Did anyone just see that Obama speech?

[Gitfiddler]

Women are hotter here too. A lot hotter.

I read the comment, sorry I don't trust that source. The study might have been done corretly but theres no mention of how it was conducted, and when measuring something like female hotness method is really, really important in gauging how realistic the survey is.

In all probability it might have been done quite exactly but that article isn't providing me with enough information to say that conclusively.

You ever been to California my friend? And if Australian women are so hot, I feel really sorry for them being stuck with a bunch of wankers who look like Crocodile Dundee, Steve Erwin, Angus Young, Bon Scott, and Frank Gambale

frank gambale is sporting the bald head these days. Was that horrible mullet he had back in the 80s and 90's a wig?

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

Anyone who wears a mullet sucks.

The only thing worse is getting a fake mullet

 

[Marshall Freak]

It doesn't really matter if you trust the source. It's a well reputed newspaper reporting on a government count. The numbers are NO where near 20-40 million.

Universal health care has been implemented in quite a few countries, and it's one of the main reasons why there are quite a few people from those countries that come to the US to pay for surgeries because their wait lists are longer than ours. Canada and the UK are two of the main ones I've read about.

Well, I'm NOT taking a source at face value - especially from a news article. I'm sorry, there are SO many flaws in media reports that come from data, it's obscene. Reputable or not I gaurentee theres at least ONE flaw in there, in fact I already pointed my major qualm with it no information on how data was gathered.

As far as universal health care goes - personally I see no issue with having it and having private for those that can afford it, as I said earlier it's the best of both worlds. If people want to pay to jump the cue by going to a different country that doesn't automatically mean the system has failed. If people were afraid of Canadian or English surgeons because they sucked then yes, I'd say the system is shite.

However look at Scandanavian countries for an example of Universal Health Care working exceptionally well. Australia's works pretty well too, not flawlessly, not by a long shot - but my experiences in the ER here and the ER in the US. I don't know why you guys put up with it!

The reasons I've read about people coming over for surgeries is because of extreme wait time. I read an article a while back about how the UK was excited because their 18month wait list was down 60 percent. There are no 18 month wait lists here.

As far as ER's it depends on where you are in both countries. Where I live, it takes about 20 seconds to get in. I'm sure there are longer waits and shorter waits both here and there.

There's currently 35-45 million here without insurance. That's about 15% give or take without calculating it of our population. Of that 35-45 million, none of them can walk into an emergency room with a problem and not be treated. Medicare and medicaid pick up the tab on a lot of them, and the hospital ends up eating on on some etc. It's not a perfect system but I know from experience dealing with the feds that I do NOT want them in control of it.

 

[stratotone]

FYI, numbers of homeless people always swell up under the liberal media and suddenly the homeless problem 'goes away' under a democratic president and is hardly mentioned. Below is pretty interesting, might want to give it a gander.

Pete

-------------------------

Christopher Hewitt, "Estimating the Number of Homeless: Media Misrepresentation of an Urban Problem," Journal of Urban Affairs, vol. 18, no. 4 (1996), pp. 431-47.
INDEX: homeless, housing

Summary: This article examines the interaction between research, the media, and public policy within the context of homelessness. Beginning in the early 1980s, estimates of the homeless were exaggerated, often 2 million or more. By the mid-1980s, reliable social science estimated numbers of homeless at much lower levels, between 250,000 and 350,000. The media continued to use the higher estimates because they relied on homeless activists and shelter providers for information, an inadequate defense of its more reliable homeless estimates by HUD, and the liberal bias of the media.


Abstract: Homelessness became an important national urban policy issue in the 1980s. Estimates of the actual number of homeless, however, varied considerably. This article tracks the way the media used estimates of the homeless as the issue emerged as part of a national policy debate.

The first national estimates to appear in print claimed that between 2-3 million people were homeless on any given night. This estimate was traced to testimony given by the Coalition for Creative Nonviolence (CCNV), a homeless advocacy organization. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published a study in 1984 using three different methods to estimate the number of homeless population: The three methods estimated the homeless population to be 254,000, 353,000, or 586,000, and HUD eventually presented 250,000 to 350,000 as the "most reliable range." Most estimates based on social science methods estimated the homeless population between 300,000 to 400,000, ranging from a low of under 300,000 to a high of 700,000.

The authors examined almost 500 articles on homelessness listed in the Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature from 1981 to 1992 to track the way the media reported estimates of the homeless. The range of estimates was bimodal: about half cited estimates of 2 million or more and about 1/3 cited estimates of 250,000 to 350,000 over the entire period.

About two-thirds of the articles examined "favored" high estimates of the homeless from 1982-84 and 1984-86 (two years after the release of the HUD report with more reliable estimates). From 1987 to 1992, 54% of the articles favored low estimates while 46% continued to favor high estimates. The higher estimates appeared to be accepted uncritically by large portions of the media.

Liberal and popular magazines and newspapers continued to cite high homeless estimates even after social science studies validated lower numbers. Conservative and scientific studies cited lower estimates more quickly.

Continued use of homeless advocates and activists were an important reason for the persistence of high estimates of homeless. An examination of citations by the media found that:

Homeless activists accounted for 33.7%;
Homeless providers accounted for another 20.4%;
Politicians accounted for 22.6%; and
Researchers made up 23.3%.

Policy Implications: In the case of the homeless, media treatment of the issue contributed to "the proliferation of state and local programs to deal with the problem" and the federal government is spending almost $1.2 billion implementing the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Act. (444) The "scope of the problem was significantly exaggerated in the media with the three million figure being widely and uncritically cited. This resulted from a combination of factors: a vigorous campaign by the advocates, a weak response by HUD officials, and ideological bias among the media." (444)

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

Intersting, seems my source was grossly misinformed.

Thanks for that - would still be interested in finding HOW they actually measured the numbers of homeless, but thats a minor detail.

 

[Marshall Freak]

Intersting, seems my source was grossly misinformed.

Thanks for that - would still be interested in finding HOW they actually measured the numbers of homeless, but thats a minor detail.

I would imagine that it's one of the hardest things in the world to count. How do you find them? I'm guessing they're relying on a combination of Welfare checks, soup kitchen numbers, Social security numbers without addresses etc but I'm sure it's a daunting task!!

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

Which is exactly why numbers on this subject are entirely unreliable. Hence why I'm hesitant to trust a media report......

 

[Marshall Freak]

Which is exactly why numbers on this subject are entirely unreliable. Hence why I'm hesitant to trust a media report......

The media isn't doing the counting, they're just reporting what organizations are counting. I don't have any problem believing them at all, it's not that hard to find a place to live here even if it's living in the projects for free. At the same time, it would be pretty hard to fuck up the numbers by a huge amount. Most of the time, those type of things aren't that far off. Even if it's twice the number, it's still 1.5 million out of 300,000,000 plus, and I bet it's less than a million, and even if it were a million, I'd be willing to bet that if the gov gave them all a house free and clear, within 5 years at least half of them would be homeless again.

 

[cloudnine]

Did anyone just see that Obama speech?

NO! Was the jist: Reparations for everyone and down with Whitey?

J/K: Every politician has to kiss the asses of their respective party, campaign/party contributers, lobbyists, etc....The best laid political plans are always laid to waste through: vetoes, add-ons, delays, committees, etc...Nothing ever gets done that hasn't been watered down with some funds leading someplace other than where they belong

I do like the fact that America seems to be moving in the direction of having an American race....not black, not white, not brown....American.

Actually, the entire theme of Obama's speech was "Everyone is American first".

Where is all this "socialist" shit coming from? Do any of you crying "socialist" even know what a socialist is?

Also, do you think the US style of healthcare actually works?

McCain has changed his opinion on a number of things. He used to be a relatively sane guy, but now he's gone for the fundie, knee-jerk "GODDAMN DEM LIBERALZ" vote with his sudden switch on positions INCLUDING the terrible tax cuts. McCain IS the equivalent of a third Bush term. Maybe in 2000 it would have been different, but not now. He supports all the failed Bush initiatives almost to a fault.

psychodave, how can you say Bush's administration "wasn't that bad"? My God, the economy is in shambles, you're in an unwinnable war, and progressive causes in almost every area have been set back 10 years. Yes, 9/11 would be a horrible thing for anyone to deal with - but instead of using it as a way to unite everyone in a common cause, they just used it as carte blanche to further their own agenda.

What experience did Bush have? A bunch of failed businesses and some nice connections?

I will also note that 90% of the criticism of Obama has nothing to do with his government, focusing on the superficial shit. "Experience" is a misnomer; the man has been in politics for a good long while now, he has travelled and experienced more than 99% of Americans including anyone in the current administration, and I believe him to be more informed and "with it" then McCain by a large margin. There's no evidence of him being an egomaniac - I suspect a lot of the hate is due to his being an intelligent and erudite guy.

Marshall Freak, people don't need to be literally starving for there to be problems. Just because people aren't dying doesn't mean they aren't suffering.

 

[Marshall Freak]

LMAO. You're delusional.

 

[cloudnine]

LMAO. You're delusional.

This is not an answer. Please try again.

 

[Marshall Freak]

LMAO. You're delusional.

This is not an answer. Please try again.

No. We disagree on damn near every point, and I'm not going to bother trying to argue with your democrat talking point bullshit.

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

No. We disagree on damn near every point, and I'm not going to bother trying to argue with your democrat talking point bullshit.

This reads like you don't have any arguments to make................................

 

[Marshall Freak]

No. We disagree on damn near every point, and I'm not going to bother trying to argue with your democrat talking point bullshit.

This reads like you don't have any arguments to make................................

It means I'm not going to bother wasting my time going through his post responding to the sheer amounts of bullshit in it.

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

Where is all this "socialist" shit coming from? Do any of you crying "socialist" even know what a socialist is?

Agreed

Also, do you think the US style of healthcare actually works?

Apparently they do, yet they've yet to experience a non-US healthcare system, correct me if I'm wrong.

INCLUDING the terrible tax cuts. McCain IS the equivalent of a third Bush term.

People need to learn that tax cuts are a shit thing for an economy, seirously, it's fucking 1st year economics. Tax Cuts when theres inflation and rising interest rates is a bad bad bad bad bad bad thing.

psychodave, how can you say Bush's administration "wasn't that bad"? My God, the economy is in shambles, you're in an unwinnable war, and progressive causes in almost every area have been set back 10 years. Yes, 9/11 would be a horrible thing for anyone to deal with - but instead of using it as a way to unite everyone in a common cause, they just used it as carte blanche to further their own agenda.

Agreed, he might not have been the worst in your opinion, but I'm struggling to think of ONE good thing he's done. In addition to this he's basically destroyed ANY positive international reputation America had.

I will also note that 90% of the criticism of Obama has nothing to do with his government, focusing on the superficial shit. "Experience" is a misnomer; the man has been in politics for a good long while now, he has travelled and experienced more than 99% of Americans including anyone in the current administration, and I believe him to be more informed and "with it" then McCain by a large margin. There's no evidence of him being an egomaniac - I suspect a lot of the hate is due to his being an intelligent and erudite guy.

I've noted this to, I'm not sure why. Same with Hillary. People just insult them, but generally lack any substance to their arguments. I can't get anyone's opinion on his policy because there to busy looking at his pastor. His thoughts when he was young or some other minor detail that has NOTHING to do with his politics NOW.

Marshall Freak, people don't need to be literally starving for there to be problems. Just because people aren't dying doesn't mean they aren't suffering.

Marshall Freak is one of those people that thinks if your on teh streets it's because your a drug addict, communist whose hurting America with your refusal to get a job.

Not that MF is a bad person.

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

It means I'm not going to bother wasting my time going through his post responding to the sheer amounts of bullshit in it.

No. It means you DON'T have any arguments to make, since cloudnine was 100%. If you did, you WOULD have responded logically and coherently. Since you refuse to prove anything I assume you've NOTHING to prove!

 

[Marshall Freak]

Where is all this "socialist" shit coming from? Do any of you crying "socialist" even know what a socialist is?

Yes. Socialism:
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

That's what the democrats are striving for. Just a few weeks ago one of the members of congress started threatening the oil companies with socializing them then caught herself and said "Take over" You guys may like that shit in your countries, but it's completely against everything we stand for here.

Also, do you think the US style of healthcare actually works?

Yes.

INCLUDING the terrible tax cuts. McCain IS the equivalent of a third Bush term.

EVERY time it's been done it's been a positive growth. Kennedy did it, Reagan did it, and Bush did it. With both of the first two, income into the Government doubled. With Bush, The economy was actually quite good up until the last couple years with record growth. Now that it's on a decline, do you actually think that people would be better off with less money in their pockets? Bullshit.

psychodave, how can you say Bush's administration "wasn't that bad"? My God, the economy is in shambles, you're in an unwinnable war, and progressive causes in almost every area have been set back 10 years. Yes, 9/11 would be a horrible thing for anyone to deal with - but instead of using it as a way to unite everyone in a common cause, they just used it as carte blanche to further their own agenda.

It hasn't been that bad other than spending like a liberal. Afghanistan was the right thing to do regardless, and Iraq was a war we went into where EVERY nation believed the same thing we did about the WMD's. In his last days Hussein even stated that he was just waiting for everyone to leave to start the programs again. Now that we're there the only right thing to do is finish it. Things are actually going pretty well there now.

I will also note that 90% of the criticism of Obama has nothing to do with his government, focusing on the superficial shit. "Experience" is a misnomer; the man has been in politics for a good long while now, he has travelled and experienced more than 99% of Americans including anyone in the current administration, and I believe him to be more informed and "with it" then McCain by a large margin. There's no evidence of him being an egomaniac - I suspect a lot of the hate is due to his being an intelligent and erudite guy.

Experience isn't a misnomer, he has none. He's barely out of diapers as far as politics go, and has accomplished nothing. Most of the hate is due to him having the most liberal record in the senate, and the fact that his programs are the absolute worst thing for OUR country.

Marshall Freak, people don't need to be literally starving for there to be problems. Just because people aren't dying doesn't mean they aren't suffering.

I never said there weren't problems, all I've said is that the problems have been blown WAY the fuck out of proportion by people that don't know what they're talking about in this thread. Just because there are a few problems doesn't mean that the government needs to take over. It won't work and their inept actions in every other program show that. When someone from another country ignorantly tells me that people are starving and that 1/10 of the population are homeless, it's apparant they don't know their ass from a hole in the ground, and need to just mind their own business if they're going to interject such stupidity.

Not that they meant anything bad by it...

.[/quote]

 

[Marshall Freak]

It means I'm not going to bother wasting my time going through his post responding to the sheer amounts of bullshit in it.

No. It means you DON'T have any arguments to make, since cloudnine was 100%. If you did, you WOULD have responded logically and coherently. Since you refuse to prove anything I assume you've NOTHING to prove!

No, it means you're both full of shit.

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

Yes. Socialism:
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

That's what the democrats are striving for. Just a few weeks ago one of the members of congress started threatening the oil companies with socializing them then caught herself and said "Take over" You guys may like that shit in your countries, but it's completely against everything we stand for here.

I need more examples then a vague antecdote. If you had any idea about socialism you wouldn't actually spew this shit. You realise the first socialist communes where in the US right?

Yes.

Based on qhat type of experiences. You've said your in the sticks, what kind of real life experiences have you actually had with ER in cities, or a surgery?

EVERY time it's been done it's been a positive growth. Kennedy did it, Reagan did it, and Bush did it. With both of the first two, income into the Government doubled. With Bush, The economy was actually quite good up until the last couple years with record growth. Now that it's on a decline, do you actually think that people would be better off with less money in their pockets? Bullshit.

Dude. Study Economics for 3 months and you'll realise how WRONG you are. There are times when tax cuts are good, now is definately NOT one of them. Seriously have you ANY idea what happens when more money is given when Interest Rates and Inflation is going up? Your better off with less money as opposed to massive jumps in IR and Inflation. But hey, any hack with a year of high school economics could tell you that.

It hasn't been that bad other than spending like a liberal. Afghanistan was the right thing to do regardless, and Iraq was a war we went into where EVERY nation believed the same thing we did about the WMD's. In his last days Hussein even stated that he was just waiting for everyone to leave to start the programs again. Now that we're there the only right thing to do is finish it. Things are actually going pretty well there now.

Every nation did NOT beleive that there were WMD, otherwise why did SO MANY speak out against you? Why else DIDN'T YOU GET UN SANCTION? WTF, your saying WE'RE full of shit. Have you ANY REMOTE IDEA ABOUT INTERNATIONAL POLITICS????? Seriously, this is the DUMBEST THING I HAVE EVER READ.

Experience isn't a misnomer, he has none. He's barely out of diapers as far as politics go, and has accomplished nothing. Most of the hate is due to him having the most liberal record in the senate, and the fact that his programs are the absolute worst thing for OUR country.

It's what your country needs. Not another WASP, not another republican with no fresh ideas and less imagination then a goldfish, but someone that can think to the future and make it happen. Wake up.

I never said there weren't problems, all I've said is that the problems have been blown WAY the fuck out of proportion by people that don't know what they're talking about in this thread. Just because there are a few problems doesn't mean that the government needs to take over. It won't work and their inept actions in every other program show that. When someone from another country ignorantly tells me that people are starving and that 1/10 of the population are homeless, it's apparant they don't know their ass from a hole in the ground, and need to just mind their own business if they're going to interject such stupidity.

I can vote in America, I'm an American citizen. It pisses me off when people dont understand the issues. Not because of innocent mistakes. But because of blind ignorance. No ones saying your government needs to take over, we're saying it needs to change policy. Change hard and chage fast. Your calling US ignorant? Yet refusing to aknowledge any arguments for such erraneous reasons such as "your from Australia" or "It wouldn't work here" ??? Grow up man. No government is out to become a tyrant. Get over yourself, this is 1774, you aren't contesting England. It's insulting that people as narrow minded, shallow, backwards and ignorant as some Americans (and plenty of other people the world over) are granted the vote.

Get some perspective happening!

 

[Marshall Freak]

I do know what socialism is, and what Obama and the rest of the democrats are after are the basics of socialism. I'm not claiming they're going to start commiting genocide like other socialist governments have, but what they're after is a state run country and that's the bottom line.

I had two years of economics and macro in college. right now is NOT the time to be taking more money from the people when they don't have any left. Anyone with the tiniest amount of common sense knows you can't squeeze blood from a stone.


Every country did believe the WMD's were there. They didn't go along with it because they didn't want war and didn't believe we should do it. The UN filed resolution after resolution and got nowhere. We didn't have to get any permission from the UN, Hussein violated the cease fire agreement he had with us. Regardless of whether we should have gone to war or not, it's been done and has to be finished or the ramifications will be tragic. Obama is lying when he says he'll be pulling the troops out in 60 days, it's not even logistically possible and it will be disastrous if he could.

He's NOT what our country needs. That's why we have elections though so that those of us who believe he shouldn't be in office can vote against him, while others that like him can vote for him.


It pisses me off too when people don't know the issues, and you clearly don't if you think there are people starving in the streets and that 10+% of our population is homeless. Many of us don't think that WE need this drastic change you're talking about and for the most part I don't give a rats ass what people in other countries think our country needs to do. Socialized medicine would be the worst thing to ever happen to our medical system. This is coming from someone that's self employed, and as of last fall my wife got laid off and is now self employed too so we don't have medical insurance at the moment so I have everything to gain by the government taking over.