I did answer your question. people dont work for free.
now answer mine.
if I'm hungry, am I within my right for force you to feed me?
no it's not your right...but you have the right to go to your township trustee and ask for assistance...and I'm sure they would direct you to a food kitchen or give you some vouchers to obtain food at a local grocery store
I don't have the right to enter your house and ask for a bandaid...not sure where you were going with that
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
if I'm hungry, am I within my rights to demand you feed me?
That is clearly not an answer to the question.
You said you don't know whether the people in Niblett's post deserve quality healthcare because you hadn't met them. I am asking: If you did meet them, how would you then determine whether or not they deserve quality healthcare?
Please answer the question.
I did answer your question. people dont work for free.
now answer mine.
if I'm hungry, am I within my right for force you to feed me?
You said you don't know whether the people in Niblett's post deserve quality healthcare because you hadn't met them. I am asking: If you did meet them, how would you then determine whether or not they deserve quality healthcare?
Please answer the question.
I did answer your question. people dont work for free.
now answer mine.
if I'm hungry, am I within my right for force you to feed me?
Maybe I'm just slow, but I don't understand how "people don't work for free" answers the question "what are your criteria for determining whether or not someone deserves health care". Will you please explain it a little more explicitly? I'm looking more for a checklist of qualifications or something. Like, what would be on your application/questionairre when you determine whether or not someone is deserving of health care.
And again, maybe I'm just slow, but I need to stick to one question at a time in order to follow the conversation.
You said you don't know whether the people in Niblett's post deserve quality healthcare because you hadn't met them. I am asking: If you did meet them, how would you then determine whether or not they deserve quality healthcare?
Please answer the question.
I did answer your question. people dont work for free.
now answer mine.
if I'm hungry, am I within my right for force you to feed me?
Maybe I'm just slow, but I don't understand how "people don't work for free" answers the question "what are your criteria for determining whether or not someone deserves health care". Will you please explain it a little more explicitly? I'm looking more for a checklist of qualifications or something. Like, what would be on your application/questionairre when you determine whether or not someone is deserving of health care.
And again, maybe I'm just slow, but I need to stick to one question at a time in order to follow the conversation.
I only "lurk" at times..and then...due to my personality.........feel a need to interject. I've read your posts scb. What I gather, from your postings, is that you're a hard-worker, and want to earn more money. (No doubt - for your family). I like you. As you strive to do better. I respect you for that reason. You also tend to be defensive. Another character trait I can identify with. Think out of the box. You'll figure it out. I have faith in you.
The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way its animals are treated - Gandhi
"Empty pockets will Allow a greater Sense of wealth...." EV/ITW
Maybe I'm just slow, but I don't understand how "people don't work for free" answers the question "what are your criteria for determining whether or not someone deserves health care". Will you please explain it a little more explicitly? I'm looking more for a checklist of qualifications or something. Like, what would be on your application/questionairre when you determine whether or not someone is deserving of health care.
And again, maybe I'm just slow, but I need to stick to one question at a time in order to follow the conversation.
you must be slow then sorry.
Count me in with her then... cos I don't get it either. How does that answer the question? The closest I can guess is that you're trying to say that one has to be employed to deserve health care without having to actually come out and say it?
before you said:
'its gaining new customers is what really drives profit.' but Aetna increased their profits by having less customers and being selective about only keeping customers that didn't use their insurance that much....so you have to ask why is Aetna in the health insurance business? it's obviously not to help people get health care, so why? profit?
its a cost cutting move. its helps in the short run... not the long.
they deserve whatever it is someone else is willing to offer them.
you obviously think healthcare is right, correct? is eating a right?
ok, but isn't the short run moves 'what really drives profit' and not giving people actual health care?
yes, i do think health care is a right, it's in our best interests to have a healthy nation, i believe even George Washington thought the health and education of the people were 2 of the most deserving things a government should spend money on
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
ok, but isn't the short run moves 'what really drives profit' and not giving people actual health care?
yes, i do think health care is a right, it's in our best interests to have a healthy nation, i believe even George Washington thought the health and education of the people were 2 of the most deserving things a government should spend money on
healthcare is useless if the quality if shit and bankrupts this country. I'm all for reform of the current system, but UHC is not the answer.
ok, but isn't the short run moves 'what really drives profit' and not giving people actual health care?
yes, i do think health care is a right, it's in our best interests to have a healthy nation, i believe even George Washington thought the health and education of the people were 2 of the most deserving things a government should spend money on
healthcare is useless if the quality if shit and bankrupts this country. I'm all for reform of the current system, but UHC is not the answer.
teh rest of the world disagrees, but hey, if you're cool with having more uninsured americans than the entire population of Canada......
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
ok, but isn't the short run moves 'what really drives profit' and not giving people actual health care?
yes, i do think health care is a right, it's in our best interests to have a healthy nation, i believe even George Washington thought the health and education of the people were 2 of the most deserving things a government should spend money on
healthcare is useless if the quality if shit and bankrupts this country. I'm all for reform of the current system, but UHC is not the answer.
Then what do you propose? Also, there seems to be plenty of evidence from those in the field of health care that the costs are not unmanageable and it might actually increase the freedom of people to choose doctors.
Maybe I'm just slow, but I don't understand how "people don't work for free" answers the question "what are your criteria for determining whether or not someone deserves health care". Will you please explain it a little more explicitly? I'm looking more for a checklist of qualifications or something. Like, what would be on your application/questionairre when you determine whether or not someone is deserving of health care.
And again, maybe I'm just slow, but I need to stick to one question at a time in order to follow the conversation.
you must be slow then sorry.
Count me in with her then... cos I don't get it either. How does that answer the question? The closest I can guess is that you're trying to say that one has to be employed to deserve health care without having to actually come out and say it?
I'm with scb also...jlew - please answer the question more specifically. The least you can do jlew, is be more specific of the criteria determining whether someone qualifies for health care or not. And I'm talking more than one short sentence.
ok, but isn't the short run moves 'what really drives profit' and not giving people actual health care?
yes, i do think health care is a right, it's in our best interests to have a healthy nation, i believe even George Washington thought the health and education of the people were 2 of the most deserving things a government should spend money on
healthcare is useless if the quality if shit and bankrupts this country. I'm all for reform of the current system, but UHC is not the answer.
uhc in principle is great ... but it will not work in the US ... it only works in conjunction with an overall socialized philosophy ... unfortunately, there are too many special interests groups that's purpose is to make mass profits ... you cannot base a health care system with that as your foundation ...
uhc is barely hanging on in canada here ... it's only surviving because most people believe in it but slowly and surely - those special interest groups are making their way into a system that is teetering ... it's been on a decline for 2 decades now ...
uhc in principle is great ... but it will not work in the US ... it only works in conjunction with an overall socialized philosophy ... unfortunately, there are too many special interests groups that's purpose is to make mass profits ... you cannot base a health care system with that as your foundation ...
uhc is barely hanging on in canada here ... it's only surviving because most people believe in it but slowly and surely - those special interest groups are making their way into a system that is teetering ... it's been on a decline for 2 decades now ...
What if we did away with the special interest groups?
uhc in principle is great ... but it will not work in the US ... it only works in conjunction with an overall socialized philosophy ... unfortunately, there are too many special interests groups that's purpose is to make mass profits ... you cannot base a health care system with that as your foundation ...
uhc is barely hanging on in canada here ... it's only surviving because most people believe in it but slowly and surely - those special interest groups are making their way into a system that is teetering ... it's been on a decline for 2 decades now ...
What if we did away with the special interest groups?
well ... you still have to convince half the population that a socialist idea is a good thing ... probably the bigger of the two challenges ...
uhc in principle is great ... but it will not work in the US ... it only works in conjunction with an overall socialized philosophy ... unfortunately, there are too many special interests groups that's purpose is to make mass profits ... you cannot base a health care system with that as your foundation ...
uhc is barely hanging on in canada here ... it's only surviving because most people believe in it but slowly and surely - those special interest groups are making their way into a system that is teetering ... it's been on a decline for 2 decades now ...
What if we did away with the special interest groups?
well ... you still have to convince half the population that a socialist idea is a good thing ... probably the bigger of the two challenges ...
we have public schools, we have food stamps, we have unemployment insurance, disability insurance, etc. i don't think we have too big of a problem embracing a 'social idea'.....since we already embrace many.
What if we did away with the special interest groups?
well ... you still have to convince half the population that a socialist idea is a good thing ... probably the bigger of the two challenges ...
we have public schools, we have food stamps, we have unemployment insurance, disability insurance, etc. i don't think we have too big of a problem embracing a 'social idea'.....since we already embrace many.
or maybe we do....remember a few years ago when Bush veto'd giving health insurance to everyone under 18? what was his reason? because it was too much like socialism.
we might not have a problem since there are already several socialistic programs but it's still a bad word to a large % of the population
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
we have public schools, we have food stamps, we have unemployment insurance, disability insurance, etc. i don't think we have too big of a problem embracing a 'social idea'.....since we already embrace many.
yeah ... but there are many who don't believe in even those things ...
we have public schools, we have food stamps, we have unemployment insurance, disability insurance, etc. i don't think we have too big of a problem embracing a 'social idea'.....since we already embrace many.
yeah ... but there are many who don't believe in even those things ...
point is....they DO exist and i doubt they're going anywhere either. so 'socialistic' ideas, in and of themselves....are not all viewed as *bad.* also, a big part of obama's platform was an overhaul/reform of healthcare...so i think there are a LOT more people willing to explore these ideas. do the majority want it? idk. however, i think many, many people re absolutely sick and tired - literally - of our current for profit, private healthcare industry.
uhc in principle is great ... but it will not work in the US ... it only works in conjunction with an overall socialized philosophy ... unfortunately, there are too many special interests groups that's purpose is to make mass profits ... you cannot base a health care system with that as your foundation ...
uhc is barely hanging on in canada here ... it's only surviving because most people believe in it but slowly and surely - those special interest groups are making their way into a system that is teetering ... it's been on a decline for 2 decades now ...
What if we did away with the special interest groups?
I'm all for that, but how exactly do you propose to do that?
point is....they DO exist and i doubt they're going anywhere either. so 'socialistic' ideas, in and of themselves....are not all viewed as *bad.* also, a big part of obama's platform was an overhaul/reform of healthcare...so i think there are a LOT more people willing to explore these ideas. do the majority want it? idk. however, i think many, many people re absolutely sick and tired - literally - of our current for profit, private healthcare industry.
i understand your point ... but my point is that socialist ideas only work when you have a majority buy in ... not when only half the population buys in ... it's like living in a village where half the people want to share their labour and the other doesn't ... inevitably the system breaks down ...
also - as silly as it was - the campaign against Obama were trying to pinpoint him as a "socialist" ... something that apparently pissed a lot of people off simply on the notion of the word ...
well ... you still have to convince half the population that a socialist idea is a good thing ... probably the bigger of the two challenges ...
but socialism is not a good thing. and can be proven.
is our form of capitalism proving to be a good thing? i guess for some
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
point is....they DO exist and i doubt they're going anywhere either. so 'socialistic' ideas, in and of themselves....are not all viewed as *bad.* also, a big part of obama's platform was an overhaul/reform of healthcare...so i think there are a LOT more people willing to explore these ideas. do the majority want it? idk. however, i think many, many people re absolutely sick and tired - literally - of our current for profit, private healthcare industry.
i understand your point ... but my point is that socialist ideas only work when you have a majority buy in ... not when only half the population buys in ... it's like living in a village where half the people want to share their labour and the other doesn't ... inevitably the system breaks down ...
also - as silly as it was - the campaign against Obama were trying to pinpoint him as a "socialist" ... something that apparently pissed a lot of people off simply on the notion of the word ...
and i understood yours. the real point is, neither you or i know, definitively what the majority wants.....and it could well be UHC. or not. also, many throw around 'labels' to combat an idea they're against, remember how everyone was a communist back in the 50s? or hell, even at the start of the iraq war, many were accusd of being against america and unpatriotic b/c they spoke out against dubya and the government? so yea...people can label away, doesn't make it fit......and 'socialist' idea or not, as i already said, we as a country already have in place many, many socialist programs. so we shall see just what america wants. one thing is for sure, whether UHC or some form....many, many people are quite unhappy with the status quo of our current healthcare industry and desire change. how much change? remains to be seen. altho even there, i personally imagine our actual citizens are open to a lot more ideas than our healthcare, for profit industry is....and that is the bigget obstacle. still, doesn't mean it can't be done.
and i understood yours. the real point is, neither you or i know, definitively what the majority wants.....and it could well be UHC. or not. also, many throw around 'labels' to combat an idea they're against, remember how everyone was a communist back in the 50s? or hell, even at the start of the iraq war, many were accusd of being against america and unpatriotic b/c they spoke out against dubya and the government? so yea...people can label away, doesn't make it fit......and 'socialist' idea or not, as i already said, we as a country already have in place many, many socialist programs. so we shall see just what america wants. one thing is for sure, whether UHC or some form....many, many people are quite unhappy with the status quo of our current healthcare industry and desire change. how much change? remains to be seen. altho even there, i personally imagine our actual citizens are open to a lot more ideas than our healthcare, for profit industry is....and that is the bigget obstacle. still, doesn't mean it can't be done.
point is....they DO exist and i doubt they're going anywhere either. so 'socialistic' ideas, in and of themselves....are not all viewed as *bad.* also, a big part of obama's platform was an overhaul/reform of healthcare...so i think there are a LOT more people willing to explore these ideas. do the majority want it? idk. however, i think many, many people re absolutely sick and tired - literally - of our current for profit, private healthcare industry.
i understand your point ... but my point is that socialist ideas only work when you have a majority buy in ... not when only half the population buys in ... it's like living in a village where half the people want to share their labour and the other doesn't ... inevitably the system breaks down ...
also - as silly as it was - the campaign against Obama were trying to pinpoint him as a "socialist" ... something that apparently pissed a lot of people off simply on the notion of the word ...
and i understood yours. the real point is, neither you or i know, definitively what the majority wants.....and it could well be UHC. or not. also, many throw around 'labels' to combat an idea they're against, remember how everyone was a communist back in the 50s? or hell, even at the start of the iraq war, many were accusd of being against america and unpatriotic b/c they spoke out against dubya and the government? so yea...people can label away, doesn't make it fit......and 'socialist' idea or not, as i already said, we as a country already have in place many, many socialist programs. so we shall see just what america wants. one thing is for sure, whether UHC or some form....many, many people are quite unhappy with the status quo of our current healthcare industry and desire change. how much change? remains to be seen. altho even there, i personally imagine our actual citizens are open to a lot more ideas than our healthcare, for profit industry is....and that is the bigget obstacle. still, doesn't mean it can't be done.
i think poll show over 70% of the population is in favor of UHC
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
Comments
no it's not your right...but you have the right to go to your township trustee and ask for assistance...and I'm sure they would direct you to a food kitchen or give you some vouchers to obtain food at a local grocery store
I don't have the right to enter your house and ask for a bandaid...not sure where you were going with that
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
Yes. That's why we have food stamps.
Maybe I'm just slow, but I don't understand how "people don't work for free" answers the question "what are your criteria for determining whether or not someone deserves health care". Will you please explain it a little more explicitly? I'm looking more for a checklist of qualifications or something. Like, what would be on your application/questionairre when you determine whether or not someone is deserving of health care.
And again, maybe I'm just slow, but I need to stick to one question at a time in order to follow the conversation.
if only UHC wasn't 4582x more expensive then food stamps, I might support it.
you must be slow then sorry.
Haha... you must not have an answer then.
I only "lurk" at times..and then...due to my personality.........feel a need to interject. I've read your posts scb. What I gather, from your postings, is that you're a hard-worker, and want to earn more money. (No doubt - for your family). I like you. As you strive to do better. I respect you for that reason. You also tend to be defensive. Another character trait I can identify with. Think out of the box. You'll figure it out. I have faith in you.
"Empty pockets will Allow a greater Sense of wealth...." EV/ITW
Count me in with her then... cos I don't get it either. How does that answer the question? The closest I can guess is that you're trying to say that one has to be employed to deserve health care without having to actually come out and say it?
ok, but isn't the short run moves 'what really drives profit' and not giving people actual health care?
yes, i do think health care is a right, it's in our best interests to have a healthy nation, i believe even George Washington thought the health and education of the people were 2 of the most deserving things a government should spend money on
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
healthcare is useless if the quality if shit and bankrupts this country. I'm all for reform of the current system, but UHC is not the answer.
teh rest of the world disagrees, but hey, if you're cool with having more uninsured americans than the entire population of Canada......
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
Then what do you propose? Also, there seems to be plenty of evidence from those in the field of health care that the costs are not unmanageable and it might actually increase the freedom of people to choose doctors.
uhc is barely hanging on in canada here ... it's only surviving because most people believe in it but slowly and surely - those special interest groups are making their way into a system that is teetering ... it's been on a decline for 2 decades now ...
What if we did away with the special interest groups?
well ... you still have to convince half the population that a socialist idea is a good thing ... probably the bigger of the two challenges ...
we have public schools, we have food stamps, we have unemployment insurance, disability insurance, etc. i don't think we have too big of a problem embracing a 'social idea'.....since we already embrace many.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
or maybe we do....remember a few years ago when Bush veto'd giving health insurance to everyone under 18? what was his reason? because it was too much like socialism.
we might not have a problem since there are already several socialistic programs but it's still a bad word to a large % of the population
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
yeah ... but there are many who don't believe in even those things ...
point is....they DO exist and i doubt they're going anywhere either. so 'socialistic' ideas, in and of themselves....are not all viewed as *bad.* also, a big part of obama's platform was an overhaul/reform of healthcare...so i think there are a LOT more people willing to explore these ideas. do the majority want it? idk. however, i think many, many people re absolutely sick and tired - literally - of our current for profit, private healthcare industry.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
but socialism is not a good thing. and can be proven.
I'm all for that, but how exactly do you propose to do that?
i understand your point ... but my point is that socialist ideas only work when you have a majority buy in ... not when only half the population buys in ... it's like living in a village where half the people want to share their labour and the other doesn't ... inevitably the system breaks down ...
also - as silly as it was - the campaign against Obama were trying to pinpoint him as a "socialist" ... something that apparently pissed a lot of people off simply on the notion of the word ...
is our form of capitalism proving to be a good thing? i guess for some
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
yes. capitalism has it flaws, all systems do. but its far better then socialism.
and i understood yours. the real point is, neither you or i know, definitively what the majority wants.....and it could well be UHC. or not. also, many throw around 'labels' to combat an idea they're against, remember how everyone was a communist back in the 50s? or hell, even at the start of the iraq war, many were accusd of being against america and unpatriotic b/c they spoke out against dubya and the government? so yea...people can label away, doesn't make it fit......and 'socialist' idea or not, as i already said, we as a country already have in place many, many socialist programs. so we shall see just what america wants. one thing is for sure, whether UHC or some form....many, many people are quite unhappy with the status quo of our current healthcare industry and desire change. how much change? remains to be seen. altho even there, i personally imagine our actual citizens are open to a lot more ideas than our healthcare, for profit industry is....and that is the bigget obstacle. still, doesn't mean it can't be done.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
how is public education working?
i think poll show over 70% of the population is in favor of UHC
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
our system has many attributes of socialism....social security/medicare being the obvious
UHC is required because the health care industry is raping the public....they are monopolies
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2