• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Conan goes soft

Lisa Simpson said:
His platform was "the state is better now than when Gray Davis was in charge and the other guy will take us backwards." No mention of healthcare, as I recall, it was mostly a fiscally-based re-election platform.


"But tonight I say we must move forward, not backward, upward, not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom!" - Kodos
Click to expand...
My very best of luck for a prosperous future to all Californians....
 
DanishDynamite said:
My very best of luck for a prosperous future to all Californians....
Click to expand...

I certainly hope so. I think I would rather see gay marriage ratified here before I started worrying about universal healthcare. However, I think universal healthcare will play better across the entire state more than gay marriage will.
 
Lisa Simpson said:
I certainly hope so. I think I would rather see gay marriage ratified here before I started worrying about universal healthcare.
Click to expand...
I'm a little surprised at this. Could you explain why you feel this way?
However, I think universal healthcare will play better across the entire state more than gay marriage will.
Click to expand...
Why? Surely even most people who profess a Democratic leaning would like to see how the numbers work out?
 
DanishDynamite said:
I'm a little surprised at this. Could you explain why you feel this way?
Click to expand...

Universal healthcare is great, but we just don't have the money, and getting us further into debt to provide it won't help us in the long run.

Why? Surely even most people who profess a Democratic leaning would like to see how the numbers work out?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you are saying. The reason I think healthcare will be more popular than gay marriage across the entire state is that California isn't liberal across the board. The cities along the coast (L.A., San Diego, San Francisco) are much more liberal than the interior of the state which is mostly agricultural and conservative.
 
I think it is generally accepted that universal healthcare is more economical than private healthcare. But of course that is in the long run, establishing the system will of course be costly. People won't stop paying so much health insurance until they feel they can really trust that they will get equally good care anyway.
 
Conan? You know, though that role did define Arnold back in the day, the cliché is to refer to his "Terminator" movie roles...
 
Lisa Simpson said:
I'm not sure what you are saying. The reason I think healthcare will be more popular than gay marriage across the entire state is that California isn't liberal across the board. The cities along the coast (L.A., San Diego, San Francisco) are much more liberal than the interior of the state which is mostly agricultural and conservative.
Click to expand...

Why don't you and Danish D. just phone each other and chat about Arnold all you want. This is getting to ba a who's-on-first situation.:eek:

Also, Lisa, I don't understand why you boil down California's issues into just two, gay marriage, and health care. Can only one of those two issues pass, and why are they mutually exclusive? Now I am confused.
 
steverino said:
Why don't you and Danish D. just phone each other and chat about Arnold all you want. This is getting to ba a who's-on-first situation.:eek:

Also, Lisa, I don't understand why you boil down California's issues into just two, gay marriage, and health care. Can only one of those two issues pass, and why are they mutually exclusive? Now I am confused.
Click to expand...


I'm not boiling California's issues down to just those two. I'm also interested in the state of the state's education, taxes, etc. Those things aren't "hot button" issues like universal healthcare and gay marriage.

What's your problem with me and Danish Dynamite discussing Arnold? I thought DD and I were having a fairly civilized conversation.
 
Merko said:
I think it is generally accepted that universal healthcare is more economical than private healthcare.
Click to expand...

To politicians and the people who want to believe them, perhaps. But I wouldn't hold my breath actual economists would line up behind that. And with health care, it's quality that's important, not saving a few dollars (which ends up being penny-wise, pound foolish as health care tech is slowed down.)


But of course that is in the long run, establishing the system will of course be costly. People won't stop paying so much health insurance until they feel they can really trust that they will get equally good care anyway.
Click to expand...

Therein lies the rub. Most "systems" make it illegal for you to go get your own health care, under the discredited notion that "this here town ain't big enuf for the both of us." It's the same thing that leads governments to establish nationalized industries, outlawing any competition. And, of course, denying people the freedom to leave a "system" and go pursue business with other free, independent people is not what a free country is supposed to be about. If the government's "system" is so great, they shouldn't have to force the competition out of business at gunpoint.
 
Mike B. said:
According to here:

http://bea.gov/bea/newsrel/gspnewsrelease.htm

California isn't doing that bad economically.

It had a strong over 4 percent GDP growth, and was in the second to top quintile for growth.

(Scroll down a bit).
Click to expand...


Check it out! Michigan is number 1 worst state in the US, except for the special cases of Alaska and Louisiana, which was in the process of having it's biggest city destroyed.

And for her effort, we re-elected Jennifer Granholm (D -- that's D for Democrat, not D grade, which would have been E) as governator. The US was booming so well that it was described as a "recession of one state", but even that couldn't get her un-elected in the face of Republican hatred this year + the fact the Republicans let a billionaire, Mr. Amway, self-nominate and run. According to my wife, he "has rat eyes". And he kind of does, it's freaky.
 
Beerina said:
To politicians and the people who want to believe them, perhaps. But I wouldn't hold my breath actual economists would line up behind that. And with health care, it's quality that's important, not saving a few dollars (which ends up being penny-wise, pound foolish as health care tech is slowed down.)




Therein lies the rub. Most "systems" make it illegal for you to go get your own health care, under the discredited notion that "this here town ain't big enuf for the both of us." It's the same thing that leads governments to establish nationalized industries, outlawing any competition. And, of course, denying people the freedom to leave a "system" and go pursue business with other free, independent people is not what a free country is supposed to be about. If the government's "system" is so great, they shouldn't have to force the competition out of business at gunpoint.
Click to expand...
Where is private healthcare illegal? Have any states really been stupid enough to ban it?
In no way does socialised medicine require the banning of private healthcare.
We have nationalised healthcare here and a booming private healthcare sector, in many ways the two complement each other. In fact there is even a private healthcare system which caters (almost) exclusively to government employees.

If you are correct and some states have (or want to) ban private healthcare, then it backs up an earlier observation I made (back when we where discussing "residency permits" which meant that the "wrong kind of family" couldn't live in their own house) that despite the almost libertarian national mythology of the US in all but a few very select areas, the US public is willing to tolerate far more government intervention into their private lives than most Europeans. Which I find odd, but fascinating.
 
brodski said:
Where is private healthcare illegal? Have any states really been stupid enough to ban it?
In no way does socialised medicine require the banning of private healthcare.
We have nationalised healthcare here and a booming private healthcare sector, in many ways the two complement each other. In fact there is even a private healthcare system which caters (almost) exclusively to government employees.

If you are correct and some states have (or want to) ban private healthcare, then it backs up an earlier observation I made (back when we where discussing "residency permits" which meant that the "wrong kind of family" couldn't live in their own house) that despite the almost libertarian national mythology of the US in all but a few very select areas, the US public is willing to tolerate far more government intervention into their private lives than most Europeans. Which I find odd, but fascinating.
Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but I believe Canada's system either bans or has significant barriers to private healthcare.

No state has banned private healthcare, and I can almost guarantee no state ever will. The universal coverage plans that have been implemented by a few states are mixture of private and public funding mechanisms. I think this is probably the best approach for trying to implement universal coverage in the US.
 
I'll nominate the thread for worst thread title in the month of January.

In 2007, "Conan" is more associated with Conan O'Brian than with the role that Arnold Schwartzenegger popularized in 1982 (!). There are people on this board that may want to talk about socialized medicine on a state level, but they will never open this thread because the title is so far removed from the topic.

If one must put "creativity" in one's thread titles, then please include both the topic to be discussed AND the allegedly clever turn of phrase.
 
Lisa Simpson said:
I'm not boiling California's issues down to just those two. I'm also interested in the state of the state's education, taxes, etc. Those things aren't "hot button" issues like universal healthcare and gay marriage..
Click to expand...

Education is much more important than gay marriage, IMO. In fact, the more educated your state's citizens become, the more they will realize this.

Lisa Simpson said:
What's your problem with me and Danish Dynamite discussing Arnold? I thought DD and I were having a fairly civilized conversation.
Click to expand...

I was kidding! Your conversation was civil. The misunderstanding seemed to stem from language or cultural differences, not by political differences. "Who's-on-first" is an example of language misunderstanding.
 
Ladewig said:
I'll nominate the thread for worst thread title in the month of January.

In 2007, "Conan" is more associated with Conan O'Brian than with the role that Arnold Schwartzenegger popularized in 1982 (!). There are people on this board that may want to talk about socialized medicine on a state level, but they will never open this thread because the title is so far removed from the topic.

If one must put "creativity" in one's thread titles, then please include both the topic to be discussed AND the allegedly clever turn of phrase.
Click to expand...

Conan the Barbarian is known the world over, who the hell is Conan O'brian? Was he the engineer from Star Trek TNG?
 
steverino said:
Education is much more important than gay marriage, IMO. In fact, the more educated your state's citizens become, the more they will realize this.
Click to expand...

Yes. I know. But education isn't a controversial subject. Everyone wants their kids to get a good education. Again...I was comparing healthcare to gay marriage because they are controversial. Not everyone is going to agree to either.
 
Ladewig said:
I'll nominate the thread for worst thread title in the month of January.

If one must put "creativity" in one's thread titles, then please include both the topic to be discussed AND the allegedly clever turn of phrase.
Click to expand...

In my youth I found myself hitch-hiking in New Mexico and Arizona. Half the drivers who stopped to give me a lift said to me, "I stopped for you because NO ONE's going to pick you up at THIS intersection."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom