Conquer Club

xelabale wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:I am simply speaking for myself. Gov't take over of health care opposers wish to force nothing on no person. Supporters demand the enforcement of something on EVERYONE. Simple, done, end of story. Supporters are fascist communists in its simplest form. Opposers love liberty and freedom. its as simple as that. Dance around it, disguise it all you want. All we are saying is....

DON'T TREAD ON ME

Good trollery, I'm impressed, but I think you went to far with the "nothing on no person", people aren't gonna buy that. Now git orf my laand.



PS tax.








Hahahahaha did I scare you?

OH GOD, OK. lets play your game. what exactly is it that opposers of gov't takeover wish to impose on others?

Caring for others less fortunate than you. Next.

el-presidente wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:I am simply speaking for myself. Gov't take over of health care opposers wish to force nothing on no person. Supporters demand the enforcement of something on EVERYONE. Simple, done, end of story. Supporters are fascist communists in its simplest form. Opposers love liberty and freedom. its as simple as that. Dance around it, disguise it all you want. All we are saying is....

DON'T TREAD ON ME

1) Facist communist is an oxymoron, Facists are anti-communist by deffinition.
2) We are not forcing anything on anyone, you can keep your doctor and your insurance, if you are lucky enough to have good insurance.
3) I love liberty and freedom, but if I am dying of something that I can't afford to get treated for I am hardly free now am I?

oh god, ok ill play your little game.

1) mussolini hated Hitler?
2) you are forcing the tax to pay (DUH)
3) If you are dying of something you can't afford to get treated for probably implies it is VERY expensive. What part of your freedom to have someone else to pay for that expensive treatment(imaginary freedom?) are you willing to take away from another person who works hard for that same money.

Phatscotty wrote:

el-presidente wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:I am simply speaking for myself. Gov't take over of health care opposers wish to force nothing on no person. Supporters demand the enforcement of something on EVERYONE. Simple, done, end of story. Supporters are fascist communists in its simplest form. Opposers love liberty and freedom. its as simple as that. Dance around it, disguise it all you want. All we are saying is....

DON'T TREAD ON ME

1) Facist communist is an oxymoron, Facists are anti-communist by deffinition.
2) We are not forcing anything on anyone, you can keep your doctor and your insurance, if you are lucky enough to have good insurance.
3) I love liberty and freedom, but if I am dying of something that I can't afford to get treated for I am hardly free now am I?

oh god, ok ill play your little game.

1) mussolini hated Hitler?
2) you are forcing the tax to pay (DUH)
3) If you are dying of something you can't afford to get treated for probably implies it is VERY expensive. What part of your freedom to have someone else to pay for that expensive treatment(imaginary freedom?) are you willing to take away from another person who works hard for that same money.

1) Hitler was a communist?
2) You have to pay tax anyway
3) less than 1 cent per person

3 questions for you:
1) why don't you want to help other Americans?
2) What will you do when you get ill?
3) Do you use anything nationalised right now (army, postal service, fire service, school, etc)?

Phatscotty wrote:3) If you are dying of something you can't afford to get treated for probably implies it is VERY expensive. What part of your freedom to have someone else to pay for that expensive treatment(imaginary freedom?) are you willing to take away from another person who works hard for that same money.

Sanctity of human life FAIL.

Phatscotty wrote:OH GOD, OK. lets play your game. what exactly is it that opposers of gov't takeover wish to impose on others?

xelabale wrote:Caring for others less fortunate than you. Next.

What?

spurgistan wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:3) If you are dying of something you can't afford to get treated for probably implies it is VERY expensive. What part of your freedom to have someone else to pay for that expensive treatment(imaginary freedom?) are you willing to take away from another person who works hard for that same money.

Sanctity of human life FAIL.

I am forced to pay for your expensive treatment? You know what, this is a waste of time, cuz your demand for socialism here in AMERICA will never fucking happen. WE are too smart, you are too lazy and demanding and apathetic. So keep trying, since i know someone who is super scared they wont be able to afford to live, won't get a single thing accomplished on this issue. You lost before you ever started

Phatscotty wrote:

spurgistan wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:3) If you are dying of something you can't afford to get treated for probably implies it is VERY expensive. What part of your freedom to have someone else to pay for that expensive treatment(imaginary freedom?) are you willing to take away from another person who works hard for that same money.

Sanctity of human life FAIL.

I am forced to pay for your expensive treatment? You know what, this is a waste of time, cuz your demand for socialism here in AMERICA will never fucking happen. WE are too smart, you are too lazy and demanding and apathetic. So keep trying, since i know someone who is super scared they wont be able to afford to live, won't get a single thing accomplished on this issue. You lost before you ever started

Get over it, it's happening, the people of America spoke and they asked for socialism - they knew what they were getting, YOU are in the minority.

More questions for you:
If your neighbour needs chemo, how much do you think you're going to have to pay?
Do you have insurance? - How much does that cost?
Do you agree with what the government spends tax money on now?

Why are you such a dick that you would rather lat thousands of people die than pay a little more taxes?

el-presidente wrote:Why are you such a dick that you would rather lat thousands of people die than pay a little more taxes?

What about people dying from lung cancer from smoking 3 packs a day? how about the guy that eats 3 cheesburgers a day. its because it takes the emphasis of "personal responsibility" something which is 100% absent from your statements. and it wont be a little more taxes? you just have no clue what you are talking about. If you can, in 1 sentence, point out to me the main tax that is being considered right now, and how much it is and what kind of a tax it is, i will continue this conversation with you. If you can not, why should i listen to you about taxes?

Let me explain how national healthcare will change your life...

1. Instead of paying money to the insurance company, you will be paying it to the government.
2. If you don't get sick right now, the insurance company earns a profit off your money. If you don't get sick under national healthcare, the money you pay goes to help someone who is sick.

The only thing bad about national health care is the large chance that it will be of poor quality. I fail to see how you prefer having Insurance companies get rich rather than having that money go to people in need.

Please don't ignore this post as you did with my prior.

Are you saying that everyone that needs help brought it upon themselves?

i am pointing out people such as drunk drivers, smokers, drug abusers, bungee jumpers, car racers, stunt doubles, people who think they can make their own wings and fly. newsflash for humanity, people get sick, people die. its natural. if you worked hard your whole life and "THOUGHT AHEAD" you have the chance to choose treatment. you socialists are all lazy losers. all you have is "emotional" instances that pull on peoples "feelings" REGARDLESS of COST or REALITY. your argument is a socialist argument, and i will fight it all day for all my life, socialist pukes. TAKE THIS FREEDOM BABY, TAKE IT! from my cold-dead hands you commie. Socialism will never happen here, NEVER

Err, it is, suck it up cupcake.

So people who get sick deserve to suffer? Why bother having hospitals at all?

Any thoughts on this:

xelabale wrote:More questions for you:
If your neighbour needs chemo, how much do you think you're going to have to pay?
Do you have insurance? - How much does that cost?
Do you agree with what the government spends tax money on now?

I think that all of you can realize that a huge, bureaucratic government such as the one that we currently have is terribly inefficient at running most of the programs that is currently has taken on ( a great example would be Social Security). Yet, you still want to give it even more responsibility, and this time you want to make this inept pile of ass kissers responsible for the health of you and your loved ones. You are also eerily complacent about your money being spent on something that has absolutely no effect whatsoever on yourself or anything that you truly car about. WTF?

Do the current companies really handle anything any better than the government does? When was the last time you thought to yourself, Hmmm, I am really glad my insurance company has me in their best interest and cares more about me than about money?

Burrito wrote:I think that all of you can realize that a huge, bureaucratic government such as the one that we currently have is terribly inefficient at running most of the programs that is currently has taken on ( a great example would be Social Security). Yet, you still want to give it even more responsibility, and this time you want to make this inept pile of ass kissers responsible for the health of you and your loved ones.

Who's asses are the government kissing? It may be inefficient, but it'll definitely be fair. Why not fight for an efficient socialised system, if that's your argument against it? Do you agree in principle with socialised healthcare, or the way it may be run?

Burrito wrote:You are also eerily complacent about your money being spent on something that has absolutely no effect whatsoever on yourself or anything that you truly car about. WTF?

So the people arguing for socialised healthcare don't care about healthcare? How I recieve treatent and pay for it has no effect on me whatsoever? I don't understand your point, you seem to be saying that anyone who cares enough to be taking time to write about it on an internet forum doesn't care? WTF?

captainwalrus wrote:Do the current companies really handle anything any better than the government does? When was the last time you thought to yourself, Hmmm, I am really glad my insurance company has me in their best interest and cares more about me than about money?

It doesn't matter whether or not they care about me. Their desire for my money and their desire for other customers to both be attracted to their company and to retain their current customers will force them to provide the service that they claim to. this is the basic principle of capitalism. However, they will do whatever they think they can get away with, which is why the consumers must remain vigilant and wary of the companies they choose to give their money to.

xelabale wrote:So the people arguing for socialised healthcare don't care about healthcare? How I recieve treatent and pay for it has no effect on me whatsoever? I don't understand your point, you seem to be saying that anyone who cares enough to be taking time to write about it on an internet forum doesn't care? WTF?

I was referring to whoever it was who said something along the lines that it didn't bother them that their money might be spent on some strangers health

xelabale wrote:Who's asses are the government kissing? It may be inefficient, but it'll definitely be fair. Why not fight for an efficient socialised system, if that's your argument against it? Do you agree in principle with socialised healthcare, or the way it may be run?

I was calling the government itself a pile of ass kissers, as all most of them care about it pleasing the person above them in order to receive some sort of reward. I don't believe in my money going to the government to pay for some other person's health. It won't "definitely be fair". There are many cases of deserving people missing out on government handouts while slackers who have never worked a day in their lives live of my tax money. I know several people who graduated high school last year, and they went straight to the welfare station and receiving welfare, just because they are lazy, while this money could be much better spent in other areas of the government.

You trust insurance companies? The amount of profit they make is directly linked to how much they don't help you. The incentives work so that the less care you receive, the bigger their profit. However, they still need you to buy their insurance. Thus you end up with a system where only the healthiest are allowed insurance (after all, you can't offer insurance to someone who might get sick), then the insurance company does everything they can not to pay out if you do get sick. Brilliant. And to make sure you keep buying insurance they need to do 2 things:
1 make sure you're all scared, so you buy insurance, hence all the ads
2 make sure the government doesn't interfere, hence the pay-offs to politicians and the massive lobbies

As soon as money is involved, decisions are taken financially rather than because of what is right.

Linking war to money is SICK.
Linking basic education to money is SICK.
Linking the police to money is SICK.
Linking health to money is SICK.

Dear OP,

Stop thinking about how you hate other people and don't want them to have money for a few minutes and answer me this: HOW DOES NATIONAL HEALTHCARE NEGATIVELY AFFECT YOU?

The Neon Peon wrote:Let me explain how national healthcare will change your life...

1. Instead of paying money to the insurance company, you will be paying it to the government.
2. If you don't get sick right now, the insurance company earns a profit off your money. If you don't get sick under national healthcare, the money you pay goes to help someone who is sick.

The only thing bad about national health care is the large chance that it will be of poor quality. I fail to see how you prefer having Insurance companies get rich rather than having that money go to people in need.

Please don't ignore this post as you did with my prior.

Everything the government does, drives up prices for ALL Americans.
When the government began providing loans to make college affordable, College Tuition prices EXPLODED.
When the government created Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to make Housing Affordable, Housing Prices went THROUGH THE ROOF!

Only a F'ing MORON would argue for the gov't to make health care affordable. With this in-arguable track record....only a F'ing MORON or an ENEMY

Phatscotty wrote:Everything the government does, drives up prices for ALL Americans.
When the government began providing loans to make college affordable, College Tuition prices EXPLODED.
When the government created Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to make Housing Affordable, Housing Prices went THROUGH THE ROOF!

Only a F'ing MORON would argue for the gov't to make health care affordable. With this in-arguable track record....only a F'ing MORON or an ENEMY

You are fixated by money money money. How can you live with the inequality? You are okay, f*ck everyone else - that's what makes America great?

A FRIEND

Phatscotty wrote:Everything the government does, drives up prices for ALL Americans.
When the government began providing loans to make college affordable, College Tuition prices EXPLODED.
When the government created Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to make Housing Affordable, Housing Prices went THROUGH THE ROOF!

Only a F'ing MORON would argue for the gov't to make health care affordable. With this in-arguable track record....only a F'ing MORON or an ENEMY

However, there is a difference...

In all the cases you described, the government was offering help to get money for something, so the analogy would work if the government was offering nationalized health insurance. However, the government is offering nationalized health care, which means it is competing with other companies, which is not what your instances describe.

Your analogy works against yourself.
1. When the government opened up their own colleges, they were free or much cheaper than actual colleges (although they are worse at educating people)
2. Haven't you noticed that housing prices have dropped massively since Freddie Mac and Frannie Mae?

Phatscotty wrote:Only a F'ing MORON would argue for the gov't to make health care affordable. With this in-arguable track record....only a F'ing MORON or an ENEMY

So why is it all less expensive in Europe?

Snorri1234 wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:Only a F'ing MORON would argue for the gov't to make health care affordable. With this in-arguable track record....only a F'ing MORON or an ENEMY

So why is it all less expensive in Europe?

You forget that he has made it clear that he hates everything foreign and so he doesn't listen to it, so that argument won't work, unfortunately.