he IS a nazi
I wish that were an option but I hear the reform will make having healthcare a requirement.
I hear there is a reply button so people know wtf you’re talking about.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/a/m/americandad/2010/03/an-open-letter-to-conservative.php
Ah yes, an article full of conjecture, half-truths, out right lies, and completely unsubstantial while completely ignoring the hypocrisies and insanity of the “left”
Massive snerk on you trying to criticize Talking Points Memo as just another stupid Lefty site. Try again douche.
no soup for you!