Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Health care is not a right, plain & simple. Neither is health insurance. Health insurance is a risk based product.
Let's not confuse the Hippocratic oath and altruism with a right either. We should be teaching more people to help their fellow neighbor rather than let the government do it and screw it up. We should be working harder to eliminate insurance companies or making them the last resort for people to use for health care. Bottom line is that this country is over-insured or over-dependent on insurance companies. I have no problem with insurance companies trying to make money but at this point they are controlling too much of the health care market.
I agree with old_cold, why are not food and shelter rights before health care?
Interesting.
All these people at the tea parties think we should be responsible for our own health care and they don't want to help anyone get health care.
We'll always have a certain segment that doesn't want to help the less fortunate.
How exactly would we have a health care system where we don't have insurance companies and the government isn't paying the medical bills of its citizens?
and where I live the housing is expensive...so is the food....hmmm food and shelter are a NECESSARY,,,health care is a lot lower on the list...so until the 'government' is going to supply EVERYONE with food and shelter..quit talking out your rear about healthcare
Health care along with water, food, cloths and shelter are neither a Right nor a Privilege. They are a NECESSITY. A moral society will provide these for everyone before they allow any individuals to be wealthy.
Besides a healthy society is more able to generate wealth because healthy workers work harder and smarter and produce more and bigger profits for the owners. Supporting a universal health care system with a progressive income tax is a good investment for the wealthy. The really wealthy won’t miss the money anyway.
All these people at the tea parties think we should be responsible for our own health care and they don't want to help anyone get health care.
We'll always have a certain segment that doesn't want to help the less fortunate.
How exactly would we have a health care system where we don't have insurance companies and the government isn't paying the medical bills of its citizens?
You think I should pay for my health insurance and healthcare and pay for someone else also
How is that fair? I didnt ask you to pay for my suurgery when I didnt have health insurance and had to have surgery
Why do you want the poor to be dependent? Why dont you want them to improve their lives?
Health care along with water, food, cloths and shelter are neither a Right nor a Privilege. They are a NECESSITY. A moral society will provide these for everyone before they allow any individuals to be wealthy.
Besides a healthy society is more able to generate wealth because healthy workers work harder and smarter and produce more and bigger profits for the owners. Supporting a universal health care system with a progressive income tax is a good investment for the wealthy. The really wealthy won’t miss the money anyway.
Cool then you'll pay for my house right? So my husband can not work or maybe just work part time
I'll send you an email or something so you know where to send the checks
Jadex - I am not wealthy enough to be considered on my tax plan. When I say shelter I do not mean a house on an acre in a suburb. I mean a, as you are in Florida, a cracker shack in the swamp. Shelter is shelter not luxury.
You think I should pay for my health insurance and healthcare and pay for someone else also
How is that fair? I didnt ask you to pay for my suurgery when I didnt have health insurance and had to have surgery
Why do you want the poor to be dependent? Why dont you want them to improve their lives?
Wouldn't access to health care improve their lives?
We're all dependent on someone unless you're independently wealthy.
If your employer decides to do away with your health insurance, there is no recourse. They aren't required by law to supply you with health insurance.
We're dependent on our employers for our $.
Over the years, the number of employers offering health insurance has been dropping. The ones that plan to offer it in the future plan to move toward high deductible plans. Studies have shown those on high deductible plans are less likely to go to the doctor because they're worried about money.
We'll always have a certain segment that doesn't want to help the less fortunate.
Yes, and typically that's the liberals, who believe someone ELSE (say, those evil conservatives) should pay to help the less fortunate (often meaning said liberals).
If you peruse the tax returns for candidates required by law to disclose them (e.g. Presidential candidates) you will learn that conservative candidates gave FIVE TIMES as much to charity as did liberal candidates.
The real difference is that conservatives believe that most people are responsible adults who can generally be trusted to do the right thing, whereas liberals believe that most people (other than themselves, of course) are ignorant children who are all so selfish that they must be forced to do the right thing. Of course, this is right in line with the typical attitudes of adults and children, respectively...
===============
Every discussion of this sort of thing devolves down to the same basic arguments from the leftwing-liberal camp:
Taxes didn't work to pay for gov't extravagance, so we need more taxes.
Welfare didn't work to reduce poverty, so we need more welfare.
Insurance (meaning HMOs and Medicare) didn't work to reduce healthcare costs, so we need more insurance.
Being a modern leftwing-liberal isn't a political stance; it's a learning disability!!
.
Last edited by Reziac; 11-12-2009 at 07:45 AM..
Reason: unclearfulness
Jadex - I am not wealthy enough to be considered on my tax plan. When I say shelter I do not mean a house on an acre in a suburb. I mean a, as you are in Florida, a cracker shack in the swamp. Shelter is shelter not luxury.
I gather you would agree then, that any plan under consideration should not allow for subsidies to anybody that lives in any manner above true poverty level?
We already have that....it's called Medicaid
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
