Edwards embraces socialized medicine as platform component.

[Gan]

Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards said on Sunday that his universal health care proposal would require that Americans go to the doctor for preventive care.

"It requires that everybody be covered. It requires that everybody get preventive care," he told a crowd sitting in lawn chairs in front of the Cedar County Courthouse. "If you are going to be in the system, you can't choose not to go to the doctor for 20 years. You have to go in and be checked and make sure that you are OK."

He noted, for example, that women would be required to have regular mammograms in an effort to find and treat "the first trace of problem." Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth, announced earlier this year that her breast cancer had returned and spread.

Edwards said his mandatory health care plan would cover preventive, chronic and long-term health care. The plan would include mental health care as well as dental and vision coverage for all Americans.

"The whole idea is a continuum of care, basically from birth to death," he said.

The former North Carolina senator said all presidential candidates talking about health care "ought to be asked one question: Does your plan cover every single American?"

"Because if it doesn't they should be made to explain what child, what woman, what man in America is not worthy of health care," he said. "Because in my view, everybody is worth health care."

Edwards said his plan would cost up to $120 billion a year, a cost he proposes covering by ending President Bush's tax cuts to people who make more than $200,000 per year.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070902/ap_on_el_pr/edwards_2
_____________________________________________

Thoughts?

Is this realistic?

Do you think the estimated costs at 120 billion encomass everyone or just the ones that are currently projected NOT to have healthcare?

What do you think about being required to see the doctor, even if you dont wish to?

I have a few thoughts on this, as evidenced in earlier discussions; however, I'll hold back to see what some others have to say before I throw in my 2 cents.

[Sean of the Thread]

I'll chalk this one up as unrealistic since he doesn't have a bat's shit chance to win anything.

[ElanthianSiren]

Thoughts?

Is this realistic?

Do you think the estimated costs at 120 billion encomass everyone or just the ones that are currently projected NOT to have healthcare?

What do you think about being required to see the doctor, even if you dont wish to?

I have a few thoughts on this, as evidenced in earlier discussions; however, I'll hold back to see what some others have to say before I throw in my 2 cents.

UHC isn't realistic with current american attitudes. With regard to seeing a doctor, even if unwilling; some people simply don't WANT to be healthy. A better platform would be to say that if you neglect to get these checks, you're not covered. That satisfies the people who don't trust/don't want medical help. I believe however, (just intuitively), that those people would be a minority.

Fiscally, it's hard to say who it encompasses without a true funding message. IMO we should be looking at countries that do have universal care and rank the highest on WHO for leads if we want to try that platform. I say this for two reasons; Politicians have already shown that they know fuckall about healthcare (see medicare). Private industry has already shown it only knows how to profit from HC, not deliver affordable options for every American.

I don't believe that Edwards is actually planning to win the nomination. What the DNC will pay attention to, however, is how many votes he gets in the primary on his platform; this is done to gauge dem interest in those issues.

[chillmonster]

Deregulatioin, in some industries, has had some very good results that are undeniable to all but the most staunch idealogues on the left. In the telecom, airline, even garbage pick up moving responsibility to organizations more incentive to do a good job has benefited Americans. The incentive is the key. Competition provides customer with other choiices and incentivises companies to charge less and provide better service because customers who don't like one aspect or another can easily go somewhere else. There are drawbacks, but In more than half of the cases, this way works best.

Now, here's what I don't understand. Why are conservatives so happy to put the health of the vast majority of this country's citizens in the hands of large corporations who are incentivised to give less coverage. Competition provides incentive to market well, yes., but once a customer is in postion to critique a companie's service, the ability to move to someone else is taken away. At that point the insurance company effectively holds a monopoly on healthcare for that customer, and their incentive is then to disregard the client's welfare and deny coverage.

The system is inherently flawed, so why wouldn't a government agency be welcome? What makes conservatives think a federal agency would be so detrimental to the welfare of Americans - especially when it would only provide another choice to consumers - be welcomed with open arms? And how isn't the industry's influence over politicians in both parties (but Republicans in particular) very obvious?

Note: The 'socialized medicine' argument is a straw man. Any real plan would likely look like this, and if the status quo were actually better, insurance companies would still thrive.

[Stanley Burrell]

Do you think the estimated costs at 120 billion encomass everyone or just the ones that are currently projected NOT to have healthcare?

I think the costs would be better spent than, say, a trillion dollar war. Not to mention this would actually save lives.

If given an option to crawl out of our current Middle East shit hole and, subsequently, transform it into health care reform, we will be reversing a tremendous amount of damage.

And I do think the idealism out-speaks the realism only because we (politicians) have alienated the idea of, say, a free cancer screening for each and every United States citizen with respect to an issue such as bringing health care out of the Dark Ages.

What I'd hope for the most is that someone who claims they'll be pushing for something of this magnitude really puts the money where their mouth is. And being that politics will ultimately govern the biggest chunk of medical reform, we'd essentially need a "Democratic Bush" to re-rout enough taxpayer to bring these ideas out of idealism and into realism. Seeing as that every single candidate, regardless of party, can thus far pronounce the word "nuclear" with pronunciation key-like accuracy, we'll have, sadly, the intelligence (comparably, at least) of someone concerned about public opinion, post-King George II era, creating political molasses to be fought through in order to have physical action culminate that reverses even a speckle of shit dust in the fiery crapstorm of damage dealt out by this administration.

[Warriorbird]

Socialized Medicine for the Democrats is the equivalent of meaningful immigration legislation for Republicans. There are certain things that will never happen because there's too much money behind them not happening.

[Stanley Burrell]

Socialized Medicine for U.S. politicians is the equivalent of meaningful immigration legislation for Republicans. There are certain things that will never happen because there's too much money behind them not happening.

I r edit.

[Gan]

Did a little reading up on the Edwards official campaign site (http://johnedwards.com/issues/health-care/), since the article left a few gaps in what his idea actually is. Perhaps I titled the thread a little wrongly as its not actually socialized medicine that he's after.




Under the Edwards Plan:

Families without insurance will get coverage at an affordable price.
Families with insurance will pay less and get more security and choices.
Businesses and other employers will find it cheaper and easier to insure their workers. The Edwards Plan achieves universal coverage by:

Requiring businesses and other employers to either cover their employees or help finance their health insurance.
Making insurance affordable by creating new tax credits, expanding Medicaid and SCHIP, reforming insurance laws, and taking innovative steps to contain health care costs.
Creating regional "Health Care Markets" to let every American share the bargaining power to purchase an affordable, high-quality health plan, increase choices among insurance plans, and cut costs for businesses offering insurance.
Once these steps have been taken, requiring all American residents to get insurance.Securing universal healthcare for every American will require the active involvement of millions of Americans.



Basically his focus is on getting healthcare insurance available for those who do not have it/can not afford it and for increasing the benefits available to those who already pay under an existing plan. Which in effect means subsidies and more government regulation in the healthcare market.

The funding for this is proposed through eliminating the existing tax cuts/loopholes for those who make 200k/yr or more. I have two problems with this. First I dont see the increased tax revenue equalling the cost of insuring those who do not currently pay under an existing plan especially if those being offered coverage really run up the tab with major medical procedures. Secondly what makes Edwards think that the folks who found the loopholes in the first place (those gaming the tax system) wont find more loopholes thus reducing the amount of revenue required to prop up this system in its 2nd and subsequent years? Its an established fact that those having to pay the taxes are a lot smarter about the system than the legislators who create/manage it.

I also have an issue with making employers pay for more thus reducing the amount necessary for employees to pay. Here is where he's playing on the ignorance of those who do pay for coverage under an employer sponsored plan. Most employee plans are already paid in part by the employer. This ratio ranges from 50% employee/50% employer contribution to 100% employer contribution. The norm I've seen ranges from 75% employer/25% employee contribution to 70/30%. By requiring the employer to cover more of the contribution level you are going to force the employer to minimize costs in other areas to remain competetive (cost reduction in things such as land/labor/capital/investment) which in turn will eventually make them non-competetive. Or the employer will just pass the costs (in a non-competetive market) right along to the consumer. Either way the employee pays in the long run.

Bottom line, people pay for insurance because they know it will benefit them when they need healthcare. Insurance companies offer insurance with the idea that on average they can make a profit off of incoming premium as compared to outgoing provider payment expenses.

Same thing can be said for car insurance, home insurance, or any other insurance.

If someone really wants to make a difference, then they should deregulate the provider availability and let people or employers buy into large premium pools which in turn drives down premium costs per individual. As it stands, pools are focused by employer, so those smaller employers have smaller premium available pools ergo their premium costs are higher.

As long as healthcare is non-nationalized then there must be an opportunity for profit in order to attract participants into the market. Otherwise who would want to participate in a market where there is no profit? (government agencies not included)

[Latrinsorm]

$120b to 300m people = 400 dollars per person per year. I spent more than that in copays this year.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/johnnyoldschool/idiot.jpg

[Stanley Burrell]

Secondly what makes Edwards think that the folks who found the loopholes in the first place (those gaming the tax system) wont find more loopholes thus reducing the amount of revenue required to prop up this system in its 2nd and subsequent years? Its an established fact that those having to pay the taxes are a lot smarter about the system than the legislators who create/manage it.

There is no "this won't be iffy."

Ideally, a federal agency with a sharper record on taxing will actually eliminate the privatized earning + insurance loophole. Very, extremely, ridiculously ideally. And I doubt, muchly, that there will ever exist a politician who can separate themselves from private firms and reallocate misappropriated funds directly into a federal watchdog such as the IRS working alongside a proposed united health care reform.

There will always be loopholes, but if a politician is willing to commit what is very possibly personal, nano-micro-economical political/economic suicide, they would make an extremely important baby step at nationalizing a health care reform.

What politician with spending powers can simultaneously not be dissuaded by a lack of support from drug companies + privatized health syndicates and be equally ready to hand over personal power to the federal government body?

Personally, I don't care how liberal and avantgarde this pitch is, I still think, when viewing a presidential nominee's rhetoric for what is is, that the idea is hogwash by anyone who could be elected to doctor any taxpayer funds towards reform.

I really pray for small doses of bravery in individuals who will hopefully pass some form of baby step legislation that, at first glance, has to be thrown out as overly ideal due to the huge conservative wall standing in the way of federal health care reform. I just hope it'll be someone who is doing more than saying they're going to make changes.

Like I said, ultimately, the president/committeeman will open their mouth and insert foot OR follow through financially. No one likes change, which sucks because it's so evident at the political level.

Yeeh-argh.

[chillmonster]

The funding for this is proposed through eliminating the existing tax cuts/loopholes for those who make 200k/yr or more. I have two problems with this. First I dont see the increased tax revenue equalling the cost of insuring those who do not currently pay under an existing plan especially if those being offered coverage really run up the tab with major medical procedures. Secondly what makes Edwards think that the folks who found the loopholes in the first place (those gaming the tax system) wont find more loopholes thus reducing the amount of revenue required to prop up this system in its 2nd and subsequent years? Its an established fact that those having to pay the taxes are a lot smarter about the system than the legislators who create/manage it.

I also have an issue with making employers pay for more thus reducing the amount necessary for employees to pay. Here is where he's playing on the ignorance of those who do pay for coverage under an employer sponsored plan. Most employee plans are already paid in part by the employer. This ratio ranges from 50% employee/50% employer contribution to 100% employer contribution. The norm I've seen ranges from 75% employer/25% employee contribution to 70/30%. By requiring the employer to cover more of the contribution level you are going to force the employer to minimize costs in other areas to remain competetive (cost reduction in things such as land/labor/capital/investment) which in turn will eventually make them non-competetive. Or the employer will just pass the costs (in a non-competetive market) right along to the consumer. Either way the employee pays in the long run.

Bottom line, people pay for insurance because they know it will benefit them when they need healthcare. Insurance companies offer insurance with the idea that on average they can make a profit off of incoming premium as compared to outgoing provider payment expenses.

Same thing can be said for car insurance, home insurance, or any other insurance.

If someone really wants to make a difference, then they should deregulate the provider availability and let people or employers buy into large premium pools which in turn drives down premium costs per individual. As it stands, pools are focused by employer, so those smaller employers have smaller premium available pools ergo their premium costs are higher.

As long as healthcare is non-nationalized then there must be an opportunity for profit in order to attract participants into the market. Otherwise who would want to participate in a market where there is no profit? (government agencies not included)

I aggree with everything you say but the highlighted paragraph because it would still not address the underlying problem in our healthcare system. If someone really wanted to make a difference, they'd set up a national Blue Cross that incorporated all funds currently allocated to medicare and medicaid to pay costs for those too poor to afford healthcare along with a healthcare tax credit to businesses and individuals roughly equaling the premium they'd pay if they elected to be included. Couple that with giving this organization negotiating power with drug companies and hospital, and opening up government run clinics for checkups and early diagnosis and we'd have a system to be envied.

We'd would not only provide healthcare fo all Americans, but also force change in the current practices of all health insurance providers. The ability to negotiate with drug companies and hospitals along with full time clinics to handle routine checkups and early diagnosis would help minimise the increased costs, and the huge savings would remove a huge burden from the business community.

[Tsa`ah]

$120b to 300m people = 400 dollars per person per year. I spent more than that in copays this year.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v456/johnnyoldschool/idiot.jpg

Well, it's unrealistic to require people to visit their doctor for preventive medicine and wellness exams. Nothing wrong with the expectation, but it just won't happen.

It's not unrealistic to think 120 billion won't stretch to cover 300 million people. I doubt the Fed is going to shell out 120 and let corporate medicine charge 50 bucks for a Tylenol III, or 200 bucks for a chest X-ray. Like any HMO or PPO, there will be price negotiations and likely government oversights to make sure (laughably) the tax payers aren't getting boned with overinflated charges and unnecessary procedures (see botox etc).

However, Edwards isn't embracing socialized medicine, he's embracing subsidized medine.

[Good Karma]

On the OP...

Preventative care is the way to go. It saves money in the long run. If every American received preventative care, and health issues were dealt with early and treatable, thus preventing costly end care, the system could pay for itself for what it saves. Insurance companies could benefit as well. And anyone could pay more for better if they had the income.

Another aspect to this is GDP. If we keep the lower income workers and their families healthy without them going bankrupt it helps our country in the long term.

Universal health care is efficient in the big picture.

[Parkbandit]

Personally, if we're going to do "free" healthcare for everyone, we should also do free meals, free housing and free transportation. And that's just to begin with... after that, we should let the individual decide on whether or not they want to work for a living... and if they pursue other dreams, we should subsidize their efforts.

Hug a tree today.. because tomorrow they will all be gone.

Thanks :)

[chillmonster]

Personally, if we're going to do "free" healthcare for everyone, we should also do free meals, free housing and free transportation. And that's just to begin with... after that, we should let the individual decide on whether or not they want to work for a living... and if they pursue other dreams, we should subsidize their efforts.

Hug a tree today.. because tomorrow they will all be gone.

Thanks :)

Here's a guy who obviously hasn't examined this issue at all, but even in his ignorance he still finds a way to form an opinion.

For you bleeding hearts out there: pass on hugging a tree and hug a Republican. He's either a complete fucking moron, a closet homosexual who's living a lie, or a real conservative who's heartbroken that the first two have taken over his party.

[Gan]

On the OP...

Preventative care is the way to go. It saves money in the long run. If every American received preventative care, and health issues were dealt with early and treatable, thus preventing costly end care, the system could pay for itself for what it saves. Insurance companies could benefit as well. And anyone could pay more for better if they had the income.

Another aspect to this is GDP. If we keep the lower income workers and their families healthy without them going bankrupt it helps our country in the long term.

Universal health care is efficient in the big picture.

By that logic then it seems a natural step to consider the following:

If the government is going to mandate preventative care, then they should also mandate a ban on smoking, drinking, eating foods that are bad for you, and engaging in any behavior that would be construed a health risk of any sort. Because now that the state is responsible for your health it will take any and all necessary steps to prevent those who are irresponsible with it from being a burden upon the rest of society.

On the other hand, personal freedom is also a big player in the big picture.

[Gan]

Here's a guy who obviously hasn't examined this issue at all, but even in his ignorance he still finds a way to form an opinion.

For you bleeding hearts out there: pass on hugging a tree and hug a Republican. He's either a complete fucking moron, a closet homosexual who's living a lie, or a real conservative who's heartbroken that the first two have taken over his party.

wait for it...



wait for it....

[Parkbandit]

Here's a guy who obviously hasn't examined this issue at all, but even in his ignorance he still finds a way to form an opinion.

For you bleeding hearts out there: pass on hugging a tree and hug a Republican. He's either a complete fucking moron, a closet homosexual who's living a lie, or a real conservative who's heartbroken that the first two have taken over his party.

You calling anyone ignorant is a joke. You've quickly filled the void left by Backlash in the stupidity department.

I value your opinion right next to the other dumb fucking liberals on this board. Backlash, Ilvane and now Chillmonster.

I give you 6 months to have your breakdown.. where you delete a bunch of posts then change your login to start fresh.

either way, you've earned this award today:

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e6/belike53/Dumbshit.jpg

Oh, and please save your next post of "OMG! why do you always have to insult people.. why can't you just debate the issue!" so I don't have to call you out for being a hypocrite as well as being dumb as used tampon.

[chillmonster]

You calling anyone ignorant is a joke. You've quickly filled the void left by Backlash in the stupidity department.

I value your opinion right next to the other dumb fucking liberals on this board. Backlash, Ilvane and now Chillmonster.

I give you 6 months to have your breakdown.. where you delete a bunch of posts then change your login to start fresh.

either way, you've earned this award today:

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e6/belike53/Dumbshit.jpg

Oh, and please save your next post of "OMG! why do you always have to insult people.. why can't you just debate the issue!" so I don't have to call you out for being a hypocrite as well as being dumb as used tampon.


Note that this fucking stupid bastard still hasn't offered a single idea about healthcare reform. He either throws support behing Gan's arguments or relies on cliche' and shitty humor because he doesn't have a single thing to say.

And please, don't flatter yourself. I don't debate morons, so save your next ignorant fucking comment for someone who actually respects you enough to take you seriously.

[Parkbandit]

Note that this fucking stupid bastard still hasn't offered a single idea about healthcare reform. He either throws support behing Gan's arguments or relies on cliche' and shitty humor because he doesn't have a single thing to say.

And please, don't flatter yourself. I don't debate morons, so save your next ignorant fucking comment for someone who actually respects you enough to take you seriously.

OMG NO! CHILLMASTER DOESN'T RESPECT ME! WHAT TO DO!!!

Oh wait.. who the fuck is Chillmaster? That's right.. no one.

My stance on healthcare is pretty well documented on this forum... I don't think it's my responsibility to regurgitate that which I've already stated for the stupid people.

But.. in the spirit of being open minded, I'm going to go to 5 of my neighbors and beg them to pay for my healthcare. If any of them agrees to it, then maybe I'll take another look at this 'free' healthcare for all.

[chillmonster]

OMG NO! CHILLMASTER DOESN'T RESPECT ME! WHAT TO DO!!!

Oh wait.. who the fuck is Chillmaster? That's right.. no one.

My stance on healthcare is pretty well documented on this forum... I don't think it's my responsibility to regurgitate that which I've already stated for the stupid people.

But.. in the spirit of being open minded, I'm going to go to 5 of my neighbors and beg them to pay for my healthcare. If any of them agrees to it, then maybe I'll take another look at this 'free' healthcare for all.

What the fuck is this idiot talking about? Obviously, he's still arguing with the idea he's formed of what a liberal should be and hasn't bothered to read the thread.

I'm done. This moron isn't worth my time.

[Parkbandit]

What the fuck is this idiot talking about? Obviously, he's still arguing with the idea he's formed of what a liberal should be and hasn't bothered to read the thread.

I'm done. This moron isn't worth my time.


Clearly you are too stupid to post here. You should be done.

BTW: If you are done with me... does this mean you will also ignore me in other threads.. or should I label you ignorand AND a hypocrite now?

[ElanthianSiren]

What I've always found interesting about the healthcare debate is the student factor. Graduate students, especially, can rarely get decent healthcare (many students are covered until 22 on parent plans), due to 16 cr mandatory sems (this severely limits employment obviously).

Further, standard student plans never cover pre-existing things like athsma, allergies, cyclical bronchitus etc. This leaves people with a choice often of putting off healthcare or putting off education. For the nay sayers of subsidized healthcare -- what is wrong with it in that instance? It doesn't seem (IMO) that forcing people to choose between health care and education bodes well for having the most educated, healthiest individuals leading the US in the future.

[Parkbandit]

What I've always found interesting about the healthcare debate is the student factor. Graduate students, especially, can rarely get decent healthcare (many students are covered until 22 on parent plans), due to 16 cr mandatory sems (this severely limits employment obviously).

Further, standard student plans never cover pre-existing things like athsma, allergies, cyclical bronchitus etc. This leaves people with a choice often of putting off healthcare or putting off education. For the nay sayers of subsidized healthcare -- what is wrong with it in that instance? It doesn't seem (IMO) that forcing people to choose between health care and education bodes well for having the most educated, healthiest individuals leading the US in the future.


Like anything else in life.. sometimes you need to work for your goals. I had healthcare my entire life.. but then again, I've been working since I was 12 and had a real job since I was 18 when I dropped off my parent's insurance. I held a fulltime job throughout college so I could maintain my health insurance.

Of course.. I could have just sat in my room and complained about how bad America is and how I didn't have insurance...

[ElanthianSiren]

Like anything else in life.. sometimes you need to work for your goals. I had healthcare my entire life.. but then again, I've been working since I was 12 and had a real job since I was 18 when I dropped off my parent's insurance. I held a fulltime job throughout college so I could maintain my health insurance.

Of course.. I could have just sat in my room and complained about how bad America is and how I didn't have insurance...

And what was your major and your highest level of education?

[Kembal]

Wonderful, PB, but I think ES was talking about health insurance for grad students. The amount of coursework they have usually prevents them from getting a job that would provide health insurance, and the student health insurance plans offered by universities suck. (they're ok and fairly cheap for single people, but if you're married (and esp. if you have kids), they're terrible and expensive to boot. And that describes a lot of grad students.)

[Parkbandit]

And what was your major and your highest level of education?


Economic and Business Management and 4 years of college. At the time, SUNY - Binghamton was considered a top 5 state school in the nation.

[Tsa`ah]

Like anything else in life.. sometimes you need to work for your goals. I had healthcare my entire life.. but then again, I've been working since I was 12 and had a real job since I was 18 when I dropped off my parent's insurance. I held a fulltime job throughout college so I could maintain my health insurance.

Of course.. I could have just sat in my room and complained about how bad America is and how I didn't have insurance...

While you deserve cudos, you are also not indicative of an entire population. There are people who can't get affordable insurance due to pre-existing conditions they were born with .. and that's just scratching the surface.

[Parkbandit]

Wonderful, PB, but I think ES was talking about health insurance for grad students. The amount of coursework they have usually prevents them from getting a job that would provide health insurance, and the student health insurance plans offered by universities suck. (they're ok and fairly cheap for single people, but if you're married (and esp. if you have kids), they're terrible and expensive to boot. And that describes a lot of grad students.)

Grad students have essentially the same course load of most college students... the only difference is that most parents support their kids through college.

Again.. if having healthcare is one of your needs.. then figure out how to make it happen instead of believing it should be granted to you.

[Parkbandit]

While you deserve cudos, you are also not indicative of an entire population. There are people who can't get affordable insurance due to pre-existing conditions they were born with .. and that's just scratching the surface.


What percentage of the population are you really debating for here? 2%? 1? I can come up with a fraction of the general population to 'prove' my point in any debate.. but we're talking about the general population. Average Joe out there.

[ElanthianSiren]

Grad students have essentially the same course load of most college students.

On which school and program are you basing this statement?

[Warriorbird]

His own...which are of course exactly the same as the rest of America's. He's an expert.

:nods sagely:

[CrystalTears]

Like anything else in life.. sometimes you need to work for your goals. I had healthcare my entire life.. but then again, I've been working since I was 12 and had a real job since I was 18 when I dropped off my parent's insurance. I held a fulltime job throughout college so I could maintain my health insurance.

Of course.. I could have just sat in my room and complained about how bad America is and how I didn't have insurance...
Even though I tend to agree with some of your views, you may have actually been an exception rather than a rule. It's not typical for a student to be able to go to school full-time, hold down a job and be able to afford health insurance on top of other expenses. If I wasn't living at home I don't know if I would have been able to afford much, even though I worked while going to school as well.

Not to bag on your age like everyone else, but times HAVE changed and it's a bit more challenging these days to incorporate a full time education AND full time work without it sacrificing one of them in some way. If this country is hell bent on working towards better education, we need to have affordable means for these kids to live on, which includes better health insurance and care.

[Parkbandit]

Jesus Christ. I forgot ElantianSiren is back.

OMG! I WANT STATS OR IT NEVER HAPPENED AND THUS I WIN THE DEBATE!! DID I MENTION I AM AN EXPERT IN MOST FIELDS?

Here:

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e6/belike53/Dead20Horse204.jpg

[Warriorbird]

Parkbandit doesn't respond well to having his tactics used on him.

[Parkbandit]

Even though I tend to agree with some of your views, you may have actually been an exception rather than a rule. It's not typical for a student to be able to go to school full-time, hold down a job and be able to afford health insurance on top of other expenses. If I wasn't living at home I don't know if I would have been able to afford much, even though I worked while going to school as well.

Not to bag on your age like everyone else, but times HAVE changed and it's a bit more challenging these days to incorporate a full time education AND full time work without it sacrificing one of them in some way. If this country is hell bent on working towards better education, we need to have affordable means for these kids to live on, which includes better health insurance and care.

Bullshit.

I don't want to sound like I am some super human being out there that does everything perfectly.. because that is far from the case. But you can't tell me that the average student, who doesn't have health insurance, cannot find 32 hours out of the week to hold down a job. I don't buy it.

Again.. it's priorities. If having health insurance is a high priority for you, then there are plenty of ways to go about fulfilling that goal. 32 hours a week is NOTHING.

[Parkbandit]

Parkbandit doesn't respond well to having his tactics used on him.


As usual WB, you've added a great deal to this discussion. Well played.

[Tsa`ah]

You think 1-2%

Have you checked over a list of disorders that disqualify people for coverage?

You do understand that 6.5% of children under the age of 18 were diagnosed with asthma in 2005 right? That's total population under the age of 18 ... per the CDC.

This year the figure is 20 million people in the US suffer from asthma, only 6 million are children.

Still sticking with 1-2% or should we move on to diabetes?

[DeV]

What I've always found interesting about the healthcare debate is the student factor.I actually agree with you, but only as it pertains to young people in need up to the age of 21 as long as they are pursuing continuing education or in a accredited work-study program of some sort. It's a place to start.

As it stands the costs of treating the uninsured are often absorbed by those of us who are insured through a number of measures. High costs of care being one of them.

[DeV]

But you can't tell me that the average student, who doesn't have health insurance, cannot find 32 hours out of the week to hold down a job. I don't buy it.Depends on your definition of the "average student"?

I place working students into two groups; those who identify mainly as sudents, but who also work to pay the bills, and those who are first and foremost working to pay the bills, but also take some college classes on the side.

Then you have to look at the kind of employment these college students are obtaining; full-time vs. part-time, on-campus vs. off-campus. There are a dozen factors to take into consideration when it comes to choosing a job as a student and if, by some miracle, that job includes medical benefits. Then you have the crop of students who work just as hard, but don't get paid. There you have your interns. Mostly junior/senior/grad level of students who very well may run into problems when it comes to affordable healthcare. Keyword: affordable

[Latrinsorm]

Grad students have essentially the same course load of most college studentsThis is me making the noise when survey says X.
OMG! I WANT STATS OR IT NEVER HAPPENED AND THUS I WIN THE DEBATE!! So we should accept any baseless statement you make without question, huh? How dogmatic of you. :D

[ElanthianSiren]

Jesus Christ. I forgot ElantianSiren is back.

OMG! I WANT STATS OR IT NEVER HAPPENED AND THUS I WIN THE DEBATE!! DID I MENTION I AM AN EXPERT IN MOST FIELDS?



Actually, I want you to demonstrate that you know what you're talking about, as your only expertise in this field is dated (your college history). What is your example of an institution which burdens its undergrads similarly to its grad programs?

[Parkbandit]

Actually, I want you to demonstrate that you know what you're talking about, as your only expertise in this field is dated (your college history). What is your example of an institution which burdens its undergrads similarly to its grad programs?


When I was a student in college, it was up to me to determine my workload. I could take a number of different credit hours.

What was your point again and what does this have to do with healthcare? I really hope your point (if you even have on) is that an undergrad may have time for a full time job, but there is no way that a grad student does... because I'll gladly show you examples inside my family of you being ignorant.

Or was your point simply to derail yet another thread asking for sources for really stupid things? If it was, I'll send you the dead horse picture via email so you can refer to it.

[ElanthianSiren]

When I was a student in college, it was up to me to determine my workload. I could take a number of different credit hours.

That has changed, due to tuition concerns regarding full time and part time status, and it's especially different in grad programs, unless you want to pay quite a bit extra.



What was your point again and what does this have to do with healthcare? I really hope your point (if you even have on) is that an undergrad may have time for a full time job, but there is no way that a grad student does... because I'll gladly show you examples inside my family of you being ignorant.

Or was your point simply to derail yet another thread asking for sources for really stupid things? If it was, I'll send you the dead horse picture via email so you can refer to it.

You may refer to my previous posts, where my point is clarified for you several times. I asked a very simple question of you, based on what you posted, which you still refuse to answer.

[Warriorbird]

They'd never allow an undergrad to do anywhere near the work I'm doing now. These days extreme credit hours also take a lot of approvals.

[Parkbandit]

So ES, Please tell us all what the average workload in hours is for an average undergrad and then for a grad.

Once you produce these numbers, verified by 3 seperate sources, and linked.. then I will be able to tell you how someone would still manage to hold a 32 hour a week job.

I'll await your data.

[ElanthianSiren]

So ES, Please tell us all what the average workload in hours is for an average undergrad and then for a grad.

Once you produce these numbers, verified by 3 seperate sources, and linked.. then I will be able to tell you how someone would still manage to hold a 32 hour a week job.

I'll await your data.

I asked you first. It really isn't that hard to dig up, but I want you to do the exercise yourself; maybe it will teach you to know what you're talking about next time you post. I doubt it, but a girl can dream.

[Latrinsorm]

I've found that "prove me wrong" is a lot more effective when I have something more than my say-so to go on. Not that this should be considered by anyone in this thread (PARKBANDIT) or anything.

[Parkbandit]

I asked you first. It really isn't that hard to dig up, but I want you to do the exercise yourself; maybe it will teach you to know what you're talking about next time you post. I doubt it, but a girl can dream.


I asked you second.. unless you are just scared that your big sticking point really brings zero to the discussion at hand. Yea.. we've been down this road before. You dwell on something small.. forever.. and derail a conversation for your own dream of one day being right.

I'm still waiting for that data.

[ElanthianSiren]

I asked you second.. unless you are just scared that your big sticking point really brings zero to the discussion at hand. Yea.. we've been down this road before. You dwell on something small.. forever.. and derail a conversation for your own dream of one day being right.

I'm still waiting for that data.

:lol: How is asking you to explain a truly stupid statement you made in reference to this thread derailing it? You can wait forever, sweetheart. I'm not doing your work for you. YOU made the statement. You back it up with facts like a good little boy.

Alternatively, admit you can't do it, and I'll forget your moment of idiocity for now. I'm sure there will be plenty to go on later.

[Parkbandit]

:lol: How is asking you to explain a truly stupid statement you made in reference to this thread derailing it? You can wait forever, sweetheart. I'm not doing your work for you. YOU made the statement. You back it up with facts like a good little boy.

Alternatively, admit you can't do it, and I'll forget your moment of idiocity for now. I'm sure there will be plenty to go on later.

Prove me wrong.

I'll prove you stupid.

[ElanthianSiren]

Prove me wrong.

You have already proven yourself wrong.

[Parkbandit]

You have already proven yourself wrong.


And you've already proven yourself stupid.


My work is done here.

Grats on another thread you've fucked up.

[ElanthianSiren]

Originally Posted by Parkbandit
Grad students have essentially the same course load of most college students.


Uh.... okay whatever. How dare someone ask you to defend the stupid statement you made in this thread.

Now, if you'll go back to your sandbox, the rest of us were talking about healthcare and plausible solutions (or bandaids) to the problem/s created by that system in the US.

I'm particularly interested in what Ganalon has to say (or someone that actually works in the industry) about specific groups that do easily slip through the cracks (in non fairytale land).

[ElanthianSiren]

One of the ideas that I had was that students (regardless of if you're agreeing with Dev or CT) must maintain a certain GPA; this allows students to decide how much work-time they can allocate, while not tying them to full time but still ensuring they do their part with regard to their GPA.

If undergrads are a concern, it could be tied to work study.

I covered grads above.

[CrystalTears]

As much as I agree that students should maintain a certain GPA, if you're going to allow for affordable insurance for students, I believe they should be a full time student. Someone taking two classes and maintaining a 4.0 can still get a job outside of school. The leniency needs to go to those who are making school their full time job.

[ElanthianSiren]

As much as I agree that students should maintain a certain GPA, if you're going to allow for affordable insurance for students, I believe they should be a full time student. Someone taking two classes and maintaining a 4.0 can still get a job outside of school. The leniency needs to go to those who are making school their full time job.

I agree. When I said full time, it was with regard to employment. I didn't mean that students shouldn't be full time; in fact, I'd been operating with the idea that they were full time, as we were talking about grad students earlier. Thanks for pointing that out.

[Stanley Burrell]

On which school and program are you basing this statement?


His own...which are of course exactly the same as the rest of America's. He's an expert.

:nods sagely:

This makes me want to actually read entire threads :lol::lol::lol: Awesome.

[Parkbandit]

Uh.... okay whatever. How dare someone ask you to defend the stupid statement you made in this thread.

Now, if you'll go back to your sandbox, the rest of us were talking about healthcare and plausible solutions (or bandaids) to the problem/s created by that system in the US.

I'm particularly interested in what Ganalon has to say (or someone that actually works in the industry) about specific groups that do easily slip through the cracks (in non fairytale land).

Still awaiting your data to support your wild claim.

[Stanley Burrell]

Still awaiting your data to support your wild claim.

I have a recent claim to support the data:

It's called, my thesis on why your (Falgrin's/PB's) thinking a freshman level BIO 100 course is "just as easy" as a Graduate Biochemistry supports my hypothesis in that you suffer greatly from bovine spongiform encephalopathy.

Maybe I'll get to use you as a test subject for my later studies.

[Gan]

Quit fucking up my thread.

:(

[Stanley Burrell]

Quit fucking up my thread.

Gah! My bad, here:

http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/icons/icon14.gif

http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/icons/icon14.gif

http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/icons/icon14.gif

All better, Gan :love:

[chillmonster]

When did this become a debate about covering grad students with the same shitty insurance? As long as the economics of the insurance industry incentivise firms to provide less coverage, the health care situation in this country will never be resolved.

On top of that: people who can't afford a doctor often can't afford the co-pays and deductibles that go along with insurance, so they won't be receiving the kind of preventative care that would result in real savings overall anyway. And forget grad students; if we were to require coverage for only poor children their parents wouldn't likely be savvy enough to fight for adequate compensations from insurance agencies. They'd end up with bills they can't afford to pay, which drives up everyone premiums for everyone else and in many cases limits the kind of care available.

Anyone who objectively analyzes this has to realize there are some very real, very deep seeded problems with the healthcare industry in America. Chipping away at the edges won't get this problem fixed.

[ElanthianSiren]

When did this become a debate about covering grad students with the same shitty insurance? As long as the economics of the insurance industry incentivise firms to provide less coverage, the health care situation in this country will never be resolved.


Anyone who objectively analyzes this has to realize there are some very real, very deep seeded problems with the healthcare industry in America. Chipping away at the edges won't get this problem fixed.

Unfortunately, I don't agree that what you want is feasible under the current system. It may help to analyze what happened with regard to the industry last time federal socialized medicine was proposed.

The more expedient approach IMO is to take the one that the far right has taken on abortion. That is to mobilize people about very specific, small groups. See recent decision on late term procedures etc.

[Xaerve]

A few points:

1) Most graduate programs, in my experience, are MUCH easier than undergraduate programs. Harvard, I know for a fact, has much easier graduate programs than undergraduate, in many fields -- with the exception of the medical school.

2) I've completed my undergraduate work, and graduate work at Harvard and have saved a bunch of money, paid for 50% of my own tuition, and paid for my own health insurance. I'd argue that my workload, while at Harvard, was comparable to anywhere in this country in any graduate or undergraduate program. I worked, 32 hours a week while taking courses and graduated with honors. I also busted my ass every summer, instead of going home and "hanging out" like my friends, who are now in debt with student loans. I don't buy this QQ students need help bullshit. If they don't learn to be responsible in college and save the 60$ bar tab, and put it towards health insurance or tuition, then though shit.

3) Universal Health Care, in Massachusetts, has been a huge success. Its not, as everyone is focusing on in this thread, about taxing more and covering more, at least always. In MA, many of the individuals who the Commonwealth Connector (The state agency that is sponsoring Universal health care in MA), has reached out too are able to pay for their own insurance, but just chose not to do so, or do not know how to do so. They are now working in conjunction with employers and employees to help get the insurance rate for the state above 90%. Granted, this has resulted in a few tax-adjustments, but in the long run, paying a LITTLE up front to ensure coverage for preventative care (I think more policy should be put in place to FORCE preventative care check-ups, if you want full coverage), can save a lot of money in the long run.

The MA system is currently diligently looking into individual's situations, and if they're capable of work, and not working, then they're getting penalized for not covering themselves soon.


I'm half awake, and about to fly out, so if any of this didn't make sense, my apologies.

[ElanthianSiren]

1) Most graduate programs, in my experience, are MUCH easier than undergraduate programs. Harvard, I know for a fact, has much easier graduate programs than undergraduate, in many fields -- with the exception of the medical school.


Question: What was your graduate program, if I may ask?

I'm in medicine/science/research, so my view of the situation is influenced by people in those fields. It was my understanding that most graduate programs are 16-20 CH minimum, plus things like rotations etc. I'm curious now what things look like in other fields.

Edit: I should add also that nobody I associate with in life is the type to consume $60 tabs at bars. Alcohol's simply a habit I find more than repulsive, (worse than smoking in fact), due to its propensity to make people lose control of themselves.

[TheEschaton]

Harvard's MPP is not easy. Nor is its MDiv.

[Stanley Burrell]

Most graduate programs, in my experience, are MUCH easier than undergraduate programs. Harvard, I know for a fact, has much easier graduate programs than undergraduate, in many fields -- with the exception of the medical school.


Question: What was your graduate program, if I may ask?

:yeahthat:

I could've gone to the most basic low-level, whatever-you-want-to-call-it college, if I throw an electrospectrometer at Harvard Freshmen (and most probably starting biology sophormores) and start telling foogs to differentiate between between the nose piece and stage condensor of your basic compound microscope, they'd probably do a decent job of keeping a fistful of thumbs up their ascot-wearing, plaid Polo bungholes (not limited to Harvard students, but undergrad biology and graduate biology will make your head spin with new material, both newly applied and through strict literature [which is a cool part of the natural sciences for me, personally!])

Pretty tired too here.

[Tsa`ah]

Quit fucking up my thread.

:(

Your thread was fucked up a few pages back ... I don't think it needed Stan's help.

[DeV]

A few points:

1) Most graduate programs, in my experience, are MUCH easier than undergraduate programs. Harvard, I know for a fact, has much easier graduate programs than undergraduate, in many fields -- with the exception of the medical school.
Graduate students are held to a higher caliber than undergraduate students. In my experience, graduate students were expected to have developed very good research skills, more in-depth and applied knowlege, and other responsibilities such as a practicum, internship, or thesis applied to the course load that professors took into account.

It can be initially overwhelming, but as an adult learner we are able to balance employment, education, and unforseen occurrences a lot better than at the undergrad level. The only thing that comes easy with grad school is the urge to procrastinate, which hit me more times than I can remember.

At the undergraduate level the professor is guiding the student and helping them to develop the skills necessary for attaining and being successful in higher education. I found myself and others using our professors more as sounding boards for affirmation and guidance. By the way, ES, the typical full-time course load for me was 9 hours (I/O Psychology) so while I spent less time in class I spent more time outside of class with coursework preparation, reading, and tons of take home assignments. I also worked 30 hours a week, sometimes less, depending on my course workload so I didn't qualify for insurance, but I did qualify for my girlfriend's insurance as a domestic partner.

[Stanley Burrell]

..Wait until he dishes out a plethora of statistical truth to make the complete antithesis of said fuck-ed up-age... :whistle:

Edit: Quoting Tsa`ah. Too tired to read Dev's ingenuity.

[Tsa`ah]

I find the notion of undergrads (as a whole) having it harder than grad students (as a whole) more than a little absurd ... then I consider the source and chuckle.

I never attended grad program and though she would be a poor example to use, my wife did. Maybe Harvard is the exception ... maybe the comment is only good for a laugh, but observing my wife and many friends in grad programs, most of their time was committed to research, reading, lecture, internships, and when they could get their head above that water line ... getting some sleep or relieving stress a few nights a month.

I could get behind the statement if the grad program was for basket weaving or gameboy ... or a number of other grad programs that will likely do nothing for you in the work force other than give you some resume filler.

[Gan]

..Wait until he dishes out a plethora of statistical truth to make the complete antithesis of said fuck-ed up-age... :whistle:

Edit: Quoting Tsa`ah. Too tired to read Dev's ingenuity.

That was neither the aim nor the concept behind posting the article in this thread. I'm afraid, Stainley, that you are, as usual, way off the mark.

[Stanley Burrell]

That was neither the aim nor the concept behind posting the article in this thread. I'm afraid, Stainley, that you are, as usual, way off the mark.

You suck at being passive aggressive :thumbdown:

[Parkbandit]

A few points:

1) Most graduate programs, in my experience, are MUCH easier than undergraduate programs. Harvard, I know for a fact, has much easier graduate programs than undergraduate, in many fields -- with the exception of the medical school.

2) I've completed my undergraduate work, and graduate work at Harvard and have saved a bunch of money, paid for 50% of my own tuition, and paid for my own health insurance. I'd argue that my workload, while at Harvard, was comparable to anywhere in this country in any graduate or undergraduate program. I worked, 32 hours a week while taking courses and graduated with honors. I also busted my ass every summer, instead of going home and "hanging out" like my friends, who are now in debt with student loans. I don't buy this QQ students need help bullshit. If they don't learn to be responsible in college and save the 60$ bar tab, and put it towards health insurance or tuition, then though shit.

3) Universal Health Care, in Massachusetts, has been a huge success. Its not, as everyone is focusing on in this thread, about taxing more and covering more, at least always. In MA, many of the individuals who the Commonwealth Connector (The state agency that is sponsoring Universal health care in MA), has reached out too are able to pay for their own insurance, but just chose not to do so, or do not know how to do so. They are now working in conjunction with employers and employees to help get the insurance rate for the state above 90%. Granted, this has resulted in a few tax-adjustments, but in the long run, paying a LITTLE up front to ensure coverage for preventative care (I think more policy should be put in place to FORCE preventative care check-ups, if you want full coverage), can save a lot of money in the long run.

The MA system is currently diligently looking into individual's situations, and if they're capable of work, and not working, then they're getting penalized for not covering themselves soon.


I'm half awake, and about to fly out, so if any of this didn't make sense, my apologies.

QUOTE YOUR SOURCES OR YOU ARE WRONG BECAUSE I KNOW EVERYTHING AND I WILL DERAIL ANY THREAD THAT DOESN'T HAVE SOURCES THAT SYNCH WITH MY LIMITED EXPERIENCE!!

-ES

[Stanley Burrell]

QUOTE YOUR SOURCES OR YOU ARE WRONG BECAUSE I KNOW EVERYTHING AND I WILL DERAIL ANY THREAD THAT DOESN'T HAVE SOURCES THAT SYNCH WITH MY LIMITED EXPERIENCE!!

- Gan

Tru.

[Gan]

That was ES that said that fuckstain.

[Gan]

You suck at being passive aggressive :thumbdown:

You suck at life.

[Parkbandit]

That was ES that said that fuckstain.


Stop picking on the drug victim Gan.

[Stanley Burrell]

You suck at life.

You have to do one of these http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/icons/icon14.gif to support your flawless assertion.

C'mon. 2x :thumbup: :thumbup:

[Tsa`ah]

QUOTE YOUR SOURCES OR YOU ARE WRONG BECAUSE I KNOW EVERYTHING AND I WILL DERAIL ANY THREAD THAT DOESN'T HAVE SOURCES THAT SYNCH WITH MY LIMITED EXPERIENCE!!

-ES

Eh ... first you have to consider the source (Lycain) before you expect the source to present sources.

[Stanley Burrell]

Stop picking on the drug victim Gan.

Fuck you.

I don't make fun of your old man decrepit wang syndrome or cialis diet.

Stupid old people.

[Gan]

You have to do one of these http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/icons/icon14.gif to support your flawless assertion.

C'mon. 2x :thumbup: :thumbup:

How about this one. It works great for crackheads.

http://smileyicons.net/s/822.gif

[Parkbandit]

Eh ... first you have to consider the source (Lycain) before you expect the source to present sources.

Shit.. that's Lycain?

WTF. I thought I scared him off years ago.

[Parkbandit]

Fuck you.

I don't make fun of your old man decrepit wang syndrome or cialis diet.

Stupid old people.

Stanley;

Just get help. I really do pity someone like you who is so messed up on drugs constantly. Help is available out there.

Life is too short to go through it stoned.

Get help. Please.

[Stanley Burrell]

How about this one.

http://smileyicons.net/s/822.gif

I was thinking more along the lines of:

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/7760/ganeatsthecockbg1.jpg

Man, I put too much effort > 3 seconds into that. Stop wasting my time!

And yes, my penis is bigger now because of that image enhancement...

[Stanley Burrell]

Stanley;

Just get help. I really do pity someone like you who is so messed up on drugs constantly. Help is available out there.

Life is too short to go through it stoned.

Get help. Please.

I assure you that just your wang discrepancy starter tablets are infinitely more the amount of pills I'm "stoned" on currently, or ever for that matter.

Speaking of life being short, you will die sooner than myself, being the senior citizen that you are, and, for that, I WIN, mwahahahaha! :spin:

[Sean of the Thread]

Seriously shocked nobody else has put his dribble on ignore yet.

[Stanley Burrell]

Alright.

I'm finished.

[Stanley Burrell]

Seriously shocked nobody else has put his dribble on ignore yet.

I'm seriously shocked you made another post about how you put me on a vBulletin ignore list.

.

[Stanley Burrell]

Er, done for real now :saint:

[Gan]

This is your brain:
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/gfx/proj/sugcon/models/brain.png






This is your brain on drugs:
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i3/3strangedays/fght.jpg (http://forum.gsplayers.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2042&d=1189011169)

[Stanley Burrell]

This is your brain:
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/gfx/proj/sugcon/models/brain.png






This is your brain on drugs:
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i3/3strangedays/fght.jpg (http://forum.gsplayers.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2042&d=1189011169)

Screw you! I was tired as fuck and was forced out of bed to take a damn picture!

I concede to caffiene being a drug though, which I am in heavy withdrawal from in that pic, hehe :D It (caffeine) and nicotine = Satan.

By the way, I heard that Edwards embraced socialized medicine as a platform component :whistle:

[Parkbandit]

Seriously shocked nobody else has put his dribble on ignore yet.

If you have someone on ignore. .and someone quotes it.. do you see that message?

[Latrinsorm]

By the way, I heard that Edwards embraced socialized medicine as a platform component :whistle:Hey, stay on topic. :rtfm: :welcome:

[CrystalTears]

If you have someone on ignore. .and someone quotes it.. do you see that message?
Unfuckingfortunately.

[ElanthianSiren]

:lol:

Actually, I wanted Lycain to post his grad/doctor/post doctor work because I'm curious to see what qualifies in which professions. Dev apparently grasped this. In the case of PB, I simply don't trust anything he posts as being more than inflamatory rhetoric or freudian ego bolstering through self denial ("I don't mean to ... (insert whatever you really mean to do) ... but...").

If I want to see a conservative opinion, I'll read Gan's, which is why I specifically asked for it in response to the model of covering small groups of people, who could argue their case, via a breakdown to whatever agency of hours work/class time etc. Grad/Students were the best example off the top of my head, after talking to a friend of mine who is headed into Jefferson to do her grad work next semester.

This was more in response to the fact that I don't find the Edwards plan feasible, but I do find feasible attempting to cover groups that are at high risk for not HAVING insurance who demonstrate commitment to being productive parts of society.

[ElanthianSiren]

Unfuckingfortunately.

x2

[Parkbandit]

:lol:

Actually, I wanted Lycain to post his grad/doctor/post doctor work because I'm curious to see what qualifies in which professions. Dev apparently grasped this. In the case of PB, I simply don't trust anything he posts as being more than inflamatory rhetoric or freudian ego bolstering through self denial ("I don't mean to ... (insert whatever you really mean to do) ... but...").

If I want to see a conservative opinion, I'll read Gan's, which is why I specifically asked for it in response to the model of covering small groups of people, who could argue their case, via a breakdown to whatever agency of hours work/class time etc. Grad/Students were the best example off the top of my head, after talking to a friend of mine who is headed into Jefferson to do her grad work next semester.

This was more in response to the fact that I don't find the Edwards plan feasible.

I'm still awaiting your 3 sources of evidence that undergrads workload is far less that of a grad.. so much that it is impossible for a grad to work a 32 hour job in order to have his/her own health insurance.

But just know.. your opinion of me is pretty much my opinion of you... so no harm, no foul. But I do read your posts for comic relief.. much like I read Stanleys, Ilvane's and Backlash's. Little substance.. but plenty of comedy... but the comedy that I'm laughing at you.. not with you.

[Xaerve]

I'm glad these boards have a history of "outing" hidden members, but I'm unfortunately not Lycain, the whole basis of calling me that comes from some e-thug/pimp posting some random attack on me in another thread. Then a few other members immediately buy into it. Anyway, moving on...


If you're interested in talking ES, instead of running your mouth (like you do in the post above this), I'll concede one point. I guess I should mention that humanities graduate studies, in general, tend to be easier. Basically, if you're going to graduate school, which many (obviously) do, to complete just graduate school, your performance is not as critical to your success. You need to get your degree, period.

The same, at least for me, was not the same in my undergraduate years. I had an above average GPA during my undergrad years, and got it by busting my ass on a wide-variety of course-work that was all very demanding. When I got into the Government school (Not the KSG, Political Theory in the Government department), things changed drastically. Work was still difficult, but my free time went up drastically. Sure I had presentations, conferences, and more meetings than I ever did when I was an undergraduate... but I actually KNEW what I was doing a lot more of the time than when I was younger taking a variety of courses.

I guess a liberal arts undergraduate program could be the difference, its a lot less about focusing on one area--like most colleges--and more about teaching individuals how to think.

Final point, because I have to go, The-E you couldn't be more wrong about the Divinity school... I know for a fact (I audited and also TOOK two Divinity graduate courses) that the Divinity school is no where near "hard" or "difficult." The course load was mediocre at best, compared to other departments.

That being said, ES/Dev, I'll concede that hard sciences, and medical school graduate work is much more time consuming than humanities. More time consuming than science oriented undergraduates... I'm not sure if I'd buy that 100%. I know pre-med kids who killed themselves, as well as pure physics concentrators at Harvard.

-X

Edit: No one even responded to my Health Care related points.. haha.

[Warriorbird]

Divinity school difficulty depends HIGHLY on the program. The same is true with humanities grad school difficulty. Do you class Law as part of the humanities?

[Stanley Burrell]

That being said, ES/Dev, I'll concede that hard sciences, and medical school graduate work is much more time consuming than humanities. More time consuming than science oriented undergraduates... I'm not sure if I'd buy that 100%. I know pre-med kids who killed themselves, as well as pure physics concentrators at Harvard.

Pre-med students usually kill themselves because they've boxed themselves into a completely neurotic ideology of needing to see an A on paper or they must rightfully commit sepaku in front of their betrayed Asian parents, er...

And it doesn't have anything to do with an extremely localized workload. Anatomy of homo sapiens? Try doing every possible histological analysis of each Domain and subsequent KPCOFGS.

I'm extremely biased against med students because a good majority essentially work for paper on a grade and flip off a great deal of knowledge that has had the opportunity to be imparted onto them by real professionals.

I do have a lot of respect for MD fellows who will spend a significant amount of time actually teaching what they've learned instead of hoarding a specific technique in order to better their own paychecks due to supply and demand. This is what I actually liked a lot about Yale vs. NYU med center.

Sorry. Opinionated.

[Parkbandit]

Unfuckingfortunately.

I am so quoting all of stanley's bullshit JUST so Sean2 doesn't miss anything.

[Stanley Burrell]

I am so quoting all of stanley's bullshit JUST so Sean2 doesn't miss anything.

If I ever saw you walking down the street, I'd be obliged to chuck a full can of Coca-Cola at your head.

[CrystalTears]

I am so quoting all of stanley's bullshit JUST so Sean2 doesn't miss anything.
Kindly go fuck yourself.

[Parkbandit]

If I ever saw you walking down the street, I'd be obliged to chuck a full can of Coca-Cola at your head.


If I saw you on the street, know that I would certainly put a quarter or two in your can. I don't normally give to indigent, useless or lazy humans.. but I like you Stanley. You are a good life lesson for parents to use with their kids.

"Don't do drugs or you'll end up a Stanley"

[Parkbandit]

Kindly go fuck yourself.

Shit.. you have him on ignore too? Am I the only one that doesn't have anyone on ignore here? If I put every stupid person on ignore.. I'd be bored out of my mind here.

[Gan]

If I ever saw you walking down the street, I'd be obliged to chuck a full can of Coca-Cola at your head.

You're such an e-thug.

[Gan]

Shit.. you have him on ignore too? Am I the only one that doesn't have anyone on ignore here? If I put every stupid person on ignore.. I'd be bored out of my mind here.

LOL

I find the entertainment factor of Stanley's posts too valuable to ignore.

[TheEschaton]

Are you serious, Xaerve? I did nothing as an undergrad and walked away with a 3.4 GPA. I went to law school at the same university, put in 50 hours a week, and am at a 3.3.

-TheE-