(V): then you should stay on topic because here is your quote

"Hey.. that doc there!! Does he need a new 50 foot pool? Isn't 30 foot big enough!!"

welshrugbyfan: But it's not a choice to stay with one insurance company for most. It's tied to work from what I hear.

In the UK you have the choice to choose your health company, if you want to pay for private care....even if you are not rich.

Imagine that!!

Vikings: My point being is not specific to the doctors but over the rate that health insurance costs have sky rocketed way above the rate of inflation in the USA.

from 1999 to 2009 US inflation was 28.8%, wages for the average joe by just over 38%....... Health insurance premium costs have risen by 131%.

It seems (as lamon says) a "cartoonish cliche" that no-one in the conservative camp questions this. Here in the UK we would. We do when it comes to large companies that have monopolies, and put pressure on our government to rectify 'profiteering'.

The rise in premium costs suggests someone in the USA health insurance system is profiteering.. It's not the patients.

welshrugbyfan: unless ObamaCare is repealed, those days are gone.

Vikings: I have friends who are doctors. They live in modest homes, work long hours, and one travels to Sudan to assist in a ministry there (at his own expense). The left loves to vilify those that work hard and earn money as a result.

(V): you devote 4 years of college plus 4 years of med school plus 2 years of internship plus a couple more years of med grad school ( if you specialize) plus 300,000 to 500,000 dollars of debt, and then someone will listen to your complaining

Artful Dodger: BFL is right. But he's just being a mouthpiece for others in the Democrat party.

The libs don't want the wealthy to pay their fair share of taxes. If the top 1% actually did pay their fair share, the libs would go into cardiac arrest... congress might have to vote themselves a pay decrease instead of more pay increases, because fair and equally proportional taxation would mean less money going into the government piggy bank, not more.

That is obviously not what the libs mean by "fair"... it means getting more for themseves.

(V): It's a cartoonish cliche that all docs are fabulously wealthy, and why you think life and liberty is laughable is disturbing. We supposedly have a right to live and the right to be free, unless our government decides otherwise.

The pursuit of happiness means you have the right to go about your business without undue interference. The effect this has had here is people were free to invent new things and market them, but in order for that to happen they had to be free to fail as well. Not everyone fails, and not everyone that fails continues to fail.

Wealth didn't just drop into Americas lap, it developed over time because people were allowed to grow businesses and invent new things. Too much government control over peoples lives has the opposite effect. If enough of your income goes towards a government that uses your money to control every aspect of your life, then where's the motivation to do something other than the usual day to day grind?

Whatever country you live in, healthcare cannot be a right because it relies on the skills of other people. The system in the US (pre Obama) is by far the best. It is a choice of whether or not you pay.

"Health insurance is a product, not a right. The right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness means the right to being free to pursue those things"



if you take the insurance out of it, it sounds like health is a product and not a right... at least when it comes to preventive medicine. It also seems that it's ok for someone to lose everything they have worked for just to pay for the medical care they need to obtain relief from illnesses that cause their '''happiness''' to be a past memory.

Hey.. that doc there!! Does he need a new 50 foot pool? Isn't 30 foot big enough!!

Artful Dodger: Never occured to me that Roberts would vote to uphold it. Some people speculated about what Justice Kennedy might do, after he said it would forever change the governments relationship with the people.

Health insurance is a product, not a right. The right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness means the right to being free to pursue those things. It doesn't mean it's the governments responsibility to make it so, it means the government should step back and let us pursue those things for ourselves.

The idea of being ruled over by a nanny state type of government is so obnoxious, it's difficult for me to comment on it without using salty language and disturbing visual imagery.

Iamon lyme: The Supreme Court messed up. The ObamaCare package was being sold as legitimate due to the Commerce Clause. But CJ Roberts said no, it's a tax and therefore it stands.

He should have sent it back to the congress and said, "OK, now you fix this and pass it as the tax it is and it's legit. But as it stands it's not."

The Dums...I mean Dems would NEVER pass it as a tax. They are on record as saying they would not pass it as a tax. That's why they trumped it under the Commerce Clause.

OBAMA is a Big Fat Liar.

Iamon lyme: Yeah, not even liberal New York would do something that stupid. I mean, some libs are morons but not to that extent!

Artful Dodger: "You don't have to buy insurance if you don't want. But you'll still have to pay for it via the tax."

It's a tax? Obama said it wasn't a tax, but I don't think he consulted the dictionary when he made that statement. Fred Thompson has assured us that "We won't be taking water from your side of the bucket. We will take it from the other side." He was talking about something else but it still applies here, doesn't it?

rod03801: "Next is : We will be told what we can and can't eat."

Or what size sody pops we may purchase...

Naw, it'll never happen.

Iamon lyme: You don't have to buy insurance if you don't want. But you'll still have to pay for it via the tax.

Iamon lyme: Next is : We will be told what we can and can't eat.

What's next? Mandatory term life insurance? What else could we be forced to pay for?

I know! State controled gasoline insurance! We have a right to affordable gas. We don't have a right to get our own oil, but that's a separate issue... that has nothing to do with gas prices.

Iamon lyme: Greed.

Iamon lyme: All our troubles can be traced right back to the government.

(V): "I hear a class action is forming in the USA based on what the banks have done. Can't blame this on the government.."

It was aliens who pressured the banks into making risky loans, not the government... and who controls the aliens?

Artful Dodger: In every picture I've seen of Holder he looks so sad and put upon. I almost feel sorry for the guy.. but I think that was the point of showing him look like that.

Iamon lyme: congress is now voting / debating on holder in contempt

Mz Pelosi accused Republicans of wanting to "suppress voter turnout" by trying to get Eric Holder to talk. Pelosi can rest easy now, because todays SCOTUS ruling should put concerns of voter turnout to rest.

I can't imagine the next Nov election being a repeat of the Reagan/Carter blowout, but I'll be hedging my bets on that one too. I may as well throw it all into the pot and go for broke... what have I got to lose?

rod03801: Murdoch is not fascinating.. just how politicians are continually kissing upto him regarding getting good press.

It's is perceivable that Fox could switch to backing the Democrats if Murdoch got a better deal from them!!

I don't how much it's being 'told' in the USA, but the big news financially here is regarding the banks AGAIN!!

But it looks like many of the big banks have been rigging rates.

Barclays has been fined £290 million, other banks are by all accounts will be taken to court.

I hear a class action is forming in the USA based on what the banks have done.

Can't blame this on the government..

Bwild: What about those incarcerated?

Artful Dodger: "...what's the SCOTUS going to rule on Obama Care tomorrow?"

It's hard to say. I'm hoping they look to the constitution to determine if any of it is constitutional or not. Some Washington insiders are of the opinion that the constitutionality of Obama care is what the judges should be looking at. Last time I looked that actually was a part of their job description, or is their job description... I'm a bit fuzzy on the details. *cough*

Obama is either going to gloat, or make a big stink over it, that's what I predict... I'm hedging my bets.

Artful Dodger: only 2 states in the nation deny felons the right to vote.

rod03801: The democrats like it that way. They have dead people voting all over the US. Not to mention the many voters they have that are ineligible for one reason or another (illegal, under age, double and triple voting, etc)

Artful Dodger: I was SHOCKED the first time I ever voted. I had my ID ready, and the lady said, "oh we can't ask for that". I was like.. WHAT??!! One of the most important things we do, and we don't have to prove who we are?

Bernice: Oh, religion and politics are bedfellows (sadly).

The Col: thought you might like that one

Artful Dodger:

thanks, I needed a good laugh

And what's the big deal libs make over voter ID. If a white person can get a voter ID, can't a black/hispanic/whatever? The ONE big thing that affects voter ID is it will stop dead people from voting AND felons AND people no eligible to vote. hmmmmmm

rod03801: BTW, I couldn't care less what Murdock does. His actions are no reflection on Fox News and try as some might to make that connection, it's a major #fail.

rod03801:

OK, so what's the SCOTUS going to rule on Obama Care tomorrow?

I would have to agree that parts of this discussion are FAR from the intentions of this board. I was hoping it was just an "aside" and would end on its own.

So, please. Let's get off of Brainking Politics. Though it got more attention than the fascinating Rupert Murdoch.

I appeal to the Mods... please, can you get this board back to politics rather than site politics.

Thank you.

Iamon lyme: exactly. The fact that you and I agree on so many political positions seems to have gotten a bit more attention than the arguments themselves. I was once accused of being a particular member here simply because I used the same smiley in some (mark that SOME) of my posts. She's black and can't stand me. And according to a few, that was just a ruse on my part to deceive. Such nonsense serves only as a distraction. As as we both know, liberals LOVE a distraction. Especially true when it comes to deflecting criticisms against their bad policies.

Iamon lyme: Does it.. I thought all this talk about what people may or not think about who is who as being one big distraction. Nothing is being proved or disproved by it at all.

"Jiggering numbers for the sake of creating a false consensus is nothing new in world of politics, is it?"

The creation of false nicks is a long established '''way''' on this site. It could be said that many of those involved in 'politics' have created fake accounts, or used others for the sake of satisfying their need, just as in the real world.

Usually one side moans about the other even though they may be, may have been, or know someone who has done the same.

(V): "btw.. is all this "I'm not you" really necessary? Hardly politics is it."

Sure it is. Didn't you know? Combining two opponents into one serves two purposes, it serves to distract from the issues and it makes it appear there is one less opponent. And if the side making the accusation is creating false nics and getting away with it, they can make it appear there are more of them. Jiggering numbers for the sake of creating a false consensus is nothing new in world of politics, is it?

btw.. is all this "I'm not you" really necessary?

Hardly politics is it.

Iamon lyme: Ok.. some history.. over the last 60 years..ish

We've seen various western and eastern states play a game of NIMBY.

....that's Not In My Back Yard.

Gun running, drugs, the support of terrorists, murderers n' genocidal maniacs. Chemically induced abnormalities in babies, stillbirths, leukaemia, etc, etc, etc..

Billions of dollars/pounds/euros given to those who are known by those supplying the money to have only one purpose with it... to kill. That women and children are killed in the process is not of the playing powers concern.

Because it's a NIMBY event. It didn't happen in their backyard, it wasn't millions of their own people...... they were 'foreigners' or 'third world' countries who needed help in deciding how to be democratic or free of capitalists.

The death and maiming toll from such policies hasn't stopped growing.

.... so......... when I see yet another case of guns getting into unfriendly hands (like all those that vanished in Iraq) .... I'm not surprised or shocked. It's like when the press went mad at Angelina Jolie showing a leg.. going "WOW.. how sexy and daring

... bull, get a reality check. It's been done before and much better by the likes of Marilyn Monroe.

Great, Lemon Lime just left and now I am here talking to myself. Wait a sec, I was doing that when he was online too!

Iamon lyme: I'm actually off to bed. Actually, I'm not really even here. Just because you're reading this post that proves nothing except that in your mind your reading something.

Iamon lyme: My psychiatrist said I don't have multiple personality disorder but we know better.

Artful Dodger: I should be sleeping now too, but haven't had much sleep since last Thursday.. the day I emerged from your sub-consious mind and reasserted my identity.

You know what, maybe "they" are right, maybe we just don't know it. If you had a split personality, but neither you nor your other identity (me) was aware of the other one, and wouldn't even know about the other one except we just happened to meet online, and are unaware that we are both talking to the other personality, in the same body.. That kind of trailed off, didn't it? What was my point?

I want to be open minded about this, and as (V) said, how can we really be sure if something is true or not?

Iamon lyme: I love the way the liberals LOVE to play the race card. So pathetic.