How many more would die if the state controlled it?

So there’s this study that speculates 19 people between 25 and 64 die each week in Georgia because they don’t have health insurance.

The report, by the way, offers no solutions. I wonder if we put all this in the hands of the government how many more people would die each week. Because I’m betting the number would go up, not down.


  1. boyreporter says:

    You rightwingers never fail to live down to your ideals. Government is always bad (except when you want to use it for your ends), and private enterprise is always good (even if it dines at the public trough through corporate welfare), despite its tendency to excess. But the thing that always resonates so tellingly is your repetition of the line that “government” is the enemy. Thanks to Ronald Reagan (who just met Charlton Heston in hell), and his oft-repeated speach about government not being the solution but the problem, you guys can’t let go of it. It’s a cheap way to get cheers and donations, but means crap. Actually, repeating the line means more than crap. It’s a perfect way to infect young people with suspicion of and hatred of all government. Whatever happened to being a good citizen, taking pride in civic responsibility and duty — which means valuing government as an expression of our common goals and concerns? Government, you may properly say, needs constant attention and restraint, but it is not, per se, the enemy. People who misuse government, such as our current White House occupant, are the infections that attack the stalk of good government, but are not THE government, in perpetuity. Thank God, government changes.

  2. Jace Walden says:

    You were right about one thing BoyReporter:

    Government is always bad and private enterprise is always good.

    Other than that, anyone who can look back on the long, sad history of collectivism and still think that “Government is Good” is a f*cking idiot and no further discussion on the matter is required.

  3. boyreporter says:

    OOOooh! Collectivism!! Look out for the Red Guards! Put down “Atlas Shrugged” and turn off Boortz, for God’s sake. Anyone who can look back at the long, sad history of laissez-faire capitalism and not see the societal and personal ills that it brought and that had to cleaned up over decades of effort — uh…can’t read? Can’t think beyond bumper stickers? Hush now. Glenn Beck is on, Jace.

  4. Jace Walden says:


    I you continue to disrespect me with your attempts at continuing “debate” on subjects matter that I have already deemed to be “closed”.

    I’ll repeat myself again, because it’s obvious that your reading comprehension skills are weak, at best:

    [A]nyone who can look back on the long, sad history of collectivism and still think that “Government is Good” is a f*cking idiot and no further discussion on the matter is required.

    Case closed.

  5. Jace Walden says:


    If you look back at the thread regarding “smoking bans”, you’ll remember that I debated you. I have no problem debating people.

    Now, “people” like “boyreporter” are a different story. He/She is either a blatant socialist ideologue, or a blog troll who is only posting to generate a reaction. The best way to deal with people like that is to either ignore them completely OR to belittle them and then ignore them completely.

    Notice, though, not one time has he/she ever denied being a “f*cking idiot”. And with every post that “boyreporter” generates, he/she only further promotes the suggestion that he/she is a “F*cking idiot”.

  6. Chris says:

    Anyone going by the moniker boyreporter who is a she has issues beyond being a collectivist idiot.

  7. boyreporter says:

    Jace: I bow to your superior knowledge of f*cking idiotism, obviously a congenital condition.

  8. Old Vet says:

    If the only choices (and I hope there are more!) are putting rapacious insurance companies between the patient and doctor, or letting the government come up with a single payer system, I’d go with the government. Not only are insurance companies out for the highest profits, even at the cost of human suffering and death, but anyone who has dealt with them on the inside knows they are probably less efficient than government. Their bureaucracy is, in fact, like the government but with less accountability.

  9. Jace Walden says:


    I thought you were an athiest? I may be thinking of someone else though.

    But if I am thinking of you, how do you reconcile your athiest beliefs with your beliefs in a “Hell”, like the one that you said Reagan just met Heston in?

  10. boyreporter says:

    You mean “atheist,” I guess. I don’t believe in hell, but it’s a handy place to imagine certain people winding up in. I have to curb such unhealthy thoughts, though, so as not to turn Republican.

    Interesting that hell is central to the thoughts of a believer. A fear of extreme and unending punishing as the basis of religious belief is a bit Dark Ages, n’est ce pas?

  11. Demonbeck says:

    With the April 15th tax deadline looming, boyreporter, is hell really all that difficult to imagine?

  12. Demonbeck says:

    And of course, that point’s foundation lies within the hatred that all people have of a particular governmental agency

  13. jsm says:

    I like how this study “estimates” how many people die due to lack of insurance coverage. Even better, it offers no facts to back up its so-called estimates… er… random, made-up numbers. However, there are factual reports of people dying in countries with socialized medicine because the waiting list for treatment is too long.

    Leftwingers can’t help but want to be just like Europe, but most won’t move there. America is different from Europe on purpose. We don’t want to be a welfare state.

  14. boyreporter says:

    Demon: No, hatred of the IRS does not naturally follow from hating to pay taxes. Unless you believe taxes are not necessary, that is.

    Jizzum: Your humanity is showing again. Oops. That was someone else. Your Scroogitude is safe. Whatever you do, don’t try to help people. I’d like to see your info about people dying from waiting in countries with national healthcare (single payer), which you like to call “socialized medicine.” The US military is a fine example of how socialized medicine can and does work. The Interstate Highway system is a form of socialized transportation. Socialized this and socialized that is just a sneering notion of greediness and myopia befitting a mole rat.

  15. Icarus says:

    “The US military is a fine example of how socialized medicine can and does work.”

    I’m just guessing here BR, but I’m thinking that you don’t know many people who are in active duty nor receive their medical benefits from the VA?

  16. Demonbeck says:

    I am not saying that, I am saying that you are admitting to at least disliking a certain portion of government, yet earlier you mocked Republicans for disliking government.

    Go ahead and admit it, there are portions of the government that you dislike and even hold disdain for. It’s ok, you’ll feel better after you get it off your chest.

  17. boyreporter says:

    Yes, disliking portions of government is natural to us all. But that’s not what Erick seemed to mean, and it’s not the message Reagan’s stupid statement means. Both meant to demean government, period. And that’s pretty irresponsible.

    And Icky: I didn’t say military healthcare was perfect. I maintain that you can’t didsdain national health and then subject our military to it. Besides, it, with its flaws, has proven itself and needs no defense from me.

  18. dorian says:

    Funny, did a liberal just talk about responsibility? I am reminded of “responsibility” every time I go to the grocery store and see some welfare queen with her six screaming kids and a cart load of steaks. Why is it my responsibility to reward people for irresponsible breeding?

    If you are an atheist, then you no doubt believe in evolution and natural selection and all that crap. Maybe, some folks just need to be weeded out of the food chain. Of course, that isn’t my idea, it belongs to Richard Dawkins.

    Finally, can anyone on either side of this issue name one government program that ran under budget and worked as intended? Just one?

  19. rugby fan says:

    Is there a welfare queen hat now?

    Out of curiosity dorian, just how do you know these women you describe receive welfare?

    Just guessing that they have not told you, nor do you know their financial records, so how do you tell if someone is on welfare?

  20. dorian says:

    EBT cards are a big tip off rugby, but you’re right. My comments had absolutely no basis in reality. I completely made that up. It never happens. My tax dollars are never wasted on welfare queens with six screaming kids and a cart load of steaks. It’s an urban myth. Like the chukacabra.

    Will it make you feel better if I take a poll?

  21. Icarus says:

    “Finally, can anyone on either side of this issue name one government program that ran under budget and worked as intended?”

    The Hartsfield Airport “Midfield Terminal”, or the “new airport”, was finished on time, under budget, and was/is wildly successful.

    Management and subsequent follow up additions have left a lot to be desired, however.

  22. dorian says:

    I think you’re right about that Icarus. However, the distinction I would make is that building a building is a process that has a beginning and an end. Across the board socialized medicine would never end.

  23. boyreporter says:

    I’d hate to be in a foxhole with Dorian. I pity your world view. And the idea of weeding people out of the food chain: problem is, the chain changes; the people in it change, depending on circumstances; you might be one of those weeded out if your fortunes changed. Oh, and that’s just the practical aspect of its idocy. There’s also…oh, heck, you wouldn’t understand compassion and…never mind.

  24. boyreporter says:

    By the way, Dorian, I bet a lot of folks could cite — from their own company experiences — private enterprise projects that threw money down a rat hole. Waste is not a government monopoly.

  25. dorian says:

    And that right there is the problem with most liberal ilk. You live in this delusion that the vast majority of those who can’t support themselves or their families are just happy-go-lucky, down-on-their-luck, poor souls who really want to work for a check instead of having one mailed to them every month for doing nothing.

    I don’t know if you smartsy liberal types are blind or stupid or both, but you clearly have a very tenuous grasp on reality. What do you think the end game is here? You have one group who can’t produce getting bigger. You have another group that can getting smaller. Where do you think that leaves us in 20 years?

    On the bright side, maybe we’ll all be speaking Chinese by then, so you can have your free medical care.

  26. Demonbeck says:

    99.9% of those who want universal health care have never had to experience it. It is a terrible, terrible idea and will ruin many more lives than lack of coverage does today.

  27. boyreporter says:

    “And that right there is the problem with most liberal ilk. You live in this delusion that the vast majority of those who can’t support themselves or their families are just happy-go-lucky, down-on-their-luck, poor souls who really want to work for a check instead of having one mailed to them every month for doing nothing.”

    You obviously have no idea what you’re talking about. Go ahead and scratch that itch, but it won’t make your stereotype true. Sweeping generalizations are useful only for betraying a mindset — and in this case, it isn’t pretty.

    “I don’t know if you smartsy liberal types are blind or stupid or both, but you clearly have a very tenuous grasp on reality. What do you think the end game is here? You have one group who can’t produce getting bigger. You have another group that can getting smaller. Where do you think that leaves us in 20 years?”

    Twenty years older, I hope. See above, re stereotypes/sweeping, etc.

    “On the bright side, maybe we’ll all be speaking Chinese by then, so you can have your free medical care.”

    That’s just stupid.

  28. rugby fan says:


    I’ve experienced national healthcare for years in Australia.

    No problems or troubles to report.

    If it is so bad and hurts so many people, why don’t we hear of countries eliminating their programs.

  29. Demonbeck says:

    The best way to make health care affordable is to provide incentives to businesses (like Walmart or Target) to open cheap medical clinics. This will keep those without insurance from clogging up our emergency rooms with non-emergencies.

    As a result, medical costs for everyone will drop – as will health care insurance costs.

  30. boyreporter says:

    I have experienced national health care in Europe, and IT WORKS. Anecdotal evidence of having a wait a bit is not evidence of failure. On the contrary, national health is a valued part of British and other older nations’ societies. And making sure every person here has insurance is no answer. The insurance companies are much of the problem, little of the solution.

  31. joe says:

    There are both good and bad things that can be said about national health care. The good—If we adopt national health care, it should slow down the influx of illegals on our southern border. The bad–We will lose all the money that Canadians spend in the US for health care.

    It seems a tough choice.

  32. Jace Walden says:

    There are good and bad things about national healthcare.

    The bad: It’s poor quality, rationed, and kills people.

    The good: We don’t have it here yet.

  33. dorian says:

    “Anecdotal evidence of having to wait is not evidence of failure”?

    I suppose that would depend on if you were the person waiting and what for, would it not? If I were waiting for a liver transplant and couldn’t get one, it’d be pretty good evidence to me.

    Another problem is you have the government deciding who lives or dies based on a cost benefit analysis (even in beloved europe where you can’t get Avastin for liver cancer, because it costs too much). Old people cost a lot too, so maybe some folks just have a duty to die to keep universal helpcare for the rest of us with only minor illnesses.

    Anyone who has ever been to the DMV ought to be terrified of a low level bureaucrat deciding what medical procedures we can get.

  34. rugby fan says:

    So your source is an organization with an agenda against socialized medicine.


    Moreover, I think we have already established that Canada’s system is flawed (which it is), so rehashing the specifics of one country’s experience when there are dozens of examples of functioning national health care policies doesn’t really seem convincing.

    The article never really says the care provided is inferior to America’s or any other private care. The best it does is decreased time with patients but that does not mean that poor care is being provided. Perhaps a general rise in public health due to access for all means symptoms or sicknesses that are not as severe and require less attention by doctors.

    I always like the here is one example of a child not being able to get treatment for leukemia (at least someone is thinking of the children), ergo, the system fails. Perhaps the fact America has the treatment is due to our wealth. And if the system ultimately pays for her coverage (which I know happens in Australia if travel is required) it still sounds like it is working. To say nothing of the thousands of people who do get treatment with ease.

  35. Jace Walden says:

    How many more would die if the state controlled it?

    Erick, I did the math. If the state controls it, you can at 7.732 more people every week.

  36. boyreporter says:

    I’m with Rugby. You other guys are both ill informed and f*cking idiots. Fosters all around! National Health is the answer. Private insurance with its triage mentality and pissant philosophers like Jace and his spoor Dorian have no standing because they have no effing experience beyond “Atlas Sucked.”

  37. dorian says:

    It must be hard to breathe with your head so far up your butt. Maybe, you should have your prostrate checked. Oh , wait. You can’t. Universal healthcare won’t pay for it. I may be a f*cking idoit, but I am an insured one. No go enjoy your free steak courtesy of my tax dollars. No need to thank me. You’re welcome.

    p.s. I have dental too.

    p.s.s. I have eye coverage also.

    p.s.s.s. I have a very low copay.

    p.s.s.s.s. Thinking about how kick butt my insurance is makes me feel better about the taxes I do pay. Thanks!

  38. Demonbeck says:

    See how much you like national health care when you are sitting in a waiting room for three days – missing work – with an abscessed tooth to see a dentist.

    Or you are waiting a month for an approval on an EKG.

  39. John Konop says:

    The Truth about Healthcare

    The problem is the intellectual dishonesty of lawmakers from both parties on this issue. The real truth is we do have a dysfunctional form of socialized medicine between programs like Peach Care and free healthcare via county hospitals like Grady. And the system will become bankrupt and/or people who do pay via taxes and health insurance will keep seeing the cost go up and quality go down.

    You cannot fix a problem with talking points from both sides and not being honest about the issue.

    That is why I support mandatory pay health insurance for people who can afford it. We cannot have a system of using tax payers and people who do buy health insurance as an emergency back up plan for people who do not.

    We must open up the system to let employers and individual have a choice to buy the same plan lawmakers, vets, and federal workers receive. This would pit private against public insurance—lets see who wins.

    We must also eliminate all exclusions, which would encourage preventive medicine which is less expensive and better for consumers. At the same time people must pay extra for life-choice behavior to give an incentive to change bad health choices and promote fitness.

    This is just a start.

  40. Demonbeck says:

    And I have had friends in Canada sit for days with a toothache waiting to see a doctor. Friends who were on vacation from America, who have insurance and could have been seen in a matter of hours in America.

  41. boyreporter says:

    Dorian: glad you have all those things. Whoopee for you. I bet you have a nice shirt, too, and shiny shoes. So what? Can you say narcissist?

    Demon: The profit motive and turning over health care to insurance companies is the heart of the problem. The aim should be health first. That’s what National Health does in more advanced countries, while we argue about a delays — which are merely anecdotal and not a whole picture. Not even close. You’ve heard on this post from people with positive personal experience with single-payer national healthcare, but it means nothing, because your mind is made up and you join with pinch-faced, tightfisted Mr. Potter types. Grand company. Grand Old Party.

  42. Demonbeck says:

    Again, the answer is to let the Walmarts of the world in on the health care business. They can provide cheap and easy healthcare and attract customers to their store all in one package. They will be open on the weekends and free up valuable space in our ERs.

    Think of the savings and the improvements in overall healthcare throughout the nation.

  43. John Konop says:


    First most healthcare plans do not cover dental it is an ad on. Also the maze the insurance company puts a sick person in to see a specialist if they are in a HMO is horrible. And even if you have a PPO it usually takes up to three weeks to get a doctor appointment even if you have warning signs for cancer.

    This system is broken bottom line.

  44. John Konop says:


    I do agree with letting retail stores get into healthcare business especially drug stores. Yet the major savings would come if the AMA would let Nurse practitioners take care of patients with lower level problems and more frequent issues like cold, flue…..

  45. Demonbeck says:


    I have had friends with much more liberal views than yours go into countries with national healthcare and come out completely turned around on this issue. Nationalized healthcare does not work.

    At the very best, you are trading one horrific set of problems for another horrific set of problems. At worst, you are getting the world’s largest superpower into a hole it will never be able to climb out of. There is no possible exit from a nationalized healthcare.

  46. rugby fan says:


    I believe we have established that Canada’s system is flawed. How about the other examples in the world that function well? Why don’t those count for anything? Why not count my anecdotal evidence for anything? Or my conservative friends who have had experiences with national healthcare and admit that they enjoy it?

    Oh, it doesn’t agree with your philosophies.

    Never mind then.

  47. Demonbeck says:


    I am not saying that there aren’t problems that need fixing. Allowing RNs to do what they are already doing for doctors anyway would be one positive step. Decreasing the amount of time a pharmaceutical can hold a patent would be another.

    I would argue that working to see drug prices raised just a little in other nations throughout the world would make a huge difference for us as well.

  48. Demonbeck says:

    The point is that you are trading one set of problems for another. It doesn’t solve anything.

  49. jsm says:

    – Evidence on that fine British healthcare…

    More than four in ten maternity units turn away women in labour
    “Maternity units are turning away women in labour because they have no room, figures show.”

    Lung patients ‘condemned to death as NHS withdraws their too expensive drugs’
    “Hundreds of patients with a rare lung disease will be sentenced to death by plans to stop doctors prescribing a range of drugs on the NHS… because they are too expensive.”

    NHS chiefs tell grandmother, 61, she’s ‘too old’ for £5,000 life-saving heart surgery
    “A woman of 61 was refused a routine heart operation by a hard-up NHS trust for being too old.”

    – Now to Canada…

    Long Lines Mar Canada’s Low-Cost Health Care
    “Mrs. Magee, a 55-year-old public school secretary, researched her condition on the Internet, and read that optimally, radiation treatment should begin two weeks after surgery. But the local provincial government clearinghouse that manages the waiting time for radiation therapy told her she had to wait until the end of September — nearly three months after her surgery — to begin treatment.”

    The truth about Canada’s ailing health-care system
    “In 1999, Dr. Richard F. Davies described how delays affected Ontario heart patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. In a single year, just for this one operation, 71 Ontario patients died before surgery, “121 were removed from the list permanently because they had become medically unfit for surgery” and 44 left the province to have their CABG surgery elsewhere, often in the U.S.

    “In other words, 192 people either died or were too sick to have surgery before they worked their way to the front of the waiting line. Yet, the Ontario population of about 12 million is only 4 percent of the population of the United States.”

    “Fifty percent of the Canadian hospital administrators said the average waiting time for a 65-year-old man who requires a routine hip replacement was more than six months; in contrast, not one American hospital administrator reported waiting periods that long. Eighty-six percent of American hospital administrators said the average waiting time was shorter than three weeks; only 3 percent of Canadian hospital administrators said their patients have this brief a wait.”

    “The Canadian system works fine for minor problems, but danger lies ahead as baby boomers age and more serious illnesses afflict them. Call it ‘Canadazation,’ the myth of high-quality, ‘free’ care. Its real costs in human suffering are ones that U.S. proponents don’t want you to know about.”

    boy, you have demonstrated that you are clueless on this issue. These represent just a snippet of the abundance of info on failing government healthcare systems throughout the world. Government bureaucrats should not be making healthcare decisions. Their major concern is the bottom line – not healing. In a single payer system, they budget a certain number of dollars to a program, and the nation must do what it can for the sick with a limited number of dollars.

    The single payer system works great for young, healthy people, but the elderly and seriously ill get the shaft. If that’s what you want, move to Europe where you think “it works.” I don’t want someone in Washington deciding whether enough money is available to treat my illnesses.

  50. Demonbeck says:

    Pitting private against public doesn’t seem to be the answer in my opinion, but if it helps create competition for lower prices, then I am all for it.

    It seems to me, though, that we already have public v. private as it stands.

    Speaking of public v. private, think about the horrible service our nation’s VA hospitals provide to our nation’s vets. Is that truly how you want your healthcare to be provided?

    When did we start turning to the government to take control of and fix all of our problems rather than expecting it to provide the right atmosphere for the solutions to come about?

  51. John Konop says:


    Healthcare system anti-life?

    Pro Birth or Pro Life?

    MSNBC-Family sues insurer who denied teen transplant

    17-year-old girl died hours after Cigna finally agreed to pay for new liver

    The family of a 17-year-old girl who died hours after her health insurer reversed a decision and said it would pay for a liver transplant plans to sue the company, their attorney said Friday.

    Nataline Sarkisyan died Thursday at about 6 p.m. at the University of California, Los Angeles Medical Center. She had been in a vegetative state for weeks, said her mother, Hilda.

    Attorney Mark Geragos said he plans to ask the district attorney to press murder or manslaughter charges against Cigna HealthCare in the case. The insurer “maliciously killed her” because it did not want to bear the expense of her transplant and aftercare, Geragos said


  52. John Konop says:


    I think if retail operation got involved in healthcare the price would go down especially if they let nurses do minor care which is the majority of healthcare ie eye- care via Target…..

    Yet if you do not let both private and public compete on a level playing field this issue will never get settled and the system will go down further in quality and prices go up. Both sides can stop using the issue as political football and at the end the free market approach will more than likely win. By doing nothing all we are doing is punishing people who buy healthcare.

  53. Icarus says:

    Like many issues, I take a middle ground here that tends to not sit well with either side.

    I get very concerned when I hear things like BoyReporter’s need to eliminate the “profit motvive” in medical care. The profit motive is at the center of American innovation, and is critical to maintain a capitalist based society.

    However, for those who believe the free market really determines health care in its current form, I would like to remind you that we give free or heavily supplemented medical care to anyone under 18 (Medicaid, Peachcare), over 65 (Medicare), and the poor (Medicaid, or laws barring refusal to treat in emergencies).

    So, those of us participating in the free market side of the equation are not only paying for our health care, but for a large part of the population that doesn’t currently pay.

    In effect, we already have socialized medicine. And if the Republicans don’t come up with a market approach that the voters can understand and more importantly, will actually work, then we’re going to get the democrats version that permanently eliminates that horrible “profit motive” that they find so very, very evil.

  54. John Konop says:


    “When did we start turning to the government to take control of and fix all of our problems rather than expecting it to provide the right atmosphere for the solutions to come about”?

    I do agree this is the problem but solution come in stages usually.

  55. Demonbeck says:


    By improving access to affordable and accessible healthcare through private business (the Walmart model I have been espousing), we open an avenue where non-emergencies can be turned away in our nation’s ER’s. If we find a functional way to reimburse these private, big retailer health care, the costs will be much smaller than those found in an ER and therefore will decrease the burden of those who actually pay the bill – namely us.

  56. Demonbeck says:

    For instance, the federal government may pay $1000 to Crawford Long to cure an illegal immigrant’s case of pink eye or the feds could pay the clinic at Target $45.

  57. Icarus, the middle ground you’re talking about is what an Obama administration (or, ok, Clinton too, in the unlikely event she wins the nomination) would be likely to implement.

    It’s a bit silly to imagine that the profit motive for healthcare is going to be somehow auto-magically eliminated with any program approved by Congress.

  58. Hey JSM, you going to give us actual apples:apples comparisons with mortality rates and such from similarly-incomed nations as our own, or are you going to continue cherry-picking crap from right-wing brit newsies?

    If not the former, I’m just going to conclude that you really suck at this and not waste my time.

  59. boyreporter says:

    Way to go, Hillbilly Ragger. I loved the Cheeto-stained comment. How many people know that joke? It’s an exact fit for the “capitalism is the answer to everything” crowd of know-nothings here masquerading as know-it-all’s. Capitalism is fine, it is a tool, it is a system, and should not be a f*cking religion. But if your soul is a dry hole, I guess it’s inevitable.

  60. Demonbeck says:

    Seriously Hillbilly, must JSM find examples for you to understand the point he is making? Britain and Canada aren’t similarly-incomed enough to draw conclusions as to what would happen in America?

  61. Demonbeck says:

    Government is fine, it is a tool, it is a system, and should not be a f*cking religion. But if you don’t believe the average person can survive on their own, I guess it’s inevitable.

  62. Yeah, actually, I DON’T believe the average person can “survive on their own,” because we’ve had thousands of years of civilization wherein we form families, clans, and finally, government. It’s not something to be feared. We’re social animals, not lone predators.

    You want to “survive on your own,” get reincarnated as a bobcat.

  63. BTW I thought I posted this before, but I have to laugh when one of the Keyboard Kommandos tries to put the fear of god into one and all by citing the “horrors” of the UK and Canadian system.

    Most Americans would take their system in a heartbeat; it’s only well-heeled established interests that prevent this from happening.

  64. Demonbeck says:

    Taking your example, though, Hillbilly, we survived for thousands of years without government as well. While we are social animals, we do not require an organization to tell us what to do and what to think. We can do that on our own.

    Our government was established to provide protection from other governments. Aside from a few other services, it really has no business interfering in our lives.

  65. boyreporter says:

    You got it. But right now, I have to go out and bag lunch in the woods and then make me a suit out of the hide and bring it back to my family…oh, wait, they’re supposed to bag their own game and make their own…heck, how’re we gonna be a-makin’ it on our own if we help one another? I know, we’ll all go hunting, and have rules about how when to shoot…wait a minute, that would be sorta like gummint, can’t have that. Let’s see now, makin’ it on our own…can we get together to make roads we all use? Have a fire department? Nah, we make our own paths and put out our own fires…a simpleton doth lurk among our posting friends.

  66. Demonbeck, I don’t want to take this any farther than it has to. Obviously we’ll be debating the proper role of government for as long as humans continue to be the dominant species on Earth. Maybe we should leave it at that for now.

  67. Demonbeck says:


    Or people could gather together privately, form corporations and make the clothes for my family. Oh wait, that might be unfair to those who don’t want to work and we can’t have that

  68. boyreporter says:

    Have you ever met anyone who didn’t want to work? For money, that is. I’m not referring to lazy teenagers or slaves. Anyone who really, really, didn’t want a job? If so, and I bet you’ll say yes you have, he or she would not in any way represent any group or high percentage of the population. Most people want to work. You seem to have some favorite cliches and whipping boys, all rooted in a Social Darwinism that I hope someday comes around on you.

  69. dorian says:

    Apparently, you haven’t spent much time at a public high school recently. Funny how liberals are all about empirical evidence when it suits there cause -for example wanting to rewrite our entire healthcare system based on your “experiences”. I’m sure there are alot of turkeys that equate humans with food and safety right up until Thanksgiving. Emprical evidence doesn’t work too well for them.

    From a practical standpoint, empirical evidence is more or less useless in a polical context anyway. One side always assumes their results are more valid than the other.

    If you want to compare apples to apples, I would suggest instead of comparing an imaginary universal health care system here to a universal health care system somewhere else – try comparing an imaginary universal health care system here to a system here. . .like say social security (with a particular emphasis on scalability. )

  70. Demonbeck says:

    I have never known anyone who didn’t want to work, but i have known plenty who weren’t willing to work the jobs for which they are qualified.

    The problem is not wanting to work a job, the problem is that folks aren’t willing to prepare themselves for the jobs they want – they don’t want to put in the work it requires to achieve.

  71. boyreporter says:

    Well, shame on them. Shame on all the people who don’t live up to your standards. How utterly judgmental and self-satisfied of you. I hope you don’t ever have to associate with such low-lifes, that your entire experience is with people who have passed your tests. All of them. On the other hand, it might be a lonely phone booth you meet in.

  72. John Konop says:


    The problem with social security is the government spent the money. With some minor tweaks and people given the right to invest a portion privately at even secured rates the system would work. Unless we fund numerous people south of the border, but that is a whole other debate.

    The real issue is Medicare, Peach-care, county hospitals……. Any rational person can see this is a train wreck! The real question is how to solve the problem.

  73. jsm says:

    “Most Americans would take their system in a heartbeat”

    Hillbilly, do you have any proof of that? Even from a left-wing newsie? You might not like my sources, but at least I have them.

    “Have you ever met anyone who didn’t want to work? For money, that is.”

    boy, when’s the last time you’ve been in the ghetto? I grew up around it. My girlfriend works with poor people who have bad credit, and she knows scores of them as well who don’t want to work and would rather sit at home and get a check.

    Dude, get your head out of your anus. I’ve rarely heard as many asinine things out of one person as I’ve seen you post.

  74. boyreporter says:

    JSM (Jizzum): You are so impolite. And your mama dresses you funny. Have I ever been to a ghetto? Man, you are so effing backward, you should be ashamed. Your girlfriend, too.

  75. Jace Walden says:

    I’ve rarely heard as many asinine things out of one person as I’ve seen you post.

    WHAT???? I take offense to this. I for one have attempted to make a living by saying asinine things on this blog. Surely you don’t mean that boyreporter says more asinine things than I? Do you?

  76. boyreporter says:

    Well, darn it, now I’m pissed. I certainly DO think that I have said far more asinine things than anyone else. Except for a whole bunch of others, of course, but Jace is right: he is not more asinine than I am. He is more asinine than most other people, sure, but not me.

  77. Demonbeck says:

    boyreporter said:

    “Well, shame on them. Shame on all the people who don’t live up to your standards. How utterly judgmental and self-satisfied of you. I hope you don’t ever have to associate with such low-lifes, that your entire experience is with people who have passed your tests. All of them. On the other hand, it might be a lonely phone booth you meet in.”

    I wasn’t passing judgement, merely stating fact. Many people out there do not prepare themselves for the things they want. Why must I (or anyone who has worked hard to achieve an education and a career) pay for their decision not to do the same?

    I am fine with my tax dollars helping out the down trodden and those who are mentally or physically handicapped, but there is a line that must be crossed when otherwise healthy people are demanding services that they could pay for if they actually tried to do something with their lives.

    It’s not an issue of someone being incapable or not having the means to get what they want, it is purely an issue of someone being unwilling to work for it. We have free education in this country and opportunities abound for those who push themselves to get it. I don’t feel sorry for those who don’t try.

  78. boyreporter says:

    How about their kids? Want to help them? Sometimes you have to help the so-called “undeserving” — shades of Dickens! — to help those who really can’t help themselves. There is bound to be waste. There is waste everywhere. But only waste related to helping our own seems to bring on such ire and condemnation.

  79. boyreporter says:

    Oh, and thanks for “The Ant and the Cricket” parable. Now I really get you. Pretty darn harsh, I’d say. What would it have cost the ant to help the cricket? Nothing, or at least, not much. But by not helping, he lost his soul. I’d start looking for mine if I were you.

  80. Icarus says:

    “How about their kids? Want to help them?”

    Thank You, BoyReporter, for thinking of the children.

  81. Bill Simon says:


    Keep this in mind: the radical religious Republicans only care about “the children” if they can scream and holler and claim a 3-day old blastocyst is a “child.”

    After the humans have been exited the womb, they no longer give a sh*t about their lives.

  82. boyreporter says:

    Icky: Very clever, though derivative.

    Bill: You are right, but that has nothing to do with where our individual and societal emphases should be (imho): in medical care, putting health for all above inflating insurance companies’ bottom lines.

  83. Bill Simon says:


    If you don’t have for-profit entities in the helath insurance realm, you end-up with the sh*t that is Grady: corrupt, irresponsible use of tons of taxpayer dollars.

    I’d rather have the for-profit entities here than any more Grady operate-alikes.

  84. boyreporter says:

    Taxpayer dollars for health services? Heaven forfend! Do you get this excited over taxpayer dollars for Pentagon waste, corporate welfare?

  85. Bill Simon says:

    Boy, you’re the one who bitched about those evil healthcare companies making a profit. There are two options in this world:

    1) Profit-seeking quality healthcare companies. OR

    2) Half-assed, crappy quality, corruption-infested government healthcare.

    Take your pick, Boy.

  86. boyreporter says:

    Saying it’s so (the crap you write) doesn’t make it so. You should, occasionally, consider opining on something you are familiar with and stay away from scary subjects such as national health care. I and others on this site have stated over and over that we have had personal experience with it and know many others who have and the horror stories you cite do not tell the whole story or even half of it. I’m glad you found God in profit, but for some it’s less than a godly pursuit. Actually, I’m not glad…but heck.

  87. Demonbeck says:

    Well, if it’s for the children, then by all means, let’s do it. Lord knows that the government does such a great job educating them!

  88. Bill Simon says:

    “God in profit”…WTF?

    Boy, just because you had a bad experience doesn’t mean the entire system should be upended to fit YOUR satisfaction and needs.

    What a selfish little imp you are…but, that’s typical of the me-me-me-me whiny left-wing agenda.

  89. boyreporter says:

    Demon and Bill: You are right. The 19th Century was wonderful. Let’s go back to it. Oh, you never left? Got it.

  90. boyreporter says:

    Let’s see…money above all…nothing for the general good…get all you can and can all you get…each for himself alone…and you have the nerve to call someone else selfish, whiny, me-me-me-me? Need a dictionary?

    BTW, I had no bad experience. Funny, though, other people have had them. Cave exit over there if you care to venture outside.

  91. dorian says:

    Typical liberal tripe. Take from those who can and give to those who can’t. Why is it my responsibility to be someone else’s atm machine? Bear in mind, you are not talking about charity, you’re talking about mandating significant redistribution of income.

    Moreover, if you want to take all the money I do make it sorta kills my incentive for making it in the first place. hey, I could be a deadbeat too and live off you. Welcome me to mediocrity comrade.

  92. Bill Simon says:

    “nothing for the general good.”

    RIGHT, Boy…those taxes I “contribute” (and everyone else contributes) at the point of a government-wielded gun isn’t used for the “general good,” is it?

    Boy, what you don’t get is that if we lived in your version of a Utopia, there would not be ANY of this “profit” available. People would become as productive as they are in countries like Amsterdam and France where a socialist government that either controls a lof of the production or just whacks 50% in taxes from any entity that bothers to set-up shop there.

  93. boyreporter says:

    Dorian: You have no responsibility at all. None. Happy now?

    Bill: Isn’t there a pile of dollars over there in the cave that you want to snuggle up on? Nape time.

  94. Bill Simon says:

    Actually, Boy, there is not. But, just because I don’t have any, that does not mean I want the government to be able to go out and steal it from someone else.

Comments are closed.