You do realize that you and others as the consumer controls where the business produces its product. However, the federal government's taxation makes it that much more expensive to buy American. Who do you really think the problem is, the free market, or the federal government?
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
SCOTUS Strikes Down ObamaCare Individual Mandate
- Thread starter Jake46184
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
You do realize that you and others as the consumer controls where the business produces its product. However, the federal government's taxation makes it that much more expensive to buy American. Who do you really think the problem is, the free market, or the federal government?
an illogical premise? Spend some times in professional sales and you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. The context of the post I quoted was Hop facing what I believe he was describing as rabid liberals. IMO, you are wasting your time trying to convince anyone who is so far dug in that they're not even open to hearing anything else, it's a waste of time. I include neocons as well.
In sales, you don't waste your time on an account you can't close. You bow out gracefully and keep in touch to see if their situation changes that might then make them more open to your product or service. In the meantime, those opportunities that are open to the possibility of buying create a better environment for successfully closing deals. Doesn't mean your gonna close every one, but you know you won't close any that are dead set against you so why waste your time.
I have liberals in my family that supported BHO and every dem before him but they did see the cracks and the changes in the party. After a wise investment of time talking through it with them, they've really converted their beliefs to one that is more libertarian. I have a friend that I won't bother talking to because she isa rabid liberal and it's a waste of time.
As for Facebook, I was kidding so to use your phrase, lighten up Francis!! I don't care for Facebook personally so I don't have an account but to each their own.
Just because you can't find the logic in something doesn't mean it isn't there. I often agree with you, I often disagree with you. Regardless, I usually enjoy reading your posts save ones like these that are full of condescension.
I'll be by to see you off at 1430.
For someone who claims to love history, you don't seem to pay much attention to it (not surprising at present in our nation). Socialism is a relatively recent arrival in Greece; probably post-WWII. It doesn't take long for a people to get used to government largesse.
If taxes were a "straight" percentage of our resources, wouldn't it be an incentive to earn more so that taxes wouldn't be so much of a bite on your income? I'd see that as a good thing.
"It ain't so much the things we don't know that get us in trouble. It's the things we think we know that just ain't so." Atriums Brown
"There are the things we know. There are the things we don't know. There are the things we think we don't know. And there are the things we don't know we don't know. And there are the things we think we know but are wrong." Paraphrase of Don Rumsfeld.
I wrote this editorial piece several years ago when the idea of universal healthcare first started being bandied about seriously in D.C., and amongst the populace. The website at the end no longer exists, but I have some new data regarding the cost per semester at HMS.
Universal Healthcare
...is not a right.
The notion that health care is a basic right, and that all persons are deserving of the services of another simply because they consume oxygen is simply not correct. Advocates of this philosophy claim that it is a noble and righteous pursuit to "provide" health services to all. On it's face this is a catastrophic lie, and the most ignoble pursuit one could take up a banner for as a cause.
Firstly, to "provide" health services to those who are not privately insured is tantamount to theft and indentured servitude. Doctors, surgeons, nurses and other skilled health professionals were not mystically born with the power to heal. Just as in any other skilled sevice/technician/labor field, these persons undertook, through no small pain or exertion of their own, to acquire these abilities. Oftentimes they sacrifice a large portion of their youth (which in this nation is largely "party time"), to assume more mature and daunting tasks. In the case of doctors, and specialized surgeons we're speaking in the 10+ year range of time and sweat invested. This may not include their necessary residencies and/or employment in private practices of other doctors in their field.
Next, we come to the topic of financial burden incurred by these individuals. Consider that a single year at a prestigious medical school, in this case the Harvard School of Medicine, the average cost for a student to attend between 2003 and 2004 was over $50, 000.00. Tuition and fees alone for that year account for nearly $35, 000.00.
In 2003, 138 students graduated the Harvard MD-PhD program. Of these, 94 had loan balances averaging $91, 801.00. The range of debt in this class of graduating students was between roughly $9, 000 and $267, 000!!! These figures include ONLY the cost of their medical school training, and are not indicative of any debts they may have remaining from their initial college, pre-med education. Keep in mind the personal expenses these individuals have, which may also be financed on credit cards, and or personal loans.
So, Here we have an individual who has undertaken no small series of tasks, incurred massive financial burden, and dedicated enormous quantities of time, which cannot be recouped, to a single goal. This goal was to become a health care professional, so that they may both heal the sick, and earn a comfortable living while doing so. THAT is the noble pursuit. THAT is the noble person.
Having now been illustrated these ideas, how then can one say that this person, who has given of themselves to acquire a skill, they have the "right" to this persons services, at reduced or minimal cost to themselves? Who then pays this highly skilled individual what his services are worth? Why then must this person be forced to give of themselves freely (it's not truly free, but we'll come to that soon enough) what the market has set a price on? If this person's service is a right, should not then auto repair be a right? Should we not all have cable and/or satellite TV and chocolate wafers on our pillows as a right?
The answer is a loud and resounding NO. For in order to "provide" this person's skilled service "freely" to all those who may require it, requires then that someone be made to pay for it. The only possible way to assure this system could work then would be a confiscatory, and punitive theft of resources from one to pay for the wants and desires of another. This very idea is disgusting, and a wanton disregard of all the principles upon which liberty are based. For one cannot be free if one is UNWILLINGLY forced to pay for a service and/or commodity one neither uses nor requires. The very concept requires the virtual enslavement of one group (the financial providers), and the servitude of another group, one which has through no small pain to themselves sacrificed a great deal to attain a position.
Think about this: Those of you who are in favor of "Universal Health Care", would you be equally as advocating of the government siezing control of whatever industry it is you're in? Would you also sing the praises of a system wherein your countless years of sacrifice mean nothing, and the monetary reward you may reap is capped off by a wretched, tyrannical system of forced servitude? Why then would you enter into such an industry? Are we not allowed as persons, is it not our goal as citizens to be our best? Should we not always endeavor to attain our best so that our posterity shall be cared for, and be left better off than were we when we entered into this world?
I'll leave you with these words:
The policy of the American government is to leave its citizens free, neither restraining them nor aiding them in their pursuits. -- Thomas Jefferson
Harvard Medical school data obtained here: http://www.hms.harvard.edu/about/facts.html
new costs: Facts & Figures | HMS
I'm still trying to locate new data on graduate indebtedness.
Universal Healthcare
...is not a right.
The notion that health care is a basic right, and that all persons are deserving of the services of another simply because they consume oxygen is simply not correct. Advocates of this philosophy claim that it is a noble and righteous pursuit to "provide" health services to all. On it's face this is a catastrophic lie, and the most ignoble pursuit one could take up a banner for as a cause.
Firstly, to "provide" health services to those who are not privately insured is tantamount to theft and indentured servitude. Doctors, surgeons, nurses and other skilled health professionals were not mystically born with the power to heal. Just as in any other skilled sevice/technician/labor field, these persons undertook, through no small pain or exertion of their own, to acquire these abilities. Oftentimes they sacrifice a large portion of their youth (which in this nation is largely "party time"), to assume more mature and daunting tasks. In the case of doctors, and specialized surgeons we're speaking in the 10+ year range of time and sweat invested. This may not include their necessary residencies and/or employment in private practices of other doctors in their field.
Next, we come to the topic of financial burden incurred by these individuals. Consider that a single year at a prestigious medical school, in this case the Harvard School of Medicine, the average cost for a student to attend between 2003 and 2004 was over $50, 000.00. Tuition and fees alone for that year account for nearly $35, 000.00.
In 2003, 138 students graduated the Harvard MD-PhD program. Of these, 94 had loan balances averaging $91, 801.00. The range of debt in this class of graduating students was between roughly $9, 000 and $267, 000!!! These figures include ONLY the cost of their medical school training, and are not indicative of any debts they may have remaining from their initial college, pre-med education. Keep in mind the personal expenses these individuals have, which may also be financed on credit cards, and or personal loans.
So, Here we have an individual who has undertaken no small series of tasks, incurred massive financial burden, and dedicated enormous quantities of time, which cannot be recouped, to a single goal. This goal was to become a health care professional, so that they may both heal the sick, and earn a comfortable living while doing so. THAT is the noble pursuit. THAT is the noble person.
Having now been illustrated these ideas, how then can one say that this person, who has given of themselves to acquire a skill, they have the "right" to this persons services, at reduced or minimal cost to themselves? Who then pays this highly skilled individual what his services are worth? Why then must this person be forced to give of themselves freely (it's not truly free, but we'll come to that soon enough) what the market has set a price on? If this person's service is a right, should not then auto repair be a right? Should we not all have cable and/or satellite TV and chocolate wafers on our pillows as a right?
The answer is a loud and resounding NO. For in order to "provide" this person's skilled service "freely" to all those who may require it, requires then that someone be made to pay for it. The only possible way to assure this system could work then would be a confiscatory, and punitive theft of resources from one to pay for the wants and desires of another. This very idea is disgusting, and a wanton disregard of all the principles upon which liberty are based. For one cannot be free if one is UNWILLINGLY forced to pay for a service and/or commodity one neither uses nor requires. The very concept requires the virtual enslavement of one group (the financial providers), and the servitude of another group, one which has through no small pain to themselves sacrificed a great deal to attain a position.
Think about this: Those of you who are in favor of "Universal Health Care", would you be equally as advocating of the government siezing control of whatever industry it is you're in? Would you also sing the praises of a system wherein your countless years of sacrifice mean nothing, and the monetary reward you may reap is capped off by a wretched, tyrannical system of forced servitude? Why then would you enter into such an industry? Are we not allowed as persons, is it not our goal as citizens to be our best? Should we not always endeavor to attain our best so that our posterity shall be cared for, and be left better off than were we when we entered into this world?
I'll leave you with these words:
The policy of the American government is to leave its citizens free, neither restraining them nor aiding them in their pursuits. -- Thomas Jefferson
Harvard Medical school data obtained here: http://www.hms.harvard.edu/about/facts.html
new costs: Facts & Figures | HMS
I'm still trying to locate new data on graduate indebtedness.
Not upset. I left FB 6 months ago, so no skin off my back. You just painted it and its participants with a very large (inaccurate) brush.
Fine, where was your logic? Show me how you can support your statement (#3 in particular) regarding FB and/or its participants without a premise that assumes they are all stupid, uninvolved, or drinking the kool-aid?
This wasn't even close to condescension, friend.
Here's a motivational speech for everybody who doesn't like this ruling, which I assume would be most of INGO. Just substitute SCOTUS for Dean Wermer, and no "dead men" references even as metaphors.
WARNING: STRONG LANGUAGE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ib43Lfdivdw
WARNING: STRONG LANGUAGE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ib43Lfdivdw
Sounded condescending to me but that's cool if it wasn't your intent.
I addressed all that you've asked for in my prior post. My comment 3 had nothing to do with Facebook. I also said, LIGHTEN UP FRANCIS, I was joking about deleting the Facebook account. Calm down killa!
If you want some source material regarding step 3 as it relates to sales, get a copy of Friese' 1% selling, Gitomers Little Red Book of Selling, or find a copy of the HP Coaching and Managing Account Managers training book, I helped write it.
You addressed what you thought I meant. It seems we are both guilty of inadequate conveyance of meaning.
I understood your first point and your third point to be related. While there is nothing in re-reading it that suggests that was actually how you intended it, there is nothing that says they operated independently of each other either.
English composition takes another hit.You understood my call-out for illogic to be aimed at your statement that some people are a lost cause. Nothing could have been further from the truth. In fact, I wondered why you were expounding needlessly on the futility of continuing to close an unclose-able sale. Now I get it.
I disagree with the premise that unclose-able is a permanent condition though. So depending on the what and the who, it may or may not be prudent to pack it in and give up. I think you agree or you would not be repeating yourself on the merits of voting for Paul on this board so often.
Absolutely!! When she condescends to condescension, you'll be in no doubt (well maybe YOU will be).
By all means save the beaver!
You addressed what you thought I meant. It seems we are both guilty of inadequate conveyance of meaning.
I understood your first point and your third point to be related. While there is nothing in re-reading it that suggests that was actually how you intended it, there is nothing that says they operated independently of each other either.
You understood my call-out for illogic to be aimed at your statement that some people are a lost cause. Nothing could have been further from the truth. In fact, I wondered why you were expounding needlessly on the futility of continuing to close an unclose-able sale. Now I get it.
I disagree with the premise that unclose-able is a permanent condition though. So depending on the what and the who, it may or may not be prudent to pack it in and give up. I think you agree or you would not be repeating yourself on the merits of voting for Paul on this board so often.
Lol, this is why I do my best work face to face.
I agree that uncloseable isn't permanent. I'd suck at what I do if I felt otherwise. Conditions change, people change which is why I say bow out gracefully and stay in touch. I believe there's hope for libs and neocons. Just like in business, some can see the problem coming and want to proactively fix it and are looking for solutions (time well spent) others don't know or don't care about the coming problems (bow out, stay in touch) but will have to deal with it one day but at that point, I'm marking up the price.
You know I love my liberty pills prescribed by the good Dr Paul
Last edited:
- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
Discuss.
Figures don't lie, but liars figure. It hasn't worked out this way with any other socialist .gov program, even those which were supposed to generate huge surpluses, like Social Security. It hasn't worked out this way anywhere else in the world it has been tried, and hasn't worked at all without confiscatory taxation of all taxpayers (I suppose you cant bleed turnips and freeloaders).
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
Cameramonkeywww.thechosen.tv
Members online
- ftbstrd
- wildcatfan
- 15kiserc
- mike8170
- Leo
- Demoderb1989
- Jay40
- indyblue
- SolidDragon74
- vitamink
- 1775usmarine
- grillak
- Nickbau5
- jbombelli
- ZachJ03
- loudgroove
- maceace
- JoeSig
- ancjr
- markiemark
- squeals99
- ditcherman
- morve80
- snorko
- TwoWheelsGonzo
- Gunmetalgray
- piper
- cedarhillfarms11
- indyartisan
- Mauser Fanatic
- X3r0h0uR
- Glock Fan
- Lee9
- ranger391xt
- PowderApe
- Creedmoor
- 2tonic
- AlienRayGun
- bulldogs42
- cbhausen
- bwframe
- Cameramonkey
- jocro