JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
- Corporate Business English Trainers
- ACT Systems, Inc.（株式会社アクト・システムズ）, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥269,500 ~ ¥280,000 / Month
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
-
- FT English Teachers for Kids - Osaka
- Kohgakusha Co., Ltd. （株式会社興学社）, Osaka
- Salary: ¥255,000 ~ ¥275,000 / Month Travel Expenses, Encouragement of Japanese learning*
0
WhiteHawk
Coming soon to a hip-hop music video near you.
I like how the crystals on the near Benz distract (almost) everybody from the fact it's wearing whitewall tires. Whitewalls! Haven't seen those since 1982!
And just think how heavy the cars must be now. Probably makes them slower than kei-class car.
japaneseno1:
NorcalMaike:
You couldn't be more wrong. I drive a Jaguar and I wouldn't want to be seen looking at one of those in person, much less driving one. I don't even like the wheels. The only way that could be more tasteless was if they used a Cadillac Escalade or a Hummer.
Posted in: Vroom vroom
0
WhiteHawk
bobbafett:
Plus, they were journalists. For Al Gore, no less. If anything like this happens to a journalist, it always makes more news than when it happens to anyone else.
Posted in: N Korea says it has detained American missionary
0
WhiteHawk
Athletes:
Thanks, it was a fun weekend. You?
The Bill of Rights, First Amendment.The document does not grant rights, but recognizes and protects "creator-granted rights".
I think you're confusing accusations with convictions of guilt.
Then can you explain to me how someone who watches one side of a story eleven times and refuses to watch an opposing perspective once, can claim to have just as valid an opinion as someone who watches two opposing perspectives?
Take a playground see-saw (also known as a teeter-totter or teeterboard, depending on where you grew up). Put a similar-sized rock on each side. That is balanced. Now put eleven rocks on one side, and leave the other side empty. See if it will balance. What you're doing is claiming the see-saw with eleven rocks on one side is just as good as the see-saw with similar-sized rocks on each side. Do you still wonder why I'm critical of such an unbalanced opinion?
No, I am much thinner and have a full head of hair.
Definition:
1. defamation: a false and malicious published statement that damages somebody's reputation. Libel can include pictures and any other representations that have public or permanent form.
2. attacking of somebody's reputation: the making of false and damaging statements about somebody
3. written statement: the plaintiff's written statement in a case under admiralty law or in an ecclesiastical court
If there was a war that ever went according to plan, please let me know.
I guess you haven't noticed this, but those debts have gown exponentially since the Democrats started doing the spending, just as I predicted. They've grown to such an extent that those foreign nations are resisting buying any more of our debt.
Can you name any legislation Clinton signed which created that peace and prosperity? Any foreign policy actions, perhaps?
None of your response changes the fact that Bush did volunteer for Vietnam, but was passed over for pilots with more flight time. Nor does it change the fact that he did not avoid risk by being in the NG, as he was flying a fighter jet that had a reputation for being difficult to fly.
Oh, but you've seen it?
The evidence is already available, in abundance. You just refuse to look at it.
Actually, I've been very critical of G.W. Bush on some issues.
As long as they don't go around claiming to have an informed opinion and accuse others of being brainwashed. You don't need a lecture? Sounds like something my niece would say. What you need is constructive criticism. Actually, you need to tell the difference between being criticized and being lectured.
Chronologically you may be an adult, but to watch a flawed piece of entertainment eleven times, then accuse anything critical (which you refuse to watch) of that entertainment as "brain-washing propaganda" is not a sign of maturity. It is reactionary. You've created, with Michael Moore's help, a worldview you want to live in, and you lash out at anything that dares challenge or question the accuracy of it.
You have a right to your opinion, and you have the right to form that opinion any way you choose. But you don't have the right to insist it is just as good as anyone else's opinion. Your right to an opinion is guaranteed to be as equal as anyone else's. The value of your opinion is not.
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
yabits:
If you're going to accuse me of lying, then have the courage to come out and say it.
I've provided all the personal information on this website I am going to do. You can go looking for the company the same way I found it, by browsing a website where one can shop for private health insurance, such as eHealthInsurance.com. Someone would have to be an idiot to not figure that one out. And since you didn't figure that one out...
"ZERO hard stats"?!? Obviously, you didn't bother to read the article at all.
Otherwise, you would've read this (among other stats):
Meritless cases must be investigated and defended resulting in the outlay of what is known as allocated loss adjustment expenses (ALAE). According to information from the Physicians Insurers Association of America (PIAA), an organization consisting of many of the physician-owned liability insurers, of the more than 10,000 claims closed in 2005, only 24 percent of these cases had an indemnity payment. Yet, the ALAE paid for those claims totaled more than $172 million, averaging almost $21,000 in expenses per meritless claim.
As I said before, I now see why you're a Leftist. It's one thing to be ignorant, but you're deliberately so.
I overlooked your response with the factcheck.org link. So I went to the site and read the article. Then I read the CBO report itself. Why didn't I read the GAO report? Because factcheck.org stated that GAO only determined:
Because this study was focused on only one condition and on a hospital setting, it cannot be extrapolated to the larger practice of medicine. Given the limited evidence, reliable cost savings estimates cannot be developed.
Yes, because the risks vary from one specialty to the next, extrapolating the data from one is not an effective way to make an estimate.
So what did I find in the CBO report that was left out of the factcheck.org article? That malpractice insurance premiums rose an average of 15% percent for all physicians between 2000 and 2002. In some specialties, some physicians saw increases of 22% and even 35%. In two years. Physicians aren't going to continue paying such increases and watch their incomes shrink. The increases will either be passed on or there will be fewer doctors
Also, they make this statement:
Second, evidence suggests that very few medical injuries ever become the subject of a tort claim. The 1984 New York study estimated that 27,179 cases of medical negligence occurred in hospitals throughout the state that year, but only 415--or 1.5 percent--led to claims.
The problem with that statement is that it only considers negligence which leads to claims. It excludes claims which are filed when no negligence is reported, which is the vast majority of claims. And I have already covered the costs of those claims, both in responses to you and to Good Jorb.
But since you like the CBO for this, would you mind if I refer to them when they contradict the economic predictions of the Obama administration?
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
From moorewatch.com:
Stupid things Michael Moore said (during a 2 minute, 36 second interview on CNN's Larry King Live):
1. Capitalism is a legal system
If you are going to make a movie about something shouldn’t you know what the word means? Just as a beginning point at least. A quick Wikipedia search of the word tells you that it is an “economic and social system,” not a legal system. To be sure there is a legal structure that is needed to make capitalism work properly, but that doesn’t make capitalism a legal system itself.
2. Regulation and rules that use to keep them in check are no longer keeping them in check
There are no more regulations? That’s news to me. I think it would also be news to the thousands of small and large companies that have to suffer increased costs due to mind numbingly dumb regulations.
3. Rich having more is anti-democracy
What is anti-democratic about someone having more stuff than me? Or even having a lot more stuff than me? I guess it is only democracy if we all have the same amount of stuff...oh wait isn’t that called something else?
4. Not only against democracy but against his personal values
This I admit is a bit of a cheap shot, but did you notice how he made a distinction between his values and democratic values?
5. Against the values of people
Yes because lord knows that capitalism goes against the very fiber of America society. The free exchange of goods and services is universally condemned by every right thinking American. The USA hates freedom and capitalism that’s for sure. That’s why they were so friendly with the Soviet Union.
6. Jesus wouldn’t approve of a hedge fund
How the hell does he know what Jesus would think? Capitalism wasn’t even an abstract concept when Jesus was alive, so how can we possible discern his opinion on that never mind his opinion on hedge funds. You know what, 2 can play at this game. Jesus hates tax collectors therefore Jesus likes capitalism.
7. Replace capitalism with democracy
What the hell? Democracy is a political system. It isn’t even a legal system. So how can he even conceptualize replacing capitalism with democracy? What do we do? Vote on what job someone will get, how much they get paid, how much his groceries will cost, and so on?
8. How can we call it a democracy just because we vote
Because that’s what democracy means? Sure there has to be a couple more requirements to fully qualify as a democracy in most people’s minds; such as competitive elections and the rule of law. But voting is the fundamental core of every democratic system.
9. Don’t want to lose his democratic rights when he goes to work in the morning or go to the bank
At this point it is pretty clear he doesn’t know what the word democratic means. Even the Greeks wouldn’t stretch it to include commercial activity. He is just using it as a buzz word to avoid using the word socialism. This kind of demonstrates just how stupid #5 is.
10. Stop the debate between capitalism and socialism
Umm...okay? One system is based on voluntary individualism and the other is based on coercive collectivism. There may be a wide spectrum between two extremes but how exactly do you propose breaking this paradigm? Wouldn’t involving democratic voting in commercial activity just lead to the coercive model? Or did you think people wouldn’t notice?
11. We are smart enough to come up with a new system that is fair to all people
Demonstrably untrue; people have been trying to do this for thousands of years. Why do you think just because it is a new century we are suddenly smarter? I’ve seen no indication of this increased intelligence.
12. It’s time to start sticking up for the little guy in this country
This isn’t so much stupid in itself but stupid in the context of the rest of the clip. Socialism does not benefit the little guy. And let’s be real here, it is socialism and not some sort of commercial democracy that Michael Moore is advocating. Every socialist system has shown that it ultimately benefits a select group of elites. You want to protect the little guy’s interests? Protect capitalism.
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
Are you calling me a "Neo Con"? If so, which definition of the term are you using? The literal definition? The latest version on Wikipedia? One of a variety that have been posed by any number of Leftist bloggers or columnists? I would like to know, so I can prove you wrong without having to cover them all.
I don't consider myself more intelligent than "anyone else", but I am certainly more informed than anyone who watches a heavily-flawed propaganda film eleven times but refuses to accept any contradicting information.
No, I don't think that, and I don't know how you got that idea.
Thank you, but if you respect my opinion, try not to misrepresent it. See "personal hatred", below.
I most certainly can accuse someone of misleading or being inaccurate. That's free speech. Especially when I can back it up. If I were deliberately claiming false information about Michael Moore, he could sue me for libel.
Art? Entertainment? No, that's Roger Moore's movies. Michael Moore's movies are marketed as documentaries. He received an Oscar for one of his movies in the documentary category. If you want to find his movies on Amazon, they're under "documentary". Same for IMDB (where is no. 2 on the list of "Luminaries of the Genre". People take him seriously. Posters on here take his movies as gospel truth. You (and others) treat any criticism of Moore and his tactics as "attacks" "with personal hatred".
You've watched one example of his propaganda eleven times. Don't look now, but your brain has been washed.
You could prove me wrong, and watch Fahrenhype 911. Please.
Which makes him a capitalist.
Apparently not. Moore employs immature exaggerations in his films, and you haven't caught on to it. Oh, and then there's that Oscar thing. So you're not the only one who has been fooled.
Remember that when you wait to watch coverage of "Climategate" on ABC, CBS or NBC on your television. So far, you could only see it while watching FoxNews. (CNN will finally have something on-air tonight.) In fact, if it weren't for the media freedom which allows FoxNews and right-wing talk radio to exist, there would be a LOT of liberal/Leftist/Democrat/"progressive" corruption you would never hear about. But, obviously, you're still free to ignore what you want to.
Actually, Bush did volunteer to go Vietnam, and CBS News' Mary Mapes (Dan Rather's boss) knew this when CBS was preparing its National Guard "scandal" story (complete with bogus NG paperwork) prior to the 2004 election.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2009/08/25/fncs-goldberg-bush-volunteered-vietnam-cbss-mapes-deliberately-omitte
I know you'll complain about the source, but I don't care. Just like Michael Moore, his fellow Leftists at CBS, NBS, ABC and CNN don't publish facts they don't like when they think nobody will notice.
I'm saying Moore is a lying propagandist. I never said I hated him, and however I may feel about him, it doesn't change the fact that others have pointed out his deliberate misrepresentations and inaccuracies. But if I did hate him personally, I would attack him personally, such as making derogatory comments about his appearance, or tossing his luggage in the dumpster. (I would like to clarify that I am not an employee of any airline, specifically any whose name begins with J and end with L.)
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
yabits:
Over 40, with one cardiac arrest and a risky lifestyle (pilot, motorcyclist). Again, I'm offering hard stats and you're offering nothing but your opinion. Buh-bye.
Athletes:
There is nothing conservative (neo- or otherwise) about Obama, Pelosi or Reid.
The problem is, the US stopped adhering to the Reagan principles several years ago. And the Democrats regained control of congress at the beginning of 2007, which is when spending increased yet more, and the economy really started collapsing. It would have been nice if Bush (ever the moderate) had vetoed some of those spending bills, but he was making deals to get the Democrats on his side. Not that it worked, of course.
And this one isn't?!?
That's because in most cases, Halliburton was the only company in that field. Besides, where was the outrage when Eleanor Roosevelt had a stake in Halliburton?
The Katrina "refugees" were overly dependent on the government to begin with. Prior to Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans had been a den of crime and welfare for decades (again, run by Democrats for 60 years). More money was spent on rebuilding that part of Louisiana than was spent on rebuilding 16 countries after WWII. The difference is, at some point, the people of those countries got back on their feet and did the work themselves. Many New Orleans residents have no work ethic because they've been coddled by the government for generations.
"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
Both Republicans and Democrats in congress spent too much. Republicans were responding to a terrorist attack and going to war. Democrats were (still) trying to buy votes.
But now, Republicans have little or no say in D.C., and spending has, just as I predicted, skyrocketed. Our deficit will triple, and generations will be more in debt when they are born than the average American now makes in five years. This is your idea of an improvement?!?
That's funny! Who leads the Democrats? Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Kerry, Jack Murtha? Yeah, not a silver spoon in that bunch... /sarcasm. By contrast, the most popular Republican these days is Sarah Palin. Not born with a silver spoon at all. And unlike Obama, she did not receive funding to Harvard from a mysterious benefactor. She paid her own way through college.
It's one thing to bring attention to what one considers inequality or injustice. It's another to use hyperbole, manipulation, and misrepresentation to get that attention. Those are just some of the tactics Moore has been accused (and proven) of doing, time and again.
If you've read this far, you've seen how.
Yes, it should, which is why you should get an opposing viewpoint. That's how informed opinions are made: Not by watching one perspective eleven times, but by getting more than one perspective.
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
yabits:
Are you suggesting they never tried? Fascinating.
I look forward to it.
And do those nations have attorneys advertising "you don't pay me unless I win your lawsuit"?
Oh boy, here we go again with the "I'll bet you can't provide..." Excuse me? I'm doing ALL the providing here. You haven't provided anything but your opinions and prejudice. Of course you expect me to do all the providing. I'm the right-winger and you're the Leftist. My job is to provide, your job is just to make demands and complain.
Fine. Here's an article: http://www.irmi.com/expert/articles/2007/kolodkin01.aspx
Good Jorb:
Here's the thing: Even lawsuits that get dropped without being settled or going to court still cost an average of $18,000 each to defend. What does it cost the plaintiff to file a claim that gets dropped? Nothing. According to the AMA, doctors are found not liable in more than 90% of the cases that do go to trial, but the cost of defending each case averages over $100,000. Again, what does it cost the plaintiff? Nothing.
A "loser-pays" system would prevent a lot of these claims where either the client or the attorney knows it's a bad claim. Now, attorneys advertise "you don't pay unless I win", and attorneys use extortion-like tactics to get settlements for claims they know won't make it to trial, much less win one.
Then, energy can be directed on resolving when a doctor really does make a mistake.
yabits:
Apparently, I'm not completely out of touch with reality, seeing as I have health insurance for less than $100/month, and I'm a middle-aged man who just recovered from surgery following a bad motorcycle accident. If I can get it for that, most Americans can as well.
Maybe I'm just out of touch with your reality? The one where Nancy Pelosi and a freshman senator/president with no executive or private sector experience knows what's best for everybody?
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
yabits:
And now you know why, thanks to my 07:16 AM post. You remember, when you said you could debate me, a Tennessee resident, on it?
Do you remember when you posted:
Well yabits, I haven't seen you put up any numbers. Or post any reference sources. Just "random musings", as you would say.
Here are more links for you. In which you'll find Democrat opposition to reform: He blames years of political rancor, including a 2005 standoff during which Democrats sank reforms proposed by President Bush, arguing that his forecast of a funding crisis was fabricated and that both systems would be financially sound for decades. http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/552876/
And where you'll find political neglect and the baby boomers: "Everybody knows that there are a couple of 800-pound gorillas under the rug, but nobody wants to talk about them because that is not the route to the Oval Office," said economist Robert D. Reischauer, president of the Urban Institute public policy center. "The situation is unsustainable in the long run, but the long run is in the future, and our political system operates very much in the present."
Yet baby boomers will start retiring and signing up for Medicare in 2011 -- during the next president's first term. And the program faces double jeopardy from rapidly rising healthcare costs and an aging society. Indeed, the trustees' report released Tuesday showed that Medicare spending will surpass Social Security in 2028, and grow to almost double the cost of the pension program in 2082. http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/26/nation/na-entitle26
Did Moore cover any of that in Sicko?
Bush's biggest (and probably only) contribution to the instability of Medicare was the prescription drug program for seniors. Another entitlement plan that one would expect from a Democrat. Proving both that Bush wasn't the right-wing extremist the Left portrays him to be, and that I can indeed be critical of President Bush.
Oh look, wild speculation based on stereotypes! No, I believe that the health care system will run optimally when there is choice, competition and risk. If you want to find slick suits milking a system for profit (a codeword for "evil", apparently), look to the malpractice area of litigation. The financial burden for which rests on the private-sector healthcare providers. There cannot be healthcare reform without tort reform. It's simply not possible.
No, if anything, the events of the past year(s) have proven that congressional meddling and a lack of tort reform have been fundamentally destructive.
I have my own health insurance for less than $100/month and prescriptions for $4, all of it through the private sector, and you're telling me the system is broken and I need Obama, Pelosi and Reid to come to my immediate rescue? Really?!?
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
Athletes:
Such as...?
Not all by themselves. They had plenty of help from Democrats in congress.
Painfully true.
Not entirely true. The AIG "bonuses" were actually deferred salaries. What the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac execs got, however, were bonuses. But since FM/FM is overseen by congress, they didn't get the manufactured outrage and ACORN protests.
Though a misleading and inaccurate one. Perhaps you should watch Fahrenhype 911 too.
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
You're not seriously suggesting that Medicare was fine and dandy until the Bush administration, are you? Wait, you are, aren't you?
So you're going to ignore how Democrats and Republicans didn't prepare Medicare for the arrival of the baby boomers? You're going to ignore the neglect and bureaucratic mismanagement Medicare was subjected to be decades of Democrat-written budgets? You're going to ignore how Democrats used Medicare as a vote-buying scheme?
So the world was perfect... until Bush was elected. Is that right?
You see a conspiracy. That says more about you than it does Republicans.
It's true that, until there is tort reform (and immigration enforcement, etc.), health care costs will do nothing but continue to rise.
Speaking of "rising health care costs", I can walk to my local grocery store and get most prescriptions filled for $4. I couldn't do that prior to (cue dramatic music) the Bush administration. Coincidence? Conspiracy? ;)
So you're willing to post about health care, but not Tenncare. You saw Moore's film Sicko, am I right? Did he or did he not cover Tenncare in his movie?
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
Not all insurance companies have their "rope" set at the same height. That's part of competition. But apparently you would rather have the government remove the principles of competition, and start rationing and denying healthcare, leaving the poor you express so much empathy for without an alternative.
I don't think you want to bring up Medicare. Even writers at the New York Times know that it's "headed for a financial abyss". So no, Medicare isn't working. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/28/opinion/28fri2.html
And the VA is notoriously bureaucratic and inefficient. Every veteran I know (including both of my parents) avoid the VA hospitals and opt for the private sector hospitals and doctors every time they need medical care.
Again, these are the standards you want for all Americans?
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
When the principles of competition, choice and risk are removed, then yes, it does become less capitalistic. But your attempts to equate private sector business with confiscatory totalitarianism are as transparent as they are ineffective. ;)
Oh, how dramatic! Embellish much, yabits? Are you suggesting that only a tiny minority of Americans can get private health insurance? That's what the fear-mongers (such as the often-debunked Michael Moore) suggest, isn't it?
Surrendering so soon? What's the matter, did Michael Moore not cover Tenncare's failings in his movie Sicko?
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
Your point is...? That health insurance companies are "evil" for charging people for insurance? That the $45k should come from taxpayers -through the government- instead of from a private sector business? Just what is your point?
They have the right to refuse service, as does any private sector business. Don't tell me you've never been to a restaurant that had a "no shirt, no shoes, no service" sign out front. I can't be the only one old enough to remember those.
Really? You read about it? So you know about the fraud and abuse that occurred under Tenncare? You know how people got bogus prescriptions and sold the drugs on the street? You know how certain Leftist groups (exploiters of the needy that they are) fought Bredesen when he tried to reduce such fraudulent practices because they were bankrupting the state? You know about non-Tennessee residents and illegal aliens filing for Tenncare? Great! I can't wait to see you defend all of it and make your case for all of the U.S. adopting a similarly expensive, unmanageable and vulnerable plan.
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
yabits:
I am so glad we're having this conversation. This exchange has explained a lot about our previous debates. Now I understand why you are a Leftist.
Perhaps you don't understand capitalism then. You don't have to join, companies compete for customers by offering various incentives to use their service, and sometimes customers have to show they are a good risk for the companies. It's a market with competition, choice and risk, and that's capitalism.
A centralized bureaucracy forcing you to buy insurance or pay a government fine (or go to jail), while confiscating money from society's productive members to subsidize society's unproductive members is what, exactly? Capitalism?
Perhaps you should read up on Tenncare. Our Democrat governor here in Tennessee, Phil Bredesen, opposes Obama and Pelosi's attempt to federalize healthcare, and it's because of his experience with Tenncare. If you were as open-minded as "progressives" claim themselves to be, you would ask "why?" and do the research.
Considering how difficult it has been to explain to you just the basics about how private health insurance operates, putting up any numbers would merely be a wasted effort.
And some of them were forced to take bailout money by the Obama administration. That's not capitalism either.
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
How nice. But you could pay money to a charity and do the same thing. Besides, most children are already covered under their parents, and for those who aren't, every state has some kind of coverage for children, plus there are many excellent charities. Also, many elderly (like my own parents) have saved up over the years to cover their health costs in their later years. As for the working poor, I'm currently one of them, and I can pay for excellent coverage for myself and pay for the surgery I had when I didn't have coverage. Of course, I don't have a big flat-screen TV, and I drive an old car (bought my bike used too)...
And there is where you find the "hidden" expense in so many of these social programs. If you take away those who could buy health insurance but spend their money on luxury items instead, those who have saved, those who are covered under their parents, and those who are in the U.S. illegally, you'll find that the truly needy are far fewer than the fear-mongers claim. Our private-sector charities (where people give because they care, not because the government forces them to) already address the truly needy.
Again, another point that is difficult for Leftists to grasp, as their default solution is the government.
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
yabits:
I think you misunderstood. $5,000 is my deductible, not my coverage. Let me try to explain it this way:
I have an accident. My medical bills come to... let's say $50,000. Since my deductible is $5,000, I pay that. My insurance covers everything after that first $5,000. In other words, they'll cover the remaining $45,000.
Does that help?
Has it never occurred to you that hospitals and doctors charge insurance companies at a higher rate than self-payers (those who pay cash)? If they have to recover the money elsewhere, then they shouldn't discount the self-payers. If they were recovering the money buy over-charging health insurance companies, the health insurance companies would sue for being charged for covering non-clients.
I would rather read my health insurance paperwork, as it's bound to be more accurate than any Michael Moore film, but thanks anyway.
GW:
I know this is a difficult concept for a Leftist to absorb, but I can take pride in paying my own way and not being a burden on others.
Nobody. It wasn't billed to anyone. See my response to yabits. And yes, it was a nasty break, requiring surgery and metal implants. I'm not looking forward to my next commercial flight...
Actually, my insurance covers 100% of my bills after my deductible. And yes, all for less than $100/month.
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
The ONLY man?!? Hardly! Hahaha...
And don't look now, but Bush isn't president any more. Nor did he invent capitalism.
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
sailwind:
Actually, it would cover it. I just have a US$5,000 deductible. And how would that make me a moocher? I pay my own bills.
GW:
Back in February, I had a motorcycle accident and broke my leg. I had no health insurance at all (well, my bike insurance covered the first $1000). The hospital gave me a $9,000 discount for paying cash, and I'm making payments on the balance at 0% interest. It's like making payments on a used car, no big deal. I still got quality health care and nobody's taxes went up.
If you voluntarily chip in, that's civilized. When the government confiscates your earnings and passes it on to someone who decided to buy a big flat-screen TV or a shiny new SUV instead of health insurance, that's not civilized. Call it communism, socialism, or socialized medicine, but don't call it civilized.
Sarge:
By default. George Soros even more.
Posted in: Less for Moore
0
WhiteHawk
tkoind2:
He doesn't do anything substantive for me. He's a textbook example of fraud and hypocrisy for me to point out to others, but that's about it.
No. Respect is earned, not an entitlement.
GW:
I wanted health coverage, so I went online and bought it. For less than US$100/month. That's capitalism.
Wanting health coverage, but insisting someone else to pay for it, that's communism. Or mooching.
Posted in: Less for Moore