StrangeSox

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 26, 2010 -> 02:44 PM) One of these words doesn't seem to make sense... There's perimeter fences you can bury underground, but I wouldn't call them an "electric" fence.

No, I don't and I didn't say that. I'm asking you to support your claim that single-payer or nationalized health care leads to zero innovation, because so far you haven't. And we have demonstrable evidence to the contrary, because medical research and advancement does come out of those countries and their is still profit motive to provide better services. But, just to throw another wrench into your argument, where does a lot funding for medical research in this country come from, especially basic science? Spoiler alert: NIH! Government Saves! The ridiculous assertion that Britain hasn't made any significant medical contributions since 1945 aside, you still haven't explained why a single-payer system means there's no reason to improve business operations, medical techniques, customer service, medicine, etc. You can capture larger client bases and/ or reduce expenses even if your price is fixed. You can treat more people with new drugs and procedures and better diagnoses. And, of course, the radical idea that some people might become doctors, pharmacists, chemists, biologists, nurses, etc. because they want to help people.

So no medical research or advancement has come out of Britain and other single-payer countries for several decades? Do you really believe that?

Yeah, I figured DLC will continue the story.

Who says there's not a profit incentive? A fixed price doesn't mean a fixed profit. Has the British NHS (or any other single-payer or national health scheme) been stagnant in terms of medical care for decades? Have they not had any medical advances in the country?

I'm hesitant to attribute it to there being a black democrat Muslim Kenyan usurper in office, because I wouldn't be shocked if there really was a decent amount of Americans who always felt like that.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Jun 25, 2010 -> 06:34 PM) Look above the picture. A home run from Gordon will do that to ya. I know man, just giving you s***.

28% of Americans say civilian control of the military is bad. I wonder if it has anything to do with having a democrat in charge or if this is a pretty stable finding.

QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Jun 25, 2010 -> 06:18 PM) eh, there's a difference between being crazy and just being a prick, I wouldn't be shocked if he goes somewhere like the LAD if they can add some payroll and he excels again. But he's always been a head case. It's seems likely that there's something going on there.

You're not guaranteed the same volume of customers no matter what. Doctor A charge $100. Doctor B charges $100. Doctor A is much better than Doctor B, so he gets a hell of a lot more customers. He's also developed more efficient methods, and so his profits are higher and he makes more. Having the price fixed at a certain dollar amount doesn't mean you make the same amount of money no matter what and that competition vanishes.

Who's that jerk?

He needs help. Seriously.

Presumably people would still prefer to go to the better hospital.

DLee can be seen clearly shouting "that's bulls***" at Zambrano in the clip.

Another gem by this team. It's like the season started over again two weeks ago. This whole place is giddy.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 25, 2010 -> 03:48 PM) more money --> better facilities and programs --> easier to attract better doctors and more specialists --> you recieve better and more sophisticated health care. They said profit, not revenue. Expenditures on facilities, programs, doctors, equipment etc. all come out before profit is calculated. So, they could spend even more on those things if they were non-profit. But what about the insurance companies? What innovations are we looking for there with a profit model vs. a completely non-profit model?

Not very far-fetched considering we have a Kenyan Muslim usurper in office now!

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jun 25, 2010 -> 02:58 PM) OHHHHH, yes, the 3% of the population and use 25% of a resource arguement. f*** that, we need to blow ourselves up. Now get off your oily made computer. OHHHHH yes that fact that makes your point wrong, f*** that fact. You are a master logician, kap.

RBI at least

MLB At-Bat had that pitch at least 3 inches off the plate also "The Pulse" for the Cubs is pretty much flat all game. LOL.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 25, 2010 -> 04:33 PM) He was an OK last man on the roster. Why not hate daily on this year's last man on the roster, Lilly? Wise did not deserve the booing. Wise was a decent last man on the roster. He had speed and made the best catch you will ever see to save a perfect game. He was a very bad last man on the roster who made a phenomenal catch.

Kotsay=fail

TCQ! TCQ! TCQ! he's back.

We are, by a wide margin, the biggest user.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 25, 2010 -> 12:00 PM) Read your history books and look beyond the fluffy language. They had representation. They had British representatives (keep in mind, colonists were British too...) in the colonies that represented them in Parliament. It was taxes man. People didn't like having to pay for every item they used simply because a government across the pond told them to. But I've said my peace on both topics. I'm not wasting a day and 7 pages arguing over distinctions that IMO don't have relevance to my point. oh ok.