| Home | Community | Message Board |
|
You are not signed in. Sign In New Account | Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery » |
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
| |||||||
 Phred Fred's son   Registered: 10/19/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 11 years, 9 months |
| ||||||
Auto-SummaryThe post argues against socialist ideology by emphasizing the importance of individual effort and freedom in human existence. It highlights the contradiction in socialism's demand for collective support while opposing personal responsibility. The author uses examples such as the existence of pedophiles and the need for productive effort to illustrate these points. The post also criticizes socialism's disregard for reality and its tendency to prioritize semantics over substance, using examples like climate change and the generosity of Americans to support its arguments.
And again you demonstrate conclusively to the audience that it is you who don't get it. That difference - the difference between choosing to do something and being forced to do something - is the core of the entire debate. It is not an "argument", it is pointing out reality.
Socialists use words differently than do people who recognize and respect freedom. As I have already pointed out, to you "solidarity" is meek submission to those in power.
There are no pedophiles in the Netherlands? That's certainly not what my Dutch acquaintances tell me.
Try to stay on track, bro.
I bolded it because Socialists always dodge it. You did, too.
Of course you don't. That's why you are a socialist. Nonetheless, the "premise" is factual: human existence requires productive human effort. That is more than a premise, it is an immutable law of nature.
I don't need you to pay taxes. I just need you to keep your hands out of my pockets.
Proof of what? That human existence is completely dependent on productive human effort? That is self evident. Readily observable. Easily testable. You want to test it for yourself? March out into the middle of the Siberian tundra, strip naked, lie on your back, and stop expending effort.
And this is why no rational person takes socialism seriously. Socialists can't refute reality, so they instead nitpick semantics and figures of speech, then pretend they have scored some great victory. Don't like the quotation marks? Fine. Let me rephrase: a person who understands the importance of freedom realizes that her existence should be supported by her own effort. A socialist claims his existence should be supported by someone else's effort.
I have made no "arguments" here. I have merely reminded you of an obvious piece of data - human existence is completely dependent on productive human effort. You knew that already. You just refuse to think through the ramifications of that essential, fundamental truth.
And again we see the standard socialist inversion of reality. Socialism depends utterly on domination. It is free market society that rejects domination. Transactions occur with the consent of both parties or they don't occur at all. In socialism, transactions occur (and - more importantly - don't occur) at the whim of a government which wields force to back up its diktats.
And again the total disconnect of the socialist from actual fact. It is no secret that the worst environmental excesses take place in the most socialist of societies. The ex-USSR, Red China, The Communist Bloc of Europe, etc.
Why do you have poor people? I thought your government took care of them.
LOL! Of course you have to disregard the generosity of Americans - because it shows your socialist claptrap to be the nonsense it really is. Every study ever done on the subject by every researcher who ever bothered to look into it shows the same thing: Americans by far outstrip their European counterparts in volunteering their time and their money to those less fortunate than themselves. It isn't even close.
Not more noble. More free and more prosperous.
See... again you seem incapable of even grasping what you discuss. The majority of Americans want to keep magic mushrooms illegal, too. Does that mean the people being thrown in prison in America for growing mushrooms are not being imprisoned against their will? Is that your test for what is right? That something is fashionable enough at the moment to get a majority of people who can be bothered to vote for it to actually bother to do so? No wonder you see nothing wrong with socialism. Phred -------------------- 
| |||||||
|
zappaisgod horrid asshole   Registered: 02/11/04 Posts: 81,741 Loc: Fractallife's gy Last seen: 10 years, 5 months |
| ||||||
I don't know about your countrymen but the Americans who vote for more government handouts aren't the ones who have to pay for it. "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy." I don't care if you are useful to society. I don't give two shits about whether I'm useful to society. I care about whether society is useful to me. You can be as useless as you wish. You can also starve in the cold if you refuse to work. I choose to be useful to myself and my own. The rest of you can go fuck yourselves. I don't much care for bums anyway. -------------------- 
| |||||||
|
imachavel I loved and lost but I loved-ftw   Registered: 06/06/07 Posts: 33,259 Loc: You get banned for saying that 
Last seen: 12 hours, 14 minutes |
| ||||||
|
Wow my post looks more cruel then Zappas, thats unusual. I must have gone too far. I guess it was when I was called selfish. The fact is, there is nothing generous about a plan that adds a bill to an already bankrupt nation. I dont see how "the possibility of health care" is more important then food and a roof over someones head. Generousity is not enabling, its empowering. I guess you dont have therapists in socialist countries? You point out this issue of a lady who had cancer and suddenly couldnt pay her 4 kids and mortgage. A condom is like $2 or $3. Why is someone who cant pay their health care having kids? Not paying your kids health care isnt cruel?
How is health itself not free? Why arent hospitals non profit, paid for by federal donations? Why is health something you or I or anyone has to pay for? And you question my heart of hearts. You pay for others health because the government forces you to. Youd honestly are saying if your government didnt stipulate, that youd just pay for someone elses health care? Btw heart of hearts is mis quoted shakespeare. Its, whats in the core of your heart? The heart of your heart? --------------------  I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties!
 I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
| |||||||
 Vaipen Psychonaut Registered: 01/15/12 Posts: 782 Loc: Europe |
| ||||||
After two decades of debate in various groups with americans I have found that this is your fall back position when arguments fail. 'If it weren't for us, you'd be speaking German'. Or words to that effect. As if america, particularly New York wasn't infatuated with the Nazi's who attended parties and were well liked and if not america wasn't interested in war with Germany untill Germany attacked america and only then did america wake up. Sorry man, you are hereby disqualified from this exchange. Edit: actually, I am gonna stop here with this discussion. I see so many bad practices here. I am being quoted but my quote gets changed with "blah blah blah". That is not a quote. That is distortion and falsifying of what I said. If you cannot even keep a discussion tidy, what use is it? Besides that, continuing is the point where I get banned, not you guys. This is an american board. This is a collision of ideologies. People go to war based on ideologies. I do not want a war on shroomery. I stated some of my ideas. You stated some of yours. I am NOT a socialist, though I do have some socialist tendencies and some appreciation for that ideology, likewise, I also have some appreciation for the freedom mindedness of many americans. So I will leave at this because it gets too personal and I want to live a live in pursuits other than mouth fighting over ideologies I do not feel much for anymore anyway because both are lame and help destroy our world. Edited by Vaipen (12/25/12 06:21 PM)
| |||||||
|
imachavel I loved and lost but I loved-ftw Registered: 06/06/07 Posts: 33,259 Loc: You get banned for saying that
Last seen: 12 hours, 14 minutes |
| ||||||
Auto-SummaryThe author argues against socialism, using examples from the United States to illustrate its strengths. They mention the elimination of poverty, a strong middle class, and various social services like welfare, medicaid, and social security. The author believes that taxing the rich more and providing shelter and medical care leads to a more prosperous society. They criticize the socialist approach of high taxation, limited freedom of speech, and lack of a true middle class. The author also criticizes the idea of a government providing welfare and believes that a free market is more effective. They end by expressing their disagreement with socialist ideologies, stating that they have never been "fair" and that they can't work. First of all, I'm not disqualified from shit. And to be honest, no one here is going to ban you. I've been very careful and listened to you, even quoting Shakespeare with your "heart of hearts" If you don't even live in a socialist country, why the fuck are you arguing? I've seen no proof aside from medicare that socialism is better then the United States. The United States largest mistake was letting gay cock George Washington get into congress and become president nominated by the same shit fuckers that decided this country would be a democratic Republic instead of just a straight democracy. We STILL have the best system, even if it's only by default. In a socialistic society there isn't really poor, middle class, upper middle class, and rich. There is only middle class, and rich, and the middle class there looks like our poor except without the drugs, crime, violence, and highly crowded neighbourhoods. I'm pretty sure I've heard stories of socialism A guy comes back after a long days work, walks into a nice brick house, and inside has one bed and one couch and can't buy a t.v. or furniture. The rich are taxed 60% instead of 35% like in the U.S. there is no real true "freedom of speech" like there is here, unless you are a news agency. It's basically what America copied, and decided to be more lenient with, if socialism is a better choice then communism, then democracy or what we have here is a better choice then socialism. What you have, is no real solid middle class, but you've eliminated poverty, wow good for you. You've achieved this by taxing the rich more then half their income, and giving people shelter and medical care, and to be honest the lower class is taxed pretty high also. In America there are two reasons for peoples mistakes, one is Wall Street, and the other is lazy selfish criminals. Think not? Why don't you come to the U.S. and see what poverty looks like when you don't live in a big city? It basically doesn't exist. In smaller towns and less populated states, the poor people are real losers that never took the opportunity to try and succeed. At the same time, in the big cities, we have similar functions, we have welfare, poverty based medicaid, social security for the elderly, we have homeless shelters, hospitals you can go into without any money, as long as you have a social security number, they may bill you, but they can't refuse treatment. We have police, fire fighters, roads, bridges, libraries. So different then socialism? How so? Yet in socialist countries, the argument is always the same, bitch at the U.S. then ask them for everything. Ask to put your money in our banks, ask for military support, ask for American t shirts, and movies, and magazines. Mean while, we ask for stuff from you also, cars, trade agreements, but even the racist red necks here couldn't care less if you are Italian or French or German as long as they can drive a nice car. How in reality, is your system better then ours, simply because you have medical care? How am I 'disqualified' from your argument because I told you the truth? Every failing grace we've ever had was inherited from Europe, murder, disease, slavery, taxes, social laws that prohibit freedom and fairness. And just about every winning quality of our society was something we invented to differentiate ourselves from you? Then when you can no longer offer facts as to why socialist government is better then ours, aside from health care, you decide someone is going to get banned, and say you will no longer continue arguing. Sorry you got a reply from the biggest right pro Republican here, Zappa. He bitches about government regulation, but then cries and moans when people criticize Wall Street, funny considering that lobbyists tend to be almost directly from Wall Street 99% of the time, and are the first ones to go straight to congress with policies and regulations they'd like put into power so they can make money more easily from the public like the stock trade was just another bank account. But there are many honest well spoken members, like Johnm214, that may say differently about your approach to health care, without using insults. But you won't hear them out, you are sold that the citizens of our country represent the people that love and promote our politicians, and that we don't have a good voice and strong reason to oppose Obama care. It's simply this, a government doesn't become fair and heartfelt by giving to charity in the form of welfare, and doing it by robbing from hard honest working folk. I'm not against health care policies for the public, I'm against federal regulation. Perhaps if you read deeper into this argument, you'd realize that if state wide health care plans were run the way they are in Massachusetts, they might work. This plan was proposed in one of our worst national crisis that's ever hit this nation. We CAN'T afford it. There isn't enough money to pay for social security and welfare for jobless. When the jobs come back, and the budget is balanced, THEN if they want to re instate health care, they can. I don't believe taxing the shit out of people to give people a welfare system, is going to solve our problems. Most of the money doesn't end up fixing the problems, but goes into politicians pockets. The same can be said of a socialist government. The difference is, here we tax less, and have lower spending bills, and you call it heartless. I call it manageable. Lot's of people here in the U.S. are able to work and survive on their own. Because they work hard and reap the rewards. It's called the free market, and tying regulation to the idea of the free market should disqualify you from the argument right there. Regulation is a symptom of plutonomy,not democracy. Haven't you heard? The idea of a government taking everything from the people to provide welfare to me sounds a lot like communism. Perhaps a more successful version of communism. The welfare in your country must be outstanding. I'll give you that. It also promotes laziness and doesn't give anyone the motivation to actually work hard for themselves. So in your heart of hearts, you are excellent at enabling. You are very generous and giving, but don't understand the concept of: give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a life time - Lao Tzu I love the IDEOLOGY behind communism, a money less society, where all benefit. The fact is, it always turns out to be total bullshit. It's never 'fair.' Fair would represent that there is TRULY no class, no poor, only rich. All work hard, and everyone prospers, everything is shared evenly. And the government works non profit, based on donations. All work, and all are rewarded, everyone would have a mansion, and a yacht, and a swimming pool. And guess what buddy, it aint never gonna happen -------------------- I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties!
I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
| |||||||
|
Vaipen Psychonaut Registered: 01/15/12 Posts: 782 Loc: Europe |
| ||||||
Auto-SummaryThe discussion was dominated by heated arguments and assumptions, particularly regarding socialism. The author explains their participation in the debate to correct misconceptions about socialism, emphasizing the importance of balance between protecting the needs of the many and the few. They discuss the polder model, which involves consensus-based decision-making, and the limitations of this model in the real world. The author also criticizes the internet's perceived lack of free speech and the tendency to ban users who disagree with dominant viewpoints. They touch on issues like taxation, disability support, and the personal budget system (PGB) for disabled individuals. The author concludes by expressing a desire to move beyond the current ideological debates and focus on finding new ways to coexist and value different perspectives. The discussion for me was over the minute I realized that it is the same discussion following the same progression through the same 'usual suspect' arguments. It was over when within a span of what...6, 7 posts I read the world pedophilia, Hitler, Nazi's and the idea of 'if it weren't for us you'd be speaking German'. People reveal a lot about themselves when they showed their cards that way. Arguments seem just smoke screen for the feeling america is always right. I explained already why I participated. It is because I saw it necessary to correct some of the ideas and assumptions you seem to have about socialism. Since I do live in a socialist state I felt it necessary to point some of them out so the debate would not follow the wrong course so to say. Your post is filled with assumptions or views that are just not so black and white as you seem to state. E.g. the taxation of the richer class is not something making them all mad at society. I recall from a few years ago that some of the richer people in a city said that they didn't mind being taxed a lot but that they disliked the idea of banning huge SUV's from the city because of various reasons, small streets, lots of bicycles, little parking space and high emissions. They felt they had the right to go there in whatever car they chose, feeling they were entitled because they paid high taxes. Kind of ambivalent isn't it? - Can't buy a tv you say. We had a small riot here about municipal governments having a special fund for a subsidy for tv's for poor people. The reasoning was that if you want these people to work, they should know what is going on in society, to be up-to-date on current affairs. From that line of thinking a tv will help someone not to be so isolated and be able to hold his ground in job interviews etc. Some said this was ridiculous. But likewise poor classes can get subsidy when their washing machine breaks down. That is nasty when you have a kid or two. The idea behind is is that these kids need to grow up among their peers and not be bullied or teased or disrespected by classmates for being poor. Hygiene is also important to avoid infections and disease in schools. So to subsidize a new washing machine, which is considered a sort of basic thing to own, a minimum requirement for life in our society, the balance tips toward this subsidy for the good of public health. I think this is one way of protecting the needs of the many and at the same time defend the needs of the few. - There is freedom of speech. Citizens can get signatures under a proposal to put something on the agenda of parliament, so it becomes discussed. Some rules apply, minimum amount of si8gnatures, once the proposal has been debated it cannot be put back on the agenda for a few years. The polder model provides a framework for around the table talks between all parties involved in decision making. E.g. they want to build a road, so municipal government talks to people who live nearby, what the effects will be on their lives, the value of their property, environmental groups are getting their say, lobby groups who oppose the whole idea. In fact, at some point people had so much say in planning, that the process stalled sometimes for 40 years! They now want to limit how much procedures can be (mis) used to stall projects. You cannot really claim we don't have any influence. I hope you know what the polder model is? "The polder model is a term with uncertain origin that was first used to describe the acclaimed Dutch version of consensus-based economic and social policy making, specifically in the 1980s and 1990s.[citation needed] The term quickly took on a wider meaning, to denote similar cases of consensus decision-making in the Dutch fashion. It is described with phrases like "a pragmatic recognition of pluriformity" and "cooperation despite differences". Source: Wiki - the real losers... I dislike sweeping statements. I know many homeless people have a mental disorder. Not all can easily cut it in society. We should be judged by the poorest among us. McKenna said we are lead by the least among us. I tend to agree. - We don't ask the us for anything. We are allies through NATO and through trade agreements and called friends when we support american stances in the Grand Chessboard. We never ask the us to fight wars. That is all american initiative. It is inf act usually the pressure from the usa through NATO that asks us to support american efforts, such as in Iraq and Afghanistan, that we as a nation of 16,5 million with our own delusions of grandeur try to fulfill. 16.5 million is what, great LA or something. Yet we do proportionally quite a lot on the international war-stage. With the current crises, that is over. Our defense forces are economised to a skeleton crew. Militarism is a vote thing in the usa. I know from discussion when the choice was Clinto or Bush that many told me no Clinto because he would economize on the army. And often they were in the army, or their husbands were. - bitch at the usa. Well, please read Mark Hertsgaard's book 'The Eagles Shadow. http://markhertsgaard.com/the-ea - "I told you the truth". Well, that is the point isn't it? - Who gets banned, this is not something you can control. I been in that position before. I know how it works. Discussion is acceptable to a point and then the paradigm of the irritated mod or his ideology decides who gets to go. And it is always the guy who 'just refuses to get it' and 'denies the so VERY obvious TRUTH'. That is never the american, it is the socialist foreigner. Think about the burning of Indigo Girls cd's after 11-9. Disagreement is fine because it creates the idea there is free speech. But if you insist in being 'anti-american' against 'logical truth' then you are considered a troll or worse. After all, in the end, the internet isn't so free, after all, it is an american discussion board and the server could be someplace in the usa, besides that, I been told, 'we gave the world internet', we get the last say in a discussion. Think this is paranoia? I have no qualms about thinking this board would do better. In the end your position is no longer maintainable because it causes problems between members and that being the case, without any further ado: 'You cannot login because you have been banned'. Trying to find an email of an admin is impossible because everything is shielded behind the ban-wall. And I gave 7 days of going between anger, disappointment, hurt and literal, sleepless nights. Welcome to the internet. - laziness: been abandoned here. We are now in a situation where the government is very on your ass about employment. There is no more freeloading here. The trend is, you work or follow an education to help you get work. When you get fired, the duration of I always forget what you call it, the money you get for being without work, is limited and shortened. Professors and doctors sweet streets. It is now easier to fire people. There are limits on how long you may do to finish your education. In some cases, people who are known to have little chance to get work, like ex-criminals, ex-drug addicts or ex-homneless people are forced to pluck asparagus from the land or sweet streets without pay as to give them routine and work experience so they can flow into a paid job one day. Human slavery with a righteous moral attitude. Blackmail and coercion: if thjeyr efuse to be 'helped' by such programs, they lose their income and basically become homeless. There used to be a debate on the issue of there being too many disabled people. The emphasis was changed from what you cannot do to what you still can do, very american I suppose. People who were in a wheelchair could still be typing on a keyboard so they couls find work, if not, reschooling had to be done so they had a chance. There is no one is disabled income who doesn't belong there. So laziness isn't promoted anymore by socialism. The costs are too high and we pay for that with modern slavery. I dislike this part of socialism very much. In the meantime we have the PGB. It is a personal bound budget people get to buy the care they need because they know best what they need. These budgets are lowered and checked more and more on possible fraud. E.g. these can be budgets granted to Kanner autists, who sit in a wheelchair drooling on their shoulder who can pay for a cab to be taken to an activity centre, pay for a daycare solution so they get something of joy out of the day and be taken back. We as a society want these disabled people to have some basic joy in life and avoid a dismal existence staring out of the window all day with no hope of ever leaving the house. Budgets are being cut. I'd rather pay more taxes so these poor bastards can have something of a life. I do not want to be responsible for a government that gives em the middle finger. Yes I agree that it is the parents job to take care. But they already work, pay taxes and cannot be in good faith asked to do more. These people suffer as well, cvan never afford a vacation, and live their life in relation to their kids disability. In manyc ases, if a child or disabled person cannot be taken to a daycare facility, the parents have to stop working and stop pay taxes because the care can be so demanding. How is that self reliance helping society in that case? What does responsibility mean in that case? It becomes a moot point. Society is better off spending some collective funds on these poor bastards and their families. There grows a very complex system of checks and balances. Totoal income for the state and how much is going out of the treasure chest. Thinsg start toi affect each other. You get a subsidy for just about anything, but also get taxes left and right on the craziest things. Bureaucracy results. In crisis. government becomes smaller. Thimgs get so mutually dependent, that economizing will cost more than it actually economizes. That is why I think life as we know it is unsustainable. I'll grant you much critique on socialism, but use the right arguments, like I just gave you. - Lao Tzu is not appropriate here because that seems to be more about education. And our education systems are very good. Although we seem to have dropped a little. It seems we suffer from the same thing you do, ongoing political reforms in the education system. Driving teachers mad, they become managers more than teachers. At least we could keep out the no child left behind system so far, but even here there is talk about it. All these bad ideas seem to come never from Kazachstan or Ethiopia. All this discussion makes me tired and tainted. I tend to long more and more towards primitivism. Let's just put on a bear skin and use shrooms and do orgies and pretend its 50.000 BC. http://www.primitivism.com/ All this shite about socialism, liberalism and whatever you wanna call these increasingly distorted and merging ideologies they are all failures. Maybe it is too hard for both of us to understand each other because we both been so indoctrinated by the virtues of our own society and the bad or disinformation about the other. Therefore, if a group of men would drag me out in the street, made me kneel down on the pavement, surrounding me, my left ankle on my right, my hands tied behind my back, my head tilted forward, a gun in my neck with a man asking me to declare once and for all what I would choose, either socialism or american liberalism and the wrong answer resulting in a neck shot, not knowing what the 'right' answer would be, being forced to choose no other than these two options, I'd have to declare myself a socialist. Not by heartfelt support for it but because of indoctrination into it, because it is the only thing I deeply experienced from birth. Isn't that sad. My repulsion of all these western ideologies has been slowly building up by the mushroom. And STILL I care enough to respond again to your post to point out some things I think you may not be getting. And in doing so I realize and have to look in to the mirror, that I do not or are just not able to get the finesse of what you are saying. And this divides us to the point beyond irritation - and I feel sad, that even despite my changing paradigms I still have the legacy, this burden or knee-jerk reaction to defend values that I no longer completely share. I like some of them, but less than before. On some issues I turned around. E.g. on the whole gun issue I am not so adamant anymore. That is, the right to own a gun seems a sound idea, but this notion in me comes from the fact I see how my socialist society turns slowly towards socialist dictatorship. In such a predicament, violence is the last righteous option of the oppressed. Then zzrip came and turned me back into the mode that violence is just playing the game of the puppeteers behind the scene, who have no ideology and no morality and like you to be lost in ideology, to make you fight another while they remain in power. Socialism, communism, libertarianism, it is all the same dominator crap. All this discussion depresses me and I dislike how I keep doing it regardless. It has to stop, we have to transcend this useless debate and rather discuss on how to find new ways to be in the world and what values and norms are to go for.
| |||||||
|
imachavel I loved and lost but I loved-ftw Registered: 06/06/07 Posts: 33,259 Loc: You get banned for saying that
Last seen: 12 hours, 14 minutes |
| ||||||
|
well how do we discuss on how to find new ways to be in the world and what values and norms are to go for? I have no more control over the misplaced values of what happens in my country then you do of what happens in your country. My question is, if the socialist model works so well, why do you not live in a socialist country?
I think the idea is, behind your model, is a very well supported frame work. Behind our model, is a very well supported frame work. But grey lines on our declarations of "peoples policies" or whatever you call them make it possible for absolute power to corrupt absolutely. One thing I dis like a lot about socialist countries are the crowded conditions. People claim things run much smoother and although things are expensive people can afford them. We have a city that in some ways mirrors a European city. It's called San Francisco. Do the laws and policies represent a socialist model? I doubt it. One thing is for certain, the minimum wage is over $9 an hour, and truthfully aside from quite a few bums and vagrants hobbling around all over, it's a pretty clean city. The city metro is super fast. The crowded conditions seem to make any business a success, I had to stand out side in a line to just get in to Burger King. But this was something else I dis liked, expensive living conditions, and yet crowded areas. Does it represent a better model then most other American cities? In some ways yes, in some ways definitely no. I would say you are saying something right. Usually when people denounce capitalism, Zappaisgod comes in and stomps all over people explaining how wrong they are. One thing though, I love about the U.S. is the amount of freedom people have to express themselves. I don't know if other countries have less people who invest in the media, or what the deal is. But as far as entertainment and freedom go, the U.S. really has QUITE a bit of it in terms of music and art, and expression, that I've never seen really matched in any other country. Perhaps this is just a trend, a market you could say, that people invest in more here, then anywhere else. It very much could just be that. I've always found though, that most people that come to this country tend to go on quite a bit about the freedoms we have here, and at the same time bitch about the lack of cultural respect. So I've always found foreigners opinions to be some what hippo critical and it's hard for me to take seriously how great their government model is, if they flee from where they are to come here. Perhaps we take in all the other countries losers that they won't tolerate and therefore get the mis represented idiots that couldn't make it in their beautiful government. I could be wrong, I very much could be. Who knows. But for sure I've always loved that America takes in everyone else s losers and makes them feel at home here. If you look into psychedelic culture btw, you'll find that most of it started here, in places like San Francisco. Many European rock bands, came to the U.S. to be famous. I don't mean to tell you that your government model sucks more then ours. Perhaps I just mean, I think it's quite obvious there is a global pyramid scheme of horse shit that is global, Bilgerberg to name one of them. It's a group not limited to one country, it's represented by all the richest entrepreneurs from the U.S., Europe, Africa, Asia, you name it. And it seems to me that ALL OUR GOVERNMENTS ARE FULL OF SHIT But yes, you are right about one thing, us arguing isn't getting us anywhere. I can't agree a socialist model is pure paradise, but then I've never spent a considerable amount of time in a country with a serious social model, so it's pretty much impossible for me to judge. Thank you for being open and understanding. -------------------- I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties!
I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
| |||||||
|
Haffenreffer Strangererer Registered: 09/17/12 Posts: 147 Last seen: 13 years, 8 months |
| ||||||
There it is, Zappaisgod is conclusively a bum. No regard for anyone else, just wants his slice of the pie, regardless of what it costs others. Bum. Anyways, it's cheaper to provide preventative care universally that it is to provide for emergency room visits for diabetes, heart disease, avoidable cancers and sicknesses of all sort. You do have to provide some incentive for this, by restricting coverage for the people who refuse to change their lifestyles, and then they can seek health coverage outside of a single-payer system, and take their tax dollars they use elsewhere. There you go. It's entirely voluntary, and the only people who pay are the people who use it. I'm sure there's a lot of people just fired up at the prospect of paying out of pocket for healthcare when there's an alternative that requires them to actually get off their ass, is supported by people doing the same, and is a results based system. I'd like that. This Socialism/Libertarian dichotomy in this thread can eat a dick, because humans have never been entirely a collective nor have they ever lived entirely by the sweat of their brow in a world of competing interests. It's both. There's a society and its structures that drives itself to the moon, and there is Neil Armstrong fucking up his quote while walking on it, along with the people who never said it happened. One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind. Neither exists in the absence of the other. Edited by Haffenreffer (12/27/12 02:54 AM)
| |||||||
|
zappaisgod horrid asshole Registered: 02/11/04 Posts: 81,741 Loc: Fractallife's gy Last seen: 10 years, 5 months |
| ||||||
So sorry but government should exist solely for the benefit of the individual citizen. Not for the needs of government and not for the needs of the fiction referred to as society. Komrade. A bum? I wish I could claim that. Instead I get billed, and pay, vast sums annually to fund those useless citizens who are tax consumers and whose work product, should they actually bestir themselves to perform any, is deemed near worthless.
It would be cheaper to not provide those services at all. "Preventative care" is such bullshit. I went to the doctor about 5 times between when I was 20 and when I was 45. 2 of them were for Lyme disease and 1 of them was for photographs and another was from being badgered by my first wife to use the HMO physical exam plan. It was like an assembly line. I know why she insisted, though. She wanted to get my hearing checked because of loud music damage. She had no idea that I didn't hear her because I didn't want to hear her.
Society is a fiction. --------------------
| |||||||
|
Vaipen Psychonaut Registered: 01/15/12 Posts: 782 Loc: Europe |
| ||||||
|
Our lifestyles are very difficult and doing the right thing is hard, it is for me. It is like asking a prisoner to do a marathon from within his cell.
Supermarkets are filled with mostly unhealthy food, some of which should not even be allowed to be labeled 'food'. But it is mass produced, so it is cheap. If people do not earn enough for quality food, they are restricted to eat the junk. Even then so they could make healthier choices, but only to an extent. Add to that the fact that most people have this unaware desperation about society and the way they live. Stress builds and in our society what do you do for stress relief? You start eating too much and at that, the bad stuff. Disease ensues. It is possible to overcome it, but you gotta be strong. As society stands, diabetes and other disease related to the combination of bad food and lack of exercise raises health care costs. I find it hard to keep my weight down... In this situation, is it right to ask of people to live a more healthy life? Go to a sport school, get on that hometrainer, eat healthier and more expensive food? Can you ask a mother of two who works, pays a lot for daycare for her kids, to buy healthier, more expensive food, on top of being barely able to pay rent, utilities and all the other stuff? I think it is not a bad idea to ask of anyone to make an effort to live healthy and in doing so, cut medical costs to all of society. But it has to go hand in hand with a change in society itsef, so people do not feel they have to eat stress away. And I know, I know! It is easy when you are sound of mind and body. But that is the point. Most people are not sound of mind and body. I am therefore reluctant to accept a forced lifestyle on anyone. That is, the idea around here that pops up now and then: a fat tax. You can eat junk food but you will have to pay compensation of some sort to society through a tax to help cover future health care. Can you intervene in people's life this way, aren't you touching on basic rights, the right what to eat? What will happen if this becomes normalized? Health care insurers checking your cholestorol each year, voluntarily of course, but if it is high, you won't get the lower premium? Will government and health care companies start to dictate how to live because their lifestyle plan is better to keep your health up and medical costs down? So, would it be required to visit a sport school, or no, voluntarily of course, but you won't get a lower premium if you aren't punching in at the clock at the sport school. And you end up paying twice as much because the fact that you do not go to a sport school is considere dproof of an unhealthy lifestyle. Is our poor health an excuse for a totalitarian health state? Can government 'voluntarily' pressure us to do the 'right thing'? Because it will be voluntary at first. Or rather it will be a blackmail situation, like I said, you better go along or you shall pay more for your health insurance. And then you become a thief of your own wallet. Fraud will keep in. There will be sport schools that auto-register you, for a small fee, right? So you have proof you live the good life. People ask their friends to clock in with their chipcard. It will be like this, the chipcard holds very personal info. Your social-fiscal number, a number corresponding to your Personal Health Dossier, a code to what health status you have, from green and maximum premium reduction to red, very unhealthy person who pays the most of all. And who knows what else. Some will hack their cards, get caught, and sentenced for basically, an unhealthy lifestyle. Not even necessarily so, they are healthy but just don't like sport schools. The lower premium is already around. Or in the sense you get free vouchers for subscribing to a gym and working out. So may society demand a healthy lifestyle of all its members? In principle only if that society also accepts the fact we are forcing people into unhealthy lifestyle with bad cheap supermarket food, that it is therefore unfair to charge people whilst not providing a better way of life at the same time. You cannot ask someone to run a marathon from a jail cell.
| |||||||
|
imachavel I loved and lost but I loved-ftw Registered: 06/06/07 Posts: 33,259 Loc: You get banned for saying that
Last seen: 12 hours, 14 minutes |
| ||||||
your argument is the same as saying "it's cheaper for a big insurance company to assume everyone will file small claims and just pay 30,000,000 people a small claim fee assuming they will all file a claim, then to pay the few claims that do get filed, because god those claims could be humungous."  make sense much? 
-------------------- I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties!
I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
| |||||||
|
imachavel I loved and lost but I loved-ftw Registered: 06/06/07 Posts: 33,259 Loc: You get banned for saying that
Last seen: 12 hours, 14 minutes |
| ||||||
I find your ideology that government debt is all because of "welfare collecting bums" and that you cry about your taxes being wasted all the time. Where in the world do you keep getting the fucking idea that if the government didn't take all your taxes to pay bums for welfare, that they'd take your taxes and spend it wisely and leave a surplus in the treasury? this is hilarious! You don't think they would've WASTED it on something else?? Has Obama shown any sign that he's been delegated properly not to JUST RANDOMLY WASTE TAX MONEY ON ANY PLAN HE JUST MAKES UP OUT OF NO WHERE?!!? your tax money is wasted. On welfare, yes. Among other things. I guarantee you if it wasn't on welfare, they'd have found something else to blow it on. You keep speaking about how the bail outs were a benefit to the tax payer. I think not, Obama bailed out billions and billions and billions to OTHER COUNTRIES  how in the world did the tax payer benefit from that??
-------------------- I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties!
I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
| |||||||
|
zappaisgod horrid asshole Registered: 02/11/04 Posts: 81,741 Loc: Fractallife's gy Last seen: 10 years, 5 months |
| ||||||
Fuck that, Komrade. What a wonderfully transparent demand for totalitarianism. This is why I reject all these "for your own good" laws. Sooner or later thugs like this will have us doing mandatory jumping jacks in a public square. Every supermarket I've ever been in has fresh produce and pasta and dairy and meat. More than enough to meet demand. So much so that they end up throwing tons of it away because it goes unsold. --------------------
| |||||||
|
420milehigh shaman  Registered: 08/19/12 Posts: 1,229 Loc: third eye Last seen: 12 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
|
you know in Obamacare there is a chunk of legislation which will make it mandatory for EVER American to have their RFID chip implanted by march 13th 2013....
Republican Congressman Ron Paul from Texas, states on his website: "Buried deep within the over 1,000 pages of the massive US Health Care Bill (PDF) in a “non-discussed” section titled: Subtitle C-11 Sec. 2521— National Medical Device Registry, and which states its purpose as…….. He quotes that part of the law and then goes on to say: "In “real world speak”, according to this report, this new law, when fully implemented, provides the framework for making the United States the first Nation in the World to require each and every one of its citizens to have implanted in them a radio-frequency identification microchip for the purpose of controlling who is, or isn’t, allowed medical care in their country". Read the entire story at: http://www.patriotactionnetwork. -------------------- All posts are entirely, 100%, conclusively false or complete works of fiction... but I can levitate lol "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin if I owe you seeds from a previous trade send me a PM, I will rectify my shortcomings and compensate you for your patience
| |||||||
|
Haffenreffer Strangererer Registered: 09/17/12 Posts: 147 Last seen: 13 years, 8 months |
| ||||||
Nope. My proposition is to basically have one really low risk pool with universal, single-payer coverage that's far cheaper to administer healhcare to (because it wouldn't accept people who are willfully unhealthy) and then let the rest find their own, more costly insurance if they wanna smoke, drink, or eat too much. Kids are covered by default, regardless of what their parents do. People who don't want it or can't have it don't pay into it. Entirely voluntary, and tough toenail-titties to the people who feel left out. The free market has never been scared of a bad bet. Ask anyone in the mortgage business. Edited by Haffenreffer (12/30/12 04:51 AM)
| |||||||
|
imachavel I loved and lost but I loved-ftw Registered: 06/06/07 Posts: 33,259 Loc: You get banned for saying that
Last seen: 12 hours, 14 minutes |
| ||||||
The free market has never been afraid of a bad bet, ask anyone in the mortgage business? Oh wow, good advice. I'm sure people getting mortgage loans, cashing the check, and going out with cash to spend on ANYTHING BESIDES a mortgage loan, was a good policy for the government to force down a banks throat. I really trust your mortgage broker friends, they are very well educated. Also, you call health insurance low risk? Well maybe you don't understand WHY it's low risk. Because so many people file their claims, that health insurance companies decide to raise the premiums so that it's EXPENSIVE to get the insurance, mean while doctors keep raising premiums as well. Basically, many many file a claim, but it's not really a claim is it. It's basically a plan showing that your health care is covered when you need it paid. It WILL to an extent act as a claim service where you need surgery that will exceed the cost of all the money you've put into the plan, but in reality most people pay more then they need paid for. Which makes sense, because the insurance companies need to make a living. Nothing in life is free, so why should insurance be. Let me make this perfectly clear, this Obama Care is not a claim service health care provider plan. The claims are already filed, for lack of a better answer. Sure, they aren't, it's like a government insurance stipulation, where I roll my eyes at the term I just used, 'stipulation'. But it's not a FOR PROFIT business, at least it's not supposed to be. When the money is pooled, it's pooled with the expectation that EVERYONE WILL FILE THE CLAIM. Or better said, that everyone will need their health covered. SO IF THAT'S NOT CLEAR ENOUGH, LET ME CLARIFY, THIS IS NOT A FUCKING LOW RISK POOL, WHAT GAVE YOU THAT IDEA??!? Do you know what a low risk pool is? Air ambulance member ship benefits. These are companies, which don't sell stipulated insurance from a licensed broker, they don't sell plans from un licensed brokers that sell under written policies, they basically sell air ambulance member ships. You pay $150 a year, and if you need surgery that cannot be performed in your current hospital, an air ambulance will fly you to another hospital and your member ship will pay for it. It's not a bad deal, considering flying in a jet ambulance probably costs a person $30,000. How is this low risk? It seems about 1 out of every 10,000 members actually files a claim once a year. 10,000 multiplied by $150, is about $1,500,000 per year if everyone renews. Ridiculous huh? That is a low risk pool. WHERE YOU GOT THE IDEA THAT OBAMA CARE IS A LOW RISK POOL IS BEYOND ME it's a plan that covers every un insured American, so let's round it to about 150,000,000 people, since I'm not sure of the exact number. Mean while, we face a 16 trillion dollar debt, wait, is it $17 trillion yet? I'm not sure. We can't pay with taxes for the current federal government services. Why would we be able to insure 150,000,000 Americans who will most likely ALL need their health covered at one point in their life? I'm confused. How is that a "low risk pool" as you called it? Btw, is Obama expecting some type of federal pension fund for all politicians to be able to collect from if Obama Care recipients don't need their health covered at the end of the year? Is that what this is about? I haven't even been keeping track, but I wouldn't be surprised. Obama doesn't make a single decision without profit being in the fore front of his mind, don't you understand that? -------------------- I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties!
I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
| |||||||
|
imachavel I loved and lost but I loved-ftw Registered: 06/06/07 Posts: 33,259 Loc: You get banned for saying that
Last seen: 12 hours, 14 minutes |
| ||||||
Listen, I'm not trying to tell you that you are full of shit, but if you for one second, you can actually prove that the government is planning to put these RFID implants in people, I will personally march up to Washington right now with a group of people and do a citizens arrest and drag Obama out of the office to be impeached by the people for violating like 18 constitutional amendment rights. I'm sorry but THIS http://patriotaction.net/forum/t looks like a conspiracy, and I think it's better left in the conspiracy forum. The RFID thing I can't find anywhere online, and the bill you are speaking of was a failed proposal anyway The proposed America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (or HR 3200)[1] was an unsuccessful bill introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on July 14, 2009. The bill was introduced during the first session of the 111th Congress as part of an effort of the Democratic Party leadership to enact health care reform. The bill was not approved by the House, but was superseded by a similar bill, the proposed Affordable Health Care for America Act (HR 3962), which was passed by the House in November 2009, by a margin of 220-215 votes. A similar bill to HR 3200, called the "Affordable Health Choices Act" (HR 1679)[2]), was introduced in the Senate on September 17, 2009. It too was unsuccessful as the Senate approved instead another proposal called the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act". According to the Congressional Budget Office, HR 3200 includes tax increases and spending cuts that reduce the net increase in the federal deficit to 1% of 2008 tax revenues. The CBO director subsequently noted that, in terms of total National Health Expenditure, non-governmental spending will increase as coverage expands.[3][4] The bill was originally sponsored by Representatives John Dingell, Charles Rangel, Henry Waxman, George Miller, Pete Stark, Frank Pallone, and Robert Andrews. The 1017 page PDF version of the bill[5] is the first of three health care reform-related legislative proposals expected from the Democratic congressional leadership.[6] Votes in the U.S. House of Representatives on this bill and on the United States National Health Care Act, an alternative that would establish a national, universal single-payer health insurance, were previously expected in September 2009[7] and again in October 2009, before the actual November 2009 vote took place. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ame Please verify your RFID theory with more substantial evidence next time. -------------------- I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties!
I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
| |||||||
|
Vaipen Psychonaut Registered: 01/15/12 Posts: 782 Loc: Europe |
| ||||||
You do understand that I am not FOR it but AGAINST it?
| |||||||
|
420milehigh shaman Registered: 08/19/12 Posts: 1,229 Loc: third eye Last seen: 12 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
|
here is the PDF, go down to page 1001 and start reading... its the national medical device registry...
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/me -------------------- All posts are entirely, 100%, conclusively false or complete works of fiction... but I can levitate lol "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin if I owe you seeds from a previous trade send me a PM, I will rectify my shortcomings and compensate you for your patience
| |||||||
|
imachavel I loved and lost but I loved-ftw Registered: 06/06/07 Posts: 33,259 Loc: You get banned for saying that
Last seen: 12 hours, 14 minutes |
| ||||||
Auto-SummaryThe post contains a link to a PDF discussing the National Medical Device Registry, which is established to analyze postmarket safety and outcomes data on medical devices. The registry aims to include information on devices used in or on patients, particularly class III devices and class II devices that are implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is tasked with implementing the registry by July 1, 2010, and will develop regulations for its establishment and operation. The post also mentions an amendment to section 303(f)(1)(B)(ii) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, which requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to recommend standards for the electronic exchange and use of unique device identifiers in certified electronic health records.
sorry, but I see NOTHING about an RFID chip: 1001 1 such sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2 2011 through 2014.’’. 3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The Secretary of Health and 4 Human Services shall begin awarding grants under section 5 399Z–1 of the Public Health Service Act, as added by sub- 6 section (b), not later than July 1, 2010, without regard 7 to whether or not final regulations have been issued under 8 section 399Z–1(h) of such Act Subtitle C—National Medical Device Registry 9 10 11 SEC. 2521. NATIONAL MEDICAL DEVICE REGISTRY. 12 (a) REGISTRY.— 13 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 519 of the Federal 14 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360i) is 15 amended— 16 (A) by redesignating subsection (g) as sub- 17 section (h); and 18 (B) by inserting after subsection (f) the 19 following: 20 21 ‘‘National Medical Device Registry ‘‘(g)(1) The Secretary shall establish a national med- 22 ical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the 23 ‘registry’) to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and 24 outcomes data on each device that— 25 ‘‘(A) is or has been used in or on a patient; and f:\VHLC\071409\071409.140.xml July 14, 2009 (12:51 p.m.) VerDate Nov 24 2008 12:51 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 000000 (444390|2) PO 00000 Frm 01001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\TEMP\AAHCA0~1.XML HOLCPC F:\P11\NHI\TRICOMM\AAHCA09_001.X 1002 1 ‘‘(B) is— 2 ‘‘(i) a class III device; or 3 ‘‘(ii) a class II device that is implantable, 4 5 life-supporting, or life-sustaining. ‘‘(2) In developing the registry, the Secretary shall, 6 in consultation with the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 7 the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 8 Services, the head of the Office of the National Coordi- 9 nator for Health Information Technology, and the Sec- 10 retary of Veterans Affairs, determine the best methods 11 for— 12 ‘‘(A) including in the registry, in a manner con- 13 sistent with subsection (f), appropriate information 14 to identify each device described in paragraph (1) by 15 type, model, and serial number or other unique iden- 16 tifier; 17 ‘‘(B) validating methods for analyzing patient 18 safety and outcomes data from multiple sources and 19 for linking such data with the information included 20 in the registry as described in subparagraph (A), in- 21 cluding, to the extent feasible, use of— 22 ‘‘(i) data provided to the Secretary under 23 other provisions of this chapter; and 24 ‘‘(ii) information from public and private 25 sources identified under paragraph (3); f:\VHLC\071409\071409.140.xml July 14, 2009 (12:51 p.m.) VerDate Nov 24 2008 12:51 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 000000 (444390|2) PO 00000 Frm 01002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\TEMP\AAHCA0~1.XML HOLCPC F:\P11\NHI\TRICOMM\AAHCA09_001.X 1003 1 2 ‘‘(C) integrating the activities described in this subsection with— 3 ‘‘(i) activities under paragraph (3) of sec- 4 tion 505(k) (relating to active postmarket risk 5 identification); 6 ‘‘(ii) activities under paragraph (4) of sec- 7 tion 505(k) (relating to advanced analysis of 8 drug safety data); and 9 ‘‘(iii) other postmarket device surveillance 10 activities of the Secretary authorized by this 11 chapter; and 12 ‘‘(D) providing public access to the data and 13 analysis collected or developed through the registry 14 in a manner and form that protects patient privacy 15 and proprietary information and is comprehensive, 16 useful, and not misleading to patients, physicians, 17 and scientists. 18 ‘‘(3)(A) To facilitate analyses of postmarket safety 19 and patient outcomes for devices described in paragraph 20 (1), the Secretary shall, in collaboration with public, aca- 21 demic, and private entities, develop methods to— 22 ‘‘(i) obtain access to disparate sources of 23 patient safety and outcomes data, including— 24 ‘‘(I) Federal health-related electronic 25 data (such as data from the Medicare pro- f:\VHLC\071409\071409.140.xml July 14, 2009 (12:51 p.m.) VerDate Nov 24 2008 12:51 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 000000 (444390|2) PO 00000 Frm 01003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\TEMP\AAHCA0~1.XML HOLCPC F:\P11\NHI\TRICOMM\AAHCA09_001.X 1004 1 gram under title XVIII of the Social Secu- 2 rity Act or from the health systems of the 3 Department of Veterans Affairs); 4 ‘‘(II) private sector health-related 5 electronic data (such as pharmaceutical 6 purchase data and health insurance claims 7 data); and 8 ‘‘(III) other data as the Secretary 9 deems necessary to permit postmarket as- 10 sessment of device safety and effectiveness; 11 and 12 ‘‘(ii) link data obtained under clause (i) 13 14 with information in the registry. ‘‘(B) In this paragraph, the term ‘data’ refers to in- 15 formation respecting a device described in paragraph (1), 16 including claims data, patient survey data, standardized 17 analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of 18 data from disparate data environments, electronic health 19 records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the 20 Secretary. 21 ‘‘(4) Not later than 36 months after the date of the 22 enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall promul- 23 gate regulations for establishment and operation of the 24 registry under paragraph (1). Such regulations— f:\VHLC\071409\071409.140.xml July 14, 2009 (12:51 p.m.) VerDate Nov 24 2008 12:51 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 000000 (444390|2) PO 00000 Frm 01004 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\TEMP\AAHCA0~1.XML HOLCPC F:\P11\NHI\TRICOMM\AAHCA09_001.X 1005 1 ‘‘(A)(i) in the case of devices that are described 2 in paragraph (1) and sold on or after the date of the 3 enactment of this subsection, shall require manufac- 4 turers of such devices to submit information to the 5 registry, including, for each such device, the type, 6 model, and serial number or, if required under sub- 7 section (f), other unique device identifier; and 8 ‘‘(ii) in the case of devices that are described in 9 paragraph (1) and sold before such date, may re- 10 quire manufacturers of such devices to submit such 11 information to the registry, if deemed necessary by 12 the Secretary to protect the public health; 13 ‘‘(B) shall establish procedures— 14 ‘‘(i) to permit linkage of information sub- 15 mitted pursuant to subparagraph (A) with pa- 16 tient safety and outcomes data obtained under 17 paragraph (3); and 18 ‘‘(ii) to permit analyses of linked data; 19 ‘‘(C) may require device manufacturers to sub- 20 mit such other information as is necessary to facili- 21 tate postmarket assessments of device safety and ef- 22 fectiveness and notification of device risks; 23 ‘‘(D) shall establish requirements for regular 24 and timely reports to the Secretary, which shall be 25 included in the registry, concerning adverse event f:\VHLC\071409\071409.140.xml July 14, 2009 (12:51 p.m.) VerDate Nov 24 2008 12:51 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 000000 (444390|2) PO 00000 Frm 01005 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\TEMP\AAHCA0~1.XML HOLCPC F:\P11\NHI\TRICOMM\AAHCA09_001.X 1006 1 trends, adverse event patterns, incidence and preva- 2 lence of adverse events, and other information the 3 Secretary determines appropriate, which may include 4 data on comparative safety and outcomes trends; 5 and 6 ‘‘(E) shall establish procedures to permit public 7 access to the information in the registry in a manner 8 and form that protects patient privacy and propri- 9 etary information and is comprehensive, useful, and 10 not misleading to patients, physicians, and sci- 11 entists. 12 ‘‘(5) To carry out this subsection, there are author- 13 ized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary 14 for fiscal years 2010 and 2011.’’. 15 (2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The Secretary of 16 Health and Human Services shall establish and 17 begin implementation of the registry under section 18 519(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 19 Act, as added by paragraph (1), by not later than 20 the date that is 36 months after the date of the en- 21 actment of this Act, without regard to whether or 22 not final regulations to establish and operate the 23 registry have been promulgated by such date. 24 25 (3) 12:51 Jul 14, 2009 AMENDMENT.—Section 303(f)(1)(B)(ii) of the Federal Food, Drug, and f:\VHLC\071409\071409.140.xml July 14, 2009 (12:51 p.m.) VerDate Nov 24 2008 CONFORMING Jkt 000000 (444390|2) PO 00000 Frm 01006 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\TEMP\AAHCA0~1.XML HOLCPC F:\P11\NHI\TRICOMM\AAHCA09_001.X 1007 1 Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 333(f)(1)(B)(ii)) is amend- 2 ed by striking ‘‘519(g)’’ and inserting ‘‘519(h)’’. 3 (b) ELECTRONIC EXCHANGE AND 4 ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS OF USE IN CERTIFIED UNIQUE DEVICE 5 IDENTIFIERS.— 6 (1) RECOMMENDATIONS.—The HIT Policy 7 Committee established under section 3002 of the 8 Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300jj–12) 9 shall recommend to the head of the Office of the Na- 10 tional Coordinator for Health Information Tech- 11 nology standards, implementation specifications, and 12 certification criteria for the electronic exchange and 13 use in certified electronic health records of a unique 14 device identifier for each device described in section 15 519(g)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 16 Act, as added by subsection (a). 17 (2) STANDARDS, IMPLEMENTATION CRITERIA, 18 AND CERTIFICATION CRITERIA.—The 19 the Health Human Services, acting through the 20 head of the Office of the National Coordinator for 21 Health Information Technology, shall adopt stand- 22 ards, implementation specifications, and certification 23 criteria for the electronic exchange and use in cer- 24 tified electronic health records of a unique device 25 identifier for each device described in paragraph (1), f:\VHLC\071409\071409.140.xml July 14, 2009 (12:51 p.m.) VerDate Nov 24 2008 12:51 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 000000 Secretary of (444390|2) PO 00000 Frm 01007 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\TEMP\AAHCA0~1.XML HOLCPC F:\P11\NHI\TRICOMM\AAHCA09_001.X 1008 1 if such an identifier is required by section 519(f) of 2 the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 3 U.S.C. 360i(f)) for the device. 7 Subtitle D—Grants for Comprehen- sive Programs to Provide Edu- cation to Nurses and Create a Pipeline to Nursing 8 SEC. 2531. ESTABLISHMENT OF GRANT PROGRAM. 4 5 6 9 (a) PURPOSES.—It is the purpose of this section to 10 authorize grants to— 11 (1) address the projected shortage of nurses by 12 funding comprehensive programs to create a career 13 ladder to nursing (including Certified Nurse Assist- 14 ants, Licensed Practical Nurses, Licensed Vocational 15 Nurses, and Registered Nurses) for incumbent ancil- 16 lary health care workers; 17 (2) increase the capacity for educating nurses 18 by increasing both nurse faculty and clinical oppor- 19 tunities through collaborative programs between 20 staff nurse organizations, health care providers, and 21 accredited schools of nursing; and 22 (3) provide training programs through edu- 23 cation and training organizations jointly adminis- 24 tered by health care providers and health care labor 25 organizations or other organizations representing f:\VHLC\071409\071409.140.xml July 14, 2009 (12:51 p.m.) VerDate Nov 24 2008 12:51 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 000000 (444390|2) PO 00000 Frm 01008 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\TEMP\AAHCA0~1.XML HOLCPC F:\P11\NHI\TRICOMM\AAHCA09_001.X 1009 1 staff nurses and frontline health care workers, work- 2 ing in collaboration with accredited schools of nurs- 3 ing and academic institutions. 4 (b) GRANTS.—Not later than 6 months after the date 5 of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor (re- 6 ferred to in this section as the ‘‘Secretary’’) shall establish 7 a partnership grant program to award grants to eligible 8 entities to carry out comprehensive programs to provide 9 education to nurses and create a pipeline to nursing for 10 incumbent ancillary health care workers who wish to ad- 11 vance their careers, and to otherwise carry out the pur- 12 poses of this section. 13 (c) ELIGIBILITY.—To be eligible for a grant under 14 this section, an entity shall be— 15 (1) a health care entity that is jointly adminis- 16 tered by a health care employer and a labor union 17 representing the health care employees of the em- 18 ployer and that carries out activities using labor 19 management training funds as provided for under 20 section 302(c)(6) of the Labor Management Rela- 21 tions Act, 1947 (29 U.S.C. 186(c)(6)); 22 23 (2) an entity that operates a training program that is jointly administered by— Having a copy of an affordable health care plan for all Americans in .pdf format, is useful. I like that, if all voters had a copy of the policies that politicians represented handy when they went to vote for said politicians, the country may have had a better vote turn out. Still, for evidence, your .pdf isn't shit. If you can find better evidence I'll believe you. Thanks for participating. -------------------- I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties!
I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
| |||||||
| |||||||
[Re: 
Edit 
Reply 
|
| Similar Threads | Poster | Views | Replies | Last post | ||
 |
 |
They are voting on Obamacare tomorrow (  1 2 3 all ) |
 skyekitty |
5,907 | 47 | 05/24/17 04:29 PM by Falcon91Wolvrn03 |
|
 |
59 Socialists in Congress - 2002 ( 1 2 all ) |
 Ellis Dee |
2,380 | 22 | 09/20/02 11:11 PM by Albino_Jesus |
|
|
question for anyone.... ( 1 2 3 4 5 all ) |
 Anonymous |
6,839 | 87 | 02/24/04 09:24 AM by GazzBut |
|
|
Tragedy: Obamacare stands ( 1 2 3 4 ... 14 15 ) |
 luvdemshrooms |
10,890 | 290 | 07/06/12 12:34 PM by The Ecstatic |
|
|
hey socialists... ( 1 2 all ) |
Anonymous |
4,043 | 32 | 09/17/03 11:46 PM by Phred |
|
 |
Socialist auto insurance vs. capitalist auto insurance |  carbonhoots |
1,063 | 11 | 08/30/03 12:33 AM by DoctorJ |
|
|
Socialists take Spain ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all ) |
Xlea321 |
12,329 | 147 | 04/02/04 11:30 PM by Anonymous |
|
|
Canada's socialist party picks new leader | carbonhoots |
824 | 8 | 01/29/03 05:04 PM by carbonhoots |
| Extra information | ||
| You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa 5,965 topic views. 1 members, 5 guests and 39 web crawlers are browsing this forum. [ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ] | ||
