GOP Tea Party Debate: Audience Cheers, Says Society Should Let Uninsured Patient Die (enemy, thought)
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.
That's hilarious. Pay your own bill. Did you not see the poster in this very thread who said her husband got a $5,000 bill for THREE HOURS in the emergency room?
What are you, a multimillionaire? One of the fundamental problems in America is that health care and health insurance is TOO EXPENSIVE for most to be able to afford. And the worse the economy gets, the worse unemployment gets, the worse this problem will get. Oh, I know how to solve the problem - let 'em die!
Until we demand that our elected representatives do something to drastically lower health care costs, then health care will keep getting more expensive. It will be like college tuition, the only ones who can afford it will be the poor, who get government assistance, and the wealthy who can afford to pay the high costs.
The answer to lower health costs is not to just pass a law and let government simply absorb the current costs for health care, and then raise our taxes to make us to pay for it all.
Until we demand that our elected representatives do something to drastically lower health care costs, then health care will keep getting more expensive. It will be like college tuition, the only ones who can afford it will be the poor, who get government assistance, and the wealthy who can afford to pay the high costs.
The answer to lower health costs is not to just pass a law and let government simply absorb the current costs for health care, and then raise our taxes to make us to pay for it all.
It is already like that. Why do republicans act as if Obama ruined a perfectly fine system? Please expalin that one to me.
The people who shouted yes, more importantly, were happy to be allowing death. Paul carries his beliefs IMO to irrational lengths, but I did not sense any barbarism from him. I sensed far too much of it from the TP crowd. It should NOT have been an enthusiastic choice on their part.
This is most certainly true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadeInAmerica
That is exactly what it was.
Yes, the part of the audience that was cheering, should have boo'ed Wolf instead. I agree, that was pretty stupid.
Some people have to look at the options. If you understand Ron Paul's policy ideals, you would understand his real answer is quite logical.
I wish Ron would have modified one of his old answers and said, "Why is the only option for someone who denies insurance, death? Are you saying that nobody would take care of them? Nobody would want to come to their aid? And yet, your alternative is to force others to pay for him, force him to pay for something he might not be able to afford. Wolf, you're suggesting that this person can afford the extra $200-400 a month to begin with, and now that they can not afford to pay for this mandatory insurance, how do you expect them to survive? Take more money from more tax payers to prop up this one person? What about the other millions in the same boat? This bill will add up! The people were fooled into Obamacare being a social medicine program, but they received a government mandate to purchase insurance from Washington lobbyists instead."
In other words, you wanted Paul to evade the question?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn
Nothing merited cheering.
What he said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rugerjitsu
it would be nice to live in a country where people were given the choice of charitable actions, rather than being forced to pay the middleman (govt) in order to help out local folks that would be in this situation...
isn't that a real liberal/compassionate response? people helping people without the feeling of needing to be paid back? if this man was local to you, and you learned of how this situation through word of mouth, and local news...would you pull some money together to help him out? would you then maybe organize a grass roots group that willingly sought out people in bad situations around your local community to help when needed?
instead, we trust the gov't...that they'll take our money and put it to good use. this only slows the process down, and you can't guarantee that your money is being used appropriately.
i don't know...just my opinion, but i agree with Ron Paul. that's what freedom and liberty is all about...having choices.
The problem is, voluntary didn't work. That's how it was before Medicare, Medicaid, and the like. "The people" didn't contribute enough to meet the need. Like with all voluntary efforts, the same people did most of the work, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AONE
I don't think Ron Paul said he should be allowed to die... but that charities would step in and attend to him. Mind you I'm not a Repug fan but I am for accuracy. The moderator made the suggestion and the audience was jeering but I think it was more for Ron Paul saying people need to be able to make their own choices.
Seems like a very slanted story without stating what was really going on. Repugs do and say enough one doesn't have to fabricate stories to illustrate their warped POV.
No, Paul didn't say let people die. Some in the audience cheered when it was asked if that was an option. Those people showed their true colors, nothing more.
Location: Currently I physically reside on the 3rd planet from the sun
2,220 posts, read 1,880,995 times
Reputation: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn
The crowd tonight shamed America. That moment is something I'd expect in a Middle East regime. Barbaric.
Hmmmm, I didn't see the debate but I wonder what is barbaric about acknowledging the government cannot pay for everyone's health care, the current system is bankrupt and our government has encouraged people to rely on a system that cannot sustain them - that seems a little cruel to me.
As for private charitable organizations filling the void for those less fortunate, I don't understand what is barbaric about that? Until government begain meddling in these affairs this was fairly common in our society.
We have become a society that looks to government to take care of us and solve all our problems. We have gone so far as to claim health care is a right and arrogantly support a system that confiscates from those who produce to provide for those who do not. Am I the only one who can see how this system is rigged for failure by abuse?
The problem with this "compassionate" approach is it breeds a generation of ingrates who as stated above have no respect or appreciation for those who are providing for them and there is no accountability for the money dumped into this system.
I'm not saying there are perfect solutions but grow up people. If there is no money to pay for something, there is no money to pay for something.
Steve Forbes had an excellent idea in his 2000 campaign. Allow people to divert a portion of their pre-tax dollars to interest baring medical savings accounts. This allows them to create a 'fund' they can manage to help cover health care costs responsibly with the emphasis on managing what services they "buy" to "save" what they can to allow these funds to grow over time to help defray the costs of their healthcare. This is the reverse of what is common with government investment where if you do not spend your budget you are likely to lose it (it encourages irresposible management of finances)
No, thats not a pancea, my point is instead of railing at the unfair, mean, barbaric people who try to tell you we can't afford universal free health care provided by graft artists in Washington confiscating the wealth of others to provide for those less fortunate which in many cases include illegal aliens and yes, irresponsible and reckless people who go through life allowing other to pick up the pieces and clean up their messes -
There are alternate options, ideas and solutions if we look for them.
As for private charitable organizations filling the void for those less fortunate, I don't understand what is barbaric about that? Until government begain meddling in these affairs this was fairly common in our society.
It's not barbaric, it's unrealistic. It never happened, despite what some of the "Happy Days" folks like to think.
Funny, I was just reading a thread where folks were chortling about a hippy girl who fell out of a tree and broke her back.
It is pretty shocking.
I am deeply saddened by how the recent obsession with politics has eroded our fundamental decency and humanity.
Another observation you should have taken in, is how people purposefully misquote and distort what politicians say, in order to inflame an issue. Especially in a thread, where the title states that Paul said to "let uninsured patient die" when he did not say, let the person die.
I got a 2k bill for a 4 hour engine replacement on a chevy.....
your point?????
the FACT is a SERVICE is provided...why not pay for the service rendered...or do you just believe in RENIGING on YOUR responsibility??? Your point? This is an invalid comparison.
its not invalid
a person went to a doctor and received a bill...should that bill not be paid for that service the person received???
listen...either you belive in PAYING for a service...or you dont
I guess you people dont tip your waiter either...you expect SOMEONE ELSE to do it for you..or not do it at all...because 'everything' should be 'free'
whether I am getting a check-up on my body or a check-up(tune-up) on my car..I go to the specialist that will DO THE JOB...and then I PAY for the service RENDERED....its called being PART of a society...pay YOUR darn bill
Last edited by workingclasshero; 09-13-2011 at 09:08 AM..
Reason: my spelling/typing sucks
Katiana Wow, just wow!
Paul is crazy if he thinks churches are out paying people's hospital bills. A few churches have some "emergency funds" that might pick up $100 or so, but that's it.
He didn't say that, he was simply making a comment, about the way past...what happened...in the old days, people from the church, used to help each other, which, I might add, is how I grew up...we as neighbors, helped others out financially when they needed help, if a barn burnt down, (but back then, people were responsible, and it actually hurt they're pride to take) we all went and rebuilt that barn...and I'm not for Ron Paul, I was simply listening...however, he did not say he thinks that is what people should do now??????? He was simply stating what happened back then, he didn't mean we should do it now or that churches should now assume financial responsiblity for the medical bills of others.
Quote:
Dizzy from that spin,yet?
Dizzy b/c you refuse to view both sides, or even consider the opinions of others without trying to make them feel less then valid? Whenever someone has to insult another, b/c of they're opinion shows that that person, is unable to view both sides of the coin....and believe me, I'm expecting another insult from you.... or dizzy b/c you are unable to grasp the fact, that there are people in this world, who might disagree with you, and it doesn't mean, your an awful person...or inept, or you should be insulted, but you are dizzy b/c you are unable to allow others they're opinions, so you insult them to make yourself feel better....?
A discussion on these subjects are good...great as a matter of fact, but to attack others for they're opinion, proves that you can only see black and white and are unable to compromise, allow, and confident enough to say...."oh well, to each they're own" and move on without leaving a derogatory comment, or mocking someone.
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.
He didn't say that, he was simply making a comment, about the way past...what happened...in the old days, people from the church, used to help each other, which, I might add, is how I grew up...we as neighbors, helped others out financially when they needed help, if a barn burnt down, (but back then, people were responsible, and it actually hurt they're pride to take) we all went and rebuilt that barn...and I'm not for Ron Paul, I was simply listening...however, he did not say he thinks that is what people should do now??????? He was simply stating what happened back then, he didn't mean we should do it now or that churches should now assume financial responsiblity for the medical bills of others. 
