1. Pepperland
    Joined
    30 May '07
    Moves
    12892
    19 Jun '09 16:24
    Originally posted by FMF
    The FACT is that THE POINT is to live. The other FACT is that 10% means there is still a chance of living. To say "...there is no point..." seems very odd.
    Yes, and 90% that there isn't a chance to live.
  2. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    19 Jun '09 16:29
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    Yes, and 90% that there isn't a chance to live.
    This is very strange brand of self-deprecating humour.
  3. Joined
    29 Mar '09
    Moves
    816
    19 Jun '09 16:29
    Originally posted by FMF
    The FACT is that THE POINT is to live. The other FACT is that 10% means there is still a chance of living. To say "...there is no point..." seems very odd.
    Could it be that socialized medicine is not that great after all? I wonder if socialized medicine can exist keeping patient and doctor decision making intact. Who is to say 10% chance is not enough? The government can't run a balanced budget, would we trust them to do our medical thinking for us?
  4. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    19 Jun '09 16:32
    Originally posted by joe beyser
    Could it be that socialized medicine is not that great after all? I wonder if socialized medicine can exist keeping patient and doctor decision making intact. Who is to say 10% chance is not enough? The government can't run a balanced budget, would we trust them to do our medical thinking for us?
    So... it's better to have no credible or affordable health system for tens and tens of millions of hard working poor families? I don't really get your point.
  5. Pepperland
    Joined
    30 May '07
    Moves
    12892
    19 Jun '09 16:33
    Originally posted by FMF
    This is very strange brand of self-deprecating humour.
    Its not humor, I wasn't trying to make a joke.
  6. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    19 Jun '09 16:39
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    Its not humor, I wasn't trying to make a joke.
    It strikes me as wholly incompatible with your anti-abortion stance.
  7. Pepperland
    Joined
    30 May '07
    Moves
    12892
    19 Jun '09 16:44
    Originally posted by FMF
    It strikes me as wholly incompatible with your anti-abortion stance.
    If there is a chance the baby will survive you shouldn't abort it, however, that doesn't mean you should ignore the facts (that sometimes its impossible to keep people alive).

    Im not saying you shouldn't try, what Im saying is that you shouldn't be surprised if it doesn't work out in the end.
  8. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    19 Jun '09 16:49
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    Im not saying you shouldn't try, what Im saying is that you shouldn't be surprised if it doesn't work out in the end.
    That's not what you said.

    It's good that you have backed down because that was arguably one of your most indecent posts here in a long time.

    Good for you for back peddling.
  9. Pepperland
    Joined
    30 May '07
    Moves
    12892
    19 Jun '09 16:53
    Originally posted by FMF
    That's not what you said.

    It's good that you have backed down because that was arguably one of your most indecent posts here in a long time.

    Good for you for back peddling.
    Ok, I shouldn't have said what I said, not in that way.

    What I meant is that you can't ignore the facts.
  10. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    19 Jun '09 16:54
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    Ok, I shouldn't have said what I said, not in that way.

    What I meant is that you can't ignore the facts.
    But if the fact is 'there is a 10% chance', then you should ignore it, is that what you mean?
  11. Pepperland
    Joined
    30 May '07
    Moves
    12892
    19 Jun '09 16:56
    Originally posted by FMF
    But if the fact is 'there is a 10% chance', then you should ignore it, is that what you mean?
    10% is very small.

    You shouldn't ignore it, but you shouldn't ignore the other 90% either.
  12. Joined
    29 Mar '09
    Moves
    816
    19 Jun '09 16:591 edit
    Originally posted by FMF
    So... it's better to have no credible or affordable health system for tens and tens of millions of hard working poor families? I don't really get your point.
    No point, just spitballing here. It raised questions in my mind about whether or not this is how socialized medicine would look. It seems pretty extreme in this case, but can the idea be improved on in some way. The affordable health system for jillions of poor families would be nice. I like discussions that bring up ideas. No point endlessly debating systems that do not work well. Nothing in this world is perfect, but maybe there are modifications to existing systems that may work better.
  13. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    19 Jun '09 16:59
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    10% is very small.

    You shouldn't ignore it, but you shouldn't ignore the other 90% either.
    "90% - against" means 'there is no point', is that what you mean?
  14. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    19 Jun '09 17:02
    Originally posted by joe beyser
    The affordable health system for jillions of poor families would be nice. I like discussions that bring up ideas. No point endlessly debating systems that do not work well.
    The systems in all the other industrialized countries work fairly well.
  15. Pepperland
    Joined
    30 May '07
    Moves
    12892
    19 Jun '09 17:05
    Originally posted by FMF
    "90% - against" means 'there is no point', is that what you mean?
    No, what I mean is that it is very unlikely to work.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree