72% of Americans support government run healthcare

[Cecilie1200]

Enough already. Anyone who wants to wave the WHO's results in our faces is hereby exempted from being able to nitpick whether or not their detractors are "biased" on the grounds of extreme hypocrisy. It's long past time you stop running and hiding like poltroons and answer the charges against your claims with something other than trying to kill the messenger.

So let's hear it, cowards. WHO's stats are seriously flawed. What's your response? And it had better be good, or I for one am going to assume that you're surrendering.

 

[Political Junky]

If this were even vaguely less retarded, I would point out that there's a difference between the AMA having a lobbying group, and BEING one. But this drooler is too dumb to even dignify that much.

Yeah, I mean what reason is there to think that an organization funded mainly by pharmaceutical companies might be biased

The AMA is more likely to take liberal than conservative positions politically, dipshit. And you aren't really stupid enough to think you're going to get traction from screaming "Evil pharmaceuticals!" around HERE, are you? Oh, wait, I forgot who I was talking to. Never mind.

What, in God's name, seems vaguely Liberal about the AMA?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Yeah, I mean what reason is there to think that an organization funded mainly by pharmaceutical companies might be biased

The AMA is more likely to take liberal than conservative positions politically, dipshit. And you aren't really stupid enough to think you're going to get traction from screaming "Evil pharmaceuticals!" around HERE, are you? Oh, wait, I forgot who I was talking to. Never mind.

What, in God's name, seems vaguely Liberal about the AMA?

In 2008, the AMA issued a policy statement on global climate change declaring that they "support the findings of the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, which states that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that these changes will negatively affect public health."

They advocate draconian gun control.

There are other things, but unfortunately, I have to go to an appointment, so I don't have time to look it up right now. I'll be back later and post more on the subject.

 

[Aristophanes]

Seventy-two percent of those questioned said they backed a government-administered insurance plan similar to Medicare for those under 65 that would compete for customers with the private sector. Twenty percent said they were opposed.

Wide support for government health plan: poll | Reuters

And herein is the BS that the hackjob Reuters journo-wanna-be reports as "72% of Americans support national healthcare."

Uh...no, they don't. 72% of Americans support the idea of a solvent, government-run system that has to compete in the private sector. Well so what? That's not that bad of an idea. It's unconstitutional and illegal and I don't support the idea, but it's not THAT odious.

If you asked them if they would support a government-run plan that would undercut all competition unfairly by not having the requirement to be solvent, having all its financial shortfalls monetized by tax payer subsidies or just printing the cash, and a government plan whose managers (the 536 morons in DC) would manipulate the tax code in order to force you onto the government plan so they would achieve another unfair edge over private options, you'd be lucky to find 10% support.

Americans aren't going to get the kind of heath care plan out of Washington that they are being told they'll get - that's why the support is so high. We're being lied to.

 

[Political Junky]

The AMA is more likely to take liberal than conservative positions politically, dipshit. And you aren't really stupid enough to think you're going to get traction from screaming "Evil pharmaceuticals!" around HERE, are you? Oh, wait, I forgot who I was talking to. Never mind.

What, in God's name, seems vaguely Liberal about the AMA?

In 2008, the AMA issued a policy statement on global climate change declaring that they "support the findings of the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, which states that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that these changes will negatively affect public health."

They advocate draconian gun control.

There are other things, but unfortunately, I have to go to an appointment, so I don't have time to look it up right now. I'll be back later and post more on the subject.

Most scientists, worldwide, believe in the adverse effects of climate change. It's not a Liberal notion even if most wingnuts deny it.

 

[Aristophanes]

Most scientists, worldwide, believe in the adverse effects of climate change. It's not a Liberal notion even if most wingnuts deny it.

So? According to the most recent election returns from Iran, 65% of Iranians voted for Ahmedinejad. Does that mean he's legitimate? Of course not.

There is no such thing as truth via concensus. People are not arbiters of the truth. The sad FACT of the matter is that the FACTS of the matter tend to show that there is no such thing as ANTHROPOGENIC global warming. Nobody contests the fact that the average global temperature may vary. It's the caus(es) of that variation that are in dispute.

CO2 concentrations in the atmopshere are higher now than they have ever been, and the rate at which CO2 is emitted into the atmosphere is higher now than it has ever been - yet for the past 11 years, the average global temperature has remained flat, or gone down. That means there is no correlation between CO2 emissions and the average global temperature, but we're trying to pass a cap and trade bill anyway. THAT in turn means cap and trade isn't about AGW, but instead is about government control.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I'd say the Canadian who has to wait six months for radiation treatment aren't too happy with their free health plan or their grieving loved ones...

nobody is advocating copying the Canadian system you moron. How about American ingenuity? We can and will build a better health care system after we shut people like you up.

Yes, because America is ALL about shutting up the opposition and building something "better" without hearing from people we don't like . . . oh wait, it's not.

obstruction is NOT an opinion --- unless one is a rabid ideologue

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I'd say the Canadian who has to wait six months for radiation treatment aren't too happy with their free health plan or their grieving loved ones...

nobody is advocating copying the Canadian system you moron. How about American ingenuity? We can and will build a better health care system after we shut people like you up.

Yes the left ilk in Congress wants to spend 3 trillion dollars to fuck up our health care. Your right, the Canadians would never think of being that fucking loony.

I don't see anyone on medicaid/medicare or the government's health care plan (Congress et al) screaming for a private hand on their policies.

 

[Aristophanes]

I don't see anyone on medicaid/medicare or the government's health care plan (Congress et al) screaming for a private hand on their policies. [/SIZE]

Well duh.

Congress is special, and they don't have the play by the rules. They get their OWN plan, and it's better than whatever they'll be giving us.

 

[Derek_Plumber]

Give this one more look.​

Wide support for government health plan: poll


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Americans strongly support fundamental changes to the healthcare system and a move to create a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll published on Saturday.

The poll came amid mounting opposition to plans by the Obama administration and its allies in the Democratic-controlled Congress to push through the most sweeping restructuring of the U.S. healthcare system since the end of World War Two.

Republicans and some centrist Democrats oppose increasing the government's role in healthcare -- it already runs the Medicare and Medicaid systems for the elderly and indigent -- fearing it would require vast public funds and reduce the quality of care.

But the Times/CBS poll found 85 percent of respondents wanted major healthcare reforms and most would be willing to pay higher taxes to ensure everyone had health insurance. An estimated 46 million Americans currently have no coverage.

Seventy-two percent of those questioned said they backed a government-administered insurance plan similar to Medicare for those under 65 that would compete for customers with the private sector. Twenty percent said they were opposed.

President Barack Obama and many Democrats in Congress have argued a publicly run healthcare insurance plan would increase competition and drive down the high cost of care at a time when the U.S. economy is mired in a deep recession.

Republicans argue a public plan would drive insurers out of business and lead to a government-run healthcare system.

Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives suggested this week that all Americans should be able to get insurance regardless of medical history and that coverage should be mandatory for individuals and businesses.

The proposal, contained in the latest House draft of the healthcare bill, would create new insurance exchanges where people shop around for health coverage. Whether a government-run plan has a role in such an exchange has spurred serious political debate.

Republicans, the minority party in Congress, have proposed more modest healthcare changes, but lack the votes in the House or Senate to push them through or derail the Democrats' health reform drive. They have warned about the expected high cost of restructuring the healthcare system, projected at more than $1.5 trillion -- a huge expense for a nation carrying record budget deficits.

The Republicans also hope to gain traction by playing on fears a vast expansion of government could further hurt the economy and reduce the quality of medical care.

The poll found that people were uneasy about heightened government involvement in the healthcare sector, with 77 percent saying they were very or somewhat satisfied with the quality of their own care.

A total of 895 adults participated in the telephone survey, which was conducted from June 12 to 16 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Give this one more look.​

But the Times/CBS poll found 85 percent of respondents wanted major healthcare reforms and most would be willing to pay higher taxes to ensure everyone had health insurance. An estimated 46 million Americans currently have no coverage.

here's an idea

How about those who want the government controlling their health care have their taxes raised and leave us folks who like our insurance alone.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What, in God's name, seems vaguely Liberal about the AMA?

In 2008, the AMA issued a policy statement on global climate change declaring that they "support the findings of the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, which states that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that these changes will negatively affect public health."

They advocate draconian gun control.

There are other things, but unfortunately, I have to go to an appointment, so I don't have time to look it up right now. I'll be back later and post more on the subject.

Most scientists, worldwide, believe in the adverse effects of climate change. It's not a Liberal notion even if most wingnuts deny it.

Actually, the notion that "most scientists" believe in manmade catastrophic climate change is itself a leftist notion. The idea that the AMA should be taking a position on it is ALSO a leftist notion.

 

[Cecilie1200]

nobody is advocating copying the Canadian system you moron. How about American ingenuity? We can and will build a better health care system after we shut people like you up.

Yes, because America is ALL about shutting up the opposition and building something "better" without hearing from people we don't like . . . oh wait, it's not.

obstruction is NOT an opinion --- unless one is a rabid ideologue

I would call the desire to silence all opposition the REAL obstruction here, and I would definitely call the person - you - who believes that his ideas are so right and virtuous that they should transcend the right of anyone to disagree with them and justify suppression a "rabid idealogue".

On the other hand, "Your idea is complete shit" is a perfectly valid opinion, and if your idea happens to be obstructed by enough people who think it's complete shit, well . . . that still doesn't make it any less of a valid opinion.

 

[Cecilie1200]

nobody is advocating copying the Canadian system you moron. How about American ingenuity? We can and will build a better health care system after we shut people like you up.

Yes the left ilk in Congress wants to spend 3 trillion dollars to fuck up our health care. Your right, the Canadians would never think of being that fucking loony.

I don't see anyone on medicaid/medicare or the government's health care plan (Congress et al) screaming for a private hand on their policies.

That's because welfare recipients are generally, by definition, lazy, dependent fuckers without the gumption to come in out of the rain. Although I personally know quite a few who aren't exactly all sunshine and puppies about dealing with government bureaucracy.

It's not that hard at all, however, to find Medicare recipients who are seriously pissed off at having to deal with the government's red tape. If you can't find any, that begs the serious question of where the hell you're looking.

 

[JW Frogen]

99% of Americans believe they don't look fat in that.

They are wrong.

 

[MaggieMae]

Yes the left ilk in Congress wants to spend 3 trillion dollars to fuck up our health care. Your right, the Canadians would never think of being that fucking loony.

I don't see anyone on medicaid/medicare or the government's health care plan (Congress et al) screaming for a private hand on their policies.

That's because welfare recipients are generally, by definition, lazy, dependent fuckers without the gumption to come in out of the rain. Although I personally know quite a few who aren't exactly all sunshine and puppies about dealing with government bureaucracy.
Great...another feminazi joins the fray.

It's not that hard at all, however, to find Medicare recipients who are seriously pissed off at having to deal with the government's red tape. If you can't find any, that begs the serious question of where the hell you're looking.

Several members of my family, as well as many friends are on Medicare and not a single one has ever had a problem with "red tape." They've had a problem with doctors overbilling, however, which means that what Medicare won't pay for, they must, and it's often outrageous. Some doctors in my community (and we all know who they are) also have now started robo-calling Medicare patients around the first of every year, knowing full well that Medicare recipients are entering into a new deductible phase. That means they get to collect FROM THE PATIENT the full amount up front. Neat, huh?

 

[jreeves]

I don't see anyone on medicaid/medicare or the government's health care plan (Congress et al) screaming for a private hand on their policies.

That's because welfare recipients are generally, by definition, lazy, dependent fuckers without the gumption to come in out of the rain. Although I personally know quite a few who aren't exactly all sunshine and puppies about dealing with government bureaucracy.
Great...another feminazi joins the fray.

It's not that hard at all, however, to find Medicare recipients who are seriously pissed off at having to deal with the government's red tape. If you can't find any, that begs the serious question of where the hell you're looking.

Several members of my family, as well as many friends are on Medicare and not a single one has ever had a problem with "red tape." They've had a problem with doctors overbilling, however, which means that what Medicare won't pay for, they must, and it's often outrageous. Some doctors in my community (and we all know who they are) also have now started robo-calling Medicare patients around the first of every year, knowing full well that Medicare recipients are entering into a new deductible phase. That means they get to collect FROM THE PATIENT the full amount up front. Neat, huh?

We can afford providing health care for 47 million uninsured Americans and non-Americans about, as much as, we can afford a nuke going off in the middle of New York City.

 

[Chris]

Yes the left ilk in Congress wants to spend 3 trillion dollars to fuck up our health care. Your right, the Canadians would never think of being that fucking loony.

I don't see anyone on medicaid/medicare or the government's health care plan (Congress et al) screaming for a private hand on their policies.

That's because welfare recipients are generally, by definition, lazy, dependent fuckers without the gumption to come in out of the rain. Although I personally know quite a few who aren't exactly all sunshine and puppies about dealing with government bureaucracy.

It's not that hard at all, however, to find Medicare recipients who are seriously pissed off at having to deal with the government's red tape. If you can't find any, that begs the serious question of where the hell you're looking.

A single payer system is more efficient because it eliminates red tape and overhead for 150 different insurance companies. That is why the rest of the world pays HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare and covers everyone.

 

[jreeves]

I don't see anyone on medicaid/medicare or the government's health care plan (Congress et al) screaming for a private hand on their policies.

That's because welfare recipients are generally, by definition, lazy, dependent fuckers without the gumption to come in out of the rain. Although I personally know quite a few who aren't exactly all sunshine and puppies about dealing with government bureaucracy.

It's not that hard at all, however, to find Medicare recipients who are seriously pissed off at having to deal with the government's red tape. If you can't find any, that begs the serious question of where the hell you're looking.

A single payer system is more efficient because it eliminates red tape and overhead for 150 different insurance companies. That is why the rest of the world pays HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare and covers everyone.

yep and why they wait for MRI's and CT scans too...

 

[tyronemcclurkin]

Look how the federal government handled social security......enough said