• Welcome to PurpleFlock! Sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.

The Random Thought Thread

rossihunter2 said:
what's the downside of universal healthcare though?
it's cheaper per capita
it's more efficient
people are more likely to use its services rather than languishing with undiagnosed problems or unfixed issues or without seeking support when they need it
it helps create a more equal society

it's not a crutch - if people are unhealthy, they should be able to seek help without fear of financial repercussions
Click to expand...
1. Its more efficient IF the government can figure out a way to make it more efficient, which isn't universally the case.
2. If large groups of people are unhealthy, step 1 is identifying why you're unhealthy. Step 1, under no scenario, should be figuring out how to make you healthy for whatever the cost is, and letting others pick up the tab for you, regardless of who that is.

You can, in fact, create societies where people are healthier with or without universal healthcare coverage. Universal healthcare coverage would get a shit ton more traction in countries like the US if people were, wait for it, simply healthier. And health isn't determined by a doctor, either.

Some people are born with issues. Some people have issues through no fault of their own. Others eat McDonald's 3 meals a day for 30 years, become diabetic at 35, and complain about how insulin costs too much. Others smoke for decades and complain about the cost of cancer treatment.
Those people haven't earned tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of dollars in lifetime healthcare coverage for fractions of the cost to them. You want healthcare companies to start charging less? Try given them a reason to never pay any claims.

If you cut out all of the just utter bad decisions people make that negatively impact their health, health insurance costs in this country or any country plummet rapidly.

Those costs won't plummet with universal healthcare. You're just shuffling the costs to somebody else.
 
JO_75 said:
To be fair... they were only a year off of the Cubs winning the World Series. That's still quite impressive for a movie back then to nearly predict a real sports outcome.

Ever since the Back to The Future movies, I have loved the idea of time travel but being able to change time for the better with little to no consequences. Sorry Doc... I know they the rules but I just want Lee Evans to catch the ball against the Pats in the 2011 AFC Championship lol.
Click to expand...
or atleast to make a 32 yard fg to tie the game
 
rmcjacket23 said:
1. Its more efficient IF the government can figure out a way to make it more efficient, which isn't universally the case.
2. If large groups of people are unhealthy, step 1 is identifying why you're unhealthy. Step 1, under no scenario, should be figuring out how to make you healthy for whatever the cost is, and letting others pick up the tab for you, regardless of who that is.

You can, in fact, create societies where people are healthier with or without universal healthcare coverage. Universal healthcare coverage would get a shit ton more traction in countries like the US if people were, wait for it, simply healthier. And health isn't determined by a doctor, either.

Some people are born with issues. Some people have issues through no fault of their own. Others eat McDonald's 3 meals a day for 30 years, become diabetic at 35, and complain about how insulin costs too much. Others smoke for decades and complain about the cost of cancer treatment.
Those people haven't earned tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of dollars in lifetime healthcare coverage for fractions of the cost to them. You want healthcare companies to start charging less? Try given them a reason to never pay any claims.

If you cut out all of the just utter bad decisions people make that negatively impact their health, health insurance costs in this country or any country plummet rapidly.

Those costs won't plummet with universal healthcare. You're just shuffling the costs to somebody else.
Click to expand...
Another big problem is fatness is now glorified.
 
Willbacker said:
Another big problem is fatness is now glorified.
Click to expand...
It's not even fatness. It's just overall lack of health awareness or emphasis in this Country.
If you reduce the costs people have to pay for healthcare, how does it incentivize them to be healthier? They can be as unhealthy as they want and they'll get cheap, affordable, healthcare coverage, for a lifetime. Rich or poor, doesn't matter, somebody will pick up the tab.

It's pretty clear that living a shorter life isn't a good enough incentive for people to be healthier. If that's not enough, I doubt making it cheaper for them to be unhealthy is going to all of the sudden make an obese person think "gee, maybe I should get in shape".
 
Willbacker said:
Another big problem is fatness is now glorified.
Click to expand...
Not sure it’s glorified but it’s now socially acceptable and encouraged to ignore the risks associated with obesity to compensate for insecurity. Questioning obesity and wanting to improve health education makes you a bigot…… very strange times indeed.
 
redrum52 said:
This offends me. I'm currently waiting for my XXXXL purple camo shorts. And it's only glorified if you're a woman. A bald man is just bald but a bal head *** has a alopecia. Go figure.
Click to expand...
Lol if you don’t have money you better have abs and a full head of hair
 
2019 draft already looked bad
but now with hollywood gone

it's looking bleak - highly possible that none of that draft class makes it past cut-down day in year 4
really could be looking at the only 2019 rookie still on the roster in year 4 being UDFA Pat Mekari lol
 
rossihunter2 said:
2019 draft already looked bad
but now with hollywood gone

it's looking bleak - highly possible that none of that draft class makes it past cut-down day in year 4
really could be looking at the only 2019 rookie still on the roster in year 4 being UDFA Pat Mekari lol
Click to expand...
I'm kind of worried about the 4th, just looking back on the middle rounds the past few years and the board's thoughts on who was taken at the time. Hopefully that'll be different this year given the depth.
 
SepticeyePoe said:
I'm kind of worried about the 4th, just looking back on the middle rounds the past few years and the board's thoughts on who was taken at the time. Hopefully that'll be different this year given the depth.
Click to expand...

as in the board not liking who we took?
or the board being wrong to like who we took?
 
SepticeyePoe said:
Not being too high on who we took, at least somewhat generally. I could just be looking into it too much given the nature of the draft.
Click to expand...

i think that's fair - i definitely havent been in love with a ton of our day 3 picks but with the understanding that day 3 is scouts day

i loved daelin hayes and tylan wallace picks last year though - didnt love ben cleveland who we took on day 2 but i thought was a day 3 guy
i loved the proche and stone picks in 2020 - and didnt know who broderick washington was...
i really liked the imam marshall and justice hill picks - but yeah i guess that draft was notable as being a little devoid of guys i liked...

worth noting though in terms of day 3 guys recently, in the pandemic, the ravens have stuck to high info players which mostly means picking out of the power 5 schools because they're able to have way more confidence in their evaluation

will be interesting to see if we go back to our roots a little and take a couple of smaller school guys in this one or whether we continue to
 
I really like our picks and get the Hollywood trade, but I’m curious what the Ravens vision is right now. The AFC is stacked and it feels like the Ravens don’t want to join that arms race currently. These moves are geared towards future years rather than the 2022 season. Which is fine, it’s ok to admit we’re not a super bowl team this year as much as fans don’t want to. But I’d wish we make up our mind one way or the other. You gotta appreciate the Ravens ability to compete nearly every year, but it seems like we’re stuck in this semi competitive wild card team purgatory.
 
BoredMarine13 said:
I really like our picks and get the Hollywood trade, but I’m curious what the Ravens vision is right now. The AFC is stacked and it feels like the Ravens don’t want to join that arms race currently. These moves are geared towards future years rather than the 2022 season. Which is fine, it’s ok to admit we’re not a super bowl team this year as much as fans don’t want to. But I’d wish we make up our mind one way or the other. You gotta appreciate the Ravens ability to compete nearly every year, but it seems like we’re stuck in this semi competitive wild card team purgatory.
Click to expand...

i mean linderbaum and hamilton are both pretty instant impact picks
it's not as obvious that we're gearing up because we've just rebuilt our OL instead of stacking our receiving corps and EDGE (yet)

there's no point analysing this draft for philosophy or strategy until it's over

and as EDC and Harbs said yesterday in the presser when asked about WRs, we've still got 2 days and the whole rest of the offseason to add guys to the room

but EDC also specifically talked about how they thought Duvernay took a jump last year and that Proche had a couple of standout games and made some clutch plays for us - didnt mention tylan wallace but was notable that tylan was seemingly ahead of both proche and duvernay to end the year last year in the game-opening 11 personnel... albeit it's possible that's just because proche was a gameday inactive because of special teams

i think the challenge for proche is gonna be being a gameday active - when he's active, he's gonna make some plays but he doesnt play special teams... but with hollywood gone, maybe he wont have to, or maybe he grabs a starting role and ends that dilemma completely

i love Bateman as our X, i think we've got options in the slot with tylan, duvernay and proche who all offer different things, maybe Duvernay can become a full-time Z for us but idk

gonna be a big year for Tee Martin and Dubb
 
rossihunter2 said:
i mean linderbaum and hamilton are both pretty instant impact picks
it's not as obvious that we're gearing up because we've just rebuilt our OL instead of stacking our receiving corps and EDGE (yet)

there's no point analysing this draft for philosophy or strategy until it's over

and as EDC and Harbs said yesterday in the presser when asked about WRs, we've still got 2 days and the whole rest of the offseason to add guys to the room

but EDC also specifically talked about how they thought Duvernay took a jump last year and that Proche had a couple of standout games and made some clutch plays for us - didnt mention tylan wallace but was notable that tylan was seemingly ahead of both proche and duvernay to end the year last year in the game-opening 11 personnel... albeit it's possible that's just because proche was a gameday inactive because of special teams

i think the challenge for proche is gonna be being a gameday active - when he's active, he's gonna make some plays but he doesnt play special teams... but with hollywood gone, maybe he wont have to, or maybe he grabs a starting role and ends that dilemma completely

i love Bateman as our X, i think we've got options in the slot with tylan, duvernay and proche who all offer different things, maybe Duvernay can become a full-time Z for us but idk

gonna be a big year for Tee Martin and Dubb
Click to expand...
I'm actually not that concerned about our WRs. I like the guys we have in the locker room and history dictates we bring in a vet opposite Batemen. I'm sure well use one or two 4th rounders on WR but thats never been our forte so I wont hold my breathe on impact players there.

For sure we need to wait and see how this draft turns out, but I have a feeling their eyes are set on 2023. Just how they approached free agency and this draft so far. Not following their norm of swooping up low key free agents on short term stop gap deals. Really only Calais and that just a couple Mil.... Most of the work we've done is multi years deals with folks who will be with the team for at least 3 years.

Well see, long way to go in the draft and Offseason, just have an odd feeling for this year.
 
BoredMarine13 said:
I'm actually not that concerned about our WRs. I like the guys we have in the locker room and history dictates we bring in a vet opposite Batemen. I'm sure well use one or two 4th rounders on WR but thats never been our forte so I wont hold my breathe on impact players there.

For sure we need to wait and see how this draft turns out, but I have a feeling their eyes are set on 2023. Just how they approached free agency and this draft so far. Not following their norm of swooping up low key free agents on short term stop gap deals. Really only Calais and that just a couple Mil.... Most of the work we've done is multi years deals with folks who will be with the team for at least 3 years.

Well see, long way to go in the draft and Offseason, just have an odd feeling for this year.
Click to expand...
There's absolutely no reason to bring Calais back if you're milking it for 2023. They're going for it. Just because the short term stop gaps haven't been signed yet doesn't mean they won't be. That market is still full of options this year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top