BF2S Forums How the modern liberal thinks

fadedsteve wrote:

More populations mean more hospitals, more staff, more equipment, more salaries, more everything!!! The bigger the population the bigger the cost!!

If you have a dinner party at a nice restaurant of 8 people as opposed to 25, do you think it will cost more or less???

Per person it will cost exactly the same.

So you're telling me that if 5 people go to a restaurant it'll cost them a set amount, but if 6 people go the restaurant will charge them more?

Further, you're telling me that you can't give me the numbers, I'll just have to take your word for it?

You honestly think that logic will end this?

Whoa, be careful with this thing. This is profoundly vague political propaganda.

There is no information contained in the video. He just throws around how liberals somehow can’t comprehend “Good, evil, success, failure, wrong, and right.” He doesn’t attempt to argue a conservative position on any point. He even attempts to claim that the only uniting force liberals have, is towards tearing down good in various good-evil dichotomies. (Maybe he is attempting to make up for the fact that most conservative stances violate the founding personal-freedom ideals that are meant to be conservative). But he says in the same breath that liberals are fundamentally incapable of making any discriminations. So how he makes the argument that liberals consistently support “evil” is probably impossible to explain based on his original thesis.

I’m a liberal and I can make discriminations anywhere I need to. For example, the orator in this vid looks like worm tongue from lord of the rings.

Attempting to reduce people to good and evil is extremely ignorant. People (and entire nations for fucks sake) are more complicated than that. The world was not produced by Disney pictures.

Its funny how they set the video up with a little press conference format so it looks like there was an audience. Actually there are like 10 people in the room.

“They try to make good things like America, Israel, and walmart look bad!”

I really laughed at that one. He just preaches like everyone would agree with that. Watch the video if you want, then go get some fresh air, talk to somebody new, learn something you didn’t know about them, maybe watch some crappy leftist propaganda like “super size me.”

Seriously be careful. If you weren’t able to bullshit detect anything in this then you may ruin your life in a cult or something.

I watched the whole thing because I think substanceless, yet persuasive, propaganda is an interesting, if filthy, art.

Last edited by Marinejuana (2007-03-29 02:33:47)

Bubbalo wrote:

So you're telling me that if 5 people go to a restaurant it'll cost them a set amount, but if 6 people go the restaurant will charge them more?

Further, you're telling me that you can't give me the numbers, I'll just have to take your word for it?

Sure, say you have a party of 6, and you seat them on the floor.  On the other hand, you could have 25 people, chances are you are going to have to pay a private dinning room fee for the bigger party.  Chances are if you have more people, that means MORE PEOPLE are going to have to tend (ie more labor) to the larger party.

Trust me, I work as bartender in a 4 star restaurant.  Having more people in a party COSTS MORE MONEY! There are different menus (=different health plans), which could increase/decrease the meal cost (health pricing plan) depending on food preference (health needs). . . .

Different health needs cost different prices. . . So saying everyone will be paying costs reletive to someone getting "just" a check up, will obviously cost different than someone getting an MRI!!  The cost for a "blanket" plan will need to encompase ALL possible health issues (ie surgery, regular checkups, emergency visits etc.)  ALL THAT WILL COST A SHITLOAD IN COVERAGE.  That is of course you are providing ADAQUATE coverage for the average American, cause after all dont you want the best for your citizens. . . .

If the USA has a national vote to increase taxes for the ability to provide health care to "all citizens" then I am all for it . . . . If the majority says YES we want universal health care, and we are willing to pay for it, then its democracy at work!!!
btw this is getting rediculous lol

Last edited by fadedsteve (2007-03-29 02:38:17)

.:XDR:.PureFodder wrote:

fadedsteve wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

So you're telling me that if 5 people go to a restaurant it'll cost them a set amount, but if 6 people go the restaurant will charge them more?

Further, you're telling me that you can't give me the numbers, I'll just have to take your word for it?

Sure, say you have a party of 6, and you seat them on the floor.  On the other hand, you could have 25 people, chances are you are going to have to pay a private dinning room fee for the bigger party.  Chances are if you have more people, that means MORE PEOPLE are going to have to tend (ie more labor) to the larger party.

Trust me, I work as bartender in a 4 star restaurant.  Having more people in a party COSTS MORE MONEY! There are different menus (=different health plans), which could increase/decrease the meal cost (health pricing plan) depending on food preference (health needs). . . .

Different health needs cost different prices. . . So saying everyone will be paying costs reletive to someone getting "just" a check up, will obviously cost different than someone getting an MRI!!  The cost for a "blanket" plan will need to encompase ALL possible health issues (ie surgery, regular checkups, emergency visits etc.)  ALL THAT WILL COST A SHITLOAD IN COVERAGE.  That is of course you are providing ADAQUATE coverage for the average American, cause after all dont you want the best for your citizens. . . .

btw this is getting rediculous lol

Ok, let every state run it's healthcare separately. Now even the largest states have approximately the same number of people as countries like the UK, France, Germany etc. problem/logic solved.

Oh, btw, personally I don't see the US being able to afford a free national health service unless the number of subscription drugs is drastically reduced. I read some time ago that on average each American is on 3 prescription drugs at any one time either in Scientific American or New Scientist.

Like I have been saying, its TOO EXPENSIVE!! We couldnt sustain it!!

No one has even mentioned the fact that the baby boomers are now going to collect social security at a rate we havent seen before which is going to drain the treasury. . . Now some liberal wants to add on national health coverage too!! We will go bankrupt. . .pure and simple!! It (socialized medicine in the USA) AINT gonna happen. . . .

fadedsteve wrote:

Sure, say you have a party of 6, and you seat them on the floor.  On the other hand, you could have 25 people, chances are you are going to have to pay a private dinning room fee for the bigger party.

But that's providing a different service.  The cost, per person, for 6 or 25 people is exactly the same for the same service.

fadedsteve wrote:

Chances are if you have more people, that means MORE PEOPLE are going to have to tend (ie more labor) to the larger party.  Trust me, I work as bartender in a 4 star restaurant.  Having more people in a party COSTS MORE MONEY! There are different menus (=different health plans), which could increase/decrease the meal cost (health pricing plan) depending on food preference (health needs). . . .

Oh, wow, I bow to your superior knowledge.  Clearly a bartender would know public health far better than anyone else .

That statement demonstrates that you have no concept of the maths involved.  For a given item there will be a probability that someone will choose it.  Certainly, if there's are three groups of people the cost per head might vary slightly depending on which items are chosen, but overall, in the long term, the cost per head will approach a given number that represents the average cost per head.  Obviously your restaurant dinner analogy doesn't allow for this because it's a one off, but public health is a long run thing.  Further, the labour will increase but the labour per person will be the same or less.

Finally, you're too mired in the analogy.  Just because you're a bartender and you compare the system to buying food doesn't mean the analogy works far enough that your bartending expertise trumps all.

fadedsteve wrote:

Different health needs cost different prices. . . So saying everyone will be paying costs reletive to someone getting "just" a check up, will obviously cost different than someone getting an MRI!!  The cost for a "blanket" plan will need to encompase ALL possible health issues (ie surgery, regular checkups, emergency visits etc.)  ALL THAT WILL COST A SHITLOAD IN COVERAGE.  That is of course you are providing ADAQUATE coverage for the average American, cause after all dont you want the best for your citizens. . . .

Yes, sure, but these are all issues that other countries who do provide universal health care have to deal with.

fadedsteve wrote:

btw this is getting rediculous lol

What, your obstinance?

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing wrote:

War is hell, civilians die in it,

You know, you're right, and it really wasn't the Nazi's fault that all those Jews died in WWII .

Declaring that war is hell does not justify throwing grenades into houses on the off chance that there are enemies inside.

fadedsteve wrote:

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

Uh-huh, sure...................that underarm technique they use is just superb..............

nice try but genicide is not thew same thing as urban combat. Wait I take it back it ain't even really a nice try.

Bubbalo wrote:

fadedsteve wrote:

More populations mean more hospitals, more staff, more equipment, more salaries, more everything!!! The bigger the population the bigger the cost!!

If you have a dinner party at a nice restaurant of 8 people as opposed to 25, do you think it will cost more or less???

Per person it will cost exactly the same.

is that why they offer group rates than? Silly if only they could see the light.

If I have a hospital. I and I have to buy an X Ray machine.

and my town has two people in it they split the cost a 10k each.
If my town has 20 people in it they each pay 1k...get it ?

Many small dairy farms have folded because a tractor, a manure tank, a milker, Etc., cost the same if you have 20 cows or 300. The 300 cow farm can absorb the cost of a liquid manure storage tank the government now requires you to use better than the guy who has 20 cows. Now almost all are farms are corporation run....They thought hey would help...but they fucked the little guy in the end.

And now for the ultimate insult to injury US senateors Jeffords ( D.) and Leahy ( D.) who you may know fron the US news lately. Have helped pass much legislation in Vermont USA to prevent these newly busted and broke farmers from selling their land. They want to keep that pretty, quint family farm in the countryside look about the area.

They pretend to be oblivious to the fact that they were the ones who caused it to fail.

Last edited by Hunter/Jumper (2007-03-29 10:08:34)

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

fadedsteve wrote:

More populations mean more hospitals, more staff, more equipment, more salaries, more everything!!! The bigger the population the bigger the cost!!

If you have a dinner party at a nice restaurant of 8 people as opposed to 25, do you think it will cost more or less???

Per person it will cost exactly the same.

is that why they offer group rates than? Silly if only they could see the light.

If I have a hospital. I and I have to buy an X Ray machine.

and my town has two people in it they split the cost a 10k each.
If my town has 20 people in it they each pay 1k...get it ?

If my country had 20 cities and each city has a hospital, the cost of the hospitals PER PERSON is the cost of 20 hospitals divided by number of people in my country. If your country has 40 cities and each city has one hospital, then you have twice as many hospitals to pay for and twice as many people paying for them then you end up with EXACTLY THE SAME COST PER PERSON.

This debate was brought to you by the letter 'H'.

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing wrote:

War is hell, civilians die in it,

You know, you're right, and it really wasn't the Nazi's fault that all those Jews died in WWII .

Declaring that war is hell does not justify throwing grenades into houses on the off chance that there are enemies inside.

fadedsteve wrote:

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

Uh-huh, sure...................that underarm technique they use is just superb..............

nice try but genicide is not thew same thing as urban combat. Wait I take it back it ain't even really a nice try.

Which has to do with what, exactly?

Hey Bubbalo since you are all for universal health care. . . .whats your stance on universal car insurance?

Do you think the government should pick up that tab too???

Last edited by fadedsteve (2007-03-29 16:05:14)