Comments on: SCHIP Torpedoed in Oregon http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/ Cleaning the Augean Stables of the Health Care Debate Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:05:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: drmatt http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10434 drmatt Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:26:07 +0000 http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10434 First, public access to highways can only be barred completely in a state of national emergency, broadcasters may deny you access to the airways if they dont like your message no matter how much you pay them. Secondly, it is actually illegal to charge for profit anything that "belongs" to the public. It happens, but it is not legal. i.e. if there is a concert in the public park and they charge admission, it is technically illegal. Really, when was the last time any organization stopped you from using the highway? secondly, when defining "financial barriers" one must take into consideration what cost would be exorbanant for most of the population for which access was intended? (not average, but two standard deviations above the mean). the "financial barriers" to use the public highway hardly reach that criteria. First, public access to highways can only be barred completely in a state of national emergency, broadcasters may deny you access to the airways if they dont like your message no matter how much you pay them. Secondly, it is actually illegal to charge for profit anything that “belongs” to the public. It happens, but it is not legal. i.e. if there is a concert in the public park and they charge admission, it is technically illegal. Really, when was the last time any organization stopped you from using the highway?
secondly, when defining “financial barriers” one must take into consideration what cost would be exorbanant for most of the population for which access was intended? (not average, but two standard deviations above the mean). the “financial barriers” to use the public highway hardly reach that criteria.

]]> By: Rich http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10429 Rich Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:40:15 +0000 http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10429 I am not certain I understand your point, really. Access to public highways is also limited by financial barriers - sure they are lower, but to some people they are equally insurmountable. If the provider of the equipment and services necessary to access the airways can get $1 more from someone else for the same time than you are willing to pay, then $1 more than you are willing to pay is the fair and equitable value. Freedom of speech is not a guarantee of an audience. I am not certain I understand your point, really. Access to public highways is also limited by financial barriers - sure they are lower, but to some people they are equally insurmountable.

If the provider of the equipment and services necessary to access the airways can get $1 more from someone else for the same time than you are willing to pay, then $1 more than you are willing to pay is the fair and equitable value. Freedom of speech is not a guarantee of an audience.

]]> By: drmatt http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10422 drmatt Tue, 13 Nov 2007 11:44:12 +0000 http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10422 Usurp? doesn't really apply being that I noted that it is the "access" to public airways that is blocked by financial barriers, I said nothing for the equipment, use of equipment or manpower used to access the airways. Please tell me how much it would cost to get a 1 minute spot on the PUBLIC airways? now tell me that this dollar amount represents a fair and equitable charge for the use of the equipment? USURP: seize and take control without authority and possibly with force; take ones right or possession. Who has really been usurped here? seems like you have had your right to access the public airways usurped? Don't forget, it is not just money, the owners of such airways do not have to broadcast anything even if you pay for it. public airways? freedom of speech? hmmmm Einstein also said; The ideals which have lighted my way, and time after time have given me new courage to face life cheerfully, have been Kindness, Beauty, and Truth. The trite subjects of human efforts, possessions, outward success, luxury have always seemed to me contemptible. None of which I have seen on this blog Usurp? doesn’t really apply being that I noted that it is the “access” to public airways that is blocked by financial barriers, I said nothing for the equipment, use of equipment or manpower used to access the airways. Please tell me how much it would cost to get a 1 minute spot on the PUBLIC airways? now tell me that this dollar amount represents a fair and equitable charge for the use of the equipment? USURP: seize and take control without authority and possibly with force; take ones right or possession. Who has really been usurped here? seems like you have had your right to access the public airways usurped? Don’t forget, it is not just money, the owners of such airways do not have to broadcast anything even if you pay for it. public airways? freedom of speech? hmmmm

Einstein also said; The ideals which have lighted my way, and time after time have given me new courage to face life cheerfully, have been Kindness, Beauty, and Truth. The trite subjects of human efforts, possessions, outward success, luxury have always seemed to me contemptible.

None of which I have seen on this blog

]]> By: Catron http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10383 Catron Mon, 12 Nov 2007 23:32:05 +0000 http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10383 Smart dude, that Einstein feller. Smart dude, that Einstein feller.

]]> By: Rich http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10378 Rich Mon, 12 Nov 2007 21:31:38 +0000 http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10378 David, Einstein said: "The eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility." He also said: "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." David,

Einstein said:

“The eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility.”

He also said:

“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the the universe.”

]]> By: Rich http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10377 Rich Mon, 12 Nov 2007 21:27:57 +0000 http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10377 Marc, You have no idea who I am, and yet you have spent considerable energy arguing with me. You have not asked for any disclosures before expending you energy, either. Likewise, I may not know who is behind this or that political ad, the arguments stand or fall on their own merits. But I am still free to band together with enought concerned citizens, corporations, or other organizations to raise money to present my own advertising. Perhaps if the "public health authorities" (who really have little to do with the legislation or its presence on the ballot - it's legislators) have a string enough case, they will have ample support. See, for example, any public voting on environmental issues. Big business, in spite of their resources, tend to lose on these issues (Open space issues, clean air regs, etc.) Matt, the public may own the airwaves, but they do not own the equipment and resources necessary to utilize them. Similarly, we all have the right to pursue good health, but we do not usurp YOUR labor or posessions, wholesale, to make the available to anyone who wants it. Not yet, anyway. Marc,

You have no idea who I am, and yet you have spent considerable energy arguing with me. You have not asked for any disclosures before expending you energy, either.

Likewise, I may not know who is behind this or that political ad, the arguments stand or fall on their own merits. But I am still free to band together with enought concerned citizens, corporations, or other organizations to raise money to present my own advertising.

Perhaps if the “public health authorities” (who really have little to do with the legislation or its presence on the ballot - it’s legislators) have a string enough case, they will have ample support. See, for example, any public voting on environmental issues. Big business, in spite of their resources, tend to lose on these issues (Open space issues, clean air regs, etc.)

Matt, the public may own the airwaves, but they do not own the equipment and resources necessary to utilize them. Similarly, we all have the right to pursue good health, but we do not usurp YOUR labor or posessions, wholesale, to make the available to anyone who wants it. Not yet, anyway.

]]> By: Catron http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10372 Catron Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:19:40 +0000 http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10372 Rich, you have hit on something that has always mystified me. Why do rank-and-file "progressives" continue to side with the NYT even though the Grey Lady's editors obviously consider them to be a bunch of morons? Rich, you have hit on something that has always mystified me. Why do rank-and-file “progressives” continue to side with the NYT even though the Grey Lady’s editors obviously consider them to be a bunch of morons?

]]> By: Rich http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10368 Rich Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:03:25 +0000 http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10368 It's remarkable how much contempt the NYT has for the voting public, and how easily they believe the public is duped. Of course, the NYT ALWAYS gives accurate and balanced information... It’s remarkable how much contempt the NYT has for the voting public, and how easily they believe the public is duped.

Of course, the NYT ALWAYS gives accurate and balanced information…

]]> By: Marc Brown http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10366 Marc Brown Mon, 12 Nov 2007 15:49:49 +0000 http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10366 'Just how is the democratic process corrupted?' I've already told you this. 1. The voters are denied knowledge on screen of who is behind the ads. That's about as basic a level of deception as you can get. 2. Big business can outspend the public health authorities and their supporters by many times. ‘Just how is the democratic process corrupted?’

I’ve already told you this.

1. The voters are denied knowledge on screen of who is behind the ads. That’s about as basic a level of deception as you can get.

2. Big business can outspend the public health authorities and their supporters by many times.

]]> By: drmatt http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10363 drmatt Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:57:26 +0000 http://www.healthcarebs.com/2007/11/08/schip-torpedoed-in-oregon/#comment-10363 Rich, no genius has found it "yet", but as you say, why would the voters want to support it if it will be supported by private industry and they will ultimately pay for the findings? Marc, I personally agree that marketing contorts facts and sways decisions, but I agree with rich as well, it is part of our society/democracy we purposely protected the right to pretty much say what you want, unless undue harm could be reasonably forseen or expected. Though our right to freedom of speech is often contorted to favor the powerful, that is where the true issue lies, we all need to know that marketers of FOS and thus should find our own answers...........imagine it "free thought" the contortion to the powerful works like this, the airwaves were owned by the public (technically public airways) sold to a very select group of media outlets for pennies really (compared to what they are worth) who inturn charge exorbanant amounts of money to advertise on them. The true question over freedom of speech in "cable TV" society is, "are financial barriers to speak in a way that can be heard a true subversion of freedom of speech?" I believe so being that the airwaves by all rights belong to the public, by definition a public forum must be open to all view points "equally" financial barriers are as real as someone with a nightstick stopping you from expressing your viewpoint in an othewise public forum. But, it is doubtful that the organizations who now control the majority of all media are going to give that up without a fight (if you read Noam Chomsky's work you will see almost all the media can be traced back to five very large and rich organizations). Rich, no genius has found it “yet”, but as you say, why would the voters want to support it if it will be supported by private industry and they will ultimately pay for the findings?

Marc, I personally agree that marketing contorts facts and sways decisions, but I agree with rich as well, it is part of our society/democracy we purposely protected the right to pretty much say what you want, unless undue harm could be reasonably forseen or expected. Though our right to freedom of speech is often contorted to favor the powerful, that is where the true issue lies, we all need to know that marketers of FOS and thus should find our own answers………..imagine it “free thought”
the contortion to the powerful works like this, the airwaves were owned by the public (technically public airways) sold to a very select group of media outlets for pennies really (compared to what they are worth) who inturn charge exorbanant amounts of money to advertise on them. The true question over freedom of speech in “cable TV” society is, “are financial barriers to speak in a way that can be heard a true subversion of freedom of speech?” I believe so being that the airwaves by all rights belong to the public, by definition a public forum must be open to all view points “equally” financial barriers are as real as someone with a nightstick stopping you from expressing your viewpoint in an othewise public forum. But, it is doubtful that the organizations who now control the majority of all media are going to give that up without a fight (if you read Noam Chomsky’s work you will see almost all the media can be traced back to five very large and rich organizations).

]]>