• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

General political chat

Tony Perkis

Well-Known Member
I challenge you to give an example of fake news on Fox. They are fairly diligent in basing their coverage on actual verifiable news and sources. They make far lest mistakes than most networks because they know the scrutiny of them is wide spread and vicious. When you make those statements it shows how uninformed you really are.

Stamps just gave an example of Yahoo fake news and it happens on a daily basis but I doubt you would know the difference.
That was easy.

https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/fox/
 

Tony Perkis

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
Trump has a great deal of stature and respect around the world. He knows about building relations while still putting America and its citizens first. It is sad to see people like you believe everything the liberal press here and around the world feed you about Trump.


http://www.pewglobal.org/2018/10/01/trumps-international-ratings-remain-low-especially-among-key-allies/

Trump’s International Ratings Remain Low, Especially Among Key Allies
 

Tony Perkis

Well-Known Member
Politifact? You aren't serious aren't you? No one but the far left believe or even use politifact. I should have known that is where you would go to paste and copy.
Yes. I don’t wait for Fox News to tell me how I should think, sheep.

I trust Politifact far greater than I trust any “news” organization that edits out things to make the their golden/orange boy look better.

https://www.salon.com/2018/09/26/fox-news-edits-out-laughing-in-clips-of-trumps-speech-to-the-united-nations_partner/
 

EricsBiscuit

Well-Known Member
Innovation in what? Better ways to deny coverage and cover less services so the insurance company makes more money and people get crappier health care?

What is immoral is that they are incentivized by profit to make sure people get as little care as possible. The less they cover, the more money they make. The more they deny, the more money they make. The harder they make it to obtain payment for care, the more money they make.
im talking about doctors and corporations who design and manufacture stuff to do with health like medicine. Insurance is supposed to be only for catastrophic stuff, like cancer. Not for regular check ups and such.
It was just poor wording, it was not meant to mean you specifically.



Let's not pretend the right does not play their own brand of identity politics. Even Sharpiro admitted as much.



I am not making guarantees but in the end [justly or not] the D's will put up a viable candidate. Castro is a name I think could come into play in the near future. Maybe not 2020 as he is young, but perhaps in years to come.



Why an amendment to ban money in politics does not get immediate bipartisan support is beyond me. Kavanaugh is on record supporting Citizens United ruling and then cried like a ----- about liberal dark money used against him [same with Sen. Collins]. You can't make this crap up.



I just come here to see a divided country. And without sounding snippy, there are plenty of people here who don't wish be anything but divided.



Yep. My biggest complaint with the ACA was it was just a giveaway to these healthcare companies [read: the real death panels that have always been around- the anti-ACA campaign "death panel" thing of the conservatives was the stupidest talking point ever if you've ever had a real experience with insurance companies but I digress]. And the proof was their stock surges after the bill's signing.



You are too binary with this. Even our beloved Dr. Peterson [who admittedly by and large opposes legislating discrimination of out society] agreed that the free market wasn't doing too much or moving quick enough during our dark days and during the civil rights movement. Its the same with environmental protections. You can say that the market will recognize a company that is a poor steward of the environment and then we the consumers will drive them out of business and in a vacuum you are 100% correct but that's not before my kids come out with 3 eyes and flippers from them poisoning the water. We need rules. This isn't thunderdome for the sake of the almighty dollar. And having that position does not make someone a socialist. There are just certain things we don't look for better deals on...like parachutes or fire extinguishers. It is not in Aetna's best interest to pay for someone's cancer treatment.



Actually, this would be the coolest thing ever if she was like atomic blonde or red sparrow or something. I'm on board.



Well, I am sending you my medical bill because you being reasonable just made me fall and hit my head.
I agree we need regulation where the risks of producing a good or service doesn't reach the entrepreneur, like with the environment. I agree with the EPA existing. Most libertarians admit that laws and some regulation is necessary for a free market to operate. Where I start to draw the line is when a gov agency starts to say how to reach certain targets and not what targets to reach. So, the agency should say what targets they want and leave it to the companies to figure out the best way to reach that target, whatever it may be.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
Politifact? You aren't serious aren't you? No one but the far left believe or even use politifact. I should have known that is where you would go to paste and copy.
None of it is serious. It’s a joke. Movie references- mostly cartoons or comics, constant quick google searches, unable to use own thoughts and words..

This a large part of the issues today. People do not have a wish to understand. Life is like a video game, pure fantasy.
 

Angel Ariel

Well-Known Member
This is one of those places where ideologically I couldn't disagree more with you.

If you knew anything about how the medical industry works, you would know that they do the opposite of "coordinate resources in the most effective manner".

The profit in medicine is made by insurance companies who don't "innovate" anything other than new ways to deny coverage.

I worked in a major regional hospital and you know what - less than 1/2 of the people who worked for the hospital had anything to do with patient care whatsoever. The rest all work in billing, insurance, and other things that have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with health care. The amount of waste is unbelievable.

But even if you don't care about any of that, how inefficient it all is, to me - it is a moral issue. Making profit off of sick people is a bad thing.
It boils down to in most industrialized nations, if you get cancer - your first thought is, "what do I do to get better". In the United States, this supposedly glorious place, the first thought for way too many is "How am I going to pay for this? What if I lose my house?"




I'd rather have the government involved than for-profit insurance companies, who's priority is making more money by providing as little health care as possible. It's sick.
Thank you for this - especially the bold. We may not agree on everything, but on all of this we agree. Most of my family works in the medical profession as well, and feels very similarly to you.
 
Top Bottom