Steven Hawking and Obama Care

[tieguy]

Our government is not sufficiently involved in the social welfare of our hungry. The 'safety net' has been shredded for the last 30 years, and particularly in the last 8. It has been estimated that $30 billion a year would eliminate hunger worldwide. How fast did we burn through $30 billion in Iraq? Ten minutes?

And our government is already involved in our health care. I have an 89-year old mother, who has had many health problems, all of which have been well handled and paid for by Medicare. Hip replacement at age 84? No problem. Ongoing supplies and care for cancer treatment? No problem. Need a respirator machine to help her breathe? No problem.

I happen to have good health insurance thanks to the corporate teat of Big Brown, and I can only hope the beancounters in ATL don't decide to pull the plug on me and all the other retirees because the CEO thinks he needs a bump in the stock price to buff up his options. If the beancounters DO dump me, I am screwed, because even with all the wealth I managed to accumulate over all those years, NO PRIVATE INSURER will touch me: two injuries on the job, high blood pressure (which did go down after I retired...) and so on and so forth.

So I think a rational discussion about how this country, the richest and most freedom loving country in the world, wants to handle an issue is important. Slogans and flat out fearmongering is not useful.

And point number two my new liberal poster who has suddenly shown up to educate us ignorant savages. Hawkings opinion about britans nhs does not discount the point that Hawkings was born into wealth and all its benifits. Hawkings quote which you selectively provide does not in fact deny the benifits his wealthy lifestyle has provided him.

retired tech girl from louisville? Interesting. I know a few techies in lousville who did you work for while there?

 

[tieguy]

Our government is not sufficiently involved in the social welfare of our hungry. The 'safety net' has been shredded for the last 30 years, and particularly in the last 8. It has been estimated that $30 billion a year would eliminate hunger worldwide. How fast did we burn through $30 billion in Iraq? Ten minutes?

my point which you reinforce is that our government has been addressing the needs of the poor through a variety of programs and yet as you point out we still have people that go to bed hungry. You now wish to reward them with the care of our health system after they have basically screwed up everything they have ever touched? Its good to see my new liberal poster that has come here out of nowhere educate us on our ignorance.

 

[TechGrrl]

And point number two my new liberal poster who has suddenly shown up to educate us ignorant savages. Hawkings opinion about britans nhs does not discount the point that Hawkings was born into wealth and all its benifits. Hawkings quote which you selectively provide does not in fact deny the benifits his wealthy lifestyle has provided him.

retired tech girl from louisville? Interesting. I know a few techies in lousville who did you work for while there?

All the shareowners....

Regarding Hawkings 'wealth', I can only quote his biography. Sorry if your opinion about his father's lifestyle doesn't match up.

As far as 'liberal' goes, I have been a registered Republican since I was first allowed to vote. However, the current crop of 'conservatives' seems to be able to talk a good line, but actual actions reveals a sadly deficient understanding of what true conservative principles are. I believe in the Constitution, not just when it is convenient or easy, but all the time. And I believe that this country has disintegrated into government of the corporate greedheads, by the corporate greedheads, for the corporate greedheads. Social darwinism at its worst.

I believe in the dignity and freedom of the individual. If you consider that 'liberal', then I will accept the label proudly.

 

[TechGrrl]

my point which you reinforce is that our government has been addressing the needs of the poor through a variety of programs and yet as you point out we still have people that go to bed hungry. You now wish to reward them with the care of our health system after they have basically screwed up everything they have ever touched? Its good to see my new liberal poster that has come here out of nowhere educate us on our ignorance.

One of the things I found ironic during the 8 years of the Bush-Cheney administration was the insistence that two things were true:

1) Government is bad because it consistently screws up the simplest things because government is inherently incompetent. Which is the point you are making.

but, at the exact same time, there was this insistence that:

2) There was no need for Constitutional protections of prisoners held in the Global War on Terror because the Government was never wrong about the prisoners' guilt.

So, can't have it both ways, now, can we? The reason our Founding Fathers wrote our governance laws the way they did is that they had a profound understanding that HUMAN BEINGS ARE FALLIBLE! There is no way to avoid screwups. So, they tried to design a system with feedback loops that could catch and correct errors. Since they were not perfect, the system is not. But it's pretty darn good, if we let it work as designed.

A government, a corporation, a small business, any human enterprise is subject to errors of omission and commission. Success generally occurs when feedback is allowed to occur, and consequences for actions are appropriate. If a bureaucracy, of any sort, government or corporate, is designed so that the feedback and consequences are only those that reward incompetence, then that is what you will get.

It's a matter of system dynamics. So when you allow corporate governance to reward extreme risk-taking with lavish bonuses, but do not have a commensurate consequence for failure, you get the Wall Street meltdowns. You get people playing craps with other people's money in a game of 'heads I win, tails you lose'. (Pardon the mixed metaphor.)

 

[Solidarity413]

Not sure if this link has been posted yet..
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/12/stephen-hawking-enters-us_n_257343.html

 

[TechGrrl]

Not sure if this link has been posted yet..
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/12/stephen-hawking-enters-us_n_257343.html

I posted something similar a couple days ago, but it isn't having any influence on those whose minds are made up!

Welcome to the discussion!

 

[Solidarity413]

Rofl that's funny. If you don't agree with him but still need to make a point, just make it up! Classic ^_^

 

[tieguy]

One of the things I found ironic during the 8 years of the Bush-Cheney administration was the insistence that two things were true:

1) Government is bad because it consistently screws up the simplest things because government is inherently incompetent. Which is the point you are making.

but, at the exact same time, there was this insistence that:

2) There was no need for Constitutional protections of prisoners held in the Global War on Terror because the Government was never wrong about the prisoners' guilt.

So, can't have it both ways, now, can we? The reason our Founding Fathers wrote our governance laws the way they did is that they had a profound understanding that HUMAN BEINGS ARE FALLIBLE! There is no way to avoid screwups. So, they tried to design a system with feedback loops that could catch and correct errors. Since they were not perfect, the system is not. But it's pretty darn good, if we let it work as designed.

A government, a corporation, a small business, any human enterprise is subject to errors of omission and commission. Success generally occurs when feedback is allowed to occur, and consequences for actions are appropriate. If a bureaucracy, of any sort, government or corporate, is designed so that the feedback and consequences are only those that reward incompetence, then that is what you will get.

It's a matter of system dynamics. So when you allow corporate governance to reward extreme risk-taking with lavish bonuses, but do not have a commensurate consequence for failure, you get the Wall Street meltdowns. You get people playing craps with other people's money in a game of 'heads I win, tails you lose'. (Pardon the mixed metaphor.)

this point appears to be a response to my point that the government also mismanaged the hunger issues as you previously highlighted. It however fails to respond to that point instead running off in another direction on your theory on accountability.

the fact remains the government has mismanaged everything they have attempted. The accountability process does not work since the next group of leaders voted in also mismanages the same issues. as such the best option is to reduce governments role and their opportunity to mismanage issues.

from what I have seen you're side is fine if you want to attempt to fix the health care system. Once you create a government managed solution the majority in this country will turn against you.

 

[tieguy]

I posted something similar a couple days ago, but it isn't having any influence on those whose minds are made up!

Welcome to the discussion!

Your present Id has not been here that long. Is this your first time posting here?

 

[Jones]

Your present Id has not been here that long. Is this your first time posting here?

As near as I can tell she's been here since at least 2006.

 

[TechGrrl]

this point appears to be a response to my point that the government also mismanaged the hunger issues as you previously highlighted. It however fails to respond to that point instead running off in another direction on your theory on accountability.

the fact remains the government has mismanaged everything they have attempted. The accountability process does not work since the next group of leaders voted in also mismanages the same issues. as such the best option is to reduce governments role and their opportunity to mismanage issues.

from what I have seen you're side is fine if you want to attempt to fix the health care system. Once you create a government managed solution the majority in this country will turn against you.

My point is that many folks who feel that government is totally incapable of managing ANYTHING don't extend that feeling to the FBI, CIA, Department of Defense, NSA, and so on. Their feelings seem to be reserved for things like Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, and other aspects of the social safety net ONLY. I was pointing out that this is a logical contradiction.

I was not running off in another direction. My comments are completely germane to the issue of whether 'government' is or can be effective. 'Government' is just a group of people we have empowered to perform certain services for us. How effective they are at performing those services is directly affected by the feedback and reward structure designed into the organization. Just like any other human endeavor.

A single-payer solution is not government managed solution. Medicare is single-payer. It does not own a single doctor, hospital, clinic, or pharmacy. It simply pays the claims. It's administrative costs are very small compared to most for-profit insurance companies. In fact, I would love to see a link to any for-profit insurance company that has a comparable overhead cost.

Your present Id has not been here that long. Is this your first time posting here?

Been here under the same ID since 2006. Spending more time here because of the IT layoffs. This thread is just gravy...

 

[tieguy]

My point is that many folks who feel that government is totally incapable of managing ANYTHING don't extend that feeling to the FBI, CIA, Department of Defense, NSA, and so on. Their feelings seem to be reserved for things like Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, and other aspects of the social safety net ONLY. I was pointing out that this is a logical contradiction.


I was not running off in another direction. My comments are completely germane to the issue of whether 'government' is or can be effective. 'Government' is just a group of people we have empowered to perform certain services for us. How effective they are at performing those services is directly affected by the feedback and reward structure designed into the organization. Just like any other human endeavor.

You could have thrown the post office in the mix since they lost money again this year despite having a monopoly on first class mail.
Arguing the point that these issues can be managed and affected by the feedback and reward structure does not negate the point that they have not been able to manage them. I believe the government can eventually learn to travel outside our universe. But as of yet they have not been able to do so.



Been here under the same ID since 2006. Spending more time here because of the IT layoffs. This thread is just gravy...

You're laid off? Your profile says retired?

 

[TechGrrl]

You're laid off? Your profile says retired?

But I retired from IT, so I know the people involved in this...at all levels of the organization, in the various IT locations. I know the folks doing the cutting, and many of the cuttees.

 

[TechGrrl]

As near as I can tell she's been here since at least 2006.

"on the Internet, no one can tell you're a 14-year old giraffe"

 

[TechGrrl]

I think there's been enough thread drift on this topic...time to move to a different thread...

 

[TechGrrl]

You could have thrown the post office in the mix since they lost money again this year despite having a monopoly on first class mail.
Arguing the point that these issues can be managed and affected by the feedback and reward structure does not negate the point that they have not been able to manage them. I believe the government can eventually learn to travel outside our universe. But as of yet they have not been able to do so.

The Post Office is actually an excellent example of an organization that does pretty well considering the political shackles it operates under. Although hypothetically 'private', it is under the thumb of politicians that don't want their constituents to complain about bad mail service, while simultaneously using their own franking privileges to the max.

Let's go over to the thread Cheryl started about the USPS, and debate how to fix it.

 

[tieguy]

The Post Office is actually an excellent example of an organization that does pretty well considering the political shackles it operates under. Although hypothetically 'private', it is under the thumb of politicians that don't want their constituents to complain about bad mail service, while simultaneously using their own franking privileges to the max.

Let's go over to the thread Cheryl started about the USPS, and debate how to fix it.

pretty well on some type of government managed grading curve? They're hideous. They have a government supported monopoly on first class mail leverage it to compete against us and still lost money.

 

[wkmac]

My point is that many folks who feel that government is totally incapable of managing ANYTHING don't extend that feeling to the FBI, CIA, Department of Defense, NSA, and so on. Their feelings seem to be reserved for things like Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, and other aspects of the social safety net ONLY. I was pointing out that this is a logical contradiction.

You are absolutely correct and dead on the money. Good job in pointing this out. Bring back the Articles of Confederation!

 

[diesel96]

I think he has alot of value. I learned alot about him, when I was researching computer control devices for my friend who got shot and is a quadraplegic. His story is wonderful, and in Obamas controlled plan, he would have no value, and keeping him alive costs too much.

Death panels...yeah baby. I could see Palin from a helicopter with 50 calibur, picking off grannys and quads......A reporter ask Sarah,"How can you shoot the elderly and hanicapped"? Sarah replies, " easy, just don't lead them as much"......

I think there's been enough thread drift on this topic...time to move to a different thread...

TechGrrl.....You dealing with Tieguy here....The only items on his I-Pod are the 1964 Ronald Reagan speech " A Time for Choosing" at the RNC.
And
Reagan's album on socialism and liberalism....it has kind of a "Reefer Madness" tone to it....lol
[video=youtube;MCqA4QhfXHA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCqA4QhfXHA&NR=1[/video]

 

[tieguy]

Death panels...yeah baby. I could see Palin from a helicopter with 50 calibur, picking off grannys and quads......A reporter ask Sarah,"How can you shoot the elderly and hanicapped"? Sarah replies, " easy, just don't lead them as much"......



TechGrrl.....You dealing with Tieguy here....The only items on his I-Pod are the 1964 Ronald Reagan speech " A Time for Choosing" at the RNC.
And
Reagan's album on socialism and liberalism....it has kind of a "Reefer Madness" tone to it....lol
YouTube - SiCKO: Ronald Reagan On the Evils of Socialized Medicine

Presently I'm researching various sources to learn how to convert liberals. I think I help turn you into god fearing, country loving conservative yet.

Here's your first primer;

See Diesel

See Diesel run from government

see diesel learn to support himself

with no help from the government.

See how proud Diesel is now.