|
boondock_saint
Jul 28, 2006, 9:30 PM
Post #76 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2005
Posts: 2157
|
In reply to: In reply to: Oh yeah - efficiency/cost does matter and (for the most part) productivity closely correlates to income. Yes, because major league baseball players are typically more productive members of society than farmers.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
PwN3d again!!!!!!11!!!11!!1
|
|
|
|
|
zozo
Jul 28, 2006, 10:20 PM
Post #78 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2004
Posts: 3431
|
The only people who say they (Richer people) will pay more is Reno. And where he is getting his info I have no idea.
A Primer - PDF
|
|
|
|
|
remi
Jul 28, 2006, 10:32 PM
Post #79 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 3, 2005
Posts: 424
|
Don't rich people pay more for the same services all the time anyways? i.e. their taxes are higher?
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Jul 28, 2006, 11:09 PM
Post #80 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: In reply to: Oh, look everyone... It's BobD, who hasn't made a decent argument without plagarizing work from some anonymous webpage, so he tries to make insults about people with opposing viewpoints. Real classy, Bob. What a legacy you've built. A much bigger one than you. My family, my friends, my work, my guidebooks, my climbing (new routes and my work at different climbing area).
Next tactic is to pull the "Hey, I climb harder" argument.... wait for it.
Such intellectual greatness is astounding. Just astounding.
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Jul 28, 2006, 11:14 PM
Post #81 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: In reply to: Oh yeah - efficiency/cost does matter and (for the most part) productivity closely correlates to income. Yes, because major league baseball players are typically more productive members of society than farmers.
You must have missed that "for the most part."
Baseball players get an income according to what the market is willing to pay them. It's altered a bit due to unions, who have ALWAYS negotiated more for the employees than the market was willing to pay, but if you get people to stop paying $75 a ticket to see a ball game, it's a safe bet that ball clubs won't be paying Alex Rodriguez some hundred million a year.
|
|
|
|
|
bobd1953
Jul 28, 2006, 11:40 PM
Post #82 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
In reply to: Next tactic is to pull the "Hey, I climb harder" argument.... wait for it. Such intellectual greatness is astounding. Just astounding.
You asked a question...I gave you a answer.
Pretty simple shit here Reno.
You don't seems to understand that we disagree on a few issues. You have a right to your opinions and so do I.
The plan facts of matter on health care in America is that for the most part...it sucks. It is out of reach for the struggling middle class, the government already spends twice as much as countries with a national plan and we insure 1/5 the amount of people.
We also rank near the bottom of the list (of first world countries) in a number of serious categories that effect the well being of our citizens.
Your basic issue is you don't wants to pay more...Fine. I have no problem paying a little more taxes if it means that ALL citizens of this country have access to basic health care.
Can you understand that.
I do climb harder than you. :D
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Jul 29, 2006, 12:41 AM
Post #83 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: The only people who say they (Richer people) will pay more is Reno. And where he is getting his info I have no idea. A Primer - PDF
Well, me and Hillary, for starters. ;)
|
|
|
|
|
climbinginchico
Jul 29, 2006, 12:46 AM
Post #84 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 3032
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Oh yeah - efficiency/cost does matter and (for the most part) productivity closely correlates to income. Yes, because major league baseball players are typically more productive members of society than farmers. You must have missed that "for the most part." Baseball players get an income according to what the market is willing to pay them. It's altered a bit due to unions, who have ALWAYS negotiated more for the employees than the market was willing to pay, but if you get people to stop paying $75 a ticket to see a ball game, it's a safe bet that ball clubs won't be paying Alex Rodriguez some hundred million a year.
A-Rod only makes $25,000,000 a year. Chump change. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Jul 29, 2006, 1:23 AM
Post #85 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
In reply to: You must have missed that "for the most part." Baseball players get an income according to what the market is willing to pay them. It's altered a bit due to unions, who have ALWAYS negotiated more for the employees than the market was willing to pay, but if you get people to stop paying $75 a ticket to see a ball game, it's a safe bet that ball clubs won't be paying Alex Rodriguez some hundred million a year.
I didn't miss anything. I just used a more outrageous example as an illustration.
There are many low paying jobs that our society depends on. There are a lot of reasons that these jobs may be low paying, especially if the jobs require minimal education or training. That doesn't make these jobs less productive.
A doctor at a private practice more than likely earns more than one of the people who unloaded from a truck a box of supplies used in said practice. If that menial unloading job enables the doctor to do his job, then how can the former be less productive than the latter?
And if we go back to someone unloading crap from trucks in a warehouse, this person may make good money, but it's not so unlikely that they won't since any one person doing that job can be replaced without too much trouble. The thing is, with the way our current society runs, the job of unloading trucks is indispensible. Our society does not run without these people; not the doctors, not the lawyers, not the politicians not the stock brokers and so on. If these people get paid less on average than any of the jobs that depend on them, explain to me how they are less productive?
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Jul 29, 2006, 1:38 AM
Post #86 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: There are many low paying jobs that our society depends on. There are a lot of reasons that these jobs may be low paying, especially if the jobs require minimal education or training. That doesn't make these jobs less productive.
I snipped the rest of your post, not because it's not relevant or accurate (it is, on both accounts,) but for brevity's sake.
Productivity is part of the equation, as pointed out, but there's also a great deal more, which I'm sure you understand. There is that whole supply/demand thing, and the more tangible aspect of skill/education. We, as a society, are willing to pay more for a skilled cardiovascular surgeon than we are for a truck/warehouse laborer, if for no other reason than we recognize that pretty much anyone could drive a forklift, but not everyone is capable of performing a fem-pop bypass. That surgeon spent upwards of a dozen years to learn the skills... you could learn to drive a forklift in a few hours.
Similar thing takes part in the baseball analogy: Not everyone can pitch like Roger Clemens, nor bat like Barry Bonds. OK, forget that Barry Bonds example. ;) But the point is made.... lower supply with increased demand = higher prices. Pretty simple, no?
Everyone likes to look for a conspiracy and in the process ignore the basics... Let the market sort itself out, and we'll be better in the long run. Healthcare, as a service, is no different.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jul 29, 2006, 2:18 AM
Post #87 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: .We, as a society, are willing to pay more for a skilled cardiovascular surgeon than we are for a truck/warehouse laborer, if for no other reason than we recognize that pretty much anyone could drive a forklift, but not everyone is capable of performing a fem-pop bypass.
An interesting way to think of all $$$ issues is in pure labor, simply a count of the hours.
A surgeon's time isn't the 31 minutes she's cutting on you. Its the thousands of hours needed to learn how to cut into you that are also reflected in the bill.
Money is nothing more than a reflection of labor, a promise to do work.
Anyway,
You're right, the surgeon is worth more. So to is an engineer, or say a large scale project manager. But we employed those talents right along side blue collar tradesmen and high school drop out day laborers, to build great public works.
We as a society have repeatedly (and not just ours) come to the position that water systems are best held and controlled by government, not the private sector. We seem to feel the same way about the police.
Many of us feel it is also to our society's benefit to adopt a public health care model. We feel that , just as with the waterworks, what we give up in pure efficiency we make up for in community service and public good.
Cheers
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
bobd1953
Jul 29, 2006, 2:39 AM
Post #88 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
In reply to: Many of us feel it is also to our society's benefit to adopt a public health care model. We feel that , just as with the waterworks, what we give up in pure efficiency we make up for in community service and public good.
Bingo!
Like I said before...I have no problem paying more taxes for a health care system that will benefit the entire population of the US.
Image what the 400 billion so far for the war could have done for the quality of life for the citizens of the US????
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Jul 29, 2006, 2:41 AM
Post #89 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: An interesting way to think of all $$$ issues is in pure labor, simply a count of the hours. A surgeon's time isn't the 31 minutes she's cutting on you. Its the thousands of hours needed to learn how to cut into you that are also reflected in the bill.
EXACTLY!
Like that old internet joke about the NASA engineer who submitted an itemized bill for $35,000 to tighten a bolt on the space shuttle:
5 minutes of labor time to tighten bolt: $100.
PhD in Aerospace Engineering to know which bolt to tighten: $34,900.
Everyone deserves the chance to have a healthy life and to get medical care when needed. Nobody has denied that. Additionally, nobody is denying that there needs to be changes to the current US healthcare system.
Just don't take away choice in the process. And don't let the government stand in the way of my health. When politicians and bureaucrats get involved in personal health decisions, you only get disasterous results (see: Terri Schiavo.)
I'm done.... off to have a glass of wine and read about 19th century Japan.
|
|
|
|
|
bobd1953
Jul 29, 2006, 2:47 AM
Post #90 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
In reply to: Just don't take away choice in the process. And don't let the government stand in the way of my health. When politicians and bureaucrats get involved in personal health decisions, you only get disasterous results (see: Terri Schiavo.)
Wrong on the politicians part...look at the countries that provide way better health care for it citizens as model. They are far from being perfect...it a good place to start.
Terri Schiavo was a religious issue...not a health one.
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Jul 29, 2006, 3:17 AM
Post #91 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: Wrong on the politicians part...look at the countries that provide way better health care for it citizens as model. They are far from being perfect...it a good place to start.
Whatever, Bob.
In reply to: Terri Schiavo was a religious issue...not a health one.
WRONG!
It was a matter of politicians getting their noses in the middle of something they had no business getting into. (It wasn't the clergy trying to fast-track things through the courts to get a different ruling.)
When it is time to make decisions about my health, those decisions will be between me, my family, and my doctor. Everyone else can kiss my lilly white ass.
|
|
|
|
|
bobd1953
Jul 29, 2006, 3:27 AM
Post #92 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
In reply to: It was a matter of politicians getting their noses in the middle of something they had no business getting into. (It wasn't the clergy trying to fast-track things through the courts to get a different ruling.)
The politicians were the puppets for the right wing religious zealots. They were playing to/for the far right/pro-life who have run the republican party for the last 6 years.
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Jul 29, 2006, 4:42 AM
Post #93 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: In reply to: It was a matter of politicians getting their noses in the middle of something they had no business getting into. (It wasn't the clergy trying to fast-track things through the courts to get a different ruling.) The politicians were the puppets for the right wing religious zealots. They were playing to/for the far right/pro-life who have run the republican party for the last 6 years.
That doesn't change the fact that it was politicians getting involved in something they should not have.
And that, among other things, is why I do not want politicians having any input into my health. I, quite simply, do not trust any of them.
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Jul 29, 2006, 5:01 AM
Post #94 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
In reply to: In reply to: There are many low paying jobs that our society depends on. There are a lot of reasons that these jobs may be low paying, especially if the jobs require minimal education or training. That doesn't make these jobs less productive. I snipped the rest of your post, not because it's not relevant or accurate (it is, on both accounts,) but for brevity's sake. Productivity is part of the equation, as pointed out, but there's also a great deal more, which I'm sure you understand. There is that whole supply/demand thing, and the more tangible aspect of skill/education. We, as a society, are willing to pay more for a skilled cardiovascular surgeon than we are for a truck/warehouse laborer, if for no other reason than we recognize that pretty much anyone could drive a forklift, but not everyone is capable of performing a fem-pop bypass. That surgeon spent upwards of a dozen years to learn the skills... you could learn to drive a forklift in a few hours. Similar thing takes part in the baseball analogy: Not everyone can pitch like Roger Clemens, nor bat like Barry Bonds. OK, forget that Barry Bonds example. ;) But the point is made.... lower supply with increased demand = higher prices. Pretty simple, no? Everyone likes to look for a conspiracy and in the process ignore the basics... Let the market sort itself out, and we'll be better in the long run. Healthcare, as a service, is no different.
I'm afraid I'm not being clear. We are on the same page, but I want to explain why I posted what I did. I'm not disputing, or even discussing the validity of differences in wages based on profession.
What I'm saying is that income does not directly relate to productivity when you take into consideration all people and all jobs, nor does education. I'm not advocating that people get paid based on their productive value to society; afterall, for all doctors need farmers, farmers need doctors too.
The reason I brought it up:
In reply to: Oh yeah - efficiency/cost does matter and (for the most part) productivity closely correlates to income.
In reply to: 1) Do you think the more productive members of society should be forced to subsidize the less productive members of society? Or to put it another way - Do you think the less productive members of society are entitled to receive forced handouts from the more productive ones?
To go back to what I was saying from the start:
The idea behind a social health care system is not how much you pay for your health care. The idea is that a certain level of health care is a fundamental need for all members of society, so the onus is on society to provide it.
I'm not making any statement on what policy on health care/ insurance the United States of America should hold, not because I don't have an opinion, but because I'm not from that country.
|
|
|
|
|
jpdreamer
Aug 1, 2006, 6:55 AM
Post #95 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 232
|
While there are food stamps and subsidised low income housing, wouldn't national health care in effect raise the basic level of health care accessible by everyone about the basic level of food and shelter? Is health care a more fundamental service than either of these?
National health care, as I understand it, would ammount to allowing anyone to walk into any hospital and get treatment. Emergency services, no matter how extravagant, would be rendered immediately. Non emergency services, if covered, would be a put your name on the list deal.
Should we have a national food care system? That is, any extremely hungry person should be able to go into any restraunt and get served a meal for which the government would foot the bill. If you're not extremely hungry you can go on a waiting list for a table and get served when your number comes up.
Or a national housing system? If you don't have anywhere to spend the night and it's going to be really cold (or really hot) you can get emergency housing at any hotel or motel.
Too apples to oranges? I'm not against nationalized health care, but it seems like it would essentially say that there is a greater fundamental right in society to health care than to food or shelter. (While there is welfare with the intent to provide food and shelter to those in need, the suggestions for implementations of nationalized health care go far above the current food and shelter system. A natural extension of that to health care is more like the free clinic model.)
That's really the only thing that troubles me about it. I mean, food and shelter seem more basic than health care.
|
|
|
|
|
edwardmedina
Aug 1, 2006, 11:24 AM
Post #96 of 96
(1302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2001
Posts: 29
|
In reply to: Even when I fart I make more sense than thorne on his best day ... |
|
|
|
|
|
