Jump to content


HERO Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Gary last won the day on April 8 2004

Gary had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Gary

  • Rank
    Septuple Millennial Master
  • Birthday 07/27/1967

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Pharmaceutical Sellout
  1. Does Trip and Martial maneuvers with Trip elements such as Legsweep have the same weight limit as Throws and Martial Throws (your pushed Str)? It seems like it should be easier to Trip someone than to Throw them, but then you get into ridiculous situations like Robin Legsweeping Godzilla...
  2. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care.
  3. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care. Your reading of philosophy has led you to the belief that there is no coercion or ethical problem with loansharking, blackmailing, or disaster area profiteering. That's the issue I'm seeing. Let's take a more stark example. Do you think it's ok for an employer to ask for sexual favors in exchange for a job? After all, the applicant has a choice now that she didn't have before. How about sexual favors for a promotion in the company (private company with 1 owner)? The subordinate has an additional choice. It sounds to me that your philosophy is ok with both the above situations since the applicant has a "choice" in the matter.
  4. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care. I still don't see how community groups account for the fact that having a private layer of insurance middlemen have massive structural costs (executive compensation, shareholder payments and profits, higher legal and administrative fees, etc) that a government plan wouldn't have.
  5. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care. I have to say that if any of these philosophies imply that loan sharking, black mail, profiteering in disaster areas, etc are not wrong ethically and imply that no coercion is involved in these situations, then they fail the "real world" test and should be rejected and widely mocked.
  6. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care. It sounds like you see no coercion or ethical problems with loan sharking, or charging 20 times the usual price for food and fuel in a disaster area such as Katrina. Is this a fair assessment of your position?
  7. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care. Ok, what do you think about loansharking? Joey has a choice of borrowing money or have some dire event happen (you can make up your own dire event). Tony Soprano offers to lend him $5000, but at 50% interest per month (and Tony Soprano can make sure he collects). Joey has an additional option compared to what he had before, but it certainly appears to me that there is an element of coercion going on. Not surprisingly, there are strict laws against loan sharking, even if Joey has no other options to raise money.
  8. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care. Yeah, if I get a few tens of thousands of people together, we would have better bargaining power to lower prices since 50,000 of us would represent a respectable pool and lowers the insurer's risk. I don't see how this will stop Blue Cross or Kaiser from paying their execs millions or any of the other money that wouldn't be paid out in overhead with a national plan. Yep, it would be just you since real world examples of national health care doesn't do this. Also note that minimizing costs and maximizing profits are NOT the same thing.
  9. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care. Well yeah, cost is the main issue. If heathcare was $1 a year, nobody would bat an eye. I'm highly skeptical that government regulations will result in cheaper health care. In fact, heavy regulation and "streamline into efficiency" seem to be a complete oxymoron. The biggest issue is that insurance companies represent a huge overhead in healthcare. Every dollar in premiums that you pay goes not only to the doctor and hospital, but to the insurance company's shareholders, to 7 figure CEO salaries, to company jets, to big bonuses to employees, etc. Plus there are huge incentives for the insurance companies to deny as many claims as possible and make it as difficult as possible make a claim. With a government run healthcare system, at least you get rid of the middleman. More of each dollar would actually go to the healthcare provider and less to overhead. Plus there wouldn't be the same incentives to stiff patients' health in the name of maximizing profits.
  10. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care.
  11. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care. The trouble is that there are roughly 50 million Joeys out there and more every year. On the one hand, you can say that it's Joey's fault that he didn't buy health insurance. On the other hand, if Joey is making $25k a year and not covered under his work, and a crappy family health policy costs $8k a year, you can kinda understand why Joey didn't purchase the policy. My point is that public roads and public healthcare are very similar. The real difference between them is that a crappy public road has all its "victims" in one geographic area whereas crappy healthcare has its "victims" distributed all over the place. If you're asking for one small group of people (people who live in port cities) to help pay for roads to a rural town (even if they don't directly benefit from that road) because it's a public good, it's not much different from asking another small group of people (people who never get sick and never use health care) to help pay for universal coverage for people who do get sick and would be killed or crippled without care (even if they don't directly benefit from that care) because it's a public good.
  12. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care. How are we going to give health care on an individual basis? Person X comes up with a sickness that costs $500,000 to treat. He can't pay. He dies or is so crippled that he can't work and feed his family. Who's going to pay? Under your ideology, the poor schmoe dies or is crippled. With no universal healthcare, X number of people statistically will die or be crippled from preventable health issues and therefore can't support their families. Without public roads, Y number of people won't be able to drive to work and feed their families. The difference is that if a road isn't built to town Z, the Y number of people are clustered together. If healthcare isn't universal, the X number of people who suffer are all scattered all over the place. With roads, everyone chips in some amount toward taxes, even people who don't directly benefit such as residents of port cities (although they benefit indirectly) for the greater good. With healthcare, it should be the same thing. Everyone chips in some amount toward taxes, even those people who don't benefit directly (although everyone benefits indirectly even if it's only due to cheaper goods and increased economic activity and jobs).
  13. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care. If someone is sick and can't afford to pay, then feeding his family becomes rather irrelevant since he won't be able to work and earn money to feed them anyway. Roads allow the person to feed his family. Good health allows the person to feed his family. The person loses the ability to feed his family absent either of these conditions.
  14. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care. To the port city resident, the benefit is not direct and pervasive. He sees his taxes going to a service that he doesn't use directly. It is true that his city has more economic activity and generates more jobs because of the roads. The same with the healthcare user. Even someone who doesn't use much healthcare, benefits indirectly since there is more economic activity and more jobs would be generated with a good national healthcare system.
  15. Re: Interesting article about Socialized Health Care. I'm close enough to walk to a train station if I wanted to. It'd be a 1.5 hour hike, but I could if I had to. And train stations existed long before public roads and would probably have expanded if the roads never came into existence. The port city residents get indirect benefits from public roads. The people who pay for national healthcare get indirect benefits from public health care. Sounds the same to me.