During GOP Debate, when RP asked about sick young man audience yells "Let him DIE!".

[WillowTree]

Considering the premise of the question was a 30yr old who could afford it, but chose not to, I'd say he was a very irresponsible individual to not look out for his family.
JMO, but then again, I don't believe you can hold folks hand to make them responsible.

There IS no such thing as personal responsibility to liberals. It's governmental responsibility. Cradle, to grave. You should never have to be responsible for anything yourself. You're not smart enough. Government is smart enough, wise enough. Let them manage your life for you. Sit back, Relax. Enjoy the free ride.

You guys got this really warped sense of personal responsibility and just about everything else. We live in a nation so rich that there are people in it with wealth so vast that it would be impossible for one person to count it. Even if they had a 100 lifetimes and spent all their time doing it. But somehow it's acceptable to you guys to have people live in filth and squalor. It's acceptable that people have to lose everything they have because they get sick.

That's really, really off the scale.

you aren't paying attention are you moron, this thirty year old had a good job, making plenty of money and because he was young he decided he didn't want insurance,, get a fucking grip..

 

[rightwinger]

He circled around the question too. At first Ron was agreeing that he should die then he gets on a rant where he says churches should pay..

He wasn't agreeing he should die. The implied question is whether government is the proper tool to care for him.

This is something that is a real hang up for liberals when considering the libertarian argument. When you hear libertarians say that we shouldn't use government to take care of the poor, you assume we think society has no responsibility to care for those who fall through the cracks, and that's simply not true. Despite the crackpot in the audience of the debate, libertarians believe in community, believe in charity, believe in helping out those in need. We just reject the common assumption that government is a good way to achieve those goals.

In Paul's rambling response, his initial response was that he made a bad choice and should pay the consequences......this is where the Tea Baggers cheered loudly

He then started rambling about the good ole days when churches would pay your medical bills. How many churches today could afford the million dollar medical bill from six months intensive care?

 

[ba1614]

The bread winner in a family gets a critical illness..so not only is there a loss of income but medical bills.

It's a double whammy.

No wonder you people applaud the death penalty and blurt out that uninsured people should die.

Considering the premise of the question was a 30yr old who could afford it, but chose not to, I'd say he was a very irresponsible individual to not look out for his family.
JMO, but then again, I don't believe you can hold folks hand to make them responsible.

I was 30, once. Big strong and extremely healthy.

Worked on a truck and moved furniture. I didn't need no stinking health insurance.

Now I am 50. About 10 years ago I had a severe heart problem that required something called an "ablation". Very long, expensive and painful operation. And I am glad I had health insurance.

I didn't either when I was single, but once the family came insurance was the responsible thing to do. I couldn't imagine being 30 with a family and chancing it without insurance, incredibly irresponsible.
Must be that conservative upbringing that taught me to look out for my own.

 

[manifold]

A question for the bleeding heart utopianites: At what point is it ok to just let him die?

 

[rightwinger]

Considering the premise of the question was a 30yr old who could afford it, but chose not to, I'd say he was a very irresponsible individual to not look out for his family.
JMO, but then again, I don't believe you can hold folks hand to make them responsible.

There IS no such thing as personal responsibility to liberals. It's governmental responsibility. Cradle, to grave. You should never have to be responsible for anything yourself. You're not smart enough. Government is smart enough, wise enough. Let them manage your life for you. Sit back, Relax. Enjoy the free ride.

You guys got this really warped sense of personal responsibility and just about everything else. We live in a nation so rich that there are people in it with wealth so vast that it would be impossible for one person to count it. Even if they had a 100 lifetimes and spent all their time doing it. But somehow it's acceptable to you guys to have people live in filth and squalor. It's acceptable that people have to lose everything they have because they get sick.

That's really, really off the scale.

The callous response is actually scary.

The extent they are willing to carry personal responsibility to include death is reprehensible. Most countries would be shocked at how callous Americans really are

I guess it is part of American Exceptionalism

 

[Seawytch]

It is just becoming more and more clear that the GnOP is the party of "fuck you, I've got mine". They don't want the poor to be healthy or educated. Healthy educated people won't become the slave class they desire here in the US of A.

 

[rightwinger]

A question for the bleeding heart utopianites: At what point is it ok to just let him die?

I would have to say at the same point it is ok to let you die if it happened to you

 

[Caroljo]

You all go on about the cheering on this video....i watched the debates, because i do plan on voting for whatever "conservative" makes the republican ticket. EXCEPT if it's Ron Paul....then I most likely won't vote for either one of them because if my choice is between him or obama, i want neither one. When this question was asked, i was very surprised to hear the cheering in the crowd, then really hated his answer! Everyone knows something has to be done about insurance, but obamacare is not the answer and i don't believe in letting someone die just because they don't have insurance....i wouldn't want that done to any of my family and nobody would.

I wish that question had been put to all of them because with the way Paul fumbled around with his answer i KNEW this would be the big discussion here today! So just because of his answer all you lefties just decide they ALL would have said the same thing?? If any of you have paid any attention to Paul, he's not anything like the others and i think alot of his ideas are nuts!

Besides...do you really think if a 30 year old went into the emergency room and was in such a shape to know he's going to die without care immediately that the hospital is going to try to find out if he had insurance before they do anything to save his life? Maybe he was in a car accident, by himself, nobody else there to talk to the doctors....and they're going to wait until they can find family before they take care of him? I don't think any hospital would do that. Besides, there's alot of people WITH insurance that don't pay their medical bills. Insurance doesn't pay the entire bill...you have a co-pay and sometimes those co-pays are quite high if they're admitted to the hospital. I know several people that don't have the money to pay that and have medical bills in collection because of it.

Maybe you are starting to get it!


Hospitals can not wait to find out the paperwork of VERY sick or injured persons.

They treat them or they die.

This is why it is compoletely rational to require all Americans have done something to PAY their way in these circumstances.

Letting people jsut choose NOT to pay anything knowing they will get treated anyway heaves the burdon on the rest of us.

Its fine to make people buy insurance becasue the alternative is they FORCE us to pay for their care if they dont.

Is it OK to force you and me to pay for the care of someone who just refuses to accept the responsibility?

This is why the public option was needed as a part of healthcare reform.

I also edited my comment above to add that it shouldn't be up to me to pay for his medical bills, and that something has to be put in place for him to somehow pay it back (community service?).

People should also not be put in jail for not having insurance. But, something has to be put in place that would push these people to pay it back somehow, and if they ignore their responsibility to pay that bill, there has to be something in place to make sure taxpayers aren't going to be stuck with the bill.

 

[manifold]

the 30 year old decided he did not want nor did he need insurance, it's called personal responsibility, but no, the GOP doesn't want him to just die and any libtard who says otherwise is just flat out a liar. We'd like to put his ass in jail for stupidity when he gets well and make him work off his bill. It still doesn't justify "mandating" that someone buy health insurance.


ya'll libtrards suck the hind tit.

Note for the record that WillowTree just argued that we should put people in jail for not having health insurance, but she opposes 'mandating' health insurance.

Willow fails basic logic.

Nah, she's just a nasty twit. Wait until the Republicans cut off her medicare, she'll be singing a different tune.

Was that her at the bagger rally holding the sign that read: Keep gubmint outta my medicare!

 

[Sallow]

He circled around the question too. At first Ron was agreeing that he should die then he gets on a rant where he says churches should pay..

He wasn't agreeing he should die. The implied question is whether government is the proper tool to care for him.

This is something that is a real hang up for liberals when considering the libertarian argument. When you hear libertarians say that we shouldn't use government to take care of the poor, you assume we think society has no responsibility to care for those who fall through the cracks, and that's simply not true. Despite the crackpot in the audience of the debate, libertarians believe in community, believe in charity, believe in helping out those in need. We just reject the common assumption that government is a good way to achieve those goals.

In Paul's rambling response, his initial response was that he made a bad choice and should pay the consequences......this is where the Tea Baggers cheered loudly

He then started rambling about the good ole days when churches would pay your medical bills. How many churches today could afford the million dollar medical bill from six months intensive care?

There wasn't any "good ole days" when churches paid your bills. The closest it came was when Churches acted as sort of hospices for dying people.

That's about it.

 

[manifold]

A question for the bleeding heart utopianites: At what point is it ok to just let him die?

I would have to say at the same point it is ok to let you die if it happened to you

And what point is that?

 

[WillowTree]

Note for the record that WillowTree just argued that we should put people in jail for not having health insurance, but she opposes 'mandating' health insurance.

Willow fails basic logic.

Nah, she's just a nasty twit. Wait until the Republicans cut off her medicare, she'll be singing a different tune.

Was that her at the bagger rally holding the sign that read: Keep gubmint outta my medicare!

you need another abortion don't ya?

 

[Sallow]

I also edited my comment above to add that it shouldn't be up to me to pay for his medical bills, and that something has to be put in place for him to somehow pay it back (community service?).

People should also not be put in jail for not having insurance. But, something has to be put in place that would push these people to pay it back somehow, and if they ignore their responsibility to pay that bill, there has to be something in place to make sure taxpayers aren't going to be stuck with the bill.

Line item tax forms?

There's lots of things I don't want to pay for..and things I do. If it's to save someone's life..I am in.

If it's to build a missile defense system which doesn't work..I am out.

That's um..like Direct Democracy.

 

[del]

A question for the bleeding heart utopianites: At what point is it ok to just let him die?

right before it starts costing me money

 

[manifold]

A question for the bleeding heart utopianites: At what point is it ok to just let him die?

right before it starts costing me money

Heartless prick.

 

[del]

A question for the bleeding heart utopianites: At what point is it ok to just let him die?

right before it starts costing me money

Heartless prick.

it's a gift

 

[strollingbones]

you can deny death....no one gets out alive...but should you deny life saving medical treatments.....to the poor or uninsured? insurance companies hold out for death.....simple as that....

i had a workmen's comp agent tell me the cheapest fall .....was death

 

[Sallow]

right before it starts costing me money

Heartless prick.

it's a gift

Wrapping paper?

 

[strollingbones]

that is heartless big prick to you manie

 

[del]

Heartless prick.

it's a gift

Wrapping paper?

it'll do in a pinch, but i prefer tissue.