- This topic has 1,886 replies, 52 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 7 months ago by
Jazzman.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 28, 2009 at 11:53 AM #438688July 28, 2009 at 11:54 AM #437929
SD Realtor
Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.
July 28, 2009 at 11:54 AM #438131Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.
July 28, 2009 at 11:54 AM #438452Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.
July 28, 2009 at 11:54 AM #438526Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.
July 28, 2009 at 11:54 AM #438693Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.
July 28, 2009 at 12:06 PM #437939dbapig
Participant[quote=SD Realtor]dbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.[/quote]
Auto insurance example. In a perfect world you’d have a guarantee that you won’t get sick or injured so that you aren’t forced to pay health insurance to live. But no one has such guarantee. And if that uninsured person somehow gets sick (because of lack of preventative care), all of us end up paying more, when it could’ve been prevented if he/she was insured. I’d say that’s a pretty fair argument.
I don’t like it being rammed through. My point is that the democrats want it done and they know it probably won’t get done if not done now. It’s not my preference either.
I want it done with care/analysis too. But Dems seem to think the longer it drags on the less likely it will get done.
July 28, 2009 at 12:06 PM #438141Participant[quote=SD Realtor]dbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.[/quote]
Auto insurance example. In a perfect world you’d have a guarantee that you won’t get sick or injured so that you aren’t forced to pay health insurance to live. But no one has such guarantee. And if that uninsured person somehow gets sick (because of lack of preventative care), all of us end up paying more, when it could’ve been prevented if he/she was insured. I’d say that’s a pretty fair argument.
I don’t like it being rammed through. My point is that the democrats want it done and they know it probably won’t get done if not done now. It’s not my preference either.
I want it done with care/analysis too. But Dems seem to think the longer it drags on the less likely it will get done.
July 28, 2009 at 12:06 PM #438462Participant[quote=SD Realtor]dbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.[/quote]
Auto insurance example. In a perfect world you’d have a guarantee that you won’t get sick or injured so that you aren’t forced to pay health insurance to live. But no one has such guarantee. And if that uninsured person somehow gets sick (because of lack of preventative care), all of us end up paying more, when it could’ve been prevented if he/she was insured. I’d say that’s a pretty fair argument.
I don’t like it being rammed through. My point is that the democrats want it done and they know it probably won’t get done if not done now. It’s not my preference either.
I want it done with care/analysis too. But Dems seem to think the longer it drags on the less likely it will get done.
July 28, 2009 at 12:06 PM #438536Participant[quote=SD Realtor]dbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.[/quote]
Auto insurance example. In a perfect world you’d have a guarantee that you won’t get sick or injured so that you aren’t forced to pay health insurance to live. But no one has such guarantee. And if that uninsured person somehow gets sick (because of lack of preventative care), all of us end up paying more, when it could’ve been prevented if he/she was insured. I’d say that’s a pretty fair argument.
I don’t like it being rammed through. My point is that the democrats want it done and they know it probably won’t get done if not done now. It’s not my preference either.
I want it done with care/analysis too. But Dems seem to think the longer it drags on the less likely it will get done.
July 28, 2009 at 12:06 PM #438703Participant[quote=SD Realtor]dbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.[/quote]
Auto insurance example. In a perfect world you’d have a guarantee that you won’t get sick or injured so that you aren’t forced to pay health insurance to live. But no one has such guarantee. And if that uninsured person somehow gets sick (because of lack of preventative care), all of us end up paying more, when it could’ve been prevented if he/she was insured. I’d say that’s a pretty fair argument.
I don’t like it being rammed through. My point is that the democrats want it done and they know it probably won’t get done if not done now. It’s not my preference either.
I want it done with care/analysis too. But Dems seem to think the longer it drags on the less likely it will get done.
July 28, 2009 at 12:09 PM #437944blahblahblah
Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
FAIL. A person walking down the street with drug-resistant TB can infect you and you can die. An unmedicated schizophrenic can stab you. A food worker with undiagnosed hepatitis can infect and sicken dozens.
Having a basic level of health maintenance for everyone occupying the same space guards the health of all.
July 28, 2009 at 12:09 PM #438146Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
FAIL. A person walking down the street with drug-resistant TB can infect you and you can die. An unmedicated schizophrenic can stab you. A food worker with undiagnosed hepatitis can infect and sicken dozens.
Having a basic level of health maintenance for everyone occupying the same space guards the health of all.
July 28, 2009 at 12:09 PM #438468Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
FAIL. A person walking down the street with drug-resistant TB can infect you and you can die. An unmedicated schizophrenic can stab you. A food worker with undiagnosed hepatitis can infect and sicken dozens.
Having a basic level of health maintenance for everyone occupying the same space guards the health of all.
July 28, 2009 at 12:09 PM #438541Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
FAIL. A person walking down the street with drug-resistant TB can infect you and you can die. An unmedicated schizophrenic can stab you. A food worker with undiagnosed hepatitis can infect and sicken dozens.
Having a basic level of health maintenance for everyone occupying the same space guards the health of all.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.