Well, you guys are light-years ahead of us on government healthcare. We have some catching up to do.
Uncle Sugar
- Thread starter Phantasmal
- Start date
Well, you guys are light-years ahead of us on government healthcare. We have some catching up to do.
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
It is amazing how we are always paying to fix what liberalism broke
Maybe you guys should stop fucking shit up
The reason it costs money for people showing up at the ED is because the federal government passed a law
Ahhh,,,you want me to climb out on that skinny little limb do you ?....ok, just this once...
The birth control pill helps to keep bleeding cycles regular, lighter, and shorter and reduces cramps. It can be used in the treatment of certain disorders that cause heavy bleeding and menstrual pain, such as fibroids and endometriosis.
Some pills may help control acne. Combination pills also may decrease the risk of cancer of the uterus and ovary and improve bone density during menopause.
All legitimate medical problems.
Is erectile dysfunction a medical problem ? Welll....yeah it is...but hardly life threatening and I don't think it needs a
government mandate to force ins. company's to cover it or to have taxpayers pay for its remedy....
Satisfied ?
Yep!
I'm getting tired of stirring up pinheads for today....it was fun for awhile and I really have to force myself to post some things just for sake of playing troublemaker.....
and it usually works.....fact is, I don't even have a dog in this fight.....except as a taxpayer.
but as always,
its a pleasure butting heads with you in a more serious way.....
so I do hereby revoke, annul, and repeal all my arguments against women's contraceptives, .... its difficult to take an opposing view when your hearts not in it....
Thats why I don't join in the debate contest here, being given a side you don't like and forcing yourself to defend it is fun but too taxing....
and it usually works.....fact is, I don't even have a dog in this fight.....except as a taxpayer.
but as always,
its a pleasure butting heads with you in a more serious way.....
so I do hereby revoke, annul, and repeal all my arguments against women's contraceptives, .... its difficult to take an opposing view when your hearts not in it....
Thats why I don't join in the debate contest here, being given a side you don't like and forcing yourself to defend it is fun but too taxing....
Last edited:
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
His statements were offensive because they are based on sexist stereotypes and because it was an ad hom attack implying that women who take contraceptive are not able to control their libido (as if they are required too) and are therefor sluts. That was also a very hypocritical as he's applying a double standard of behavior and because in the past he's signed pro-contraception legislation into law. So that is controversial.
It's also controversial in that a former elected chief executive of a State aspiring to higher office is that profoundly ignorant about preventative health care.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
No it's not. It's paid for by your taxes.
exactly
"we have to fix this problem, which we created by mandating that poor people had to be paid for in the first place!"
"oh shit... this mandate thing isn't working out so well.. we need to fix it by going to single payer!"
he didn't say that women that take contraceptives can't control their libido. he was saying those desperate to have someone else pay for it instead of being patient and getting it themselves can't control their libido. I think there is a difference in how you parse what he said.
breaking this sentence down:
1) women need Uncle Sugar
well, yeah. If you are asking to get money from the government, or some other source, then that's exactly that that is. Are people offended by the uncle sugar part?
2) to buy their birth control
right.. nothing offensive about that.
3) because they can't control their libido.
so that's the main issue? So if we are to stipulate that above is incorrect, then what is the issue?
I don't know, I really don't get this one. I feel like you guys are making shit up. I feel like desh or something, cause this is going over my head. Don't get this at all.
1) women need Uncle Sugar
well, yeah. If you are asking to get money from the government, or some other source, then that's exactly that that is. Are people offended by the uncle sugar part?
2) to buy their birth control
right.. nothing offensive about that.
3) because they can't control their libido.
so that's the main issue? So if we are to stipulate that above is incorrect, then what is the issue?
I don't know, I really don't get this one. I feel like you guys are making shit up. I feel like desh or something, cause this is going over my head. Don't get this at all.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
I'm not parsing and you just repeated his ad hom fallacy. That that these women are desperate to have someone else pay for contraception when A. That contraception is paid for by the health care premiums they will be paying and B. Because they believe contraception should be managed as preventative health care which is quite reasonable. Which, as I said before, is very disturbing that Mike just doesn't get the importance of preventative health care where contraception is concerned.
officially filing this away under 'm' for mountain out of a molehill. and 'n' for not a big fucking deal at all.
so they aren't? they wont complain if they have the subsidizing stop?
actually I can't say it's a mountain out of a molehill. That would imply some weight to it. I just find it to be so out of the blue and irrelevant, like I seriously feel like I am missing a crucial piece of the puzzle. I would be having the same reaction in this thread if rana posted that huckabee said that plants need water. It's just like "uhhh what? what am i supposed to do with this?"
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Well I guess I don't get your point of view either...and I mean I really don't get it. When I'm paying a substantial amount of money for my health care services either by cash premiums or by my tax dollars how is "Uncle Sugar" giving me anything? Don't I have the right to bargain for the level of coverage that I pay for and since I am footing the bill shouldn't I have the right to expect certain standards of service? I mean where do you guys come up with this "free shit"?
Then from a pure business standpoint, don't these insurance companies have a right to encourage and incentivize the use of preventative health care when the actuary data proves it will save them very large sums of money?
Back to basics....
Text of Huckabee's remarks...
"Women I know are outraged that Democrats think that women are nothing more than helpless and hopeless creatures whose only goal in life is to have the government provide for them birth control medication.
Women I know are smart, educated, intelligent, capable of doing anything that anyone else can do. Our party stands for the recognition of the equality of women and the capacity of women. That’s not a war on them, that’s a war for them.
And if the Democrats want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of government then so be it!
Let us take that discussion all across America because women are far more than the Democrats have played them to be. And women across America have to stand up and say enough of that nonsense."
Now whats really the problem ?
Text of Huckabee's remarks...
"Women I know are outraged that Democrats think that women are nothing more than helpless and hopeless creatures whose only goal in life is to have the government provide for them birth control medication.
Women I know are smart, educated, intelligent, capable of doing anything that anyone else can do. Our party stands for the recognition of the equality of women and the capacity of women. That’s not a war on them, that’s a war for them.
And if the Democrats want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of government then so be it!
Let us take that discussion all across America because women are far more than the Democrats have played them to be. And women across America have to stand up and say enough of that nonsense."
Now whats really the problem ?
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Well the next time you get pregnant why don't you come back and revisit this issue?
Do you have any idea of the cost of having a child? I'm just talking about the birthing a child too. Not the cost of raising one but I'll get back to that. Your out of pocket alone is going to be in the $10,000 to $15,000 range and that's if nothing goes wrong! Need a C-Section? That out of pocket cost has now double or tripled for not just you, but for your insurance company as well and God forbid that there is any serious health problems cause not only will you have to deal with the stress and anxiety from that situation you'd be looking at some major debt too. Worse for the insurance company. Have a child that's a premie and you can be racking up close to 7 figures in medical costs that you and the insurance company would be paying but even if everything goes right you're still going to dishing out about $10 grand out of pocket.
So you get the point. Having babies is expensive. Real expensive and if the government can incentivize and encourage young dumb single girls who don't have the sense to protect themselves from guys like you and I, who just want to get laid, I say more power to them. It's going to save a lot of money.
I mean your bitching about the cost of birth control? Shit fuck man, that's a fraction of the cost to have a baby and a minute drop in the bucket compared to the cost of raising a child for 20 years.
Mikes comments are a big deal cause this is a person who wants to make public policy decisions for the entire nation and this guy can't even do basic math.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Sure they will. It's bad public policy and it's bad public health policy. You want to stop all subsidization across the board as an ideological purist than be my guest. If you want to do it on a rational basis where there is a measurable return on investment...well that's another story.
The practical aspect you for some unfathomable reason don't seem to get is that even in the short term subsidizing contraception saves a shit ton of money on unwanted and irresponsible pregnancies. That's just short term. Long term it would save a literal ocean of money. That you can't see this return on investment fairly boggles.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Well then you're just simply being niave cause there slightly more than 50% of the population where this issue means A LOT to them. It may be no big deal to you cause your ass will never get pregnant. Well....wait till you have to pay for one.
they aren't paying for it directly, they are being subsidized.