296 pts ยท January 4, 2017
*cries in European...
Your attitude reveals your ignorance.
Are we argueing that there should be less shootings or that there should be less victims when they occur?
But the over simplification of 'some gun legislation was lifted' obviously deserves thousands of upvotes, right? Be consistent, at least.
Isn't it funny how you get downvoted for the obviously correct answer? No, It'S nOt Us, It MuSt Be ThE gUn LaWs!
This.
I believe you. Problem is, there's plenty of empirical evidence out there that what you want is not what you get when it comes to socialism.
This post definitely shows the importance of correct punctuation.
Thank you. Now it makes sense.
Ah, ok, that makes sense, of course. So they get only 30 days off on a 7 out of 7 work week? How's that even legal?
Most people get 2 days off a week? Where's that supposed to be?
The moment, apart from parody, Mohammed Ali or Mandela are played by a white gal, we can talk. Until then, nice try.
...other people and feel smug about not understanding the underlying economic principles on top of it. Way to go, dude! Way to go!
Nothing to lol or ergo here, dude. You seem to still don't get it. Just because you're not paying, doesn't mean it's free. You leech off...
So it's not free. Someone is paying for it. In your case the government. In other words, the people who pay taxes. They pay your health care
Obviously, you're just repeating false stereotypes you heard from other clueless loudmouth people and aren't willing to think for a second.
That's pathetic. A company doing this would be out of business in no time. Why would anybody sane buy their product if the do that?
Your doctors and nurses and hospitals and other providers of healthcare all work for free? I'm pretty sure, they don't. Ergo, not free.
I actually work in this field and know exactly how it works. You, on the other hand, seem to lack understanding basic economic principles.
*covered
...can put into a tariff before people will simply get the product of a competitor instead? The market is pretty efficient in that regard.
They may try, but courts will sort that out. It's either covetef by the terms & conditions or not. And how much profit do you think, they...
..by the underlying payment system (tax funded, social security fund, private insurance, self paying, etc.). I'm listening.
Are you serious? Explain to me, like I'm a child, how high the costs of treating e.g. a common cold are and in what way that is influenced..
It's the simple answer to everything nowadays, isn't it? Don't bother fact checking! It's so obvious! Morons.
costs are not dependent on who's paying, but on the type and scale of treatment.
You're obviously stupid. Why would an insurance cost any different than any other system? Administrative costs are very samish. And medical
The problem with taxes is, they're by definition not bound to any specific purpose.
I doubt that.
*cries in European...
Your attitude reveals your ignorance.
Are we argueing that there should be less shootings or that there should be less victims when they occur?
But the over simplification of 'some gun legislation was lifted' obviously deserves thousands of upvotes, right? Be consistent, at least.
Isn't it funny how you get downvoted for the obviously correct answer? No, It'S nOt Us, It MuSt Be ThE gUn LaWs!
This.
I believe you. Problem is, there's plenty of empirical evidence out there that what you want is not what you get when it comes to socialism.
This post definitely shows the importance of correct punctuation.
Thank you. Now it makes sense.
Ah, ok, that makes sense, of course. So they get only 30 days off on a 7 out of 7 work week? How's that even legal?
Most people get 2 days off a week? Where's that supposed to be?
The moment, apart from parody, Mohammed Ali or Mandela are played by a white gal, we can talk. Until then, nice try.
...other people and feel smug about not understanding the underlying economic principles on top of it. Way to go, dude! Way to go!
Nothing to lol or ergo here, dude. You seem to still don't get it. Just because you're not paying, doesn't mean it's free. You leech off...
So it's not free. Someone is paying for it. In your case the government. In other words, the people who pay taxes. They pay your health care
Obviously, you're just repeating false stereotypes you heard from other clueless loudmouth people and aren't willing to think for a second.
That's pathetic. A company doing this would be out of business in no time. Why would anybody sane buy their product if the do that?
Your doctors and nurses and hospitals and other providers of healthcare all work for free? I'm pretty sure, they don't. Ergo, not free.
I actually work in this field and know exactly how it works. You, on the other hand, seem to lack understanding basic economic principles.
*covered
...can put into a tariff before people will simply get the product of a competitor instead? The market is pretty efficient in that regard.
They may try, but courts will sort that out. It's either covetef by the terms & conditions or not. And how much profit do you think, they...
..by the underlying payment system (tax funded, social security fund, private insurance, self paying, etc.). I'm listening.
Are you serious? Explain to me, like I'm a child, how high the costs of treating e.g. a common cold are and in what way that is influenced..
It's the simple answer to everything nowadays, isn't it? Don't bother fact checking! It's so obvious! Morons.
costs are not dependent on who's paying, but on the type and scale of treatment.
You're obviously stupid. Why would an insurance cost any different than any other system? Administrative costs are very samish. And medical
The problem with taxes is, they're by definition not bound to any specific purpose.
I doubt that.