| | |
The C.I.A.'s illegal business
![]() |
Kinda figured you'd say that, being republican (no offense), but I'm glad you presented both sides of the argument. I think if you become a doctor you can't get so far in the profession if you are doing it only for the money. I think many of them feel they are helping people and they probably feel pretty bad when patients die on them. That just means, they care about the people they are trying to help. And I think they wouldn't mind the inconvenience too much if they would be able to help more people than they already are. But, I want to know how it is doctors and medical professionals get screwed? (And just if it counts I'll throw it in. My mom is a registered nurse and she supports universal healthcare. She believes in will benefit her patients and/or potential patients)
Disclaimer: Nothing I say can be considered credible information (I wonder what that means about this disclaimer then).
It's better than no healthcare. You are being very very vague in your explanation. A simple, "government touches it, and it's bad" is a poor argument. C'mon. Convince me. Well, the government is in charge the social security and I think that's a good program. Better than privatized social security, in my opinion.
Disclaimer: Nothing I say can be considered credible information (I wonder what that means about this disclaimer then).
•
•
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 126
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 1
Social Security good? LOL Maybe in concept. But not in implementation, along with welfare and public education. The US government is horribly inefficient. All this does is give more control to the government. Once the government gets hold of healthcare it will not give it back. Just another step towards socialized America.
What's so bad about nationalized social security as opposed to privatized social security? You fail to even provide evidence or examples. And what do you mean "give it back"? After receiving health care for free, why would I want them to take it away? Nations like Canada, and France, along with others seem to be doing just fine in this respect.
Last edited by sk8ndestroy14; Jun 28th, 2007 at 9:28 pm.
Disclaimer: Nothing I say can be considered credible information (I wonder what that means about this disclaimer then).
•
•
•
•
It's better than no healthcare. You are being very very vague in your explanation. A simple, "government touches it, and it's bad" is a poor argument. C'mon. Convince me. Well, the government is in charge the social security and I think that's a good program. Better than privatized social security, in my opinion.
"One of the methods used by statists to destroy capitalism consists in establishing controls that tie a given industry hand and foot, making it unable to solve its problems, then declaring that freedom has failed and stronger controls are necessary." --Ayn Rand
•
•
•
•
What's so bad about nationalized social security as opposed to privatized social security? You fail to even provide evidence or examples. And what do you mean "give it back"? After receiving health care for free, why would I want them to take it away? Nations like Canada, and France, along with others seem to be doing just fine in this respect.
I hope you will remember that I told you I am originally from Spain.
Over there that's what we have. Exactly like France.
You need to get in a schedule list to be considerate for an operation necesary for health and for you to function. You know how long do you have to wait for it. Think a year if you are lucky. Most people end up paying what we call `private' doctors to get attended correctly.
I know how terrible it is. And it boils my blood just to talk about it.
•
•
•
•
Kinda figured you'd say that, being republican (no offense), but I'm glad you presented both sides of the argument. I think if you become a doctor you can't get so far in the profession if you are doing it only for the money. I think many of them feel they are helping people and they probably feel pretty bad when patients die on them. That just means, they care about the people they are trying to help. And I think they wouldn't mind the inconvenience too much if they would be able to help more people than they already are. But, I want to know how it is doctors and medical professionals get screwed? (And just if it counts I'll throw it in. My mom is a registered nurse and she supports universal healthcare. She believes in will benefit her patients and/or potential patients)
•
•
•
•
It's better than no healthcare. You are being very very vague in your explanation. A simple, "government touches it, and it's bad" is a poor argument. C'mon. Convince me. Well, the government is in charge the social security and I think that's a good program. Better than privatized social security, in my opinion.
Last edited by joshSCH; Jun 28th, 2007 at 11:05 pm.
![]() |
Similar Threads
- Smoking (Geeks' Lounge)
Other Threads in the Geeks' Lounge Forum
- Previous Thread: Where's Your Ticklish Spot?
- Next Thread: Need Support from all of you.
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
advice amazon apple article bankrupt bankruptcy bear beard beijing bot chat children code cognitive_disorder console consoles convert cracked.com daniweb design development dlc ebook election empty facebook feed financialcrisis fun future games gaming google grandtheftauto gta gtaiv halo3 hardware hunting information internet java kids language library life linux love lynx mad manly marketing merger microsoft murder news nintendo obama odf operating os pain parentalcontrol planning playstation population ps3 python research rss school sims software softwaredevelopment sony starteam stocks study subversion survey timeisonmyside. tinfoil_hat unused usarmy vapid videogames viruses walmart wave wii windows windows>all windows_wins world worldofwarcraft wow www xbox xbox360 zomg_conspiracy






