Tentative hello!

Bubba said:
Gracie,

I'm pretty new here also, a couple months. As you've seen, these people can't even greet a newcomer without resorting to childish insults and incivility. Hard to feel that you're being welcomed. I, and hopefully you, would like to see that change. How can our nation remain strong and free when citizens automatically lash out at people who are only guilty of holding different opinions??

Here's hoping we will have interesting, spirited, and thoughtful discussions in the days and weeks to come.
Click to expand...

One reason this forum is rough.
Those of us of a certain age remember the admonition as kids, even when it wasn't directed at us. Perhaps we remember it from the cantankerous family gathering around the Thanksgiving table just after a particularly hot election, or as a discussion around certain holidays. Passions would stir, tempers would flare, and someone would eventually say, "Never discuss politics or religion in polite company."

Nothing stirs the blood more than God and flag. Every philosopher and politician throughout human history has known this, though some more instinctively than others.
Click to expand...

So can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.
 
Bubba said:
Gracie,

I'm pretty new here also, a couple months. As you've seen, these people can't even greet a newcomer without resorting to childish insults and incivility. Hard to feel that you're being welcomed. I, and hopefully you, would like to see that change. How can our nation remain strong and free when citizens automatically lash out at people who are only guilty of holding different opinions??

Here's hoping we will have interesting, spirited, and thoughtful discussions in the days and weeks to come.
Click to expand...

...and then kill each other. ;)
 
Jack said:
The 'Reality' here at JPP is a partisan 'Red Team/Blue Team' mentality.
Good Luck with a rational conversation/discussion of any topic that isn't based on 'Team Loyalty'.
Click to expand...

Impossible. I've posted solutions to healthcare (Moosecare) and national election reform. Both would require compromise from both sides.
Of course the usual suspects on Blue team labelled me a rayciss or invoked Godwin's Law and those on the Red team ignored me .
 
Last edited:
anonymoose said:
Impossible. I've posted solutions to healthcare (Moosecare) and national election reform. Both would require compromise from both sides.
Of course the usual suspects on Blue team labelled me a rayciss or invoked Godwin's Law and those on the Red team ignored me .
Click to expand...

I guess I should have mentioned there are some exceptions. :(
 
anonymoose said:
Impossible. I've posted solutions to healthcare (Moosecare) and national election reform. Both would require compromise from both sides.
Of course the usual suspects on Blue team labelled me a rayciss or invoked Godwin's Law and those on the Red team ignored me .
Click to expand...

Moose care? I must have missed it. Tell me more. Would an enema for a blocked bowl be called a Rocky the Flying Squirrel?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Moose care? I must have missed it. Tell me more. Would an enema for a blocked bowl be called a Rocky the Flying Squirrel?
Click to expand...

I unveiled Moosecare initially on DCJ a few years back after I saw how Obamacare devastated the health insurance I provided for my employees , which they liked.
Moosecare is pretty detailed so no time to go into it here and now but to summarize there were different options, not a one size fits all.
Most importantly everyone has to pay into some type of plan.
Those that prefer Medicare for all would go to a VA type system.
Free-market advocates would have to pay into an HSA and pay cash to the provider of their choice. Any unused HSA funds could be bequeathed to heirs.
Other options between those two extremes were described.

Sailor thought the plan was brilliant, a couple others on Blue Team found it to be rayciss or fascist (I assume because I'm not a member of Blue Team.)
 
Last edited:
anonymoose said:
I unveiled Moosecare initially on DCJ a few years back after I saw how Obamacare devastated the health insurance I provided for my employees , which they liked.
Moosecare is pretty detailed so no time to go into it here and now but to summarize there were different options, not a one size fits all.
Most importantly everyone has to pay into some type of plan.
Those that prefer Medicare for all would go to a VA type system.
Free-market advocates would have to pay into an HSA and pay cash to the provider of their choice. Any unused HSA funds could be bequeathed to heirs.
Other options between those two extremes were described.

Sailor thought the plan was brilliant, a couple others on Blue Team found it to be rayciss or fascist (I assume because I'm not a member of Blue Team.)
Click to expand...
I think that if Moosecare has the following three conditions it would work at lowering cost.

It requires all persons to carry some form of coverage.
A public option is available.
Some form of Cost controls are implemented.

I say that because all developed nations in the world that have effectively reduced healthcare costs have implemented these three principles.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I think that if Moosecare has the following three conditions it would work at lowering cost.

It requires all persons to carry some form of coverage.
. Most importantly everyone has to pay into some type of plan.
Click to expand...
A public option is available.
. Those that prefer Medicare for all would go to a VA type system.
Click to expand...
Some form of Cost controls are implemented.
Click to expand...
It has all three Mott.
The VA/Medicare for all is the public opinion.
Another option would be a medical cost sharing plan (MCSP)
The free market option and MCSP basically have cost control built in. Providers would be required to list their fees or negotiate with individuals.

Feel free to play devil's advocate and ask questions. I thought it all out pretty well.
 
Last edited:
anonymoose said:
It has all three Mott.
The VA/Medicare for all is the public opinion.
Another option would be a medical cost sharing plan (MCSP)
The free market option and MCSP basically have cost control built in. Providers would be required to list their fees or negotiate with individuals.

Feel free to play devil's advocate and ask questions. I thought it all out pretty well.
Click to expand...

Hey I’m open minded to any plan that includes those three principles. That’s where Barry screwed the pooch with Obama care. He was so blinded by compromising on those three principles in order to get bipartisan support that he dropped two of those three principles and then the vote went down on party lines. It was a major miscalculation on Barry’s part as Dems had control of the House and Senate and he absolutely could have passed the PP&ACA without Republican support. Then to add insult to injury the universal mandate was over turned with the end result that it did little if anything to reduce growing healthcare cost.

It reminds me about what the character Mike in Breaking Bad said about half measures.

That ended up turning the PP&ACA into a Rube Goldberg Three Headed Hydra.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top