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.
Hurray to us, that's how we take care of business ourselves as a Christian nation, so help us God: 50 million people with no health care coverage in one of the richest countries in the world, endless number of bankrupcies due to people's inability to cover their skyrocketting medical bills, people dying premature deaths from not being able to afford preventive care or address a health condition in its early symptoms, insured sick people being denied insurance coverage due to "preexisting conditions", pregnant women with no prenatal care, the highest underweight babies rate in US in 40 years, the list goes on and on.
"If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the towns of the land that the LORD your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward your poor brother." Deuteronomy 15:7
P.S. Thank you, PurpleLove08.
Your kidding right? Our deficit is bigger than most countries economies.
We used to be the richest country in the world but runaway unchecked gov't spending changed all that.
Drop pre-existing conditions. Why? Because YOU think it unfair, so sluff off any unaccountable liabilities on the money making big, bad insurance companies. Typical progressive liberal whining! Just like They already ARE paying most of the taxes. No logical basis in reality. It's an actuarial risk that MUST BE accounted for. It could be allowed for with some sort of government tax-revenue/insurance partnership arrangement to cover only pre-existing conditions for which a premium would be charged, but creative thinking isn't in the liberal bag.
Lower insurance premiums to make them more affordable. WHY? You need to learn some business basics and with insurance,asw with all commerce, competition determines any profit range. That is likely a toally alien concept for you to come to grips with. They all work with very similiar actuarial stats and standard policy provisions to determine premiums. You don't just "make them affordable". Unbelievable!
Offer subsidies to the poor. HUH! In this country? Do you want me to rattle off the many, many programs designed especially for the poor, many of which are regularly abused. Programs designed as giveaways to the poor ARE SUBSIDIES and many are unfunded mandates to the states and are breaking this antion financially. In no nation on Earth are the poor so provided for as here...and you libs always resort to whining about "the poor". Step back from the Kool-Aid machine please..., you've had too much already.
Only you who appear to want Obacare always make it as an either or choice. It isn't! This country currently has three government-run health programs available to it's citizens. They are Medicaid for the poor and Medicare for the elderly. In addition, veterans are provided for with care via The Veteran's Administration. The "reasonable" thing would be to fix that which ALL agree is broken, NOT to use public reliance upon government AS AN EXCUSE to enable a complete takeover of 17% of the country's economy. YOU and your pals always deride the insurance companies, the banks, big commerce of all kinds for their terrible profits.
Please to tell me HOW without them and more like them, inspired to a system that rewards creative risk-taking and good business sense with profit, we would STILL have grown to become the most successful example of free enterprise in the world while being the envy for all other nations who mimic us successfully. No better example than post WWII era Japan, later South Korea and other Pacific rim countries while the European nations mainly, save for Germany, languish in assorted socialism patterns stagnating so bad they had to form the European Union for survival. Show me where your idea of big government, all-providing socialism has worked successfuly over the long haul.
OR...Step up to the mark and take the challenge I made at my last post before this..., right at the end.
doctorhugo, Your many years of travel and experience on this planet have you ever made a claim to an insurance company over car damage, made a claim because your house was damaged by severe hail or items stolen? How smooth was the payments to you, how much did you have to push the issue with the insurance company to get compensation?
...upon you to return. Not having read ANY of my comments, such as this excerpt, you launch another display of raw ignorance:
Quote:
This country currently has three government-run health programs available to it's citizens. They are Medicaid for the poor and Medicare for the elderly. In addition, veterans are provided for with care via The Veteran's Administration. The "reasonable" thing would be to fix that which ALL agree is broken, NOT to use public reliance upon government AS AN EXCUSE to enable a complete takeover of 17% of the country's economy.
You'll note I defined it as a "government-run" program...'duhhh', as you like to say!
You lashed out in knee-jerk, predictable fashion with this:
Originally Posted by learningCA Well, for a start, those who enjoy Medicare right now are fiercely defending it against anyone attempting to make the smallest change to it.
Medicare is a government ran program, isn't it, doctor Hugo?
"Yes, they've been tricked by Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh into believing that health care reform will somehow involve golden-grilled ACORN thugs showing up at bingo with a tray of syringes filled with black liberal death juice. Yes, they've been tricked by Sean Hannity and Lou Dobbs into thinking that this 'halfrican American' president with his terrorist pals and his Kenyan birth certificate is trying to supplant God's U.S. government with a liberal fascist homocracy."
This sort of response is why I call you a "bomb-thrower". It takes no intelligence whatsoever and a fear of real honest debate to constantly, almost without exception, self-indulge onesself in gratuitous and quite defining infantile displays of irrelevance.
Yet another perfect example wherein you defined yourself. I'm merely laying it out for you here. Despite my comment upon a "reasonable" option above, in that same excerpt you failed to read, I negated all you said. Since you cannot expound sufficiently upon your own thoughts or lack the ability to formulate such you continue to lift content from various sources and bomb-throw with it.
As a reward for such wasting of my time I've added you to my personal short list of those for whom I give the Nixonian "benign neglect" treatment to. Feel free to continue your "bomb throwing" and impatiently awaiting the reply that will never come. Bye-bye...
The subject here is neither auto insurance nor homeowners' insurance, but a fair try at a diversionary flanking attack.
If you post on those topics I'll be more than glad to respond though. I guarantee it.
Apparently you know if you were honest with me about your experiences from the questions I've posted you'll know what my response will be. Nice dodge, at least you've answered my questions without answering them.
Here is the Kaiser poll the Doc so graciously made us aware of. http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/8042-F.pdf
A lot of very interesting information, I don't, however, see how it supports the Docs assertion. But I may have lost track of what the assertion was in the rhetoric. 42% for, 41% against and 16% uncertain. The specific proposals are divided, to be sure, yet I suspect many of those undecided are so, because neither plan calls for Universal Coverage.
That would be great. I hope they have the strength of character to do it.
If their character was strong - they would spell out at least some of the taxes, fees, and penalties in this bill if you don't comply with the regulations.
If their character was strong, they wouldn't make these deals while hiding in the broom closet.
If he stopped pissing money away it would be doable. The problem? Now that he's the president he see's how impossible politicians, like him, make it to acomplish anything.
He's not "pissing money away." And I'd say he never expected this level of resentment and babyish stonewalling that has worked to the detriment of the entire country that the right presents in their insane slobbering need to get back into power.
If he stopped pissing money away it would be doable. The problem? Now that he's the president he see's how impossible politicians, like him, make it to acomplish anything.
That is a very good point well taken. I could see how easy it is to say so much during an election, once your nominated, I believe those who have been president, see just how many of the promises, or expectations, are not able to be followed out. That go's for both sides, Once they make it to the Presidency, they see just how impossible some of there visions are.
Obama admits health care overhaul may die on Hill - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100205/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaul - broken link)
I can't say I'm crying buckets.
My heart goes out to those who are uninsured, who have high premiums, have high deductibles, etc but this bill Congress put together is not the direction our country needs to go in.
We can learn a lot from all the other industrialized countries that have managed to figure out universal health care. We are the only industrialized country that doesn't guarantee health care to all it's citizens. Let's take a look at Germany, France, the UK, and Canada. They all get very good marks in certain areas.
Look, all parties agree there is too much debt in america right?
We also know universal healthcare is going to cost money, its not going to be free. Only the most ignorant people will argue it will be cheaper, it won't. The claim is that america lets sick people die without treatment, well that should save usa money compared to the other nations because we don't treat our sick.
So.
according to the cia factbook debt level of various nations
usa who is in far too much debt according to everyone including obama 40%
Countries with universal healthcare
Germany 77
France 79
Canada 72
Uk 68
So let me get this straight, USA has far too much debt, yet all the countries who have put taxes on their great great grandchildren like canada and have universal healthcare are better off. Right!
When universal healthcare comes around cost will creep up like in MASS. and then they will raise taxes until there is no more income left to tax, then you will have 300 million people dependent on gov't health and as soon as we are all dependent on it, we will be in 80% debt of our gdp like france and we will have to slowly dismantle the system until we end up like canada, waiting forever for healthcare
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.
.
Ah yes like the bad penny I can always depend ...
