Texsox

Original content is always cool around here

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Aug 31, 2009 -> 05:13 PM) That's pretty good list. I salute you. but this should be US citizens only. people here on visas need to be covered by their employer. There are no group policies under this plan. What is the difference if the green card or Visa person takes their salary and pays their premium, or the company pays it direct?

Jim really seems to put some thoiught into his posts Keep beating me Jim, just keep beating me to the post

Zero chance there won't be an inquiry

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 31, 2009 -> 11:14 AM) That wasn't serious, but it really doesn't help. If any other business had $10 trillion in accumulated losses, it wouldn't be around still. Could you imagine the late fees on that debt?

SS, almost every state has limits on fees and interest that financial institutions can charge, what do you think of them? Consumer protection or unfair restrictions on banks? I am uncertain of the history of these laws, but I am assuming they were a backlash against excessive fees that the banks were charging, or shameless pandering for votes by politicians. :-)

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 31, 2009 -> 09:25 AM) So out of curiousity, what should happen to the banks when customers don't pay? That is a fair question, and what is in place seems to be the best solution for the banks. What do we do if what is in the best interest of the company/bank/private entity is not in the best interest of consumers and ultimately the US?

I always get stuck on the thought that if X is the person the voters elect, why place any barriers to X?

Obviously I agree with Rex. Seems like a goal that everyone should agree with. I get the feeling that if a President issued a Kennedy-esque challenge like landing, and returning, a man on the moon, the opposition party would do everything they could to thwart the efforts.

How about the age?

Quiet, I am trying to type

lots of luck keeping it down around here

Elves are sometime scary/ f*** a ghost beat me

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 31, 2009 -> 08:12 AM) I just googled it... Is Forbes good enough? http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/27/ted-kenne...r-robinson.html Gee looks like my link, I guess you have me on ignore I feel like Balta Well written piece, and since he was Reagan's speechwriter, we should expect nothing less.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Aug 31, 2009 -> 09:29 AM) and that's why I am conflicted. It's a solid counter point. It kind of comes down to "best available" why reject the majority of people on the planet automatically? Especially if the person is the one voted on by the citizens?

Another confusing moment in this thread

Zoom was a lousy TV show

Xerox is not what I mean when I refer to reproducing with my girlfriend

Very interesting Fla, perhaps I should verify my supplier.

Sure, that's the ticket. Rim salt poisoning

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Aug 31, 2009 -> 08:57 AM) So, I've pondered this before and I still have yet to come to a clear decision on my stance. While I understand why this was implemented back then, I am not totally sure how applicable it is today. The example I use is if a kid was born in say... Sweden... and at the age of 3 moved to America with his family, by the time he is 35, he's probably going to be no less American than I am. So, whose to say he is less deserving to be President for the country he loves? But at the same time, i can see how it is a deterrent from keeping some guy who may have been born in say... Kenya... and be secretly Muslim, be a great charismatic guy,... only to use that charisma to transform America into some kind of socialist Muslim country. ok ok... you get the joke there, but the point is valid i think. We have home born and bred citizens capable of leading us down a path we do not want to go.

The vision of what each of us have of the future of health care in this country must be so dramatically different. Listening to the public, I think some believe the Doctors will be forced to close their offices and come work for the some giant government run assembly line of health care. Tens of thousands of closed Doctor offices across the landscape. Doctors closing their practices and selling real estate or becoming Monavie distributors. On the other side, I think some believe we'll have an express lane into seeing a Doctor, all tests will be performed the same day, and all the negatives will disappear.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Aug 31, 2009 -> 08:47 AM) TECHNICALLY, they were all born in what would become the United States of America... just not before we were independent from Great Brittan. Fair enough.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 31, 2009 -> 08:36 AM) Where is your line? What exact freedoms are you willing to give up so the government can make things "better"? I hear a lot of s*** from people who are willing to turn their lives over to the government, but I am curious for you all to start answering your own questions? Speech? Religion? Movement? Property? How do you define "turning your life over to" Boarding a plane that was inspected, controlled, etc by the government? Buying food that was inspected by the government? Driving on bridges that were inspected by the government? Allowing police to monitor your movements as you walk down the street? Use the court system to put someone to death? If you mean having the government pay my Doctor instead of some insurance company, I have no problem with that. I would be "turning my life over" to a private insurance company, not of my choosing.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 31, 2009 -> 08:19 AM) Exactly. So why would you support the governmentally organized destruction of our medical system? I'll take a chance and give a full explanation. Because the current system will not be in America's best interest moving forward. The current system is based on companies offering health insurance to their employees. Smaller companies, those that keep jobs in the US instead of outsourcing to foreign countries, have the roughest time offering that benefit. I see small business as the greatest driving force in our economy; moving insurance away from a benefit of employment will help those small businesses to compete for the best employees. Further individual health is actually a community health issue. So many diseases are communicable. By treating the society as a whole, we stand a better chance at a more healthy population for everyone, not just those lucky enough to work for a company that offers health insurance, or who is married to someone with health insurance benefits. Finally, I trust out elected leaders to change the face of health care before the CEOs of insurance companies. The insurance companies have already destroyed the system of the 50s, 60s, and 70s when patients truly had a choice in who they saw or what hospital they visited. Patients have no real choice in who they are insured with, and depending on policy, have no real choice in which provider to see. That doesn't seem very free to me, especially compared to the 70s when I was growing up. And it all started with a simple "benefit". Go to this Doctor and we (the insurance company) will handle the payment. Soon the insurance company had routed their customers to the Doctors that they chose. The patient is the least powerful cog in the current system. They lack the knowledge of the medical community and the money of the insurance company. They are a source of profit or loss for the insurance company. And finally, I believe in America and the people who live here to build the best system on the planet. But I've always been a big fan of the USA and our unlimited potential to do good.