Handicapped Man's Wheelchair Seized Over Medical Marijuana

To get what? He's already got free health care.

It is private health care and very inadequate. He deserves far better.

Why couldn't he just get that better free care?

What happened there?

Do you know of a country on the planet that has 'free' health care or 'free' anything?
I'm guessing no. Unless you are that naive, which even i find hard to believe.

Actually, RIFDemocracy, I know several. Sweden, Denmark, Costa Rica, Norway, and many others.

Really? All those countries have higher tax rates, as does Canada.
I can't speak for Costa Rica, however, though I hear it is one of the best in Latin America. Not sure how they pay for it.

My point is that health care is not free, per se. There is no such thing as free.
However, you do generally get what you pay for.

This man doesn't pay taxes to get the "other" health care?

That is a hard question. Totally makes their health care system awesome, I understand.

Didn't think you had an answer to my actual question.

Especially when I saw who recommended your comment. I can't take you serious with your coattail rider. I laugh every time. Insulting isn't answering.

@RFIDemocracy - in these countries, and others, I got free health care even though I was not a resident nor a national of those countries.

Understood, yet, if you were there any length of time you probably contributed something to the tax revenues like VAT, for example. Someone pays for it. The high cost is recovered from incoming government revenues. Therefore, 'free' is not really free.

Wikipedia: Maurice Lauré, Joint Director of the French Tax Authority, the Direction générale des impôts, was first to introduce VAT on April 10, 1954. Initially directed at large businesses, it was extended over time to include all business sectors. In France, it is the most important source of state finance, accounting for 52% of state revenues.

***

In Denmark, VAT is generally applied at one rate, and with few exceptions is not split into two or more rates as in other countries (e.g. Germany), where reduced rates apply to essential goods such as e.g., foodstuffs. The current standard rate of VAT in Denmark is 25%

***

In Iceland, VAT is split into two levels: 24.5% for most goods and services but 7% for certain goods and services. The 7% level is applied for hotel and guesthouse stays, licence fees for radio stations (namely RÚV), newspapers and magazines, books; hot water, electricity and oil for heating houses, food for human consumption (but not alcoholic beverages), access to toll roads and music.

In Norway, VAT is split into three levels: 25% is the general VAT, 14% (formerly 13%, up on January 1, 2007) for foods and restaurant take-out (food eaten in a restaurant has 25%), 8% for person transport, movie tickets, and hotel stays. Books and newspapers are free of VAT, while magazines and periodicals with a less than 80% subscription rate are taxed. Svalbard has no VAT because of a clause in the Svalbard Treaty. Cultural events are excluded from VAT.

In Sweden, VAT is split into three levels: 25% for most goods and services including restaurants bills, 12% for foods (incl. bring home from restaurants) and hotel stays (but breakfast at 25%) and 6% for printed matter, cultural services, and transport of private persons. Some services are not taxable for example education of children and adults if public utility, and health and dental care, but education is taxable at 25% in case of courses for adults at a private school. Dance events (for the guests) have 25%, concerts and stage shows have 6%, and some types of cultural events have 0%.

He was a well loved man.

I cannot imagine how incredibly frustrating it would be to see, hear but not be able to communicate in an effective manner.

Your second to last paragraph is very true.

The water/pot comment is debatable but your point of view is understandable and (unlike some people's comments on use of pot) reasonable.

Sorry for the loss of your friend

It's really sad when someone pours his heart out in an experience and shares and people are more focused on something else....

...especially the rapid fire recommend group that seems to recommend every little comment they agree with and not the one that actually used heart to make a comment.

Pathetic.

So much for open-minded and tolerant.

Awwwww, No one ever recommends your posts. Wonder why?

Proved point of how heartless some of those that recommend are.

Thank you.

He *is* displaying some disturbing symptoms.
Someone prescribe him a blunt quick!

Pass him the joint! He'll improve after a few puffs. ;)

3 rule breakers in a row.

No shit.

really.
pay attention.

Have you always pick on girls? You must have been popular at school.

What girl?

Private care facility. What the fuck do you know about the Canadian system. Oh right. Nothing.

'It's like California having laws saying it's ok to smoke for
medical reasons but the feds can come in and cause trouble.'

Under Bush. No longer operative. Get current.
'Lucky for those in Texas the State does not recognize the FBI or the CIA as police officers and therefore they are not allowed to rush on in without consulting the local police department of said city. '

Dream on. Wait till it's the department that's under investigation. Texas doesn't tell the Feds what to do except in their fertile imaginations.

'So if they did legalize it here the police could keep the feds out based on that alone.'

With what, six-guns?

'Oh about Bush...because a man was arrested and harassed for selling medical marijuana and it was done under Obama's watch.'

Nice personal anecdote, conspicuously unsupported by anything other than your reliably unreliable say-so.

'When she supports you it's for no reason other than because it's against me the person she pretends to ignore. '

So she thinks you're a dork as well? Wow. It's going around.
In fact, Jesus thinks you're a jerk.

**George H. Wu (born 1950) is a United States federal judge.
Wu was nominated by President George W. Bush on January 9, 2007.

Shocked! Shocked, I tell you....a Bush appointee took the law into his own hands?!

OTOH,
"George W. Bush during his six years as governor of Texas presided over 152 executions, more than any other governor in the recent history of the United States. Bush has said: "I take every death penalty case seriously and review each case carefully.... Each case is major because each case is life or death." In his autobiography, A Charge to Keep (1999), he wrote, "For every death penalty case, [legal counsel] brief[s] me thoroughly, reviews the arguments made by the prosecution and the defense, raises any doubts or problems or questions." Bush called this a "fail-safe" method for ensuring "due process" and certainty of guilt.

He might have succeeded in bequeathing to history this image of himself as a scrupulously fair-minded governor if the journalist Alan Berlow had not used the Public Information Act to gain access to fifty-seven confidential death penalty memos that Bush's legal counsel, Alberto R. Gonzales, whom President Bush has recently nominated to be attorney general of the United States, presented to him, usually on the very day of execution.[1] The reports Gonzales presented could not be more cursory.
Take, for example, the case of Terry Washington, a mentally retarded man of thirty-three with the communication skills of a seven-year-old. Washington's plea for clemency came before Governor Bush on the morning of May 6, 1997. After a thirty-minute briefing by Gonzales, Bush checked "Deny"—just as he had denied twenty-nine other pleas for clemency in his first twenty-eight months as governor."

Bush and his ruthless appointees make the hospital administrator look merciful and just by comparison.

Doesn't let Obama off the hook for it happening on his watch and his time in office.

Hate on Bush all you want...it matters not for what happened this year when Obama is President.

Obama the man for change allowed another man who was following the law to go down in flames. The legality of it is flimsy at best and he just let go.

It's like driving past an accident caused by a drunk driver. You know that legally that drunk driver is responsible for his actions but you totally ignore the injured in the other vehicle and justify it because well....the law will make him pay.

That person is just as guilty as the one that caused the accident.

Obama is guilty as Bush for ignoring this injustice.

It's in the article headline. American's still call aboriginals 'indians' which is also a slur.

It is in the local vernacular and is by no means offensive.

I've never said the "C" word for anyone.

I do say darker though...but that's because my friend has a sense of humor. So not something I'd say anywhere else or in public, for that matter. No need to get people all riled up over a single word that's so simple and could mean anything.

The bad words are those that don't have many meaning outside of being crass.

How does one fix grumpiness?

as a manager of a care facility I doubt she has an oath to answer to...

What about the law? Is she not obstructing his legal rights under license from the government?
Brutal.

Apparently not or the law would have stopped her by now...you know...Canada is perfect.

And no they should not if there is a facility that can care for them that they can go to.

It is, after all, Canada. He doesn't HAVE to go there. He has choices does he not?

let US ALL pray for this woman's well-being

Something NOT about religion and you find a way to make a snide comment.

I stand by what I said to you in that other thread. So much hate.

I hope she get's a good dose of SHAME! It's time for people to be ashamed for what they do. It's not okay!

Jammer, do you think it is right for people to deny medical care to others based on their beliefs? Are you defending that?

hahahah...this article is NOT about religion. NOT about religion and NOT about religion.

It's about a woman who is being a prick to man in CANADA that is supposedly the health care that people here in AMERICA want.

So don't make it about something it is not and your question is irrelevant to the article. What I think on tha twill not be discussed until such an article pops up.

Until then you should stay focused on the article.

This is why those people that recommended your comment cannot and should not be trusted with who they think is right for promoting your kind of prejudice.

You know...it's not just Christians that would deny such to someone based on beliefs...but it happens to be the only one you constantly pick.

The government approves and ships medical cannabis to this man. The woman takes away his medical cannabis because she believes, contrary to the approval of the government, that it is a "narcotic".

No this is not about Religion, I was using that as an example because it is similar in that it was a belief that motivated the action of the person. Beliefs can be about science, literature, art, a myriad of things that aren't religion.

You evaded my question. Do you support people denying health care because of their beliefs?

It was a poor example.

I believe that no one should do anything that the are opposed to...no matter WHERE or WHAT field they are in. Even a doctor.

The problem arises when they don't try and help to find someone that will provide that for you.

If one wants to play the blame game and blamed things then one can blame him for not checking to see if she was someone that would with hold what he needed. Or whoever it is that watches over him to have asked.

Because in your poor example you blame beliefs...so it's not too far of a stretch from that to blame him for not making sure the care he wanted was the care he'd get. Assumption could be the cause of most of his pain....if he checked then he would know....

....if we are playing this blame game then that is my answer to you.

If this was in America it would be all about the health care. Since it's in Canada...can't be about that because no one who is for Obama-care would want to taint what they deem perfect....so they blame the individual. Essentially not wrong...but totally funny on how one holds a double standard.