Professional restaurant supplies Textbook Trade In Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc $5 Albums Fire TV with 4k Ultra HD Mother's Day Gifts Amazon Gift Card Offer bschs2 bschs2 bschs2  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Fire, Only $39.99 Kindle Paperwhite UniOrlando Shop Now DOTD
Customer Discussions > Automotive forum

Reason for electing next president


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 351-360 of 360 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 30, 2012 6:28:40 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 30, 2012 7:10:48 AM PDT
SpiderWebb says:
AM> I have no idea who the "guy" you are referring to is. If you had replied to my post, I would have known who you mean. It would be helpful if you use quotes also.

I've already answered your question about health insurance earlier.

Feel and think are not "values" of any kind. Examples of values are; Staying strong in the face of adversity, Belief in a supreme being. Never lying even if it hurts, The group is more important than the individual. Being loyal.

Values are character traits!

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 30, 2012 8:08:45 AM PDT
S. Allen says:
"Belief in a supreme being" is not a "value" that is a character flaw, a delusional psychosis.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 30, 2012 8:43:51 AM PDT
SpiderWebb says:
SA> A character trait can be positive or negative. To those who don't believe in a supreme being, it's negative. To those who do believe, it's positive. Nevertheless, it's still a value. Whether it's positive or negative is determined by the person who is being asked! Not believing in a supreme being is also a value!

To me, both of the above values have equal veracity because neither can be proven nor disproved!

Of the 200+ known values, most individuals can pare down the list to 5 or 6 core values. When groups write mission statements and vision statements, common core values of the group must first be established. Where appropriate, those common core values are then encapsulated in both the vision and mission statements.

Posted on Jun 30, 2012 2:42:33 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 30, 2012 2:52:38 PM PDT
SW, I was referring to the link you posted by Peter Ferrara
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/02/16/obamas-budget-the-decline-and-fall-of-the-american-economy/
Peter Ferrara's sole purpose is to move a political agenda along rather than find solutions to real problems. He plays on people's feelings and not on the hard discussions that must be addressed. He supported Tobacco companies in the 1990's claiming that second hand smoke was not harmful. He was the first in line to denounce global warming. He is doing the bidding for the markets entities in which prefer to operate with dishonesty.

SW, my complaint with you is not a personal one but I am sure you will not feel that way. What I do have a complaint with you is how you reason your debates. It is imposable to argue I feel questions with I feel responses. I'll expand on that in a moment.

Here is the core of my disdain. You say you don't like the healthcare plan because you feel government is forcing you to do something you do not want to do, you use the words, "Taking Your Freedoms". You feel like you should be able to pick and choose individuals worthy of your support, (in rational reasoning, this would be a overwhelming task and quite unachievable when applies to national healthcare). In the same token you have valid concerns with the current state of our healthcare system. Inconsistent billing, unsustainable out of control costs, etc. What you never speak of the core problems that address the structural problems of healthcare.

SW, no, you never directly answered directly either yes or no to the question of "do you think healthcare is a right or a luxury only afforded to individuals with the means to pay". What I received was a "I feel" response to the question. A simple yes or no is all that is needed, not "I feel" pushing the debate into some objective direction. We all feel things are unfair, but with deeper analysis, we understand why these situations exist. I feel it unfair that a 80 year old grandma has to take her shoes off in a airport simply because some radical Islamists hijacked airplanes and caused great destruction of life and property. I don't like standing in line at the supermarket but realize that this is how a orderly society acts. My point of the question was not to embarrass you in anyway, but in having you acknowledge one way or the other means you have to now address systemic problems in our current healthcare system or simply ignore the problem do to your belief that healthcare is a luxury. Till this day, and after repeated attempts to get a yes or no answer from you, you chose eluded the core question, in which only then can lead to a compromise in which addresses not only others concerns but yours also. Health is a value along with virtue and you know exactly what I was referring too. Again, you elude the main theses at hand by some distraction and in my humble opinion, your need to display intellectual superiority and or hubris. I do not view this as a competition of wit's, were we are constantly engaged in character degradation, but a sincere attempt to come to some rational conclusions to a crises. Yes, I would agree that in reading this, you can make an argument that I am engaging in the same activity I just denounced, but I do not know how to put it without sounding condescending. I am sure you would not agree with what I am saying but read the last few post on the "Why is America Failing" site and ask yourself when you have acknowledged that one simple question. Read how you evaded the topic. Ask yourself did I contribute anything in which addresses the problem or did I simply state my feelings in which added to the list of complaints but never addressed those complaints with solutions.

My rational to asking this key question is to have you think hard about solutions. It you were a policy maker and made a honest attempt to address the topic, you would see that Obama had little choice in addressing the problem in the way he did. You are critical of how Obama addressed the whole issue but you said nothing on how you would have addressed things differently. It is easy to be a Monday morning quarterback, hindsight is 20/20. My attempt was to have you be put in the same position in which honest leaders have to address the problems. As soon as it becomes a political football, one loses focus on the true problems and it turns into a political fight. No one is going to solve problems spinning political bias. The evasion of the question I posed is all to reminiscent of the Washington squabbles in which all of us claim to be appalled by find ourselves engaged in the same activity.

To give you one example of what I am talking about is this, you said that you hated the way Obama forced the bill down the throats of congress. This calls for a response such as Obama did not force anything because Obama is in the executive branch, Democratic leaders in congress forced it through. We could argue the stall tactics of the right and quibble about deceptions and lies. To counter your compliant one could argue that congress was held up for a entire year debating this bill, so how could it possibly have been rushed through. The right had time to claim the left wants to kill grandma, and such non-sense and implement every stall tactic they could to stop this bill in its track. You see what just happened. What the hell on how the bill was passed address the true issue, how do we lower healthcare costs, make it more affordable and accessible to more Americans, all while keep the integrity of the healthcare system. We shifted the debate to politics and how many votes can I get is I stall, misrepresent, and flat out lie about my opponent. Now we are debating the term "Values", really? It is easy to criticize others for making the hard decisions . Often they are not popular by voters because you cannot please everyone, that's why they are hard decisions. There is a word associated with individuals who get thing done, it's called leadership.

One last issue I would like to add, when you talk about taking away your freedoms, you identify yourself as someone embedded with the far right. You have slung words as socialist and alike. The word socialist seemed to have died off in the 1950's until the far right brought it back in the same intended propaganda use. It is difficult to denounce yourself as a creature of the right when you have defended every right wing topic that comes to pass on these post. Your use the buzz words that are intentionally fed by rightist propagandist only confirms you true allegiance to that cause. If you truly are a moderate, sometime right, sometimes left, and sometimes libertarian, then I suggest avoiding the republican fed spin words. Just an observation.

Once again, you waste my time on topics that are irrelevant to the core discussion. That is another trait of right wing politics, complaints, shift the conversation to gain political advantage, and move the sheep along to the voting booth, that is when they are not battling to take the so called "Freedoms" away from voters who do not fit the rich white man or the redneck profile.

Lastly, who are you to claim what a positive or negative value is? Because you do not believe in some deity it is a negative value? Wow, does god tell you to only help the ones you see fit? I always thought is was the meek.

Try this for Values; I have no idea of your complaint on the use of "Values", but then again, your intent was not to debate but to attack, admit it.
Health
Trust
Virtue
Thoughtfulness
Trust
Utility
Vision
Volunteering
Unity
Solidarity
Sympathy
Teamwork
Responsibility
Respect
Realism
Rationality
Philanthropy
Peace
Order
Organization
Mindfulness
Love
Leadership
Justice
Involvement
Humility
Honor
Helpfulness
Gratitude
GIVING!!!!
GENEROSITY!!!!
FAIRNESS
ETHICS
EMPATHY

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 1, 2012 8:33:14 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 1, 2012 8:35:48 AM PDT
SpiderWebb says:
AM> I apologize but I can't find the time to fully respond to your posts because they are simply too long. I do enjoy reading your point of view but because I have a lot of stuff on my schedule, I can't take the deep dives you can. Starting at the top;

The fact that P. Ferrara may have been a paid representative of the tobacco industry has nothing to do with the veracity of the article I referred to. It's probably a character flaw of mine but unless I have a reason to doubt the content of what I read, I don't have time to look into everyone's background. I also am not a very good researcher. If I don't find what I want within the first few hits, I move on.

Two points on the healthcare thing. Picking who I want to help is easy. As I have already proven, I live in one of the poorest counties, not only in SC but in the south which is generally a poor corner of the country. I moved here because of a sense of social responsibility to my fellow man. Most of what I do revolves around the humane society but I also work for the children's home and Habitat. There is more to do here than I can ever hope to accomplish. I don't golf or fish or play tennis because most of my free time is used as a volunteer to various charities. I have my little transport business and I walk my dogs every day. That's it!

You have asked me at least 5 times if healthcare is a right or a luxury and I attempted to answer by saying it's neither. Our rights are enumerated by the Dec of Ind and the Constitution. I don't recall anything about healthcare in those documents other than the article about "promoting the general welfare." To me, that means our folks in the government can give us universal healthcare if they think it's the right thing to do for our people. Conservatives believe it should be done at the state level because it's not an enumerated power. Regardless of who does it, I have a right to express my opinion about whether I like it or how it was passed. SCOTUS said the mandate is a tax and is therefore constitutional. Taxes are controlled by the Congress to adjust as they see fit.

To address how I would fix the healthcare problem of excessive cost;
1. I would allow people to buy their insurance in any state.
2. I would dismantle the state insurance commissions.
3. I would promote tort reform to cut down the number of lawsuits.
4. I would form a high risk pool for people who have pre-existing problems.
5. I would promote prevention by promoting healthy lifestyle choices.
6. I would promote testing for illegal drugs with incentive bonuses.
7. I would encourage competition with consumer co-pays.
8. I would stop the practice of paper files and go paperless.
9. I would have all health records password protected by the patient.

Your quote> "The right had time to claim the left wants to kill grandma, and such non-sense and implement every stall tactic they could to stop this bill in its track."

I remember a political commercial that had a Paul Ryan look alike pushing grandma off a cliff. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnnaeOHXFyI I think both sides did their share of nonsense and name calling.

Posted on Jul 1, 2012 2:32:30 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 1, 2012 2:37:41 PM PDT
SW, thank you for a thoughtful post. Perhaps I am harder on you because I know you have the intellectual ability to think beyond the one liner answers. In respect to you, I will not pick apart your solutions but will say that many have been implemented in the American Free Choice Act. Some other solutions would and should not be implemented because they truly do violate individuals free rights. Could you imagine the government telling all the population to report for drug testing. As we saw in Florida, the cost of administrating the program cost much more then the savings also. The high risk pool is the government subsidised pool in which is the bases for the American Free Choice Act. While I agree that caps should be put on liability, countless studies show that the saving from such enactment would be minuscule and would have almost no impact on cutting costs. It is more of about a perceived injustice that draws folks to make that claim but in practice, does nothing to solve the crises we have. It has been used more effectively as a political tool to gain votes on the "FEELING FACTOR". With that said, tort reform is in the American Free Choice Act.

SW, what you laid out is either unconstitutional or already in the American Free Choice Act. I will say that only a few of your points I would argue with, the rest is quite legitimate. The rational of you thinking matches those in Congress in which have beat you to the punch and already addresses those cost savings measures and it is call the "American Free Choice Act".

I agree that you have a right to your opinion, my point was that your opinion never addressed the real problem at hand. I believe that the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness is the epitome good health. I am not sure how you derive you can avoid healthcare from those words, but that is subjective and open for interpretation.

Lastly, Why I am not defending such harsh portrayal of Paul Ryan, I would not put some TV add from some interest group on the scale of elected leaders perched on their soap box preaching that the healthcare bill will kill grandma. I fact, what they were referring too was the 5 billion dollars, of a 80 billion dollar annual program, shifted away from medicare to fund the newly proposed healthcare bill. This was never designed to come in the way of reduced benefits but savings from programs you yourself have suggested. The "Death Panels" was derived from a claws in which allowed older Americans in poor health to be advised of their rights, the prognoses of their illness, and control over how much life sustaining measures they would care to endure. This design of what was to be discussed by, and this is real important, "Patient / Doctor" and not government, would be determined by a panel of healthcare providers,(Made up of Doctors and Nurses), again not politicians. My wife has always told me that if she was on her deathbed, she did not want to be resuscitate in any manor. As a husband, I would find making that decision very difficult and emotions would dictate that the doctors do everything to keep her alive. This comes a great cost at what amounts to a feudal effort regain a life that could never be again and comes at a cost of pain a suffering of the loved one. This acts much as a living will in which many Americans do not have. Mr. Ryan was a instrumental cheerleader to make these well thought out issues to be some sinister plan by Democrats. Going against popular belief, I am not so much a lefty but more of a hatred of the right for acting like children and distorting what should be a sober and real debate by both sides.

On the other side of the coin, Mr. Ryan's proposed budget would gut medicare and medicare and reduce it to a coupon system. $5000 a year for a family to get insurance is a pipe dream. Perhaps you have the means to take your government issued coupon and couple it with your own cash to buy some plan for say $25,000 a year, but most seniors are barley making it as it is now. So in all reality, how is really pushing grandma over the cliff, a distortion of law in which dogma dictates the terms, or real cuts to a program that goes to the heart of healthcare? To make this worse, the saving in which Ryan proposes would shift from healthcare to a tax cut for the rich. With that said, the portrayal of Mr. Ryan pushing grandma over the cliff is more of a reality in reflection of his budget and not at all derived from the American Free Choice act.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 2, 2012 5:55:48 AM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Jul 2, 2012 6:01:03 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 2, 2012 5:59:05 AM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Jul 2, 2012 6:00:54 AM PDT]

Posted on Jul 2, 2012 8:53:45 AM PDT
S. Allen says:
""Jul 2, 2012 5:55:48 AM PDT L. Kammeyer says:
Now that is some funny stuff right there ""

Just stating an easily provable fact.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 3, 2012 5:33:27 PM PDT
Agree, with you 100% it is the wall street brokers who are gettign rich off of us. pushing up oil price. then to the pump, nothing the President can do.
‹ Previous 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Automotive forum (309 discussions)

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Automotive forum
Participants:  76
Total posts:  360
Initial post:  Mar 16, 2012
Latest post:  Jul 3, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 11 customers

Search Customer Discussions