Alaska Darin

Clearly. I'm continually amazed at how few people understand our current reality. Doing the same stupid **** over and over isn't progressive. Progressive?

What should "burn your ass a little" is that the United States doesn't have the friendliest tax policies in the world and essentially forces businesses to put their money elsewhere. If you continue to add regulation and cost, you're going to lose revenue to places that don't. It's really that simple.

Which Bush policy caused the housing bubble, professor? Once again, the beauty of your stupidity is its simplicity.

Why not just type: "I don't have any concept of what it's like to work with the government, so I'll live in ideological land."? You mean because having a legal, binding contract between entities isn't formal enough for you? The government doesn't "invest", it buys things. Goods, services, etc. Often, they are things that no other entity in the world is either allowed to buy or could even afford. On top of that, they put in rules that make it virtually impossible for small or diverse businesses to compete in the arena, which is why there are enormous companies that essentially built to deal solely with the U.S. government. Your "solution" would cost the taxpayer even more money. Jesus Christ, comrade. You actually teach some form of economics?

The government ends up "owning" a good portion of the technology that's privately developed. They're even allowed to pass that technology around to competing companies. WHICH IS WHY THEY PAY FOR THE R&D. The government "owning" any commercial entity is a horrible idea. The reason most contracts/projects go over budget is poor government management/incessant scope change. Making that easier would be even worse for the taxpayer. Why not just admit you have virtually no understanding of the process, rather than propose such a ludicrous "solution"?

No, I'm not. I don't want to get into a whole thing about how it truly works but the margins are what they are because most of the companies are purposely built to be inefficient with low margins.

Obama, Mayor Royce, Stringer Bell, Omar, Snoop, and Chris. Yeah, baby.

Me too. If for no other reason than the !@#$ing name is ridiculous.

Bull. I know. There are times, depending on the contract, where it leads to ridiculous profits. Been there. Seen it. No argument there, though they can get through leaner times based on relationships more easily than many industries. You know why.

Yeah, lets suspend protection every time a cop or fireman makes a mistake too. Nice management strategy, "educators".

I don't think there's any question that defense contractors have a leg up. That doesn't make them immune to bad management or stupid decisions. They're also only as good as their customer, which tells a lot of the story.

No kidding.

It's going to be tough to pull something like that off unilaterally.

You don't have to explain the role of advertising - it's the reason I rarely watch live television. The American health care "system" has facets of the free market but it's probably the best/worst example of government intervention into the free market. The balance is shot all to hell. I'd say it's a long range conspiracy by the bureaucrats to effect a takeover but there's no way they're competent/smart enough to pull that off over such an extended term.

There isn't anything "free market" about the American health care "system".

I wouldn't say I'm arguing anything. The fact is there's more money in the American political system than the GDP of all but a handful of countries. That generally means more bureaucracy and more corruption. Like I said, I'm sure it would start out on track but it wouldn't take long for it go completely off the rails. This country desperately needs someone to press the reset button. We don't need this much government and the government we should have needs to be accountable. Good luck getting that fixed. No one's arguing that health care in the U.S. isn't desperately !@#$ed up. I've said the same thing on this board numerous times that Brill wrote in his article. ACA didn't address those things or any of the other things that make health care ridiculously expensive. The reason for that has everything to do with politicians (regardless of affiliation) being in the pockets of lobbyists and the apathy/stupidity of the publicly educated populous. You liberals are getting exactly what you deserve.

In my experience, most college kids and sports fans in general deserve to be yelled at.

In the short term, that may actually work. In the long term, lobbyists and politicians will turn it into another boondoggle that will cost the taxpayers billions upon billions and ensure the game is controlled by someone who doesn't have the patient's best interest in mind. JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE. I know that's a tough thing for you liberals to face but big government/central control has never made anything more affordable for the average person. It's always the opposite. ALWAYS.

You mean because conservatives profit so much from the health care and legal lobbies? http://online.wsj.co...7595120225.html http://www.nationalj...-money-20090727 http://www.reuters.c...E5AJ3HA20091120 "Lawmakers, especially Democratic Senators up for re-election next year, have seen a flood of campaign donations from hospitals, device makers and others with billions at stake." You're going to have to do better than that. Be specific on what parts that the "conservatives" supposedly killed that would have made health care in America more affordable.

The real question is what part of ACA actually addresses the real reasons health care in this country costs so much?

Yeah, that's why they pay less. Is there any amount of crap you liberals won't believe?

You know, the one Obama cowed to so he could get his horrible leftislation passed... He wins. You lose. Stop playing. The problem in government has little to do with funding. That's an age old line of crap for politicians to reach deeper into people's pockets. Stop being part of the problem.

I don't "know" it, which is why I used the term "likely". I used the term "likely" based on my personal life experience. Is that simple enough for you or does the guy who has used more supposition in this thread than everyone else combined going to need me to draw pictures? You don't know me, so don't blindly believe that I wouldn't tell you to STFU if you were tossing such stupidity around in my presence. Because like most of this thread, you'd be wrong. It has nothing to do with courtesy. The world needs more people telling others to STFU and I'm pretty willing to do it. Ask anyone here who has actually met me. I'm the same dude in person that I am on the internet. You've typed out the same ridiculous drivel over and over again, as if you're going to win by having more long posts than everyone else. It's not making you look smarter, nor is anyone buying it. I suspect you even know it's utter bull **** but you're not man enough to walk away. Maybe I'll go all Zimmerman and shoot you off the board.

/thread