A health care question...

The T wrote: Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: The T wrote: ^We certainly agree on that. But the way people object the change would give the idea that people LOVED it... Come on, some change is better then nothing with the way things were... Let's hope for the best.  Not if its change in the wrong direction. It hasn't been proved to be in the wrong direction. That's your theory (and many other people's, I'm not denying that).  And how do you prove if something like this is the right direction or not?  By trying it. The US  tried the other system for years. It failed. By wanting it to succeed instead of desiring its total failure, which would also mean further damage to everyday Americans.  There's no way of telling. For every one who thinks this plan stinks, there's another person that thinks it IS going in the right direction. The ones who think it stinks had their chance. Now it's the other one's. As simple as that.

Where does this negativity come from?  What "other systems" has the US "tried for years" that "failed[?]"  I think the way things are here has been a huge success overall, but just that there are things we could certainly improve upon.

The T wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: The T wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: The T wrote: ^We certainly agree on that. But the way people object the change would give the idea that people LOVED it... Come on, some change is better then nothing with the way things were... Let's hope for the best.  Not if its change in the wrong direction. It hasn't been proved to be in the wrong direction. That's your theory (and many other people's, I'm not denying that).  Your point? You can't just say change is good as an absolute statement. You seem pretty comfortable making absolute statements about how bad this change is though...

Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: The T wrote: ^We certainly agree on that. But the way people object the change would give the idea that people LOVED it... Come on, some change is better then nothing with the way things were... Let's hope for the best.  Not if its change in the wrong direction. It hasn't been proved to be in the wrong direction. That's your theory (and many other people's, I'm not denying that).  And how do you prove if something like this is the right direction or not?  By trying it. The US  tried the other system for years. It failed. By wanting it to succeed instead of desiring its total failure, which would also mean further damage to everyday Americans.  There's no way of telling. For every one who thinks this plan stinks, there's another person that thinks it IS going in the right direction. The ones who think it stinks had their chance. Now it's the other one's. As simple as that.  Where does this negativity come from?  What "other systems" has the US "tried for years" that "failed[?]"  I think the way things are here has been a huge success overall, but just that there are things we could certainly improve upon.

The T wrote: Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: The T wrote: ^We certainly agree on that. But the way people object the change would give the idea that people LOVED it... Come on, some change is better then nothing with the way things were... Let's hope for the best.  Not if its change in the wrong direction. It hasn't been proved to be in the wrong direction. That's your theory (and many other people's, I'm not denying that).  And how do you prove if something like this is the right direction or not?  By trying it. The US  tried the other system for years. It failed. By wanting it to succeed instead of desiring its total failure, which would also mean further damage to everyday Americans.  There's no way of telling. For every one who thinks this plan stinks, there's another person that thinks it IS going in the right direction. The ones who think it stinks had their chance. Now it's the other one's. As simple as that.  Where does this negativity come from?  What "other systems" has the US "tried for years" that "failed[?]"  I think the way things are here has been a huge success overall, but just that there are things we could certainly improve upon. I certainly don't see this system as anything close to a success... A success would not need be changed...

Doesn't address the question.  Question in bold.  Ignore my opinion that follows the question if you must.

The T wrote: Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: The T wrote: ^We certainly agree on that. But the way people object the change would give the idea that people LOVED it... Come on, some change is better then nothing with the way things were... Let's hope for the best.  Not if its change in the wrong direction. It hasn't been proved to be in the wrong direction. That's your theory (and many other people's, I'm not denying that).  And how do you prove if something like this is the right direction or not?  By trying it. The US  tried the other system for years. It failed. By wanting it to succeed instead of desiring its total failure, which would also mean further damage to everyday Americans.  There's no way of telling. For every one who thinks this plan stinks, there's another person that thinks it IS going in the right direction. The ones who think it stinks had their chance. Now it's the other one's. As simple as that.  Where does this negativity come from?  What "other systems" has the US "tried for years" that "failed[?]"  I think the way things are here has been a huge success overall, but just that there are things we could certainly improve upon. I certainly don't see this system as anything close to a success... A success would not need be changed...  Doesn't address the question.  Question in bold.  Ignore my opinion that follows the question if you must. Oh... Yes, the system where the insurance companies run the show. The for-profit system. Not that it has dramatically changed with the new bill but it is a start.

Those two things in bold there?  Yeah, they are not the same thing, and neither represents our situation at all.

The T wrote: You always do this like if you were correcting a test by one of your students, don't you Robert? All that's left is for you to start assigning grades to posts...

I was never this hard on my students! 

I actually approach this as my new job would dictate- quality control for a directory assistance / information company! 

I'm so hardcore. 

The Doctor wrote: ^ Uh...the for-profit health-care system Rob.  Tried it.  It sucks.  Leaves lots without the care they need, etc., etc., etc.

No, we have not tried the "for-profit" health care system.  We've been doing something completely different than that.

"Whatever is not for profit is either charity or robbery."

-Epignosis

Epignosis wrote: "Whatever is not for profit is either charity or robbery."-Epignosis

Wrong again Rob some of the schools I have worked for are 'non-profit', they aren't charities nor are they robbers, they provide a service for a price and then more or less break even. Schools are not the only place where this strange phenomena takes place.

Edited by Easy Money - April 05 2010 at 18:55

Easy Money wrote: Epignosis wrote: "Whatever is not for profit is either charity or robbery."-Epignosis Wrong again Rob some of the schools I have worked for are 'non-profit', they aren't charities nor are they robbers, they provide a service for a price and then more or less break even. Schools are not the only place where this strange phenomena takes place.

So such institutions always have a zero budget?  Cool.  Could teach the US government something.

Wait, when was I wrong before?