I guess that's one way to look at it. It's a ridiculous way to look at it, but I guess it's not surprising coming from someone who doesn't think genocide is a big deal.
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
So federalizing private insurance companies is OK? Federalizing private anything seems to reek of Russia or China style government. If making Healthcare avaliable is the priority, then expand Medicare and Medicare.
Understand this, I couldn't afford insurance until my business started growing. It took years because I was learning as I went. I know insuran e is expensive. I've wrote 20k in workman comp and general liability this year, and its been a horrible year so far. Insurance reform would be nice. Its still broken.
Obama is Greorge Washington compared to Trump. If you can’t see that that’s your problem. BTW I never voted for Obama either time. Trump is in a league all by himself.
He doesn't. Here's proof:
"I don't understand how healthcare works!"
"I don't understand how healthcare works either, but he's saying things that make me feel good about it!!!"
This isn't a great look for Trump. Basically admitting on February 7th that he thought it was much more deadly than the flu and much more contagious but then saying the opposite in every press conference he had at the time about it.
You could argue he was doing it to stop a mass hysteria with the virus (which obviously happened anyway) but it's still a bad look when you say something in private then tell the American public the exact opposite.
like i posted earlier, if people want to consider woodward a valuable source, then they have to judge.
personally, i’ve posted, and people have posted the same info of how his tone has flip flopped almost weekly regarding this...imo, that’s more valuable in deciding whether or not trump’s comments to woodward are resonating.
and fox news is saying he’s been serious since feb 7th and then placing fauci clips in saying “there’s no reason to change your lifestyle now” when fauci said full interview, “we shouldn’t be concerned right now, but until data comes out, we shouldn’t panic”...that is the end of feb, not fukking may, june, etc.
and karl rove trying to explain the difference between biden vs trump re: virus is worth the price.
"It goes through air, Bob. That's always tougher than the touch. You know, the touch, you don't have to touch things. Right? But, the air, you just breathe the air."
Truly fortune this thing is less deadly than italy/wuhan CFRs since Trump was willing to let something deadly run rampant in exchange for stock market being propped a few extra weeks.
Just as bad though are the 'advisors' that enable him to throw 5% of Americans under the bus.
He didn't call for testing strategies, mask strategies or any strategy aside for handing off to governors while pretending it was a hoax or overblown, all for short-term stock market numbers that are his favorite achievement.
And why downplay masks when he knows it is airborne? Cuz he's Trump and Trump says and does confounding, stupid things.
Maybe he wanted to thwart a panic, fine, but at least come up with some plan to suppress the economic damage that a pandemic can inflict.
Just as bad though are the 'advisors' that enable him to throw 5% of Americans under the bus.
He didn't call for testing strategies, mask strategies or any strategy aside for handing off to governors while pretending it was a hoax or overblown, all for short-term stock market numbers that are his favorite achievement.
And why downplay masks when he knows it is airborne? Cuz he's Trump and Trump says and does confounding, stupid things.
Maybe he wanted to thwart a panic, fine, but at least come up with some plan to suppress the economic damage that a pandemic can inflict.
Last edited:
I didn't say Trump was better. If your sole reason to compare Trump to Hitler/Bundy is because people hate them, then Obama is a better comparison because they had the same job and both are hated.
There's really no point in arguing why it's ridiculous. It's obvious to any rational person. You clearly stated that the genocide against Indians wasn't a big deal because they had some weapons. Maybe you're just ok with genocide against Indians and your racism doesn't extend beyond them.
Ohhh, the Redskins name bothers you. I forgot. I never "stated" any such thing. Don't lie like that. I completely and totally admit (and have always maintained) that the USA committed genocide against most, if not all, the native tribes of the North American continent... absolutely. And, those tribes were armed and did put up a helluva fight(s). So, you're wrong about my attitudes. I don't believe Redskins is always a racist term, however. It's not. It's about context.
ETA: I do not believe the plight of the native Indian tribes of North America was the same as or even as "bad"as what the African slaves endured. If you were an Indian, you could fight back. And, in some cases, depending on exactly when in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, you could, and would live within your tribe just as your ancestors, on your ancestral lands. You were not kidnapped and forced into chattel slavery and be property of a white man. If you were born an African slave, you died a slave, and only knew slavery from birth to death. So, no, they're not the same experience and I don't believe any rational person would say they endured the same kind of oppression. But, I completely admit that the American Indian tribes were maligned and almost exterminated... but, they were not OWNED and treated as property. I would take being an Indian over an African slave anytime, every time. Just because I don't think it was as bad as the African slave's plight, doesn't mean I condone what was done to the Indians.
I'm rational and it's not ridiculous to me at all. So, man-up. Back up your claim.
Last edited:
next time you're in front of a pretty redhead bartender, try the 'I'll have a bourbon and a ginger' line. I'm sure it will work.
who said it was a cruise ship? Anyway, if there's a problem with seeing the ship analogy, the problem isn't the analogy.
We should make healthcare a priority IMO. But that's just my opinion and I'm not into forcing it on others. Therefor, health and healthcare can be as much of a priority to individuals as they care to make it. From where comes the assumption that only the government can prioritize health for us? The government shouldn't take my money to address the health of others, especially of those who have NOT made it a priority of their own, is the point.
I guess it's fair for you to call everything you don't understand jibber-jabber. After all, everything you say is jibber-jabber to your dog. Think about that jibber-jabber for a minute.
In reality, you can't explain something to someone who refuses to understand, even something as simple as supply and demand. People have been spending more and more on healthcare over time...
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org...health-services-spending-by-quarter-2010-2019
"Health spending totaled $74.6 billion in 1970. By 2000, health expenditures had reached about $1.4 trillion, and in 2018 the amount spent on health had more than doubled to $3.6 trillion. Total health expenditures represent the amount spent on healthcare and health-related activities (such as administration of insurance, health research, and public health), including expenditures from both public and private funds."
"On a per capita basis, health spending has increased over 31-fold in the last four decades, from $355 per person in 1970 to $11,172 in 2018. In constant 2018 dollars, the increase was about 6-fold, from $1,832 In 1970 to $11,172 in 2018."
we are demanding more and more in terms of healthcare, and there is more and more healthcare to be had, in terms of newer drugs and treatments. You don't have to have a glut of healthcare provision to keep spending and prices from rising, falling demand accomplishes the same thing. But demand is not falling, and supply is just keeping up. If supply just keeps up with demand, and demand keeps increasing, demand keeps driving prices and spending upward.
So now compare us to other countries...
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org...ending-growth-slowed-u-s-comparable-countries
"As would be expected, wealthy countries like the U.S., tend to spend more per person on health care and related expenses than lower income countries. However, even as a high income country, the U.S. spends more per person on health than comparable countries. Health spending per person in the U.S. was $10,224 in 2017, which was 28% higher than Switzerland, the next highest per capita spender."
https://www.commonwealthfund.org/pu...20/jan/us-health-care-global-perspective-2019
"
- The U.S. spends more on health care as a share of the economy — nearly twice as much as the average OECD country — yet has the lowest life expectancy and highest suicide rates among the 11 nations.
- The U.S. has the highest chronic disease burden and an obesity rate that is two times higher than the OECD average.
- Americans had fewer physician visits than peers in most countries, which may be related to a low supply of physicians in the U.S.
- Americans use some expensive technologies, such as MRIs, and specialized procedures, such as hip replacements, more often than our peers.
- The U.S. outperforms its peers in terms of preventive measures — it has the one of the highest rates of breast cancer screening among women ages 50 to 69 and the second-highest rate (after the U.K.) of flu vaccinations among people age 65 and older.
- Compared to peer nations, the U.S. has among the highest number of hospitalizations from preventable causes and the highest rate of avoidable deaths.
Also, it should be no surprise that the demand in the U.S. drives the development of new drugs and treatments and technologies. It should also be no surprise that those developments find their way into the systems of foreign countries. In other words, to a real extent and in a real way, we are subsidizing their systems.
"Spending "so much" is a sign of success? Only if you are getting massive returns, which we aren't. What school of business did you go to?"
LOL massive returns? Investing in healthcare is an investment in health. What sort of massive return do you expect from a visit to the doctor, and where did you get your business acumen from? As one of the links indicates, a wealthier country would be expected to spend more on health. How fvcking hard is that to understand? How does that not tell you that we are more financially successful and can therefor spend more on health?
How healthcare works? This is one of the top five dumbest posts I've seen on this board.
you must be joking.
"Hey, suck it up Indians. We didn't take you from your land, we only took your land from you. And we didn't enslave you, we only all but exterminated you. And now we have these nice reservations for your impoverished asses to live in, while the descendants of slaves have to deal with being ordinary citizens that some of us treat like children, on the land that belonged to your ancestors. You are so lucky to be here and you don't even appreciate the little bit that we didn't do to finish you off completely."
The last few weeks have shown that Trump was right about him shooting someone on 5th ave. and never losing any supporters. I always knew the country had a small number like this but had no idea there was so many. This country is in some deep shit and I don’t see any way out.
7 consecutive poasts from 12:40am - 3:50am. Gotta question what kind of life someone leads with those type of stats...unless you’re European, in which case, gross.
I agree. He shouldn't bother responding to avoid further embarrassing himself.
You alright, dude? You seem really angry lately. I don't get your strange obsession with me but you really need to step up your digs. This is D+ material at best.
Exactly... the US Government, and its mechanisms, royally fvcked-over the North American Indian Tribes. It was a methodical, streamlined, bloody disgrace to humanity.
It was out of character for me. I apologize.
Too bad you haven't figured it out. I don't suspect you ever will.
I have to question what kind of life someone leads when they obsess on number of posts and posting times of other posters. Maybe I should just say GET a life....unless you're from a rat-infested, filth-ridden northeastern city, in which case, my condolences.
^actual photo of terrorfanny before he began balding and when he had fewer chins.
One poster coming up with terrible nicknames is enough. We don't need another one.
"willing to use weapons" - i would've used 'Napolean Dynamite' as the nickname if i'd known this would be your retort.
Similar threads
