cddolphin Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 I always thought women wore heels because of the whole height aspect of sexual selection. I didn't know that the posture changes brought about by heels actually structurally emphasizes their hips/buttocks and chest. Quote For instance, when standing barefoot, the anterior angle, or pelvic tilt, of the female pelvis is 25 degrees. On 1-inch heels it moves up to 30 degrees, on 2-inch heels it increases to 45 degrees, and on 3-inch heels it increases up to 60 degrees… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXsteeler Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 2 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said: Profit off services provided? Isn’t that how every other industry works? Profit off of basic human needs for life? I'm not saying doctors shouldn't make good money, but the owners of These companies contribute nothing to society while taking billions for nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cddolphin Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, TXsteeler said: Profit off of basic human needs for life? You paid for the food in your fridge, the water in your tap, the clothes on your back, the shelter you sleep in, etc. 4 minutes ago, TXsteeler said: but the owners of These companies contribute nothing to society while taking billions for nothing. That's a bit hyperbolic and certainly debateable. Edited February 19, 2018 by cddolphin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXsteeler Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, cddolphin said: You bought the food in your fridge, the water in your tap, the clothes on your back, the shelter you sleep in, etc. That's a bit hyperbolic and certainly debateable. How are those billionaires contributing to society? They are the most easily replaced component of a business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cddolphin Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, TXsteeler said: How are those billionaires contributing to society? If nothing else (and that's a huge if): tax revenue. Edited February 19, 2018 by cddolphin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagles101 Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 8 minutes ago, TXsteeler said: How are those billionaires contributing to society? They are the most easily replaced component of a business. They are probably the least replaceable on a business sense. Not everyone can properly run a multi billion dollar company. But on a society level they are worthless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXsteeler Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 2 minutes ago, cddolphin said: If nothing else (and that's a huge if): tax revenue. How does that make sense? If they weren't making that money, then someone else would keep it and they would either spend that money, which would be taxed, or keep it, in which case we could raise taxes on other things. Those regular people also wouldn't be keeping their money in tax havens off shore. Try again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 11 minutes ago, TXsteeler said: Profit off of basic human needs for life? I'm not saying doctors shouldn't make good money, but the owners of These companies contribute nothing to society while taking billions for nothing. As @cddolphin said, you pay for every other one and someone profits. Healthcare, unlike those other things, isn’t a commodity, but rather a service. You’re not paying for some generic product, but rather my services and the services of other healthcare providers. Are you implying you have a right to my time? That I should have to care for you, regardless as to whether you can pay? Who should set that price, you or me? What if some people can afford my services, enough to fill my day, but not you. Am I still obligated to care for you? I’m not trying to be a jerk here, simply show there’s more than one a side of the argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXsteeler Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 1 minute ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said: As @cddolphin said, you pay for every other one and someone profits. Healthcare, unlike those other things, isn’t a commodity, but rather a service. You’re not paying for some generic product, but rather my services and the services of other healthcare providers. Are you implying you have a right to my time? That I should have to care for you, regardless as to whether you can pay? Who should set that price, you or me? What if some people can afford my services, enough to fill my day, but not you. Am I still obligated to care for you? I’m not trying to be a jerk here, simply show there’s more than one a side of the argument. I'm talking the people at the very top, not doctors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 2 minutes ago, TXsteeler said: How does that make sense? If they weren't making that money, then someone else would keep it and they would either spend that money, which would be taxed, or keep it, in which case we could raise taxes on other things. Those regular people also wouldn't be keeping their money in tax havens off shore. Try again. How is this different than the execs at any large company? Kroger sells food and their CEO is loaded. Same thing. ”If you remove the bloated salaries and take profit out of _____ , everything would be cheaper.” Where does this logic end before you go from capitalism to communism? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwny Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 1 minute ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said: As @cddolphin said, you pay for every other one and someone profits. Healthcare, unlike those other things, isn’t a commodity, but rather a service. You’re not paying for some generic product, but rather my services and the services of other healthcare providers. Are you implying you have a right to my time? That I should have to care for you, regardless as to whether you can pay? Who should set that price, you or me? What if some people can afford my services, enough to fill my day, but not you. Am I still obligated to care for you? I’m not trying to be a jerk here, simply show there’s more than one a side of the argument. I think he’s arguing that the care provider deserves to make money, but that the middle man between the patient and doctor shouldn’t be making tens of millions of dollars. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, LETSGOBROWNIES said: As @cddolphin said, you pay for every other one and someone profits. Healthcare, unlike those other things, isn’t a commodity, but rather a service. You’re not paying for some generic product, but rather my services and the services of other healthcare providers. Are you implying you have a right to my time? That I should have to care for you, regardless as to whether you can pay? Who should set that price, you or me? What if some people can afford my services, enough to fill my day, but not you. Am I still obligated to care for you? I’m not trying to be a jerk here, simply show there’s more than one a side of the argument. Legally, the answer to most of those questions is "it depends, but there are situations where the answer is yes". If I show up at a hospital with a heart attack, legally the hospital is required to give me health care from someone independent of my ability to pay, the hospitals' hypothetical schedule, etc. etc. But you know that already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 Just now, iPwn said: I think he’s arguing that the care provider deserves to make money, but that the middle man between the patient and doctor shouldn’t be making tens of millions of dollars. As in insurers? Don’t use them then, negotiate those prices on your own behalf and pay the provider or facility directly. Insurance providers are also “gatekeepers” to some degree for doctors who may otherwise order redundant or unnecessary tests that you, the consumer, would have a hard time differentiating between necessary or not, hence prior auths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXsteeler Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 1 minute ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said: How is this different than the execs at any large company? Kroger sells food and their CEO is loaded. Same thing. ”If you remove the bloated salaries and take profit out of _____ , everything would be cheaper.” Where does this logic end before you go from capitalism to communism? Why are you worried about the distinction between capitalism and communism and not just worried about what makes this a better country for 320 million Americans vs a few 10,000 people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 1 minute ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Legally, the answer to most of those questions is "it depends, but there are situations where the answer is yes". If I show up at a hospital with a heart attack, legally the hospital is required to give me health care from someone independent of my ability to pay, the hospitals' hypothetical schedule, etc. etc. But you know that already. The facitlty is required, absolutely, and the MD and facility are able bill you for payment of services rendered. An individual MD is not required to do so. I can’t force an ortho surgeon to take me on as a patient if they don’t care to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts