Mad about Obama's dismissive response on Marijuana? How mad? Do something about it!

darknemesis05

darknemesis05

Active Member
LoudBlunts said:
LMAO...um are you aware that you said 'there are more important problems at hand to be dealt like border control and the war on the taliban' ?

and are you aware that those 3 things are very much inter connected?

LMAO
Click to expand...

I have parkinsons my mind aint what it used , to be on the other if we legalize pot that would be helping all the cartels that profit from drug trafficking i believe the mexican mafias make money from smuggling our guns to mexico thus incresing border violence
 
panta

panta

Well-Known Member
LoudBlunts said:
not to mention not only making revenue from taxing it

but saving and making more money from not punishing and jailing our US citizens which cost mad money.

not to mention how can people pay taxes/help the economy if they are sitting in jail for victimless/violentless crime.
Click to expand...
thats the truth,but the mayority of people are still undeveloped and live in ignorance under the impression that marijuana-drug equals bad,and theres alot of people who are making money in all of this,the whole system,i see it marijuana being ilegal is just the same as alcohol during the prohibition its just a matter of time when its going down,just that its more reasonable to legalize weed than alcohol,im sure there are more violent incidents like shootings,car accidents,fights etc.incited by people under the influence of alcohol than weed and if u check the wikipedia page about marijuna on the scale compared with other drugs its behid alcohol in all aspects,so i dont see any reason why this is ilegal while alcohol is legal,i would unerstand it in a society witch banned both but like this its ridiculous
 
Twistyman

Twistyman

Well-Known Member
tipsgnob said:
that's what I'm talking about...hmmm I bet doctors don't make as much in Canada as they do in the US....damn...:)
Click to expand...
We have some Dr's that opt out of the system to go private IE: plastic surgeons.. but like my orthopedic guy makes about $300,000 a year.. here we don't make profit off of sick people.. even if you were madoff the prescription insurance would be about a premium of $700. per year and a max. of a $70. per month deductible for all and as many meds you have...
I picked up today xanax.. patoloc, flomax advair ventolin and spirival..that one alone in the US is about $150.00 I get the for $0..as I don't work..if I did..the ins. above would cover all..
Same with our banks...they don't or are they allowed to lend to poor gamble people and they can't profit on speculation..... I find it just a better Idea not to profit off the poor or sick..profit should be made by consumer products /realestate(sp) of people you can buy stuff.. not those who can't afford... thats loansharking......
 
LoudBlunts

LoudBlunts

Well-Known Member
Twistyman said:
Hey LB.. been a while... Thats crap...I've had 3 hip replac.
2 should... I knee... all together 8 major ops over a year in hospital... cost 0..
I can see any dr I want and walk out and see another for the same thing.. no one tells me who or how many times I can see a DR... I get meds free... I get transport to Dr. free.. dental free.. physio, free, xrays..free..blood test..free in the US the ins. is about $12,000 per year... here its about $10 a weeks on a $20,000 a year salary.. our minimum wage. is $9.00 per hour... And for waiting the longest I waited was 6 months, but if it was severe theres no real wait.. and here you won't be homeless because you get sick... I would have been homeless at the 2nd hip replacement..
Click to expand...
yea been a long time. had to leave the crap alone. nice to see ya twisty.


anywho, im not disagreeing with the pro's of universal healthcare at all

with anything you MUST weight the pro's and cons

period. we've heard your pro's twisty, why not list your cons


cuz in my humble opinion, and as well as others....there are many....starting with:


-waiting to see a doctor is the same bs as well.

-no competition equals average sometimes piss poor service

-doctor shortage because we once lived in a land of the free. capitalism. but now...its no money in being a doctor...so those who do it for the love of the job may still be there, but the doctor surplus will damn sure take a hit if universal healthcare is introduced

-there isnt EVEN ONE government office/program that runs efficiently or effectively..... are we sure that we want our government trying to run but ultimately would ruin another one of our choices of freedom?

i could go on and on
 
AcidBurn901

AcidBurn901

Well-Known Member
Twistyman said:
I find it just a better Idea not to profit off the poor or sick..profit should be made by consumer products /realestate(sp) of people you can buy stuff.. not those who can't afford... thats loansharking......
Click to expand...
Meet the United States Government!
 
Twistyman

Twistyman

Well-Known Member
There are issues in all systems... but here we don't get Drs looking down their noses at a less profitable patient ..or get that beneath them attitude... Two Drs. I had in the past do hip # 1 & 2 were head hunted because they were the top of the field.. my 1st hip replacement was in 1975 and it was new then and he was a pioneer so I got the best DR.. I just like a DR..who does it for the love of helping the sick... not the love of a Mercedes... It takes special sort of people to care for the sick before they worry about their bottom line....
"I'm much too important darling" attitude... and when did open heart surgery become a competition... I thought all Drs' are equal...

Thats a US attitude I fail to understand.. why does someone have to loss/fail to make someone win or be better.......

All I know, for all the possible faults... not ONE canadian citizen has been made poor and homeless just because they got sick..and not one family got a bill and lost their home because their parent died and didn't pay the bill before they died...... What how dare they die owing us Dr's.... lets ruin the remaining family....... then when one of them throws a heart attack we'll fuck him too..muhahahaha.... I'll stick with our meager paid, over worked Drs' anyone remember the hippocratic oath..do no harm...homeless to buy his mercedes sounds like harm to me....
 
tipsgnob

tipsgnob

New Member
According to the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, the United States is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not provide universal health care!
Universal Health Care has been implemented in most developed countries, and even in many developing countries. Germany, Europe, the United Kingdom, and several others boast various versions of Universal Heath Care systems. But the United States health care system has fallen behind.
 
LoudBlunts

LoudBlunts

Well-Known Member
lol. while i've seen both sides of the fence, you guys have yet to even look at or even mention the cons

you just keep posting pro universal healthcare

so i guess ill get back to being militant against universal healthcare


  1. There isn't a single government agency or division that runs efficiently; do we really want an organization that developed the U.S. Tax Code handling something as complex as health care?
  2. "Free" health care isn't really free since we must pay for it with taxes; expenses for health care would have to be paid for with higher taxes or spending cuts in other areas such as defense, education, etc.
  3. Profit motives, competition, and individual ingenuity have always led to greater cost control and effectiveness.
  4. Government-controlled health care would lead to a decrease in patient flexibility.
  5. Patients aren't likely to curb their drug costs and doctor visits if health care is free; thus, total costs will be several times what they are now.
  6. Just because Americans are uninsured doesn't mean they can't receive health care; nonprofits and government-run hospitals provide services to those who don't have insurance, and it is illegal to refuse emergency medical service because of a lack of insurance.
  7. Government-mandated procedures will likely reduce doctor flexibility and lead to poor patient care.
  8. Healthy people who take care of themselves will have to pay for the burden of those who smoke, are obese, etc.
  9. A long, painful transition will have to take place involving lost insurance industry jobs, business closures, and new patient record creation. (could it be? even MORE economic disaster?)
  10. Loss of private practice options and possible reduced pay may dissuade many would-be doctors from pursuing the profession. (i mean really, what good is free health care when you dont even have a good amount of options....let alone any doctors to choose from. Oh wait...the very few doctors that are available are too busy with tons of other patients)
  11. Malpractice lawsuit costs, which are already sky-high, could further explode since universal care may expose the government to legal liability, and the possibility to sue someone with deep pockets usually invites more lawsuits.
  12. Government is more likely to pass additional restrictions or increase taxes on smoking, fast food, etc., leading to a further loss of personal freedoms.
  13. Patient confidentiality is likely to be compromised since centralized health information will likely be maintained by the government.
  14. Like social security, any government benefit eventually is taken as a "right" by the public, meaning that it's politically near impossible to remove or curtail it later on when costs get out of control.
 
tipsgnob

tipsgnob

New Member
LoudBlunts said:
lol. while i've seen both sides of the fence, you guys have yet to even look at or even mention the cons

you just keep posting pro universal healthcare

so i guess ill get back to being militant against universal healthcare


  1. There isn't a single government agency or division that runs efficiently; do we really want an organization that developed the U.S. Tax Code handling something as complex as health care?
  2. "Free" health care isn't really free since we must pay for it with taxes; expenses for health care would have to be paid for with higher taxes or spending cuts in other areas such as defense, education, etc.
  3. Profit motives, competition, and individual ingenuity have always led to greater cost control and effectiveness.
  4. Government-controlled health care would lead to a decrease in patient flexibility.
  5. Patients aren't likely to curb their drug costs and doctor visits if health care is free; thus, total costs will be several times what they are now.
  6. Just because Americans are uninsured doesn't mean they can't receive health care; nonprofits and government-run hospitals provide services to those who don't have insurance, and it is illegal to refuse emergency medical service because of a lack of insurance.
  7. Government-mandated procedures will likely reduce doctor flexibility and lead to poor patient care.
  8. Healthy people who take care of themselves will have to pay for the burden of those who smoke, are obese, etc.
  9. A long, painful transition will have to take place involving lost insurance industry jobs, business closures, and new patient record creation.
  10. Loss of private practice options and possible reduced pay may dissuade many would-be doctors from pursuing the profession.
  11. Malpractice lawsuit costs, which are already sky-high, could further explode since universal care may expose the government to legal liability, and the possibility to sue someone with deep pockets usually invites more lawsuits.
  12. Government is more likely to pass additional restrictions or increase taxes on smoking, fast food, etc., leading to a further loss of personal freedoms.
  13. Patient confidentiality is likely to be compromised since centralized health information will likely be maintained by the government.
  14. Like social security, any government benefit eventually is taken as a "right" by the public, meaning that it's politically near impossible to remove or curtail it later on when costs get out of control.
Click to expand...
Great Britain has had universal health care since 1945...
 
Twistyman

Twistyman

Well-Known Member
LB the tax issue is always thrown out there..yeah it bumps up our taxes..as I said a $20,000 a year salary may lose $10-20 per week because of it.. thats a maximum of $1040 per year... not the $12,000 your insurance cost..and speaking of ins.. ours goes to Gov. who finance the hospitals not the insurance(remember AIG) and HMO's who's CEO's make $20,000,000 bonuses all while chosing the cheapest drs for those with less insurance AND MAYBE YOU IF YOU GET sick...God forbid... ... I see the same Dr/. that a millionaire does..

I've sat beside Dick Irvin (famous hockey play by play guy) waiting to see my lung specialist.. My shoulder surgeon was Dr Couglin..he was the DR for the Montreal expo's... I'm not ushered off to some beggars area when I'm poor and sick... I'm not lower class because of bad breaks and health problems..
 
LoudBlunts

LoudBlunts

Well-Known Member
i can dig it


with all that said Twisty.... if you was president...how would Twisty set it up?


Strictly Universal Healthcare? Strictly Private Healthcare?

and/or a mixture of both?

in my humble opinion, i think it would be best to have a mixed system of universal and private (like in province Alberta)
 
misshestermoffitt

misshestermoffitt

New Member



  1. There isn't a single government agency or division that runs efficiently; do we really want an organization that developed the U.S. Tax Code handling something as complex as health care? The FDA being a government agency is already running health care, who is it that approves or denies the sale of medication?

2 "Free" health care isn't really free since we must pay for it with taxes; expenses for health care would have to be paid for with higher taxes or spending cuts in other areas such as defense, education, etc. currently in the US, health care is a FOR PROFIT business. Universal health care would stop price gouging for services.

3. Profit motives, competition, and individual ingenuity have always led to greater cost control and effectiveness. I disagree with this. Profit motives lead to hospitals defrauding patients as well as insurance companies with shady billing and billing most services as "out of network"

4 Government-controlled health care would lead to a decrease in patient flexibility. It would lead to more patient flexibility. Right now, unless you have the network health care of the one of 2 hospitals in this area to choose from, you can't afford to use them. One hospital won't treat a patient with the opposite insurance. I guess that's wrong, they'll treat them, but the cost is insane.

5 Patients aren't likely to curb their drug costs and doctor visits if health care is free; thus, total costs will be several times what they are now. I recently read a story about a couple who is selling everything they own on e-bay because their child has autisim and their insurance refuses to regonize autisim as a disease. It doesn't matter how many doctors say the child needs trreatment, the insurance won't pay. Should we be putting tax payers out of their homes because they have a sick child?

6 Just because Americans are uninsured doesn't mean they can't receive health care; nonprofits and government-run hospitals provide services to those who don't have insurance, and it is illegal to refuse emergency medical service because of a lack of insurance.Government run hospitals aren't everywhere, the closest one to me is 3 hours away. Imagine having some kind of accident and then having to drive for 3 hours to get help. Hospitals will treat you, and then they will harrass unmercifully for their payment, don't forget, if you don't have their particular insurance, all costs are doubled for being "out of network" Should we allow the bills of people to be doubled because they can't afford the "network" insurance ?

7 Government-mandated procedures will likely reduce doctor flexibility and lead to poor patient care This is the same reason as reason number 4. See number 4 for the answer.

8 Healthy people who take care of themselves will have to pay for the burden of those who smoke, are obese, etc. Right now as it stands, every person with health insurance is already paying for people who don't take care of themselves through higher premiums and higher deductables.

9A long, painful transition will have to take place involving lost insurance industry jobs, business closures, and new patient record creation. (could it be? even MORE economic disaster?) So the health insurance industry would lose a few jobs, big deal, serves them right for putting peoples benefits on hold while they "decide on coverage" when we all know they are waiting for the patient to die so they don't have to pay. Screw them, what comes around goes around. New patient record creation would be some new jobs, wouldn't it?

10 Loss of private practice options and possible reduced pay may dissuade many would-be doctors from pursuing the profession. (i mean really, what good is free health care when you dont even have a good amount of options....let alone any doctors to choose from. Oh wait...the very few doctors that are available are too busy with tons of other patients) I could have sworn thar doctors pledge an oath to treat anyone who needs care. I've never heard anything in that oath about major medical coverage. What a great way to weed out the "in it for the cash" people from the ones who truely are in it for the science and the opportunity to help others.



11 Malpractice lawsuit costs, which are already sky-high, could further explode since universal care may expose the government to legal liability, and the possibility to sue someone with deep pockets usually invites more lawsuits. Or it could go the other way. Doctors may actually be forced to pay attention to what they are doing.


12 Government is more likely to pass additional restrictions or increase taxes on smoking, fast food, etc., leading to a further loss of personal freedoms. Have you seen any of these things happen in other countries with universal health care?


13 Patient confidentiality is likely to be compromised since centralized health information will likely be maintained by the government. Patient confidentiality isn't any safer now. We're really reaching now aren't we?


14 Like social security, any government benefit eventually is taken as a "right" by the public, meaning that it's politically near impossible to remove or curtail it later on when costs get out of control. I refer back to the answer about families losing everything they own due to a sick child, or much worse, families having to actually quit their job because it's the only way to get any medical coverage for a sick child.


I would also like to point out to you that the government has been withholding "medicare tax" out of everyone's paycheck for the past 10 years. A person isn't eligible for medicare until they are what, like 65 years old? Right now people who have no and can't afford health insurance are paying for future health care. How many people who receive next to no medical care for their entire life are going to even still be alive at 65 to receive their benefits that they've paid for? Now there is the biggest scam ever for you. "Lets make them pay for health care for when they're old, but we'll make sure they have no health care until then, that way when they die, we can keep all those monies". *insert evil laugh here* :dunce:
 
darknemesis05

darknemesis05

Active Member
misshestermoffitt said:
Nope, Darknemesis, that is a fact. What Tips said is true, Canada does have universal health care and medical marijuana at the same time.

You can't take a fact and call it an opinion simply because you don't agree with it.
Click to expand...
i was stating that what i said was MY point of view but it was a misunderstood responce to Loudblunt:weed:
 
Twistyman

Twistyman

Well-Known Member
LoudBlunts said:
i can dig it


with all that said Twisty.... if you was president...how would Twisty set it up?


Strictly Universal Healthcare? Strictly Private Healthcare?

and/or a mixture of both?

in my humble opinion, i think it would be best to have a mixed system of universal and private (like in province Alberta)
Click to expand...
A good question LB... Id say that all the new up to date Drs must practice in the general realm 1st for X years.. buts as it is now here they can go private after... but its at their peril or success.. No gov. subsidy for lets say hospital space.. they,. as they do now here set up their own OR's clinics MRI Xray facilities etc... no tax payers money for them to get rich.. Here MRI's are where theres a need for more equipment and a lot of private clinics have opened, which opens space in hosp. setting for the less fortunate... so a lot will use public for treatment yet pay (if they can) for early MRI..that being said MRI's are done right away if life threatening.. ..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top