Posted by ? on February 01, 2006 at 23:19:41 (PST):
In Reply to: Re: To Have Healthcare Or Not To Have Healthcare posted by The Chief on February 01, 2006 at 13:40:50 (PST):
: You really should reread your post before you post, they are hard to follow like this first paragraph. I also think you need to go back and reread things that I wrote. I challenge you to find anywhere where I said that milk is set LOW for the consumer and never said anything about a maximum price, in fact that whole sentence doesn’t make sense. So it is you who are too stupid to even comprehend what is being said here.
: Yes it is regulation that we’ve been discussing but you keep changing what you say and then blame me for saying it. So I’ll recap here so maybe you can follow it. It was YOU who said the state minimum for cigarettes was there so the state doesn’t get “screwed” out of it’s tax dollars and I said it was because it was to keep cigs out of kids hands. When I researched this I found out I was wrong and admitted so. It was to protect the small retailer. You came back and said I can believe what I want be you know better, but offered no proof. And now you’re just saying, it works. Well, what works? Are you now saying it is to protect the small retailer. Saying “it works” doesn’t help your original argument at all. So yes this is regulation, but what happened to competition? Remember that word. It’s one of the things that makes this country great
: First I have to say if you are going to correct my spelling errors you should make sure you don’t have any in your post, this last one was full of them not to mention all of them. Second, again I challenge you to go back and find where I said Sheetz didn’t need to sell things at a loss to get people into the store. You make this stuff up as you go along to help your pitiful argument. Yes they do sell it at a loss to get people into the store, and I don’t have a problem with that. The reason I brought that up was to prove to you just because a store is selling something lower then costs doesn’t mean the producer of that item is also taking a loss. I notice you didn’t address that in may last post. So it would be the same with milk. Just because Wal-Mart would sell it at a $1 a gallon (like you say) doesn’t mean the farmer is also taking that loss. Wal-Mart is taking the loss to get you in the store to buy other things. The farmer is out of the loop. See!
: Wow, I finally got you to get off your lazy ass and do some research. I guess I’m finally getting to you. But just as I figured you went to one of the most liberal magazines out there, Consumer Reports to get your information. But here’s a quote in the article for you, “Our findings: While consumers have made some gains under deregulation, on balance they've lost ground.”, which means at the end of the day everything balanced out. And another quote, “When Congress deregulated industries, it didn't just untie the hands of business. In many cases, it straitjacketed consumers” so they are saying it wasn’t deregulation so much as the way they were deregulated.
: Yes it does say some deregulation happened between 1975 and 1985 which were the phone company and the airlines to name two. But we were not talking about them, now were we. We were talking about the electric company and natural gas. So here’s a quote for you from open secrets: “Pennsylvania’s deregulation experiment, enacted in 1998, has been a rousing success by most accounts. Nearly 500,000 consumers – more than 11 percent of ratepayers – had chosen to leave their utility company as of Oct. 1999, reports The Washington Post.” Did you notice the date there? Did you also notice that it said deregulation was a “rousing success”. See, what you did here was claim (in fact you said you were sure) electric was deregulated back in the late 70’s or early 80’s, and then found some things that actually were deregulated in that time frame and now you say, see I told you so. Nope, I’m not going to let you get away with that dishonesty. You throw shit against the wall and hope something sticks. In fact you said, “The deregulation in '96 was the airline industry” , now that is your quote, but now you quote the Consumer Reports article that says the airline was deregulated in the late 70’s. Are you going to admit here you are wrong? Then you state that in your last post, “the deregulation that you’ve been rating about “ (that also is your quote) as if deregulation is something bad, but stated a few post back this little gem, “Incidentally look how much cheaper it is to fly now.” So you really don’t know what you’re talking about. One post you say how good deregulation is because it’s so much cheaper to fly now, then you post articles that say all the good things about deregulation is “a myth”. How can I take what you say seriously? You can’t talk out of both sides of your mouth, see!
: This next paragraph you answer your own question and don’t even know it because your brain doesn’t know what your hands are typing. Here’s what you say, “Is it really so hard for you to see that the doctors and hospital charge these enormous fees, just so that they will get what they want when the insurance companies set their LOWER rates”. Reread it again and again. You see, it doesn’t matter what the doctors or hospitals charge, the insurance company sets the “LOWER rates” just like you say. Here’s an example, if Dr. Nutjob charges the insurance co. $500 for a brain scan of you and finds no brain and the insurance co pays $250 for this, then Dr. Nutjob gets a check for $250. So it doesn’t matter that Dr. Nutjob charges $500 for it. Maybe Dr. Jackwad charges $300 for the brain scan, he too will only get $250. I agree that not all insurance companies pay the same amount, and that is why the doctors and hospitals charge more than what is paid, because insurance A may pay one amount and insurance B may charge another amount and they can’t charge different amounts depending on which insurance company the patient has. Now is that really hard to see. And one last thing, not everyone is out to rape you, as you say.
: So we have enough oil to support ourselves do we. We just import the oil which causes our trade deficit to go through the roof because why? We pay the Middle East billions of dollars for their oil so they can sponsor terrorism because why? As of 2005 we import over 61% of our oil and you say it’s because why? In 1973 and 1978 we had gasoline lines because the Middle East shut off oil to the West and you’re saying we had those lines why? If we have enough oil why would you want to “drill the shit out of Alaska”? Here you don’t even know what you’re talking about. I just seen a list of the top 10 oil producing states and Alaska wasn’t even on the list. In fact it said the most promising places in America to get oil is North Dakota, Wyoming and the Gulf of Mexico. Didn’t say one thing about Alaska. And the whole reason we bought Alaska wasn’t just for military security like you say. Is there nothing you say that is the truth?
: See now you’re saying “If we do have extra oil to sell it on the market” which is different from what you said in other posts. You just change your argument to suit whatever it is you’re arguing about here and now and doesn’t matter what you posted before. Show me just one web site that says we do not need to import oil because we have plenty. That should keep you busy for awhile.
: So you want to put a tariff on everything. Does that mean oil too? You said everything. How about food that is not grown here, tariff that too. How about minerals that are not found in this country, put a tariff on that too. How much of a tariff would you impose. Maybe 15% or 25%. No wait, how about a 50% tariff. That will show them we are serious. But wait, if we do that, maybe, just maybe the other countries will put tariffs on the items they buy from us. Who cares, right?
: The price of gasoline is this country is high because of the lack of oil refineries. They were in short supply before the hurricanes hit and now they are really in short supply. If we had a surplus of refinery space we would have cheap gas. So yes, President Bush is telling the Saudi’s what to do. Our friend in the White House. A great State of The Union speech last night, don’t you think?
You know, I had about 8 paragraphs typed here, then I decided "Give it up, this moron will never understand!". So I'm gonna quit beating this dead horse and move on.
Later..... ASSHOLE
p.s. Why don't YOU reread YOUR posts, you go back and forth and back and forth. First we do not need regulation, then we already HAVE regulation, then we need deregultion, then we are already deregulted, then the regulation we have works, then it doesn't work. Make up you frickin' mind!