Ok, I'm in! From now on, only partially digested see-foods for me!
fOx
I don't shop there anyway.
There are none particularly close by to me, which is a shame. Their organic chocolate truffles are frikin awesome. (got a box for Christmas)
I'll put it on my boycott list right under Philadelphia.
Not really into Boycotts, don't even get why they want us to. Whole Foods is a good store. I don't go there often, but I ain't stopping just because some butthead wants me to do so.
There's none near me so I'd have to go way out of my way to not go there. Kinda like Philadelphia.
You are supposed to boycott it because the guy who owns it was crass enough to suggest and alternative to a single payer system in health care.
So let me get this right. The owner exercised his right of free speech and now we are suppossed to boycot his stores to hurt his sales thereby hurting the employees?
Well that is odd, since almost NO ONE is suggesting a single payer system for the US, so we should be Boycotting everything and everyone.
You guys are a wealth of misinformation on this topic. 
Denial is more than just a river in Africa.
It isn't denial.
There is zero chance that single payer is going to be in any Bill that will be brought before Congress this year. Zero.
It isn't even worth discussing, because it ain't gonna happen. In fact, I can't imagine Single Payer EVER working in the US. The health insurance industry is financially healthy and with a few tweaks would work a hell of a lot better than it currently does. That is what these companies are fighting against with this massive campaign of misinformation and disinformation, a few tweaks.
Wrong. They are fighting the slippery slope to a full fledged government take over. I agree that a single payer won't work. Your man BO and plenty of Dems don't agree with us though. He is going to push for it the rest of his time in office. It won't happen this year, but that doesn't mean that they will stop just because they can't get it in this go around. One piece at a time. They will do it for Teddy.
Not going to happen. You can quote me.
Obama might want it, Teddy might want it from the Great Hereafter, George Washington might want it to have his wooden teeth fixed, but it ain't gonna happen.
In order to accomplish this you have to pass a Bill in Congress and Congress is not going to write such a Bill.
By the way, I told people this same thing in 1993 most of whom reacted just the same way you are doing now. A decade and a half later the only progress that we have seen is that instead of 27 million uninsured Americans, we now have something like 50 million. Insurers don't want to cover sick people or those who are likely to be sick, as well as lots of other kinds of people. The only way to get what we want from them is to pass a few laws that require everyone, more or less, to have some kind of coverage.
That ain't radical, Bubb, leaving millions uninsured is radical.
In order to accomplish this you have to pass a Bill in Congress and Congress is not going to write such a Bill.
Umm, They already did write such a Bill but removed the single payer provision after the people went ape shit.
That ain't radical, Bubb, leaving millions uninsured is radical.
I don't think its radical. I think its natural selection.
I agree that a single payer system passing is doubtful. However, when one proposes that there be a "public option" that "costs" less than everything else, mandates the same level of care, and the doctors are legally prevented from refusing, you are pretty much guaranteeing the system collapses to a single insurer that is taxpayer subsidized. That was definitely in the original plan.
There are most definitely congress critters and activists who are demanding a single payer system though.
Z, a small point of information here. What they took out was a public option. That would be a Medicare style program funded by the guv'mint which would be an option for people who couldn't get regular commercial insurance.
Single Payer is when there is no commercial insurance, ONLY the public plan.
BIG BIG BIG difference.
It really isn't unreasonable to suggest that commercial insurance needs someone to pick up the slack, seeing that 50 million Americans don't have it.
Personally, I don't see why this has degenerated into a partisan political fight. Something has to be done to get more people covered, I don't really care much about how it gets done as long as it happens.
Once again, it is a national disgrace that so many Americans lack basic health insurance. Something has to be done about that.
In all honesty, I don't see anyone focusing on that, I just see petty ideological talking points being thrown around. Intentionally mixing up 'Public Option' with 'Single Payer' is just one of the pieces of disinformation that is confusing the public.
No one but the insurance lobby wins if this problem isn't properly addressed. That's what happened in '93.
Personally, I don't see why this has degenerated into a partisan political fight.
Because the Democrats don't want to bother with getting Republicans on board. Because Republicans don't want to bother negotiating. Just like basically every other contentious issue in America.
Something has to be done to get more people covered...
Why? I'm not saying it wouldn't be a good thing to get more people covered, but I don't see why something has to be done.
Good question, so here is the good answer. The government is spending tremendous amounts of money on health care for uninsured people who get into car accidents or get cancer or some other expensive disease. Been this way for many many years.
The whole notion of a plan that is 'revenue neutral' was based on the idea that we could cover most of the uninsured Americans with the same amount we are already spending.
If that is socialist, well then I guess your grandma will have to be next before the fictional 'Death Panel.' (NOTE: that was a joke indicating that this very sensible idea is being defeated by not addressing the problem but by name calling and jumping through the Looking Glass into an alternate reality where common sense and practicality is about the same thing as treason.)
Good question, so here is the good answer. The government is spending tremendous amounts of money on health care for uninsured people who get into car accidents or get cancer or some other expensive disease. Been this way for many many years.
The whole notion of a plan that is 'revenue neutral' was based on the idea that we could cover most of the uninsured Americans with the same amount we are already spending.
Sounds good in theory, but that is not what is getting past (and to be honest, I don't believe the government can actually cover more people with the same amount of money - its just a theory based on the idea that what we have now is inefficient and they can do it better - there is no proof).
If that is socialist...
It is completely socialist, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. However, it is entirely against the foundation of America. This is suppose to be a country based on freedom, but that freedom means each person has to be responsible for his or her self. I'm not opposed to helping the less fortunate, but government health care/insurance is completely outside the powers granted to the government by the Constitution. If you want that, go live in Canada, or France, or Japan, or the UK, or some place that isn't restricted like our government is.
Almost nobody except Obama is right. That's why the FF is having to fight for Kennedy Care so hard. Fortunately, the temp services offer professional protestors pretty cheap. These are the same crazily dressed folks holding up store bankruptcy and condo auction signs on street corners.
The CtW Investment Group is not named fiduciary for any pension or other fund or plan, nor does it render investment advice. The CtW Investment Group does not exercise or seek to exercise any discretionary authority or discretionary control regarding management of any plan, disposition of any plan assets, proxy voting decisions, appointment of plan trustees, or any other aspect of plan management or administration. Although CtW Investment Group strategies and initiatives are thoroughly reviewed for compliance with applicable laws and regulations, the law requires trustees and other fiduciaries to conduct their own review and make independent decisions before implementing or adopting any of these strategies or initiatives.
In Short...They Be Douchebagnozzles.
We shop at Whole Foods all the time - good quality food and much of it is not that expensive .. how this equates to health care ... I don't care unless they are abusing their workers terribly - and that is not the case. I'm with Gramps on this one .. I'm not going to stop shopping there because some butthead says so.
Whole Foods, 15th best place to work in America. The guy is trying to keep his standing and good med coverage for his people. The FF will see to it that his employees get VA type care just like other poor folks do, and send the US down a deeper hole than it is now.
Cowboy_Way
I'm so hopping mad! Oh, I'm a tellin ya!!! I ain't gunna shop there no more! Wait... I don't really get out ta the city that much. But if I did, I wouldn't ride my horse within a five mile radius!