[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!

The GOSPEL of the ALIENS | Fallen Angels | Giants | Anunnaki

The IMAGE of the BEAST Revealed (REV 13) - WARNING: Not for Everyone

WEF Calls for AI to Replace Voters: ‘Why Do We Need Elections?’

The OCCULT Burger king EXPOSED

PANERA BREAD Antichrist message EXPOSED

The OCCULT Cheesecake Factory EXPOSED

Satanist And Witches Encounter The Cross

History and Beliefs of the Waldensians

Rome’s Persecution of the Bible

Evolutionists, You’ve Been Caught Lying About Fossils

Raw Streets of NYC Migrant Crisis that they don't show on Tv

Meet DarkBERT - AI Model Trained On DARK WEB

[NEW!] Jaw-dropping 666 Discovery Utterly Proves the King James Bible is God's Preserved Word

ALERT!!! THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION WILL SOON BE POSTED HERE


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Health/Medical
See other Health/Medical Articles

Title: European Health Care: Economic Malpractice
Source: AT.com
URL Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011 ... care_economic_malpractice.html
Published: Jan 1, 2012
Author: Hugh de Payns
Post Date: 2012-01-01 10:26:02 by CZ82
Keywords: None
Views: 35794
Comments: 79

European Health Care: Economic Malpractice

By Hugh de Payns

Any reasonable person does not take satisfaction in the failure and destruction of another. This is especially true when the other is innocent of any wrongdoing or lack of judgment.

Yet sometimes, epic failure can constructively serve as an example of what not to do. If the individual states of our nation are a laboratory of democracy, then the states of Europe are the laboratory of socialism. What we are witness to in Greece, and eventually in Spain, Italy, and possibly France, is the painful death of the welfare state.

Credit markets are locking up all over the continent; meanwhile, trillions have been pumped into their banks in an effort to keep them afloat. But their situation is so bad that they cannot even take the risk of making business loans. Employment is shrinking, and tax revenues are falling. Internally, the socialist cash-machine is running empty as other people's money dries up. It is all happening just as reader of American Thinker foresaw.

The welfare state's demise, long inevitable, will be painful and ugly, and it will harshly impact the weakest and the most innocent of the population. After all, the welfare state defies the laws of economics and the laws of mathematics. Take notice as the liberal and socialist agitators and pundits shake their collectivized fists at the sky and curse the gods without any noticeable change. The facts on the ground will do what they will, despite rhetoric or political pontifications coming from any quarter.

One of the first organs to fail is the socialized health care program. No matter its stated merits, a serious and impactful socialized medicine program is simply too expensive for any state to long sustain.

For months prior to the passing of ObamaCare, we were told -- repeatedly -- how it would "bend the cost curve downward" and open up better health care for millions of Americans...all at the same time!

The problem is that the pundits on the left at the time and still today don't even believe their own rhetoric. In fact, they are either living in a fantasy land that never existed or simply lying.

Back in May 2010, bluegrasspundit made mention of the total hypocrisy of the left with regard to ObamaCare.

After shilling for ObamaCare for months, the New York Times is now telling Greece getting out of the health care marketplace would allow health care costs to come down. The hypocrisy of the left is simple astounding.

The NY Times also made mention of the total impossibility of it all.

Another reform high on the list is removing the state from the marketplace in crucial sectors like health care, transportation and energy and allowing private investment.

What is also important to make note of is that these socialized countries do not have the traditional bogeyman that leftists point their finger at: a revenue-hungry military. The Greek military is small to the point of insignificance. The same is true with Spain, Italy, and most others on the continent. Their defensive needs were being functionally met and subsidized by the United States.

A recent article by the NY Times makes for overwhelming evidence of the disruption and pain this transformation causes to the innocent and the disadvantaged. While the article is slanted politically, it is worth reading in its entirety; the reader must realize that this will happen in other European nations, and eventually here in the U.S. should we be so foolish as to follow their example.

At public hospitals, doctors report shortages of all kinds of supplies, from toilet paper to catheters to syringes. Computerized equipment has gone unrepaired and is no longer in use. Nurses are handling four times the patients they should, and wait times for operations -- even cancer surgeries -- have grown longer.

Access to drugs has also been affected, as some drug manufacturers, owed tens of millions of dollars, are no longer willing to supply Greek hospitals. At the same time pharmacists, afraid that the government might not reimburse them, are asking for cash payments, even from those with insurance.

Brick by brick, the edifice of socialized medicine is ruthlessly and forcefully being taken apart.

The lesson here is for our nation to rid ourselves of ObamaCare entirely before it becomes embedded into the fabric of society, because it too will be rooted out by the forces of economics. It is easier to throw out the seed than uproot the plant, so the sooner this is done, the better. Anything less is a form a gross medical malpractice.

"There are two places only where socialism will work; In Heaven, where it is not needed, and in Hell, where they already have it." -Winston Churchill

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: CZ82 (#0)

Yet sometimes, epic failure can constructively serve as an example of what not to do. If the individual states of our nation are a laboratory of democracy, then the states of Europe are the laboratory of socialism. What we are witness to in Greece, and eventually in Spain, Italy, and possibly France, is the painful death of the welfare state.

Except that the countries with the strongest economies in the world right now spend more on social welfare services than Greece, Italy, and Ireland (and even the U.S.)

For example, Sweden, which has the largest social welfare structure as a percentage of GDP, has a GDP higher now than before the crisis began.

Meanwhile, Ireland, which has cut spending by 14% in the last 2 years, still pays around 8% interest on its bonds.

Tagline for sale - inquire within

go65  posted on  2012-01-01   11:46:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: CZ82 (#0) (Edited)

Yet the American"Thinker" consistently ignores the documented success of the Israeli compulsory health care model. I wonder why?

And it's been given credit for creating the oldest average national lifespan of 82 years.

"ROTFLMAO... Perfect! She longs... for someone to Teabag her. a man that squats on top of a women's face and lowers his genitals into her mouth during sex, known as "teabagging" She aches for it"... ~~~JWpegler. Head Tea Bagger and Tea Party supporter extraordinaire, explicitly expressing his fantasies in public about other posters.

mininggold  posted on  2012-01-01   11:56:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: mininggold (#2)

Yet the American"Thinker" consistently ignores the documented success of the Israeli compulsory health care model. I wonder why?

My guess would be that 'compulsory' is simply un-American.

We The People  posted on  2012-01-01   12:08:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: We The People (#3)

My guess would be that 'compulsory' is simply un-American.

Sorry.... no man is an island.

Lots of things are compulsory in this country

"ROTFLMAO... Perfect! She longs... for someone to Teabag her. a man that squats on top of a women's face and lowers his genitals into her mouth during sex, known as "teabagging" She aches for it"... ~~~JWpegler. Head Tea Bagger and Tea Party supporter extraordinaire, explicitly expressing his fantasies in public about other posters.

mininggold  posted on  2012-01-01   12:12:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: mininggold (#4)

My guess would be that 'compulsory' is simply un-American.

Sorry.... no man is an island.

At least with a health care plan that includes everyone, people can choose whether or not to seek necessary health care without fear of bankruptcy.

Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1

We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul

lucysmom  posted on  2012-01-01   13:31:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: lucysmom (#5)

At least with a health care plan that includes everyone, people can choose whether or not to seek necessary health care without fear of bankruptcy.

Why should someone be forced to pay for healthcare for someone else? There is no such right to healthcare. In fact it is tyranny to make normal people pay for some faggot who inserted the aids virus up his rectum.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   13:34:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: A K A Stone (#6)

Why should someone be forced to pay for healthcare for someone else?

You are not "forced", but incur a tax burden as the result of voluntary activity.

Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1

We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul

lucysmom  posted on  2012-01-01   13:44:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: lucysmom (#7)

You are not "forced", but incur a tax burden as the result of voluntary activity.

Taxes aren't voluntary.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   13:46:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: A K A Stone (#8)

Taxes aren't voluntary.

The activity that has taxes as a consequence is voluntary.

Economics is a social phenomenon and in no way a “science”, no matter how desperately its high priests would like to have it believed otherwise. It is, instead, a branch of anthropology and the sooner that is recognized and accepted, the better off human-kind in general and the world of academic economics, in particular, shall be proximity1

We probably will see widespread civil disorder in the 1980s, as a direct result of our faltering economic system. Ron Paul

lucysmom  posted on  2012-01-01   13:47:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: lucysmom (#9)

The activity that has taxes as a consequence is voluntary.

What in your view should be taxed to pay for healthcare for all?

Paying taxes isn't voluntary. Taxing something and pretending that it is voluntary is disingenuous.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   13:49:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: A K A Stone (#10)

Then you think requiring people to have auto insurance to drive is illegal taxation and that we don't have an obligation to all take responsibility for the dangers inherent to travel by automobile. Interesting.

We have an obligation to make sure human health needs and the inevitability of sickness and death is addressed.

It is never wrong to learn and live the lesson of the good Samaritan in your Bible, because humanity is always at it's best when we work together to help each other tackle the inevitable part of being mortal beings subject to disease and death.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2012-01-01   14:17:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Ferret Mike (#11)

Then you think requiring people to have auto insurance to drive is illegal taxation and that we don't have an obligation to all take responsibility for the dangers inherent to travel by automobile. Interesting.

Not quite. Let me clarify.

Our taxes pay for the roads. The citizens have a right to use the roads without license or insurance. It is fascism to require auto insurance.

That has nothing to do with responsibility for your actions on the road. If you get into an accident on the road you should be held financially and if circumstances warrant criminally responsible.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   14:27:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Ferret Mike (#11)

We have an obligation to make sure human health needs and the inevitability of sickness and death is addressed.

No we have no such obligation. But if out of the goodness of our hearts we want to then we should.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   14:28:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: Ferret Mike (#11)

It is never wrong to learn and live the lesson of the good Samaritan in your Bible, because humanity is always at it's best when we work together to help each other tackle the inevitable part of being mortal beings subject to disease and death.

Yes. Voluntarily. Forcing people to do it takes on a different meaning.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   14:29:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: A K A Stone (#12)

But if you are a normal human taking a risk and gamble that you not having the means to keep from ruining the other party in an accident financially just by simply not having the means to compensate them, it doesn't matter what penalty you suffer for this error in judgment.

The other party and their dependents are made to suffer along with the punished party unable to meet their obligations in an accident, and that is unacceptable.

The system is set up to prevent this collateral damage caused by human myopia and willingness to gamble with the financial viability of others.

And thus I support the requirement for auto insurance.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2012-01-01   14:33:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: A K A Stone (#14)

"Yes. Voluntarily. Forcing people to do it takes on a different meaning."

There is no free lunch in life. Anyone ignoring a sister or brother in need in that biblical example still suffers consequences for their lack of concern for their fellow human being.

I would of thought you could see that nuance to the story in the Bible. I know I do.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2012-01-01   14:36:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Ferret Mike (#15)

But if you are a normal human taking a risk and gamble that you not having the means to keep from ruining the other party in an accident financially just by simply not having the means to compensate them, it doesn't matter what penalty you suffer for this error in judgment.

That is life Mike. Not this artificial thing where you have to pay corporations at threat of being jailed to simply exercise your God given right to travel to provide for your family.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   14:40:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: Ferret Mike (#15)

The other party and their dependents are made to suffer along with the punished party unable to meet their obligations in an accident, and that is unacceptable.

Bullshit.

Statistically more people would be better off. Some people go their whole life without getting into an accident and pay tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars for nothing.

We can never have a perfect world.

I would suggest a type of insurance that only covers yourself if you are so worried about it.

I have insurance but it should be voluntary.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   14:42:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Ferret Mike (#16)

There is no free lunch in life.

Tell that to Obamas fat cow of a wife while she scarfs down food stolen from the taxpayers.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   14:43:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: A K A Stone (#13)

"No we have no such obligation. But if out of the goodness of our hearts we want to then we should."

I profoundly disagree. What you are saying is that if say the Chinese invade us and we require people by force of law to help the war effort in a teamwork effort to survive this is wrong because we should only care to save our collective skins out of the goodness of our heart.

Sorry, but on many levels we have a requirement for the welfare of us all. On many levels we either provide for the general welfare and greater good of we the people, or we all suffer or die miserably for our lack of social cohesion and commitment for the greater good of the United States as a nation.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2012-01-01   14:43:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Ferret Mike (#15)

The system is set up to prevent this collateral damage caused by human myopia and willingness to gamble with the financial viability of others.

Fuck the system.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   14:43:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: A K A Stone (#19) (Edited)

"Tell that to Obamas fat cow of a wife while she scarfs down food stolen from the taxpayers."

That is a diversionary argument using a family member of an elected official to create an emotional smoke screen to avoid a reasoned explination of your side of the debate concerning the point at hand.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2012-01-01   14:45:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Ferret Mike (#20)

I profoundly disagree. What you are saying is that if say the Chinese invade us and we require people by force of law to help the war effort in a teamwork effort to survive this is wrong because we should only care to save our collective skins out of the goodness of our heart.

Yep. I wouldn't want anyone who didn't want to defend ourselves in case of attack on our side anyways.

Besides it violates the 14th amendment (sometimes called the 13th)

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   14:46:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: Ferret Mike (#22)

I profoundly disagree. What you are saying is that if say the Chinese invade us and we require people by force of law to help the war effort in a teamwork effort to survive this is wrong because we should only care to save our collective skins out of the goodness of our heart.

I can' wait until the fat cow is thrown out of the white house. They act like they won the lottery or something. Their whole family sucks.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   14:47:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: A K A Stone (#21) (Edited)

"Fuck the system".....

.... and then see the result of this lack of adult responsibility taking screw us all as a result.

Like it or not, part of being mature and responsible is doing things that none of us personally like to do on a selfish level.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2012-01-01   14:48:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: A K A Stone (#24) (Edited)

"I can' wait until the fat cow is thrown out of the white house. They act like they won the lottery or something. Their whole family sucks."

An emotional diatribe framed as a tantrum is only our desire to avoid arguing the point at hand.

An opinion single family of dependents of an elected official is not a well framed argument from you explaining why my argument back to you is erronious in any way.

You are being diversional and obviously do not want to argue the point in good faith.

That would be like me saying Hitler was evil simply because Eva Braun was an opportunistic whore.

It that is the best you can do, then you have lost the debate.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2012-01-01   14:53:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: Ferret Mike (#26)

yawn.

When is the fat ugly bitch going to get out of the white house? She eats way to much.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   14:56:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Ferret Mike (#26)

Mike. Nobody has a right to tell me what to do. How do do it. What to buy. What not to buy. I'll do what I want to and no one will stop me.

If I harm someone else. I would be wrong and should be stopped. But I don't. And the remote possibility that someone might get in an accident on the road doesn't make anyone surrender any rights to the contrary.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   14:58:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: A K A Stone (#28)

OK, I can't make you work to argue a counterpoint. None the less, you still are not advancing a rebuttal to my posts.

You don't wish to argue, just talk about your likes and dislikes in people who are not elected officials. A good day to you, I'll continue other dialogs I am engaged in elsewhere on the Internet then for now.

I don't have time for this sort of smoke screen.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2012-01-01   15:05:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: Ferret Mike (#29) (Edited)

Obama < shit

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   15:07:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: A K A Stone (#28) (Edited)

"If I harm someone else. I would be wrong and should be stopped."

That is what auto insurance law does exactly. thanks for agreeing with me.

If you harm another because you have an accident and do not have the means for them to get their car fixed, or medical care to keep their life and the lives who depend on them from falling apart, you should be sanctioned severely for this lack of commitment to the personal responsibility of driving.

Making you get car insurance is not simply, 'making you do what you don't want to do' as if that was a market choice like buying Pepsi instead of Coke, it's making sure that you are observing your responsibility not to ruin others in the commission of your mutual use of the roadway.

The system does not work if what you gamble in your driving is another's life and livelihood as the stakes in the bet you make by not having insurance to drive.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2012-01-01   15:12:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Ferret Mike (#31)

You can hurt someone riding a bicycle. Should you have to get insurance just in case?

You can hurt someone skateboarding. Should they be required to buy insurance too.

You can do damage while walking too. Should you required to buy insurance if you are walking? Under your logic you should. Who know you could step on some dog shit or ink and track it into some businesses nice white carpet.

Legislating every aspect of our existence is getting ridiculous. We need to free our souls and let us be men and women again.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   15:28:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: A K A Stone (#32)

Liability auto insurance covers death and injury caused in the commision of driving.

You really want a bicyclist's family suing you into the poorhouse because you say ran over him or her will finishing a text message or were distracted momentarily by say a lit cigarette falling into your lap?

I don't see any point to your rebuttal. In effect you are actually making a good case for liability coverage.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2012-01-01   15:33:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: Ferret Mike (#33)

I don't see any point to your rebuttal. In effect you are actually making a good case for liability coverage.

So walkers should be required to have insurance. Got ya fool.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   15:34:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: A K A Stone (#32) (Edited)

"You can do damage while walking too. Should you required to buy insurance if you are walking?"

Can you walk at 55 MPH? Auto insurance recognizes the consistent and considerably higher jeopardy involved in driving.

Not to mention that if someone walks on your property and falls into a hole or slips and falls, sues you and wins a judgment against you, you are going to pay through your nose forever for being found liable for a risk you didn't address before they suffered from it's existence.

You still don't prove your point that it is OK to use another's life and financial well being as the stakes in your gamble taken when you drive without insurance.

And if your ox was gored by an uninsured person colliding with you causing you to not be able to provide for your family due to injury of loss of physical asset like a car, you would be i here whining mightily at the injustice of it all; especially if that person were liberal thus being an even better scapegoat in your eyes for this calamity that befell you at their irresponsible hands.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2012-01-01   15:43:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: Ferret Mike (#35)

Can you walk at 55 MPH? Auto insurance recognizes the consistent and considerably higher jeopardy involved in driving.

So we only have insurance for the highway and where speeds are 55 mph and greater.

That doesn't make any sense.

I'm for freedom and you are not.

A K A Stone  posted on  2012-01-01   15:49:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: A K A Stone (#36)

I absolutely entered no qualifier for a specific speed to be involved in having insurance. This diversionary and makes no point supporting your argument that it is OK to use the wellbeing and assets of another as the stakes in the gamble involved in driving without insurance.

"I'm for freedom and you are not."

I argue in support of adult acceptance of personal responsibility, and you express disdain for this concept.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2012-01-01   15:56:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: Ferret Mike, AKA Stone (#15)

But if you are a normal human taking a risk and gamble that you not having the means to keep from ruining the other party in an accident financially just by simply not having the means to compensate them, it doesn't matter what penalty you suffer for this error in judgment.

"Trying" to make car insurance mandatory is just another way to keep the average "government educated idiot" from being responsible for their own incompetent actions (just like Obamacare). By the way the law doesn't work anyway and there are numerous people that still don't carry insurance.... That's why most current insurance policies offer protection from uninsured motorists for just a few dollars per month, I think mine is about $5..... So if you are currently a responsible person just shut up and pay the extra couple dollars and be covered.....

Some states have what they call "no fault" insurance, which means your company is responsible for the damage to your vehicle even if it was the other guys fault.... If the other guy doesn't have insurance at least you are covered and it's up to your insurance company to go after the other guy to get their money back..... One little tweak than can be done to the system is make some type of punishment mandatory for those who chose not to carry insurance and have no way of paying for the damages they cause..... With the proceeds of that punishment going to the victims insurance company...... even if it takes "YEARS" to pay the money back, that alone would be a big deterent for those not "Voluntarily" carrying insurance...

Also.... if states would make the requirements to get a drivers license considerable harder, then a lot of the irresponsible/incompetent drivers wouldn't be on the roads to begin with......

Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!

CZ82  posted on  2012-01-01   16:13:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: go65 (#1)

Except that the countries with the strongest economies in the world right now spend more on social welfare services than Greece, Italy, and Ireland (and even the U.S.)

Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!

CZ82  posted on  2012-01-01   16:56:18 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: go65 (#1)

For example, Sweden, which has the largest social welfare structure as a percentage of GDP, has a GDP higher now than before the crisis began.

And only somewhat acceptable results.....

www.national center.org/NPA555_Sweden_Health_Care.html

Quiz of the Day: Who made the statement "The world would be a better place if only Men were to vote?????? HINT: It was a woman!!!

CZ82  posted on  2012-01-01   17:19:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (41 - 79) not displayed.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com