Universal health care- For or against? (premium, money, states, Florida)

[burdell]

Originally Posted by silas777

So where would you draw the line on that general welfare phrase Burdell?

That's a complex issue I couldn't begin to answer in a reasonable length of time but I most certainly wouldn't just take the knee-jerk position of "nothing for the people, let them help themselves".

I'd start with simple things like the alleged 'protection' of the people by not allowing them to order drugs from Canada, sounds more like protecting drug profits to me. And with all the anti-discrimination laws on the books why do uninsured individuals pay much higher rates than insurance companies to hospitals? And that's small potatoes. I don't think we'll make much progress at all until the phrase "I'm from the government, I'm here to help you" isn't terror inducing in most people.

The first line should probably be drawn at the entrance to Congress. Any member thinking his job is to further his/her own interests should be put on the first bus out of town.

[fishmonger]

Originally Posted by silas777

so does that include telephone? because without a phone you cant call 911 in case of an emergency!

Maybe if the private sector was unable or unwilling to provide telephone service to enough people that a large number of people went without telephones... I don't know the statistics on that, though. Maybe cities and counties should provide public telephones (or low-fee pay phones) in areas where lots of people don't have telephones... I don't know. I guess it could probably prevent a lot of crimes and deaths.

Are there areas where large numbers of people have no phone access? That could be pretty dangerous.

Then again... never mind, I'm stoned and don't know what I'm talking about.

[dreamofmonterey]

Originally Posted by fishmonger

Question not directed to me, but personally I'd say it should stop at the basic needs of existence... food, shelter, healthcare, police/fire protection, education, etc. The capitalist system isn't enough of a perfect meritocracy for anyone to definitively say that the extreme conditions of poverty and living below a survivable level are really a "just punishment" for a majority of those who experience it. To believe so (in my opinion) signifies coldness and social Darwinism.

and that punishment- and social darwinism- is an agenda created by-. ??...

Last time I checked, people being treated for rat bites and cancer at McLean Mass General was because they HAD NO community resources. This is all first hand- it was a quota my brother had in med school. This is AMERICA- 2007 and people are living in the streets with babies, and getting typhoid Something is wrong here, folks.

[JerZ]

Originally Posted by silas777

so does that include telephone? because without a phone you cant call 911 in case of an emergency!

That was a little silly. Where's the comparison? There's a difference between saying, "Hi, neighbor. I'm sick. Can I borrow your phone?" and saying, "Hi, neighbor. I'm sick. Can I borrow $30,000?" (I'm thinking, could be wrong, that the fear her is, "Oh, if we offer health care to everyone, where will it end? Will we have to pay for phones for everyone too?" I think that's extreme.)

I don't think free phones need to be given to people just in case they get sick. You can borrow the phone for three seconds and it hardly costs anyone a thing; and in fact you don't actually need a phone at all, but could go to, or be taken to, the hospital. But healthcare is necessary when people are sick, and is not a question of just knocking on a door and being nice and asking for the use of a phone. I don't really see where the comparison was there.

But then again, I'm a tree-hugging pinko who thinks we're a society because, well, we're...a society. Which to my mind means we do take care of one another. (Commie alert, commie alert, yada yada, sigh.)

And for the record, yes, I have health insurance. It is through my husband's company. I worked for twenty years at companies that provided insurance. Between my amount and the company's portion, my working history has been paying into the health care system for TWO DECADES to the tune of many thousands of dollars which I have not (thank goodness) collected on in full, or even close. BUT if my husband's company were to drop insurance tomorrow, and one of us got sick, none of that would matter--we'd be scr*wed and left to rot. Even if it were one of the children. I definitely feel there's something wrong with that. The idea here seems to be that it's all or nothing: There are some people who NEVER pay their own health care and some who ALWAYS do. But obviously this is not the case. There are people who pay and pay and pay and then perhaps lose a job and hence the health care.

[spunky1]

So basically, you want the government to take care of you, bottom line.

[silas777]

Originally Posted by ShadowXOR

I would be more than willing to help foot your bills through a universal health care system if I made far more than you.

so i will ask you the same thing i asked sunny and never got an answer. (if I made far more than you) does this mean you think only the wealthy should pay for everyon elses healthcare?

[silas777]

Originally Posted by sunnyhelena

Actually- Dishnetwork went out this evening for 3 hours and I had to call to complain- they make $280.00 month off me for mediocre programming.

Did I say I wanted to pay for Warren Buffets healthcare?. He could have paid for my fathers, who was in the Korean War.

Seriously ? $280.00 a month for tv? That would go along way to paying for health insurance

[spunky1]

Originally Posted by silas777

so i will ask you the same thing i asked sunny and never got an answer. (if I made far more than you) does this mean you think only the wealthy should pay for everyon elses healthcare?

Evidentally so . . . I would guess Shadow is young and idealistic, and when he is making more money will not be so willing. . . and his qualifier "if I make far more money than you" is interesting.

[carolinajack]

i am against universal health care

[fishmonger]

Originally Posted by spunky1

So basically, you want the government to take care of you, bottom line.

And in many ways so do you, I'd imagine. What do you think we have firemen, police, and a millitary for?

Or are you one of those extreme right econ-libertarians who thinks we should privatize those as well?