"And then I learned exactly how much they had paid, which was a good deal less than any US health insurance, and I almost punched a hole in you."
Is that really the best you can come up with? You're stupid enough to think it's free, then when proven wrong, you try the "well it's cheaper" crap?
Let's see your figures guy, I say you're full of it, and in light of your total failure to support your spew with citations, I'm right.
"I almost punched a hole in you."
THEN you realized you're a pasty ass loser who is safe behind his keyboard, but knows full well if you HAD punched me in the face it's be YOU who needed "free" insurance.
Nowhere in there does it say the CIA sponsored it, it says they are being investigated. As to "If you're sponsoring something, you're pretty much running it" that's just stupid.
"he who has the gold, makes the rules."
NATO has more gold, so by your logic THEY make the rules.
Just like I said. Stop trying so hard, it just makes it look that much worse when you're wrong like you are now.
"You said "it" where "it" is: "You're telling me that even a simple correction requires me to engage people like you in debate?""
I see you can't read for comprehension.
"You said "that" where "that" is: "That's a pretty stupid thing to say.""
No, I see your problem, you can't read for comprehension.
"If you felt insulted, it's only by your own words."
I see, you're apparently incapable of reading what you write. That makes your incoherent posts make far more sense.
"Which must be why you said it, and said that."
I believe those are your words, and please don't embarrass yourself by lying and saying it wasn't an insult.
"I command you to respond!"
Really? You've allowed yourself to sink to that?
Ok, I command you to continue to post on Slashdot as your admission that I am better than you, with every post being another admission of same.
Grow the fuck up guy, I'm trolling and you're serious. It amuses me no end that you're a bigger douche when you're serious than I am when I'm trolling.
"And then it really hit me this was all for free and I almost punched a hole in the wall."
And THEN it was explained to you that it wasn't in any way free, and that they had paid for it.
You people always fail on that one, like you did there, and that kind of disregard for reality says much about your ability to accurately assess subject.
The Act allows employees of a qualifying employer and the employee's immediate family members who had been covered by a health care plan to maintain their coverage if a "qualifying event" causes them to lose coverage. A qualifying employer is generally an employer with 20 or more full time equivalent employees (ERISA cites"(more) than 20 employees on a typical business day during the preceding calendar year"). Among the "qualifying events" listed in the statute are loss of benefits coverage due to (1) the death of the covered employee, (2) termination or a reduction in hours (which can be the result of resignation, discharge, layoff, strike or lockout, medical leave or simply a slowdown in business operations) that causes the worker to lose eligibility for coverage
"I have known a few myself"
I'd like to hear specifics because that's pretty unusual.
No, what gives them a lower infant mortality rate is, at least partially, their extremely high abortion rate.
Cubas per capita abortion rates are nearly 3 times those of the US. In fact, once you examine the figures you realize the number of countries that perform fewer abortions than Cuba is vanishingly small.
"No, you set up a strawman and knocked it down. My argument was never what you said it was."
I never said your argument was anything, I took exception with an example you used, which was faulty.
I don't know why you're trying so hard, but you've totally missed the point and no doubt will ignore what I've said in a rush to reply with a point I neither brought up nor care about.
So, as clear as I can, INDIVIDUAL ABUSE IS DIFFERENT FROM SYSTEMIC ABUSE. You'll notice that nowhere in there did I say anything about your argument.
As to "straw men", I think you need to look that one up so you don't incorrectly accuse someone of using one again. You DID give an example of an individual abuse, so you're completely wrong.
CAN. NOT WILL like you claimed, you lied, I caught you. That was not your only lie, just the first one I chose.
"Trolling you? For days?"
That's what it's called when I tell you I don't give a fuck about what you think, and you respond in order to get me to reply. TROLLING, look it up. And yes days you fucking moron, you started trolling me a week ago.
"You evidently have no concept of the time it takes to write a Slashdot post"
ANd you evidently are still having trouble with reading comprehension
"by WNight (23683)on Friday February 29, @02:06AM"
So are you just incredibly stupid, or do you not understand what I'm telling you? Yes, you've been trolling me for days idiot.
"But no, you don't care. Not at all. "
I'm glad you finally get it, I guess there's a small chance you're not a stupid as your posts make you appear.
"If you weren't such an abominable asshole this wouldn't be so funny."
Why does the fact that I'm an asshole make you being a proven liar funny?
Of course, now is when you reply with your pathetic attempt to not look wrong and stupid. You've failed every time so far, but I'll give you permission to try again.
In fact, I'm telling you to reply and try again.
Of course, you'll make up a stupid excuse as to why you're not posting because I told you to, and try to make it look like you're not doing exactly what I said to.
But you'll reply anyway, because you can't stand that I proved you're a liar, and moreso, because I told you to.
Slashdot Mirror
"You dumsonfabitch!"
Why post AC if you're going to sign your post?
"you complain about the lack of democracy "
You're a liar, I've never done that.
"and still you think it wrong of them to abort however many fetuses they want to?"
No, actually, improve your reading skills. I never said anything about "wrong" in any of my discussion of the subject.
You really need to get a reading tutor.
"Did you actually read what you responded to?"
Clearly, you on the other hand have failed to understand it twice now.
"The question was: How many people in the US can't change jobs because of losing health insurance if they do?"
Right, and I was right. Very few.
"If they'd lose health insurance if they change jobs, it's because their new job wouldn't have health insurance. "
That's idiotic, the state of insurance at their new job has no influence on their old insurance. You're wrong
"Most people do not change jobs and then immediately look for a new job."
What kind of retard are you? They look for a new job then change to it. Stop grasping at straws you look even more idiotic now.
"And CORBA lasts 18 months when changing jobs."
No moron, that's wrong too.
"And incidentally many people in the US cannot get insurance without a job"
Another lie.
So you've lied, and made up facts, just because I proved you were wrong.
How fucking pathetic are you?
"Ok, I command you to continue to post on Slashdot as your admission that I am better than you, with every post being another admission of same."
Thanks, at least we can agree I'm better than you.
"And then I learned exactly how much they had paid, which was a good deal less than any US health insurance, and I almost punched a hole in you."
Is that really the best you can come up with? You're stupid enough to think it's free, then when proven wrong, you try the "well it's cheaper" crap?
Let's see your figures guy, I say you're full of it, and in light of your total failure to support your spew with citations, I'm right.
"I almost punched a hole in you."
THEN you realized you're a pasty ass loser who is safe behind his keyboard, but knows full well if you HAD punched me in the face it's be YOU who needed "free" insurance.
Nowhere in there does it say the CIA sponsored it, it says they are being investigated. As to "If you're sponsoring something, you're pretty much running it" that's just stupid.
"he who has the gold, makes the rules."
NATO has more gold, so by your logic THEY make the rules.
Just like I said. Stop trying so hard, it just makes it look that much worse when you're wrong like you are now.
"You said "it" where "it" is: "You're telling me that even a simple correction requires me to engage people like you in debate?""
I see you can't read for comprehension.
"You said "that" where "that" is: "That's a pretty stupid thing to say.""
No, I see your problem, you can't read for comprehension.
"If you felt insulted, it's only by your own words."
I see, you're apparently incapable of reading what you write. That makes your incoherent posts make far more sense.
"Which must be why you said it, and said that."
I believe those are your words, and please don't embarrass yourself by lying and saying it wasn't an insult.
"I command you to respond!"
Really? You've allowed yourself to sink to that?
Ok, I command you to continue to post on Slashdot as your admission that I am better than you, with every post being another admission of same.
Grow the fuck up guy, I'm trolling and you're serious. It amuses me no end that you're a bigger douche when you're serious than I am when I'm trolling.
Sorry, perhaps you need a lesson, you're wrong when you say
"It was a secret network operated by the CIA"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio
"Gladio (Italian, from Latin gladius, meaning sword) is a code name denoting the clandestine NATO "stay-behind" operation in Italy after World War II"
"Which must be why you said it, and said that."
That doesn't even make any sense. I mean if you're going to insult me, call me your dad or something.
Read the post again, you're obviously not smart enough to understand what I wrote.
"And then it really hit me this was all for free and I almost punched a hole in the wall."
And THEN it was explained to you that it wasn't in any way free, and that they had paid for it.
You people always fail on that one, like you did there, and that kind of disregard for reality says much about your ability to accurately assess subject.
"Get outta the kitchen if you can't take the heat."
So I can't just point out an invalid comparison? You're telling me that even a simple correction requires me to engage people like you in debate?
That's a pretty stupid thing to say.
No, actually it sometimes lasts 36 months.
And unless I miss my guess, 18 months is plenty of time to find NEW insurance, or a job that has some.
Did you bother to think before you posted?
"fucktard"
At least you were man enough to sign your post.
Just like I said you would.
"You ignored the man's point about systemic abuse"
You're right I did, because I don't care about it's validity or discussing it.
Why do you people think that when you get a response it's an invitation to debate? Can you not read what you reply to?
I told the man why his argument as flawed, I couldn't care less about it beyond that.
"focusing on the point"
NO. I DID NOT FOCUS ON ANY POINT, ONLY ON POINTING OUT AN APPLES TO ORANGES COMPARISON.
Got it? It's not hard, why are you having such a hard time?
"Why are you asuming that the infinte mortality rate of the aborted group would be greater that the population that is allowed to go to term."
Do you have any idea at all what you're discussing? Do you even realize why that question is silly?
"Remember that they do not have the technology to determine abnormalities to the same extnt as they do in the US."
Thanks you for proving my point so nicely without realizing it. Ask yourself, what do they do with fetuses that they CAN determine are abnormal?
They abort them. Meanwhile, in the US, we bring them to term and treat them, resulting in a higher mortality rate.
It's not hard to understand, I don't know why you're having such a problem.
"come up with something more recent than 1985"
That's when IT WAS PASSED INTO LAW genius.
It's still in effect.
I might be interested in arguing once you get your foot out of your mouth...
"Like all the US citizens! Yay!"
Bush is a fucking idiot and a traitor. Rise up and overthrow that madman.
That would get me found and shot in Cuba, yet strangely, not here in the US.
Funny how the reality of the situation escapes people like you in your rush to spew snide remarks all over the place.
Virtually none.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolidated_Omnibus_Budget_Reconciliation_Act_of_1985
"I have known a few myself"
I'd like to hear specifics because that's pretty unusual.
They abort more fetuses than virtually any other country on earth.
If that's what it takes to get the number in the US marginally lower I'm not sure it's worth it.
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/index.html#ST
"Which gives them a lower infant mortality rate"
No, what gives them a lower infant mortality rate is, at least partially, their extremely high abortion rate.
Cubas per capita abortion rates are nearly 3 times those of the US. In fact, once you examine the figures you realize the number of countries that perform fewer abortions than Cuba is vanishingly small.
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-unitedstates.html
United States= 19.7 abortions per 1000 (2004)
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-cuba.html
Cuba = 57.0 per thousand. (2004)
I imagine the US numbers would come down too if we started aborting that many fetuses.
Here's another (slightly less current) list. It says the same thing.
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/2504499.html
Regardless of your stance on abortion, crowing about low infant mortality while you're aborting that many fetuses seems a little ridiculous.
"No, you set up a strawman and knocked it down.
My argument was never what you said it was."
I never said your argument was anything, I took exception with an example you used, which was faulty.
I don't know why you're trying so hard, but you've totally missed the point and no doubt will ignore what I've said in a rush to reply with a point I neither brought up nor care about.
So, as clear as I can, INDIVIDUAL ABUSE IS DIFFERENT FROM SYSTEMIC ABUSE. You'll notice that nowhere in there did I say anything about your argument.
As to "straw men", I think you need to look that one up so you don't incorrectly accuse someone of using one again. You DID give an example of an individual abuse, so you're completely wrong.
You completely failed to understand and address my point.
You are using an example of an individual abuse to argue against systemic abuse.
They are not equivalent or comparable, and what you did is disingenuous, as the difference is obvious an significant.
I wasn't really asking for a reply, I was just making you aware of a fault in your post that makes your argument fail.
He told me in our state (Florida) the soil was usually too porous to build a basement in, and the risk of flooding was extremely high.
Most houses I've seen here don't have a basement, it's a surprise when I see one.
"Desertion can lead to you getting shot"
CAN. NOT WILL like you claimed, you lied, I caught you. That was not your only lie, just the first one I chose.
"Trolling you? For days?"
That's what it's called when I tell you I don't give a fuck about what you think, and you respond in order to get me to reply. TROLLING, look it up. And yes days you fucking moron, you started trolling me a week ago.
"You evidently have no concept of the time it takes to write a Slashdot post"
ANd you evidently are still having trouble with reading comprehension
"by WNight (23683)on Friday February 29, @02:06AM"
So are you just incredibly stupid, or do you not understand what I'm telling you? Yes, you've been trolling me for days idiot.
"But no, you don't care. Not at all. "
I'm glad you finally get it, I guess there's a small chance you're not a stupid as your posts make you appear.
"If you weren't such an abominable asshole this wouldn't be so funny."
Why does the fact that I'm an asshole make you being a proven liar funny?
Of course, now is when you reply with your pathetic attempt to not look wrong and stupid. You've failed every time so far, but I'll give you permission to try again.
In fact, I'm telling you to reply and try again.
Of course, you'll make up a stupid excuse as to why you're not posting because I told you to, and try to make it look like you're not doing exactly what I said to.
But you'll reply anyway, because you can't stand that I proved you're a liar, and moreso, because I told you to.