this should speed up healthcare reform???

[Larkin]

You'll notice that I said I'm a fan of hybrid systems in nearly every single post on the subject.

You said it once I believe, then went into how socialism works with this example. Look back if you want.

Remember I'm telling you how stupid your Ayn Rand quote is by contextualizing how purely capitalist systems operated on an exploitative model and then how I showed how socialism/capitalism hybrids also make money (succeeding in the face of purely capitalist failures--seriously, nearly every other major US airline BUT southwest went bankrupt) and yet distribute the profits in a better, more fair and amenable way? Yeah. Those were good times.

First, why are you avoiding my question to you? It's not hard, it hurts you I will admit, but not that much. Why avoid it?

Second, the studies I have seen, even your own links, don't talk of it has highly as you. Even with using a completely biased group as your links use they don't say out right that its because of profit sharing that productivity improve. Did you actually read those reports you gave me? Maybe you should. I ofcourse didn't read the last one like I mentioned before. They really should change their slogan when its an obvious lie. It takes all my ability to care of what is on the page and throws it right out the window.

Third, you keep harping this one company, but with what? I see nothing here. You are telling me its because of profit sharing. I already told you why they turned around. Give it a rest.

I'm not a socialist. That being said, I do believe in socialized capitalistic structures (and if you argue that makes me a socialist I swear to god I will find you and hurt you). Anyone that preaches the virtue of a "pure" system is an idiot who is deluded by dreams of utopia and probably couldn't outwit a gerbil.

That makes you a socialist........


......far more then a capitalist. *avoided ass kicking...maybe. Really though with how you fight for it I really wonder if it matters that much.

If you read my posts you would see I admitted to Benfica that I believe in some socialism aswell. Just look back on that if you haven't. Its on page nine I believe.

One other thing, everytime I talk of socialism I do so on the extreme of its existence. That is how I think of all systems. I don't know if that is the right way to think of things, but its just how my brain works. Socialism is a system I can agree with just a tiny, very tiny bit, while the rest makes me sick. Capitalism is something I disagree on a very tiny level. Just the edges is what I find disgusting. I believe you are the opposite.

~Jason

Why do you sign your name? Just wondering. Its always on the back of my mind.

I only brought up the book because of the quote. The book itself I really enjoy reading so far....as entertainment. I know why you don't like it and that is fine. I'm not going to look down on you for that. Its you opinion and this is mine. Let the book go.

 

[Larkin]

this website blows goddammit haarg why did you close my thread

I don't accept your challenge anyways. You're inferior to me in life and inferior to me in game. Don't bother me vermin.

 

[Zer0]

http://michaelprescott.net/hickman.htm

 

[SlayerDragon]

Let me get this straight you say I'm wrong with nothing like usual with you guys, then you on the Denmark issue you list Wikipedia as your source. Wow, you showed me.

That was completely worth you time to post and you completely pwned me. Damn you rule bro. And you using your entire lifetime as a source of greatness is ****ing awesome.

How many of those years are irrelevant do you think? Let me give you a hint, a ****load. But yes, lets count our experience in the real world when we're ****ing toddlers. That makes allot of sense. Wait...

Nominating for worst post ever.

 

[Benfica]

no, that's historical fact of every federal social program we've ever had

But public option is not and has never been THE "social" program! It's just a method to reduce policy costs and restore market competition, so that the social program (subsidizing) becomes cheaper.

In fact, I suspect that it almost would pay for itself. From other post: (for the example, assume that private health insurance costs $6000)

So, what would be the advantage of a public insurance company? It would provide coverage at just the required price to sustain itself. Not profit oriented or just getting enough profit to assure that it will keep being viable in the future. Without the parasitical removal of funds out of the system, a coverage could cost $4000 or $4500 with co-payment only enough to fill it's purpose: prevent abuse. To support and give coverage at reduced prices to the ones that can't afford or are being un-ethically rejected by private insurance, the payers would need to spend, say, $500 extra. That would amount to $5000 instead of $6000.

This competition would force private insurance companies to lower their prices to $5500 and improve quality, give extra value over the public coverage. End result: poor people would get covered, and no refusal on pre-conditions. The current payers could opt for the public coverage, saving $1000 and getting rid of co-payment rip-offs; or keep the same, which thanks to competition would need to provide a better product and also provide some savings in due time.

Solidarity would have made it better for both the ones that can and the ones that can't afford insurance. Individualism and radical approach made everything worse for all! The easier access for the poor, unemployed, bankrupted, with pre-conditions,etc... will be globally more expensive than planned, because the plan will subsidize private sector policies only. In a few years everyone will pay higher premiums because subsidizing gives more room to raise prices, plus more taxes to support this.

 

[SlayerDragon]

I don't really know how many times I have to say this but....

I ONLY ENJOY THE BOOK AS ENTERTAINMENT! Drop the ****ing book already. ****ing pricks. If you going to harp on how horrible she is was and in extension therefore I shouldn't like the book. WHATEVER. I do, its fun to read for me. Go **** yourself if you don't like that fact. Jesus freaking christ. Well off to Atlas Shrugged.

Oh and Fullbleed, everyone knows you never heard of the book before I brought it up. Who are you kidding here?

I too post quotes from things I find entertaining in order to back up my arguments.

 

[Larkin]

I too post quotes from things I find entertaining in order to back up my arguments.

I find the quote truthful, the book entertaining, prick. Now, if the moron known as slayerdragon would leave the building...

 

[hal]

Alrighty.. shutting this tired old thread down.

Remember. Play nice, boys n' girls.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

But public option is not and has never been THE "social" program! It's just a method to reduce policy costs and restore market competition, so that the social program (subsidizing) becomes cheaper.

In fact, I suspect that it almost would pay for itself. From other post: (for the example, assume that private health insurance costs $6000)

Even if we looked at other countries who have similar programs we couldn't say that.

The public option would primarily be funded by tax money throughout it's life. It wouldn't improve competition, because, at least the original bill, had no room for competition. If it's either the public option or employer sponsored healthcare, how much choice do you have?

Oops.............