If a person gets sick with a disease or disability they can't afford or not covered by insurance, who should pay for it? (financial, programs)

[weltschmerz]

Originally Posted by fumbling

Sorry for the language but this is one of the stupidest statements I've seen in all the threads pertaining to this issue.

Buckle up. It's still early.

[weltschmerz]

Originally Posted by janelle144

It would have if you had no home or any material wealth. I see you got through it and still have your computer.

No, it wouldn't. We tried.

Well, if I still have a computer, then no harm done, eh? All is well.

[fumbling]

Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow

Oh the spin.

NO, what you fail to understand, like always, is that the difference between what this person's mother did, and being stuck on a waiting list until you die, is that she CHOSE to refuse medical treatment.

Seriously, you people are desperate.

That's another republican talking point that's been thoroughly discredited by real Britons and Canadians. Seriously, you anti-healthcare people are desperate.

[janelle144]

Originally Posted by Votre_Chef

Yes, both stories were reported, within their proper context, in the mainstream, legitimate press. Perhaps you missed it.

I thought you were going to tell us the whole story, guess you really don't know.

[janelle144]

Originally Posted by weltschmerz

No, it wouldn't. We tried.

Well, if I still have a computer, then no harm done, eh? All is well.

You never said it wasn't and you are now on welfare.

[fumbling]

Originally Posted by janelle144

It would have if you had no home or any material wealth. I see you got through it and still have your computer.

So you favor the approach of health care issues consuming all of a household's wealth and home? This is not just stupid but callous.

[Votre_Chef]

Originally Posted by janelle144

I thought you were going to tell us the whole story, guess you really don't know.

Harry Reid's cancer comments from The Atlantic:

Come On, No. Harry Reid Doesn't Hate Kids with Cancer - Abby Ohlheiser - The Atlantic Wire


Politifact on Limbaugh's claim that Sebelius was the one person who would determine whether little girl dies or not:


PolitiFact | Rush Limbaugh says HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was the "one person" to determine fate of 10-year-old lung patient Sarah Murnaghan

[fumbling]

Originally Posted by janelle144

I thought you were going to tell us the whole story, guess you really don't know.

Everyone who reads and listens to the news knows the whole story, that it was in response to a Republican ploy to selectively open certain programs during the shutdown, and Harry Reid said why should he agree to selectively open certain government programs, he wants the shutdown to end so all government programs are reopened. Again I hate to use strong language but in trying to pass that story off, you are either stupid or you think CD posters are stupid.

[janelle144]

Originally Posted by fumbling

So you favor the approach of health care issues consuming all of a household's wealth and home? This is not just stupid but callous.

Not at all, we do have a saftey net, people should not be saying we don't.

[fumbling]

Originally Posted by janelle144

Not at all, we do have a saftey net, people should not be saying we don't.

I know your MIL and FIL had safety nets paid for by taxpayers like me but what safety net do middle class people have who are denied health insurance because of pre existing conditions?