Really,
Are we in so deep to insurance companies, that the government has to make lack of health insurance a crime?
Kansas Deutsch Film Full HD online
3 years ago
Monday, October 5, 2009
Friday, December 12, 2008
Reply to: Judges ruling on the things they carried
Lawrence said...
Florida Judge RulingI recently heard a drug addiction counselor say that the majority of his addict patients cases all had 1 factor in common. That factor was that the father-figure was missing in these patients childhoods. So by trying to ban gay couples from adoption seems to be a pro-addict cause. To say that these homes are harmful to children is a very ignorant view. The people who think this are wearing blinders that help them ignore all these true problems. I have trouble understanding how any sane person can say that it was better to shuffle these children in and out of homes until they were 18; then to let them stay with a loving, good person. Sexual orentation is just an excuse for people to crucify something they will not take the time to understand. This judge should be applauded for doing the research and looking at the FACTS. "In doing so, giving rise to a slow epidemic in increasing the equality of gay people." It saddens me that a statement like this has to be said. Like the old Depeche Mode song, "People are People". It is up to us to add labels, and we keep doing so. It shouldn't matter gay or straight, black or white, good people are good people. Please judge others as individuals, and don't be lazy and just group people.
December 12, 2008 1:55 PM
Florida Judge RulingI recently heard a drug addiction counselor say that the majority of his addict patients cases all had 1 factor in common. That factor was that the father-figure was missing in these patients childhoods. So by trying to ban gay couples from adoption seems to be a pro-addict cause. To say that these homes are harmful to children is a very ignorant view. The people who think this are wearing blinders that help them ignore all these true problems. I have trouble understanding how any sane person can say that it was better to shuffle these children in and out of homes until they were 18; then to let them stay with a loving, good person. Sexual orentation is just an excuse for people to crucify something they will not take the time to understand. This judge should be applauded for doing the research and looking at the FACTS. "In doing so, giving rise to a slow epidemic in increasing the equality of gay people." It saddens me that a statement like this has to be said. Like the old Depeche Mode song, "People are People". It is up to us to add labels, and we keep doing so. It shouldn't matter gay or straight, black or white, good people are good people. Please judge others as individuals, and don't be lazy and just group people.
December 12, 2008 1:55 PM
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
How safe are we?
The cloud of terroism is still very much darkening our American skies. Al-queda terroists have said they are targeting our subway systems in New York. Mumbai, India gunman singled out British and American tourists killing at least 78 people. Is it ever going to feel safe in America? I think we all know that after 9/11 the whole semblence of safety shifted. I do think that in my lifetime, things will never truly feel safe. In a world that has overcome so many biases when will we become unbiased against things like religion? Meanwhile, there are pirates on the seas taking over any ships that might happen to cross their paths. Is this world we live in now any more dangerous than the world 50 years ago? Or is it that the information of these problems is more readily available? I cannot help but feel that our nation is a target; therefore, all citizens and our allies are now targets also. What are the solutions for the future? I have no idea. I can only hope that our salvation lies in the fact; that we are a nation made up of many different kinds of people and beliefs. The war with fear-mongers will continue. I just hope that we don't give up all of our rights as free citizens because of the fear. "The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself"-Franklin D. Roosevelt
Friday, November 14, 2008
But all Milk is not created equal in the eyes of organized religion....
In my fellow classmate's blog: the things they carried, there was a post about a movie that chronicled Harvey Milk. Harvey Milk was a gay rights activist who fought for and was murdered because of his beliefs. The author began to wonder why a persons' gender, race, age, and even sexual orientation had such an effect on how people and the world views them. The author wonders why Congress makes exceptions when the U.S. Constitution is worded to let people have the rights of a free citizen. Personally, I believe that Congress makes these exceptions because Congress needs to be able to turn a blind eye when the situation (and the big money) demands it. I agree that sexual orientation should have no impact on how a person is perceived in this world. Organized religion does believe that gay marriage is sinful, and they control a lot of the money that has supported many a Congress person's campaign. The members of Congress also have been raised in community churches that are conservative in nature. Congress makes exceptions because these exceptions pay the bills. Remember, money is the law.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Broken Promise: The first of many?
"Our opponents are dedicated to manipulating this broken system to raise as much money as possible -- and they've proven they are very good at it," Obama's site declares. No mention that Obama's been pretty good at it himself, raising $295 million to John McCain's $122 million.
John McCain and Barack Obama said they would use public campaign finance only. Barack Obama said he would be a canidate whose campaign would be funded by the people, not private interests. His campaign would be one funded by the ordinary American: the college student, the minimum wage employee, and the bus drivers of America. However like most politicians, McCain would have done the same; Barack met some of the donater's from Hillary's camp. I don't blame Obama for this change. Most politicians would have done this and probably have in the past. The problem is, in my opinion, that he has dressed himself up as the purer and more saint-like than other politicians. Why has Barack Obama's camp found the need to hide who gave him the money? Why is the amount only listed as $1000 or more? Obama made a promise to operate in the limits of public campaign finance. He broke that promise. His only reasoning was that the public finance system was broken. Obama said he would need all that money fight dirty campaign ads like the Kerry Swift boat commercials. Those commercials never really came about. If George W. Bush had made that same comment; what would the reponse have been? Maybe this was a great plan to sabotage McCain's campaign funding, maybe not. I don't fault Obama for changing his mind; he had a tactical advantage and used it. I do fault the way it was done. Don't be a hypocrite, and then make yourself out to be a hero. Account for who gave you your funds. People in America have been blinded by a bad presidency that was very hard on America as a whole. John McCain is not George W. Bush, and Barack Obama is not a perfect person. Please use your heads and remember fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Quit being fooled by the political arena.
John McCain and Barack Obama said they would use public campaign finance only. Barack Obama said he would be a canidate whose campaign would be funded by the people, not private interests. His campaign would be one funded by the ordinary American: the college student, the minimum wage employee, and the bus drivers of America. However like most politicians, McCain would have done the same; Barack met some of the donater's from Hillary's camp. I don't blame Obama for this change. Most politicians would have done this and probably have in the past. The problem is, in my opinion, that he has dressed himself up as the purer and more saint-like than other politicians. Why has Barack Obama's camp found the need to hide who gave him the money? Why is the amount only listed as $1000 or more? Obama made a promise to operate in the limits of public campaign finance. He broke that promise. His only reasoning was that the public finance system was broken. Obama said he would need all that money fight dirty campaign ads like the Kerry Swift boat commercials. Those commercials never really came about. If George W. Bush had made that same comment; what would the reponse have been? Maybe this was a great plan to sabotage McCain's campaign funding, maybe not. I don't fault Obama for changing his mind; he had a tactical advantage and used it. I do fault the way it was done. Don't be a hypocrite, and then make yourself out to be a hero. Account for who gave you your funds. People in America have been blinded by a bad presidency that was very hard on America as a whole. John McCain is not George W. Bush, and Barack Obama is not a perfect person. Please use your heads and remember fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Quit being fooled by the political arena.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Healthcare: the next economic bomb?
http://http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/09/28/0928healthcare_edit.html
Consider that more than 45 million Americans have no health care coverage (nearly 6 million Texans lack coverage), and health care costs are growing faster than the economy. Those costs account for 16 cents of every dollar spent in the United States, according to the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office. Its January report stated that "our health care system is badly broken. In fact, if there is one thing that could bankrupt America, it's runaway health care costs."
There is a new economic crisis brewing under everyones' noses. It has been there for some time. We hear people talk about it, but no-one really ever seems to worry about it until they need medical attention. By that time, it's too late. The fact is that, as seen above, there are too many people without health care coverage. The current system is arranged to make it so that people without health coverage can't afford medical treatment on their own. The insurance companies have almost created a monopoly on Americas' health. This is unacceptable and needs to be changed. For those people who cannot afford health care the taxpayers are now covering the costs. What happens when the taxpayers can no longer afford to cover the costs of the uninsured and their own families? The Obama plan taxes the "rich people" who make over $250K and uses some of that money to help cover health costs. It would also gice another $50 million dollars to help the health care industry update record, technology and equipment. McCain's plan gives tax credits to families and lets them shop around for a private provider. Neither plan really seems to address the insurance-caused inflation problems of our current health care system.
Is the high cost of health insurance the problem? Is the inflation caused by the insurance the problem? I realize that this is a huge problem with many factors. I does seem to me, however, that simply providing more money to the health unsurance companies will only wind up letting them throw more expensive parties. While the rest of America is left wondering when this health care crisis will become front page news.
Health care by the numbers :
In 2007, 45 million nonelderly people in the United States lacked health coverage.
Nearly 6 million Texans (5,832,884) lacked health insurance.
More than eight in 10 uninsured people (81 percent) come from working families.
About two-thirds of the nonelderly uninsured are from low-income families (income below 200 percent of poverty, about $42,400 for a family of four in 2007).
Adults ages 19-54 make up the majority (71 percent) of the nonelderly uninsured, but nearly 9 million children lacked health coverage in 2007.
Since 2000, the number of nonelderly uninsured has grown by 8 million — with the only decline in the number of uninsured occurring in 2007, largely driven by an increase in public coverage.
Uninsured adults are five times as likely as the privately insured to lack a usual source of care (54 percent vs. 10 percent) and four times as likely to postpone care because of cost (26 percent vs. 6 percent).
Half of the uninsured report that paying for health care and health insurance is a serious problem.
Source: Kaiser Family Foundation
Consider that more than 45 million Americans have no health care coverage (nearly 6 million Texans lack coverage), and health care costs are growing faster than the economy. Those costs account for 16 cents of every dollar spent in the United States, according to the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office. Its January report stated that "our health care system is badly broken. In fact, if there is one thing that could bankrupt America, it's runaway health care costs."
There is a new economic crisis brewing under everyones' noses. It has been there for some time. We hear people talk about it, but no-one really ever seems to worry about it until they need medical attention. By that time, it's too late. The fact is that, as seen above, there are too many people without health care coverage. The current system is arranged to make it so that people without health coverage can't afford medical treatment on their own. The insurance companies have almost created a monopoly on Americas' health. This is unacceptable and needs to be changed. For those people who cannot afford health care the taxpayers are now covering the costs. What happens when the taxpayers can no longer afford to cover the costs of the uninsured and their own families? The Obama plan taxes the "rich people" who make over $250K and uses some of that money to help cover health costs. It would also gice another $50 million dollars to help the health care industry update record, technology and equipment. McCain's plan gives tax credits to families and lets them shop around for a private provider. Neither plan really seems to address the insurance-caused inflation problems of our current health care system.
Is the high cost of health insurance the problem? Is the inflation caused by the insurance the problem? I realize that this is a huge problem with many factors. I does seem to me, however, that simply providing more money to the health unsurance companies will only wind up letting them throw more expensive parties. While the rest of America is left wondering when this health care crisis will become front page news.
Health care by the numbers :
In 2007, 45 million nonelderly people in the United States lacked health coverage.
Nearly 6 million Texans (5,832,884) lacked health insurance.
More than eight in 10 uninsured people (81 percent) come from working families.
About two-thirds of the nonelderly uninsured are from low-income families (income below 200 percent of poverty, about $42,400 for a family of four in 2007).
Adults ages 19-54 make up the majority (71 percent) of the nonelderly uninsured, but nearly 9 million children lacked health coverage in 2007.
Since 2000, the number of nonelderly uninsured has grown by 8 million — with the only decline in the number of uninsured occurring in 2007, largely driven by an increase in public coverage.
Uninsured adults are five times as likely as the privately insured to lack a usual source of care (54 percent vs. 10 percent) and four times as likely to postpone care because of cost (26 percent vs. 6 percent).
Half of the uninsured report that paying for health care and health insurance is a serious problem.
Source: Kaiser Family Foundation
Friday, October 3, 2008
Creative Destruction!
http://www.breakingviews.com/2008/10/02/tarp's%20economic%20implications.aspx
Bailing out these companies seems to be a mistake on some levels. This article pointed me to a new theory I hadn't heard of called "creative destruction". Giving money to the corporations that have failed themselves, the United States of America and to some extent, the world. Rewarding these companies with the proverbial "get out of jail free card" seems to send the message that it's OK. People make mistakes, that is true, but shouldn't they learn from these mistakes? If the governments' dog pees in the kitchen; do we get some average person to buy the paper towels, clean it up, then get the dog some very expensive bottled water? No, you punish and train the dog, in the hopes it does not happen again.
With this bailout the government has shutdown many openings in the market to allow new people, with new ideas a chance to start new business's and to not allow this giant mess to keep continuing. Creative destruction states that "again out of destruction a new spirit of creativity arises". All I think we should ask is that we allow a new spirit of creativity to arise. Inject money into the market, but look to the lessons to Hoover and the 'Veterans Bonus'. Don't inject the big corporations, inject the people who will boost the market by spending with some of this money.
This plan is dangerous because it diverts the funds from its' most productive uses. The investments failed. Let other people have a chance to see investments that will not.
Bailing out these companies seems to be a mistake on some levels. This article pointed me to a new theory I hadn't heard of called "creative destruction". Giving money to the corporations that have failed themselves, the United States of America and to some extent, the world. Rewarding these companies with the proverbial "get out of jail free card" seems to send the message that it's OK. People make mistakes, that is true, but shouldn't they learn from these mistakes? If the governments' dog pees in the kitchen; do we get some average person to buy the paper towels, clean it up, then get the dog some very expensive bottled water? No, you punish and train the dog, in the hopes it does not happen again.
With this bailout the government has shutdown many openings in the market to allow new people, with new ideas a chance to start new business's and to not allow this giant mess to keep continuing. Creative destruction states that "again out of destruction a new spirit of creativity arises". All I think we should ask is that we allow a new spirit of creativity to arise. Inject money into the market, but look to the lessons to Hoover and the 'Veterans Bonus'. Don't inject the big corporations, inject the people who will boost the market by spending with some of this money.
This plan is dangerous because it diverts the funds from its' most productive uses. The investments failed. Let other people have a chance to see investments that will not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
