Now we know their names
Comments
-
metalnyc wrote: [quote=sweet tea]anyway, stephen hawking IS very good at articulating his thoughts in words. just not so good at forming those words with his body.
yeah, i thought of that, but he was the only famous person i could think of that was highly intelligent and had some speaking issue, unless you guys know my boss.
************************
you work for George Bush? -
JJB wrote:
nope.yeah, i thought of that, but he was the only famous person i could think of that was highly intelligent and had some speaking issue
Gee, I wonder if the fact that you could think of only ONE highly intelligent person who's not a good speaker (and that only because he is not *physically* capable of clear speech) ought to clue you into anything ... -
Hamilton wrote: [quote=metalnyc][quote=sweet tea]anyway, stephen hawking IS very good at articulating his thoughts in words. just not so good at forming those words with his body.
yeah, i thought of that, but he was the only famous person i could think of that was highly intelligent and had some speaking issue, unless you guys know my boss.
************************
you work for George Bush?
see, now that's a good/funny response. -
metalnyc wrote: [quote=Hamilton][quote=metalnyc][quote=sweet tea]anyway, stephen hawking IS very good at articulating his thoughts in words. just not so good at forming those words with his body.
yeah, i thought of that, but he was the only famous person i could think of that was highly intelligent and had some speaking issue, unless you guys know my boss.
************************
you work for George Bush?
see, now that's a good/funny response.
**************************
sorry about that,I'll try not to do it again. -
There is a difference between Health Care and Health Insurance. You do not have Health Insurance. You can go to a doctor and receive Health Care without Health Insurance providing you pay the fees. Find a job that offers Health Insurance.
Drea wrote: I see so much about the evils of universal health care brought up on here.
I can only speak for myself, but one of the reasons why I choose Obama to vote for over McCain is due to the health care reasons. I have a full time job. I do not receive benefits. I do not receive time off. If there is a government holiday and my office is not open, I don't get paid for that day.
In addition to that, I just have enough to pay all my bills. I barely have enough after all that to go see a movie or something. If I want a new pair of pants, I'd better buy Ramen Noodles all that week, because I can't afford both some clothes and groceries. And before you tell me to move, I can't afford that. Due to my financial situation, I can't afford to always do wonderful things to my credit, so I don't even know who would take me, lol.
So I looked into the state options for health care. I make too much to qualify for any state assistance. I can't afford the other low cost health insurance options they offer. Not even close. So what do I do when I get sick? I pray, lol. Oh, I want birth control? Sure. Go to Planned Parenthood. A visit there will cost me over $100 just to get seen. Plus the cost of birth control. I just can't afford it.
A voucher offering me some assistance towards health care is not going to help. Not in the least. They have to do something with the current situation. I don't understand why the illegal immigrants living down the block have healthcare, and they don't even pay taxes. I constantly get shit on, even though I work so hard to make ends meet.
To me, it sounds like McCain is Bush part 2. I look at Obama and I truly hope he can do something different for us, and not just for his rich friends. -
and the next president of the US should know how many freaking states there are in the US. Without his portable teleprompter the guy is an idiot.
“Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go.”
"Everybody knows that it makes no sense that you send a kid to the emergency room for a treatable illness like asthma, they end up taking up a hospital bed, it costs, when, if you, they just gave, you gave them treatment early and they got some treatment, and a, a breathalyzer, or inhalator, not a breathalyzer. (crowd laughing) I haven't had much sleep in the last 48 hours."
What they'll say is, "Well, it costs too much money," but you know what? It would cost, about... It -- it -- it would cost about the same as what we would spend... It... Over the course of 10 years it would cost what it would costs us... (nervous laugh) All right. Okay. We're going to... It... It would cost us about the same as it would cost for about -- hold on one second. I can't hear myself. But I'm glad you're fired up, though. I'm glad."
and Joe stand up chuck Biden is even worse of an idiot.BrooklynGigCenter wrote: Even with fully functional bodies, neither Bush nor Palin could write an intelligent essay based on one chapter of a Brief History of Time.
And anyone who aspires to be (or is) president should be able to. -
Of course. Because it's that easy. Really, I must be too lazy or stupid to continue staying in a job where I have absolutely no benefits. Silly me, why didn't I think of finding a job that offers insurance! LOL!!!!
Oh, and since I've been laid off effective the 7th of November, maybe I can finally qualify for some state assistance, lol. I doubt it, though. I truly doubt it.eggcream wrote: There is a difference between Health Care and Health Insurance. You do not have Health Insurance. You can go to a doctor and receive Health Care without Health Insurance providing you pay the fees. Find a job that offers Health Insurance.
[quote=Drea]I see so much about the evils of universal health care brought up on here.
I can only speak for myself, but one of the reasons why I choose Obama to vote for over McCain is due to the health care reasons. I have a full time job. I do not receive benefits. I do not receive time off. If there is a government holiday and my office is not open, I don't get paid for that day.
In addition to that, I just have enough to pay all my bills. I barely have enough after all that to go see a movie or something. If I want a new pair of pants, I'd better buy Ramen Noodles all that week, because I can't afford both some clothes and groceries. And before you tell me to move, I can't afford that. Due to my financial situation, I can't afford to always do wonderful things to my credit, so I don't even know who would take me, lol.
So I looked into the state options for health care. I make too much to qualify for any state assistance. I can't afford the other low cost health insurance options they offer. Not even close. So what do I do when I get sick? I pray, lol. Oh, I want birth control? Sure. Go to Planned Parenthood. A visit there will cost me over $100 just to get seen. Plus the cost of birth control. I just can't afford it.
A voucher offering me some assistance towards health care is not going to help. Not in the least. They have to do something with the current situation. I don't understand why the illegal immigrants living down the block have healthcare, and they don't even pay taxes. I constantly get shit on, even though I work so hard to make ends meet.
To me, it sounds like McCain is Bush part 2. I look at Obama and I truly hope he can do something different for us, and not just for his rich friends. -
eggcream wrote: There is a difference between Health Care and Health Insurance. You do not have Health Insurance. You can go to a doctor and receive Health Care without Health Insurance providing you pay the fees. Find a job that offers Health Insurance.
Yea it must be so easy to find a job that offers health insurance that 50 million people just aren't looking hard enough.
and sure, you can have health care as long as you pay the bills. but those bills are so exorbitant that nearly half of all declared bankruptcies are due to inability to pay medical expenditures.
I find it amazing that universal health coverage is even a subject of debate in the US. -
As more and more Republicans become unemployed (together with so many other people), the controversy over universal health care will diminish.
The problem with Republicans is that they tend to be both "comfortable" and smug. -
I don't know why I'm jumping back into this fray, I must be a glutton for banging my head against a brick wall, but...
re Universal healthcare/health insurance et al - To all the people here who are voting for Obama for health care reasons: Do you really believe that "universal health care" (by which I mean, health care, for every person in the country, including illegals, for which the person in question pays no money) is at all possible? Are you really incapable of understanding that in order to have such a thing happen, one of two things must occur:
1) Either the tax rates will climb astronomically in order to fund this massive expenditure, in which case you will end up paying for your health care anyway, except you'll also end up paying for the health care of many, many other people, regardless of whether you actually use your health care at all, or,
2) The overall quality and availability of health care will decline to the point that it's at in other countries that have implemented a government-funded healthcare system, wherein you must go on a waiting list for years in order to get non-emergency treatments, and in which it is up to some government flunky to decide whether or not you are deserving of said treatment.
Forgive me for thinking that either one, or, more likely, a combination of these two, is unacceptable. This does not make me heartless. It merely makes me realistic. If there were enough resources (doctors, nurses, hospital space, medicine, equipment, etc) out there to make universal health care at all practical, don't you think it would have been implemented years ago? Think about how difficult it is currently to find a quality doctor, or to make an appointment, or to get treatment at a hospital. Think about how overcrowded and understaffed and frenetic hospitals are now, the lack of space and equipment, the lack of training.
Now imagine if all that care was available to every single person in this country, for free* (*by which I mean, of course, paid for with the taxes of people who actually pay them, ie, legal citizens who actually work for a living). How much more overcrowded would the healthcare system become, how much more difficult would it be to get treatment, how much longer would you be forced to wait for care?
And do you really want the same people who are responsible for the post office, the DMV, the IRS, the public transportation systems, do you really want these same people in charge of your health care!? -
booklaw wrote: As more and more Republicans become unemployed (together with so many other people), the controversy over universal health care will diminish.
Oh, and booklaw? Give me one credible stat that shows that Republicans are more "comfortable" than Democrats. It's not a question of being comfortable or smug. Liberals are the walking personification of "smug." It's a question of not wanting to have your hard-earned money stolen by the government to be given to people who didn't earn it in the most inefficient and wasteful way possible.
The problem with Republicans is that they tend to be both "comfortable" and smug. -
transplant wrote: I don't know why I'm jumping back into this fray, I must be a glutton for banging my head against a brick wall, but...
why is it possible in like 50 other countries, but not in the US?
re Universal healthcare/health insurance et al - To all the people here who are voting for Obama for health care reasons: Do you really believe that "universal health care" (by which I mean, health care, for every person in the country, including illegals, for which the person in question pays no money) is at all possible? Are you really incapable of understanding that in order to have such a thing happen, one of two things must occur:
1) Either the tax rates will climb astronomically in order to fund this massive expenditure, in which case you will end up paying for your health care anyway, except you'll also end up paying for the health care of many, many other people, regardless of whether you actually use your health care at all, or,
2) The overall quality and availability of health care will decline to the point that it's at in other countries that have implemented a government-funded healthcare system, wherein you must go on a waiting list for years in order to get non-emergency treatments, and in which it is up to some government flunky to decide whether or not you are deserving of said treatment.
Forgive me for thinking that either one, or, more likely, a combination of these two, is unacceptable. This does not make me heartless. It merely makes me realistic. If there were enough resources (doctors, nurses, hospital space, medicine, equipment, etc) out there to make universal health care at all practical, don't you think it would have been implemented years ago? Think about how difficult it is currently to find a quality doctor, or to make an appointment, or to get treatment at a hospital. Think about how overcrowded and understaffed and frenetic hospitals are now, the lack of space and equipment, the lack of training.
Now imagine if all that care was available to every single person in this country, for free* (*by which I mean, of course, paid for with the taxes of people who actually pay them, ie, legal citizens who actually work for a living). How much more overcrowded would the healthcare system become, how much more difficult would it be to get treatment, how much longer would you be forced to wait for care?
And do you really want the same people who are responsible for the post office, the DMV, the IRS, the public transportation systems, do you really want these same people in charge of your health care!? -
vidro3 wrote: why is it possible in like 50 other countries, but not in the US?
Did you even read my post? It's possible to implement a system of universal health care, but not without having the health care system become incredibly inefficient and overwhelmed. There's a reason that Europeans and Canadians and South Americans come to the US when they need timely, quality care. See the 2nd point in my original post. -
From what I understand, in countries with universal health care, if you don't want to wait (if it's not life threatening, I personally see no big deal in waiting) for your elective or non emergency surgery, it is still possible to pay out of pocket for it and therefore not wait. And, while there might be some people from other countries coming here for medical care, it's not a huge influx. By and large, most people in countries with universal health care (I have a lot of friends who live in Canada and NZ and Australia), are pleased with it.
Have people watched Sicko? -
here's the choice:
--unaffordable healthcare
--no healthcare
--universal healthcare.
which would you choose?
me? i'd stop all our stupid wars and pork barrel spending and give us some f'ing healthcare. the money is there, it's just being allocated for the wrong things. -
i'll add that my father was a physican and the idea of socialized medicine scared the shit out of him. he's likely rolling around in his grave as i type this. but with so many physicians having to stop practicing because they can't afford their insurance premiums--ob gyns, surgeons, etc--i think that ultimately it would free up these care givers to do what they initially went to med school for: to take care of people who are sick.
-
LongTimeSloper wrote: From what I understand, in countries with universal health care, if you don't want to wait (if it's not life threatening, I personally see no big deal in waiting) for your elective or non emergency surgery, it is still possible to pay out of pocket for it and therefore not wait.
Sooo, basically, if you're rich enough to afford it, you're allowed to jump the line and get better and faster treatment than the inefficient care offered to everyone else. Is that what you're advocating?
And you say you don't have a problem waiting for non-life threatening treatment? So you'd be willing to wait weeks or months or years to get an appointment for, say, an ear infection, or to get knee replacement surgery?LongTimeSloper wrote: And, while there might be some people from other countries coming here for medical care, it's not a huge influx.
Ha - I think the fact that anyone would choose to come here for medical care, particularly when it involves, say, a transatlantic flight, means that our system is significantly better than what is offered in Europe. You don't see Americans going to Europe or anywhere else for health care, you see people coming here. This is like the argument that the way of life is so much better elsewhere in the world, and yet immigration to the US is ridiculously higher than anywhere else in the world. It's for a reason.LongTimeSloper wrote: Have people watched Sicko?
And again - you don't hear about people floating on rafts from Florida to Cuba... -
transplant, do you have health insurance? if so, what does it cost you per year, including out of pocket expenses?
-
brooklynpotter wrote: here's the choice:
Actually, there's a fourth choice - affordable healthcare - millions of Americans have it. I have a pretty piss poor job, I make about $32K a year, which doesn't go far at all in NYC, but I can afford healthcare, as can many many other Americans.
--unaffordable healthcare
--no healthcare
--universal healthcare.
which would you choose?
me? i'd stop all our stupid wars and pork barrel spending and give us some f'ing healthcare. the money is there, it's just being allocated for the wrong things.
And again, I really wish you, or any other of the people posting on here, could tell me where the money would come from to fund this "universal healthcare."
To say that we should "stop all our stupid wars" is a facile argument. There will always be a need to fund our military and to provide for self-defense. Granted, at the moment we are spending a ton more than we usually are on military spending, but that is purely temporary. Even when we are at peace we stil must spend billions on defense. This is not going to change.
On the other hand, I completely agree with you on pork-barrel spending, but that is not going to change until both parties clean out Washington. The Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans on this.
Having said that, funding a national, universal health care system to the point where it could provide adequate, timely care to all Americans is impossible. By adequate and timely, I mean the ability to a sick person to make an appointment and see a doctor the same day, if necessary. In many cases, that is not possible right now, but it would exponentially worse under a government-run, taxpayer-funded system.
The way to fix the health care system is to completely privatize it. If the government needs to be involved at all, it should only be to put a stop to the endless lawsuits that are responsible for driving up insurance costs, and therefore, treatment costs. -
brooklynpotter wrote: transplant, do you have health insurance? if so, what does it cost you per year, including out of pocket expenses?
Sorry, posted my last one before seeing this - kinda answered your question, but more specifically: Yes, I have health insurance, subsidized by my employer (I'm an administrative assistant, not overly demanding). I pay about $50 a paycheck (pre-taxes), and I've yet to use it in the two years I've worked here, so my annual costs are approximately $2600, plus if you want to throw in whatever I spend on voluntary preventative care, ie gym membership, otc medicine, etc. So basically myself and my employer have been paying for other people's health care already, even without universal health care. And it sucks. Why should I have to pay even more for other people's health care, that I don't even use? -
transplant, if by "afforable healthcare" you mean healthy new york, that's basically not healthcare at all. i had it, i ran through the benefits in 5 months. healthy new york is essentially a plan for healthy new yorkers
-
transplant, you work in an office that gives you healthcare. you are lucky, many of us don't
and the whole "i don't want to pay for healthcare i don't use"... can be opened wide up for any government/state expense you don't use: medicare, medicaid, public schools, etc -
as long as we're trading anecdotes, i'll throw in that a french colleague from my old job -- where we had pretty good health insurance, certainly not the worst plan i've had -- went home to france for her knee surgery because it would have cost her so much more EVEN WITH INSURANCE to have the surgery here that the flight, etc., was worth it.
back to the topic:
we already spend a tremendous amount on health care as a nation, but we spend it very inefficiently. too much of the money goes to insurance companies, who do not provide medical services. if i were the king of the world, that's the first place i'd go to get the money you're asking about.
and yes, i'd stop the stupid war spending, too. not all defense spending, but there is a limit. it's facile to pretend that there's no middle ground. -
brooklynpotter wrote: transplant, if by "afforable healthcare" you mean healthy new york, that's basically not healthcare at all. i had it, i ran through the benefits in 5 months. healthy new york is essentially a plan for healthy new yorkers
No, I don't mean healthy new york. I mean the health insurance that millions of Americans are able to afford, be it through their employer, or however else they pay for it. Yes, you're right, it's not affordable for everyone, and that's unfortunate, but quality health care is a finite resource. It would be great if everyone could eat gourmet meals every night too, but that costs money, because gourmet meals take extensive training to prepare, and are therefore expensive. Medical training is also very expensive and time-consuming, and it's therefore not available to everyone. I feel like I shouldn't have to explain the laws of supply and demand to an adult.
I'm sorry for your personal troubles, but I don't understand why you think the government has the right to take my money to pay for your health care. -
transplant wrote: [quote=LongTimeSloper]From what I understand, in countries with universal health care, if you don't want to wait (if it's not life threatening, I personally see no big deal in waiting) for your elective or non emergency surgery, it is still possible to pay out of pocket for it and therefore not wait.
Sooo, basically, if you're rich enough to afford it, you're allowed to jump the line and get better and faster treatment than the inefficient care offered to everyone else. Is that what you're advocating?
And you say you don't have a problem waiting for non-life threatening treatment? So you'd be willing to wait weeks or months or years to get an appointment for, say, an ear infection, or to get knee replacement surgery?LongTimeSloper wrote: And, while there might be some people from other countries coming here for medical care, it's not a huge influx.
Ha - I think the fact that anyone would choose to come here for medical care, particularly when it involves, say, a transatlantic flight, means that our system is significantly better than what is offered in Europe. You don't see Americans going to Europe or anywhere else for health care, you see people coming here. This is like the argument that the way of life is so much better elsewhere in the world, and yet immigration to the US is ridiculously higher than anywhere else in the world. It's for a reason.LongTimeSloper wrote: Have people watched Sicko?
And again - you don't hear about people floating on rafts from Florida to Cuba...
OK-first off all-you were talking about surgery-not ear infections, I have never heard of anyone waiting 2 years for basic health care in countries with universal medicine-never! And, we are not talking about Cuba-we are talking about Europe, Canada, etc.. You are so blowing this out of proportion it is not funny!
And, I do see people going to other countries for health care-I know a man who went to Columbia recently for heart surgery because it was significantly cheaper there than here and his health insurance here would not cover it all. i also know people who go to Canada for health care and prescriptions all the time due to the fact that they do not have health coverage here to pay for it-yet, in Canada, you can go to a clinic and get seen by a doctor just by the fact that you are a citizen of that country.
And, again, have you seen Sicko? -
And again, I really wish you, or any other of the people posting on here, could tell me where the money would come from to fund this "universal healthcare."
Gee, I bet all the money that has been spent on the most recent war would have funded a universal healthcare program rather nicely. what has the government spent? A trillion dollars? -
transplant wrote: but quality health care is a finite resource. It would be great if everyone could eat gourmet meals every night too, but that costs money, because gourmet meals take extensive training to prepare, and are therefore expensive. Medical training is also very expensive and time-consuming, and it's therefore not available to everyone. I feel like I shouldn't have to explain the laws of supply and demand to an adult.
1. "quality healthcare" isn't a limited resource in the way oil or gold or diamonds are. it's more like tomatoes. if you want more tomatoes, plant more tomatoes and fewer eggplant. likewise, there could be more "quality healthcare" if we decide that healthcare -- rather than, say, insurance company ads, administrative costs, and CEO raises -- was what we were going to spend our money on.
.
2. it's gross to compare healthcare to gourmet meals, unless by "healthcare" you mean "cosmetic surgery". it would be more fair to compare it to food in general. we've decided to feed our people, partly because it's the right thing to do, and partly because a starving underclass isn't so good for political stability, and revolutions aren't as much fun as they're cracked up to be. -
LongTimeSloper wrote:
Yes, sarcasm is fun for all, but do you have any idea how much it would cost to fund a national, universal health care system that actually works? A hell of a lot more than a trillion dollars.And again, I really wish you, or any other of the people posting on here, could tell me where the money would come from to fund this "universal healthcare."
Gee, I bet all the money that has been spent on the most recent war would have funded a universal healthcare program rather nicely. what has the government spent? A trillion dollars? -
oh, and what's up with the "obama wants to redistribute the wealth, vote mccain" business in general lately? is mccain suddenly promising to do away with all taxes? because if not, he's still redistributing. that's what taxes do.
bush has taken MY MONEY and spent it on vanity wars i don't agree with that kill my friends. i'd rather see it clear up somebody else's ear-infection, thanks.
and one more thing: you haven't been buying healthcare with your employer. you've been buying INSURANCE. insurance works by having you pay now with the promise that they'll pay later, even if that means they pay more money than you've ever given them, so that a car accident or heart attack won't end up with your losing your losing your house. if you haven't gotten your money's worth yet, that's because you haven't had the catastrophic event you've been insuring yourself against. there's always hope that you'll win big later, i suppose. -
sweet tea wrote: 1. "quality healthcare" isn't a limited resource in the way oil or gold or diamonds are. it's more like tomatoes. if you want more tomatoes, plant more tomatoes and fewer eggplant. likewise, there could be more "quality healthcare" if we decide that healthcare -- rather than, say, insurance company ads, administrative costs, and CEO raises -- was what we were going to spend our money on.
"We decide..." By which you mean the government decides. I'd much rather be able to choose for myself what I spend my money on. I don't need healthcare at the moment, so I'd prefer to save my money for when I do, not have the government steal it to pay for other people's health care, on the vague assurance that when I do actually need health care, the system will still be functioning well enought to provide it. That's worked out so well with Social Security...and the government can "decide" all it wants to throw money at health care, but it can't force people to go to medical school, and where is this money coming from? From taxes! Universal health care is not free! And do you really believe that the government will be less wasteful with healthcare dollars than private companies currently are?
One of you, anyone in here, please: Tell me why the government should be able to take my money in order to pay for the health care of other people?
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 40K All Categories
- 27.1K Neighborhoods
- 5.1K Crown Heights/Prospect Lefferts Gardens
- 7.1K Prospect Heights
- 2.3K Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy
- 8K Park Slope
- 549 Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
- 442 Flatbush/Midwood/Ditmas Park
- 657 BoCoCa (Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens)
- 151 Red Hook
- 104 Gowanus
- 304 Bay Ridge/Bensonhurst
- 130 Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay
- 270 Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO and Downtown
- 598 Windsor Terrace / Kensington
- 673 Greenwood Heights and Sunset Park
- 749 Brooklyn and Beyond
- 6.3K Stuff
- 86 Brooklyn Back When
- 1.2K Brooklyn Pets
- 257 Brooklyn Kids
- 241 Brooklyn Eats
- 51 Brooklyn Booze
- 3.6K The Lounge / Random Stuff
- 611 Brooklyn Politics
- 122 Brooklyn Sports and Fitness
- 111 Brooklyn Photos
- 339 Site Issues
- 8 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- 6.2K Listings
- 1.1K APARTMENTS and REAL ESTATE
- 1.3K Sales Openings Events
- 2.3K The Classifieds