If Universal Healthcare is a Bad Idea...

[Marion Morrison]

Who should go without?

Those that can't pay enough, next!

Who the fuck wants to give insurance companies more money? Raise your hand!

If you do, you're oblivious, those bastards have been getting unjust premium increases for nigh on 30 years.

Stop bribery, medical costs drop like a rock.

 

[Lewdog]

You ever think there might be some people poor and not working because of medical problems they didn't have insurance to help them with?

How are the problems of individuals legally the problem of other individuals with whom there is no relation? By what authority does a government reach into an individual's pocket to cover the negligence - or simple bad luck - of another individual?

So you are against people getting healthy so they can work and become contributing members of society? So does this mean you are for just taking sick people behind the woodshed and shooting them like a horse with a broken leg?

No. I am against people being forced involuntarily into a government charity scheme for which there is no Constitutional authority.

Sounds to me like you use that as an excuse. If you want people to get healthy and become members of the workforce you should be happy about the end result period.

Why would I be happy about people being forced to give up assets to a government which has no legal authority to take them?

Look don't tell me you are for poor people with health problems getting health care as long as you aren't "forced" to do it. That's just you being head strong or making an empty excuse.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

How are the problems of individuals legally the problem of other individuals with whom there is no relation? By what authority does a government reach into an individual's pocket to cover the negligence - or simple bad luck - of another individual?

So you are against people getting healthy so they can work and become contributing members of society? So does this mean you are for just taking sick people behind the woodshed and shooting them like a horse with a broken leg?

No. I am against people being forced involuntarily into a government charity scheme for which there is no Constitutional authority.

Sounds to me like you use that as an excuse. If you want people to get healthy and become members of the workforce you should be happy about the end result period.

Why would I be happy about people being forced to give up assets to a government which has no legal authority to take them?

Look don't tell me you are for poor people with health problems getting health care as long as you aren't "forced" to do it. That's just you being head strong or making an empty excuse.

I am for the rule of law, not emotion.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Who should go without?

YOU

 

[Clementine]

Who should go without?

No one is ever refused emergency treatment. We've always had Medicare. Schools offer plans for poor students. Of course, Planned Parenthood claims to offer so many services (a lie).

It's not working now because the average middle class people are picking up the tab. Didn't hear a single leftist express concern for the many who lost their plans and couldn't afford a new one. I guess they are the ones who should go without, according to the left. Then they can pay the fine at tax time to make sure others have what they can't afford for themselves.

There was no concern for those who paid up to three times as much for their plan but still had to pay out of pocket all year because the deductibles were so high. But as long as they foot the bill, who gives a shit about the hardships they endure?

There are able bodied people getting shit for free, from phones to free healthcare. Maybe if more would carry their own weight, it wouldn't hurt middle class so much. And not all who saw higher premiums were doing that great. Some single parents were shocked when the new rates were way out of their budget.

Universal healthcare would just permanently put the burden on the working people. It would mean long waiting lists for a lot of tests and treatment. Some things will not be available. It would seriously hurt the chances of new treatments at research hospitals.

Right now, the wealthy and the leaders of countries with socialized medicine come to the states. I saw them at Mayo all the time. The best healthcare would be out of reach for the average person.

 

[Lewdog]

So you are against people getting healthy so they can work and become contributing members of society? So does this mean you are for just taking sick people behind the woodshed and shooting them like a horse with a broken leg?

No. I am against people being forced involuntarily into a government charity scheme for which there is no Constitutional authority.

Sounds to me like you use that as an excuse. If you want people to get healthy and become members of the workforce you should be happy about the end result period.

Why would I be happy about people being forced to give up assets to a government which has no legal authority to take them?

Look don't tell me you are for poor people with health problems getting health care as long as you aren't "forced" to do it. That's just you being head strong or making an empty excuse.

I am for the rule of law, not emotion.

Another excuse. The U.S. is the richest country in the world and all the countries in the world with the top life expectancy and quality of life have universal healthcare.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No. I am against people being forced involuntarily into a government charity scheme for which there is no Constitutional authority.

Sounds to me like you use that as an excuse. If you want people to get healthy and become members of the workforce you should be happy about the end result period.

Why would I be happy about people being forced to give up assets to a government which has no legal authority to take them?

Look don't tell me you are for poor people with health problems getting health care as long as you aren't "forced" to do it. That's just you being head strong or making an empty excuse.

I am for the rule of law, not emotion.

Another excuse. The U.S. is the richest country in the world and all the countries in the world with the top life expectancy and quality of life have universal healthcare.

The country is not rich--we have people that are rich. Our country is 20 trillion in debt, and I would hardly call that rich.

So when you say we are the richest country in the world, what you really mean is that we have the richest people in the world--and that is true. However, just because we have the richest people in the world does not mean they should be footing the bill for those that are not rich.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Who should go without?

People on social programs. Every time this subject comes up in the media, their first concern is what about the poor people? Well, what about the working people is my question?

Working people are the ones who are paying for the non-working, and some of us working people don't have coverage ourselves. In the meantime, the poor are popping out kids like a popcorn machine and the rest of us have to support them including their medical.

You ever think there might be some people poor and not working because of medical problems they didn't have insurance to help them with?

Yes I did, and those people are applicable for disability and Medicaid. Any other questions?

No, they are not all eligible. You have any idea how hard it is to get disability anymore?

Yes I do, because I have two tenants on disability. It's not that hard at all.

If a person cannot work because of medical disabilities, they qualify for SS disability. In fact, if they can still work but have disabilities, they still qualify for SS disability.

Both my tenants have part-time jobs. Now I'm not saying they are not Fd up--they are. But they are both working. As for myself, thanks to government, I may be on disability myself even though I can still work. It all depends if they add more regulations against me and if I can pass my government physical in a few months.

 

[Lewdog]

Who should go without?

People on social programs. Every time this subject comes up in the media, their first concern is what about the poor people? Well, what about the working people is my question?

Working people are the ones who are paying for the non-working, and some of us working people don't have coverage ourselves. In the meantime, the poor are popping out kids like a popcorn machine and the rest of us have to support them including their medical.

You ever think there might be some people poor and not working because of medical problems they didn't have insurance to help them with?

Yes I did, and those people are applicable for disability and Medicaid. Any other questions?

No, they are not all eligible. You have any idea how hard it is to get disability anymore?

Yes I do, because I have two tenants on disability. It's not that hard at all.

If a person cannot work because of medical disabilities, they qualify for SS disability. In fact, if they can still work but have disabilities, they still qualify for SS disability.

Both my tenants have part-time jobs. Now I'm not saying they are not Fd up--they are. But they are both working. As for myself, thanks to government, I may be on disability myself even though I can still work. It all depends if they add more regulations against me and if I can pass my government physical in a few months.

Wrong. Why do you keep floating this lie? Just because you have two tenants on disability doesn't mean it is easy to get. Seriously... you need to educate yourself.

In fact things were so bad that the government had to step in and ask why such a high percentage of people were turned down their first attempt to get disability.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

That's a brilliant solution for the wealthiest country in the world.

It's not about miney. It's about Right and Wrong. Thoise who do not add to Society, or pull their own weight, hsve no value in Society.

That's a brilliant solution for the wealthiest country in the world.

It's not about miney. It's about Right and Wrong. Thoise who do not add to Society, or pull their own weight, hsve no value in Society.

It's about Right and Wrong.

Who decides?
I was not well off as a young man as most are not. Luckily, I never needed to use healthcare in any real way. The ability to pay at any given time should not be the deciding factor when prioritizing care. The goal rather, should be balancing those in need with those who are not.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

People on social programs. Every time this subject comes up in the media, their first concern is what about the poor people? Well, what about the working people is my question?

Working people are the ones who are paying for the non-working, and some of us working people don't have coverage ourselves. In the meantime, the poor are popping out kids like a popcorn machine and the rest of us have to support them including their medical.

You ever think there might be some people poor and not working because of medical problems they didn't have insurance to help them with?

Yes I did, and those people are applicable for disability and Medicaid. Any other questions?

No, they are not all eligible. You have any idea how hard it is to get disability anymore?

Yes I do, because I have two tenants on disability. It's not that hard at all.

If a person cannot work because of medical disabilities, they qualify for SS disability. In fact, if they can still work but have disabilities, they still qualify for SS disability.

Both my tenants have part-time jobs. Now I'm not saying they are not Fd up--they are. But they are both working. As for myself, thanks to government, I may be on disability myself even though I can still work. It all depends if they add more regulations against me and if I can pass my government physical in a few months.

Wrong. Why do you keep floating this lie? Just because you have two tenants on disability doesn't mean it is easy to get. Seriously... you need to educate yourself.

In fact things were so bad that the government had to step in and ask why such a high percentage of people were turned down their first attempt to get disability.

Why would I lie? My second tenant got disability without a lawyer. She did it all by herself with the help from the SS office. She was refused the first time a few years back, but reapplied and had it in less than six weeks while Obama was still President.

My first tenant had to wait nearly a year, and he did hire a lawyer. From what I have seen, that's not the case any longer. You can get it pretty easily and quickly compared to years before. Things have changed.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Who should go without?

Those who cannot pay for it, or receive it as a benefit for their employment.

No one should go without healthcare. It is a basic human right.

Bull shit. I'm in healthcare, you have no right to my time or my training. It's the stupidest argument coming from the left since, well, you guys say a LOT of stupid shit.

You're paid by a healthcare provider. You abide by their business plan whether you agree or not.

People no doubt hate seeing you coming.

 

[Lewdog]

You ever think there might be some people poor and not working because of medical problems they didn't have insurance to help them with?

Yes I did, and those people are applicable for disability and Medicaid. Any other questions?

No, they are not all eligible. You have any idea how hard it is to get disability anymore?

Yes I do, because I have two tenants on disability. It's not that hard at all.

If a person cannot work because of medical disabilities, they qualify for SS disability. In fact, if they can still work but have disabilities, they still qualify for SS disability.

Both my tenants have part-time jobs. Now I'm not saying they are not Fd up--they are. But they are both working. As for myself, thanks to government, I may be on disability myself even though I can still work. It all depends if they add more regulations against me and if I can pass my government physical in a few months.

Wrong. Why do you keep floating this lie? Just because you have two tenants on disability doesn't mean it is easy to get. Seriously... you need to educate yourself.

In fact things were so bad that the government had to step in and ask why such a high percentage of people were turned down their first attempt to get disability.

Why would I lie? My second tenant got disability without a lawyer. She did it all by herself with the help from the SS office. She was refused the first time a few years back, but reapplied and had it in less than six weeks while Obama was still President.

My first tenant had to wait nearly a year, and he did hire a lawyer. From what I have seen, that's not the case any longer. You can get it pretty easily and quickly compared to years before. Things have changed.

You can't use the experience of just a couple people "You know" as how things really are. I knew someone that had agoraphobia so bad they couldn't leave their house without a panic attack and Crohn's Disease so bad they bled out of their ass every day. It took them the max amount of tries, then a refile, and the max amount of tries again to get approved. It took them 8 years, had lost everything they had, and was living in a homeless shelter by the time they got approved.

You need to look at the actual stats and quit relying on just a couple of people. I know someone that has survived a plane crash. Does that mean everyone should survive plane crashes? I someone else that has survived brain cancer. So does that mean everyone should survive brain cancer?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

so there are no such things as rights?

Not in terms of healthcare.

You only hold that position because you're already covered.

If you were out in the cold, no doubt you would hold a different position.

It's a right solely because no one can control when they become ill or injured. The ability to pay should not determine someone's fate.
No doubt you were not in a position to cover such an event at some point in your life.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Who should go without?

Universal healthcare is a GREAT idea. Now. How do we afford it?

That's the beauty of being a left winger. Someone else will just magically pay it. Not us of course. Some mysterious rich person.

That's the way it has always worked. You pay for the next guy until your number comes up and then they pay for you.

Do you honestly believe that your Medicare is going into an account for you rather than you paying for your father's generation?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Who should go without?

Those who cannot pay for it, or receive it as a benefit for their employment.

No one should go without healthcare. It is a basic human right.

Bull shit. I'm in healthcare, you have no right to my time or my training. It's the stupidest argument coming from the left since, well, you guys say a LOT of stupid shit.

I live in a country where everyone who is born is entitled to healthcare until the day they die.....

...Health care is a right. I wasn't born with it but all my children and grandchildren were.

Then please stay in thst country and keep your nose out of American Society. It may be a Right in your country, but it most definitely is not here. If it ever becomes one, I'll be dead.

No doubt because you couldn't afford the remedy, dope.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Would betcha a large contingent here has been without it on occasion

They're lucky they never had an event that left them broke because of it.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Who should go without?

People on social programs. Every time this subject comes up in the media, their first concern is what about the poor people? Well, what about the working people is my question?

Working people are the ones who are paying for the non-working, and some of us working people don't have coverage ourselves. In the meantime, the poor are popping out kids like a popcorn machine and the rest of us have to support them including their medical.

You ever think there might be some people poor and not working because of medical problems they didn't have insurance to help them with?

How are the problems of individuals legally the problem of other individuals with whom there is no relation? By what authority does a government reach into an individual's pocket to cover the negligence - or simple bad luck - of another individual?

So you are against people getting healthy so they can work and become contributing members of society? So does this mean you are for just taking sick people behind the woodshed and shooting them like a horse with a broken leg?

Death panel.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Who should go without?

People on social programs. Every time this subject comes up in the media, their first concern is what about the poor people? Well, what about the working people is my question?

Working people are the ones who are paying for the non-working, and some of us working people don't have coverage ourselves. In the meantime, the poor are popping out kids like a popcorn machine and the rest of us have to support them including their medical.

You ever think there might be some people poor and not working because of medical problems they didn't have insurance to help them with?

How are the problems of individuals legally the problem of other individuals with whom there is no relation? By what authority does a government reach into an individual's pocket to cover the negligence - or simple bad luck - of another individual?

So you are against people getting healthy so they can work and become contributing members of society? So does this mean you are for just taking sick people behind the woodshed and shooting them like a horse with a broken leg?

No. I am against people being forced involuntarily into a government charity scheme for which there is no Constitutional authority.

Until you're in need of course.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Who should go without?

Universal healthcare is a GREAT idea. Now. How do we afford it?

That's the beauty of being a left winger. Someone else will just magically pay it. Not us of course. Some mysterious rich person.

That's the way it has always worked. You pay for the next guy until your number comes up and then they pay for you.

Do you honestly believe that your Medicare is going into an account for you rather than you paying for your father's generation?

So you convinced the old people to give the government all of their money with the promise the next generation will pay for them. While at the same time telling that same next generation they shouldn't have to pay anything because they are owed healthcare. Do you see the missing component in this situation? Like anyone actually paying the bills?