An idiot and his table saw...

Page 3 of 9  


There was no context. But it is interesting that someone would drag Bush and Obama into a discussion about SawStop. Do they have a SawStop or even use a table saw?

What exactly am I stretching? Keith believes in a Darwinian system, where instead of having safety devices we rely on people cutting off their fingers, which according to him teaches them personal responsibility. That is in fact an ideology. Based on that, we should rip out all the GFCIs, seatbelts, smoke detectors, etc. Be careless around the house with a cigarette, you'll learn by dying in a fire, right? Misuse that hairdryer and you'll get shocked or killed. That will teach you.

Fool. I didn't say people should not be personally responsible. Nor did I say people should be sue happy, another red herring Keith is now draggin in here. I said that a feature like SafetyStop has nothing to with personal responsibility because accidents can and do happen to all of us.

You sure are.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Oh, my, I'll miss you dear....
See, a discussion would be more meaningful if you had actual facts and specifics instead of just wandering around. Never made the statements? Exactly what statements are those that you claim that I falsely ascribed to him?
That I said he dragged Bush and Obama into a discussion about SawStop?
He didn't? Then someone must have hijacked his computer when this post was made:
"Every one from obama who is still blaming President Bush for his failures to the man working in his garden. "
You then claimed that I was dragging ideology into the discussion? Better look up the definition. Keith clearly has an ideologoy of his own, that I would call misguided. His belief is that all accidents stem from lack of personal reposnibility, negating the need for safety devices, which of course is nonsense on both counts. All accidents don't stem from lack of personal responsibility and even if that were true, it still does not negate the usefullness of safety devices. Given his reference to Obama and the above, I then simply posed the question about conservatives. Virtually all of them extole the virtues of self reliance, taking personal responsibility. So, none of them have table saw accidents, right?
>You should

I turned it into a philosohy? Keith has the philosophy I outlined above and posted it here. Just because I showed you it doesn't make any sense, all of a sudden, I'm the bad guy?
As for it being your last post, that's probably a good idea. Because you're incapable of addressing any specifics, and are now resorting to insults and lies.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 13:00:22 -0800 (PST), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

Everyone has accidents, but not purchasing medical and disability insurance is a choice. Why should a successful business be punished by having to cover the deadbeats?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I assume you're referring to Obamacare? I don't believe Obamacare is the right approach and there are better ways of achieving the same thing with less govt involvement. But here is the essence of the problem. Not only are businesses already covering the cost of deadbeats, most of the public is. What do you think happens when the guy with no insurance, low pay or no job, etc has an accident and runs up a $100K hospital bill? We are all paying it for it now. The business and individuals pay for it in the form of higher insurance costs. We pay for it in the form of outrageous hospital charges when we go there. One big reason an aspirin costs $10 in a hospital is so that they can use that money to offset their losses from the guy who shows up sick or from an accident with no insurance.
Now, please tell me you're not going to pretend that problem isn't real, that we can just make the guy pay, like another poster here. If anything, REQUIRING everyone to have medical insurance is the personal responsibility approach, because it makes everyone have a means to pay for their own care.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Because according to the idiots, that would make you bad person
Frankly I don't have a problem with people donating to private charity to help the needy But when the government starts picking your pocket to do it, I have a problem One only has to look at how UNsuccessfull government is about solving the problem All their "welfare" programs are spiraling out of control BECAUSE of ALL the leaches that are hanging on to the tit. And these idiots want to attract even more leeches
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Still waiting for you answer to a simple question. A guy making minimum wage, no insurance, has a bad car accident where he runs off the road and hits a tree. He has severe head injuries, internal injuries, etc.
What exactly should happen here, step by step and who will pay for it? Does EMS take him to the hospital? Does the hospital refuse to care for him because he has no insurance, no means to pay? Is there even an EMS at all?
I don't expect real answers, because you've proven yourself long on some flakey alleged core beliefs. But either they haven't been thought through or you are so inhumane that you'd let people like the above die. But, this is your chance to redeem yourself, for all to see. So, please, tell us step by step what should happen in the above everyday situation.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

# # Still waiting for you answer to a simple question.
Asked and asnwered Since you didn't like the first answer, you'll be waiting a long time for one you like Enjoy
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I figured as much. You're just intellectually dishonest. You claim to have some valid alternative to either the current system where we all wind up paying for healthcare for those that cannot, or for requiring everyone have mandatory minimum healthcare coverage. Yet, when asked to explain how it would work, starting from the scene of a car crash, you just run away. The most you've said is that you don't have a problem with people donating to private charity". Why, how caring and magnanimus of you. That's it? That is all you've got? And like most of the buffoons that pretend to stand on such high moral ground, I expect you'd be among the last to actually donate.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

# # I figured as much. You're just intellectually dishonest. You # claim to have some valid alternative to either the current # system where we all wind up paying for healthcare for those # that cannot, or for requiring everyone have mandatory # minimum healthcare coverage.
You're not only stupid, bu t a liar too I never made ANY claim about "having some valid alternative " That's just you pulling ignorant shit out of your ass again (Did you ever consider cleaning off your head after your pull it out of your ass ? That way you won't spread it on Usenet)
# Yet, when asked to explain how it would work, # starting from the scene of a car crash, # you just run away.
Don't have to explain something YOU INVENTED whole cloth Your strawman - you feed it
# # The most you've said is that you don't # have a problem with people donating to private charity". # Why, how caring and magnanimus of you. That's it? # That is all you've got? And like most of the buffoons that # pretend to stand on such high moral ground, I expect # you'd be among the last to actually donate.
Since you don't even know who I am - you have NO CLUE as to what and whom I donate Once again, you're just pulling ignorant shit out of your ass.
Go wash your head before you get to your keyboard The constant flow of shit from you stinks.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I didn't invent it, it's a common, everyday, real world occurance. You just refuse to address it because, well, you can't. You stand on your soap box and claim to have simple solutions for real world problems. Yet, obviously you don't.

I know you're fundamentally dishonest. You put forth bankrupt ideas that are worthless and when someone exposes any one of the many obvious holes in it, instead of being able to answer for youself, you run away like a child.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

# # I didn't invent it, it's a common, everyday, real world # occurance. You just refuse to address it because, # well, you can't. You stand on your soap box and claim # to have simple solutions for real world problems. Yet, # obviously you don't.
<yawn> Do you by being an asshole naturally or did you train for the job ? Let's referesh the MORON's pea-sized brain
Your strawman was I quote (you) > You claim to have some valid alternative to either the current system where... "
I made NO such claim Your scenario was thrown at me based on this LIE
So take your claim take your scenario And SHOVE it.
Your strawman YOU feed it.

# # I know you're fundamentally dishonest. #
Considering that: - you know shit - yo make wild-ass presumptions about others - you lie - then you lie some more when called on it.
You can take your "knowledge" and shove it right back up your ass where you got it from..
# You put forth bankrupt ideas that are worthless # and when someone exposes any one of the many # obvious holes in it, instead of being able to answer # for yourself, you run away like a child.
The only one "putting forth" anything in this thread, was you, you idiot Your strawman and presumptions are neither my problem nor my responsibility
Now piss off you stupid wanker Go peddle your lies and presumptions elsewhere
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Excuse me, but YOU are the one bitching that we should not require everyone to have healthcare so that they are covered in the event of an accident or illness that puts them in the hospital. I asked what YOUR alternate system was. YOU responded with you have no problem with people donating to charity. And you also gave a response that indicated you didn't much care what happened to them. So apparently now you agree that is not a VALID alternative and in fact you don't have any workable, real approach.
So, instead of something that could start to address the problem of us all paying for the guy who has no insurance, exactly what is going on now, you'd prefer to hang your hat on empty basic principles. Principles which only sound great to some fanatic, yet that same fanatic can't go through a simple example of how it would work in the real world. You can't because it doesn't work.
A guy with a low paying job has a car crash. He has serious head injuries. He'a laying on the side of the road. What should be done? Should be a simple thing, how would it work? Go ahead, finally answer it instead of running away.
That is about as intellectually bankrupt as you can get. And as I said before, in my experience, the whack jobs like you with alleged simple solutions like, "I shouldn't have to pay for it, let charity do it", are usually the ones that actually give nothing to charity.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 8 Dec 2012 05:12:14 -0800 (PST), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

+1
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

# # Excuse me, but YOU are the one bitching that we should not # require everyone to have healthcare so that they are covered # in the event of an accident or illness that puts them in the # hospital. #
<yawn> More ignorant spin and projection But thank you for demonstrating how you did the projection
Rest of stupid shit and repetition ignored
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Well you clearly stated that no one should be forced to buy health insurance. That it should be their right to go uninsured. That is one of your core positions, is it not? When it was explained to you that we are all now paying for those uninsured people when they wind up injured or ill at the hospital and asked for what YOUR solution is for the uninsured guy with serious injuries after a car crash, the best you could come up with is this:
"You are MORE than welcome to pay for it if you want Why should I pay for it It's his life, his choice, his responsibility "
You're right about one thing, it isn't a valid alternative, but it's the only alternative you've put forth.
Real humanitarian you are, big man. You'd probably go driving right by yourself, honking the horn:
"That'll teach you!"

It's not a strawman it's the real world, it happens everyday. It's just you have no answer, except a completely heartless one that you've already put forth, in your own words, above.

No I'm not. Your statements are quite clear and there for all to see. You're incapable of putting forth an argument that makes sense. You can't even explain your solution or approach to a guy with no insurance that is seriously injured in a car crash. That of course is because you don't want to admit the obvious truth, you'd let them die. Your some kind of real whack job. Then you want to preach to us about the perils of seat belt laws leading to dictatorships? Some world we'd be in if we let you and your ilk get in charge.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

# # Well you clearly stated that no one should be forced to # buy health insurance.
BZZZT And you are the MORON who segued into claimung that was some valid alternative" Not my problem you don't have reading skills
# That it should be their right to go uninsured.
# That is one of your core positions, is it not?
Who the fuck cares ? I sure stopped caring about the shit you project on me
snip the rest of the stupid shit, lies, projections and strawman arguments
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
says...

The problem with Welfare isn't the people recieving Welfare. The "leeches" are the ever expanding legions of government bureaucrats who are there to try to keep anybody from cheating the system.
In its first few years Welfare had a real effect. In the 40 or so years since the budget has increased radically but the number of people being helped and the degree to which they are being helped has remained substantially unchanged.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Oh what a pile of total BS. Show us any evidence that this is true. That the overwhelming percentage of welfare money is not actually going to recipients. As for the bureaucrats checking up for fraud, there should be more of them. When is the last time you saw anyone prosecuted for welfare fraud?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

# # Oh what a pile of total BS. Show us any evidence that # this is true. That the overwhelming percentage of welfare # money is not actually going to recipients. As for the bureaucrats # checking up for fraud, there should be more of them. # When is the last time you saw anyone prosecuted for # welfare fraud?
<sigh> Another fine demonstration of absence of logic A bunch of bureaucrats pushing paper to "insure lack of fraud" does NOT necessarily and automatically lead to prosecution for welfare fraud. It just guarantees more bureaucrats to push more paper, as has been the case
Meanwhile we have undeniable evidence of the unraveling of the social fabric of inner city residents who also happen to be the least employed and most welfare dependent Just look at the increase of single parent families, women never married with multiple fathers for their brood of kids, crime and gang issues, to name a few.
But hey, naturally, according to you, those are not problems. the act that no one got prosecuted for fraud is far more critical
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

When you have some actual data that shows that today, something is different and the vast majority of welfare payments are not going to those on the programs, but is instead being consumed by bureaucrats, let us know. But as usual, I suspect that won't be forthcoming, will it. Profanity will.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.