MARCELL DAREUS POWER

If you want to build on that assumption first you'll have to convince me, and anyone else who takes umbrage, of the idea that a non-merit based (or merit based, for that matter) social welfare program is the proper role of the state. you just said the state would take care of the kids, regardless, are you actually arguing poor children should just die? literally no safety net... Secondly, you're making Initially, without access to contraception, those poor who are responsible enough to use the offered contraception might see an increase in pregnancy in that demographic. However, since we're speaking about a group who are separated from those who wouldn't use the available contraception at all in the first place by their tendency to be more responsible Additionally, I find the notion that a large enough sub-segment of the poor population, whose behavior in poverty can best be described with any adjective other than "responsible", are making use of the offered free contraception to be dubious at best. rich or poor, people will have sex man... its not so much about some empty term of being responsible when we all know, good repsonsible people have sex... its called nature...you are saying these people are responsible, and therefore wont have sex... talk about wild assumptions... No, what you are is a !@#$ing moron who makes wild leaps of logic and correlates behaviors with policy that has nothing to do with eventual outcomes. The fact that you're a self-described liberal Democrat has nothing at all to do with those poor tendencies, although I do find it humorous that you would demonize your preferred ideology by ascribing those traits to all of it's members in broad brush strokes. of course, a pretentious !@#$ on a bills message board... really man...? no. its irrelevant, just like crime is different in certain areas, you wouldnt argue to not have access to law enforcement... same with access to different kinds of bc in a health care system... That is the dumbest thing I've ever read here, and that's saying something. First of all, stop conflating medical coverage with medical care. They aren't even remotely the same thing; and if your argument is against scarcity of resources then your argument becomes even worse because . If you want to argue for a nationalized risk pool for those sorts of ailments where no market based solution is viable, I'm all ears. However, when you want to insure things like well visits, mundane illness, and birth control; which the large majority of the population will suffer from or need/desire, the reason the medical care, in all forms, is so scarce in america, is because its so expensive, because its in a market... again, because medical care is an absolute need, this generates incredible demand, people cannot opt out of medical care, like opting out of walmart or a shoe store... this is why police/fire/military/roads, would fail miserably in a market... the supply/demand metric does not work. the scarcity is generated by price, not giving people more access... the number 1 cause of bankruptcy is health care costs. you are working under the assumption that if more people have access you will get less care, when its the market in health care that is restricting access/care. its not a fair market for consumers. because insurance companies are competing, and are accountable to shareholders, prices most go up to take advantage of market vulnerability, and the incentive is to not give care... free markets are great, but if a person cannot opt out, then its dogmatic and rigid to hold onto that perspective with health care... Actually, condoms are readily available in the US. They are provided free of charge by multiple well funded charities, clinics, and universities. Additionally, they can be purchased for about 50 cents/per on the market. The market has already solved this issue, and your bloviating assertions to the contrary are absurd. Leninists like yourself like to toss out canards about everything market based being "anti-some protected group", when the truth is that your insistance in seperating and protecting them locks them into a permanent and unescapable merit-based caste system. If anyone is anti-women here, it's you; insisting that they are inferior and therefor need extra help. If it was anything like the enourmous corn-riddled **** you took in the post I'm currently disecting, I'll spare myself the time, and you the intellectual beat down. Fiat declaration built around a foolish assumption which I've already debunked in this post above. It's becoming clear that you don't have a very good handle of the language. Peddle your Leninism somewhere else. people spend their time and money how they see fit, and some people are in better position. for example, a janitor wont do as well as bruce smith, ( for market reasons) which would make it hard to save for retirement or function when older, hence the reason for ss... !@#$tard.. I'll let this stand, and allow the reader to decide if this is an apt descriptor of me, or if you've been caught staring too deeply into a mirror. tasker- you are the perfect example of a free market fundamentalist, and im pro free market... just not with every single sector of society...lol

whats the point of voting if you live in major red or blue state? i agree, do an online popular vote... is that so hard?

the time off instead of rushing back is probably really going to help... so we will see...

yeah, sometimes he blows the guy up, and even is very stout, but is late shedding... its technique, not talent with alex.

ummm no, bb.com said mcgee is full go mon... hes fine...

although, if a private bank has the power to loan out free money, at will, well.... thats pretty much a free loader. if i could print money at will and loan it out, id be rich too...lol

if im not mistaken, in austrian economics, currency would be set, it wouldnt change, like 10-1.... the bank could not loan out past this reserve ratio of dollars to gold, creating a ceiling on debt/inflation. but im not sure... The extension of credit needed to be "commoditized" in some form - gold has long been the commodity of choice that helped establish a credit based currency system. The basic tenet of any credit based monetary system is that the extension of credit should be used to finance productivity. Where credit based systems self-destruct is when credit extension is used to speculate on rising asset prices. When the rate of credit expansion slows you get a financial crisis as asset prices begin to plateau or decline as investors retreat from the market. MDP is right in that money is loaned into existence thanks to fractional reserve banking. like he said... i also think inflation does rise, but value is still value... the market would adjust, but it does get out of whack like in 08 and the crash of 29 but because we have a fed with no gold reserve standard, we soften the blow when the market adjusts

What they can't do is claim the right to the resources of others simply because they like to !@#$ irresponsibly. so you proved my point, by not having access to contraception, the chances go up that poor people will have unwanted pregnancy, thus creating an even heavier burden on the state... but dont worry, im a liberal democrat that ignores reality, ( people wont have sex) To cover unforeseen eventualities and maladies that only a small portion of the population will experience at any given time, thus taking advantage of a shared risk pool and lowering the financial burden of those occurrences. Birth control doesn't fit this model because it breaks the shared risk pool. so like pretty much all medical coverage, the demand is great, and supply is low, hence the reason it doesnt work in a market, which is why we need single payer... when we are the only 1st world country that cant get contraception for women, either its a market issue, or anti-women issue, or both... see post on single payer... pretty much a simpleton answer, obviously market health care doesnt work, your post proves that... and for the same reason the police and fire wouldnt work in a market... incredible demand that is needed not wanted, which creates market vulnerability, which makes your regurgitated, non critical thinking ass, comment on personal responsibility !@#$ing dumb as !@#$...

yeah, they need a big guy... brockers got hurt

does this make sense? what do u mean?

mcgee said he will be full go monday... brooks to ir thigpen may stay for a few weeks... naaman comes back

people tend to forget, the early 90s bills teams were really a running team with thurmanator and kenny d! sure they passed, but thurman was the identity... remember 95 wildcard game vs miami, 350 yds rushing!

how in the !@#$ not?

i dont get it...

i mean, hes the president of us all, so its kind of dumb for fl or ohio to decide it... just sayin...

aiken easley- active after they use ir rule/ tank carder asper zach brown eddins gilbert green saenz

so if its 10-12, why didnt they ir him?

right on front page

IS HE?

front of billsdaily says he is fine... so idk

disscuss. r u suprised?

green and saenz make it...

no ****, but why are women denied care by the insurance company but men arent? babies and children can work? get jobs? whats the point of health insurance if you cant get contraceptives covered? really? preventing pregnancy is not a medical issue??? why would anyone be opposed to this?

because u were white?

what in the blue !@#$ is up with brooks... i know mcgee needs a few weeks to get ready... brooks????