Where are the links proving a single one of your points, Tim?

You are worse than a troll. You p*wned me into thinking you MIGHT have a legitimate point, but you got nothin’. Nothin’ but your ‘manager’s and his wife’s word” for it, i.e., YOUR neocon word for it.

Which is shit.

BelowDecksWatch Says:
——————————————————————————–

The unaffordable Romneycare health insurance scam mandates me to pay $440/month with a $4000 deductible! And since I can’t afford that, Romneycare fines me almost $1000/year in fines.

Only a Republican could come up with a plan to charge you for the health care you can’t afford.

As a trust fund baby from the lucky sperm club, Romney can afford it with his daddy’s money, but most of us can’t.

One state in America, my state, was able to put into place a plan that got everybody health insurance. And it did not require a public government insurance company.

But it did require the government to force people to buy health insurance.

It’s still government mandated health insurance.

This is why the Republicans suck. They talk about small government, but then when they are in power they use the state on you just as much as Democrats.

Gawd, how shallow, useless and pathetic.

Thanks for the support gamer !
Your approval is so . . necessary.

the REAL reason they don’t want a public option is because it will be cheaper than the current private system. That means private insurers would have to cut costs and lower their profit forecasts; AND for the first time in decades the playing field between providers and buyers would be leveled, something, I am certain, will make them crazy. This is the whole issue in a nutshell.

What Romney and his fellow Republicans are fighting for is the status quo, i.e. a fragmented broken and bloated insurance system, bloated CEO pay and system that put shareholder profits before the welfare of the people they are supposed to help.

you almost feel like you’re cheating when you get paid

wiley. it doesn’t get any better than that. congratulations.

I’m not demeaning teachers. Almost all my wife’s friends from college went on to be teachers. They’re cool. (That’s where I got the June, July, August – a joke from them).

Some people strive for money. Some people work for other things. Those are decisions that each individual makes.

If I’m fortunate enough to end up on the operating table of the world’s greatest surgeon and he saves me, it doesn’t really matter to me if his motivation to be great was money or humanity.

If I’m fortunate enough to be taught by the world’s greatest teacher, it also doesn’t matter if their drive was financial or altruism.

I would appreciate their service.

And I appreciate you too, ralph.

Just don’t tell the other trolls.

You’re a conservative. In my experience, conservatives tend to focus on more concrete measures of things — money being the most concrete and easily quantifiable out there.

Conservatives tend to concentrate in high-paying professions like business.

The reason the teaching profession, academia, the arts and, to whatever extent it leans that way, journalism tend to attract more liberals than conservatives, in my opinion, is because liberals tend not to focus as much on the concrete (black and white, if you will) elements of things, like money. We focus more on the overall intangible good to be found in a type of work than conservatives seem to. (This may be why conservatives seem so terrified of higher taxes. It’s like it’s some magic boogeyman phrase to them.)

Artists don’t go into the arts for the money; the kind of wealth that movie stars or rock stars accumulate is a lottery, and show business — any business having to do with the arts — is so brutal that anyone doing it for the money will give up long before they have the chance to make it big, unless they hit it right from the start.

So why do people devote their lives to acting as a profession? Or writing? Or dance or music or painting?

Because as hard as it is, to do anything else would be harder for those artists.

Same thing with teachers, and with journalists and with any number of professions that offer modest income prospects but outsized impact on the world.

You don’t seem to buy any of this, and it doesn’t surprise me. If conservatives in general thought of these professions as honorable, they wouldn’t demean education and the arts the way they do. They wouldn’t, for instance, make the joke that you made above about “June, July and August”, if it was indeed a joke (it’s not clear).

So you can put on your “reasonable” hat and nod solemnly and acknowledge that not everyone decides what they want to do in life based on the paycheck, but you really don’t buy it. That’s what your comments here say to me.

And I still maintain that it’s a sad way to view the world. You may call it “realistic” if you prefer, but I think it’s sad. Sad and misguided. But entirely understandable from a conservative.

I think our medical delivery system has actually suffered in some ways for the high incomes that doctors typically earn.

I do acknowledge that, in my experience, the percentage of doctors who are among those “driven to serve” is remarkably low these days in this country. It’s much commonly those who “driven to earn”.

ralph. I know you care, so I’ll break back in.

There are three reasons that teachers pursue teaching; June, July and August. And okay, they want to make a difference. you’re right.

We may be arguing two different things, because maybe these are two different types of people.

When I question why students would go into medicine if it didn’t pay well, I believe that.

Maybe I believe it, because traditionally, doctors have made a lot of money. The field has been able to attract not only those talented people that want to serve humanity, but those talented individuals that want to earn a lot of money. It would make sense that if the salaries were capped or limited, those talented people seeking the money would move on to something else. I believe that would effect the profession.

Your arguments about teachers are correct. They are a different breed. Everybody knows that you won’t get rich teaching, so I assume that a greater majority of those people would fall into the category of people serving humanity (not people seeking wealth). I concede that for teachers (the group you consider) the argument that money motivates is not as applicable.

Additionally, Keith is right. This issue about cutting doctor salaries is not applicable to this thread. And again, I’m sorry I brought it up.

All I know is that if Conservatives for Patients’ Rights tried to cut my price per post, I would eventually lose my enthusiasm to keep coming back here.

(That’s a joke).

Good night.

Sometimes he even sounds like a real right-wing nutcase, but he knows just how to tweak his delivery to let us in on the joke. He’ll just go that extra half-step into absurdity, with just the right phrasing, to make the conservative position seem even more ridiculous than the real tighty-righties do.

It’s a delicate balance, to be sure, and the great GOPsby manages it consistently. Well done!

Moreover, they failed horribly to even plan for an uprising and the chaotic aftermath. Instead, they were going to goddamned bible study at the Pentagon.

The repiggies have been a massive, disastrous failure at everything. The ones trying to squelch the public option for health care are liars and scum.

halliburton et al could not measure up to the original makeup of the once self-sufficient U.S. military, serving no other purpose than to enrich a favorable few…

- ban voting on college campuses

- require photo id

- confirm at least 50K in federal taxes paid before polling

- require kings dominion to sell the photo i.d. with the price of a season pass.