Tormund Ukrainesbane Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Hey Californians the Governator does not want you to watch his movies on your big screen TVBig screen plasma televisions are to be banned in California because they use too much energy. In a world first, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has given his backing to the crackdown on sets more than 40 inches wide. These liquid crystal display and plasma high definition sets can use as much as three times the power of smaller cathode ray models.Geez. Intrusive government much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Iceman of the North Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Yeah, obviously a ban is over the top. What he ought to do is just have an annual $500 tax on these TV sets. This might even help with the budget situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Iceman,Then give the money to PBS and NPR so we don't have to listen to pledge drives. That's how the BBC is funded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormund Ukrainesbane Posted October 16, 2009 Author Share Posted October 16, 2009 Yeah, obviously a ban is over the top. What he ought to do is just have an annual $500 tax on these TV sets. This might even help with the budget situation.The fact that this seems like a reasonable compromise to someone baffles my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinDonner Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 The fact that this seems like a reasonable compromise to someone baffles my mind.I think you might want to reset your irony detector. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stupidguy Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Good idea. ALL TV should be banned. What good does it do for society? THink about all the good that people cold be doing if we didn't have these idiot boxes wasting time and making our brains into mush.THere's a reason China and Europe are far superior to the UNited States. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormund Ukrainesbane Posted October 16, 2009 Author Share Posted October 16, 2009 THere's a reason China and Europe are far superior to the UNited States.Care to advise us what that is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 stupidguy,Good idea. ALL TV should be banned. What good does it do for society? THink about all the good that people cold be doing if we didn't have these idiot boxes wasting time and making our brains into mush.THere's a reason China and Europe are far superior to the UNited States.Then the Government should ban computers. How much power is wasted on them and the moniters we are looking at right now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stupidguy Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Good point. I shall reevaluate my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbigski Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Because nothing like that would ever happen here in the US, with profit-driven fatcats behind every health care decision! Sorry, your single point of data fails in comparison to Shryke's story about a company that suspended operations in an entire state to avoid insuring one man.I'd rather live with a system where there are multiple providers such that they have to keep most of their customers no more unhappy than their competitors do, then one where the single provider just needs to keep 50% of voters happy. Which is going to provide better service to the most people over the long run?Show me a single point of data in the US showing that things are so bad that the doctors (Hippocratic oath be damned!) are conspiring to kill off their patients without consent purely due to financial constraints and you might have a more salient point.I expect more out of my Rypp Gorgeous.Didn't realize you were such a long time fan of mine! In fact, as at best the second most popular 6'5" atheist Republican on the board, I was starting to think I didn't have any fans at all.What? If anything, this is an illustration of why we should give public healthcare more funding, not why we should get rid of it. The main complaints against the NHS are a direct result of privatising and cost-cutting, it has nothing to do with the fact it's publically run.Personally, most of the time I'm going to prefer empowering individual choice rather than throwing more money at a bureaucracy. We're just going to disagree on this one, it seems.It's going to be really fun when the decisions about who gets healthcare start to get based on political outlooks. Like Glenn Reynolds said this morning "Just remember — if football is so thoroughly politicized under this gang, why expect that liver transplants will be different?" More choice, less command economy, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Irving Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 okay thats total bullshit. Although personally I could never really see whats the point of a big screen tv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stupidguy Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Care to advise us what that is?Education and athleticism. The only 2 things that matter. Americans (actually white americans) are lazy as hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alguien Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 I'd rather live with a system where there are multiple providers such that they have to keep most of their customers no more unhappy than their competitors do, then one where the single provider just needs to keep 50% of voters happy. Which is going to provide better service to the most people over the long run?Did you just say that you'd rather be screwed by multiple parties than by one person? :) In any event, your "single provider" comparison is bullshit because that's not what happening here.Show me a single point of data in the US showing that things are so bad that the doctors (Hippocratic oath be damned!) are conspiring to kill off their patients without consent purely due to financial constraints and you might have a more salient point.How about the article that Shryke JUST LINKED TO in the last thread where an insurance company cut off funding for a WHOLE STATE rather than pay a single person's health bills. Whole state > single person. It's going to be really fun when the decisions about who gets healthcare start to get based on political outlooks.As opposed to decisions on who gets healthcare because its more profitable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stupidguy Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 All I can say abput healthcare is that all the doctors I know are against a single payer system. Does anyone know why that would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereward Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Because a single payer would have much more power over the control of costs, meaning doctors wouldn't be able to charge for unnecessary procedures and tests, and would be in a weaker position to negotiate the charges for the drugs and test they do do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormund Ukrainesbane Posted October 16, 2009 Author Share Posted October 16, 2009 Education and athleticism. The only 2 things that matter. Americans (actually white americans) are lazy as hell.Well, what with some of the most prestigious universities in the world being located here, being on the cutting edge of research and technology, I'd say we're doing ok in education. I think we could be doing way better, but I think the propaganda that the rest of the world is a gazillion times smarter than us is just that. We don't do too bad in the Olympics either. Also, you won't find a lot of room for racism on this board, so you might want to think over statements like that in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stupidguy Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 There could be many reasons but whichever doctors you know are not representative of the whole. A recent survey had a majority for reform and a pretty high % even for single-payer. One reason that they would like single-payer is that it takes out a lot of administrative complications in dealing with a bunch of insurers. But they are probably worried that they'll be paid less in a single-payer system. mcbigski - Every health system is flawed and every one has its horror stories. I assure that everyone on the outside looking in at the US and its horror stories feel better about their own system.Where were the doctors from. I'll bet alot of the views stem from where they live and what they see in practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stupidguy Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Because a single payer would have much more power over the control of costs, meaning doctors wouldn't be able to charge for unnecessary procedures and tests, and would be in a weaker position to negotiate the charges for the drugs and test they do do.Doctors are only interested in helping patients. Those tests are not really unnecessary. My aunt is a doctor and she's all about (ONLY about) the patient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annelise Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Lindsay Graham.. the new maverick?Sen. Lindsey Graham, a longtime friend and ally of Sen. John McCain, is now going a step further, Democrats say, and actually becoming the new McCain.Senior members of the majority party say the South Carolina Republican has displaced his Arizona mentor as the dealmaker on two big agenda items of the Obama administration: climate change and immigration.As McCain, on the heels of his presidential election defeat, has distanced himself from Democrats, Graham has moved in to fill the vacuum.And Graham’s decision to pick up the mantle of the maverick has been noticed and not always appreciated by conservative Republicans. Hecklers at a town hall meeting in Greenville, S.C., on Monday night accused their senator of abandoning conservative principles, to which he replied that he loved the GOP too much to let it become “the party of angry white guys.â€Sen. John Kerry (Mass.), one of the chief Democratic sponsors of climate change legislation, has invited Graham to be his principal Republican partner on the issue.Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), vice chairman of the Senate Democratic Conference, is in talks with Graham about teaming up to pass major immigration reform.“I’m trying to use my time up here to solve problems,†Graham told The Hill. “The Republican Party needs to be seen as a center-right party that will solve hard problems.“We have an energy independence problem and I think the planet’s got a [climate] problem. So I’d like to be a Republican who can bring good business practices to solving this problem.“If the administration wants to embrace immigration reform, I will try to be helpful.â€[...]Graham appears to have grown tired of critics of the type who disrupted congressional town hall meetings this summer and who reject bipartisanship.At a town hall meeting in Greenville on Monday, Graham told constituents who waved anti-government signs and jeered in protest of his climate stance to “chill out.â€http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/63405-g...-into-his-shoes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormund Ukrainesbane Posted October 16, 2009 Author Share Posted October 16, 2009 It's too easy. Anyone else wanna have a go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.