Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
zk
Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]For zk
http://www.medicare.gov/your-medicare-costs/costs-at-a-glance/costs-at-glance.html
http://blog.ehealthinsurance.com/2014/10/is-ebola-covered-by-my-health-insurance-plan/
http://thehappyhospitalist.blogspot.com/2014/08/Ebola-Virus-30-Day-Readmission-Medicare-Penalty.html
http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Daily-Reports/2014/August/05/opeds.aspx%5B/quote%5D
Not sure what the purpose of posting those links is, Zeitgeist. Got any actual evidence of any conspiracies?
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]
When time came to bit goodbye… [/quote]I thought we were going to have some Twilight Saga action for a second there.
Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]What about Obamacare?[/quote]
Wow. Good answer. If, that is, you can back that up with some kind of reasonable explanation.
Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]Probably not one of the one’s most people would think of, but this one is useful:
“More than 20 years ago journalist Edward Jay Epstein wrote the definitive expose of the diamond business, initially published in the Atlantic Monthly in 1982 and subsequently as a book, The Rise and Fall of Diamonds. Epstein, it must be said, is a conspiracy buff, but his research on diamonds is pretty credible. His central contention is that diamonds have little inherent value; their perennially high price is solely a function of clever promotion and ruthless manipulation of the market. You ask: Isn’t that true of any high-value product? Nope. Take gold, a true commodity in the sense that it’s fungible, as the economists say–like quantities of gold are freely interchangeable. Gold’s purity can be readily assayed and it’s indestructible for practical purposes, making it a reliable store of value. Even now that the world has abandoned the gold standard, gold’s price has held up well on the open market.”That’s more of a monopoly than a conspiracy. And it’s well known.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]
Hands with long slender fingers like those of piano player are more beautiful. [/quote]I’ve always found long slender fingers witchlike and ugly. And shallow people boring and… shallow.
To each his own, I guess.
Participant[quote=CA renter]
From what I’ve seen, “conspiracy theorists” tend to be right more often than not. All to often, they are ridiculed for many years before they are proven right. One should never accept the “official” version of a story until they do their own thorough and independent research. Sometimes, logic and reason are enough to disprove an “official” story.[/quote]
Really? How about some examples?
Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]Because there seems to be a rift here between the official version of how the experts describe Ebola behavior and the disturbing evidence of how it appears to be spreading, I have to post this:
“If you’re a conspiracy theorist, then you’re crazy, right? That’s been the common belief for years, but recent studies prove that just the opposite is true. “Researchers — psychologists and social scientists, mostly — in the U.S. and United Kingdom say data indicate that, contrary to those mainstream media stereotypes, ‘conspiracy theorists’ appear to be more sane than people who accept official versions of controversial and contested events.”
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/047168_conspiracy_theorists_sanity_propaganda.html##ixzz3G5jlph32%5B/quote%5D
If you’re a conspiracy theorist, I would expect an incredibly lame article like that to be enough to convince you that you’re “more sane” than someone who’s not a conspiracy theorist. If I thought it would do any good, I’d take the time to destroy that article sentence by sentence.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]We all choose our reality. That’s why there’s always someone for everyone.[/quote]
Nonsense. We don’t choose our reality. Unless we’re schizophrenic. And even in that case, we don’t really choose it. Except maybe on a subconscious level. In any case, the schizophrenic’s chosen reality is “his” reality, but it’s not reality.
You can make things happen and change some things. But most of reality is outside your control. And it’s reality, whether you choose it or not.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi] Anyway, I choose to see her side rather than just reduce her situation to that of a kept woman.
She’s very intelligent and capable. I thInk her intrinsic worth is quite high.[/quote]
Choosing to see it doesn’t make it true.
Participant[quote=outtamojo]According to Yahoo article, nurse who caught it knew full well she was treating Ebola patient and was wearing the full protective outfit.
I work in healthcare and I knew all along how these bulletins and special protocols work. They send you emails and maybe let you put on the gear a few times and then make you sign a piece of paper saying you were trained but nothing preps you for the real thing. There is only one good teacher and that is experience, which we dont have in good supply.
They will try to blame it on the poor
worker but in my view the pencil pushers as they always do failed to take into account the practical aspect of a learning curve.
They need to set up a team able to travel to care for stateside Ebola patients so they can get the necessary experience. They need to set up rooms for the team to live so they self quarantine.
The range in talent between the best and the worst healthcare workers is such that if you send in the worst you are just sending them in to die.
Hug your healthcare worker today for they risk their own lives and that of their families everyday.[/quote]Good points and good ideas, mojo. I like the traveling team idea.
I imagine that the story of the Texas healthcare worker will be similar to the Spain healthcare worker. Made a small mistake and paid for it tragically. Not to put the blame on her. Like you said, without experience in dealing with these things, it would be very difficult to make zero mistakes.
ParticipantThat story, as you tell it, Brian, is very strange. You have lots of strange ideas, and your take on this story is one of them.
I’m not sure how you see this as anything other than a sugar daddy situation.
Participant.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]
I know her not to be shallow[/quote]
Doesn’t sound like she “expected” a 2-carat ring.
Participant[quote=CA renter]
but these men will expect these women to spend an inordinate amount of time, money, and energy on their looks.
[/quote]Like I said, idiots. If physical beauty is your priority such that you’re willing to pursue a beautiful woman whose priority is money (instead of a woman whom you love, whose priorities are similar to yours, whom you have fun with etc.), then you’re an idiot in my book. No matter how rich you are.
Rich shallow guy and beautiful shallow woman might deserve each other (they’re both 2s, if you ask me), but I highly doubt they’ll be happy for longer than it takes for her to own half his stuff. Which he’ll deserve at that point.
[quote=CA renter]
Most people have an oar in the water and are willing to pull hard,[/quote]
I think most people aren’t willing to pull hard at all, And I think lack of oar pullage explains the high divorce rate. -
AuthorPosts
