Vienna's twitter on health care and humor in politics.

Chat and sip. Beret optional.

Moderator: Ginny

Fred
Tengster
Posts: 767
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 1:55 am
Location: NY metro area

Postby Fred » Tue Sep 08, 2009 2:03 am

rahau wrote:
Fred wrote:Not worried about you. Worried about a couple of soreheads on FB. Hope they stay out there. That's all. :)


Don't worry, Fellow Beatnik. I'm sure the soreheads will stay on FB. Even if we have a discussion on this board, I'm sure it will be more civil than those found elsewhere. Surely you realize by now that anyone who appreciates Vienna is much more intelligent, thoughtful, insightful, and civilized than the average person? :)

There seems to be only one genuine sorehead over at FB, and it appears he's not really a fan. No true Warm Stranger would abandon Vienna over a political or philosophical difference. If they do, they're not worth the title.


The guy you referred to really flipped out since the last time I signed on here. You are right; it is hard to reconcile his degree of wackiness with the good taste and discernment needed to appreciate Vienna's music. (...he said, breaking his arm patting himself on the back. ;) ) I do tire of these guys (always guys, it seems) and their harangues, however. Not just on FB but on the evening news, in my inbox from other groups, seemingly everywhere I go. It's making me a little crazy. That's the root of my peevishness above, for which I apologize to all, especially Ang Mo. :)

connor35
Cool Stranger
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 2:05 pm

Postby connor35 » Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:53 am

Ang Mo wrote:My ultimate question is why there is even a debate about the "public option"? I thought the conservatives believed in the principle of a free market where a consumer could make a choice. In the current debate the conservatives feel that only a private sector option should be available. My understanding of a free market is where the consumer can decide whether to stay in a private sector offering or they could go with the public option.


The concern would be that the 'public option' has an unfair advantage. First the govt can create the public option -- then the govt can set the rules for the private companies. So that isn't really the "free market".

For example, I live in Florida and the state of Florida just started offering it's own homeowners/ hurricane insurance (hurricane insurance is a big deal here).

The insurance companies by law (and it's a good law) essentially have to keep X% of possible claims in a cash bank account. This is good policy.

But when the state of Florida started issuing insurance, they do not abide by their own law. They basically just collect insurance money from home owners and are praying the big one doesn't hit here (when it does FL will be asking the Fed for much help). It's really the same with Social Security. There is a 'trust fund' but the govt collects more than it needs and rights itself IOUs. This is far more egregious than what Enron did. But who polices the govt itself?

So to recap: private insurers have to (a) pay their overhead, (b) pay small claims when there are no big hurricanes, (c) put a lot of money in govt mandated savings account.

The 'public option' for insurance has to do (a) and (b). But not (c). And C is huge.

Guess which costs less.

The result is that State Farm, previously Florida's largest insurance left the state entirely because they couldn't compete with the public option. Other smaller companies have left, too.

When the big one hits, I'd personally rather have State Farm who would have a big pot of money sitting & waiting to pay claims than have to rely on the State government who has no money sitting in a pool.

So here is an example of a public option competing with the private market. In theory it's a good idea. But when the govt can also create rules to hamstring the private companies, and it will, it's not really a free market.

I don't think these debates belong here. There are plenty of political boards for such conversations. I come hear to read about Vienna and about music.

But you asked, so I'm giving one reason why it's not 100% clear that the public option is cut & dried the best thing to do. Basically because in the not-too-distant future the public 'option' would be the only option. Then it isn't really an option.

Ang Mo
Tengster
Posts: 1661
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 11:17 pm

Postby Ang Mo » Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:27 am

I don't think these debates belong here. There are plenty of political boards for such conversations. I come hear to read about Vienna and about music


Well as I pointed out quite clearly to someone else, if you truly believed that you don't want the conversation on the forum, then why did you post to this thread? Answer The reason being is because I propose that you wish to steer the conversation towards the healthcare debate. You have shown your true colors. This thread was not even at the top of the list, but you just had to weigh in on it and you didn't seem to weigh in on the ones about Vienna and her music. I am pretty confident I can call you a liar.

You sound sincere, but your actions contradict the sincerity. I do not agree with your opinion on the insurance. Why is Fed Ex still in business if the U.S. Postal service was so good at delivering a package on time? Why is that? Why are they profitable?

I disbelieve your theory that the public option gets rid of the competition. I just find it odd that people have no problems with Government armies, government fire department or police department, but absolutely freak out at the idea of Government health care. You look at the other modern countries that have government health care and they spend less money on health care and yet they have healthier happier people. If it was so bad I think the people in those European countries and Canada would have a revolution. And there doesn't seem to be any reports of government run death camps on the elderly. Strange days indeed.
--the only adults who are never depressed: chuckleheads, California surfers, and fundamentalist Christians who believe they have had a personal encounter with Jesus and are saved once and for all. Would you trade your depression to become any of these?

Walking Stranger
Getting Stranger
Posts: 363
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:57 pm

Postby Walking Stranger » Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:39 pm

Ang Mo wrote:And there doesn't seem to be any reports of government run death camps on the elderly. Strange days indeed.


What ? I am lost and don't follow you on this sentence. Any reading recommendation or links with examples ? Thanks in advance.

WS
♡ Internet/Drugs/Seeds. Copy=Right. ACTA harms freedom. Stop ACTA!Please copy and share. Say NO to ACTA.

Ang Mo
Tengster
Posts: 1661
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 11:17 pm

Postby Ang Mo » Thu Sep 10, 2009 5:19 am

Hi Walking Stranger,

Certain industrialized nations such as Canada, England, and France for example all have National Health Insurance. The majority of people living in these countries are quite satisfied with their government run health insurance. You do not read stories or see stories on the news where the governments of these countries are killing the elderly when they get to a certain age, they don't send them off to death camps.

Here in the U.S.A. a political party called the Republicans are claiming that if the citizens of the United States decide to follow the example of the three countries mentioned above, then the elderly of this country will be sent off to death camps to be killed.

I will post a video where this is being discussed and talked about. This will be more helpful on the topic than anything I write.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEI_ZXoR2Nk
--the only adults who are never depressed: chuckleheads, California surfers, and fundamentalist Christians who believe they have had a personal encounter with Jesus and are saved once and for all. Would you trade your depression to become any of these?

Walking Stranger
Getting Stranger
Posts: 363
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:57 pm

Postby Walking Stranger » Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:11 pm

Ang Mo wrote:Here in the U.S.A. a political party called the Republicans are claiming that if the citizens of the United States decide to follow the example of the three countries mentioned above, then the elderly of this country will be sent off to death camps to be killed.

I will post a video where this is being discussed and talked about. This will be more helpful on the topic than anything I write.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEI_ZXoR2Nk


Thanks ANGelic ANGry MOnster ;).
A few years back I read somewhere that there are some sci-fi books about this ongoing treatment or probable situations the elders would be in : something like old people deciding to take a free train ticket to a trip but it happens at the end that during all that traveling with beautiful landscapes, the end is death in a so-called luxury death camp or death hotel .

Did I mentioned in some post that White Antelope sung the Death Song ? :
"Nothing lives long but the Earth and the mountains."

In a nutshell (and BTW let me show off my awkward translation skills :oops: ) :

"Bulletin" - "Die schönsten Gedichte von Hermann Hesse" - Diogenes, Zürich, 1996.

"Wie schwer wir uns doch dieses Leben machen,
Und wissen ja, wie kurz es ist und nichtig,
Und nehmen es doch so verzweifelt wichtig !
Es ist zum Weinen, Freund, es ist zum Lachen. [...] "


Oh combien difficile nous rendons cette vie
Et la sachant qu'elle est courte et vouée au néant
Et quelle importance désespérée nous lui accordons !
C'est à en pleurer, l'ami, c'est à en rire.


How difficult we make this life
And how well we know it's short and void
And we give it so desperated importance !
It makes just cry, my friend, it makes just laugh.

EDIT : here is a wink
♡ Internet/Drugs/Seeds. Copy=Right. ACTA harms freedom. Stop ACTA!Please copy and share. Say NO to ACTA.


Return to “The Cafe”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests