Trending Games | Continent of the Ninth Seal | Magerealm | Devilian | Path of Exile

    Facebook Twitter YouTube
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,994,911 Users Online:0
Games:836  Posts:6,458,196
Recent forum postsRSS
Active threads
Cloud view
List all forums
General Forums
Developers Corner General Discussion
Popular Game Forums
Click a status to find game forum
Game Forums
Click a letter to find game forum
2029 Online 2112: Revolution 2Moons 4Story 8BitMMO 9 Dragons A Mystical Land A Tale in the Desert III A3 ACE Online AD2460 ARGO Online Aberoth Absolute Force Online Absolute Terror Achaea Adellion Aerrevan Aetolia, the Midnight Age Age of Armor Age of Conan Age of Empires Online Age of Mourning Age of Wulin Age of Wushu Aida Arenas Aika Aion Albion Online Alganon All Points Bulletin (APB) Allods Online Altis Gates Amazing World Anarchy Online Ancients of Fasaria Andromeda 5 Angels Online Angry Birds Epic Anime Ninja Anime Pirates Anime Trumps Anmynor Anno Online Applo Arcane Hearts Arcane Legends ArchLord ArcheAge Archeblade Archlord 2 Archlord X Armored Warfare Ascend: Hand of Kul Asda 2 Asda Story Ashen Empires Asheron's Call Asheron's Call 2 Astera Online Astonia III Astro Empires Astro Lords: Oort CLoud Asura Force Atlantica Online Atriarch Aura Kingdom Aurora Blade Auto Assault Avatar Star Battle Dawn Battle Dawn Galaxies Battle for Graxia Battle of 3 Kingdoms Battle of the Immortals Battlecruiser Online Battlestar Galactica Online Battlestar Reloaded Beyond Protocol Bionic Marine Command Online Black Aftermath Black Desert Black Gold Black Prophecy Black Prophecy Tactics: Nexus Conflict Blackguards 2 Blacklight Retribution Blade & Soul Blade Hunter Blade Wars Blazing Throne Bless Blitz 1941 Blood and Jade Bloodborne Bloodlines Champions Boot Hill Heroes Borderlands 2 Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel Bound by Flame Bounty Bay Online Brain Storm Bravada Bravely Default Bravely Second Brawl Busters. Brick-Force Bright Shadow Bullet Run Business Tycoon Online CTRacer Cabal Online Caesary Call of Camelot Call of Gods Call of Thrones Camelot Unchained Canaan Online Cardmon Hero Cartoon Universe CasinoRPG Cast & Conquer Castle Empire Castlot Celtic Heroes Champions Online Champions of Regnum Chaos Online Child of Light Chroma Squad Chrono Tales Citadel of Sorcery CitiesXL Citizen Zero City of Decay City of Heroes City of Steam City of Transformers City of Villains Civilization Online Clan Lord Clash of Clans Cloud Nine Club Penguin Colony of War Command & Conquer: Tiberium Alliances Company of Heroes Online Conquer Online Conquer Online 3 Continent of the Ninth (C9) Core Blaze Core Exiles Corum Online Craft of Gods Crimecraft Crimelife 2 Cronous Crota II Crowfall Crusaders of Solaris Cultures Online Cyber Monster 2 Cyberpunk 2077 Céiron Wars
D&D Online DC Universe DK Online DOTA DOTA 2 DUST 514 DV8: Exile Dalethaan Dance Groove Online Dark Age of Camelot Dark Ages Dark Legends Dark Orbit Dark Relic: Prelude Dark Solstice Dark Souls 2 Dark and Light DarkEden Online DarkSpace Darkblood Online Darkest Dungeon Darkfall Darkfall: Unholy Wars Darkwind: War on Wheels Das Tal Dawn of Fantasy Dawntide DayZ Dead Earth Dead Frontier Dead Island Dead Island 2 Dead Island: Riptide Deco Online Deep Down Deepworld Defiance Deicide Online Dekaron Demons at the Horizon Desert Operations Destiny Diablo 3 Diamonin Digimon Battle Dino Storm Disciple Divergence Divina Divine Souls Divinity: Original Sin Dofus Dominus Online Dragon Age: Inquisition Dragon Ball Online Dragon Born Online Dragon Crusade Dragon Empires Dragon Eternity Dragon Fin Soup Dragon Heart Online Dragon Nest Dragon Oath Dragon Pals Dragon Raja Dragon's Call Dragon's Call II Dragon's Prophet DragonSky DragonSoul Dragona Dragonica Dragons and Titans Drakengard 3 Dream of Mirror Online Dreamland Online Dreamlords: The Reawakening Drift City Duels Dungeon Blitz Dungeon Fighter Online Dungeon Overlord Dungeon Party Dungeon Rampage Dungeon Runners Dungeon of the Endless Dying Light Dynastica Dynasty Warriors Online Dynasty of the Magi EIN (Epicus Incognitus) EVE Online Earth Eternal Earth and Beyond Earthlock: Festival of Magic Earthrise Eclipse War Ecol Tactics Online Eden Eternal Edge of Space Einherjar - The Viking's Blood Elder Scrolls Online Eldevin Elf Online Elite: Dangerous Embers of Caerus Emil Chronicle Online Empire Empire & State Empire Craft Empire Universe 3 EmpireQuest Empires of Galldon End of Nations Endless Ages Endless Blue Moon Online Endless Online Entropia Universe EpicDuel Erebus: Travia Reborn Eredan Eternal Blade Eternal Lands Eternal Saga Ether Fields Ether Saga Online Eudemons Online EuroGangster EverEmber Online EverQuest Next EverQuest Online Adventures Evernight Everquest Everquest II Evony Exarch Exorace F.E.A.R. Online Fable Legends Face of Mankind Fairyland Online Fall of Rome Fallen Earth Fallen Sword Fallout 4 Fallout Online Family Guy Online Fantage Fantasy Earth Zero Fantasy Realm Online Fantasy Tales Online Fantasy Worlds: Rhynn Faunasphere Faxion Online Fearless Fantasy Ferentus Ferion Fiesta Online Final Fantasy Type-0 HD Final Fantasy XI Final Fantasy XIV Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn Firefall Fists of Fu Florensia Flyff Football Manager Live Football Superstars Force of Arms Forge Forsaken Uprising Forsaken World Fortnite Fortuna Forum for Discussion of Everlight Freaky Creatures Free Realms Freesky Online Freeworld Fung Wan Online Furcadia Fury Fusion Fall
GRAV GalaXseeds Galactic Command Online Game of Thrones: Seven Kingdoms Gameglobe Gate To Heavens Gates of Andaron Gatheryn Gauntlet Gekkeiju Online Ghost Online Ghost Recon Online Gladiatus Glitch Global Agenda Global Soccer Gloria Victis Glory of Gods GoGoRacer Goal Line Blitz Gods Rush Gods and Heroes GodsWar Online Golemizer Golf Star GoonZu Online Graal Kingdoms Granado Espada Online Grand Chase Grand Fantasia Grepolis Grimlands Guild Wars Guild Wars 2 Guild Wars Factions Guild Wars Nightfall H1Z1 Habbo Hotel Hailan Rising HaloSphere2 Hand of Fate Haven & Hearth Hawken Heart Forth Alicia Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft Helbreath Hellgate Hellgate: London Hello Kitty Online Hero Online Hero Zero Hero's Journey Hero: 108 Online HeroSmash Heroes & Generals Heroes & Legends: Conquerors of Kolhar Heroes in the Sky Heroes of Atlan Heroes of Bestia Heroes of Gaia Heroes of Might and Magic Online Heroes of Thessalonica Heroes of Three Kingdoms Heroes of the Storm Hex Holic Online Hostile Space Hunter Blade Huxley Icewind Dale: Enhanced Edition Illutia Illyriad Immortals USA Immune Imperator Imperian Inferno Legend Infestation: Survivor Stories Infinite Crisis Infinity Infinity Iris Online Iron Grip: Marauders Irth Worlds Island Forge Islands of War Istaria: Chronicles of the Gifted Jade Dynasty Jagged Alliance Online Juggernaut Jumpgate Jumpgate Evolution KAL Online Kakele Online Kaos War Karos Online Kartuga Kicks Online Kill Strain King of Kings 3 Kingdom Heroes Kingdom Under Fire II Kingdom of Drakkar Kingory Kings Era Kings and Legends Kings of the Realm KingsRoad Kitsu Saga Kiwarriors Knight Age Knight Online Knights of Dream City Kothuria Kung Foo! Kunlun Online Kyn L.A.W. LEGO Universe La Tale Land of Chaos Online Landmark Lands of Hope: Redemption LastChaos League of Angels League of Legends - Clash of Fates Legend of Edda: Vengeance Legend of Golden Plume Legend of Grimrock 2 Legend of Katha Legend of Mir 2 Legend of Mir 3 Legendary Champions Lego Minifigures Online Lichdom: Battlemage Life is Feudal Light of Nova Lime Odyssey Line of Defense Lineage Lineage Eternal: Twilight Resistance Lineage II Linkrealms Loong Online Lord of the Rings Online Lords Online Lords of the Fallen Lords of the Fallen 2 Lost Saga Lucent Heart Lunia Lusternia: Age of Ascension Luvinia World
MU Online Mabinogi Maestia: Rise of Keledus MagiKnights Magic Barrage Magic World Online Manga Fighter MapleStory Martial Heroes Marvel Heroes Marvel Super Hero Squad Online Marvel: Avengers Alliance Mass Effect 4 MechWarrior Online Megaten Meridian 59 : Evolution Merlin MetalMercs Metaplace Metin 2 MicroVolts Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor Midkemia Online Might & Magic Heroes Online Might & Magic Heroes: Kingdoms Might & Magic X: Legacy MilMo Minecraft Mini Fighter Minions of Mirth Ministry of War Monato Esprit Monkey King Online Monkey Quest Monster & Me Monster Hunter 4: Ultimate Monster Madness Online MonsterMMORPG Moonlight Online: Tales of Eternal Blood Moonrise Mordavia Mortal Online Mourning My Lands Myst Online: URU Live Myth Angels Online Myth War Myth War 2 Mythborne Mytheon Mythic Saga Mythos N.E.O Online NIDA Online Nadirim Naviage: The Power of Capital Navy Field Necropolis Need for Speed World Nemexia Neo's Land NeoSteam Neocron Nether Neverwinter Nexus: The Kingdom Of The Winds NinjaTrick NosTale Nova Genesis Novus Aeterno Oberin Odin Quest Odyssey RPG Ogre Island Omerta 3 Online Boxing Manager Onverse Oort Online Order & Chaos Online Order of Magic Original Blood Origins Return Origins of Malu Orion's Belt Otherland Forums OverSoul Overkings Overwatch Oz Online Oz World Pandora Saga Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen Panzar Parabellum Parallel Kingdom Parfait Station Path of Exile Pathfinder Online Perfect World Perpetuum Online Persona V Phantasy Star Online 2 Phantasy Star Universe Phoenix Dynasty Online Phylon Pi Story Picaroon Pillars of Eternity Pirate Galaxy Pirate Storm Pirate101 PirateKing Online Pirates of the Burning Sea Pirates of the Caribbean Online Pixie Hollow Planeshift Planet Arkadia Planet Calypso PlanetSide 2 Planetside Planets³ Playboy Manager Pocket Legends Pockie Ninja Pockie Pirates Pockie Saints Pokémon X and Y PoxNora Prime World Prime: Battle for Dominus Priston Tale Priston Tale II Prius Online Prodigy Project Blackout Project Gorgon Project Powder Project Titan Forums Project Wiki Project Zomboid Puzzle Pirates Quest for Infamy Quickhit Football
R2 Online RAN Online RF Online ROSE Online Rage of 3 Kingdoms Ragnarok Online Ragnarok Online II RaiderZ Rail Nation Rakion Rappelz RappelzSEA Ravenmarch Realm Fighter Realm of Sierra Realm of the Mad God Realm of the Titans Realms Online Rebel Galaxy Reclamation Red Stone Red War: Edem's Curse Regnum Online Remnant Knights Renaissance Repulse Requiem: Memento Mori Rift RiotZone Rise Rise of Dragonian Era Rise of Empire Rise of the Tycoon Risen 3: Titan Lords Rising of King Risk Your Life Rivality Rockfree Rohan: Blood Feud Role Play Worlds Roll n Rock Roma Victor Romadoria Rosh Online Roto X Rubies of Eventide Ruin Online Rumble Fighter Runes of Magic Runescape Rust Rusty Hearts Ryzom S4 League SAGA SD Gundam Capsule Fighter Online SMITE SUN Sacred 3 Sagramore Salem SaySayGirls Scarlet Blade Scions of Fate Seal Online: Evolution Second Chance Heroes Second Life Secret of the Solstice Seed Serenia Fantasy Seven Seas Saga Seven Souls Online Sevencore Shadow Realms Shadow of Legend Shadowbane Shadowgate Shadowrun Chronicles Shaiya Shards Online Shattered Galaxy Sho Online Shot Online Shroud of the Avatar SideQuest Siege on Stars Sigonyth: Desert Eternity Silkroad Online Skyblade Skyforge SmashMuck Champions Smoo Online Soldier Front Soul Master Soul Order Online Soul of Guardian South Park: The Stick of Truth Space Heroes Universe Sparta: War of Empires Spellcasters Sphere Spiral Knights Spirit Tales Splash Fighters Squad Wars Star Citizen Star Conflict Star Sonata 2 Star Stable Star Supremacy Star Trek Online Star Trek: Infinite Space Star Wars Galaxies Star Wars: Clone Wars Adventures Star Wars: The Old Republic StarQuest Online Starbound Stargate Worlds Starlight Story Starpires State of Decay SteelWar Online Stone Age 2 Stormfall: Age of War Stormthrone Storybricks Stronghold Kingdoms Styx: Master of Shadows Sudden Attack Supremacy 1914 Supreme Destiny Sword Coast Legends Sword Girls Sword of Destiny: Rise of Aions SwordX Swords of Heavens Swordsman
TERA TS Online TUG Tabula Rasa Tactica Online Tales Runner Tales of Fantasy Tales of Pirates Tales of Pirates II Tales of Solaris Talisman Online Tamer Saga Tank Ace Tantra Online Tatsumaki: Land at War Terra Militaris TerraWorld Online Terraria Thang Online The 4th Coming The Agency The Aurora World The Banner Saga The Banner Saga 2 The Black Watchmen The Chronicle The Chronicles of Spellborn The Crew The Division The Epic Might The Hammers End The Incredible Adventures of Van Helsing The Incredible Adventures of Van Helsing 2 The Legend of Ares The Lost Titans The Matrix Online The Mighty Quest for Epic Loot The Missing Ink The Mummy Online The Myth of Soma The Pride of Taern The Realm Online The Repopulation The Secret World The Sims Online The Strategems The West The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt Theralon There Therian Saga Thrones of Chaos Tibia Tibia Micro Edition Tiger Knight Titan Siege Titans of Time Toontown Online Top Speed Topia Online Torchlight Torment: Tides of Numenera Total Domination Transformers Universe Transistor Transverse Trapped Dead: Lockdown Traveller AR Travia Online Travian Triad Wars Trials of Ascension Tribal Hero Tribal Wars Tribes Universe Trickster Online Trove Troy Online True Fantasy Live Online Turf Battles Twelve Sky Twelve Sky 2 Twilight War Tynon U.B. Funkeys UFO Online URDEAD Online Ultima Forever: Quest for the Avatar Ultima Online Ultima X: Odyssey Ultimate Naruto Ultimate Soccer Boss Uncharted Waters Online Undercover 2: Merc Wars Underlight Unification Wars Universe Online Utherous Utopia Valkyrie Sky Vampire Lord Online Vanguard: Saga of Heroes Vanquish Space Vector City Racers Vendetta Online Victory - Age of Racing Vindictus Virtonomics Vis Gladius Visions of Zosimos VoidExpanse Voyage Century Online W.E.L.L. Online WAR (Warhammer Online) WAR2 Glory WYD Global Wakfu War Thunder War of 2012 War of Angels War of Legends War of Mercenaries War of Thrones War of the Immortals WarFlow Waren Story Warflare Wargame1942 Warhammer 40,000: Eternal Crusade Warhammer 40K: Dark Millennium Online Warhammer Online: Wrath of Heroes Warkeepers Warrior Epic Wartune Wasteland 2 WebLords Wild West Online WildStar Wind of Luck WindSlayer 2 Wings of Destiny Wish Wizard101 Wizardry Online Wizards and Champions Wonder King Wonderland Online World Golf Tour World of Battles World of Darkness World of Heroes World of Kung Fu World of Pirates World of Speed World of Tanks World of Tanks Generals World of Warcraft World of Warplanes World of Warriors World of Warships World of the Living Dead WorldAlpha Wurm Online Xenoblade Chronicles 3D Xenoblade Chronicles: X Xenocell Xiah Xsyon Xulu YS Online Yitien ZU Online Zentia Zero Online Zero Online: The Andromeda Crisis Zodiac Online Zombies Ate My Pizza eRepublik Discussion Forums

All Posts by Muirin

All Posts by Muirin

2 Pages 1 2 »
22 posts found
Originally posted by Plasuma!!!
Originally posted by Muirin
Originally posted by Plasuma!!!

Watching that video really showed me something about propaganda.


I am sad this country is in the shape it is. We fight over big nothings - the sanctity of marriage, healthcare, taxes... when what we all really need is an education. If everyone had the ability to think for themselves and debate logically, we wouldn't be having these silly issues.


How is health care, sanctity of marriage, and taxes big nothings?  You education and that is important, education gives rise to a belief in tolerance.   You said " if everyone had the ability to think got themselves and debate logically" and that to get their we need education.  But if someone gets educated and you remove the debates how will we learn anything?  Without debating we will never learn anything no matter how much education you have.  If i am misunderstanding what you meant please give me more insight.


You're either confusing yourself or my wording was awkward... more than likely the latter.

The issues of health care, marriage, and taxes are big nothings. That is to say: the taxes, health care, and marriages themselves are still quite important. The issues surrounding them are not.

If everyone could debate logically and think objectively, we wouldn't have these issues in the first place. They may surface, but would be quickly resolved. There's no point in dwelling on the situations when a compromise can be made - some people don't want compromises because they are uneducated. They believe the compromise could be detrimental to their survival, and indeed it may because they don't understand the situation. They just want it to stay the way it is, they don't have the resources or knowledge to observe the situation from another's perspective and so a debate with them is impossible.

The nature of competitive parties: if one party is at a disadvantage, the other will dominate. If both parties are on equal grounds, they will call a truce and make agreements. Debates are based on how much you know about yourself, your issues, and your opponent's issues (which means at least one other point of view is required).

Debates are great, I didn't say we shouldn't have them. I said we need to spread the ability to debate logically. Meaning objectively. If we did debate logically, we wouldn't have these silly issues.


I think I get what you are saying now.  At first i though you were meant  that those issues themselves were not important.  I don't get what you mean by "resources" when talking about debating. 

Just because a compromised is meet between 2 or more parties does not mean anything was solved. With a proper debate i don't think a compromise would ever come.  To win a debate their would be no compromise, 1 groups point would be proven false or invalid.  A compromise in politics is a easy means to the finish line without a true debate on the issue at hand.  Just because you don't want compromise on some things does not mean you are uneducated.  The whole idea of debating is to give someone another perspective while proving theirs wrong.  You can debate with just about anyone on anything, weather they are high school drop outs or hold a PHD.  The point of the debate is to gain knowledge from others and on issues, to hear both sides while trying to prove the others invalid.  That's just what i think a debate is all about, doesn't matter if you are educated or uneducated you can still have a debate.  But yes sometimes you find people that its just impossible to debate anything with because they are that ignorant to different ideas.   But as long as someone is willing to debate then they are open to new ideas and trying to expand their knowledge.

knowledge gives rises to a belief in tolerance

Originally posted by Plasuma!!!

Watching that video really showed me something about propaganda.

In Conservative media, the host is usually a calm, comforting individual who imposes complacency upon you with his or her soothing words. You follow them from an emotional perspective as your brain is flooded with endorphins triggered by this primal response to an individual who may well be the equivalent of a parental figure you wish you had. You will follow what they say without question. After all, why would you question your parents?

When it isn't a calming personage, it's a strong, militant individual who encourages you to fight. They encourage you to fight for the survival of your beliefs, because the terrible enemies of your position wish to oppress you. You will follow them because they are on your side. They lead the fight, those venerable generals!

If not those two, it's somebody who absolutely must remind you that everything is at stake and the world is out to get you. Fear for your lives!

Liberals tend to use different brainwashing techniques, such as the iconography condescendingly explained in that video.

Others use big words to confuse you, and so you take their word for it when they sum up their jargon-filled speeches in one iconic sentence - it's like lighting a firework, watching the fuse in a curious way until it launches, and then you see the explosion of pretty lights in the sky at the end. You are dazzled by their intellect, by their supposed understanding of the situation, and so you follow them - they are your intellectual superiors and they surely know how to make your life better.

Most importantly, you trust the media. You trust them... because why would they lie to you?

Very interesting. The state of the country seems to indicate that there are many people who fall victim to these ploys. It's sad that higher education is so unattainable to many in this country, as any amount of critical thinking frees a person's mind from the these media traps. Perhaps the media prefers a stupid public, perhaps the high cost of education is intended to keep the lessers from challenging the positions of their superiors? Liberals and Conservatives alike want to keep it that way.

I am sad this country is in the shape it is. We fight over big nothings - the sanctity of marriage, healthcare, taxes... when what we all really need is an education. If everyone had the ability to think for themselves and debate logically, we wouldn't be having these silly issues.


How is health care, sanctity of marriage, and taxes big nothings?  You education and that is important, education gives rise to a belief in tolerance.   You said " if everyone had the ability to think got themselves and debate logically" and that to get their we need education.  But if someone gets educated and you remove the debates how will we learn anything?  Without debating we will never learn anything no matter how much education you have.  If i am misunderstanding what you meant please give me more insight.

Originally posted by Sabiancym

 LOL at the irony of this thread.


Coming from a guy with the inverted Anarchist symbol in his sig and avatar.  I know it's from the movie and not technically an A, but the design came from the circle-A and the ideas behind them are similar.



Should we get rid of the Bald eagle icon as well? Is it dangerous? After all it is branding an ideology.


I like the mask more then the V icon.  I don't associate the V icon with anarchy.  Anarchy is only a transitional form of government, since it only lasts as long as people are willing to live in total chaos.  Someone will always rise to be a leader quickly.


The icon themselves are not a bad thing.  The bad thing comes to what is associated with the icon and how the icon is used.  You're branding all ideology as bad.  Ideology is not it self but, but the type of ideology could be.  It is all based on how stuff it used.  Like the Swastika, it has a long history.  To most in western cultures it is associated with Nazi's. but to other cultures it has a wide range of meanings.  Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Chinese, and Ancient Greek all used a icon that looks very similar.  But they all have different meanings.  So its not the icon that is dangerous, it what the icon represents and how it is used.  The icon is just something that people can use to bind them together, in some common goal.  Hopefully the goal is something good and not evil.  But who determines if something is good or evil is another topic.

Barack Obama ran an unprecedented Presidential campaign - utilizing the power of design to help secure the seat of the President of the United States of America. However, his iconic emblem, the ever present "O", holds more power than even Obama knows. Bill Whittle points out the dangers of branding an ideology with an icon and how, perhaps, the powerful symbol will be used against the very man it built up


I've never though much about the power icons can hold until now.  I do find it disturbing how the Obama logo is everywhere .

UPS and FedEx are currently in a political battle over what labor laws are classified under.  UPS is classified under National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).  UPS is classified under NLRA because they do the majority of their shipping by truck.  NLRA allows unionization at the local level for any national company, making it very easy to form labor unions.  Because of this UPS is one of the most unionized companies around.  On the other hand FedEx is classified under Railroad Labor Act (RLA).  FedEx is classified under RLA because they do the majority of their shipping by air.  Under RLA you need the majority of the whole company to agree to unionize, making it much harder.  Because of this only a small part of FedEx is unionized, the ground shipping part.  UPS tried once to get reclassified under the RLA, but the request was denied.  So UPS is trying to level the playing field by getting FedEx classified under NLRA now.  UPS is doing this because their labor costs are around twice as much as FedEx.  This move by UPS is unethical and horrible.  But the real monster here is the federal government, they hold the power to crush any business they wish to overnight.


Using Unions As Weapons
UPS and FedEx face off in Congress instead of the marketplace

By: Veronique de Rugy





Imagine two competing pizza delivery companies that are identical in every way except their delivery methods. Pizza Company A delivers its pizza by car and Pizza Company B delivers its pizza by bike.

Now imagine that the government has completely different labor laws for pizza parlors with cars and pizza parlors with bicycles. The result is much larger labor costs for Company B than Company A. Is that fair? Should the government care?

A similar situation underlies a vicious fight between United Parcel Service (UPS) and its main private competitor in the delivery business, FedEx, over archaic labor rules that classify the companies based on their favored forms of transportation. Because 85 percent of FedEx deliveries go by air and 85 percent of UPS deliveries go by truck, the two companies are obliged to obey different labor laws.

FedEx Express, the company’s air delivery service, operates under the Railway Labor Act (RLA), instituted in 1926 to arbitrate labor disputes in industries (including, by 1936, airlines) that are deemed vital to interstate commerce. Under this law, in order to be recognized, a union must receive a majority of votes from all a company’s employees, rather than merely a majority of those who choose to vote. That makes it much more difficult for labor to organize. As a result, FedEx Express, and therefore FedEx, have been mostly union-free for decades.

UPS, by contrast, operates under the 1935 National Labor Relations Act (NLRA, commonly known as the Wagner Act). This Depression-era law allows unionization at each individualoffice of a national company, thereby significantly lowering the barriers to labor organizing. As a result, UPS is one of the largest unionized companies in the country. (Like UPS, the FedEx Ground and FedEx Freight divisions of FedEx are covered by the NLRA.)

This legal distinction has had a significant impact on the two competitors’ labor costs. Average compensation and benefit cost per employee at UPS is more than double that at FedEx—$74,413 vs. $29,310. (See table.)

By now, UPS has had enough of the extra costs labor unions impose on its business. To tackle the problem, Big Brown teamed up with the very people responsible for the costs: the Teamsters. Working together, they’ve lobbied the Democratic majority in Congress to transfer approximately 100,000 of FedEx’s employees—basically the ground pickup and delivery operations of FedEx Express—to fall under the Wagner Act. The change would make it easier for these employees to unionize, which would raise FedEx’s labor costs.

House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.) inserted language changing FedEx’s labor status into a reauthorization bill for the Federal Aviation Administration. The legislation passed the House by a vote of 277 to 136 in May, over FedEx’s objections. The measure is now awaiting passage in the Senate.

Committee members who supported the amendment claimed they wanted to create a level playing field between the two companies. “It’s an issue of fundamental fairness,” Rep. Candice Miller (R-Mich.) told Roll Call. “The workers, and most importantly consumers, would be better served.”

It’s interesting that these lawmakers think leveling the playing field needs to take the form of giving more, not less, power to unions. Where were they back when UPS was trying to be reclassified under the Railway Labor Act?

In 1993 UPS argued to the NRL Board that all of its activities, “including ground operations,” should be subject to the RLA “because the ground operations are part of the air service.” Whatever you think of the Railway Labor Act, the law was intended to protect the arteries of commerce and to ensure that any bargaining agreement for employees be the same throughout the entire company, so that no local unit could paralyze the entire company. It was designed for companies that primarily use rail and air in conducting or facilitating interstate commerce. In that sense, FedEx, with its integrated system, probably has a stronger claim to be an RLA company than UPS does. Yet according to Washington Post columnist George Will, “FedEx supported UPS’s efforts, even though the vast majority of UPS parcels never go on an airplane, whereas FedEx’s trucking operations exist to feed its air fleet and distribute what it carries.” UPS’s demand was denied, opening the path to today’s battle.

Rather than continue pushing for reclassification, or just competing fair and square under current law, UPS is using the federal government to inflict damage on its competition. While this maneuver is hardly commendable, it is predictable. In their 2004 book Saving Capitalism From the Capitalists, economists Raghuram G. Rajan and Luigi Zingales of the Chicago Booth School of Business brilliantly describe this Washingtoncentric way of competing. “Capitalism’s biggest political enemies are not the firebrand trade unionists spewing vitriol against the system,” they warn, “but the executives in pin-striped suits extolling the virtues of competitive markets with every breath while attempting to extinguish them with every action.”

Yet unions do play an important part in this comedy. Teamsters gave $2.4 million to Democrats during the 2008 federal election season and are now collecting the rewards. While it’s tempting to see this as the last gasp of sputtering private-sector unionism—whose share of the U.S. private work force, according the Bureau of Labor Statistics, has plummeted from 36 percent in 1953 to 7 percent today—that would, alas, be incorrect.

For the first time in well over a decade, unions have both a strong ally in the White House and a Democrat-controlled Congress. At press time, members of Congress were negotiating a version of the misleadingly named Employee Free Choice Act, which would impose compulsory arbitration on private companies that can’t reach agreement with their unions. Meanwhile, the Obama administration is eliminating reporting requirements that forced some transparency on unions—notably the LM-30 Rule, which required union officials to report conflicts of interest, and the LM-2 rule, which required disclosure of financial information and information about labor leaders’ compensation. And the president has pushed through labor-friendly takeovers of Michigan’s auto industry.

Unions represent an Industrial Revolution–era understanding of labor relations. The modern American movement grew out of an assembly line culture where every product was identical and workers were viewed in a similar way. As that mode of production has declined, so have unions’ relevance and power.

But in an increasingly mixed economy with government exerting outright or implicit control over large swaths of domestic output, private-sector unions may experience a comeback. That’s especially true if the president delivers on his campaign promises. If that happens, we can expect businesses to be treated equally poorly by the government. To come back to our pizza delivery example, it won’t matter how the companies get their product to your door; both will face high costs. And that means you will too.

Not sure about there laptops.  I did have a desktop from them 5 years ago and i had a lot of problems with it.

I'm not trying to call anyone out, that would be counter productive and make me a hypocrite.  Just a general rule, let the other guy get mad and start calling people names.  At that point they invalidate there argument and you have won.  Because they can no longer debate with you on even terms they have to resort to attacks.


Just trying to help people get better at debating.  If people are good at debating its a lot funner to read the topic.

Thanks for taking the topic of the post away from the the starting story.

Always debate you're point to the best of you're abilities.  The moment you start calling others out is the moment that you're point you are debating loses its merit.  Stay on topic and civil about things please.


Nov. 7 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. House passed legislation with the most far-reaching changes to the nation’s health-care system in four decades, requiring all Americans to get coverage, and subjecting insurers to new restrictions and competition from a government program.

The House voted 220-215 today to approve the measure, which would cost more than $1 trillion over 10 years. Just one Republican, Representative Joseph Cao of Louisiana, backed the plan, and 39 Democrats broke ranks to oppose it.

Lawmakers hailed the step as a historic follow-on to the 1965 creation of the Medicare program for the elderly and disabled. They said the bill would cover 36 million uninsured Americans and curb costs. New rules would prevent insurers from denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions, and seniors would get help obtaining preventive care and medicine.

“This bill is change that the American people urgently need,” President Barack Obama said earlier in the day after meeting with Democrats on Capitol Hill.

With the House vote, Congress moved closer than ever to a goal of universal access to health care. Former President Bill Clinton and first lady Hillary Clinton, now secretary of state, never got past committee work in the early 1990s.

Spotlight on Senate

The spotlight now moves to the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid is struggling to get the votes to even begin debate on his version. Once the Senate passes a bill, lawmakers from each chamber would work together on a compromise for a new round of votes, a process likely to take months.

Reid this week wouldn’t commit to meeting Obama’s goal of signing a health-care bill into law by the end of the year. Already, that would have represented a five-month gap between the votes of four of the five congressional committees assigned to work on health care and a White House signing ceremony.

The House vote came after a daylong session, in which a battle over funding for abortion threatened to derail the bill’s chances, and disputes over everything from illegal immigrants to the cost of the legislation peeled away enough Democrats to make the balloting close. Republican John Boehner called it a “big government takeover of health care.”

The margin was narrow enough to prompt last-minute lobbying from Obama, who pressed lawmakers to “rise to this moment, answer the call of history” and pass his signature initiative.

Dingell’s Gavel

The day began with a raucous debate over the ground rules for considering the legislation. Michigan Representative John Dingell, 83, presided over the proceedings, wielding the same gavel he used during the debate that led to the creation of Medicare to calm down lawmakers shouting over each other.

After more than 5 1/2 hours of general debate, the lawmakers turned to an amendment from Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak that would have further limited the use of federal dollars for abortions. It passed on a 240-194 vote.

They then rejected a Republican alternative bill by a 258- 176 vote.

For most of the year, the biggest fight has been over the creation of a government-run insurance program, the so-called public option, to compete with private insurers such as Hartford, Connecticut-based Aetna Inc.

Public Option

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, had to scale back her original proposal for the public option. Lacking votes for tying the program’s reimbursements to doctors to the lower rates paid by Medicare, she settled on a plan that would instead negotiate rates with providers, as private insurers do.

The Senate version calls for a similar program that would allow states to opt out. Still, Reid faces opposition from Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, an independent aligned with the Democrats, and Snowe, the only Republican to vote for any proposal so far. At least four Senate Democrats have also been critical of the idea.

Reid needs all 60 votes controlled by the Democratic caucus to even begin debate, and it’s not certain he has them. He would then need 60 votes again to cut off debate and take a vote, amid battles over the public option and new taxes to pay for the expanded insurance coverage for Americans.

“We’re going to do this legislation as expeditiously as we can, but we’re going to do it as fairly as we can also,” Reid told reporters on Nov. 3.

Both the House and Senate bills require Americans to get insurance, add new restrictions on insurers and encourage greater use of preventive medicine, electronic records and research on the effectiveness of treatments.

2010 Provisions

Many of the House provisions take effect in 2010. The elderly would face no co-payments for preventive care and get help paying for drugs. The uninsured would get temporary aid until new purchasing exchanges are created, and young adults could stay on their parents’ plans until they turn 27.

House leaders also included an expansion of the government Medicaid program for the poor, which may cost the federal government less than providing subsidies to help people buy insurance. The plan would expand eligibility to people whose incomes are 150 percent of the official poverty level.

To finance their bill, House Democrats opted for a surtax on couples who make more than $1 million a year. They would also impose a 2.5 percent excise tax on medical devices that the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation estimates would raise $20 billion over 10 years.

The House bill also requires that employers offer insurance or pay a penalty, with exemptions for businesses with payrolls of less than $500,000. That is a subject of debate in the Senate, where the chamber’s health committee included a mandate and the finance panel rejected it.

New Fees, Limits

The bill would make large businesses that self-insure their employees pay $2 billion in fees over the next decade. And it adopts a Senate proposal to set a $2,500 limit beginning in 2011 on contributions to tax-advantaged Flexible Spending Accounts used to pay out-of-pocket medical costs.

To address rising costs, the bill calls for the independent Institute of Medicine to make recommendations on how to fix the Medicare payment system and calls for Medicare to negotiate prices for drugs, potentially driving down prices.

Drugmakers managed to keep the negotiation provision out of the legislation that created the Medicare prescription drug program in 2003 and have fought it this year. The industry reached an agreement, now under fire, with Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus and the White House to pledge $80 billion to the overhaul effort and avert further contributions.

Originally posted by Cleffy

I think when the fed is run by the right people it can be successful.  However, that means getting the right person.  Being appointed by the President and verified by Congress doesn't really breed best interests.

The purpose of the fed is so the US government does not have control of its own money supply.  If it did can you imagine how much money they would be printing for the greater good?  Its in Congresses best interest to lower interest rates and create inflation through printing.  Its the feds duty to make sure they don't do anything as foolishly detrimental as that.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 5: The Congress shall have Power…To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.

Article I, Section 10, Clause 1: No State shall…coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debt.

Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Consitution, of Certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X: The power not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


So Congress is prohibited by the Constitution to use anything other then Gold or Silver to be legal tender and that is what the US Treasury does.  The FED is a private cartel of banks that has been given a charter by government to operate.  The FED has the power to print money, but its is the job of the US Treasury to control the value of the dollar.  The irony in that.  The FED is the third Central Bank in Americas history.  The First and Second Central Banks closed down because the charter were allowed to expire.  Since the creation of the FED in 1913, inflation has hit around 2080%, what use to cost $20 in 1913 now costs around $430.  To make it easier its lost about 95% of its value.  The FED has caused great periods in economic instability since its creation.   The FED markets itself as being able to control inflation and market stability.  We have seen the stock market crashes of 1919, 1929,1930, 1937, 1973, 1987, 2000, and 2007.  Compared to only 2 major market crashed since before the creation of the FED, 1901 and 1906. 


So its not only is congress not allowed create a fiat currency (paper money) since its unconstitutional, the practicing of a fiat currency created many period of instability.  So the FED has been failing at its job since its creation and been proving that Keynesian Economics does not work.


No way that movie sucks!  :P

The FED plans on keeping interest rates between 0 and .25% for a extended period of time.  As long as inflation is stable and unemployment fails to decline.  Capital comes from savings, the more savings we have the more capital we have and the lower the interest rates will be.  Vice versa the less savings you have the less capital you have and the higher the interest rates will be.  This is very important to the market.  When interest rates are low it tells investors that there is capital and they should invest.  But in reality there is very little real capital in America.  So when we have artificially low interest rates it gives investors the wrong impression and they are willing to make more risky investments then they normal world if real capital was low.  But you can't just lower interest rates on the whim.  In order to low them you need a increase in savings, but since savings are low the only way to do it is to print the money, or in the modern age enter a number in a computer.  So in order for the FED to low the interest rates so low and keep them low they have to keep increasing the money supply so they can loan it to people.  This creates the problem of inflation.  The more money you print the less purchasing power all the existing money has.  Inflation is a hidden tax on everyone.


What are you're thought on this?



Nov. 4 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve repeated it will keep interest rates near zero for “an extended period” and specified for the first time that policy will stay unchanged as long as inflation expectations are stable and unemployment fails to decline.

“Businesses are still cutting back on fixed investment and staffing, though at a slower pace,” the Federal Open Market Committee said in a statement today. “Household spending appears to be expanding, but remains constrained by ongoing job losses, sluggish income growth, lower housing wealth and tight credit,” the FOMC said after meeting in Washington.

Chairman Ben S. Bernanke is trying to determine when the recovery is strong enough to withdraw the $1 trillion the Fed injected to avert a depression. The dollar declined as the Fed’s statement, which followed a report last week showing the economy expanded last quarter for the first time in more than a year, signaled growth alone won’t be enough to warrant tighter policy.

Officials kept their benchmark overnight lending rate at between zero and 0.25 percent, where it has been since December. The conditions they cited to keep it there are “low rates of resource utilization, subdued inflation trends, and stable inflation expectations.”

“What they’re saying is the economy is improving, but it’s still entirely dependent on stimulus,” said Chris Low, chief economist at FTN Financial in New York, who doesn’t expect an interest-rate increase until next September. Fed officials are signaling that “The test for when rates have to go up, or stimulus has to be removed, ought to be inflation.”

Dollar Slides

The dollar slid as much as 1.2 percent, the biggest intraday decline since Sept. 8, before trading at $1.4876 per euro at 4:09 p.m. in New York, compared with $1.4724 yesterday. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index was up 0.1 percent at 1,046.50 after rising as much as 1.5 percent.

Discussing inflation, the central bank said: “With substantial resource slack likely to continue to dampen cost pressures and with longer term inflation expectations stable, the Committee expects that inflation will remain subdued for some time.”

Prices rose 1.3 percent for the 12-month period ending September, as measured by the personal consumption expenditures price index, minus food and energy, the Fed’s preferred gauge. Fed officials cited a 1.7 to 2 percent long-run goal for the overall index in June.

Core Inflation

“The Fed is focused on a very low core inflation number and is assuming that it is only going to get lower,” said Stephen Stanley, chief economist at RBS Securities Inc. “They are pretty worried about the low level of inflation and think they are on hold for a very long time.”

The difference in yield between 10-year inflation-protected Treasury notes and nominal Treasury notes is 212 basis points, indicating that investors see consumer prices rising by 2.12 percent per year over that time. In October, consumers anticipated inflation of 2.9 percent over the next five years, up from 2.8 percent in September, according to the University of Michigan’s consumer sentiment survey, released Oct. 30.

The Fed completed its $300 billion program of purchasing Treasuries last month. Today’s statement said the central bank will purchase a total of $1.25 trillion of agency mortgage- backed securities and “about $175 billion of agency debt” through the first quarter of next year.

“The amount of agency debt purchases, while somewhat less than the previously announced maximum of $200 billion is consistent with the recent path of purchases and reflects the limited availability of agency debt,” the statement said.

Australia, Israel

The ebb of the global crisis that caused $1.7 trillion in credit losses and writedowns has already helped spur central banks from Australia to Norway to start increasing borrowing costs. Today’s unanimous statement indicates the Fed isn’t yet ready to follow some of their counterparts abroad.

“We are nowhere near there,” Michael Holland, chairman of New York-based Holland & Co., which oversees more than $4 billion in assets, said on Bloomberg Television. “We don’t have anything approaching the position where they can start unwinding.”

Record-low interest rates and Fed purchases of Treasuries and mortgage debt, combined with the Obama administration’s $787 billion fiscal stimulus, helped boost gross domestic product 3.5 percent from July to September. Without the auto industry, which benefited from the government’s “cash for clunkers” program, growth would have been 1.9 percent.

Commodities Rally

Stocks and commodities have rallied as a stronger global economy encourages investors to take greater risks. The Standard and Poor’s 500 Index is up about 17 percent this year and crude oil prices are 80 percent higher. Gold has advanced 23 percent and touched a record of $1,096.20 an ounce in New York today.

Policy makers are “trying to add some sort of conditionality to their ability to include or exclude the ‘extended period’ language,” said Alan Ruskin, head of currency strategy at RBS Securities Inc. in Stamford, Connecticut.

While the return to growth has aided companies including Ford Motor Co., it has yet to pay off in jobs, with employers squeezing higher output from a smaller labor pool.

Ford, the only major U.S. automaker to avoid bankruptcy, beat forecasts and posted third-quarter net income of $997 million Nov. 2, its first operating profit since early 2008 on smaller discounts and higher sales.

Job Cuts

New Brunswick, New Jersey-based Johnson & Johnson said Nov. 3 it will shrink its 117,000-member workforce by 6 percent to 7 percent as it tries to cut costs and invest in more profitable areas of its business. Jabil Circuit Inc., a Florida-based electronics manufacturer whose customers include Nokia Oyj, said Sept. 29 it plans to cut an additional 1,500 positions.

“If employment losses don’t get down to a small level, we won’t have income growth to support consumer spending,” Kurt Karl, chief U.S. economist at Swiss RE Financial Products in New York, said before today’s Fed announcement.

The Labor Department on Nov. 6 will report that the unemployment rate rose to 9.9 percent in October, from 9.8 percent the previous month, as companies cut another 175,000 jobs, according to the median forecasts in Bloomberg News surveys of economists. More Americans filed bankruptcy in October than any month since changes to bankruptcy laws in 2005.


I found the forum thank you.  In the future you should include a link to said forum.  But the reason why i won't use that forum can be discussed in another thread.


The question i ask is more about economics and free market.

What are you're thoughts on preventive care control the costs of health care with/without government health care?

While preventive care is normally less expensive then what the outcome could be without it.  But who will be able to judge when the cost of the preventive care is more cost effective then not getting it?  In the end it should be let up to the individual and doctors to determine if the financial cost, time, and overall improvement to health is worth it.  If government gets involved in subsidizing preventive care it will increase the demand for it.  With increased demand there will a increase in prices, with the increase in prices there will be even more need for the government to subsidize more cost of preventive care.  So any subsidize in government health care will just make the costs greater and greater.




In an attempt to control the aggregate healthcare costs that will be shouldered by taxpayers under his proposed system, President Obama has pushed increased reliance onpreventive care for all eligible Americans. His argument is that, because preventive care is normally much less expensive than later surgeries, increased use of these earlier, preemptive treatments will entail radical cost savings. As with many of the president's healthcare promises, this argument falls apart under rigorous examination.
The Economics of Prevention

The logic behind increased preventive care is simple; if an individual knows he will be afflicted with some serious and expensive malady, say a heart attack, it is typically much less expensive for him to undergo preventive procedures, in this case the insertion of vascular stents. In such a case, not only is the patient likely to save money and possibly prolong his life, but he also removes the anxiety of knowing he is at high risk for heart failure.

Preventive treatment, then, will only be purchased when it removes serious anticipated future risks, either of higher treatment costs or of serious pain or death. Any surgery requires the curtailment of other forms of consumption, so consumers will prefer to abstain from preventive care unless they know they are at high risk of high future financial or physical costs. The unregulated consumer, in an extreme example, would never purchase a surgery to prevent the prospect of future ingrown hairs.

For every disease or affliction, there is an interval of risk over which preventive care justifies its price and thus will likely be purchased. Consumers who expect that they are at extremely low risk for heart failure will almost certainly not purchase vascular stents because they believe their risk of dying of heart failure is so low that the value of preventing it is practically worthless to them.

On the other hand, there are those individuals — for example, the morbidly obese and those who have already suffered multiple heart attacks — who are almost certain to die of a heart attack. For these unfortunate consumers, the risk of death is already so certain that preventive surgery may be worthless.

There are some methods of preventive care which can almost certainly avert the risk of dying of an affliction, and for these procedures, even those extremely high-risk patients will likely decide the surgery is worth its price. The "risk threshold" for preventive care is decided on by individuals and their doctors, but like all economic decisions is influenced by price; more expensive treatments are less likely to be purchased by marginally risky consumers.
Not All Hearts Are Created Equal

If the president's plan were applied only to cholesterol-clogged patients, it is quite clear that the preventive care would save money and lead to a positive health outcome. However, this is not a victory for Mr. Obama's plan. Patients such as these are likely to pay for preventive care with or without a government mandate or subsidy. No "cost savings" occur by compelling a group of high-risk patients to do what they already would have. In fact, any subsidies to such a group actually increase taxpayers' health burden.
"No 'cost savings' occur by compelling a group of high-risk patients to do what they already would have."

It is absolutely paramount to remember in our analysis that American patients are not homogeneous mannequins smoothly distributed over one or two physical variables along a bell curve or any other type of graph. Each individual consumer is an acting, reasoning human being with a unique set of uncertain health risks and, more importantly, unique desires and risk tolerances.

The reality is that many people are at no price-justifying risk for dying early of any disease. This, for the a priori economic thinker, explains what the president believes is Americans' underutilization of preventive care: if more people had reason to believe that preventive care is worth its price, they would of course already be purchasing it. Rather, for the majority of Americans, vascular stents and other preventive treatments are simply not worth the requisite time, money, and physical invasion.

Mandating or even subsidizing preventive care for these individuals does not eliminate very many expensive late-term surgeries in the future, and thus would clearly not result in any such cost savings for the taxpayer. In fact, it is easy to see that subsidizing new preventive surgeries will result in increased costs to taxpayers.

Worse still, providing subsidies for these new and unmerited preventive surgeries not only costs tax dollars, but also comes at a cost to what mainstream economists refer to as "social welfare," because increased vascular stent consumption necessarily entails decreased consumption of another good or service.

Furthermore, the market for preventive care is also far from homogeneous. For many diseases or maladies, there are multiple methods of prevention, which each hold different potential costs and benefits for each patient. Some methods of preventive care, such as our example of vascular stents, entail a decision on the quantity of the procedure — how many blood vessels will be stented — with a diminishing marginal benefit to each additional unit of care. To expect Obama's proposed healthcare bureaucracies to calculate the cost-cutting level of subsidy for each individual method of preventive care is absurd. Instead, preventive decisions should be left to specialized doctors and their patients.

Even if we grant that Obama's health bureaucracies will somehow be able to effectively target individual patients along the "risk thresholds" for subsidized preventive treatments, it is still unclear that this will decrease aggregate financial costs. For any net cost savings to occur, we must also assume that these consumers sometimes forgo preventive care, even though it would ultimately be more cost-effective for every individual lumped into that class to pursue the preventive treatments in question. Only under these conditions would Obama's proposal serve its purpose.
"American patients are not homogeneous mannequins."

However, this simple pursuit of lower aggregate spending over time is a weak justification for suppressing individual choice. Acting Man does not consume in the interests of possibly minimizing the total costs of some abstract statistical class in which he's included by regulators.

In reality, an individual health consumer chooses to consume or abstain from preventive care according to his subjective appraisal of the value of the possible extra length or quality of life he may receive as a result of the preventive care against the value of the consumption made possible by abstaining from the preventive care.

He makes this decision while taking into consideration his medically determined risk of harm from the malady and his personal tolerance for that risk. Such an intimate decision, which weighs the value of extra months or years of life and the quality of life gained or sacrificed, all while accounting for risk tolerance, literally cannot be made by budget-balancing government employees.
What about Individual Costs?

Obama's proposal for subsidized prevention would not only increase aggregate healthcare spending by funding unmerited preventive treatments, but would also increase the per-unit prices of those treatments. The economics here are simple subsidy economics; a subsidy for any service will decrease the effective price of that service to the consumer, increasing demand for that service along any market price. Holding supply constant, this increased demand will increase the market price for that service.

For the Obama cost plan, this is a second Achilles' heel; the greater the subsidy granted, the greater the increase in market price will be, because consumers will face a smaller and smaller portion of any treatment's real price. They will thus choose to consume more and more unmerited preventive procedures, increasing the prices of those frivolous treatments. As the price of general preventive care rises, the public will of course expect greater and greater subsidies for their treatments.

The tragic end result of this experiment will be the political need for the health bureaucracy to subsidize a higher portion of the soaring prices of a greater number of preventive treatments. To argue that this represents lower aggregate costs is pure nonsense and should be dismissed as such.

$7 $5

While increasing preventive care to cut long-term costs may seem logical at first, it is clear to see that government-mandated treatment cannot possibly lead to a more cost-effective balance between preventive treatment and future treatment.

Furthermore, we can see that any subsidy for preventive care will massively increase costs for the individual and, under Obama's plan, for the taxpayer. From these conclusions, it is obvious that only individual patients armed with the advice of their doctors can be trusted to make cost-effective decisions regarding their preferred method of care.


the big lebowski,  you left the name of the movie in the URL.  But it was to easy anyways.  Don't post pictures of peoples faceless unless it was a very obscure part in a movie.  That ruins the game by making it way to easy.

The point is this game is not to be super easy.  Its to tests peoples movie knowledge.

Here is 1 more picture to go with the starting picture.


Here is another movie, this one is from the first 5 minutes of the movie.

 Again good luck. 

Neither of them are correct. 

7/10 for stereotypical  characters, cheesy one liners, and overall bad dialog.

To slow



Never seen it

The rules are simple, post 1 picture from any movie that you want.  The person to guess what movie it is gets to post the next picture.  The game continues as long as people are willing to keep playing.  You can post more then 1 picture if you want and hints.  The point of this game is to keep is going and guessing, so please try to stay active while you have a picture posted.

I will try to start this out easy, good luck.



2 Pages 1 2 »