My book, Silent Thunder is now at the publishers, the contract is signed and the evil editor will begin to rip my work apart. I am happy and sad at the same time. Happy becaue after years of work my book was accepted for publication. Sad because it is no longer under my control. Do other authors have this feeling of loss and elation?
[quote]Are you concerned about the environment or are you concerned with man? Because, it sure seems like you're trying to play the whole outfield.[/quote] I think he is only interested in mankind, that is a good thing in my opinion. Any problem we make we can fix.
[quote]Paladin, even if nuclear fallout doesn't kill animal and plantlife, it kills humans and that is my mainconcern. What do I care if nature still exists if human kind has been erradicated?[/quote] If what you write is true then you took my statement out of context to put up a straw man. [quote]Bottom line is that technology offers the means for massmurder and sustained destruction of our environment so that it would be hostile for our survival. And collective suicide as a
[quote]I don't really understand your distinction - either you have the impact or you don't. [/quote] We have the p
Add to that the air car that is coming out. It is a car that runs on compressed air. Gets about 125 miles on a charge and the one designed for America has a small gas engine to recharge it extending the mileage to two thousand miles to a tank of gas. We could use it but it is hard to break into the American market with the Big Three running the show.</sp
[quote]Actually, I would have to disagree with your comment about our impact. I feel that we have much more of an impact - or capability for it at least - than we think, we just are not at the point where we realize that we can I would say.[/quote] Then do me a favor, look
[quote]You still don't get it. As long as there is no coercion involved and insurance companies are permitted to offer a wider range of options more closely tailored to your needs, you should be happy.[/quote] D, this one is a hater, does not understand the concept of insurance and will only be happy when we are all paying for is problems while he complains about paying for fat people.
[quote]I'm still going to do everything I can to take care of it and lessen my impact. It's just what I feel is right.[/quote] <span style="font-family: Verdana; color: black; font-si
[quote]You can't be serious? There are 3 year drops in temperature all the time, but the overall trend is upwards. See this NASA graph: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif[/quote ] You need to do more than look at graphs, you need learn something you missed in grade school. Our Sun is the source of most of the heat in
[quote]Well you can't choose to grow old, or get younger again, so for a universal healthcare system that would raise obvious moral issues, especially when you factor in that many old people who have retired will be on a lower income and hence wouldn't be able to pay any such tax as easily, and UHC will be funded by taxation which itself is based on ability to pay.[/quote] <span style="font-family: Verdana; col
[quote]Paladin seems to dispute the first 2 of these, which are you disputing?[/quote] not at all, I am disputing that it is the case with every fat person. If you have a medical condition your weight goes up, they are just as fat as the person that does not have a medical condition. How can YOU tell the difference? Why should that person pay a fat tax if they did not eat bad foods, or over eat? You assume that a person is fat only because they don't eat right and should pay a tax for
[quote]People choose how much(+what) they eat+exercise, which affects how fat they are. The fatter they are, the more health problems they are likely to have, meaning the more healthcare they require on average. [/quote] Healthcare they will likely nee
[quote]Still, where was the fear and paranoia? If big gov't under Obama is just as bad and drives paranoia/fear....then it's the same with Bush. Right?[/quote] Because there is no balance with Mr. Obama. The Legislature is controlled by the same party that is in the White House. The last time Republicans had control of both the Legislature and the White House was for 2 years under President Reagan. The liberals scream
[quote]Opposing a fat tax because you want other people to have to pay for you (if you're fat), while opposing universal health care because it means you have to pay for other people.[/quote] Well I am not fat. Six foot one inch tall, 217 lbs. I still do not understand how I am paying for fat people please explain? You assume that fat people ar
This is very true, and well said. Remember that the auto industry was in crisis. The big three were on the verge of bankruptcy. The government offered money with strings. Two of them took the money Ford did not. The two that took the money went into bankruptcy while Ford did not. This would lead me to believe that Ford has a better chance of survival. The cash for clunkers me
[quote]George Bush increased the government and its like crazy - where was the paranoia and fear with that?[/quote] First he was trusted by republicans not conservatives. Conservatives called him a liberal and we were laughed at by other liberals because Mr. Bush was portrayed as a hard right conservative. Mr. Bush was doing what Mr. Obama is doing only at a slower pace. [quote]Such is the limits of a President. He may push and advertise his agenda/platform...but ultimately on
[quote who="Nitro Cruiser" reply="20" id="2328796"] I am confused, where is the hypocrisy? Please explain. Here it is. It is my business if I have to pay for it. Ah, so it's ok if you benefit, but not if someone else benefits? Classic hypocrisy.[/quote] Good one Nitro!
[quote]Some of them could be achieved, no question, but none without a cost.[/quote] But that is what is so great about the plan. At this point the President is not talking about caping the costs. Insurance companies will raise rates accordingly but the government can always under cut them. The government is forbiddn by law to make a profit so it can charge as little as it wants.
[quote]they're saying: lets cut through the Rush Limbaugh, Rachel Maddow, Sean Hannity, et al. bullshit.[/quote] AJ
[quote]Ah, so it's ok if you benefit, but not if someone else benefits? Classic hypocrisy.[/quote] I am confused, where is the hypocrisy? Please explain.
I sent a link of the congressional healthcare bill to the White House.
[quote]Your way? I apparently just came to it... [/quote] So you admit that you are new to this. lol See what a little editing can do? [e digicons]:D[/e]
This is great! This is what the president is promising us all and is commendable. The issue I have is that his stated goal before he was elected is a single payer system meaning the government is the single payer. If that is correct then insurance companies will be excluded from the equation and all the promises will fade away with the insurance companies.
No Discrimination for Pre-Existing Conditions <span style="font-s
[quote]I have to agree that doctors do make way too much money and using the excuse that the machines they use to diagnos patients and the fact that they are saving lives is not fair. Makes me wonder why soldiers do not make as much.[/quote] I have to disagree with you here. A doctor staring off makes about 100 an hour for a 12 hour shift. Sounds like a lot right? By the time the doctor pays his student loans, his malpractice insurance, income taxes and dues he takes home about 7.50 a
JoeUser Forums