From: Bill Graham on

"Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
news:4b3eaafd$1$19486$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com...
> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:g4CdnZyYp-hrOaPWnZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>
>> "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
>> news:4b3ea0c5$0$12828$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com...
>>> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:xZydneWphIfKC6PWnZ2dnUVZ_uOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You know, there is another reason than money why I am opposed to the
>>>> Obama health plan....there is a philosophical difference between people
>>>> paying for their own health care and letting the government (taxpayers)
>>>> pay for it. If you are paying your own way, then your lifestyle will
>>>> (and should) affect your premiums, and the insurance companies will
>>>> charge you more for endangering your life and health.But when the
>>>> government just insures everyone automatically, then there is no
>>>> individual responsibility, and people will drive, eat, drink, and live
>>>> generally like there's no tomorrow. Good health care is expensive, and
>>>> that's the way it ought to be. By costing you money, it insures that
>>>> you will fully realize the cost of not taking good care of yourself.
>>>> It's the same old argument....Socialism takes away individual
>>>> responsibility, and this also takes away your freedom to do what you
>>>> want to do, and pay your own way. I have to pay $1450 a month for three
>>>> people, and this is one of the reasons why I no longer ride a
>>>> motorcycle, and no longer smoke tobacco. I didn't need any laws to
>>>> convince me of this.....It was my own choice.
>>>
>>> Your statement has nothing to do with the reality of insurance. At the
>>> present time there is no firm "Obama health plan." However, the gut of
>>> the Senate plan is that insurance companies will be prohibited from
>>> denying coverage based upon pre=existing conditions. Don't confuse life
>>> with health. e.g. There may be an exclusion from coverage for scuba or
>>> stunt driving accidents on a life policy. On a health policy, they don't
>>> do it,unless you get into the catastrophic coverage area.
>>>
>>>
>>> Peter
>>
>> weg9 says: And so what would prevent me from living like there's no
>> tomorrow for N years, and then, when I am getting old and sick, just
>> applying for the government's health plan where some poor insurance
>> company is forced to insure me, and then going into the hospital for some
>> serious late stage health care?
>
>
> The same thing that keeps me from doing that. It's called a sense of
> personal responsibility.
> You could always rob a bank, get caught and let the government take care
> of you for the rest of your life.
>
> Let's take a different tack. Isn't something wrong when you could lose all
> your money because you get sick, even though you have done everything
> right? Your long term nursing care isn't covered by your vaunted
> insurance. (Unless you have long term care insurance. In which case see
> how quickly you will reach the limit.)
>
> Peter

Yes.....To all that. That's why I say that rationing is necessary, and any
health plan will have to include it......It's not a perfect world, and we
will all die some day, and there is nothing either the government or private
insurance companies can do about it. All we can do is the best we can do,
and I claim that the capitalistic system holds the best chance of getting
that for us......It had done pretty well by me so far.....I was not born
rich. I worked and saved and purchased good health insurance my whole life,
and I am happy with where I am right now. When my socialistic government
wants me to pay for the indiscretions of others, it makes me sick.

From: seth d. on
On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 20:37:12 -0500, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net>
wrote:

>
>
>Tell me, are you in favor of repealing the marijuana laws?

Yes, they are just as ridiculous as you are.

Can we have you and all like you repealed while we're at it?

I also think that abortion should be legal until the 75th trimester. That's
18 years old in case you don't want to do the math. If that option was
available I doubt you would have made it this far to make everyone else's
lives so miserable for so long.



From: Bill Graham on

Someone, (probably Ray) says:

>> Or the classic "guns don't kill people ...".
>
I guess it will be all right when someone beats him to death with a baseball
bat......In my case, being that I am an overweight 74 year old, I will carry
a snubby 38 to protect myself, thanks.......:^).

From: Peter on
"Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ut6dnQT77LUaMaPWnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>


> weg9 says: Yes. I am in favor of repealing the Marijuana laws.....I am in
> favor of repealing any laws against any and all drugs.....Everyone should
> have the right to ingest anything they have the money to pay for, with or
> without a doctor's prescription. Why would you want some doctor to have
> control over you or your body? He should be paid for his advice, and not
> for his power.
>
> Yes. Bush ran up a deficit going to war...So have many other
> presidents.....Unfortunately, (or fortunately) that's one of the powers we
> give presidents. and, whenever they do, the nation is split over whether
> it is a good thing or not......Sorry about that, but it is not my fault.
>
> My riding a bike without a helmet only costs you money if you are forced
> to pay for my health or lack of it. In a libertarian world, you would not
> be responsible for my health care, and it wouldn't cost you anything if I
> broke my head. The law that forces hospitals to care for anyone who is
> carried in to them off the street is a liberal law.....It is not my doing.
> Today, we have the ability to identify anyone in a few seconds by scanning
> their eyeballs, fingerprints or DNA, or a chip implanted under their skin.
> We don't have to take care of people who are here illegally, or who who
> refuse to buy health insurance. If you want to take care of these
> irresponsible people, then do so, but please don't charge me for it.
>
> "We disagree?" about what? That the tax laws shouldn't be used to control
> people's morality? What kind of a liberal would say that? Would you like
> to live in Iran, where the government controls everyone's morality? then
> go there......I would like to control my own morality, thanks. If I want
> to drink or smoke myself to death, than why would you care? And, be
> careful.....Pretty soon the senate will get around to preventing you from
> doing something that you would like to do, and stop it by taxing the hell
> out of it....what will you do then? Maybe they will decide that pastrami
> sandwiches or egg cr�mes are bad for you. Anything that most of them don't
> regularly do, as a matter of fact.....They don't like to rice motorcycles
> without their helmets, so it is easy for them to make a law against
> it.......I don't see them making any laws forcing you to wear a helmet on
> the golf course......You can get a broken head there, too. I wonder why
> not? Is it because golf is an old geezers game, and a lot of them play
> it......Oh, no.....That can't be the reason......:^)

Your problem is that you would let a poor person die in the streets. Does
having compassion for others = morality, you bet it does. Does a failure to
have compassion for others = a lack of morality, same answer.

You never answered what would you do about the person who becomes sick,
through nobody's fault. I say we have a moral obligation to take care of
them. You claim no. If I understand what you are saying that is what we
disagree about. If that is not, please explain your position on the above.


--
Peter

From: Peter on
"Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ut6dnQT77LUaMaPWnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>

> weg9 says: Yes. I am in favor of repealing the Marijuana laws.....I am in
> favor of repealing any laws against any and all drugs.....Everyone should
> have the right to ingest anything they have the money to pay for, with or
> without a doctor's prescription. Why would you want some doctor to have
> control over you or your body? He should be paid for his advice, and not
> for his power.
>

That is hardly the position of the classic conservative.



> Yes. Bush ran up a deficit going to war...So have many other
> presidents.....Unfortunately, (or fortunately) that's one of the powers we
> give presidents. and, whenever they do, the nation is split over whether
> it is a good thing or not......Sorry about that, but it is not my fault.
>
> My riding a bike without a helmet only costs you money if you are forced
> to pay for my health or lack of it. In a libertarian world, you would not
> be responsible for my health care, and it wouldn't cost you anything if I
> broke my head. The law that forces hospitals to care for anyone who is
> carried in to them off the street is a liberal law.....It is not my doing.
> Today, we have the ability to identify anyone in a few seconds by scanning
> their eyeballs, fingerprints or DNA, or a chip implanted under their skin.
> We don't have to take care of people who are here illegally, or who who
> refuse to buy health insurance. If you want to take care of these
> irresponsible people, then do so, but please don't charge me for it.
>
> "We disagree?" about what? That the tax laws shouldn't be used to control
> people's morality? What kind of a liberal would say that? Would you like
> to live in Iran, where the government controls everyone's morality? then
> go there......I would like to control my own morality, thanks. If I want
> to drink or smoke myself to death, than why would you care? And, be
> careful.....Pretty soon the senate will get around to preventing you from
> doing something that you would like to do, and stop it by taxing the hell
> out of it....what will you do then? Maybe they will decide that pastrami
> sandwiches or egg cr�mes are bad for you. Anything that most of them don't
> regularly do, as a matter of fact.....They don't like to rice motorcycles
> without their helmets, so it is easy for them to make a law against
> it.......I don't see them making any laws forcing you to wear a helmet on
> the golf course......You can get a broken head there, too. I wonder why
> not? Is it because golf is an old geezers game, and a lot of them play
> it......Oh, no.....That can't be the reason......:^)


You obviously know nothing about golf,

Tiger the Geezer.

--
Peter