First Prev
of 18
Next Last
Really

Grandville, MI

#389 Mar 9, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
When you don't call names then you have a place to be talking to me about it.
You can call me all the names that make you fell important. I'm sitting over here laughing because all you got is your misguided opinions.
What names have I called you? Link it or shut up about it. They are my opinions to which I am entitled, no differently than you. Your arrogance is sickening.

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

#390 Mar 9, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh ya. At least thanks for bringing up the nurse. A direct in-law started out as a ER nurse locally and for the last 15 or more years has worked for a Fortune 50 corporation that's the biggest medical/pharmaceutical company in the country.
She used to explain away the corporate myth just like you do. Since being in the midst of how they actually operate we are now able to discuss these issues in a much less combative atmosphere. She now sees I haven't been talking out of just some radical conspiracy theory standpoint.
But just keep believing what you need to believe so that everyone else that doesn't see things the way you do can still be the idiot "liberals".
My sister-in-law is an ER nurse and has been a nurse now for a long time in Phoenix. If your direct in-law was an ER nurse here than one experience that was probably very different was the number of illegal aliens they dealt with on a daily basis. Phoenix has a few more of those than GR. Which goes back to two of my points; our in-laws would have a different discussion about this than we would, and given the difference in hospitals in Phoenix and GR, that would also color the discussion.
I don't think you are talking out of some "radical conspiracy theory." I believe you are coming from a philosophy that has been around for a long time, one which sounds good but has been proven throughout the history of mankind to be wishful thinking. The underlying premises of the French Revolution reflected your philosophy while the American Revolution and the Federalist Papers reflect mine.
Do I think liberals are idiots? Well, there is another word for someone who does the same thing over and over again and expects different results so you can decide which fits the liberal mind better.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#391 Mar 9, 2013
FLBeaver wrote:
<quoted text>
My sister-in-law is an ER nurse and has been a nurse now for a long time in Phoenix. If your direct in-law was an ER nurse here than one experience that was probably very different was the number of illegal aliens they dealt with on a daily basis. Phoenix has a few more of those than GR. Which goes back to two of my points; our in-laws would have a different discussion about this than we would, and given the difference in hospitals in Phoenix and GR, that would also color the discussion.
I don't think you are talking out of some "radical conspiracy theory." I believe you are coming from a philosophy that has been around for a long time, one which sounds good but has been proven throughout the history of mankind to be wishful thinking. The underlying premises of the French Revolution reflected your philosophy while the American Revolution and the Federalist Papers reflect mine.
Do I think liberals are idiots? Well, there is another word for someone who does the same thing over and over again and expects different results so you can decide which fits the liberal mind better.
No, your philosophy is best reflected in the Anti-Federalist Papers.

I find it interesting that I am clueless about how business works and now all of a sudden it breaks down to how business works by region.

The relating of my in-law had nothing to do with nursing, per-say. It was about starting out in nursing then moving up into a Fortune 50 (medical) company and finding out how the real corporate world works at those levels. And how the real corporate medical world works. That all of a sudden my not having any idea of how the corporate structure works became a lot less invalid.
Sassy

Grand Rapids, MI

#392 Mar 9, 2013
SIB, don't even bother to reply to Sandy, all she does is attack. Has nothing worthwhile to say.
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
When you don't call names then you have a place to be talking to me about it.
You can call me all the names that make you fell important. I'm sitting over here laughing because all you got is your misguided opinions.
Really

Grandville, MI

#394 Mar 10, 2013
Sassy wrote:
SIB, don't even bother to reply to Sandy, all she does is attack. Has nothing worthwhile to say.
<quoted text>
Stuff it Sassy. All you are is an arrogant, bigoted liar. You have nothing to offer in any discussion besides demeaning, lying arrogance.
Batch 37 Pain Is Good

Jackson, MI

#395 Mar 10, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
When you don't call names then you have a place to be talking to me about it.
You can call me all the names that make you fell important. I'm sitting over here laughing because all you got is your misguided opinions.
You're not SIB! First, your answer is too short.... Second, you misspelled and that never happens to SIB..... BTW, what happened to Ginger's critique of the misspelling...... She keeps a dictionary next to the computer....

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

#396 Mar 10, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
No, your philosophy is best reflected in the Anti-Federalist Papers.
I find it interesting that I am clueless about how business works and now all of a sudden it breaks down to how business works by region.
The relating of my in-law had nothing to do with nursing, per-say. It was about starting out in nursing then moving up into a Fortune 50 (medical) company and finding out how the real corporate world works at those levels. And how the real corporate medical world works. That all of a sudden my not having any idea of how the corporate structure works became a lot less invalid.
Much of the AFP had to do with individual rights, which ended up being included in the Bill of Rights. What I was talking about is the basic philosophy of the two sides. As I pointed out earlier, the liberal starts with the outcome (everyone has equal medical care at little or no cost) and then puts a plan in place to make it happen. What is left out are things like cost, real people, real institutions. For the liberal, given the goal is worthy (good, free healthcare), everyone and everything SHOULD adjust their behavior to make it happen and if they don't it's because they aren't smart enough to understand the benefits. As Jefferson said, if 1/2 the people on the earth had to die to achieve the goals of the French Revolution it would have been worth it. A more modern phrase is "you can't make an omlette without breaking eggs."

The conservative looks at trade-offs and takes into account human nature. They look at the cost and look at the trade offs, like having fewer doctors or the real consequences being lower quality of care for everyone. If you had read or watched anything on this you would have seen the two sides talking past each other. Neither side addressed the same issues.

And if you are clueless as to how business works, then you would be clueless as to how it works on the local, regional, national and world level. If you don't understand the basic lemonade stand, you can't understand global corporations. It's like moving from addition to multiplication to calculus, to stats and higher mathmatics. If you can't add, then the rest is just pretending.

And I get your point about your family member moving into corporate medicine. But once again it isn't your experience. I don't disagree that there are greedy, rotten business people. My point, and history has shown it, is that as bad as business is, government is worse. A government hospital is much worse than a private one. A government service is much worse than a private one. It doesn't matter what the area, the more govenment gets involved the worse it becomes. One simple reason is that business has competition to keep it in line. Government has nothing to stop it.

One last point, how the corporate world works in medicine is very different than how it works in automotive, or tech, or food, or entertainment or ...whatever. The medical world is highly regulated. Whereas Kraft can go from an idea to a product on the shelf for sale in a few months, it can take more than a decade for a medical company to do the same thing because of the test and regulations involved. That's why companies like J&J which work in both the medical world and the consumer world keep those groups apart, because everything from HR to product development is very different.

SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#397 Mar 10, 2013
FLBeaver wrote:
<quoted text>
Much of the AFP had to do with individual rights, which ended up being included in the Bill of Rights. What I was talking about is the basic philosophy of the two sides. As I pointed out earlier, the liberal starts with the outcome (everyone has equal medical care at little or no cost) and then puts a plan in place to make it happen. What is left out are things like cost, real people, real institutions. For the liberal, given the goal is worthy (good, free healthcare), everyone and everything SHOULD adjust their behavior to make it happen and if they don't it's because they aren't smart enough to understand the benefits. As Jefferson said, if 1/2 the people on the earth had to die to achieve the goals of the French Revolution it would have been worth it. A more modern phrase is "you can't make an omlette without breaking eggs."
The conservative looks at trade-offs and takes into account human nature. They look at the cost and look at the trade offs, like having fewer doctors or the real consequences being lower quality of care for everyone. If you had read or watched anything on this you would have seen the two sides talking past each other. Neither side addressed the same issues.
And if you are clueless as to how business works, then you would be clueless as to how it works on the local, regional, national and world level. If you don't understand the basic lemonade stand, you can't understand global corporations. It's like moving from addition to multiplication to calculus, to stats and higher mathmatics. If you can't add, then the rest is just pretending.
And I get your point about your family member moving into corporate medicine. But once again it isn't your experience. I don't disagree that there are greedy, rotten business people. My point, and history has shown it, is that as bad as business is, government is worse. A government hospital is much worse than a private one. A government service is much worse than a private one. It doesn't matter what the area, the more govenment gets involved the worse it becomes. One simple reason is that business has competition to keep it in line. Government has nothing to stop it.
One last point, how the corporate world works in medicine is very different than how it works in automotive, or tech, or food, or entertainment or ...whatever. The medical world is highly regulated. Whereas Kraft can go from an idea to a product on the shelf for sale in a few months, it can take more than a decade for a medical company to do the same thing because of the test and regulations involved. That's why companies like J&J which work in both the medical world and the consumer world keep those groups apart, because everything from HR to product development is very different.
I'm not even going to bother addressing the entire post as it's just more rehashing the same ole same ole.

But, you were the one to bring up the car example. And now you're trying to change the context?

I'll once again reference what I wrote about that VERY good friend of mine who has been and is VERY staunchly "conservative", hates government, elevates private sector business, strongly against national health care and despises liberals/democrats/progressive s for ALL the same reasons you do. YET lauds what the VA, a government health care, did for him over anything and everything the private hospitals and doctors have been able to do for him. Yet still.....

So looking at the trade offs it's better to have people die, even children, for lack of affordable health than it is to take the measures to make health care affordable. If it isn't affordable to maintain the profit structure then that's just the nature of things. I do understand that. I just don't agree with it.

As long as conservatives believe people should be contributing members of society then society does have a degree of responsibility to them also. That's what makes up a civilized society. As opposed to an anarchy.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#398 Mar 10, 2013
FLBeaver wrote:
<quoted text>
Much of the AFP had to do with individual rights, which ended up being included in the Bill of Rights. What I was talking about is the basic philosophy of the two sides. As I pointed out earlier, the liberal starts with the outcome (everyone has equal medical care at little or no cost) and then puts a plan in place to make it happen. What is left out are things like cost, real people, real institutions. For the liberal, given the goal is worthy (good, free healthcare), everyone and everything SHOULD adjust their behavior to make it happen and if they don't it's because they aren't smart enough to understand the benefits. As Jefferson said, if 1/2 the people on the earth had to die to achieve the goals of the French Revolution it would have been worth it. A more modern phrase is "you can't make an omlette without breaking eggs."
The conservative looks at trade-offs and takes into account human nature. They look at the cost and look at the trade offs, like having fewer doctors or the real consequences being lower quality of care for everyone. If you had read or watched anything on this you would have seen the two sides talking past each other. Neither side addressed the same issues.
And if you are clueless as to how business works, then you would be clueless as to how it works on the local, regional, national and world level. If you don't understand the basic lemonade stand, you can't understand global corporations. It's like moving from addition to multiplication to calculus, to stats and higher mathmatics. If you can't add, then the rest is just pretending.
And I get your point about your family member moving into corporate medicine. But once again it isn't your experience. I don't disagree that there are greedy, rotten business people. My point, and history has shown it, is that as bad as business is, government is worse. A government hospital is much worse than a private one. A government service is much worse than a private one. It doesn't matter what the area, the more govenment gets involved the worse it becomes. One simple reason is that business has competition to keep it in line. Government has nothing to stop it.
One last point, how the corporate world works in medicine is very different than how it works in automotive, or tech, or food, or entertainment or ...whatever. The medical world is highly regulated. Whereas Kraft can go from an idea to a product on the shelf for sale in a few months, it can take more than a decade for a medical company to do the same thing because of the test and regulations involved. That's why companies like J&J which work in both the medical world and the consumer world keep those groups apart, because everything from HR to product development is very different.
I'm not even going to bother addressing the entire post as it's just more rehashing the same ole same ole.

But, you were the one to bring up the car example. And now you're trying to change the context?

I'll once again reference what I wrote about that VERY good friend of mine who has been and is VERY staunchly "conservative", hates government, elevates private sector business, strongly against national health care and despises liberals/democrats/progressive s for ALL the same reasons you do. YET lauds what the VA, a government health care, did for him over anything and everything the private hospitals and doctors have been able to do for him. Yet still.....

So looking at the trade offs it's better to have people die, even children, for lack of affordable health care than it is to take the measures to make health care affordable. If it isn't affordable to maintain the profit structure then that's just the nature of things. I do understand that. I just don't agree with it.

As long as conservatives believe people should be contributing members of society then society does have a degree of responsibility to them also. That's what makes up a civilized society. As opposed to an anarchy.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#400 Mar 10, 2013
Rob wrote:
<quoted text>
Changing the context? You do that all the time Jason! To bad you don't practice what you preach.
Ya I'll take that into serious consideration coming from a complete jack wad like you. You are a primary argument why abortion should be legal and gays allowed to marry.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#402 Mar 10, 2013
Rob wrote:
<quoted text>
Listen you are changing the context again! If you want to get married I'm not against it. Just call it something else like a civil union or something.
Why? Because NO ONE would even consider marrying you? Much less enter into a civil union or something else with you. Of either sex.

I am married for over 40 years and to one of the opposite sex. It's fine with me that you haven't been able to get there at all. It's just sad that you have to take your personal frustration about it out on someone else. But being anonymous probably makes it just a bit easier on you.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#404 Mar 10, 2013
Rob wrote:
<quoted text>
Jason I am married. I'm not interested. You might consider yourself being the opposite sex after you sex change but technically your the same sex. BTW did you ever get that mistake they made during your operation fixed? You should really go to one of the gay forums you hung out in before if you want to talk about your sexual frustrations. This is not the place for it. Besides maybe you could find a fling for next weekend.
Please forward my deepest condolences to your "spouse". And my deepest sympathies for their deep lack of self esteem to believe they didn't deserve a human being to be married to.
pipedream

Grand Blanc, MI

#406 Mar 10, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
Please forward my deepest condolences to your "spouse". And my deepest sympathies for their deep lack of self esteem to believe they didn't deserve a human being to be married to.
I think the little twerp means his mother. Wouldn't be surprised if his is married to mom. She's realizing she should have kicked is lazy good for nothing fat ass out of her house 3 years ago.
Really

Grandville, MI

#407 Mar 10, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
Please forward my deepest condolences to your "spouse". And my deepest sympathies for their deep lack of self esteem to believe they didn't deserve a human being to be married to.
Nice, and you say the Republicans are beneath contempt? I feel bad for your spouse being married to you for over 40 years. Apparently they didn't think they could do any better?
Really

Grandville, MI

#408 Mar 10, 2013
pipedream wrote:
<quoted text>
I think the little twerp means his mother. Wouldn't be surprised if his is married to mom. She's realizing she should have kicked is lazy good for nothing fat ass out of her house 3 years ago.
I doubt anyone would bother to marry you. All you would do is bully and degrade them. What a wonderful example of a leftist you are.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#411 Mar 10, 2013
Really wrote:
<quoted text>Nice, and you say the Republicans are beneath contempt? I feel bad for your spouse being married to you for over 40 years. Apparently they didn't think they could do any better?
I never said Republicans are beneath contempt. Once again you are projecting your thoughts onto me.

So you side with Robbie boy. Okay.
Really

Grandville, MI

#414 Mar 11, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said Republicans are beneath contempt. Once again you are projecting your thoughts onto me.
So you side with Robbie boy. Okay.
Don't side with anyone. Once again, because you need "people" like pipedream to support your opinion, you project that others need that as well. And you have inferred that the Republicans are beneath contempt. You would be thrilled to have a one party system. As long as it's the progressives in power to complete the destruction of the country.

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

#416 Mar 11, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not even going to bother addressing the entire post as it's just more rehashing the same ole same ole.
But, you were the one to bring up the car example. And now you're trying to change the context?
I'll once again reference what I wrote about that VERY good friend of mine who has been and is VERY staunchly "conservative", hates government, elevates private sector business, strongly against national health care and despises liberals/democrats/progressive s for ALL the same reasons you do. YET lauds what the VA, a government health care, did for him over anything and everything the private hospitals and doctors have been able to do for him. Yet still.....
So looking at the trade offs it's better to have people die, even children, for lack of affordable health care than it is to take the measures to make health care affordable. If it isn't affordable to maintain the profit structure then that's just the nature of things. I do understand that. I just don't agree with it.
As long as conservatives believe people should be contributing members of society then society does have a degree of responsibility to them also. That's what makes up a civilized society. As opposed to an anarchy.
I donít remember ever bringing up a car example. I tend to use the lemonade stand. But thatís not a biggie.

Your example of the VA hospital misses the point because there are other people that have had a lousy experience. A sample of 1 doesnít mean anything. At issue is the base model. Does it work? Does it work better than a private model? Is the model expandable? I would say the answers are, yes, no but nor does it work significantly worse, and lastly no.

After all the stuff I would have thought you would have paid better attention to this. Right now everyone is able to get free health care. In fact that is part of the problem because each year millions of people go into the ER for free care, some go in every month. And while that cost is ďfreeĒ to them, it really isnít free. It gets passed on to others in a variety of ways. Right now we currently offer free medical care to the world as long as you are willing to go to an ER room.

No adult or child has died because of they werenít able to get care. While folks like Reid and Pelosi liked to talk about this horror, neither of them was able to actually document a case where it happened. But it is much more likely to under the ACA. If I was a Hospital Director and a child needed surgery but couldnít afford it, I could find numerous ways to make it happen. However, under the ACA if the government says I canít help for whatever reasons, then I canít. Under the system coming into place it will become illegal to help someone if they arenít worth saving. As the President said, for many folks it will be time to take a pill and die.

With medical care there are a lot of trade offs that have nothing to do with profit. Look at those who need kidneys and are on a waiting list. Or people who need a special type of surgery but there are only so many surgeons available. Recent headlines talked about shortages of various drugs. The list goes on and on. It is a part of life that liberals consistently ignore.

Your last part is false because you used a word only liberals use: should. Liberals believe that everyone is or can be a contributing member of society. So they want to spend money rehabilitating hard core felons. Or giving money to a high school dropout/drug addict so that they can become a contributing member of society.Liberals believe that society is responsible for everyone regardless of the choices they have made. Conservatives believe that some are and some arenít. Conservatives believe that society has a responsibility to those who are or are trying to be contributing members of society. For those that choose not to be, that responsibility is on themselves and their family. Not society at large.

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

#417 Mar 11, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not even going to bother addressing the entire post as it's just more rehashing the same ole same ole.
But, you were the one to bring up the car example. And now you're trying to change the context?
I'll once again reference what I wrote about that VERY good friend of mine who has been and is VERY staunchly "conservative", hates government, elevates private sector business, strongly against national health care and despises liberals/democrats/progressive s for ALL the same reasons you do. YET lauds what the VA, a government health care, did for him over anything and everything the private hospitals and doctors have been able to do for him. Yet still.....
So looking at the trade offs it's better to have people die, even children, for lack of affordable health care than it is to take the measures to make health care affordable. If it isn't affordable to maintain the profit structure then that's just the nature of things. I do understand that. I just don't agree with it.
As long as conservatives believe people should be contributing members of society then society does have a degree of responsibility to them also. That's what makes up a civilized society. As opposed to an anarchy.
I donít remember ever bringing up a car example. I tend to use the lemonade stand. But thatís not a biggie.

Your example of the VA hospital misses the point because there are other people that have had a lousy experience. A sample of 1 doesnít mean anything. At issue is the base model. Does it work? Does it work better than a private model? Is the model expandable? I would say the answers are, yes, no but nor does it work significantly worse, and lastly no.

After all the stuff I would have thought you would have paid better attention to this. Right now everyone is able to get free health care. In fact that is part of the problem because each year millions of people go into the ER for free care, some go in every month. And while that cost is ďfreeĒ to them, it really isnít free. It gets passed on to others in a variety of ways. Right now we currently offer free medical care to the world as long as you are willing to go to an ER room.

No adult or child has died because of they werenít able to get care. While folks like Reid and Pelosi liked to talk about this horror, neither of them was able to actually document a case where it happened. But it is much more likely to under the ACA. If I was a Hospital Director and a child needed surgery but couldnít afford it, I could find numerous ways to make it happen. However, under the ACA if the government says I canít for whatever reasons, then I canít. Under the system coming into place it will become illegal to help someone if they arenít worth saving. As the President said, for many folks it will be time to take a pill and die. With medical care there are a lot of trade offs that have nothing to do with profit. Look at those who need kidneys and are on a waiting list. Or people who need a special type of surgery but there are only so many surgeons available. Recent headlines talked about shortages of various drugs. The list goes on and on. It is a part of life that liberals consistently ignore.

Your last part is false because you used a word only liberals use: should. Liberals believe that everyone is or can be a contributing member of society. So they want to spend money rehabilitating hard core felons. Or giving money to a high school dropout/drug addict so that they can become a contributing member of society. Liberals believe that society is responsible for everyone regardless of the choices they have made. Conservatives believe that some are and some arenít. Conservatives believe that society has a responsibility to those who are or are trying to be contributing members of society. For those that choose not to be, that responsibility is on themselves, their family, friends and others who choose to help. Not society at large.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 18
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Belmont Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Experience a historical Christmas in downtown G... 2 hr Really 58
College football roundup: Ohio State starts the... (Sep '13) 4 hr Buffalo Bull 1,482
Put Tolls on Our Interstate Highways 6 hr Really 20
most ludicrious car commercial 7 hr bobolinq 1
happy wife . . . 8 hr bobolinq 1
sony balony 13 hr Idea Maker 6
Jesus Steals Christmas Back From Satan 18 hr Who 1
Belmont Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Belmont People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Belmont News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Belmont

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 8:50 am PST

NBC Sports 8:50AM
Kyle Long inactive for Sunday's game vs. Detroit
NBC Sports 8:50 AM
Kyle Long inactive for Sunday's game vs. Detroit
NBC Sports 9:03 AM
Jay Cutler active vs. Lions, will back up Jimmy Clausen
NBC Sports 9:03 AM
Jay Cutler active vs. Lions, will back up Jimmy Clausen
NBC Sports10:20 AM
Jimmy Clausen unimpressive early in Chicago