New 9/11 photos released

dreamer20

Worshipped Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Posts
7,968
Media
3
Likes
20,659
Points
643
Gender
Male
If you can trust the government to manage NUCLEAR weapons and trillion dollar submarines...
I think they can handle the billing over an aspirin and a MRI machine.

And y'know what?
We could give EVERY American healthcare tomorrow, just by buying a few less weapons systems...

I mean, when you have a larger military than the next 12 biggest nations COMBINED... I think we might be looking at a bit of a case of overkill, here.


Until you or someone you know gets incinerated in an airplane.

That incineration is exactly what happened on 9/11 despite America having a huge military. Sending America's military half a world away to Iraq and Afghanistan to slaughter innocents, cause destruction, hunger, homelessness and poverty, did not eliminate worldwide acts of terrorism. As ClaireTalon stated before, this tactic was not appropriate with regard to combating terrorism. The traditional approach, which has proven to be effective, is to use police and intelligence agencies to infiltrate and destroy terrorists networks:

http://www.lpsg.org/33691-war-on-terrorism-chasing-ghosts.html

1
 

Phil Ayesho

Superior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Posts
6,189
Media
0
Likes
2,790
Points
333
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
Again, as if the 3000 killed in WTC wasn't enough, it changed the way we live. From jamming up airport security to the Patriot Act to cultural strife with Muslims...we went into Afghan because we had to. You downplay the significance of that event in your zeal to sell socialism, etc.
Yes, we sent out socialized army onto Afghanistan... for what? To eliminate the taliban for harboring Al Queda... and to get Bin Laden...

And when it looked like we Had the guy trapped, YOUR GUYS decided to divert resources to Iraq...

They dod not WANT to get bin laden and spoil their grab for Iraqi oil, and their planned 20 billion dollar giveaway to the company the VP owned stock in.
Quit being such a douchebag and blathering with that phony, inappropriate comparison between defense and healthcare.
Yeah, I am sure you would prefer to not have your imbecilic worldview upset with the facts and the truth.
Public monies pay for our defense, our roads, our water and sewage systems.

The idea that insurance companies- who have NOTHING to do with healthcare, should be allowed to take 30% off the top is idiotic... hey everyone, Let's ADD 30% to the cost of the things that will save your life, AND hand control over whether you get access to those things to a company incentivized to increase their profits by Denying you those services.

YEah that makes sense.

Listen, you silly tool, the companies that make the mail sorting equipment the USPS uses , and the little jeeps they drive around, and even the leather bags they carry mail in, ALL make a profit because they sell the government the TOOLS to provide that service.
Just as the Defense contractors make money selling the government the military hardware they need.

How STUPID would it be to put a row of middlemen between Lockheed and the DOD, just so these middlemen can ADD cost for NO service rendered.

The Same thing that works for the Army and the Post office would work in health insurance... All the REAL contributors, the Doctors, the equipment manufacturers would get a profit from selling the goods to the government... the only thing we WOULDN'T be doing is paying a bunch of jackasses to tell you you your policy is canceled after 20 years of premiums because you actually got sick.
Can you misuse the post office?

Can you misuse or exploit the Sanitation system?

Can you misuse or exploit water delivery?
y'know, the quickest way to find out would be to privatize them, cause if you CAN misuse something, it will be done for MONEY.

Really... how stupid are you? You don't think the safety of your drinking water is paramount? Your government is not interested in making a Profit on purifying your water... so there is no Incentive to cut corners, to NOT replace worn equipment, no incentive to buy the cheap stuff that doesn't really filter out the contaminants and then falsify the purity tests...
AND no one driving a Bentley because he can charge you thru the nose because you HAVE to have water to live.
No - these services are delivered, and you pay per usage. If you don't pay your water bill, or you don't put a stamp on your envelope - you don't get water and you don't get mail delivered.
Okay- see here, this just proves you have no functioning intellect whatsoever.
Guess what, braniac? You pay for ALL government services. You pay for the highways in a tax on your gasoline, you pay for the military thru a tax on your income, you pay for local parks in a sales Tax... HOW you pay is based upon whether your usage can be metered.
EVERYONE pays for sewer , who is hooked up to the sewer.
And they meter your water for you.

But the key is that the government's ONLY incentive is public service. No one in the water district is gonna get a bonus for figuring out how to SCREW the ratepayers.

And guess what? Social Security is PAID FOR... they took it out of your check, remember?

And Government healthcare would be exactly the same... We would ALL pay for insurance...
every working american, paying a tax for it...

And the result would be that Rates would PLUMMET... because even the young and healthy would be paying for insurance.
And like with the mail, like with the water... there is no incentive to do anything but serve the public good.

What greater example of serving public good is there than tending to the ill and infirm?

It is IMMORAL for anyone to make any more profit from these services than is absolutely necessary.
Phizer sells the same medication in Europe for one third what US citizens pay... and makes a PROFIT.

Only here in the US has private health care resulted in Phizer getting YOUR congressmen to allow them to fuck every single one of us for three times as much as they actually need to turn a profit.
Are you fucking kidding me? I don't even have the patience to get into this with you again
you mean you don't have any actual supported argument.

and who took credit for the internet and the tech boom? Clinton and Gore.
you really are a right wing zombie, aren't you?
The tech boom was REAL... a REAL economy selling REAL goods and services.... it was not a manipulation of the market.
What we GOT out of it was the world wide Web and an entire new paradigm for doing business online.

That is real and has real lasting economic value and real productivity.

The BUBBLE was NOT caused by Clinton nor Gore, but by Bush Senior and Reagan Deregulating the process of IPO... and deregulating the market.

the BUST was caused by morons like you, playing fast and loose with the rules, and betting that anything with DotCOM after its name would go up in value long enough for them to make a killing.
Charlatans putting together internet companies that had NO revenue model... and selling their stock to idiots like you.

Sorry- it once again can be traced back to conservative economic agendas...

And, really, Dude... CLinton does not get a pass from me... in his second term he allowed you right wing dipthongs to pass a LOT of that free market idiocy.
Because it was on the brink of collapse - it was the only choice they had at the time.
Funny how the market never got anywhere near the brink of collapse when it was properly regulated, huh?
 

Phil Ayesho

Superior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Posts
6,189
Media
0
Likes
2,790
Points
333
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
How in the hell would you 'regulate' IPO's? That makes no sense. Tell people they can't buy a stock? Put a ceiling on a stock price?
By making sure the principals could NOT sell their stock out within a year of making the IPO, THAT'S how. If the principals MUST hold their stock until the company turns a profit, or shows a viable revenue model, then there is less incentive to put together bullshit companies just because the market has investor fever on some hot new thing that idiots who buy stocks don't understand.

Jeez, for an "investor" you sure as hell don't know much about how investors get taken to the cleaners....
Again, first boom since the depression was the tech boom - thanks, Clinton.
Um, NO... WRONG-- between the end of the depression and the DotCom boom, there were LOTS of booms... the auto industry boom, the computer boom, they were simply predicated upon REAL products and real industry... and they NEVER became "bubbles".

Bubbles are caused when jackasses like you get legislation passed that does away with regulations.

Relaxed SEC regs governing IPOs ENABLED the dotCom boom- which was REAL- pal- got any Google stock ?) Relaxed Banking regs ENABLED the S&L collapse. and the era of republican domination of congress and the Bush years Really put the nail in our economic coffin by deregulating energy markets, oil markets, insurance markets, Credit Card companies...
In short... Every single part of the economy that has FUCKED us all in the ass are those parts to which the republicans applied their economic "wizardry".
The police aren't out there to protect the $200 in the cash register. They are there to protect the clerk from being murdered.
When you type something like this... isn't there a voice in your head murmuring to you how utterly ridiculous it sounds?

Try now and THINK... Why is there someone willing to murder the clerk? to get MONEY.... if there was no cash register... would someone murder the clerk?

Crime happens mostly over money. every see those pictures of the drug hideouts they discover?...y'know, the ones with piles and piles and piles of MONEY.
Yeah. Madoff was the republicans' fault. Blame the SEC - a government agency.
And WHO has had control of the government for the previous 10 years?

RIGHT the guys who say government can't DO anything right...

And you know what happens when you elect people who think the government can't work? Right, you get a government that can't work.

Sheesh... you conservaturds' capacity for deluding yourselves is astonishing.
The 'free market' gave us automobiles, Microsoft, television, surgical devices and medical technology, airplanes, prosthetic limbs, diapers, telephones for grandparents to talk with their grandchildren, baseball gloves and amusement Walt Disney World, among others.
WRONG AGAIN you uneducated moron. Those were NOT the products of a Free market, they were the products of a REGULATED market.
From FDR to Reagan, the markets in the US had been REGULATED.

Not "free" at all.
The last time we had a truly free market was the era referred to historically as the era of the "robber barons"-- and that one ended in 1929.
And 14 million Americans that earn over $50k/year - who decide NOT to purchase health insurance - could have health insurance with a few less large screen TV's.
Um... you're not thinking. The problem with private health insurance is that healthy, young people generally WON'T buy it... and the health insurance companies do not WANT older, sicker people to buy it... so what we have are fewer and fewer people, paying more and more for our health system.

And the ones without insurance, or who have been DENIED insurance? They end up going to emergency rooms where the hospital has to EAT it if they don't pay, and pass the cost onto YOU the taxpayer... OR they are too old for private insurers to cover, so they get on medicare... which is GOVERNMENT HEALTH CARE.

SO... what is the POINT of insurance?
What is the entire economic model behind it?

It is the idea od SPREADING risk across as broad a population as possible.

We ALL pay for the police and the army... to protect our lives and our homes.

We should ALL pay for healthcare, to protect our lives just as much if not more... because you MAY never get robbed... or may never live to see your nation invaded... but EVERYONE WILL Need Medical Care... at some point in time.

You spread that risk by making everyone pay for it... and when the citizen MUST pay for something... That is when it become immoral and unethical to allow one penny's worth of unnecessary profit.

Besides... if all those young folks were paying 13 grand a year for health insurance... then NO ONE would buy big screen TV's and THAT economy would collapse.
 

B_starinvestor

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Posts
4,383
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
Location
Midwest
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
If you can trust the government to manage NUCLEAR weapons and trillion dollar submarines...
I think they can handle the billing over an aspirin and a MRI machine.

FYI

the cost of a Trident missile, Ohio Class submarine was roughly 2 billion dollars.

Only 18 were made, and the last one was launched in 1996.

The new class of Virginia attack subs will cost 2.8 billion and only 30 are planned.


You're off by about $997 billion on the cost of a sub.

The rest of your post is about the same.