• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Necesary Reforms

pgwenthold said:
I get a kick out of the "president must get security clearance" & the claim that it would have prevented the last two democratic presidents. Istr a recent president who was a known cocaine user, had a drunk driving conviction, and was an admitted alcoholic. Highest level security clearance?
Click to expand...

And was a known associate of the Texas Rangers Baseball team
 
The insinuation that the high cost of medical care in the US is primarily driven by lawsuits is without any basis.

The idea that if the POTUS is impeached then the VPOTUS must also leave office and that we can simply leave the office of POTUS unfilled until we can hold another election is ludicrous. The US would be totally unable to respond to any international crises during this period.
 
icebear said:
4. Elimination of the outmoded WW-II notion of triage in favor of a system which took some rational account of who pays for the system and who doesn't. The horror stories I keep reading about the middle-class guy with an injured child having to fill out forms for three hours while an endless procession of illegal immigrants just walks in and are seen, would end, as would any possibility of that child waiting three hours for treatment while people were being seen for heroin overdoses or other lifestyle issues.
Click to expand...

Okey there are a bunch of problems but this one pretty clearly shows you don't get it. Your average middle-class guy doesn't pay enough into the system to be seen straight away if they don't need to be. Doctor on demand is an incredibly inefficient way of doing things so is seriously expensive. Upshot is that it is limited to the genuinely wealthy and not the middle classes. The rest of us are always going to be limited to a system that prioritises the best use of doctors time rather than us.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
Exempting doctors from lawsuits while creating a fund to compensate victims of incompetence seems like a communist idea to me.
Click to expand...

You missed the third part of that one. Also proposed was a non-inbred tribunal to wed out bad doctors, i.e. a tribunal composed of a cross section of society and not just other doctors.
 
uke2se said:
AAH, more like, like the OPs other threads.
Click to expand...
I'd be willing to extend some slack to a "critical thinker in training", but I'm not seeing a lot of teachability here. The poster seems to have his mind quite firmly made up, and, without even a clue as to just how far out of his depth he is, comes here not to learn, but to teach. The real lesson may well end up being one we should all have learned long ago: Don't feed the trolls. There are plenty of places where discourse at the level of this poster are the norm. This just isn't one of them.

Welcome to the shark tank, little guppy. Hope you enjoy your time here as much as some of us will.
 
Skimmed the OP, and saw "Obungacare" and "education/indoctrination". Which is good, since it saves me the time of actually reading the post.
 
Education needs reform. Not by politicians and not by "education scholars" but by people who are actually in the classroom weighing in heavily on the matter; the teachers.
 
icebear said:
Clinton, the cocaine, the underage girls at the governor's mansion parties, the Juanita Broaddrick charges, the other (numerous) allegations of sexual assault and/or rape, the Mena airport operations for starters.

Obama, drug use, the lack of US citizenship, the associations with shady/unsavory characters, Wright, Dorn, Ayers for starters.
Click to expand...

So we'd never have a president, senator, or... well, pretty much any elected officials? Things like smoking weed they volunteered, they could just be quiet about it. Granted you would disqualify them for any accusations (including ones that have been proven false ) but the Dems, or anyone else for that matter, could just accuse the Reps.

Eta: Actually, I doubt any cadidate would survive the primaries.
 
Last edited:
icebear said:
There should also be some mechanism to prevent utterly unqualified people from holding high offices. Certainly a candidate for president or vice president, or for US Senator or member of the House of Representatives should need to obtain the same basic and simple secret level security clearance which anybody would need to be a guard at the gate of any military base in our land. That isn't asking for much but it would have spared us from the last two democrat presidents.
Click to expand...

Here are the requirements for the current security clearance levels:

Wikipedia said:
Security assessment/clearances
Individuals who require access to more sensitive information (or access to sensitive federal government sites and/or assets) because of their job will be required to sign the Security Clearance Form (TBS/SCT 330-60e). There are three basic levels of clearance:
Confidential (Level I)
In addition to the RS checks, foreign employments, immediate relatives, and marriages/common-law relationships must be declared and be screened.
This level of clearance will grant the right to access designated and classified information up to Confidential level on a need-to-know basis. Department Heads have the discretion to allow for an individual to access Secret level information without higher level clearance on a case-to-case basis.
Secret (Level II)
Same as Confidential.
This level of clearance will grant the right to access designated and classified information up to Secret level on a need-to-know basis. Department Heads have the discretion to allow for an individual to access Top Secret-level information without higher-level clearance on a case-to-case basis.
Top Secret (Level III)
In addition to the checks at the Secret level, foreign travels, assets, and character references must be given. Field check will also be conducted prior to granting the clearance.
This level of clearance will grant the right to access all designated and classified information on a need-to-know basis.
Click to expand...

A secret clearance is so easy that anyone can get it if they were so inclined and could pass the background check. It's even easier to obtain than a concealed carry license.

icebear said:
Education

Notice I didn’t mention public education/indoctrination in that one since to my thinking public schools need to be abolished and not reformed.
Click to expand...

Speaking as a man who obtain their education from public schooling I would have to say I strongly disagree. Abolishing it would negatively effect millions of Americans nationwide, as most either can't afford the private alternatives or live nowhere near a private school. And home schooling is even more of a joke than public schooling.
 
icebear said:
Obama, drug use, the lack of US citizenship, the associations with shady/unsavory characters, Wright, Dorn, Ayers for starters.
Click to expand...

Ah. So you're a Birther then? You automatically fail.
 
Mudcat said:
Speaking as a man who obtain their education from public schooling I would have to say I strongly disagree. Abolishing it would negatively effect millions of Americans nationwide, as most either can't afford the private alternatives or live nowhere near a private school. And home schooling is even more of a joke than public schooling.
Click to expand...

US public ed still worked after a fashion in 1955, but it was nobody's idea of fun to be involved in even then. It was based on the Prussian model, and intended to produce cannon fodder and bricks in the wall, not self-reliant people.

If you simply got rid of it, funds could be provided for the truly poor to set up their own neighborhood school. It would cost a lot less and work a lot better.
 
icebear said:
If you simply got rid of it, funds could be provided for the truly poor to set up their own neighborhood school. It would cost a lot less and work a lot better.
Click to expand...

And where exactly do you think they will find the time for this?
 
icebear said:
US public ed still worked after a fashion in 1955, but it was nobody's idea of fun to be involved in even then. It was based on the Prussian model, and intended to produce cannon fodder and bricks in the wall, not self-reliant people.

If you simply got rid of it, funds could be provided for the truly poor to set up their own neighborhood school. It would cost a lot less and work a lot better.
Click to expand...

So... Abolish public schools, use the money that would've gone to public schools to set up neighborhood schools because neighboorhoods using that money is somehow different. This will be cheaper & be better because...?
 
icebear said:
You missed the third part of that one. Also proposed was a non-inbred tribunal to wed out bad doctors, i.e. a tribunal composed of a cross section of society and not just other doctors.
Click to expand...

Oh, so doctors fall into 2 mutually exclusive groups: good doctors and bad doctors? There isn't a continuum?
 
Isn't anyone going to comment on the fact that a thread advocating the abolishment of public education as a necessary thing misspells the word "necessary"?

Think of the children!
 
sir drinks-a-lot said:
How does a single payer option eliminate making profit off of people's health?
Click to expand...

That's an interesting point. It doesn't. But then that sort of demonstrates that single payer isn't socialism, doesn't it? It's still capitalism, just with more rigid controls to insure universal access.
 
Redtail said:
So... Abolish public schools, use the money that would've gone to public schools to set up neighborhood schools because neighboorhoods using that money is somehow different. This will be cheaper & be better because...?
Click to expand...

they won't be forced to teach evolution and things that he doesn't agree with.
 
Unabogie said:
It doesn't. But then that sort of demonstrates that single payer isn't socialism, doesn't it?
Click to expand...
You could argue against that strawman more effectively by pointing out that Socialism is an economic system and single payer health care is not, therefore the straw man is comparing apples to oranges. Category error.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom