If Universal Healthcare is a Bad Idea...

[PredFan]

It's never a good Idea to give the government a say in whether you live or die.

Your loved ones should be who makes that call.

That, to me, is the prime issue in all of this. I don't want the health of my friends and family subjected to politics.

But then your health is in the hands of private companies, is that better?

Yes, much.

 

[Marion Morrison]

It's never a good Idea to give the government a say in whether you live or die.

Your loved ones should be who makes that call.

That, to me, is the prime issue in all of this. I don't want the health of my friends and family subjected to politics.

But then your health is in the hands of private companies, is that better?

Yes, much.

\

I disagree.

 

[PredFan]

It's never a good Idea to give the government a say in whether you live or die.

Your loved ones should be who makes that call.

That, to me, is the prime issue in all of this. I don't want the health of my friends and family subjected to politics.

But then your health is in the hands of private companies, is that better?

Yes, much.

\

I disagree.

Which is your right. Unlike healthcare.

 

[Anathema]

Yeah, well, wanting to be in the past, to have a Constitution which is outdated and causing problems, and the people are loving it, and then complain about the corruption which is caused by it, a bit confusing.

The Constitution is neither outdated nor causing our issues. Nor is it causing corruption. In fact the Constitution is the means to remedy asny such issues; so long as it is followed.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yeah, well, wanting to be in the past, to have a Constitution which is outdated and causing problems, and the people are loving it, and then complain about the corruption which is caused by it, a bit confusing.

The Constitution is neither outdated nor causing our issues. Nor is it causing corruption. In fact the Constitution is the means to remedy asny such issues; so long as it is followed.

Yes, it is. Actually.

The way people vote is causing problems. Why?

Well, FPTP is negative voting. As you saw in 2016, a lot of people were voting AGAINST the person they didn't want to see in the White House. Two candidates that were not really a choice at all.

If you look at German elections where they get to vote twice, one FPTP and the other PR, you see that FPTP is negative voting, tactical voting, trying to stop people getting in, but PR is positive voting, and under PR 10% of the population are switching votes from the larger parties to smaller parties because they know they can vote for who THEY WANT TO VOTE FOR and not suffer the consequences.

In PR there are, I believe, a minimum of about 6 parties in parliament. In the US there are two. That's not choice. How can a country of 300 million plus only have two parties to represent all the different politics in the US? Realistically the Republicans and Democrats don't even represent those who vote for them, such is negative voting.

 

[Flash]

[QU


Yeah, well, wanting to be in the past, to have a Constitution which is outdated and causing problems, and the people are loving it, and then complain about the corruption which is caused by it, a bit confusing.

You Moon Bats think the Constitution is outdated because it promotes the concept of personal Liberty over filthy ass slavery of socialism. You can't stand that, can you?

 

[Flash]

[equences.

In PR there are, I believe, a minimum of about 6 parties in parliament. In the US there are two. That's not choice. How can a country of 300 million plus only have two parties to represent all the different politics in the US? Realistically the Republicans and Democrats don't even represent those who vote for them, such is negative voting.

If you don't like the choices then start your own party.

 

[PredFan]

Yeah, well, wanting to be in the past, to have a Constitution which is outdated and causing problems, and the people are loving it, and then complain about the corruption which is caused by it, a bit confusing.

The Constitution is neither outdated nor causing our issues. Nor is it causing corruption. In fact the Constitution is the means to remedy asny such issues; so long as it is followed.

Yes, it is. Actually.

The way people vote is causing problems. Why?

Well, FPTP is negative voting. As you saw in 2016, a lot of people were voting AGAINST the person they didn't want to see in the White House. Two candidates that were not really a choice at all.

If you look at German elections where they get to vote twice, one FPTP and the other PR, you see that FPTP is negative voting, tactical voting, trying to stop people getting in, but PR is positive voting, and under PR 10% of the population are switching votes from the larger parties to smaller parties because they know they can vote for who THEY WANT TO VOTE FOR and not suffer the consequences.

In PR there are, I believe, a minimum of about 6 parties in parliament. In the US there are two. That's not choice. How can a country of 300 million plus only have two parties to represent all the different politics in the US? Realistically the Republicans and Democrats don't even represent those who vote for them, such is negative voting.

The Constitution is not outdated and there is nothing at all wrong with our voting system. You just don't like it because it stands in the way of your socialist, globalist, agenda.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That's not choice. How can a country of 300 million plus only have two parties to represent all the different politics in the US?

There is no law that says ten parties can't join. It's the choice of the people to have only two parties--not the government.

All you people on the left talk about is how great other countries have it, yet you never leave here to go there. They have socialized medical care, they have gun control, they don't have very wealthy people.....okay, if that's the way you want it, you're in the wrong country.

We are not changing to be like everybody else. The United States of America is different than all other countries. That's what makes this place so special. There is no other USA in the world to go to if you leave here; only one, and we are it.

We have liberties extended to us by the US Constitution. We have our guns and are going to keep them. We have wealthy and are getting more people wealthy every year. We only have one way of electing a President, and that's by the electoral college.

We are not like everybody else and we want to keep it that way.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Oh, sure it was, it was the way everywhere. Just some countries grew up, and you're basically telling me the US is still in 1900.

No. We're not in 1900. With 26 specific exceptions we should still be in the last 25 years of the 18th Century. You know, when this nation was founded and the rules which were intended to govern this nation (Thge US Constitution) were put in place.

Yeah, well, wanting to be in the past, to have a Constitution which is outdated and causing problems, and the people are loving it, and then complain about the corruption which is caused by it, a bit confusing.

HTF does the US Constitution cause corruption?

 

[dblack]

It's never a good Idea to give the government a say in whether you live or die.

Your loved ones should be who makes that call.

That, to me, is the prime issue in all of this. I don't want the health of my friends and family subjected to politics.

But then your health is in the hands of private companies, is that better?

It's only the hands of private companies if I choose to do business with them. And if I don't like they way they do business, I can tell them to take a hike. You never have that option with government.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I have a nephew who's son is a self employed studio musician, so he has no group insurance. He is 22, and married. He has juvenile diabetes, and his wife gave birth to a baby boy with a hole in his heart. According to the GOP budget director, and several posters on this board, he does not deserve insurance for himself, or his son, because they made "bad lifestyle decisions". However, thanks to ACA, he is getting his medication, and the baby had heart surgery. I guess that they should be labeled deadbeats.

Music is great but not a reliable source of income. I've been a musician all of my life. I was in bands. I taught guitar at my home. I took a job at a music studio teaching, but it was all part-time because everybody and their mother plays an instrument.

I never perused that lottery ticket because I needed a stable income. I needed to know I have a place to work the next morning. I needed to know I have a paycheck coming every other week.

Nothing would make me happier than to pull my Les Paul out of the case and play for a living, but that's unrealistic. Extra money? Sure, nothing wrong with that. But I would not insist the taxpayers fund my dream no matter how unlikely my success would be.

During my prime I was pressured to pursue music. People considered me one of the fastest and best lead guitarists in the Cleveland area. But if it's one thing I learned about music, it's that there is always somebody better than you. So get a job and let music be something on the side.

 

[dblack]

Instead of demanding I pay for those who won't, why don't you demand that people take responsibility for their own life?

You're already paying for those who don't.

Those expensive ER visits that people access for "free" because they have nothing else? You're paying for that.

Not necessarily. How those losses are absorbed is entirely situational. But you're right to point out that EMTALA is an unfunded mandate, and when faced with these kinds of mandates, business have to find a way account for the loss. In general, they have to cut jobs, raise prices or go out of business.

In any case, you have to appreciate how this sounds to those us opposed to these mandates in the first place. We hear you saying "Listen, we have to have this new law that violates your rights because of this other law that violates your rights." - it doesn't make a lot of sense. It's drinking to cure a hangover.

Yeah, we're simply not going to max out access, low cost and quality, at least not until medical technology takes a few more steps (which it will). For now, however, I think that expanding the Medicare/Medicare Supplement/Medicare Advantage system to all solves/mitigates the most problems at one time. It's a reasonable point of equilibrium between Single Payer (where we appear to be heading) and free market competition. And a side benefit is that it takes a massive cost monkey off the backs of American business.

This would just be driving things off a cliff. It would only further distort an already decimated health care market. The only way health care prices will come back in line with everything else we need is if we start treating health care like everything else we need, and quit chasing the fantasy that we can get someone else to pay for it.

 

[dblack]

Why don't the industrialized nations of the world who do provide universal healthcare have more problems with poverty than we do?

Because they have more power over everyone's economic decisions.

 

[Markle]

Universal health care is not a bad idea; the right wing merely has, nothing but repeal, that is the problem.

Universal health care is a failure. In countries where it is practiced, it provides poor care to everyday workers and the wealthy have a separate cash system.

From all the news of late, I'm certain you are well aware that they have death panels as we do with Obamacare.

You're right the right has screwed this up by not having a reasonable plan in place. My guess is they did not expect Donald Trump to win either until it was too late to start work.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I have a nephew who's son is a self employed studio musician, so he has no group insurance. He is 22, and married. He has juvenile diabetes, and his wife gave birth to a baby boy with a hole in his heart. According to the GOP budget director, and several posters on this board, he does not deserve insurance for himself, or his son, because they made "bad lifestyle decisions". However, thanks to ACA, he is getting his medication, and the baby had heart surgery. I guess that they should be labeled deadbeats.

Music is great but not a reliable source of income. I've been a musician all of my life. I was in bands. I taught guitar at my home. I took a job at a music studio teaching, but it was all part-time because everybody and their mother plays an instrument.

I never perused that lottery ticket because I needed a stable income. I needed to know I have a place to work the next morning. I needed to know I have a paycheck coming every other week.

Nothing would make me happier than to pull my Les Paul out of the case and play for a living, but that's unrealistic. Extra money? Sure, nothing wrong with that. But I would not insist the taxpayers fund my dream no matter how unlikely my success would be.

During my prime I was pressured to pursue music. People considered me one of the fastest and best lead guitarists in the Cleveland area. But if it's one thing I learned about music, it's that there is always somebody better than you. So get a job and let music be something on the side.

Yep. Just like the budget director said. Bad lifestyle decisions, so the baby with the hole in the heart should be left to die. You are, in fact Ray, the poster boy for the GOP.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I have a nephew who's son is a self employed studio musician, so he has no group insurance. He is 22, and married. He has juvenile diabetes, and his wife gave birth to a baby boy with a hole in his heart. According to the GOP budget director, and several posters on this board, he does not deserve insurance for himself, or his son, because they made "bad lifestyle decisions". However, thanks to ACA, he is getting his medication, and the baby had heart surgery. I guess that they should be labeled deadbeats.

Music is great but not a reliable source of income. I've been a musician all of my life. I was in bands. I taught guitar at my home. I took a job at a music studio teaching, but it was all part-time because everybody and their mother plays an instrument.

I never perused that lottery ticket because I needed a stable income. I needed to know I have a place to work the next morning. I needed to know I have a paycheck coming every other week.

Nothing would make me happier than to pull my Les Paul out of the case and play for a living, but that's unrealistic. Extra money? Sure, nothing wrong with that. But I would not insist the taxpayers fund my dream no matter how unlikely my success would be.

During my prime I was pressured to pursue music. People considered me one of the fastest and best lead guitarists in the Cleveland area. But if it's one thing I learned about music, it's that there is always somebody better than you. So get a job and let music be something on the side.

Yep. Just like the budget director said. Bad lifestyle decisions, so the baby with the hole in the heart should be left to die. You are, in fact Ray, the poster boy for the GOP.

You're damn right I am, and the GOP message is to not start a family until you are financially secure enough to support that family. The liberal poster boy says if you can't even take care of yourself, start a family anyway; government will take care of them if you can't.

 

[featherlite]

Do you have a good argument as to why those groups should be punished for doing no wrong?

Those 2 groups are unnecessary. Children can be replaced and the elderly no longer add anything to Society.

nice.

 

[Markle]

i suggested something like that a couple of times. My idea is that if we want to give businesses tax cuts, give those cuts to employers who provide reasonable health insurance to their employees. As far as Medicare goes, allow people with preexisting conditions to join the program for a reasonable monthly cost just like we do with younger people on SS disability. That would reduce the costs to insurance companies and keep the cost of premiums down. Plus I think it's something any Democrat would go along with.

Medicare is massively in debt. For me it is fantastic. But it carries with it tens of trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities.

Progressives think the "rich" should pay for all everyone's limitless health care. The trouble is, there just aren't enough rich! Anywhere. So how do you ration who gets a new heart and who ends up as a donor?

 

[Vandalshandle]

I have a nephew who's son is a self employed studio musician, so he has no group insurance. He is 22, and married. He has juvenile diabetes, and his wife gave birth to a baby boy with a hole in his heart. According to the GOP budget director, and several posters on this board, he does not deserve insurance for himself, or his son, because they made "bad lifestyle decisions". However, thanks to ACA, he is getting his medication, and the baby had heart surgery. I guess that they should be labeled deadbeats.

Music is great but not a reliable source of income. I've been a musician all of my life. I was in bands. I taught guitar at my home. I took a job at a music studio teaching, but it was all part-time because everybody and their mother plays an instrument.

I never perused that lottery ticket because I needed a stable income. I needed to know I have a place to work the next morning. I needed to know I have a paycheck coming every other week.

Nothing would make me happier than to pull my Les Paul out of the case and play for a living, but that's unrealistic. Extra money? Sure, nothing wrong with that. But I would not insist the taxpayers fund my dream no matter how unlikely my success would be.

During my prime I was pressured to pursue music. People considered me one of the fastest and best lead guitarists in the Cleveland area. But if it's one thing I learned about music, it's that there is always somebody better than you. So get a job and let music be something on the side.

Yep. Just like the budget director said. Bad lifestyle decisions, so the baby with the hole in the heart should be left to die. You are, in fact Ray, the poster boy for the GOP.

You're damn right I am, and the GOP message is to not start a family until you are financially secure enough to support that family. The liberal poster boy says if you can't even take care of yourself, start a family anyway; government will take care of them if you can't.

That baby should have know better than to be born to such irresponsible parents.