|
|
|
 |

July 28th, 2004, 07:37 PM
|
 |
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: twilight zone
Posts: 2,247
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
Norfy, I'm surprised you haven't made the Darwinian argument against the social safety net of universal healthcare: the weak, the lazy, and the inept die off, preferably before they breed, and the gene pool gets cleansed. Or were you working up to this? 
|

July 28th, 2004, 07:53 PM
|
 |
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Münster, Germany
Posts: 78
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
Quote:
Originally posted by Arryn:
[qb] just look at bin laden . but the muslim faith is in general more tolerant bin laden is only a sect which isn't even tolerated by the muslim leaders while the catholic church seems to me much more fanatic and they tolerate , even support extreme and almost violent catholic sects .Can you name an "extreme" Catholic sect that exists *today*? (And cite examples of what makes them "extreme" and "almost violent".)
|
I can G.W. B. and his follower!!!!!!!!!
__________________
Algebraic geometry seems to have acquired the reputation of being esoteric, exclusive, and very abstract, with adherents who are secretly plotting to take over all the rest of mathematics. In one respect this Last point is accurate. --David Mumford
|

July 28th, 2004, 08:11 PM
|
 |
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: twilight zone
Posts: 2,247
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
Quote:
Originally posted by Skolem:
I can G.W. B. and his follower!!!!!!!!!
|
Wrong. Bush isn't Catholic, though he is pretty extreme.
|

July 28th, 2004, 08:25 PM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,013
Thanks: 17
Thanked 25 Times in 22 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
Quote:
Originally posted by Norfleet:
I'm the one ignoring every instance where it fails? You seem to be doing that yourself. Every person who leaves the country to seek treatment represents a failure of the health care system. Yet you'd ignore this when claiming your system is better.
|
No, I'm not ignoring it. The aggregate health statistics of the population show that in general people are healthier in Canada. Nobody here has been able to show that these statistics are significantly altered by those wealthy people that might go to the U.S. for treatment.
There is no need to ignore large segments of the population to arrive at this. You, on the other hand, would like to simply ignore the part of your population that can't afford health care. That's called biased sampling, and you can be used to get such useless results as showing that there are no people living below the poverty line by refusing to count people that live below the poverty line.
Quote:
That depends on how you define statistically significant.
|
Statistically significant means that the number of such cases is large enough that it has a noticeable effect on the health of the general population.
Quote:
I don't believe that publicly-funded healthcare in general is, as there are an awful lot of really frivolous treatments that get funded at your expense.
|
Why don't you name some frivolous treatments then.
Quote:
Not at all: The police arguably provide a public service that is beneficial to all. Everyone benefits from them, mostly, unless you happen to be a criminal.
|
And everyone benefits from a healthy population. A population with healthier people is a population that can be more productive.
Quote:
We have the second amendment for a reason, insofar as certain politicians keep trying to hamstring it, something which is apparently sadly lacking in Canada and leaves you at the mercy of killers, rapists, robbers, and other hoodlums.
|
Oh good grief. Keep on spreading that FUD Norfleet. I know that you are incredibly paranoid, but the violent crime rate is lower in Canada than the U.S.
Quote:
Oh, not at all. I don't believe people who fail are always lazy. Everyone has their own cause for failure, which can be summarized as consisting of some combination of apathy, incompetence, stupidity, and laziness.
|
You might want to avoid contradicting yourself when you write something.
[ July 28, 2004, 19:33: Message edited by: Graeme Dice ]
|

July 28th, 2004, 08:32 PM
|
 |
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: CA
Posts: 744
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
Wow. You are gone for less than a day, and there are 3 new full pages of flames on several none-related topics.  Ok, here we go...
Quote:
Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
And you're a moron with all the logical skills of a rather stupid rock. An argument made without supporting evidence is one that can be ignored, as it contains no useful information.
|
LOL. Well said. It looks like I need to reclarify my collection of rocks into 2 new categories of smart and stupid. Sounds like facinating project. Do you think you can give me a hand with it Graeme? 
[ July 28, 2004, 19:56: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]
|

July 28th, 2004, 08:39 PM
|
 |
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: CA
Posts: 744
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
Quote:
Originally posted by Norfleet:
quote: Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
I suppose that next you'll tell me that Zaire has a great health care system since the richest people there can afford to go to the U.S. for their treatment.
|
That assertion makes no sense, because obviously, Zaire does not have a great health care system if people there are leaving the country to seek their health care. Nobody goes *TO* Zaire to get treatment. You have missed the Graeme's point completely. He was saying that any healthcare system that gives most benefit only to the rich people is not a good one. The question what exactly they need to do to rip these benefits is irrelivent for the topic of this discussion.
|

July 28th, 2004, 08:41 PM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 75
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Jibjab, Politics, the Big Bang and more!
I'm seeing a lot of comments claiming Bush is extreme, or radical, self righteous etc. I just want to get an idea of what you guys consider as extreme and such. I'm assuming it's his religious convictions, but what I see from Bush is pretty republican status quo. He's anti abortion and against gay marriage. Most conservative replicans are anti abortion, and gay marriage has been illegal since the beginning of this country up until just recently. He's not pushing for the overturning of Roe vs. Wade and he wants to keep the status quo for marriage. So what exactly is extreme? Specifically. When I hear the words extreme republican, I think of Pat Buchanan, he wanted to throw homeless people in jail for vagrancy. To be honest, Bush is pretty liberal when it comes to domestic social issues, for a republican. Is it because of his choice to go to war? Without the approval of the U.N.? Is it because he believed in the case against Iraq and still won't back down from it? I see a lot of hatred for Bush and I just don't get it. John Kerry himself made the exact same case for war with Iraq, and has even admitted to commiting war crimes in vietnam. Real war crimes, but he gets a pass every time, on every issue. I feel a whole lot safer with this guy in power than ANY democrat (except maybe Liebermann or Zell Miller), but a lot you feel exactly the opposite. I'm not trying to change anyones mind here, I just want to know where the hatred is coming from.
Vig
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|