PAXidemic!

[modeps]

http://evavhost.com/i/news/pax.jpg

In case you attended this past weekend's festivities in Washington as the Penny Arcade Expo, you should probably pay close attention to your vital signs. If you exhibit some fevers or sore throat or whatever, get thyself to someone of a medical profession post haste! The Swine Flu has been confirmed, as tweeted by @Official_PAX (http://twitter.com/Official_PAX/status/3845571614):

just got confirmation of H1N1 case. If you feel bad go to the doctor and get tested! #PAX

[net7runner]

It's the PAX! Soon we'll all be reavers! REAAARRGHHUUGHGHH!

[prence]

lolz owned.

[Syl]

I'm kind of worried of hearing the same thing about Dragon*Con; but so far there hasn't been a single warning.

[NuK]

Both my wife and I are feeling under the weather after a paxorific weekend. I've got a gnarly cough starting up, but I've got my fingers crossed that it's just allergies or something. I had the flu earlier this year and it sucked.

[pwnophobia]

Both my wife and I are feeling under the weather after a paxorific weekend. I've got a gnarly cough starting up, but I've got my fingers crossed that it's just allergies or something. I had the flu earlier this year and it sucked.

To the doctor you go!

And if you do come down with the H1N1 you should email (http://twitter.com/Official_PAX/status/3847882528) RKHOO your flight info.

[Trickyicky]

Wow, that's nuts.. it was bound to happen, I suppose. Hopefully everyone comes through in good health.

[ÜberJumper]

Back in 2003 when I was down at E3, one of the companies (gamespy?) was handing out surgical masks with their logo on them. This was during the SARS scare.

Conventions, sporting events/touraments/olympics, movies/theatres, and of course subways/train stations and airports... anywhere were people gather in large numbers, are great for passing on communicable disease, especially where hygiene, like hand washing isn't enforced.

Most hospitals I go to nowadays have alcohol based hand sanitizer at all entrances and in most rooms. Even my office has hand sanitizer dispensers spread out around it just this last week. Most hospitals I'm on the phone with have something to do with Hand washing as part of their hold messaging. "It's ok to tell your doctor to WASH THEIR HANDS before treating you".

[Tintivilo]

Someone needs to make some... "I went to PAX and all I got was..." t-shirts

[Syl]

I feel a little beat from Dragon*Con, admittedly, 4 days without sleep, donating blood and massive amounts of liquor probably have more to do with it than any flu.

[Anenome]

H1N1 is a horrible name, it shall be renamed, 'The Pax'.

After the Pax ravages the cities causing 'bring out 'cha dead!' levels of devastation and suffering, only the geeks so geeky they didn't even attend PAX, sequestered away in their mother's, mother's basements are left to repopulate the human race with the few existing geek women alive in the world.

Millions of geek boys descend upon the un-warned Facebook accounts of the last three women alive in the world, being eager to continue the human race in some way, and being rejected utterly by the poor girls. Alas.

[thejeromer]

I started feeling shitty on day 3 of PAX but never any fever, just a cold. Now it's more just a scratchy throat and my head feels congested.

But man, was it ever a great PAX.

[NuK]

To the doctor you go!

And if you do come down with the H1N1 you should email (http://twitter.com/Official_PAX/status/3847882528) RKHOO your flight info.

I'm local, so at least I haven't flown it around. But I am writing this from work in downtown seattle...

I will probably work from home tommorrow if i feel crummy still. I'm not a big "going to the doctor" kind of person, and if you read the fine print on H1N1, for most people it's about the same as a normal flu.

My goal now to to minimize the spread of my potential infection. :)

[E Huntington]

I like that the Penny Arcade guys are actually letting their attendees know what's going on. I doubt if this were any other con we'd hear anything about it. I think it shows that Gabe and Tycho actually care about their fans/friends/attendees.

[Mozgus]

Like always, Maddox echoes my thoughts on the matter:

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=swine_flu

[Cutter99]

Like always, Maddox echoes my thoughts on the matter:

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=swine_flu

Really? Those are your thoughts on the matter? Here - try some other thoughts:

http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/04/whats-different-and-dangerous-about-swine-flu/

That's the biomedical science editor for Encyclopedia Britannica - a woman with PhD's in pharmacology and toxicology. Read up on what she has to say, you may find it educational.

[skinnyboy30]

Those fucks and their Swine Flu's! Now my D&D game is F'n canceled due to some twats thinkning they have the plague! =/

[ÜberJumper]

Really? Those are your thoughts on the matter? Here - try some other thoughts:

http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/04/whats-different-and-dangerous-about-swine-flu/

That's the biomedical science editor for Encyclopedia Britannica - a woman with PhD's in pharmacology and toxicology. Read up on what she has to say, you may find it educational.

New to Maddox?

[Cutter99]

New to Maddox?

Sadly, no. I think he's hysterical - but some people take him seriously.

[Anenome]

Remember what Rahm Emanuel said? "Never let a serious crisis go to waste."

Today's Left, what I call 'velvet fascists' typically try to use war to create a crisis. A war allows the country's leaders to do whatever they want with the country. But, the Left today is trying to find a war equivalent, something that provides the same galvanization of society without the consequent death and risk. Their 'velvet fascism' has found all sorts of war equivalents for the modern age, chief among them being 'global warming'. However, the housing crash served nicely recently, and swine flu is another similar thing.

(More info here (http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/0385511841), before someone ignorant becomes hysterical about use of the word 'fascism', which should not be conflated with racist 'Hitlerian fascism'.)

So, swine flu is being overblown? Sure, but there's a political motive behind it.

[Mozgus]

Sadly, no. I think he's hysterical - but some people take him seriously.

Its not impossible to be dead-on accurate and hysterical at the same time. I just cant stand hypochondriacs. I'm sorry. I just think they are pussies. I love Mike and Jerry for what they do, but if you have ever listened to their podcast, without fail every episode, one or both of them will claim to be infected with some terrible virus. Once Gabe twittered about feeling sick, the others followed, and in came this huge scare.

People just blow illness out of proportion. I get the flu once maybe every 3 years. I get a fever, I relax for a day, I puke if need be, and I'm all better. I've never understood what the big f-ing deal is. In fact, I went for a span of 13 years once without vomiting once. In my last year of full time work, I took no more than 1/3rd of a day off, because I woke up with a migraine once. That's it. And I don't even eat very healthy or exercise. I just consume what my body craves, and I drink the supposedly poisonous tap water.

For more information, I'll step aside and let the legend himself educate you:

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=7309396

[brandonjclark]

Like always, Maddox echoes my thoughts on the matter:

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=swine_flu


Please take this with the best of intentions, Mozgus, but what are you doing to your mind reading that crap? I clicked your link and read this Maddox fellow for the first, and last, time. In fact, I was so saddened to read this drivel, I wrote him an email.

Hey, how’s it going? I just came across your stuff tonight and thought I’d click on the link to email you, obviously. I really don’t have anything positive to say about your writing. So, if you don’t want to hear anything negative, stop reading now.

My first problem with your writing is that it’s basic in nature. It doesn’t have any twang, flavor, juice or plain ‘ole interest. It’s dull.

Secondly, you’re vocabulary appears rather limited. This is a turn –off for anyone reading you for the first time.

In addition, your troll-like, wannabe shock-jock attitude exudes poor taste and even worse language. I can only imagine it draws similarly-typed mindsets.

Lastly, I noticed a picture of that revolutionary on your homepage, and although I have nothing negative to say about whatever reason you had for putting him top-left, couldn’t you have come up with something bitterly original here to better serve your point? Maybe you couldn’t, but what are you really trying to say with that picture? It limits you.

I do have some suggestions, and since you seem just like the type of person to take them and have read this far, let me indulge your ego.

You probably have a fairly large amount of hits to your site, and most likely some sort of frequent or repeat fan base. This is great! Just think of the topics you could bring to your public’s attention, instead of rehashing the same tired news stories clogging our news pipes today with your seemingly 180-degree, flip every issue-attitude. (swine flu, movie reviews, etc.) My suggestion here is to start using your reach for something positive, and extremely less selfish, as you appear to be wasting your time much like me at the moment. It doesn’t take an academic to see the lies, deceits and foolhardy exploitation of the public’s interests, this is certain. But it does take a healthy intellect to wade through this game of distracting advertisements and bold lettering. You’re better than this, so take the next step and use the system, don’t react to it. Once you come to the realization that it isn’t going anywhere, you can start adapting.

I applaud you for the courage you believe to display in exposing your superficial, outwardly radical views. Not an ounce of bravery is required to post on the Internet, but it does take some gusto to post what you do and poke your head out for book signings and the like. Protect your face, and read this sentence again, there are those (not me) who wish you danger, and I’m sure of this in a most non-evidential approach given your online attitude.

Finally, if you decide not to use your power for something productive, and continue to dismember belief and propagate dissent, please start writing with more intrigue, madness and sheer genius. You currently are exhibiting the mind of a child, and I mean that in the best self-help sort of manner.


Brandon J. Clark


You're better than this too, Mozgus, I've read your posts. Take the next step in life and graduate from this Maddox garbage.

/Self-righteousness

[brandonjclark]

Remember what Rahm Emanuel said? "Never let a serious crisis go to waste."

Today's Left, what I call 'velvet fascists' typically try to use war to create a crisis. A war allows the country's leaders to do whatever they want with the country. But, the Left today is trying to find a war equivalent, something that provides the same galvanization of society without the consequent death and risk. Their 'velvet fascism' has found all sorts of war equivalents for the modern age, chief among them being 'global warming'. However, the housing crash served nicely recently, and swine flu is another similar thing.

(More info here (http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/0385511841), before someone ignorant becomes hysterical about use of the word 'fascism', which should not be conflated with racist 'Hitlerian fascism'.)

So, swine flu is being overblown? Sure, but there's a political motive behind it.

I just fell in love.

[Anenome]

I just fell in love.

If you haven't already read the book I linked I highly suggest it. I read 'Road to Serfdom' by Hayek a long time ago, and knew the twist on the political definition of 'fascism', but this book is life changing, quite literally. Cannot recommend it enough. I would venture to say that anyone who reads that book cannot long remain a leftist thereafter, it's that powerful and revealing.

[brandonjclark]

If you haven't already read the book I linked I highly suggest it. I read 'Road to Serfdom' by Hayek a long time ago, and knew the twist on the political definition of 'fascism', but this book is life changing, quite literally. Cannot recommend it enough. I would venture to say that anyone who reads that book cannot long remain a leftist thereafter, it's that powerful and revealing.


I'll survey the details, but it will be equivalent to bringing sand to the beach.

[Mozgus]

Please take this with the best of intentions, Mozgus, but what are you doing to your mind reading that crap? I clicked your link and read this Maddox fellow for the first, and last, time. In fact, I was so saddened to read this drivel, I wrote him an email.
The man has turned trolling into a career, and has a best selling book. Do you have a best selling book? No? Then, I can't imagine he will care about your advice. The fact that you even took the time to write him hate-mail means you're just one more added to the list of the troll'd. Congratulations.

[Anenome]

The man has turned trolling into a career, and has a best selling book. Do you have a best selling book? No? Then, I can't imagine he will care about your advice. The fact that you even took the time to write him hate-mail means you're just one more added to the list of the troll'd. Congratulations.

Lol, it's true Brandon is casting pearls before swine, but when/if he reads it, it will register somewhere deep inside and hopefully he'll feel just a tinge bad as he should and that seed will one day blossom into what B wants him to do.

Brandon, if you think that link was bad, check out his 'Alphabet of Manliness' which segways directly into blatant and over-the-top sexism as well.

I don't know if I'd call his email hate-mail either, more chiding.

Sometimes the worst thing that can happen to a person is for their malfunction to make them famous. The world is replete with examples.

[brandonjclark]

The man has turned trolling into a career, and has a best selling book. Do you have a best selling book? No? Then, I can't imagine he will care about your advice. The fact that you even took the time to write him hate-mail means you're just one more added to the list of the troll'd. Congratulations.


The fact that you empower his idea is grossly retarded. I fear the only ones being trolled here are the fools standing up for this fucking moron.

[Anenome]

The fact that you empower his idea is grossly retarded. I fear the only ones being trolled here are the fools standing up for this fucking moron.
- And, btw, that pict you mentioned is Maddox as Che.
Lol @ people who idolize Che, the mass murderer.

[Mozgus]

The fact that you empower his idea is grossly retarded. I fear the only ones being trolled here are the fools standing up for this fucking moron.

How am I the one being trolled? Maybe you need to head on over to urban dictionary for a while. That's not quite how trolling works.

[Anenome]

How am I the one being trolled? Maybe you need to head on over to urban dictionary for a while. That's not quite how trolling works.

it's okay, Mozgus, I'm sure you'll come to see just how immature Maddox really is once your age gets into the double digits.

[Roc Ingersol]

The linked swine flu article (the real one, not maddox) is old, written largely based on conjecture. The swine flu we have isn't killing healthy adults. (in countries with adequate health care)

As for Rahm Emmanuel and the left -- of course they're using this. Just like the right beat on the terrorist drum. ... Or have we already forgotten duct tape and plastic sheeting, the color-coded fear gauge and all that additional power collected into the office of the executive?

Some of us were bitching about that erosion of the separation of powers the whole time. But too many people didn't mind, because they liked the party in power. They forgot that politicians are politicians first, party members second and if they're human beings at all, it's way down the line.

As far as shameless hijacking and exaggeration of threats for political football goes, 'wash your hands' is a hell of a lot more benign than 'duct tape' and 9-11 whaargarbl. But give them time. I'm sure they'll eventually leverage all that cute new power and you'll have a legitimate complaint to make.

Bummer no-one was listening the first time around, eh?

[bean19]

Today's Left, what I call 'velvet fascists' typically try to use war to create a crisis. A war allows the country's leaders to do whatever they want with the country. But, the Left today is trying to find a war equivalent, something that provides the same galvanization of society without the consequent death and risk. Their 'velvet fascism' has found all sorts of war equivalents for the modern age, chief among them being 'global warming'. However, the housing crash served nicely recently, and swine flu is another similar thing.

So, swine flu is being overblown? Sure, but there's a political motive behind it.

1. What exactly makes the current administration "velvet fascists"?

2. Fox News is a far right news program but they run fearful news over the swine flu regularly. Are they now in league with these velvet fascists?

3. When people accuse Bush of politicizing the deaths that occurred during 9/11 and the subsequent deaths in the war he started, they can point at the fact that literally billions of dollars have been funneled to his special interests like big oil and the military infrastructure. What do you think Obama's endgame is with your conspiracy theory?

[Cutter99]

The linked swine flu article (the real one, not maddox) is old, written largely based on conjecture. The swine flu we have isn't killing healthy adults. (in countries with adequate health care)


Really? "Conjecture?" Perhaps you did not read it - so allow me to briefly summarize the established facts contained therein:

-H1N1 is a virus labeling that identifies genetic variations controlling the surface proteins hemagglutinin (H) and neuraminidase (N).
-There have been many flu strains that carry the H1N1 characteristic, but one of them was the 1918-19 flu pandemic.
-This H1N1 variant is a swine variant, which is important because pigs are susceptible to human and bird flu strains.
-Flu viruses incubating within pigs have the potential to produce triple reassortant influenza (having genetic traits of pig, bird, and human flu.) This creates a lot of possible combinations of potentially worrisome strains.
-The more people infected by the current strain of H1N1, the more millions of viral replications have the potential to mutate into that one perfectly infectious and viciously deadly strain. It's a one in a hundred bajillion chance, however...
-The more people who are calmly conscious of this, the more hands washed, the more we cut down on the number of lottery-tickets we're collectively buying.

Do we understand the exact genetic lineage of all possible flu strains and the specific coding for all virus elements? Of course not. Does all this mean you should running screaming in the streets in panic and set your hair on fire? No. Can we collectively promote a more germ conscious environment and save ourselves a lot of unnecessary viral replication? We can! Yay!!

[Cutter99]

As for Rahm Emmanuel and the left -- of course they're using this. Just like the right beat on the terrorist drum. ... Or have we already forgotten duct tape and plastic sheeting, the color-coded fear gauge and all that additional power collected into the office of the executive?

Some of us were bitching about that erosion of the separation of powers the whole time. But too many people didn't mind, because they liked the party in power. They forgot that politicians are politicians first, party members second and if they're human beings at all, it's way down the line.

As far as shameless hijacking and exaggeration of threats for political football goes, 'wash your hands' is a hell of a lot more benign than 'duct tape' and 9-11 whaargarbl. But give them time. I'm sure they'll eventually leverage all that cute new power and you'll have a legitimate complaint to make.

Bummer no-one was listening the first time around, eh?

All of this, I completely agree with. Cheers, I say.

[Wyrm]

Please take this with the best of intentions, Mozgus, but what are you doing to your mind reading that crap? I clicked your link and read this Maddox fellow for the first, and last, time. In fact, I was so saddened to read this drivel, I wrote him an email.

Hey, how’s it going? I just came across your stuff tonight and thought I’d click on the link to email you, obviously. I really don’t have anything positive to say about your writing. So, if you don’t want to hear anything negative, stop reading now.

My first problem with your writing is that it’s basic in nature. It doesn’t have any twang, flavor, juice or plain ‘ole interest. It’s dull.

Secondly, you’re vocabulary appears rather limited. This is a turn –off for anyone reading you for the first time.

In addition, your troll-like, wannabe shock-jock attitude exudes poor taste and even worse language. I can only imagine it draws similarly-typed mindsets.

Lastly, I noticed a picture of that revolutionary on your homepage, and although I have nothing negative to say about whatever reason you had for putting him top-left, couldn’t you have come up with something bitterly original here to better serve your point? Maybe you couldn’t, but what are you really trying to say with that picture? It limits you.

I do have some suggestions, and since you seem just like the type of person to take them and have read this far, let me indulge your ego.

You probably have a fairly large amount of hits to your site, and most likely some sort of frequent or repeat fan base. This is great! Just think of the topics you could bring to your public’s attention, instead of rehashing the same tired news stories clogging our news pipes today with your seemingly 180-degree, flip every issue-attitude. (swine flu, movie reviews, etc.) My suggestion here is to start using your reach for something positive, and extremely less selfish, as you appear to be wasting your time much like me at the moment. It doesn’t take an academic to see the lies, deceits and foolhardy exploitation of the public’s interests, this is certain. But it does take a healthy intellect to wade through this game of distracting advertisements and bold lettering. You’re better than this, so take the next step and use the system, don’t react to it. Once you come to the realization that it isn’t going anywhere, you can start adapting.

I applaud you for the courage you believe to display in exposing your superficial, outwardly radical views. Not an ounce of bravery is required to post on the Internet, but it does take some gusto to post what you do and poke your head out for book signings and the like. Protect your face, and read this sentence again, there are those (not me) who wish you danger, and I’m sure of this in a most non-evidential approach given your online attitude.

Finally, if you decide not to use your power for something productive, and continue to dismember belief and propagate dissent, please start writing with more intrigue, madness and sheer genius. You currently are exhibiting the mind of a child, and I mean that in the best self-help sort of manner.


Brandon J. Clark


You're better than this too, Mozgus, I've read your posts. Take the next step in life and graduate from this Maddox garbage.

/Self-righteousness

Dude, he found his niche. Why do you care if he spews funny shit onto the internet? Does it hurt you?

[Roc Ingersol]

Really? "Conjecture?"Yes. Conjecture. And I did read it. It was written early last spring. Before any cases really hit the US, before it was sequenced and before it was studied in depth.

What made the 1918-19 flu so deadly, was the fact that it kicked healthy immune systems into overdrive, resulting in very high mortality among otherwise-healthy adults (cytokine storms). This new swine flu does not do this. Despite it's genetic resemblance to the spanish flu, it is not the same thing.

It sure as hell can mutate into a killer. But so can any flu strain. It's not like pig/avian/human flus have sole claim to being the source of deadly pandemics.

All I'm saying is: the linked article was written before we knew nearly as much as we currently know and as of right now, we know that medically speaking the swine flu is no more hazardous than the 'normal' flu (which is itself an ever-shifting target of 'which strain will be the strain this year).

I'm not saying don't take precautions. We should always wash our hands and stay home when sick. (the question isn't: 'can you make it through the day', it's: 'can you do your job without exposing your co-workers to a nasty disease you selfish prick').

That is always good advice.

[brandonjclark]

Dude, he found his niche. Why do you care if he spews funny shit onto the internet? Does it hurt you?


Well, obviously you know the answer to that question. Of course it doesn't hurt me, but in my own sick and twisted mind I would feel guilty if I didn't attempt to raise him out of that barrel of shit.

The real question is, does it hurt you that I care?

[Cutter99]

Yes. Conjecture. And I did read it. It was written early last spring. Before any cases really hit the US, before it was sequenced and before it was studied in depth.

What made the 1918-19 flu so deadly, was the fact that it kicked healthy immune systems into overdrive, resulting in very high mortality among otherwise-healthy adults (cytokine storms). This new swine flu does not do this. Despite it's genetic resemblance to the spanish flu, it is not the same thing.

It sure as hell can mutate into a killer. But so can any flu strain. It's not like pig/avian/human flus have sole claim to being the source of deadly pandemics.

All I'm saying is: the linked article was written before we knew nearly as much as we currently know and as of right now, we know that medically speaking the swine flu is no more hazardous than the 'normal' flu (which is itself an ever-shifting target of 'which strain will be the strain this year).

I'm not saying don't take precautions. We should always wash our hands and stay home when sick. (the question isn't: 'can you make it through the day', it's: 'can you do your job without exposing your co-workers to a nasty disease you selfish prick').

That is always good advice.

You're right: H1N1 hasn't been any more deadly than the conventional flu strains going around.

But the structural differences and increased potential for unforeseen mutation are significant in the present H1N1 strain. Again, they're no cause for panic - but I think they're relevant to any discussion about what public action should or shouldn't be taken.

The question is purely academic at this point - everyone else seems to be holding some sort of political debate? Hooah, forum madness!

[Wyrm]

Well, obviously you know the answer to that question. Of course it doesn't hurt me, but in my own sick and twisted mind I would feel guilty if I didn't attempt to raise him out of that barrel of shit.

The real question is, does it hurt you that I care?

No, I'm just curious as to why you can't enjoy some humor that comes from a low brow direction every once and awhile.

Are you offended by Tucker Max as well?

[Johan]

H1N1 is the biggest pile of bullshit fearmongering.

BOO! FLU! Unless you're older, an infant, or suffering a severe immune-system-related health issue, influenza won't kill or even permanently harm you. It does kill tens of thousands a year, but so do automobiles, and I don't see people running in fear from their car keys.

When 1918 repeats, then we can worry.

Edit: Just checking if I can still edit...

[ÜberJumper]

Johan:

That's the problem, this H1N1 strain doesn't kill the older and the infants, it kills the healthy adults.

The fear is that it's very much like the 1918 strain (which was also an H1N1 virus). The 1918 flu had a 2.5% mortality rate.

All that being said, there is a LOT of fear mongering going on about this. SARS was WAY scarier than H1N1. FFS you got it by breathing on each other, and you didn't need to just rest until it went away, you needed respirators to keep you alive. With the flu, at least we can treat it like any other flu, but SARS, that scares the hell out of me.

SARS mortality rate (over 8000+ or so cases) was 9.6%

[brandonjclark]

No, I'm just curious as to why you can't enjoy some humor that comes from a low brow direction every once and awhile.

Are you offended by Tucker Max as well?


I hadn't heard of him until now, but, yup.

These types of fellows are just not intriguing, as they remind me of my early twenties which was a drunken, drug-induced haze. I grew out of that, and now find it offensive. Sorry if I seem like a stiff.

[Ravenus]

Those fucks and their Swine Flu's! Now my D&D game is F'n canceled due to some twats thinkning they have the plague! =/

Ummmm... well if it were anything other than D&D I'd agree, but let's just consider this a blessing by god on your social life

[Johan]

That's the problem, this H1N1 strain doesn't kill the older and the infants, it kills the healthy adults.

Well...good then! Less CO2 in the environment, and fewer end-of-life medical costs. After all, don't we want to "bend the curve" and "save the environment?" ;)

The fear is that it's very much like the 1918 strain (which was also an H1N1 virus). The 1918 flu had a 2.5% mortality rate.


The fear is overblown, because any flu virus can mutate, in any particular year, to become a killer pandemic (seasonal flu is already a pandemic in its reach around the globe, if not in its kill rate).

Hell...the WHO had to redefine the meaning of "pandemic" so they could continue to scare people about H1N1. (http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/influenza/panflu/news/april1205pandemic.html)

I wonder how much pharmaceutical manufacturers will make off of H1N1 vaccines this year????? Alarmist idiots...

[pwnophobia]

Ummmm... well if it were anything other than D&D I'd agree, but let's just consider this a blessing by god on your social life

What makes D&D any worse than your few hours, one night a week, of playing XBOX 360?

[workerbee]

Well, I'm a local got swine flu from PAX - I started feeling the symptoms on Sunday afternoon and got confirmed by my doctor on tuesday.

The biggest problem with H1N1 flu is that most people exposed to it will get it since they don't have any immunity to this mutated strain (unlike most strains of flu that go around). You won't be killing anyone off any worse than the normal flu (which mostly come from complications arising from being sick), but if you want to get half your office out on sick leave at the same time, go ahead and show up a couple days while you're contagious...

Of course, there's nothing that's so much fun as waiting around at the pharmacy while wearing a mask :)

[Johan]

The biggest problem with H1N1 flu is that most people exposed to it will get it since they don't have any immunity to this mutated strain (unlike most strains of flu that go around).

This is an interesting hypothesis, but I don't believe there's any hard data to point to regarding transmission rates, though H1N1 certainly moved quickly around the globe as most seasonal influenza viruses do.

Four of my children were exposed to the H1N1 virus this summer. All were in close quarters with multiple confirmed cases for multiple days before the infected individuals were identified as infected and removed from the environment (indoors, with other children). A family friend of mine, a nurse, was literally freaking out that we needed to go on Tamiflu. I was absolutely flabbergasted at the lack of perspective and the fear that the government had engendered in this medical professional. I refused to do anything, and none of my kids came down with it. If they had presented symptoms, I would have acted according to the severity of the symptoms, as I would any time they are sick or injured. Running to the medical cabinet, pharmacy, or doctor is not always necessary or even useful.

People need to take a deep breath and, failing to calm down from that, might follow it with a few beers or glasses of fine wine, perhaps in concert with a relaxing movie or the like. :D

[Darcydian]

The problem is, most adult humans are at least partially if not completely resistant to the standard Flu strain and it's yearly circulation, and even if you do catch it, full flu symptons do not arise in almost 80% of the cases. Sore throats, Running noses, achey joints, All of those are symptons of your body fighting off the virus. The heavy vomiting, fever, breathing complications, dizziness, seemingly paralyzing fatigue and the other severe symptons that people associate with the flu and are what kills people. (Dehydration, fever related deaths, airways closing up so on and so forth) Noone dies just from "having the flu" It's not malaria or anything of the sort. The symptoms of the Flu swine or otherwise do not include death. People die because of complications due to the flu.

This is why the H1N1 is more dangerou is because whatever mutation occured it has made the strain affect the normally unaffected or minorly affected to get the full on flu. I am one of those people who either A does not catch the flu at all each year, or if I do, it's a 1 day and gone with minimal symptons. I am one of those at risk for this because I'm not used to those severe symptons and would either react poorly or may uncover another health risk I was unaware I had.

[Ulysses]

Ummmm... well if it were anything other than D&D I'd agree, but let's just consider this a blessing by god on your social life

Odd, given how a D&D game (or any PnP game) is such a social activity.

[Anenome]

1. What exactly makes the current administration "velvet fascists"?
- Their ideology of smiley-face fascism. Read the book I mentioned.

2. Fox News is a far right news program but they run fearful news over the swine flu regularly. Are they now in league with these velvet fascists?
- They're in the news business. They are not government. So, I could care less about them for the purposes of this discussion.

3. When people accuse Bush of politicizing the deaths that occurred during 9/11 and the subsequent deaths in the war he started, they can point at the fact that literally billions of dollars have been funneled to his special interests like big oil and the military infrastructure. What do you think Obama's endgame is with your conspiracy theory?
- Who mentioned anything about a conspiracy. I'm more interested in what true and what's actually being said by the parties involved. Or, are you denying that Rahm Emanuel said what I quote him as saying. Perhaps you are denying that the Left wants to take over health care also?

The agenda of a fascist is to achieve total control of society via the power of government. The health care debate currently involves an attempt to take over 1/7th of the US economy.

[Anenome]

Well...good then! Less CO2 in the environment, and fewer end-of-life medical costs. After all, don't we want to "bend the curve" and "save the environment?" ;)

Have you heard of Prince Phillip of England? Ardent leftist, socialist, fascist, and environmental whackjob, said this: "If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels."

And he was completely serious about it. There are some radical environmentalists who think the earth's population of humans needs to be reduced to just 500 million.

[Ulysses]

He's a leftist and a fascist ? Damn, that is crazy.

[bean19]

He's a leftist and a fascist ? Damn, that is crazy.
Anemone wishes to marry the terms.

[Johan]

There are some radical environmentalists who think the earth's population of humans needs to be reduced to just 500 million.

Obama's science czar advocates forced abortion, forced sterilization...among other things. (http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/)

He's one of the saner ones in the administration, too. :D

[Anenome]

He's a leftist and a fascist ? Damn, that is crazy.
- They're actually the same thing; all fascists are leftist, but not all leftists are fascists. Musolini was a leftist himself and a favorite of the Left before WWII (just look at the press coverage of him from back then, or lookup his biography), and largely invented what we know as fascism, he even coined the word 'fascism'. This is a simply matter of historical record. Before Musolini created fascism he was a Marxist and semi-anarchist--both leftist movements.

Hitler was also a fascist, with his "National Socialism" party (it wasn't called 'national conservatism' I'll have you note). And Woodrow Wilson was a fascist as well, though he wasn't able to make the fascist policies instituted during WWI stick once the war ended. Fascism was the glamor movement of the left at this point in time, before Hitler gave it such a bad name.
(All of this is documented in Goldberg's "Liberal Fascism")

After WWII, the American left repudiated 'national socialism' in the form of fascism and embraced 'international socialism' in the form of marxism, however many of the policies remain the same. Since nationalism was regarded as a rightist concept to 'internationalist' marxists, they called fascism a 'rightist' concept and conflated the definitions. However, both nationalist and internationalist leftists are still 'on the left' even if one is more left than the other, and the one on the extreme left calling the other one 'right' doesn't make him a rightist, much less a conservative. That's where the rub lies.

You'll note that Hitler was a vegetarian/vegan, hated smoking, hated drinking, banned all guns, believed in environmentalism, and a host of other policies still being pushed by the left in America today.

You don't know any of this because those who write the history books are leftists themselves and refuse to admit it to themselves even. To admit it would be to face that extreme shock, that they are, in part, of the same ideology that produced Hitler. But that is the truth of the matter.

Anemone wishes to marry the terms.
- No, I don't. The terms are already conflated by the truth of history. You are simply ignorant of the truth and of history. That is the purpose of that book, to show the ideological history of fascism which is undeniably a product of the left, it's philosophies and philosophers. Anyone who doubts that only shows that they've been brainwashed away from the historical facts.

Not that I blame such people, since the root of that deception goes back to WWII and the idea that fascism is a rightist concept has been a popular myth ever since, but that assumption has never been accurate or deserved. If you deny the leftist relation to fascism you simply don't know your history or your political philosophy, end of story.

Even the most cursory glance at political philosophy would tell you there's a basic conflict between rightist political philosophy and fascism, and an intrinsic relation between fascism and leftist philosophy:

The left believes government should solve your problems, believes in the increase and power of the government in order to make the world into a Utopia.

Fascism pushed central government power to control everything in society and control it from the middle in order to achieve utopia.

Rightist thinking believes government is largely the problem in human affairs and needs to be small, needs to interfere less, believes in distributed political power not centralized control, distrusts bureaucracy, and that government cannot legislate the world into a utopia.

On this basis, it's quite accurate to say that China, as it is run today, is a fascist country with total central control, total power of government over its citizens, much like communist Russia was.

Now, how did it get that way? Because it's rulers were socialists and discovered that socialism's economic theory was ridiculous. Rather than collapse economically like Russia, the gave up economic controls. By giving up communistic economic theory, they created a country with total central political control and relatively free economy subject to total central control--virtually the exact thing Hitler created in Germany, and other fascists sought to create elsewhere.

Now what do we have? Modern American fascists, calling themselves the 'new left' attempting to put government in control of 1/7th of the US economy.

[Johan]

^^^ Well said regarding liberal fascism, but your ROI will make the effort a wasted one, I'm afraid. The intellectually blind don't respond well to instruction.

[bean19]

Anemone - You are confusing left and right with authoritarian vs. libertarian. There are authoritarian right policies and left policies. For example, it is authoritarian to want to tell women that they cannot have abortions (right) or to say that people should get permits before buying guns (left).

Socialized medicine is no more authoritarian than socialized police forces, but it serves the right to call the left fascist even as they campaign to withhold equal rights from gays and eliminate the right to choose.

As an aside, stop calling names and argue your points or I'll declare you an intellectual child and ignore you (like another poster in this thread). While I like discussing things and perhaps learning something new (as I have done with great posters like Ox), I know that I have nothing to learn from someone childish enough to resort to name calling and hyperbole (1/7 of the economy).

[Ulysses]

You don't know any of this because those who write the history books are leftists themselves and refuse to admit it to themselves even. To admit it would be to face that extreme shock, that they are, in part, of the same ideology that produced Hitler. But that is the truth of the matter.

Hm, sounds familiar.

[Johan]

stop calling names and argue your points or I'll declare you an intellectual child and ignore you

Of course, you would never do that to someone...

I know that I have nothing to learn from someone childish enough to resort to name calling and hyperbole

My GOD man...it took you just a few dozen words to forget your own principles! :D

it serves the right to call the left fascist even as they campaign to withhold equal rights from gays

Thank GOD the Democrats don't support things like DOMA (shhh...signed by Bill Clinton!), which of course Obama would never defend...uh, I mean, uh....HOLY SHIT! (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hogarth/obamas-doma-defense-unacc_b_215718.html)

Just don't ask about it...or tell! (http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-05-10/obamas-dont-ask-dont-tell-hypocrisy/)

How's Obama's troop increase in Afghanistan treating you? (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112566413&ps=cprs)

Slap pretty packaging on it, and people lap shit up like it's steak. It's all about the marketing.

[Anenome]

Anemone - You are confusing left and right with authoritarian vs. libertarian. There are authoritarian right policies and left policies. For example, it is authoritarian to want to tell women that they cannot have abortions (right) or to say that people should get permits before buying guns (left).

Socialized medicine is no more authoritarian than socialized police forces, but it serves the right to call the left fascist even as they campaign to withhold equal rights from gays and eliminate the right to choose.


It's not my mission in life to convert you, so no worries. Although, I don't know why you call the 1/7th claim as hyperbole. And how is it not authoritarian when the proposal includes both central control, and the -requirement- that people buy health insurance, along with copious fines if you don't.

And, as far as any policy is authoritarian it is no longer rightist, by definition. That's not to say there aren't a lot of republicans that aren't authoritarians--I'm against them too.

And I think your citing abortion as an example is particularly poor, since it's regarded as a moral issue by the right, not merely an instance of government control. The right equates abortion to murder, and thus it falls in one of the only things government really should do: protect the innocent from crime/criminals. That is, one of the very few justifiable purposes of the government is policing.

The difference between policing and socialized medicine is that policing involves the use of coercion, and therefore can only be justified by the assent of the community. Medicine / health-care does not require coercion, and injecting coercion does indeed make it authoritarian.

Pls point out where I've called names at all? Saying someone's ignorant of history =/= calling names in my book.

[bean19]

Anemone - That's a really good and mature response without any name-calling that deserves a longer response than I can give right now, but I'll give it one later. Just wanted to give you kudos on arguing your point as I actually enjoy that.

Btw, I'm a bit of a political mutt. I'm a social liberal, economic conservative (not neocon mind you, but classically conservative) libertarian. I just point that out so you know that there are probably going to be as many things we agree on as we disagree upon.

[Anenome]

... it serves the right to call the left fascist even as they campaign to withhold equal rights from gays and eliminate the right to choose.


- See if you can understand this Bean. I care about truth more than anything. More than politics. More than power. If something is untrue, I don't want any part of it. My philosophy is based on truth.
Too often the Left poisons the argument by attacking motives over policy.

We've already discussed gays and equal rights, you and I. Gays want to co-opt the word 'marriage'. If they'd back off that WORD which has religious connotations, and simply accept legally-equal civil-unions, that issue dies and they get their way. You know my position on this already, I don't even think the government should be involved in marriage in the first place but should issue civil-unions to -everyone-, gay and straight alike.

Now, calling abortion a 'right to choose' is nothing more than attacking motives again because you're implying an opponent is against freedom for women somehow. The right doesn't look at abortion as just an issue of choice. If there were no moral ambiguity in abortion, the right would not care about it in the least. The right simply believes that if something might possibly be murder, it should be avoided. It's not about being anti-women, though that's another favorite motivation-attack.

If you want to defend THIS (http://www.theync.com/media.php?name=10918-full-late-term) (do not click that link unless you want to see an abortion), then feel free . I'll pit my position on the side of history with this one. I don't think the state should ever condone killing children for any reason. That's just me though. You can keep approving of baby murder if you want. It seems to be legal right now. But legal doesn't make it moral, as Dr. King pointed out.

Now, is it fair for me to call you in favor of baby-murder? Hardly. For the left it's about lifestyle, quality of life for women. I don't think quality of life issues trump the idea of murder, and so I can't condone abortion.

[Anenome]

Anemone - That's a really good and mature response without any name-calling that deserves a longer response than I can give right now, but I'll give it one later. Just wanted to give you kudos on arguing your point as I actually enjoy that.

Btw, I'm a bit of a political mutt. I'm a social liberal, economic conservative (not neocon mind you, but classically conservative) libertarian. I just point that out so you know that there are probably going to be as many things we agree on as we disagree upon.

- Well I'm glad, I hope my post above doesn't piss you off too much, 'cause I doubt we're gonna agree on abortion any time soon :P

I don't consider myself a neocon either, most neocons are former leftists who intend to use control of the state to institute a rightist vision as opposed to the left's. They want to do this typically as a function of outside threats to the country, and so focus on foreign policy. But at least they have their economics fairly right, and don't envision tearing down society and controlling every aspect of it from the ground up.

This is why government grew under Bush rather than shrunk.

You're economically conservative / libertarian, good, I applaud that. We need more people with good sense in economics. We don't need to agree on social issues, just build a tolerant political society where no one controls other's private lives, and put forth stable economic policy.

The problem comes when people want to institute cradle-to-grave government oversight--such a vision actually requires leftist economic control. But the result is always a worse quality of life for the people.

Well, the last century sure has been an interesting one. We're still waking up from it, in many ways. Currently we have the last of the baby boomers in charge of politics right now, and they were a very radical generation. When the 80's kids get power, hopefully we'll see things change quite a bit in the right direction.

[Phoenix1985]

Wasn't this thread about PAX, somehow...? Seriously, how're the dudes and dudettes over there :(

[Johan]

Wasn't this thread about PAX, somehow...? Seriously, how're the dudes and dudettes over there :(

They all died from swine flu. Really. It's a pandemic.

[Samstag]

They all died from swine flu. Really. It's a pandemic.

It was a merciful death, then. Apparently one political party or the other (or both?) was about to put them in a concentration camp.

[bean19]

The problem comes when people want to institute cradle-to-grave government oversight--such a vision actually requires leftist economic control. But the result is always a worse quality of life for the people.
1. I'm afraid you've been reading propaganda. There are many countries that have much higher quality of life for the average individual than we have in the United States. One of the things they do is guarantee medical care.

2. Government medical care would be extremely affordable in our country if medical care and insurance companies were not already fundamentally broken. We have a system that allows insurance companies and Medicare to be billed absurd amounts for minor services. There is not an Aspirin in the world that should cost $10. Hospitals raise their costs to the maximum because they are offsetting the large amount of work they perform for free or for which they only receive small amounts of payment after collections. Medical equipment providers do so because they can get away with it (if you have loose morals and can pull up half a million to start a medical equipment company then this is an easy way to get rich).

3. There are some very serious problems with government medical care and what people call a welfare state. They tend to offset problems that you get with capitalism. In a capitalist society, skilled workers are the only ones that are in short supply, so unskilled workers (laborers) must work below the poverty line. This means that they can't afford the standard things we consider cause economic stability like health care, home ownership, and reliable transportation. The problems you get when you allow the working poor to go without medical treatment because they can't afford it or to go into debt when they are forced to get it due to emergency care are several. Someone who doesn't get treated early on could then exacerbate their injury and become disabled which then becomes a strain on our economy, or worse they could die and cause the family they provided for to have to use government programs. Plus, poverty is directly related to crime. People that do not have hope are not afraid of prisons.

You read like someone who is having his opinion made for him instead of someone who is reading from a variety of sources and making his own opinion. It's a lot of fun to watch Fox News and enjoy the name-calling and blaming, but if you get away from it and start reading about the issues from experts in their fields then you star to see that both sides don't really have a satisfactory answer. Hopefully together they'll come to one.

Edit: Btw, I'm only presenting one side of this. There are arguments for a completely free market, lowered taxes, and even fewer social programs, but that's a bit of a test. I want to see if you know those arguments or if all you know is the name-calling and vitriol that Fox News outputs daily.

[Orz]

Wow, there's a lot of vile posts in a thread about PAX. It's a sad thing when people just won't stop screaming their own views to listen to anyone else. There is no such thing as meaningful public discourse anymore, and no one is willing to entertain the possibility that anything - or everything - they believe is wrong. If you believe this post only applies to people who hold beliefs opposing your own, then you are guilty of this.

As for swine flu, wash your hands. Good advice in any situation.

[Anenome]

1. I'm afraid you've been reading propaganda. There are many countries that have much higher quality of life for the average individual than we have in the United States. One of the things they do is guarantee medical care.
- Yes, and when you guarantee free health care the result is rationing. One such country is Canada. When Canada cannot provide the health coverage its citizens need, you know what they do? They send their citizens across the border and pay American hospitals to do the work for them. 'Highe quality of life' is a composite statistic and rather easily twisted. We have a much higher percentage of immigrants, for instance, which tends to mess with comparative sociology.

You wanna talk about people dying because they can't get their diseases looked at quickly enough? There's tons of people quite literally dying because they cannot get cancer looked at quickly enough in England for instance. Let's talk injustice. In Britain, recently, a woman's baby was left to die by her doctors because it was born two days too soon, it was premature, but the health-care regulations there say after a certain number of days they'll pay to save the baby, and before that cutoff date they will not. So, they let her baby die. Is that what we want done here? Here's the link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6142370/Bereaved-mothers-campaign-against-medical-guidelines-that-allow-premature-babies-to-die.html

2. Government medical care would be extremely affordable in our country if medical care and insurance companies were not already fundamentally broken. We have a system that allows insurance companies and Medicare to be billed absurd amounts for minor services. There is not an Aspirin in the world that should cost $10. Hospitals raise their costs to the maximum because they are offsetting the large amount of work they perform for free or for which they only receive small amounts of payment after collections. Medical equipment providers do so because they can get away with it (if you have loose morals and can pull up half a million to start a medical equipment company then this is an easy way to get rich).
- Yes, medical care would be much cheaper--but only if they government stopped regulating it to death. Hospitals charge $10 for an aspirin because the government requires them to take patients whether they can pay for it or not. This causes hospitals to close, such as the recent closing in Los Angeles, which simply couldn't afford to keep the doors opening. It's a govenrment policy causing that, nothing else. Those who cannot pay should be seeking charitable help.

Government also helps drive up prices by guaranteeing pay rates of services rather than allowing market forces to waltz in.

Let me ask you this though: government is just a group of people. Business is also a group of people. The only difference is that the gov has coercive powers. How do coercive powers make health-care cheaper? I can see quite plainly how it makes it more experience by mandating care, but how is it going to make it cheaper? Is it going to poof medication, doctors, and equipment out of thing air? Or, is it simply going to force doctors to do what it says, and if so, how many doctors are going to quit the profession, making the situation worse. Again, there's trade-offs for everything you do.

Gov intervention in health insurance companies causing them to fail--this sounds familiar. We had government intervention in the housing market that caused it to fail--yes, gov caused that. Then we had gov intervention in the railroad industry long, long ago that caused it to fail also and it was taken over by government. This forms a pattern: regulate an industry into the ground and then take it over.

3. There are some very serious problems with government medical care and what people call a welfare state. They tend to offset problems that you get with capitalism. In a capitalist society, skilled workers are the only ones that are in short supply, so unskilled workers (laborers) must work below the poverty line. This means that they can't afford the standard things we consider cause economic stability like health care, home ownership, and reliable transportation.
- This is 19th century thinking which viewed the world in terms of class, and assumed that those in one class never change classes throughout their lifetime. In the modern economy, those working below the poverty line are, by vast margins, teenagers and those in school. They become middle-income workers in their middle-age, and often quite wealthy by old-age. Even the unskilled become skilled in the process of working their job and gaining experience. This is not a problem of capitalism at all. And there's no other country where income-earning is as mobile as in America, meaning that the ability of a person to go from poverty to wealthy is easier than anywhere else in the world--which is why this nation is so attractive to immigrants in my belief.

The problems you get when you allow the working poor to go without medical treatment because they can't afford it or to go into debt when they are forced to get it due to emergency care are several. Someone who doesn't get treated early on could then exacerbate their injury and become disabled which then becomes a strain on our economy, or worse they could die and cause the family they provided for to have to use government programs. Plus, poverty is directly related to crime. People that do not have hope are not afraid of prisons.
- Government should get out of the charity business. Charity would pick up the slack, and has done so historically. The idea that high taxes are good because government does good with the extra money is a false one for many reasons. Private charities also do far better jobs of vetting the money going out and making sure the people receiving it are truly in need--something government run programs are notoriously bad at. Witness the number medicare and SS scams, people receiving checks from dead relatives, etc.

And poverty is -not- related to crime. That is a myth. The poorest places in America are also some of the safest places. Because, the poorest place in America is some white-red-neck hick-town of like 113 people, with 90% of them on welfare, but also almost zero crime.

If you want to make accusations about crime, you must look to cultural attitudes about crime. Some cultures are far more crime tolerant and thus have more crime. Figure out a way to change that.

You read like someone who is having his opinion made for him instead of someone who is reading from a variety of sources and making his own opinion. It's a lot of fun to watch Fox News and enjoy the name-calling and blaming, but if you get away from it and start reading about the issues from experts in their fields then you star to see that both sides don't really have a satisfactory answer. Hopefully together they'll come to one.
- That's extremely paternalistic and insulting. I don't even have cable, so watching Fox news is right out. And you'd be somewhat hard pressed to find someone more widely read, especially in politics, but also in general.

IMO, the best way to deal with our country's problems is not to follow the European welfare/healtcare ridiculousness with 80% tax rates, but rather to follow the ancient Chinese advice, to make the max tax rate 20% and allow prosperity to follow.

The government doesn't create jobs, the government does not create prosperity--but it can interfere with it. Government can only get out of the way and ensure the playing field is level. Furthermore, government healthcare is not Constitutional (and don't quote the general welfare clause either, that's not a blank check).

[Johan]

^^ Doomed to failure. He's not seeking to understand your point of view, or to change his own. He's seeking to convert you.

Complete waste of time.

[Anenome]

^^ Doomed to failure. He's not seeking to understand your point of view, or to change his own. He's seeking to convert you.

Complete waste of time.

Hope that's not his aim. Trying to convert me would be a waste of time.

[bean19]

Let me ask you this though: government is just a group of people. Business is also a group of people. The only difference is that the gov has coercive powers. How do coercive powers make health-care cheaper?
Clearly we agree there is a problem and we agree that the reason medical costs are ridiculous is that doctors/hospitals do not always get paid because they provide care to people who need it rather than turning them away.

Where we disagree is that you feel that people who can't afford health insurance should rely on charity for healthcare or live without it and/or die without it. The only care that we guarantee to people (and which then puts them in debt) is emergent care. You can't go to a hospital and get a checkup for free. You have to go with a life-threatening illness or injury to not be turned away if you don't have medical care. You think that hospitals should not be required to take people who are sick but who don't have insurance? I believe in personal responsibility, but I'm also a Christian and that line of thinking is just monstrous to me Anemone. I hope I misunderstood you.

I believe medical costs will go down because the government will pay for all these freebies so that the doctors don't have to charge the paying customers $10 for aspirin to make up for the customers that don't pay. Also, I believe that once the majority of people are getting care that is not emergent (more pharmaceutical use), we'll move on to legislating against the legalized theft that that pharmaceutical companies daily commit.

Gov intervention in health insurance companies causing them to fail--this sounds familiar. We had government intervention in the housing market that caused it to fail--yes, gov caused that.
Lack of intervention caused it to stumble and then the government had to step in to save the finance industry. Greedily offering stupid people loans they couldn't afford in order to resell these "high profit" that they knew would become defunct is what caused it.

This is 19th century thinking which viewed the world in terms of class, and assumed that those in one class never change classes throughout their lifetime. In the modern economy, those working below the poverty line are, by vast margins, teenagers and those in school. They become middle-income workers in their middle-age, and often quite wealthy by old-age. Even the unskilled become skilled in the process of working their job and gaining experience. This is not a problem of capitalism at all. And there's no other country where income-earning is as mobile as in America, meaning that the ability of a person to go from poverty to wealthy is easier than anywhere else in the world--which is why this nation is so attractive to immigrants in my belief.
I agree there is opportunity in the United States. That doesn't change the fact that we have a very large number of people living below the poverty line that simply can't afford medical insurance.

Wow. I just read where you stated that poverty isn't related to crime. I'm just going to stop here. I don't think I'm going to change your mind, and I don't think you read enough that you'll say anything that is new or interesting to me.

[Johan]

I'm just going to stop here. I don't think I'm going to change your mind, and I don't think you read enough that you'll say anything that is new or interesting to me.

Clearly someone has been right on target in this thread.

Doomed to failure. He's [bean] not seeking to understand your [Anemone] point of view, or to change his [bean] own. He's [bean] seeking to convert you [Anemone].

Complete waste of time.

It was me. :D

[Anenome]

Where we disagree is that you feel that people who can't afford health insurance should rely on charity for healthcare or live without it and/or die without it. The only care that we guarantee to people (and which then puts them in debt) is emergent care. You can't go to a hospital and get a checkup for free. You have to go with a life-threatening illness or injury to not be turned away if you don't have medical care. You think that hospitals should not be required to take people who are sick but who don't have insurance? I believe in personal responsibility, but I'm also a Christian and that line of thinking is just monstrous to me Anemone. I hope I misunderstood you.

- What does Christianity have to do with forcing others to pay for your healthcare? That is just robbery. The Bible applauds charity, not robbery.

What you're saying is that you want to make healthcare a right? That would be the first time that we have ever given people a right to someone else's effort. By which I mean that only doctors give healthcare, so if you give people a right to healthcare, you're saying people have a right to served by doctors. In other words, you're saying doctors are slaves.

And we both know that neither the current legislative proposal, nor what the Left wants to do with healthcare will stop at preventative care. They want it all, complete control of that sector of the economy. The public-option is a poison pill designed to force private plans to abdicate to the unfair pressure created by it. For instance, the plan would force employers to either continue their current private plan, or pay an 8% payroll tax and shift all their employees to the public option. Sounds good, right? Problem: the average cost of a company healthcare plan is more like 12% of the payroll. Any company that doesn't switch and has competitors that do will find itself facing stiffer competition and possibly being put out of business, if even one company they compete with switches. Thus, to stay alive, they will all switch.

I believe medical costs will go down because the government will pay for all these freebies so that the doctors don't have to charge the paying customers $10 for aspirin to make up for the customers that don't pay. Also, I believe that once the majority of people are getting care that is not emergent (more pharmaceutical use), we'll move on to legislating against the legalized theft that that pharmaceutical companies daily commit.
- Legalized theft? You crazy? Legalized theft requires coercive power, only the government has that. No one's forcing you to buy anything from a private company. Ditch the talking points. If you want to say that pills cost too much and the generic brand is cheaper, then fine we can talk about that--just leave the emotional illogical terms at home.

My first question then is: do you have any idea how much it costs to successfully research, test, and produce a drug? And how many lives have been saved by doing so? America's drug production is profitable and there's nothing wrong with that. People who think making a profit is wrong are idiots, cannot stress that enough. A drug company has to recoup what it spent, thus it charges.

For a lot of these pills, the cost of producing the first pill that comes off the production line, after all the R&D and testing and approval process, costs at a billion dollars. The first pill. This is an economic principle. If they only sold one pill, they'd be ruined, or would have to charge a hell of a lot for that one :P Instead, the amortize the cost across expected demand. So, if they expect to sell X amount in the lifetime of the pill, the take the already spent R&D money, M, and the cost of the pill is then M / X = $ per pill.

If you destroy the pharmeceutical industry you are going to kill a lot of people that otherwise would've lived just because you have a moral objection to profit making. And if you force them to bring down prices, they will simply cut back on R&D and you will kill a lot of people because of the drugs that then also won't be discovered and created.

(re: housing crisis) Lack of intervention caused it to stumble and then the government had to step in to save the finance industry. Greedily offering stupid people loans they couldn't afford in order to resell these "high profit" that they knew would become defunct is what caused it.
- If you believe that you are literally nothing more than brainwashed. This is the part where you need to turn NPR off and read some sources yourself, 'cause it's pure ignorance. The government forced companies to make loans irregardless of the credit of the borrower. That's what caused the crisis. Everything else is just the market reacting to that fact. And the whole situation wouldn't have even been possible if it weren't for the quangos known as fannie and freddie (do you even know what a quango is?).

Here's an article/interview with Thomas Sowell, PhD in economics: http://www.reason.com/news/show/133593.html

He's also the author of a book that just came out, called "The Housing Boom and Bust (http://www.amazon.com/Housing-Boom-Bust-Thomas-Sowell/dp/0465018807/reasonmagazineA/)". He might have a bit more of a grasp on it than you, right? Here's his conclusion:

"A quick but thorough guide to the causes of the crises, Sowell's book shows how government policies led to a huge increase in highly risky housing loans. As he notes, the immense local variability in housing prices and failed loans reveals that the government mistook a set of local problems for a national one, and then imposed a single troublesome national solution. Sowell argues that while foolish decisions to indulge in complicated investment vehicles affected the specifics of how the financial contagion spread, at its root the housing problem is one of bad mortgages. And those came from bad decisions by government and by borrowers themselves."


That doesn't change the fact that we have a very large number of people living below the poverty line that simply can't afford medical insurance.
- The answer is not a government takeover of health care.