Disclaimer

I mentioned big tobacco simply for the fact that the 'NationalCenter.org' think tank is paid for by lobbying enterprises -- the same ones that stand to lose if social medicine were to take hold here in the US. The tobacco industry is only loosely tied to our discussion. If you're going to give facts (or links to them), they need to be unbiased. I've looked at your links and taken into account the arguments presented, but there's nothing new that I haven't already reviewed. Each side just cherry-picks facts, but particularly the self proclaimed conservatives are the ones who tend to use 'fear' as a political weapon. If you go to social medicine, then this will happen - you'll have lines, it'll be all scary, and...woooooo. That's bullshit. Even with our free-market oriented health system, we STILL have lines and we STILL have people that slip through the cracks on coverage (since many companies will stop at nothing to prove 'pre-exisiting conditions' so they don't have to fork out the dollars). If social medicine is sooo bad, why is the US life expectancy less than many countries with socialized medicine?

And your point that 'no one has a right to health insurance' is pretty asinine. Seriously, there's a TON of things that we don't have "rights" to but would make the world we live in a worse place. We dont have a right to sanitation systems, but you don't shit in an outhouse do you? We don't have a right to be hauled off in an ambulance when we wreck our cars, but you sure do appreciate those EMTs when you need them don't you? We don't have any right to have firemen (let alone VOLUNTEER firemen) risk their lives to save your house if it catches fire, or cut you OUT of your wrecked car... but the world is a better place for those people. Or do you not agree with that too? All SOCIAL SERVICES paid for, at least in part, by your tax dollars. You don't have an explicit RIGHT to any of them.

You first source is a known CONSERVATIVE slant, therefore it is not an unbiased fact source. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Center_for_Public_Policy_Research

Ditto for number #2... conservatives.com, gimme a break

They have an agenda to seek out material that slams social medicine and boosts private medicine. How much are they being paid, and by who? Ohh, I found some of the things that organization lobbies for...and the scandals involved. BIG supporter... or 'willing ally' as one article put it of big tobacco.

http://www.slate.com/id/2138082/entry/2137077/

http://www.mediatransparency.org/recipientprofile.php?recipientID=682

I think you need to heed your own words, the very same post you quoted me from on Page 3 had me advocating HSAs and high deductible insurance in our current system, but even then - those aren't permanent solutions.

You're still missing the point... Just as we Americans bitch about private insurance and health care, you'll find Europeans, Canadians, and Japanese complaining about social medicine. YOU CAN'T PLEASE EVERYONE ALL THE TIME! There are some medical conditions that favor social medicine, and other conditions where market-driven medicine is better.

And the fact of the matter is, yea, everyone wishes we could've saved more, but another great American ideal is 'instant gratification' - most people today don't care about what happens tomorrow. (Of course, there are polar opposite people). This is why we're in the housing slump we're in, this is why people live beyond their means - the future is later, we worry about ourselves today. Not to mention, future expenses can only be projections, it's all uncertain. If I knew I wouldn't ever get sick, I shouldn't be forced to save money. Do you think it'd be fair to have someone who is genetically predisposed to cancer and still smokes - should we force them to save an extra $1000/mo for their future health care needs? If so, where does that money come from if they only make $24k/yr?

There is no incentive to save for health care - why? Because the more you save, the more you penalize people. That's money people could've spent on themselves, instead of on health care needs. I have no incentive to save 10x more money than you, if in the end, you and I both end up with the same medical care. The only difference is that the medical provider will burn through my savings 10x slower than yours - but we'll both be broke in the end, given the same care, being gov't funded. So, why shouldn't I just save the bare minimum I have to, and spend the rest of the money on myself and my family? If I told you I need you to give me $1000/mo to set aside for future medical bills that may...or may not...happen, rather than let you have that extra $1000 to buy a new motorcycle, or do whatever it is you do with your 'fun money' - you'd probably tell me to go to hell. Because the bottom line is that no matter how rich or poor, how much money you saved or didn't, in the end - you'll be bailed out by gov't run social programs.

Then, the next question is, well - why should we have social programs to support people who were too lazy, too stupid, or just plain incapable to have saved for themselves? Because the vast majority of us don't have a $100,000/yr job and money only goes so far. How much should they've saved? What's the threshold? What are we supposed to do with these people that can't afford care? Toss them out in the streets to fend for themselves? Put them in some institution full of poor sick people? (If that's my only option, I'd probably euthanize myself before that). How do you propose we handle all these people once their personal savings run out?

How the hell do you figure that the free market solution is to kill you off. They cant make money off of you if your dead.

Why do you have such a narrow, short-sighted, uneducated, view of things? Not only that, but your post adds nothing of substance to this debate. It's pretty obvious why private insurance has an incentive to kill you off - you need an example? Ok, I'll pick a simple one so you can follow... A 24-yr-old pays an outrageous $400/mo in health insurance = $4800/yr. So $4800/yr is going to your insurance, which if you NEVER go to the doctor or make use of your insurance, the insurance company profits $4800/yr off you, minus some overhead. Assuming you NEVER use your insurance (highly unlikely), and you insurance company invests their profits at a modest 8%/yr - after 30yrs - your contribution becomes $543,759.41 [You can check this in Excel, =FV(8%,30,-4800)].

Now, I've made a TON of assumptions to simplify for you: Your health care premium never changes over 30 years; no compounding (even with monthly compounding, it's only around a $50k difference); You NEVER use your insurance for 30yrs while paying premiums; You're with the same insurance company over those 30 years; Not taking into account any cost-sharing, which would affect the insurance companies risk aversion; and there's a few others, but they're rather minuscule and don't affect the argument.

So, BEST case scenario, you're worth $550k to the insurance company you've been with for over 30 years, if you've switched companies - then you're not even worth that. Now at 54 yrs old, too young for Medicare, you're forced to turn to your private insurance. So, I'll say it again - insurance isn't a charity, you are there for them to make money off of. So, my question is -- how long would it take for you to burn through $550k in medical cost if you were stricken with cancer, or needed open-heart surgery (maybe multiple times), or something else?? I'm not doing the research for you, but I believe the answer is "not too long". So, after the $550k is gone, the insurance company no longer has a profit - especially if you need ongoing and expensive drug treatments for your ailments, your premiums end up sky-rocketing to something you can't afford - and thus you're broke. :broke:What's the point of living if you can't afford to live? What good are you to an insurance company -- even alive, you're not profitable. And remember, $550k is BEST CASE with insurance making ZERO profit off you... most likely, you're lucky to be worth 30% of that to an insurance company.

Social medicine will fix nothing. Michael Moore is a dumb ass. Have you seen any of the other movies generated to debunk sicko. They go to cuban hospitals and show doctors covered in feces and blood and urine for an entire shift. How sanitary. And healthy! Jackass!

Its funny how many people bitch about social medicine, yet you don't hear people whine and bitch about our current government run social medicine programs (Medicare / Medicaid) anymore than they bitch about all the shit you have to deal with going through private insurance. And, people that do bitch, typically have no experience with social medicine in the least. That's like me saying Harleys are the shittiest built motorcycles on the planet, I can't believe anyone would support a company like that -- when I've got ZERO experience with Harleys. That is an ignorant and shallow statement to make. I'd like to see half these people put their money where their mouths are and live the rest of their life without Medicare or Medicaid. It's also pretty easy to bash something, but where are your solutions? I don't think calling people jackasses and dumb asses are really going to solve this countries problems. So thanks for contributing.

And, I'm sure there are TONS of movies debunking 'sicko' - I wasn't promoting the movie anymore than to offer some other views on things that any open-minded person could consider, not to CHANGE your point of view, just consider other arguments. It's just like anything else, you'll have horror stories from social and private medicine - neither system is perfect. You have to look at the systems as a whole and pick and choose the best of both to optimize health care.

If you've got any credible links or sources that are counter to my argument, I'd be happy to read them. I'm not going to make blanket statements...I'm open-minded enough to consider other peoples point-of-view as long as their FACT-based and not just dribble...

2003

Suzuki Hayabusa (GSX-1300R)

40th Anniversary edition

Best 1/4 pass: 10.53 @ 146mph (first and only time I had it out last year)

Only mod so far is a tank bra

Planned mods: RCC Turbo Kit (after I finish grad school)

Have any of you watched Sicko? While you have to take everything Micheal Moore puts out with a grain of salt due to the spin, but there are some issues that social medicine addresses that the free market can't. I don't know where I stand on social vs. free market healthcare, but I don't take solace in the fact that the free market incentive is to kill me off through NOT treating me so profits can be generated. Insurance isn't charity - they're in it to make money through cost sharing (as mentioned by gsxrnurse) and denial of disbursement. While insurance can never deny you treatment, they can refuse to cover the costs - so you're bankrupt after any type of medical disaster. Social medicine will fix some aspects of that part of the equation.

On the other hand, the free market makes sense from some other aspects, like privacy and choice. I'm sure the optimal solution is some BALANCE of both aspects so people can choose privacy over cost, or some tiered progression thereof.

But, since we have to deal with the system as it stands today, I think that forcing people to be more proactive in their health and choices is the best way to curtail these health issues. I believe, HSAs (again as mentioned above) and other high deductible health care plans will help with this.

speaking of photoshop are there any experts here? I have a photo that i need some "work" done to.

What exactly do you want to do?

Not to bust balls... just saying.

RT57 in Elyria is probably the worst road on the planet.

I second that. And they still haven't fixed it.

I've copied the verbiage over from my Craigslist ad. Nothing wrong with the bike, just don't really have the space anymore. Luckily I've convinced my g/f to put her bike in the shed while I still keep the 'cane in my regular garage, but I don't know how long that'll last

1987 Honda Hurricane CBR1000F

1987 Honda Hurricane (CBR1000F)1987 Honda Hurricane CBR1000F http://powersports.honda.com/the_story/heritage/heritage_milestone.asp?Decade=1980&TargetUrl=Milestone/Milestone_Model_0113.asp&PrevPageTitle=Milestone+Archive

*Approximately 15,000 original miles (the dash was replaced at approximately 10k miles, with one from eBay that had 26k on it, and it currently shows over 30k -- have receipt and old dash to verify)

*Mechanically sound, oil changes every 3000 miles with full synthetic, Yoshi pipes. Will run 11.82 @ 120 mph in the 1/4 mile with 200# rider.

*Body is ok, fairings have been scraped (previous owner had dropped it a few times), but some parts have been replaced (eBay again).

I wouldn't say this is a great starter bike, because it's pretty quick yet it's extremely heavy for a sportbike, but it was my first bike. I'm selling it because I've upgraded.

KBB Retail is $2175, KBB Trade In is $1455. I would like to get $2000 out of it. You won't find a faster 1000cc bike for $2000. I'm only selling because I don't have the space for 3 crotch rockets in my garage. I would love to keep this bike, as it was my first bike.

I'm in Elyria -- 419.571.3167 for questions or to look at it. No joyrides. I've since winterized the bike (battery out, stabil in the tank, placed on centerstand).

I thought I was going to like the new Buell. I didn't. I dig the Rotax power plant but can't get past the 'Turbo Teen' front end...

Turbo Teen...ha! I agree with you on both points. From what I've read about Rotax, I think this engine choice will be a godsend for Buell. And I hear you on the styling. It kinda looks like a half-assed attempt at an R1 or R6, and to see those bulky "wind blocker" side covers in person was a real turnoff. Regardless, I think this is a step in the right direction for Buell. I've put about 500 miles on my dad's '99 X1 Lightning, and the 1125R appears to be leaps and bounds above that bike. I'm only a Buell fan because I like the technology and patents Buell holds (ZTL Braking, for instance) and the "Made in America" reputation. But, I'm keeping my 'busa.

No probably about it - it was you. Guess I should have introduced myself.

Anyone see the $120,000 MV Agusta?

Yea, and I still can't figure out where that $120k went? There sure wasn't $120k worth of carbon fiber on it.

I thought the new 1125R from Buell looked pretty trick. And the 1098S was nice (the only one I didn't get to pop-a-squat on). Those are good for the twisties, but I've pretty much settled on straight line work.

Anyone witness any folks drop a bike? Teenage hardass wanna-be dumped a GSXR-750 right next to me and my girl. All 90lbs of him couldn't pick it up by himself. Weak.