BF2S Forums How the modern liberal thinks

fadedsteve wrote:

On a side note. . . .

I didnt know liberals really think?? I thought they yelled and screamed and just acted out!! You know the mantra "No blood for oil", "Halliburton" "Al Gore is the prophet of Global Warming" blah blah blah

If you dont believe what they believe, your wrong. . . .there is no arguing with them cause they have already made up their mind. . . .

I got into an argument with my girlfriend last night.  She was blabbing on about universal health care blah blah blah blah blah. . . .when I asked her who was going to PAY for everyones health care, she got mad and said I was not compassionate and insensitive.  Universal health care is a nice idea in theory, and has worked for some countries in Europe, but for the USA with 300,000,000 million + people?? Lets get real. . . .

Who in their right mind thinks that, that (socialized medicine) won't bankrupt our country?? Honestly, who the fuck is going to pay for that?? Granted our medical care system is broken, but broken because insurance companies fuck us!! Imagine if the government was in control of health care in the USA?? Oh mama we would be skrewed!!

And to think people think health care is broken now. . . .wait till the Democrats get a hold of it (socialized medicine yowza!!) Hey, its coming down the pike if Billery or Da Bama gets elected in 08'!!!!

Ahh, the silly republican blames insurance companies, opens mouth without thinking (the proverbial mouth, in this sense), needs to start expanding his horizons beyond fox news, and the New Republic...... what party, if you had to guess, receives large (and I mean really large) sums of money from the insurance industry?

If you answered the repubs, you'd be correct. So quit all your pissing and moaning about insurance companies when simpletons like you that subscribe to the most pervasive groupthink this country has seen in...(well, I don't know how long, but it's been a long time) voted people into office that are "friends of the program"

With regard to universal healthcare, one must only have a cursory knowledge of how the current system works; of which you (who must get their news directly from Rush, and only Rush) obviously have no clue. You, sir, have what we like to call insipient diarrhea of the mouth. Anyway...back to the point, ah yes, healthcare.

So, the poor/old people have medicaid/medicare, the middle class (mostly unionized persons) have private health insurance, along with the upper middle class and the rich folks. Somewhere in between there are between 35 and 46 million Americans (depends on who ya ask) without any healthcare coverage. So, what happens when these uninsured americans fall ill, or need medical attention? Morons like you would probably say, "F that lazy bastard that won't get off his lazy derriere and get a job so that they can afford health coverage!" But we'll ignore that for now. To answer the question: they do nothing, they sit around, and let the infection, wound, disease, etc. fester until they have no option but to seek the assistance of an emergency room, which by law is not allowed to refuse service to those in need of urgent care. Who picks up the bill? You and me stupid, and millions of other "hard-working, tax-paying americans!" (please note the repub rhetoric, because I am layin it on pretty thick here).

So, as you can see, my feeble-minded little friend, what we have here (other than a failure to communicate) amounts to defacto socialized medicine in practice, although not in name. You and I are picking up the tab for millions of uninsured Americans, but cringe at the idea of "free health care for all," which has got to be one of the most idiotic reactions anyone could have. One is reminded of chicken-little, when the "conservatives" (who, by the way have expanded the gov't at a record rate over the last half-decade; whatever happened to small gov't anyway? Answer: it's a myth, the proverbial red-herring; used to dupe gun-toting, budweiser-swilling morons like yourself into voting for them) talk about the crush it would place on the economy. You wanna know what would happen if we socialized medicine? People who need healthcare (especially preventative healthcare) would get it. People who want to keep their private health insurance to avoid the red-tape would; and health insurance companies would make less money (which is the real reason why we don't have universal healthcare).

Let's see your rebuttal to that argument, Billy-Bob.

Last edited by R Dub (2007-03-28 22:25:05)

fadedsteve wrote:

The training you recieve in the USA military is the best in the world

And Pat Tillman died how, again?

And last I checked, it's pretty widely recognized that of all the "elite" units in the world, the SAS are fairly universally considered the best. So enough with the chest pounding, "America, Fuck Yeah" attitude.

fadedsteve wrote:

because Iraq would have needed to have been dealt with at some point..

Why? Please reply with something other than, "because I said so"

fadedsteve wrote:

Although the war has been a tactical blunder, its NOT worth not joining the military.  Just because you disagree doesnt mean you shouldnt serve your country.  The training you recieve in the USA military is the best in the world, and the opportunities that come as a result of your service are endless.

Yeah, great oppurtunities to be ignored and neglected by the VA system. Come home to a job that probably won't be there, and have you seen what an E1/2/3 gets paid these days? Makes me look rich, and I ain't.

fadedsteve wrote:

side note: Socialized Medicine would break our economy PERIOD.  The money we are spending in Iraq is extravagant, but the money we would be spending on socialized medicine would be absurd . . . .It flat out would bankrupt our treasury / create a long lasting stagnant economy.

sidenote: you are a moron and don't know what you are talking about.
sidenote: the subprime housing glut (ie the glut of housing on the market due to foreclosures and those selling their homes to avoid foreclosure) is going to stagnate the economy; the mounting national debt is going to stagnate the economy, the continued "operation Iraqi freedom" (what are we freeing them from anyway? their oil?) will stagnate the economy, not universal or as you would call it, "socialized" healthcare.

You have spouted little more than rhetoric; the often-regurgitated slime that is politiking; apply the rules to the facts (economic rules that are in existence, not made up by Rush; I know you have a ditto Rush sticker on your car, don't you) in a logical, well-stated manner, then maybe we can have a dialogue. Yet you speak in absolutes, of which there is no such thing (other than maybe the fact that W is a complete idiot). Speak like you care about discourse, not rhetoric, come up with your own thoughts, or at least a broader view of things then maybe we can all come to some kind of understandings.

Oh, and one more thing: "They" ("they" being W and the Bushies) didn't "misread" or "misinterpret" intelligence. They ignored it. They lied and falsified, and then they beat the war drum until we were all on board. They blamed Iraq; said they had WMDs; (one thing to think about...if Iraq had WMDs that were capable of being launched, do you think we really would have invaded the country? Something to chew on)

fadedsteve wrote:

and dont insult me btw my "feeble minded little friend". . . .

Why the hell is that in quotation marks?

How come generalizations about conservatives are welcome but generalizations about liberals are met with such animosity?

+2 to the reasons why I think these forums are biased and a waste of time as far as serious conversation goes.

ps. i do consider myself liberal.

Spark wrote:

Btw Socialized medicine would bankrupt this country!! Why?? Cause more federal government is BAD government!!! Because all the government is going to do is take control of the health care system, and tax the wholly living fuck out of us!! WHO IS GOING TO PAY THE BILL FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE?? WE ARE, and we'll GET SKREWED UP THE ASS FOR IT!!!

Says the political movement that introduced the Patriot Act, and spent hundreds of billions of dollars on what now seems to be an endless struggle.

And I honestly want to know whether there's any factual basis for this irrational fear/paranoia. Most European countries (Scandanavian countries especially) are going brilliantly with universal healthcare.

Sure the scandanavian countries are doing well, Norway only has 4 + million people!!

I live in the Bay Area, California and we have 3+ million ALONE here not too mention the undocumented fucking illegal immigrants!! So get off the soap box! Los Angeles has 9+ million, and thats only 6 hrs away down south!!! 36 million in the whole state of California, which doubles any population of any scandanavian country!!!!

In regards to the widening of the government. . . yes beauracracy has gotten bigger, Im not denying that.

"endless struggle" if our troops are allowed to do their job maybe this war will fucking end!! The Dems sure want to declare defeat/surrender whatever you want to call it!

Its known that Baghdad needs to be secured in order for real progress to happen. . .SO FUCKING LET THE TROOPS TAKE THE CITY BACK!!! End the bs rhetoric and let them WIN!! Were already there, lets win and leave, whats so wrong with letting our troops take care of business?? Monday morning quarterbacking is pointless at this juncture. . .

I have said the war has turned out to be a mistake, but it doesnt have to be in vain if their is still a possibility of victory.  The commanders on the ground have said there has been marked improvement, and the violence is down, I saw let the troop surge work its way out.  If it turns out to be another failure, then start gettin guys out. . . .

Last edited by fadedsteve (2007-03-28 23:25:18)

Spark wrote:

Btw Socialized medicine would bankrupt this country!! Why?? Cause more federal government is BAD government!!! Because all the government is going to do is take control of the health care system, and tax the wholly living fuck out of us!! WHO IS GOING TO PAY THE BILL FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE?? WE ARE, and we'll GET SKREWED UP THE ASS FOR IT!!!

Says the political movement that introduced the Patriot Act, and spent hundreds of billions of dollars on what now seems to be an endless struggle.

And I honestly want to know whether there's any factual basis for this irrational fear/paranoia. Most European countries (Scandanavian countries especially) are going brilliantly with universal healthcare.

And what populations are you dealing with? Universal "free" healthcare works with small, rich countries. Not with 300 million + citizens without taxing the hell out of them.

I agree that our healthcare system needs reform, but your system does not work for everyone. You're just as bad as Bush if you think your system is best for everyone.

No, I'm not.  What difference does it make?

Bubbalo wrote:

No, I'm not.  What difference does it make?

MORE PEOPLE MEANS MORE MONEY(I.E.HIGHER TAXES)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! that you have to aquire to pay for all of them to have "adaquate" health care. . . .

Think of the elderly, children, the inbetweeners (25-55 yr olds). . . .the government is paying for their health care, you dont think that will have a drastic effect on our countries economy. . . .are you high?

I dont even want to think of how high the taxes would become on the American tax payer. . . .To crunch those numbers would be mind numbing. . .They are already high!!! jesus christ

The main difference is THE DIFFERENCE between the USA and Scandanavia!! Scandanavia has the resources to do socialized health care, they have the GDP, and a population in which to work around.  We (USA) are simply to populated to think we could take care of everybody, not too mention provide adaquate health care to make everyone happy.  Its a nice idea, but would never be successul here. In small European countries it (socialized medicine) has worked, but they are exactly that, SMALL EUROPEAN COUNTRIES.

Last edited by fadedsteve (2007-03-28 23:49:49)

Bubbalo wrote:

devildogfo wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

No, I'm not.  What difference does it make?

Pay for x people's healthcare costs y amount of money. Pay for 200x people's healthcare costs 200y amount of money. And no, more people does NOT equal more national income.

The US has the world's strongest economy and you're arguing that they have less money per capita?  For a given tax rate, the US should have more money per capita.

Meaning that the US would need a lower tax rate than most European countries.

No we pay a shitload of taxes already. . . depending on which state you live in, you might even pay more state tax!!!

We do have a strong economy! However, they have more money per capita! Norway for instance has the best GDP in the world, they consequently also have a population to work with (ie are able to provide more services). We have a strong GDP, but we have too many people to become a socialzed state(ie provide the services that european nations provide their citizens).  Look at the other European nations (France, Germany etc) before they joined the EU their economies really struggled to gain growth (due to all the social services!).  We dont have the luxury of joining a "NAU" (north american union) to supplement things and pay off things immidiately.  We are on our own!

As much as I want everyone to be healthy and be taken care of, the REALITY, is that our economy wouldnt be able to supplement the cost of that undertaking (ie socialized USA medicine).  The economy would be stagnant, its due for a recession soon anyway!

Last edited by fadedsteve (2007-03-28 23:46:11)

Bubbalo wrote:

The US has the eighth best per-capita GDP.

Keep trying.

It does, look who is ahead of us!!!!! All those scandanavian countries and Luxumborg!!!

Their TOTAL populations dont go over 36 million, which is the size of my state!!!! They can do socialized medicine, they have the money cause economically it is feasible!!!! The USA cannot do it effectively economically without killing its citizens bank accounts!!! PERIOD

Do we really need to compare Luxumborg to the USA, or Norway or Sweden for that matter. . . .They are totally different in the way they allocate their funds, not too mention the size and scope of their countries.

Bubbalo wrote:

Sweden, Netherlands, Finland, Austria, all below you.

Even Australia's below you and we have public health services.

Again all those populations are lower than the total number of people in my state California. . . .Arnold Swarszenagger (however yop spell it) wants to provide health care to all California's children!

Do you have any idea how much more state tax I am personally going to have to pay just for childrens health care? thats of course if his idea passes CA legislature. . .  Keep in mind this isnt a plan for all 36+ million Californians. . . .

Do you have any idea how expensive a health package for all 360+million Americans would cost?? Honestly, do you have ANY CLUE how rediculous that number would be. . . .ITS NOT FEASIBLE

Again those nations are able to do universal health care because their populations are low enough for their governments to pick up the tab! What their governments spend their money on is completely different from what OUR government spends its money on. 

Our national population is too high to think that we could pay/provide adaquate health care. . .If we attempted universal health care, we would be put in an economic tailspin that we would never recover from.

Last edited by fadedsteve (2007-03-29 00:35:12)