So...what you think about the health care bill?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ergo...more rationing than ever and the lines will simply get longer. Medicare is rationing. But the bill wants to get rid of Medicare in favor of this one which will cover illegal aliens and much more. Money we don't have. How easy is this NOT to understand?
 
kokonut said:
Ergo...more rationing than ever and the lines will simply get longer. Medicare is rationing. But the bill wants to get rid of Medicare in favor of this one which will cover illegal aliens and much more. Money we don't have. How easy is this NOT to understand?
Click to expand...

The problem with illegal aliens is that they cannot be turned away in an emergency. So if the illegal aliens cannot afford to pay the medical bills, they won't pay for it. Who will pay for it? The taxpayers, of course. Can this be prevented? Not really because like I said, they cannot be turned away in an emergency.

Not quite a situation that can be easily resolved.
 
kokonut said:
Ergo...more rationing than ever and the lines will simply get longer. Medicare is rationing. But the bill wants to get rid of Medicare in favor of this one which will cover illegal aliens and much more. Money we don't have. How easy is this NOT to understand?
Click to expand...

Insurance companies also ration the healthcare system too as well. They call the shots, not the clients.
 
Lantana said:
There will not be any changes, just hidden ones that we get in the beehind. We will still be paying for those who cannot afford to buy their own healthcare. (Or in other words who won't work for it).
Click to expand...
You really think this is the case, that people won't work for it? Same as losing their homes, because they are too wrapped up in Facebook? Maybe this touches a nerve with me, because I felt such overwhelming rejection time after time when I was sending resumes, having VR services assisting my job search as well. Seems like there are lots of people that think the jobless are that way because they choose to be.

Feel free to enlighten me on why I deserved to lose my job in 2002, again in 2007 and 2008? I was never fired. I worked every day. I did what I was told. I exceeded expectations. Do you think I would rather sit online and argue about healthcare, live on peanuts, scrape together a meal, than work? I have never asked for SSI/SSDI, welfare, food stamps. I prefer to work. I barely can buy groceries with UI money. Fill me in with these "facts" that you are writing here.
 
Banjo said:
Insurance companies also ration the healthcare system too as well. They call the shots, not the clients.
Click to expand...

You pay what you can afford. Not all insurance companies are the same.
 
Banjo said:
The problem with illegal aliens is that they cannot be turned away in an emergency. So if the illegal aliens cannot afford to pay the medical bills, they won't pay for it. Who will pay for it? The taxpayers, of course. Can this be prevented? Not really because like I said, they cannot be turned away in an emergency.

Not quite a situation that can be easily resolved.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about emergency care.
 
souggy said:
I never thought I say this, but man at least Kokonut makes more reasonable arguments against the healthcare reforms. What you keep citing can be interpreted in so many different way.
Click to expand...
Our economy is a very delicate balancing act. If even one component gets knocked out of balance, the entire works go out of whack. With our economy the problems started when liberals started declaring that everyone should own a house, whether they could afford it or not (Freddy Mac & Fannie Mae). People started losing their homes and refused to take responsibility for getting in over their heads. Next thing you know the entire economy is effected and people are not only losing their homes, now they are losing their jobs. Now, people don't have jobs, therefore they don't have health benefits. It really is simple economics and going from a free enterprise system to a socialist system really isn't going to fix the problems we are currently experiencing. The only thing that will fix these issues is personal accountability of each of us.

saywhatkid said:
Here is the Conservative stance, in my opinion. Most of them feel they have earned what they have, and don't want to share it with those that have less. Funny thing, those are the same people that tend to support gun ownership and religion. They got their pile, they want to be able to defend it, and they want to tell you who to worship. If you are different, you are a stupid and uninformed loser. Circumstances be damned! If you have financial problems, no matter the cause; too bad for you. They went to college, paid their dues, and feel entitled to keep the results.

All I can say; someday, they may be in the other side's shoes. Karma is a bitch, yes?
Click to expand...
Welcome to Free Enterprise...essentially the opposite of socialism. Since you have taken it upon yourself to define Free Enterprise, I will take it upon myself to define Socialism in a way I hope even you can understand (this is how I explained it to my 11 yr old daughter). My 11 yr old daughter works very hard and saves every penny for "college". She has amassed much more financial wealth than her siblings. When she sees something at the store that she wants, she has to decide whether or not it is really worth parting with her money for. Many times it is not. Whereas if her brothers and sisters have a penny, they will spend a dime. Therefore, I explained that I was going to take her money (approximately $700) and divide it equally among her and her siblings. It didn't matter that her siblings didn't work for that money or save what they had, but it would only be "fair" if everyone had exactly the same thing. She protested. I declared her a conservative.
 
If you honestly think socialism is equilivent to lack of economic freedom or free enterprise, look at what socialism is again.

Take a look at the economic index list. There have been several times in the past where so-called "socialist" countries were higher on the economic freedom list than the United States. Right now the States is ranked as #6, but it had dipped down much lower than that in the past.

And what you are describing is communal anarchism or Communism, not socialism.
 
And she got to keep her 700, right? LOL!
 
Of course, 2c, I'm not a dictator lol
 
Eve said:
Our economy is a very delicate balancing act. If even one component gets knocked out of balance, the entire works go out of whack. With our economy the problems started when liberals started declaring that everyone should own a house, whether they could afford it or not (Freddy Mac & Fannie Mae). People started losing their homes and refused to take responsibility for getting in over their heads. Next thing you know the entire economy is effected and people are not only losing their homes, now they are losing their jobs. Now, people don't have jobs, therefore they don't have health benefits. It really is simple economics and going from a free enterprise system to a socialist system really isn't going to fix the problems we are currently experiencing. The only thing that will fix these issues is personal accountability of each of us.

Welcome to Free Enterprise...essentially the opposite of socialism. Since you have taken it upon yourself to define Free Enterprise, I will take it upon myself to define Socialism in a way I hope even you can understand (this is how I explained it to my 11 yr old daughter). My 11 yr old daughter works very hard and saves every penny for "college". She has amassed much more financial wealth than her siblings. When she sees something at the store that she wants, she has to decide whether or not it is really worth parting with her money for. Many times it is not. Whereas if her brothers and sisters have a penny, they will spend a dime. Therefore, I explained that I was going to take her money (approximately $700) and divide it equally among her and her siblings. It didn't matter that her siblings didn't work for that money or save what they had, but it would only be "fair" if everyone had exactly the same thing. She protested. I declared her a conservative.
Click to expand...

It is not as simple as that. People dont usually choose to get laid off and then fall behind with their bills. Your daughter has someone willing to pay her but when her cash flows stop, will she still have that choice?
 
That's about accurate, Eve.

It's like being taxed twice or three times just because you managed your money smartly.
 
Reba said:
That is not true. Conservative people do care.
Click to expand...

Show me, Did you read my post and many conservative are against on health care reform bill, even not including public options and you never understand about insurance companies has treat in past so I'm not damn kidding.

If they do care so they shouldn't fight against health care reform without public options.
 
shel90 said:
It is not as simple as that. People dont usually choose to get laid off and then fall behind with their bills. Your daughter has someone willing to pay her but when her cash flows stop, will she still have that choice?
Click to expand...
yes, because she won't allow circumstance to dictate to her. She will find a way. I had to work 3 jobs while getting my college degree. It's called gumption and in her case it must be hereditary.
 
kokonut said:
That's about accurate, Eve.

It's like being taxed twice or three times just because you managed your money smartly.
Click to expand...

Her explanation only occur in communal colonies, communal anarchy or Communism...

Socialism is like this:

We will give someone else basic healthcare so they can recover faster than not receiving any healthcare at all, thus they can return to the workforce and actually contribute more money into the system and drive the economy forward.

It does not means everyone get the same thing... that's Communism, not socialism.
 
Eve said:
yes, because she won't allow circumstance to dictate to her. She will find a way. I had to work 3 jobs while getting my college degree. It's called gumption and in her case it must be hereditary.
Click to expand...

Good for you..

I think health care should be paid by the taxpayers so everyone gets it. Then stuff like TVs, cars and etc are based on how hard one works.
 
saywhatkid said:
Here is the Conservative stance, in my opinion. Most of them feel they have earned what they have, and don't want to share it with those that have less. Funny thing, those are the same people that tend to support gun ownership and religion. They got their pile, they want to be able to defend it, and they want to tell you who to worship. If you are different, you are a stupid and uninformed loser. Circumstances be damned! If you have financial problems, no matter the cause; too bad for you. They went to college, paid their dues, and feel entitled to keep the results.

All I can say; someday, they may be in the other side's shoes. Karma is a bitch, yes?
Click to expand...
I hate to ruin a good stereotype, but that's really not the way conservatives think. They think that charity is the responsibility of individuals, not government, because frankly, government is pretty bad at it. Conservatives, as a whole, are quite generous with their own money.

Entitlement programs already in place are driving us bankrupt and nobody can reform it because that would be political suicide. Too many other programs suffer from unintended consequences that end up hurting the intended beneficiaries or cause other problems. When the government takes it upon itself to dole out benefits to groups, political considerations and fashionable causes tend to take precedence over actual needs (like AIDS research, which gets far more federal funding per sick person than other diseases that affect far more people, like cancer). It also leads to divisive squabbles as groups fight for an optimal place at the government teat.

There's nothing easier for a politician to do than shower benefits upon one group that will be paid for by another group and take the credit along with the votes. Many of those same politicians tend to be the most miserly with their own money (prime examples being Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Al Gore).
 
souggy said:
Her explanation only occur in communal colonies, communal anarchy or Communism...

Socialism is like this:

We will give someone else basic healthcare so they can recover faster than not receiving any healthcare at all, thus they can return to the workforce and actually contribute more money into the system and drive the economy forward.

It does not means everyone get the same thing... that's Communism, not socialism.
Click to expand...

When you don't have the money to do an extended coverage of basic health care for all, what's the point? In order to do that you tax more but that just makes things worse, not better. The increased taxation will simply be passed onto the consumers and the unemployed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top