|
|
"The Republican War Against Women" - the book
By Jetackuu 2012-05-09 12:38:22
it's just an argument about the most successful method of delivery, and in a capitalist system, obviously a free market would be the best way
it's a bad argument as history has proven that it's failed.
Free market system is flawed just as a pure socialist system of government is flawed, greed kills both.
You need regulated capitalism, but healthcare shouldn't be in the industry of making profit.
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2012-05-09 12:41:03
You mean China where the baby flesh containing pills come from?
It's not working so well for those babies.
By Drjones 2012-05-09 12:41:58
I'm curious, what is everyone's definition of "healthcare"? Are we talking preventative care only?
everything short of things like boobs jobs (unless they somehow are medically relevant, or somebody had implants due to breast cancer or something).
Thanks for replying. I guess it's easy for some people to overlook the fact that otherwise healthy people often have accidents or other emergencies which would require care. Or perhaps it's simply that they do not care. I honestly think a lot of folks simply don't care, which is a truly sad state of affairs.
thats a sad look on life you have there. dont you think though that everyone has a family, and almost everyone loses friends and family to disease, illness and injury? how could anyone NOT care about this? it's just an argument about the most successful method of delivery, and in a capitalist system, obviously a free market would be the best way I don't think it's obvious in the slightest.
Ideally everyone would have top-notch healthcare and it would be free or such a trivial fee that it would never register as a concern at all. How do we get there?
Caitsith.Sai
Server: Caitsith
Game: FFXI
Posts: 702
By Caitsith.Sai 2012-05-09 12:43:40
it's just an argument about the most successful method of delivery, and in a capitalist system, obviously a free market would be the best way
it's a bad argument as history has proven that it's failed.
Free market system is flawed just as a pure socialist system of government is flawed, greed kills both.
You need regulated capitalism, but healthcare shouldn't be in the industry of making profit.
The problem is, how do you continue to create incentive for qualified people to become doctors in the numbers that the US needs to service its population?
[+]
By Chakstealandbot 2012-05-09 12:47:23
it's just an argument about the most successful method of delivery, and in a capitalist system, obviously a free market would be the best way
it's a bad argument as history has proven that it's failed.
Free market system is flawed just as a pure socialist system of government is flawed, greed kills both.
You need regulated capitalism, but healthcare shouldn't be in the industry of making profit.
obviously there needs to be regulation to prevent fraud and abuse in ANY system, so you bringing that up is rather silly to me. do you think that little girl's lemonade stands should get shut down for operating without a permit? because it already happens. is that the kind of regulation you're for? that's not free market you stooge, we havent had a free market in a very very long time. when we did have a free market, it was the period of largest and fastest expansion of the middle class in history, ever. explain that, if you can please
I'm curious, what is everyone's definition of "healthcare"? Are we talking preventative care only?
everything short of things like boobs jobs (unless they somehow are medically relevant, or somebody had implants due to breast cancer or something).
Thanks for replying. I guess it's easy for some people to overlook the fact that otherwise healthy people often have accidents or other emergencies which would require care. Or perhaps it's simply that they do not care. I honestly think a lot of folks simply don't care, which is a truly sad state of affairs.
thats a sad look on life you have there. dont you think though that everyone has a family, and almost everyone loses friends and family to disease, illness and injury? how could anyone NOT care about this? it's just an argument about the most successful method of delivery, and in a capitalist system, obviously a free market would be the best way I don't think it's obvious in the slightest.
Ideally everyone would have top-notch healthcare and it would be free or such a trivial fee that it would never register as a concern at all. How do we get there? oh, well thats OK, cause in this thread apparently we dont need to explain the obvious anyway. the way we make the cost of healthcare go down is by relativity, we get the standard of living and the wealth of the average american back up again.
By Jetackuu 2012-05-09 12:49:19
You mean China where the baby flesh containing pills come from?
It's not working so well for those babies.
there's flaws in every system, but last I checked their economy is trumping ours several fold.
it's just an argument about the most successful method of delivery, and in a capitalist system, obviously a free market would be the best way
it's a bad argument as history has proven that it's failed.
Free market system is flawed just as a pure socialist system of government is flawed, greed kills both.
You need regulated capitalism, but healthcare shouldn't be in the industry of making profit.
The problem is, how do you continue to create incentive for qualified people to become doctors in the numbers that the US needs to service its population?
That is one problem, as there's certainly some that would do it in order to help others, but the pay is certainly a current incentive now.
Truth be told I haven't thought of a solution to that, but other countries seem to make do with it and have a higher quality of healthcare than we do.
I'd be fine with it all being non profit private industries as well, where the profits go back into it. Like a co-op. People however shouldn't be getting wealthy over the suffering of others. The doctors getting fair compensation is one thing as they pretty much give their lives for what they do, however shareholders are another.
Cerberus.Tikal
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 4947
By Cerberus.Tikal 2012-05-09 12:49:41
@Chakstealandbot: You need to cite something like that, or not bring it up in a discussion.
Ragnarok.Nausi
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2012-05-09 12:49:42
He'll just say it never happened
By Jetackuu 2012-05-09 12:52:59
it's just an argument about the most successful method of delivery, and in a capitalist system, obviously a free market would be the best way
it's a bad argument as history has proven that it's failed.
Free market system is flawed just as a pure socialist system of government is flawed, greed kills both.
You need regulated capitalism, but healthcare shouldn't be in the industry of making profit.
obviously there needs to be regulation to prevent fraud and abuse in ANY system, so you bringing that up is rather silly to me. do you think that little girl's lemonade stands should get shut down for operating without a permit? because it already happens. is that the kind of regulation you're for? that's not free market you stooge, we havent had a free market in a very very long time. when we did have a free market, it was the period of largest and fastest expansion of the middle class in history, ever. explain that, if you can please
I'm curious, what is everyone's definition of "healthcare"? Are we talking preventative care only?
everything short of things like boobs jobs (unless they somehow are medically relevant, or somebody had implants due to breast cancer or something).
Thanks for replying. I guess it's easy for some people to overlook the fact that otherwise healthy people often have accidents or other emergencies which would require care. Or perhaps it's simply that they do not care. I honestly think a lot of folks simply don't care, which is a truly sad state of affairs.
thats a sad look on life you have there. dont you think though that everyone has a family, and almost everyone loses friends and family to disease, illness and injury? how could anyone NOT care about this? it's just an argument about the most successful method of delivery, and in a capitalist system, obviously a free market would be the best way I don't think it's obvious in the slightest.
Ideally everyone would have top-notch healthcare and it would be free or such a trivial fee that it would never register as a concern at all. How do we get there? oh, well thats OK, cause in this thread apparently we dont need to explain the obvious anyway. the way we make the cost of healthcare go down is by relativity, we get the standard of living and the wealth of the average american back up again.
the Great Depression rings a bell.
your bold is the best thing I've read from you all day, that would be easy, now if we could only get companies to pay people what they deserve instead of pocket the profit they gain from underpaying employees.
[+]
Server: Siren
Game: FFXI
Posts: 507
By Siren.Inuyushi 2012-05-09 12:53:32
China may be sound economically, but that's about it. As for Doctors in other countries, I'm sure for some a Gun was incentive enough.
now if we could only get companies to pay people what they deserve instead of pocket the profit they gain from underpaying employees.
I agree with you on this, but in some cases disagree. It's like if you give a man too much rope, he'll most likely use it to hang himself. My dad owned his own construction business, and it was put to himself this way when I came to his employee's salary: "Give them just enough to pay their bills, get drunk and have fun. But not so much that they come back Monday needing more money." It's sad, but true given the type of workers he had to employ to get work done in our small town in Texas.
By Chakstealandbot 2012-05-09 12:56:19
@Chakstealandbot: You need to cite something like that, or not bring it up in a discussion.
you talking about the lemonade stands? pick your source. its not even one isolated incident
By Artemicion 2012-05-09 12:56:31
Caitsith.Mahayaya said: »/sigh.
I just straight disagree with you, whether or not they request it or it's required for another reason is a moot point, it's still healthcare.
Healthcare should be a right, as it is required to live, as is shelter and food, these things should all be rights, as the extension of the guaranteed life.
Also there's all sorts of collective rights, which over impose over individual rights. Where do you think the idea of imminent domain comes from?
In my opinion, health care shouldn't be a right for a very simple reason:
The people who eat nothing but fast food and take no responsibility upon themselves to eat healthy, but still expect to live as long as people who actually give a ***about their health, end up using more of the monetary aid than the trying-to-be-healthy people.
So reduce taxes and let people take on some accountability. The people who eat nothing but processed foods can die earlier and the people who actually make an effort to eat fresh foods live longer.
Just wanted to note that a matter of being, or rather, eating healthy is a heavy conflict for those of lower monetary class. Our food provisioners on mass level rely on heavily processed and chemically enhanced (thus unhealthy) foods to meet the massive demands of our country while maintaining optimal shelf life. Such processes also allow for optimal pricing, which many rely on simply so they have something in their stomachs at the end of the night.
We have livestock being fed things they weren't meant to eat to grow or develop while simultaneously injected with growth hormone steroids to give optimal amounts of food per unit, which then become ingested by consumers. We also have genetically altered seeds that build immunity to various pesticides and chemicals, all while maintaining a sweeping domination of patient and law so nobody else can use any other types of seeds. This market of heavily processed food downright monopolizes the industry in terms of price and mass production, so competition of healthier foods tend to get elevated prices which I am sure many would be unable to afford, even at a relatively middle class level.
So we have this perpetuating cycle of unhealthy food being ingested by a vast majority of Americans, while the options to eat healthy tend to be limited to those with the privilege of being able to afford it. Ironically, all this cheap food is only cheap in short term, while being ultimately more expensive when health complications arise over time, as opposed to those that can initially dish out the money to eat healthy and not remotely suffer as much from the bodily consequences of overly processed and preserved foods.
So don't misunderstand people not eating healthy as a "choice"; because often times it's the only option for their means. Therefore we have this sort of clash of maintaining principal within our healthcare system, while simultaneously perpetuating this rich vs poor scenario.
Cerberus.Tikal
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 4947
By Cerberus.Tikal 2012-05-09 13:01:01
@Chakstealandbot: You need to cite something like that, or not bring it up in a discussion.
you talking about the lemonade stands? pick your source. its not even one isolated incident Free market, largest middle class, record expansion.
By Artemicion 2012-05-09 13:03:26
@Chakstealandbot: You need to cite something like that, or not bring it up in a discussion.
you talking about the lemonade stands? pick your source. its not even one isolated incident
Yikes, those are the kind of articles I'd expect to read on The Onion.
Kind of disturbing to see that. I thought it a general passive understanding or common sense to regard such "businesses" as more of a charity rather than a legitimate means of established business.
Cerberus.Pleebo
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2012-05-09 13:07:44
Lemonade stands? That's awesome.
Server: Siren
Game: FFXI
Posts: 507
By Siren.Inuyushi 2012-05-09 13:09:34
Caitsith.Mahayaya said: »/sigh.
I just straight disagree with you, whether or not they request it or it's required for another reason is a moot point, it's still healthcare.
Healthcare should be a right, as it is required to live, as is shelter and food, these things should all be rights, as the extension of the guaranteed life.
Also there's all sorts of collective rights, which over impose over individual rights. Where do you think the idea of imminent domain comes from?
In my opinion, health care shouldn't be a right for a very simple reason:
The people who eat nothing but fast food and take no responsibility upon themselves to eat healthy, but still expect to live as long as people who actually give a ***about their health, end up using more of the monetary aid than the trying-to-be-healthy people.
So reduce taxes and let people take on some accountability. The people who eat nothing but processed foods can die earlier and the people who actually make an effort to eat fresh foods live longer.
Just wanted to note that a matter of being, or rather, eating healthy is a heavy conflict for those of lower monetary class. Our food provisioners on mass level rely on heavily processed and chemically enhanced (thus unhealthy) foods to meet the massive demands of our country while maintaining optimal shelf life. Such processes also allow for optimal pricing, which many rely on simply so they have something in their stomachs at the end of the night.
We have livestock being fed things they weren't meant to eat to grow or develop while simultaneously injected with growth hormone steroids to give optimal amounts of food per unit, which then become ingested by consumers. We also have genetically altered seeds that build immunity to various pesticides and chemicals, all while maintaining a sweeping domination of patient and law so nobody else can use any other types of seeds. This market of heavily processed food downright monopolizes the industry in terms of price and mass production, so competition of healthier foods tend to get elevated prices which I am sure many would be unable to afford, even at a relatively middle class level.
So we have this perpetuating cycle of unhealthy food being ingested by a vast majority of Americans, while the options to eat healthy tend to be limited to those with the privilege of being able to afford it. Ironically, all this cheap food is only cheap in short term, while being ultimately more expensive when health complications arise over time, as opposed to those that can initially dish out the money to eat healthy and not remotely suffer as much from the bodily consequences of overly processed and preserved foods.
So don't misunderstand people not eating healthy as a "choice"; because often times it's the only option for their means. Therefore we have this sort of clash of maintaining principal within our healthcare system, while simultaneously perpetuating this rich vs poor scenario.
On a side note to this, as I don't disagree with you, but have you heard of Extreme Couponing? You can get crazy expensive things for cheap. My wife cut out grocery bill from $200~ish/mo to (on average) $100/mo. There's even a woman who came on the show and coupon's for her 100% vegan diet. And we're talking on a dime here. People in hard financial times have turned to coupons and been able to eat healthy/well again without sacrificing.
By Jetackuu 2012-05-09 13:11:31
oh yes their human rights and many other areas needs a lot of work.
the point is: we tried 100% free market, it didn't work, we tried regulated capitalism it did work, however companies found loop holes and got around to straight out legally bribing legislation to benefit themselves, on top of a further wage gap, and it's basically making the entire working class the lower class, almost eliminating the middle class.
I will agree that unions are part of the problem as well, but if we got rid of those there should be more regulations across the US about wages, workers rights, hour/break regulation.
No people shouldn't be making $30+ an hour working in a damn factory. Another issue is the need for uneducated labor is diminishing, we're at a transition to where we can have an economy sustained where people don't HAVE to work for a living but only need to work for above the minimum, and no that shouldn't be subsidized by those who work, maybe by the elites, but by technology.
If people want above the bare minimum they should work, but they shouldn't have to work 2 40 hour jobs to maintain a roof over their head.
(another part is even now if people got paid more, people could be limited to a 30-32 hour work week and there would be less unemployment).
I see some issues with the plan aside from setting it up:
1. with people having more free time, they would require more things to keep them occupied, this ranges from crime prevention, to people being lazy/bored (fat), to people having more mental health issues, etc.
2. ok I'm out of ideas for the moment, had a phone call and lost my train of thought, feel free to post anything you think would be other issues in such a world.
the bottom line here is that I doubt any of the posters on this site are in the millionaire class, much less billionaire, we're about in the same boat together (even people in other nations than the US, this affects you too, oil is traded in US currency after all, our weak market means the oil will be high, hence why it's about 3x higher than it should be).
the working class built the nation, even today, the elites prosper due to the efforts of the working class, if it weren't for us, they wouldn't be there. I don't think it's too much to ask to not have to work ourselves to death to meet ends meet, just to retire when we're old, to probably be put in a home and get sponge baths and play bingo.
Ragnarok.Nausi
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2012-05-09 13:12:52
Caitsith.Mahayaya said: »/sigh.
I just straight disagree with you, whether or not they request it or it's required for another reason is a moot point, it's still healthcare.
Healthcare should be a right, as it is required to live, as is shelter and food, these things should all be rights, as the extension of the guaranteed life.
Also there's all sorts of collective rights, which over impose over individual rights. Where do you think the idea of imminent domain comes from?
In my opinion, health care shouldn't be a right for a very simple reason:
The people who eat nothing but fast food and take no responsibility upon themselves to eat healthy, but still expect to live as long as people who actually give a ***about their health, end up using more of the monetary aid than the trying-to-be-healthy people.
So reduce taxes and let people take on some accountability. The people who eat nothing but processed foods can die earlier and the people who actually make an effort to eat fresh foods live longer.
Just wanted to note that a matter of being, or rather, eating healthy is a heavy conflict for those of lower monetary class. Our food provisioners on mass level rely on heavily processed and chemically enhanced (thus unhealthy) foods to meet the massive demands of our country while maintaining optimal shelf life. Such processes also allow for optimal pricing, which many rely on simply so they have something in their stomachs at the end of the night.
We have livestock being fed things they weren't meant to eat to grow or develop while simultaneously injected with growth hormone steroids to give optimal amounts of food per unit, which then become ingested by consumers. We also have genetically altered seeds that build immunity to various pesticides and chemicals, all while maintaining a sweeping domination of patient and law so nobody else can use any other types of seeds. This market of heavily processed food downright monopolizes the industry in terms of price and mass production, so competition of healthier foods tend to get elevated prices which I am sure many would be unable to afford, even at a relatively middle class level.
So we have this perpetuating cycle of unhealthy food being ingested by a vast majority of Americans, while the options to eat healthy tend to be limited to those with the privilege of being able to afford it. Ironically, all this cheap food is only cheap in short term, while being ultimately more expensive when health complications arise over time, as opposed to those that can initially dish out the money to eat healthy and not remotely suffer as much from the bodily consequences of overly processed and preserved foods.
So don't misunderstand people not eating healthy as a "choice"; because often times it's the only option for their means. Therefore we have this sort of clash of maintaining principal within our healthcare system, while simultaneously perpetuating this rich vs poor scenario.
That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. People don't have any other choice but to eat Mc Donalds? Anyone who cannot put 2 and 2 together to realize that you save more money cooking your own food instead of going to a restaurant doesn't deserve my sympathy. Grocery store foods aren't toxic, you don't have to blow 400 bucks at whole foods to "eat healthy".
By Chakstealandbot 2012-05-09 13:12:56
it's just an argument about the most successful method of delivery, and in a capitalist system, obviously a free market would be the best way
it's a bad argument as history has proven that it's failed.
Free market system is flawed just as a pure socialist system of government is flawed, greed kills both.
You need regulated capitalism, but healthcare shouldn't be in the industry of making profit.
obviously there needs to be regulation to prevent fraud and abuse in ANY system, so you bringing that up is rather silly to me. do you think that little girl's lemonade stands should get shut down for operating without a permit? because it already happens. is that the kind of regulation you're for? that's not free market you stooge, we havent had a free market in a very very long time. when we did have a free market, it was the period of largest and fastest expansion of the middle class in history, ever. explain that, if you can please
I'm curious, what is everyone's definition of "healthcare"? Are we talking preventative care only?
everything short of things like boobs jobs (unless they somehow are medically relevant, or somebody had implants due to breast cancer or something).
Thanks for replying. I guess it's easy for some people to overlook the fact that otherwise healthy people often have accidents or other emergencies which would require care. Or perhaps it's simply that they do not care. I honestly think a lot of folks simply don't care, which is a truly sad state of affairs.
thats a sad look on life you have there. dont you think though that everyone has a family, and almost everyone loses friends and family to disease, illness and injury? how could anyone NOT care about this? it's just an argument about the most successful method of delivery, and in a capitalist system, obviously a free market would be the best way I don't think it's obvious in the slightest.
Ideally everyone would have top-notch healthcare and it would be free or such a trivial fee that it would never register as a concern at all. How do we get there? oh, well thats OK, cause in this thread apparently we dont need to explain the obvious anyway. the way we make the cost of healthcare go down is by relativity, we get the standard of living and the wealth of the average american back up again.
the Great Depression rings a bell.
your bold is the best thing I've read from you all day, that would be easy, now if we could only get companies to pay people what they deserve instead of pocket the profit they gain from underpaying employees.
a recession is the product of a boom cycle, in the case of the great depression it was caused by war-time inflation. Hoover and Roosevelt both tried to correct it in many different ways and only made it worse. even World War 2 simply exchanged the unemployment for debt. the depression truly ended when they cut the taxes when the troops all came back home, it increased production greatly, thus lowering both unemployment and prices of goods, and it happened incredibly fast
By Artemicion 2012-05-09 13:14:13
Caitsith.Mahayaya said: »/sigh.
I just straight disagree with you, whether or not they request it or it's required for another reason is a moot point, it's still healthcare.
Healthcare should be a right, as it is required to live, as is shelter and food, these things should all be rights, as the extension of the guaranteed life.
Also there's all sorts of collective rights, which over impose over individual rights. Where do you think the idea of imminent domain comes from?
In my opinion, health care shouldn't be a right for a very simple reason:
The people who eat nothing but fast food and take no responsibility upon themselves to eat healthy, but still expect to live as long as people who actually give a ***about their health, end up using more of the monetary aid than the trying-to-be-healthy people.
So reduce taxes and let people take on some accountability. The people who eat nothing but processed foods can die earlier and the people who actually make an effort to eat fresh foods live longer.
Just wanted to note that a matter of being, or rather, eating healthy is a heavy conflict for those of lower monetary class. Our food provisioners on mass level rely on heavily processed and chemically enhanced (thus unhealthy) foods to meet the massive demands of our country while maintaining optimal shelf life. Such processes also allow for optimal pricing, which many rely on simply so they have something in their stomachs at the end of the night.
We have livestock being fed things they weren't meant to eat to grow or develop while simultaneously injected with growth hormone steroids to give optimal amounts of food per unit, which then become ingested by consumers. We also have genetically altered seeds that build immunity to various pesticides and chemicals, all while maintaining a sweeping domination of patient and law so nobody else can use any other types of seeds. This market of heavily processed food downright monopolizes the industry in terms of price and mass production, so competition of healthier foods tend to get elevated prices which I am sure many would be unable to afford, even at a relatively middle class level.
So we have this perpetuating cycle of unhealthy food being ingested by a vast majority of Americans, while the options to eat healthy tend to be limited to those with the privilege of being able to afford it. Ironically, all this cheap food is only cheap in short term, while being ultimately more expensive when health complications arise over time, as opposed to those that can initially dish out the money to eat healthy and not remotely suffer as much from the bodily consequences of overly processed and preserved foods.
So don't misunderstand people not eating healthy as a "choice"; because often times it's the only option for their means. Therefore we have this sort of clash of maintaining principal within our healthcare system, while simultaneously perpetuating this rich vs poor scenario.
On a side note to this, as I don't disagree with you, but have you heard of Extreme Couponing? You can get crazy expensive things for cheap. My wife cut out grocery bill from $200~ish/mo to (on average) $100/mo. There's even a woman who came on the show and coupon's for her 100% vegan diet. And we're talking on a dime here. People in hard financial times have turned to coupons and been able to eat healthy/well again without sacrificing.
Coupons actually work on a psychological level that encourage buying more than what is necessary, and often have conditions of purchasing at least 2 units of what was intended. Also since they're manufacturer based, they often lean towards name brand items which even with the coupon discount will cost more than going generic.
Coupons are a poor excuse of a solution for being able to eat healthy, especially since they tend to discount the very things you shouldn't be consuming in the first place.
Cerberus.Ica
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 57
By Cerberus.Ica 2012-05-09 13:14:34
thats a sad look on life you have there. dont you think though that everyone has a family, and almost everyone loses friends and family to disease, illness and injury? how could anyone NOT care about this? it's just an argument about the most successful method of delivery, and in a capitalist system, obviously a free market would be the best way
I don't know...I'm seeing a few people in here saying that no one is actually entitled to healthcare. Basically what I'm getting from them is that if I can't afford it, I'm SOL.
[+]
By Drjones 2012-05-09 13:14:44
Caitsith.Mahayaya said: »/sigh.
I just straight disagree with you, whether or not they request it or it's required for another reason is a moot point, it's still healthcare.
Healthcare should be a right, as it is required to live, as is shelter and food, these things should all be rights, as the extension of the guaranteed life.
Also there's all sorts of collective rights, which over impose over individual rights. Where do you think the idea of imminent domain comes from?
In my opinion, health care shouldn't be a right for a very simple reason:
The people who eat nothing but fast food and take no responsibility upon themselves to eat healthy, but still expect to live as long as people who actually give a ***about their health, end up using more of the monetary aid than the trying-to-be-healthy people.
So reduce taxes and let people take on some accountability. The people who eat nothing but processed foods can die earlier and the people who actually make an effort to eat fresh foods live longer.
Just wanted to note that a matter of being, or rather, eating healthy is a heavy conflict for those of lower monetary class. Our food provisioners on mass level rely on heavily processed and chemically enhanced (thus unhealthy) foods to meet the massive demands of our country while maintaining optimal shelf life. Such processes also allow for optimal pricing, which many rely on simply so they have something in their stomachs at the end of the night.
We have livestock being fed things they weren't meant to eat to grow or develop while simultaneously injected with growth hormone steroids to give optimal amounts of food per unit, which then become ingested by consumers. We also have genetically altered seeds that build immunity to various pesticides and chemicals, all while maintaining a sweeping domination of patient and law so nobody else can use any other types of seeds. This market of heavily processed food downright monopolizes the industry in terms of price and mass production, so competition of healthier foods tend to get elevated prices which I am sure many would be unable to afford, even at a relatively middle class level.
So we have this perpetuating cycle of unhealthy food being ingested by a vast majority of Americans, while the options to eat healthy tend to be limited to those with the privilege of being able to afford it. Ironically, all this cheap food is only cheap in short term, while being ultimately more expensive when health complications arise over time, as opposed to those that can initially dish out the money to eat healthy and not remotely suffer as much from the bodily consequences of overly processed and preserved foods.
So don't misunderstand people not eating healthy as a "choice"; because often times it's the only option for their means. Therefore we have this sort of clash of maintaining principal within our healthcare system, while simultaneously perpetuating this rich vs poor scenario.
On a side note to this, as I don't disagree with you, but have you heard of Extreme Couponing? You can get crazy expensive things for cheap. My wife cut out grocery bill from $200~ish/mo to (on average) $100/mo. There's even a woman who came on the show and coupon's for her 100% vegan diet. And we're talking on a dime here. People in hard financial times have turned to coupons and been able to eat healthy/well again without sacrificing. Coupons are awesome and all, but when was the last time you saw a coupon for say...fresh vegetables? I don't think I've ever seen that, and those are pretty darn important for eating healthy. Coupons help with the bottom line, but I wouldn't consider them comprehensive solution all on their own. Eating healthy is still a expensive.
[+]
By Artemicion 2012-05-09 13:17:14
Caitsith.Mahayaya said: »/sigh.
I just straight disagree with you, whether or not they request it or it's required for another reason is a moot point, it's still healthcare.
Healthcare should be a right, as it is required to live, as is shelter and food, these things should all be rights, as the extension of the guaranteed life.
Also there's all sorts of collective rights, which over impose over individual rights. Where do you think the idea of imminent domain comes from?
In my opinion, health care shouldn't be a right for a very simple reason:
The people who eat nothing but fast food and take no responsibility upon themselves to eat healthy, but still expect to live as long as people who actually give a ***about their health, end up using more of the monetary aid than the trying-to-be-healthy people.
So reduce taxes and let people take on some accountability. The people who eat nothing but processed foods can die earlier and the people who actually make an effort to eat fresh foods live longer.
Just wanted to note that a matter of being, or rather, eating healthy is a heavy conflict for those of lower monetary class. Our food provisioners on mass level rely on heavily processed and chemically enhanced (thus unhealthy) foods to meet the massive demands of our country while maintaining optimal shelf life. Such processes also allow for optimal pricing, which many rely on simply so they have something in their stomachs at the end of the night.
We have livestock being fed things they weren't meant to eat to grow or develop while simultaneously injected with growth hormone steroids to give optimal amounts of food per unit, which then become ingested by consumers. We also have genetically altered seeds that build immunity to various pesticides and chemicals, all while maintaining a sweeping domination of patient and law so nobody else can use any other types of seeds. This market of heavily processed food downright monopolizes the industry in terms of price and mass production, so competition of healthier foods tend to get elevated prices which I am sure many would be unable to afford, even at a relatively middle class level.
So we have this perpetuating cycle of unhealthy food being ingested by a vast majority of Americans, while the options to eat healthy tend to be limited to those with the privilege of being able to afford it. Ironically, all this cheap food is only cheap in short term, while being ultimately more expensive when health complications arise over time, as opposed to those that can initially dish out the money to eat healthy and not remotely suffer as much from the bodily consequences of overly processed and preserved foods.
So don't misunderstand people not eating healthy as a "choice"; because often times it's the only option for their means. Therefore we have this sort of clash of maintaining principal within our healthcare system, while simultaneously perpetuating this rich vs poor scenario.
That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. People don't have any other choice but to eat Mc Donalds? Anyone who cannot put 2 and 2 together to realize that you save more money cooking your own food instead of going to a restaurant doesn't deserve my sympathy. Grocery store foods aren't toxic, you don't have to blow 400 bucks at whole foods to "eat healthy".
I never mentioned McDonalds or restaurants , but if that was what you mustered from reading my post, then I really don't need to explain myself to you, since you tend to have a habit of misinterpreting and misrepresenting other people's words.
[+]
By Jetackuu 2012-05-09 13:17:52
Caitsith.Mahayaya said: »/sigh.
I just straight disagree with you, whether or not they request it or it's required for another reason is a moot point, it's still healthcare.
Healthcare should be a right, as it is required to live, as is shelter and food, these things should all be rights, as the extension of the guaranteed life.
Also there's all sorts of collective rights, which over impose over individual rights. Where do you think the idea of imminent domain comes from?
In my opinion, health care shouldn't be a right for a very simple reason:
The people who eat nothing but fast food and take no responsibility upon themselves to eat healthy, but still expect to live as long as people who actually give a ***about their health, end up using more of the monetary aid than the trying-to-be-healthy people.
So reduce taxes and let people take on some accountability. The people who eat nothing but processed foods can die earlier and the people who actually make an effort to eat fresh foods live longer.
Just wanted to note that a matter of being, or rather, eating healthy is a heavy conflict for those of lower monetary class. Our food provisioners on mass level rely on heavily processed and chemically enhanced (thus unhealthy) foods to meet the massive demands of our country while maintaining optimal shelf life. Such processes also allow for optimal pricing, which many rely on simply so they have something in their stomachs at the end of the night.
We have livestock being fed things they weren't meant to eat to grow or develop while simultaneously injected with growth hormone steroids to give optimal amounts of food per unit, which then become ingested by consumers. We also have genetically altered seeds that build immunity to various pesticides and chemicals, all while maintaining a sweeping domination of patient and law so nobody else can use any other types of seeds. This market of heavily processed food downright monopolizes the industry in terms of price and mass production, so competition of healthier foods tend to get elevated prices which I am sure many would be unable to afford, even at a relatively middle class level.
So we have this perpetuating cycle of unhealthy food being ingested by a vast majority of Americans, while the options to eat healthy tend to be limited to those with the privilege of being able to afford it. Ironically, all this cheap food is only cheap in short term, while being ultimately more expensive when health complications arise over time, as opposed to those that can initially dish out the money to eat healthy and not remotely suffer as much from the bodily consequences of overly processed and preserved foods.
So don't misunderstand people not eating healthy as a "choice"; because often times it's the only option for their means. Therefore we have this sort of clash of maintaining principal within our healthcare system, while simultaneously perpetuating this rich vs poor scenario.
That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. People don't have any other choice but to eat Mc Donalds? Anyone who cannot put 2 and 2 together to realize that you save more money cooking your own food instead of going to a restaurant doesn't deserve my sympathy. Grocery store foods aren't toxic, you don't have to blow 400 bucks at whole foods to "eat healthy".
it's the most ridiculous thing you've ever heard because it doesn't fit in your world view, however it is the facts of the world.
a recession is the product of a boom cycle, in the case of the great depression it was caused by war-time inflation. Hoover and Roosevelt both tried to correct it in many different ways and only made it worse. even World War 2 simply exchanged the unemployment for debt. the depression truly ended when they cut the taxes when the troops all came back home, it increased production greatly, thus lowering both unemployment and prices of goods, and it happened incredibly fast
not always, and the great depression had many factors, not limited to corruption, greed, prohibition.
Um we were pulling out of the depression after the new deal, the war pulled us out the rest of the way. As for the cut taxes bit, calling bs, trickle down economics doesn't work.
By Chakstealandbot 2012-05-09 13:19:03
@Chakstealandbot: You need to cite something like that, or not bring it up in a discussion.
you talking about the lemonade stands? pick your source. its not even one isolated incident Free market, largest middle class, record expansion.
never heard of the gilded age of America? the states and cities were preventing free markets in some instances, but the federal government got out of the way and it was the largest expansion of the middle class. we even had open immigration, which we now can not have because of hefty welfare systems.
Cerberus.Tikal
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 4947
By Cerberus.Tikal 2012-05-09 13:19:12
When I've got $17 to last me the week, you're damned right I'm going to eat McDonalds. $3 for 2 burgers and a large tea is hard to turn down when you're really hurting.
By Artemicion 2012-05-09 13:21:16
Though it's funny you mention McDonalds.
As it just so happens to be a legitimate means of getting the most food for your dollar. So it isn't a surprise that those that have a family they need to feed, but don't have the cash to do so appropriately will more often than not resort to McDonalds, because they rather not have their kids or their spouse go hungry for the night if it can be helped.
By Chakstealandbot 2012-05-09 13:21:53
Caitsith.Mahayaya said: »/sigh.
I just straight disagree with you, whether or not they request it or it's required for another reason is a moot point, it's still healthcare.
Healthcare should be a right, as it is required to live, as is shelter and food, these things should all be rights, as the extension of the guaranteed life.
Also there's all sorts of collective rights, which over impose over individual rights. Where do you think the idea of imminent domain comes from?
In my opinion, health care shouldn't be a right for a very simple reason:
The people who eat nothing but fast food and take no responsibility upon themselves to eat healthy, but still expect to live as long as people who actually give a ***about their health, end up using more of the monetary aid than the trying-to-be-healthy people.
So reduce taxes and let people take on some accountability. The people who eat nothing but processed foods can die earlier and the people who actually make an effort to eat fresh foods live longer.
Just wanted to note that a matter of being, or rather, eating healthy is a heavy conflict for those of lower monetary class. Our food provisioners on mass level rely on heavily processed and chemically enhanced (thus unhealthy) foods to meet the massive demands of our country while maintaining optimal shelf life. Such processes also allow for optimal pricing, which many rely on simply so they have something in their stomachs at the end of the night.
We have livestock being fed things they weren't meant to eat to grow or develop while simultaneously injected with growth hormone steroids to give optimal amounts of food per unit, which then become ingested by consumers. We also have genetically altered seeds that build immunity to various pesticides and chemicals, all while maintaining a sweeping domination of patient and law so nobody else can use any other types of seeds. This market of heavily processed food downright monopolizes the industry in terms of price and mass production, so competition of healthier foods tend to get elevated prices which I am sure many would be unable to afford, even at a relatively middle class level.
So we have this perpetuating cycle of unhealthy food being ingested by a vast majority of Americans, while the options to eat healthy tend to be limited to those with the privilege of being able to afford it. Ironically, all this cheap food is only cheap in short term, while being ultimately more expensive when health complications arise over time, as opposed to those that can initially dish out the money to eat healthy and not remotely suffer as much from the bodily consequences of overly processed and preserved foods.
So don't misunderstand people not eating healthy as a "choice"; because often times it's the only option for their means. Therefore we have this sort of clash of maintaining principal within our healthcare system, while simultaneously perpetuating this rich vs poor scenario.
That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. People don't have any other choice but to eat Mc Donalds? Anyone who cannot put 2 and 2 together to realize that you save more money cooking your own food instead of going to a restaurant doesn't deserve my sympathy. Grocery store foods aren't toxic, you don't have to blow 400 bucks at whole foods to "eat healthy".
it's the most ridiculous thing you've ever heard because it doesn't fit in your world view, however it is the facts of the world.
a recession is the product of a boom cycle, in the case of the great depression it was caused by war-time inflation. Hoover and Roosevelt both tried to correct it in many different ways and only made it worse. even World War 2 simply exchanged the unemployment for debt. the depression truly ended when they cut the taxes when the troops all came back home, it increased production greatly, thus lowering both unemployment and prices of goods, and it happened incredibly fast
not always, and the great depression had many factors, not limited to corruption, greed, prohibition.
Um we were pulling out of the depression after the new deal, the war pulled us out the rest of the way. As for the cut taxes bit, calling bs, trickle down economics doesn't work.
then whats your explanation for the rapid employment and production? the machines and factories were already there, right? they were simply missing the producers to operate and produce goods correct? how else can you get more of that without lowering the cost of operation?
When I've got $17 to last me the week, you're damned right I'm going to eat McDonalds. $3 for 2 burgers and a large tea is hard to turn down when you're really hurting.
sounds like you should quit trolling ffxiah and collect some cans or something, either way you're so far gone from the point of healthcare now
oh yea, i missed this cause of new page:
Quote: 2. it's working pretty damn well for China right now, aside from that healthcare wise it works, works a lot better than our broken healthcare system, what rank are we in the world for healthcare again? 30something?
3. what about that comment? I answered it already, again reading comprehension. I don't differentiate them, again reading comprehension. we talking about the same China? the one that harvests organs from prisoners? doesn't sound like the kind of people i want taking care of me, not to mention the government also killed a ton of their own people and have sexist laws about how many kids you can have, i love how you glorify china yet bag on the nutty right-wing catholics and christians for the same ***.
and can you show me where you explained how free food and water will be provided for all humans?
Cerberus.Ica
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 57
By Cerberus.Ica 2012-05-09 13:22:47
Caitsith.Mahayaya said: »/sigh.
I just straight disagree with you, whether or not they request it or it's required for another reason is a moot point, it's still healthcare.
Healthcare should be a right, as it is required to live, as is shelter and food, these things should all be rights, as the extension of the guaranteed life.
Also there's all sorts of collective rights, which over impose over individual rights. Where do you think the idea of imminent domain comes from?
In my opinion, health care shouldn't be a right for a very simple reason:
The people who eat nothing but fast food and take no responsibility upon themselves to eat healthy, but still expect to live as long as people who actually give a ***about their health, end up using more of the monetary aid than the trying-to-be-healthy people.
So reduce taxes and let people take on some accountability. The people who eat nothing but processed foods can die earlier and the people who actually make an effort to eat fresh foods live longer.
Just wanted to note that a matter of being, or rather, eating healthy is a heavy conflict for those of lower monetary class. Our food provisioners on mass level rely on heavily processed and chemically enhanced (thus unhealthy) foods to meet the massive demands of our country while maintaining optimal shelf life. Such processes also allow for optimal pricing, which many rely on simply so they have something in their stomachs at the end of the night.
We have livestock being fed things they weren't meant to eat to grow or develop while simultaneously injected with growth hormone steroids to give optimal amounts of food per unit, which then become ingested by consumers. We also have genetically altered seeds that build immunity to various pesticides and chemicals, all while maintaining a sweeping domination of patient and law so nobody else can use any other types of seeds. This market of heavily processed food downright monopolizes the industry in terms of price and mass production, so competition of healthier foods tend to get elevated prices which I am sure many would be unable to afford, even at a relatively middle class level.
So we have this perpetuating cycle of unhealthy food being ingested by a vast majority of Americans, while the options to eat healthy tend to be limited to those with the privilege of being able to afford it. Ironically, all this cheap food is only cheap in short term, while being ultimately more expensive when health complications arise over time, as opposed to those that can initially dish out the money to eat healthy and not remotely suffer as much from the bodily consequences of overly processed and preserved foods.
So don't misunderstand people not eating healthy as a "choice"; because often times it's the only option for their means. Therefore we have this sort of clash of maintaining principal within our healthcare system, while simultaneously perpetuating this rich vs poor scenario.
That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. People don't have any other choice but to eat Mc Donalds? Anyone who cannot put 2 and 2 together to realize that you save more money cooking your own food instead of going to a restaurant doesn't deserve my sympathy. Grocery store foods aren't toxic, you don't have to blow 400 bucks at whole foods to "eat healthy".
Where in that post did they even mention McDonalds... or any fast food place, for that matter?
Server: Siren
Game: FFXI
Posts: 507
By Siren.Inuyushi 2012-05-09 13:23:31
Caitsith.Mahayaya said: »/sigh.
I just straight disagree with you, whether or not they request it or it's required for another reason is a moot point, it's still healthcare.
Healthcare should be a right, as it is required to live, as is shelter and food, these things should all be rights, as the extension of the guaranteed life.
Also there's all sorts of collective rights, which over impose over individual rights. Where do you think the idea of imminent domain comes from?
In my opinion, health care shouldn't be a right for a very simple reason:
The people who eat nothing but fast food and take no responsibility upon themselves to eat healthy, but still expect to live as long as people who actually give a ***about their health, end up using more of the monetary aid than the trying-to-be-healthy people.
So reduce taxes and let people take on some accountability. The people who eat nothing but processed foods can die earlier and the people who actually make an effort to eat fresh foods live longer.
Just wanted to note that a matter of being, or rather, eating healthy is a heavy conflict for those of lower monetary class. Our food provisioners on mass level rely on heavily processed and chemically enhanced (thus unhealthy) foods to meet the massive demands of our country while maintaining optimal shelf life. Such processes also allow for optimal pricing, which many rely on simply so they have something in their stomachs at the end of the night.
We have livestock being fed things they weren't meant to eat to grow or develop while simultaneously injected with growth hormone steroids to give optimal amounts of food per unit, which then become ingested by consumers. We also have genetically altered seeds that build immunity to various pesticides and chemicals, all while maintaining a sweeping domination of patient and law so nobody else can use any other types of seeds. This market of heavily processed food downright monopolizes the industry in terms of price and mass production, so competition of healthier foods tend to get elevated prices which I am sure many would be unable to afford, even at a relatively middle class level.
So we have this perpetuating cycle of unhealthy food being ingested by a vast majority of Americans, while the options to eat healthy tend to be limited to those with the privilege of being able to afford it. Ironically, all this cheap food is only cheap in short term, while being ultimately more expensive when health complications arise over time, as opposed to those that can initially dish out the money to eat healthy and not remotely suffer as much from the bodily consequences of overly processed and preserved foods.
So don't misunderstand people not eating healthy as a "choice"; because often times it's the only option for their means. Therefore we have this sort of clash of maintaining principal within our healthcare system, while simultaneously perpetuating this rich vs poor scenario.
On a side note to this, as I don't disagree with you, but have you heard of Extreme Couponing? You can get crazy expensive things for cheap. My wife cut out grocery bill from $200~ish/mo to (on average) $100/mo. There's even a woman who came on the show and coupon's for her 100% vegan diet. And we're talking on a dime here. People in hard financial times have turned to coupons and been able to eat healthy/well again without sacrificing.
Coupons actually work on a psychological level that encourage buying more than what is necessary, and often have conditions of purchasing at least 2 units of what was intended. Also since they're manufacturer based, they often lean towards name brand items which even with the coupon discount will cost more than going generic.
Coupons are a poor excuse of a solution for being able to eat healthy, especially since they tend to discount the very things you shouldn't be consuming in the first place.
I agree, coupons have the affect of having a person buy more than you would if not using the coupon. It is then upon the person to not go back to the store until both of those items are used up. But you are wrong when you say the coupon discount will cost more than going generic. In some cases that is true, but if you find the right bargains, you're wrong. The trick is to match sales with coupons to truly get the ideal price. Otherwise, yes Generic wins. In reference to your last comment, I mentioned a vegan couponer. You can get healthy food with coupons.
Caitsith.Mahayaya said: »/sigh.
I just straight disagree with you, whether or not they request it or it's required for another reason is a moot point, it's still healthcare.
Healthcare should be a right, as it is required to live, as is shelter and food, these things should all be rights, as the extension of the guaranteed life.
Also there's all sorts of collective rights, which over impose over individual rights. Where do you think the idea of imminent domain comes from?
In my opinion, health care shouldn't be a right for a very simple reason:
The people who eat nothing but fast food and take no responsibility upon themselves to eat healthy, but still expect to live as long as people who actually give a ***about their health, end up using more of the monetary aid than the trying-to-be-healthy people.
So reduce taxes and let people take on some accountability. The people who eat nothing but processed foods can die earlier and the people who actually make an effort to eat fresh foods live longer.
Just wanted to note that a matter of being, or rather, eating healthy is a heavy conflict for those of lower monetary class. Our food provisioners on mass level rely on heavily processed and chemically enhanced (thus unhealthy) foods to meet the massive demands of our country while maintaining optimal shelf life. Such processes also allow for optimal pricing, which many rely on simply so they have something in their stomachs at the end of the night.
We have livestock being fed things they weren't meant to eat to grow or develop while simultaneously injected with growth hormone steroids to give optimal amounts of food per unit, which then become ingested by consumers. We also have genetically altered seeds that build immunity to various pesticides and chemicals, all while maintaining a sweeping domination of patient and law so nobody else can use any other types of seeds. This market of heavily processed food downright monopolizes the industry in terms of price and mass production, so competition of healthier foods tend to get elevated prices which I am sure many would be unable to afford, even at a relatively middle class level.
So we have this perpetuating cycle of unhealthy food being ingested by a vast majority of Americans, while the options to eat healthy tend to be limited to those with the privilege of being able to afford it. Ironically, all this cheap food is only cheap in short term, while being ultimately more expensive when health complications arise over time, as opposed to those that can initially dish out the money to eat healthy and not remotely suffer as much from the bodily consequences of overly processed and preserved foods.
So don't misunderstand people not eating healthy as a "choice"; because often times it's the only option for their means. Therefore we have this sort of clash of maintaining principal within our healthcare system, while simultaneously perpetuating this rich vs poor scenario.
On a side note to this, as I don't disagree with you, but have you heard of Extreme Couponing? You can get crazy expensive things for cheap. My wife cut out grocery bill from $200~ish/mo to (on average) $100/mo. There's even a woman who came on the show and coupon's for her 100% vegan diet. And we're talking on a dime here. People in hard financial times have turned to coupons and been able to eat healthy/well again without sacrificing. Coupons are awesome and all, but when was the last time you saw a coupon for say...fresh vegetables? I don't think I've ever seen that, and those are pretty darn important for eating healthy. Coupons help with the bottom line, but I wouldn't consider them comprehensive solution all on their own. Eating healthy is still a expensive.
True, very true. I guess I should say the part of our Grocery bill that got decimated came from non-food items. Such as soap, tooth brushes (free), floss (free), Mouth-wash, and other things such as that.
The Republican War Against Women: An Insider's Report from Behind the Lines by Tanya Melich
Republished in paperback 1998!!!
Originally in hardback sometime before the 1996 election.
Oh, did I mention the author is a REPUBLICAN?
This war is nothing new, just newer than the class war.
|
|