Is Health Care a Right?

[SinA]

It seems like a pretty big portion of the health care debate is focused on whether or not health care itself is a right. I think it's a pretty important question that I don't have an answer for myself.

If it is, why?
If not, why not? And what is it if it's not a right?

[furie]

i look at heath care as an extension of "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"

it's a pity that sentence is not in the US Constitution.

[Furtherman]

We should help each other if possible without ignorance getting in the way. Yes.

[TooLowBrow]

I think health care should be a right, but there has to be a limit.

Should health care cover Viagra, Rogaine, or lipo? Probably not in most cases, perhaps so in a few others.

How much health care is enough? Do I deserve round the clock doctors and nurses? It'd keep me healthier.

Who get's the 'quality' health care? If I need a liver, am I assured one? Am I added to a list of people waiting for a donor? If I have a family member who wants to give me theirs, can I take it? Or am I denying someone else the 'right' of health care by not giving it to them?

And what if a doctor fucks up? Has he taken away your rights?

I just don't know.

[dino_electropolis]

i look at heath care as an extension of "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"

it's a pity that sentence is not in the US Constitution.

You have it right there.

Its the pursuit of happiness thats a right, not happiness itself.

Of course that begs the question, can one pursue happiness without healthcare?
They look pretty happy, so my answer is no.

http://www.boatnerd.com/pictures/historic/perspectives/HenryFordII/HFordII1920sMVM34.jpg

[jauble]

No, now help my friend pay her medical bills.

[TheMojoPin]

No.

[underdog]

I don't understand why people think its so important that we're safe from invading enemies, but not safe from disease and sickness. It's so strange.

We're a civilized society. We're supposed to take care of our weakest members, not let them suffer because they don't have enough money to stay healthy.

[Tallman388]

I wouldn't call it a right, but people should have access to affordable health care, including medications.

[furie]

You have it right there.

Its the pursuit of happiness thats a right, not happiness itself.

Of course that begs the question, can one pursue happiness without healthcare?
They look pretty happy, so my answer is no.

http://www.boatnerd.com/pictures/historic/perspectives/HenryFordII/HFordII1920sMVM34.jpg

I was looking more as heath care being an extension to the LIFE part of that sentence.
that's life itself, not the pursuit of it, by the way.

[ryno1974]

Yes.

Lock it up.

[GregoryJoseph]

No. There will always be the haves and have nots.

We can argue about the "fairness" of this, or how ethical it is, but to say people are born with the right to medical attention seems a bit of a stretch.

[The Jays]

I don't know if it's a right or not, but I think it's pretty wrong that people have to choose between having health insurance or putting food on the table, that it's pretty wrong that a perfectly healthy person who doesn't have health insurance can one day need expensive surgery for something wrong that he never knew, and that surgery will end up ruining his life because he goes bankrupt from not being able to afford the bills.

Of course, there are those who would say this is what survival of the fittest is, and that America is not about helping out the rest of the country, that its all about me, me, me, give me my money so I can buy motorcycles and McDonald's.

[Ritalin]

I think health care should be a right, but there has to be a limit.

Should health care cover Viagra, Rogaine, or lipo? .

I think that question should be, is Viagra, Rogaine or Lipo healthcare?

[TooLowBrow]

I think that question should be, is Viagra, Rogaine or Lipo healthcare?

Viagra?
Yeah. Erections are part of a healthy lifestyle. If you went to a Dr. today and said that you couldn't get it up, would he say, no big deal, or would he try and treat you?

Lipo?
Yeah. If your weight is causing you health problems, often lipo is necessary to lower health risks.

Rogaine?
I don't know. But I'm sure there are asshole who, even now, have rogaine paid for by health insurance and listed as health care.

[conman823]

Viagra?
Yeah. Erections are part of a healthy lifestyle. If you went to a Dr. today and said that you couldn't get it up, would he say, no big deal, or would he try and treat you?

Lipo?
Yeah. If your weight is causing you health problems, often lipo is necessary to lower health risks.

Rogaine?
I don't know. But I'm sure there are asshole who, even now, have rogaine paid for by health insurance and listed as health care.

Lipo is not nessasary to lower Health risks, diet and excersice ARE. Personal changes in lifestyle are not Healthcare issues. Perhaps 3 sessions with a Nutritionist should be covered but not Lipo.

Rogaine is a definate NO, its vanity nothing more.

Viagra is a luxury. If you can't get it up, it doesn't effect your ability to LIVE a productive life.

[TooLowBrow]

Lipo is not nessasary to lower Health risks, diet and excersice ARE. Personal changes in lifestyle are not Healthcare issues. Perhaps 3 sessions with a Nutritionist should be covered but not Lipo.


Viagra is a luxury. If you can't get it up, it doesn't effect your ability to LIVE a productive life.

If I show up at a hospital and I'm 900 lbs and say I need help, ANY doctor would recommend lipo to stave off the immediate risks, followed by lifestyle changes, personal training, supervised diets. Later would probably be more lipo and skin removal.



Viagra IS a luxury. To most of us. However if a soldier, serving our country, loses the ability to get hard without viagra would you tell him its not part of health care? That its not important?
A 90 year old would get surgery to get freckles removed in case they turn tumorous and eventually fatal, but the 23 year old's dick doesn't effect his life at all.

[yojimbo7248]

I don't understand why people think its so important that we're safe from invading enemies, but not safe from disease and sickness. It's so strange.

We're a civilized society. We're supposed to take care of our weakest members, not let them suffer because they don't have enough money to stay healthy.

and we do take care of weakest uninsured members of society when they go to an emergency room. I wish these "fuck 'em, I've got my health insurance" people had the logical, moral consistency to not allow these poor uninsured people to get emergency room attention. It is far more expensive to allow the poor, uninsured to rely on emergency room treatment. We would save tons of money if we simply allowed them to suffer and die. That's what confuses me about people who just want to ignore the millions of uninsured and shoot down any reform. We already pay for the their health care in the most inefficient, expensive way. Have some balls and propose that we turn away the uninsured from emergency rooms. Fuck 'em, it's their fault for not taking care of their own insurance.

[Crispy123]

NO.

But a government of the people by the people for the people should take on the responsibilities the people want. I want my government to regulate health care for all people instead of starting wars for no fucking reason.

I want to ensure all the people of this country have shelter and food before the government spends millions on subsidising corporate interests and sets up government agencies that invades the privacy of the citizens of this country by tapping phones or reading my library and medical records.

[HBox]

We are talking about liposuction? What is this, 1993? Stomach stapling and gastric bands are the in thing./

[epo]

No. There will always be the haves and have nots.

We can argue about the "fairness" of this, or how ethical it is, but to say people are born with the right to medical attention seems a bit of a stretch.

You are so right. If you get sick without a safety net, you DESERVE to go bankrupt.

[HBox]

You are so right. If you get sick without a safety net, you DESERVE to go bankrupt.

Whenever I see a mother walking away from the pharmacy empty handed and crying with a sick, sniffling little girl holding her hand I think of what a great country we live in.

[epo]

Whenever I see a mother walking away from the pharmacy empty handed and crying with a sick, sniffling little girl holding her hand I think of what a great country we live in.

I saw a disabled veteran today who had too much pride, but was struggling. I laughed at him since he didn't use our social safety net, which keeps my tax rate low.

Win = me.

[Dude!]

Whenever I see a mother walking away from the pharmacy empty handed and crying with a sick, sniffling little girl holding her hand I think of what a great country we live in.

wow
i've never, ever seen that

[GregoryJoseph]

You are so right. If you get sick without a safety net, you DESERVE to go bankrupt.

Sorry, but that's not what I wrote.

Twisting the words to pervert their meaning accomplishes nothing.

[epo]

When your kid gets terminally ill, you deserve to beg at the feet of that financial counselor.

[conman823]

If I show up at a hospital and I'm 900 lbs and say I need help, ANY doctor would recommend lipo to stave off the immediate risks, followed by lifestyle changes, personal training, supervised diets. Later would probably be more lipo and skin removal.



Viagra IS a luxury. To most of us. However if a soldier, serving our country, loses the ability to get hard without viagra would you tell him its not part of health care? That its not important?
A 90 year old would get surgery to get freckles removed in case they turn tumorous and eventually fatal, but the 23 year old's dick doesn't effect his life at all.

So then you would cover Smokers who contract Lung Cancer as well? Thats generous of you. To me a person who gets too 900lbs is the same thing.

I would say Soldiers Healthcare, like Senior Healthcare is a separate issue. Soldiers should receive life long Healthcare for anything just for their service to the country. Everyone else, oh well.

[HBox]

wow
i've never, ever seen that

I wish I didn't either.

Luckily later in my life I was leaving the parking garage at Philadelphia Children's Hospital and in front of me was a happy mother and her bald, happy daughter with a little hospital wrist band. The mother was paying for her parking ticket and the little girl couldn't wait and took off running to the car but then had to stop and ask her mom where the car was. The Mom went off running after her and told her that they better hurry up because everyone was waiting for them at home. I've never seen more happiness in people in my life. So that even things out.

[conman823]

You are so right. If you get sick without a safety net, you DESERVE to go bankrupt.

Wrong direction. That is the fault of Lobbists who get into our governements heads and allow high rates for procedures and medication etc.

Whenever I see a mother walking away from the pharmacy empty handed and crying with a sick, sniffling little girl holding her hand I think of what a great country we live in.

Whenever I go to an ER and see 90% of the room full of illegals who will never pay a dime for treatment and they get to go in before me, a tax paying hard working citizen, I think what a great country we live in.

[epo]

No. There will always be the haves and have nots.

We can argue about the "fairness" of this, or how ethical it is, but to say people are born with the right to medical attention seems a bit of a stretch.

The subtle virtue of the universe is wholeness
It regards all things as equal
The virtue of the sage is wholeness
He too regards all things as equal.

[GregoryJoseph]

The subtle virtue of the universe is wholeness
It regards all things as equal
The virtue of the sage is wholeness
He too regards all things as equal.

When the government is unseen
the people are simple and happy.
When the government is lively
the people are cunning and discontented.

[JohnGacysCrawlSpace]

Every man for himself, that is what this country was founded on.

[conman823]

The subtle virtue of the universe is wholeness
It regards all things as equal
The virtue of the sage is wholeness
He too regards all things as equal.

When the government is unseen
the people are simple and happy.
When the government is lively
the people are cunning and discontented.

Milk, Milk, Lemonade
Around the back
Fudge is made

[epo]

When the government is unseen
the people are simple and happy.
When the government is lively
the people are cunning and discontented.

Thus it is the subtle essence
that gives life to all things,
and with its virtue nurses them, grows them,
fosters them, shelters them, comforts them,
nourishes them and embraces them.

[underdog]

Whenever I go to an ER and see 90% of the room full of illegals who will never pay a dime for treatment and they get to go in before me, a tax paying hard working citizen, I think what a great country we live in.

Where do you live that 90% of the people in the waiting room are illegal immigrants? Are you sure you aren't thinking of nothing?

[conman823]

Where do you live that 90% of the people in the waiting room are illegal immigrants? Are you sure you aren't thinking of nothing?

Staten Island, NY

Richmond County Medical Center ER

Spend a Friday Night there, its a blast.

[underdog]

Staten Island, NY

Richmond County Medical Center ER

Spend a Friday Night there, its a blast.

Why would I go to a hospital on a Friday night?

Are you sure you aren't confusing homeless with illegal immigrants?

[TooLowBrow]

So then you would cover Smokers who contract Lung Cancer as well? Thats generous of you. To me a person who gets too 900lbs is the same thing.



Do you not help anyone who's ever smoked?
What if they only smoked as a kid and haven't tried it again for 40 years?

If not 900 lbs... how about 500? 400? 300?



It's not hard to be generous when you are helping people live better lives fictitiously on a message board which has little to no meaning in the real world.
It's odd to me to think that people, even on this entertainment purposes board, are stingy with compassion, here, where it will cost them nothing.

[GregoryJoseph]

Thus it is the subtle essence
that gives life to all things,
and with its virtue nurses them, grows them,
fosters them, shelters them, comforts them,
nourishes them and embraces them.

Exactly.

The Tao provides, not the government.

[conman823]

Why would I go to a hospital on a Friday night?

Are you sure you aren't confusing homeless with illegal immigrants?

Articles that support my local issues with ER's.

http://www.ny1.com/content/top_stories/105083/si-hospital-nears-er-capacity--prompts-talk-of-expansion/Default.aspx

http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2009/08/at_last_islands_2_hospitals_ma.html

[underdog]

Articles that support my local issues with ER's.

http://www.ny1.com/content/top_stories/105083/si-hospital-nears-er-capacity--prompts-talk-of-expansion/Default.aspx

http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2009/08/at_last_islands_2_hospitals_ma.html

I have to be honest; I see no difference between residents of Staten Island and illegal immigrants.

[epo]

Exactly.

The Tao provides, not the government.

Good, tell that to the uninsured and underinsured in our nation. I'm sure their Tao will heal them.

[conman823]

It's odd to me to think that people, even on this entertainment purposes board, are stingy with compassion, here, where it will cost them nothing.

Your discussing REAL issues on a message board. Look my views would be the same if we were out having a beer.

You want me on HERE to be compassionate to everyone instead of being who I truely am? Thats crap, usually I like to keep it light and hang around the Tech board and wrestling forums, but this isn't a light topic.

Ultimately the whole system is FUCKED, and nobody in politics is going to fix that.

[conman823]

I have to be honest; I see no difference between residents of Staten Island and illegal immigrants.

Shocking, more Boston ignorance.

[conman823]

Good, tell that to the uninsured and underinsured in our nation. I'm sure their Tao will heal them.

Holistic treatments cost too much. No insurance will cover that!

[TooLowBrow]

Shocking, more Boston ignorance.

That's true.

Here in NY we'd rather have illegal immigrants than Staten Islanders

[conman823]

That's true.

Here in NY we'd rather have illegal immigrants than Staten Islanders

Immigrants from New Hyde Park and Brooklyn are the reason this town stinks to begin with.

I hate SI..why am I defending it?

[TooLowBrow]

Immigrants from New Hyde Park and Brooklyn are the reason this town stinks to begin with.



That's cause we keep sending our garbage over there! HAHA!
:lol:

[The Jays]

That's cause we keep sending our garbage over there! HAHA!
:lol:

Yeah, try again, the city closed the dump almost a decade ago, fucko.

[The Jays]

I have to be honest; I see no difference between residents of Staten Island and illegal immigrants.

Don't fucking insult me.

[TooLowBrow]

Yeah, try again, the city closed the dump almost a decade ago, fucko.

Maybe you're used to it if you live there, but it still stinks:down:

[earthbrown]

no

[The Jays]

Maybe you're used to it if you live there, but it still stinks:down:

Where the fuck can you still smell it? What part of the island? Tell me.

[TooLowBrow]

Where the fuck can you still smell it? What part of the island? Tell me.

I can see the stink lines from here

http://www.wpclipart.com/cartoon/turd.png

[conman823]

The people who will be living on top of the Freshkills landfill when its turned into Million Dollar homes will need Universal Health Care from the cancer causing Air and Water.

[The Jays]

Yeah, sorry, wrong. Can't build houses on parkland, so try again.

[furie]

Yeah, sorry, wrong. Can't build houses on parkland, so try again.

you don't have to build on the parkland.
all that trash will seep into the water table

[HBox]

Everyone knows that only pedophiles, retards and half-man, half-animal abominations live on Staten island.

[sr71blackbird]

It is not a "right". It is a privelage, and a luxury, much like owning a car or a home. If you have the money for it and need it, you get it. However, if you need it and have the money for it and choose to not take advantage of it, that is your "right".

[epo]

It is not a "right". It is a privelage, and a luxury, much like owning a car or a home. If you have the money for it and need it, you get it. However, if you need it and have the money for it and choose to not take advantage of it, that is your "right".

Exactly. Only the priviledged deserve health care coverage, fuck everyone else.

[SouthSideJohnny]

You are so right. If you get sick without a safety net, you DESERVE to go bankrupt.

Do you also have a right to employment? What if someone gets laid off without a safety net, do they deserve to go bankrupt?

[epo]

Do you also have a right to employment? What if someone gets laid off without a safety night, do they deserve to go bankrupt?

False equivalency.

Although we do have a safety net called unemployment insurance.

[earthbrown]

Exactly. Only the priviledged deserve health care coverage, fuck everyone else.

everyone gets basic emergency care, above that it is a luxury.

Where does it stop? Should i be entitled to the same care Bill Gates gets???


K

[SouthSideJohnny]

How is that a false equivalency? If you lose your job through no fault of your own, it could very well put you into bankruptcy. How is that different from an illness resulting from no fault of your own?

As for unemployment benefits, they only last for limited duration. I have friends who were laid off recently and the unemployment doesn't come close to matching the lost salaries. If they were not able to find replacement jobs, they would have been heading into bankruptcy. That seems directly analogous to the healthcare issue.

The unemployment benis are akin to an emergency room not letting you die if they can prevent it. It will keep you alive for a while longer, but the bills are still going to drive you into bankruptcy.

[Syd]

Healthcare is a necessary right. No matter how you cut it, preventable deaths and disease represent a loss towards you. Whether you want to be human about it and realize that there are people dying due to lack of healthcare or if you want to be greedy about it and recognize that a preventable death is the loss of a consumer.

It hurts the bottom line of business, it hurts your fellow citizens of the United States. The only defensible excuse that healthcare is not a right is if you're a boardmember of a health insurance company and look to lose profits from universal healthcare.

[boosterp]

Thumbing through responses I have mixed feelings on this. Being a vet who has multiple injuries from service of this county my health care is a right. I have seen the vets who did not occur injuries in the service abuse the system, hell half of them will brag about it over a smoke. The VA was specifically set up to care for those injured in the service but expanded in the 80s to care for all veterans making under a certain amount of money. Since then the flood gates have opened and the budget has more than tripped just in the past 10 years. Yet, my VA serves just under 121k people and has a annual medical operating budget of $580 million.

On the "civilian" side I have worked with our county health care system which serves the uninsured and under-insured people living in this area. The annual operating budget is $1.3 billion for a census of 900k.

So, we spend $4800 per veteran treated and $1450 per civilian treated.

That is a lot of freaking money. So, I am torn between it being a right (otherwise I'd be a hypocrite) and it being something earned (which I'd also be a hypocrite). Could it be both, in my case though it is?

[west milly Tom]

Health care is something you plan for and earn. What are some other "rights? Perhaps universal day care and universal home ownership. Thus debate is an exerscize in futility. Everyone knows the three inalienable rights. Life is one of them. Free health care isn't. For fuck's sake already.

[west milly Tom]

Also if you want to curb health care costs lift the interstate trade ban on insurance and allow the companies to compete nation wide. Watch the costs fall the market would fix itsel.

[A.J.]

Urine in my anus.

I think the more important question is if THIS is a right.

[boosterp]

Also if you want to curb health care costs lift the interstate trade ban on insurance and allow the companies to compete nation wide. Watch the costs fall the market would fix itsel.

There is some truth to this since each state has a say in health insurance practices. But since most companies (health and business') are national the savings would be very little

[epo]

There is some truth to this since each state has a say in health insurance practices. But since most companies (health and business') are national the savings would be very little

Exactly. Working in the health care industry, I find the national discourse on this issue to be woefully ignorant.

[boosterp]

Exactly. Working in the health care industry, I find the national discourse on this issue to be woefully ignorant.

I do as well. Being a former provider I would have to check off on a certain form what service I provided for the patient, use diagnostic codes, etc. for billing purposes. Many have not a clue what all that entails nor how it all translates into coverage or insurance practices. Yet what they do know is co-pays and what is taken out of their checks each month. Thus, many only see one side of the whole issue. Working with Medicare and Medicaid will also give one who is in the industry much insight yet many on the outside whether covered by these 2 or not have not a clue what is going on other than what payroll taxes them for.

[booster11373]

No health care for anyone at anytime is my new mantra!!!!!!!!!!

saying that I hope someone gets some deadly virulent communicable disease that will just eat the fleash and turn the brain to mush

[The Jays]

everyone gets basic emergency care, above that it is a luxury.

Where does it stop? Should i be entitled to the same care Bill Gates gets???


K

Where the hell do they get basic emergency care? If you go to a hospital, yes, they must treat you, but they then send you a bill, and if you cannot pay it, creditors come after you. I know this because it's happened to me.

[west milly Tom]

Where the hell do they get basic emergency care? If you go to a hospital, yes, they must treat you, but they then send you a bill, and if you cannot pay it, creditors come after you. I know this because it's happened to me.



Get a job then hippie.

[The Jays]

Get a job then hippie.

Fuck you. I have a job. I was recalling an instance when I was 19, when I did not have health insurance.

[The Jays]

Also if you want to curb health care costs lift the interstate trade ban on insurance and allow the companies to compete nation wide. Watch the costs fall the market would fix itsel.

That would require federal regulation of the industry. Are you supportive of that?

[west milly Tom]

That would require federal regulation of the industry. Are you supportive of that?



No dummy it would require deregulation. The ban is there because of faulty lawmaking that's already in place.

[The Jays]

No, douchebag, if you allow interstate health coverage, then which states' rules regulate it?

[Ogre]

I see your hippie and raise you a dummy. I see your dummy and raise you a douchebag.

[The Jays]

I see your hippie and raise you a dummy. I see your dummy and raise you a douchebag.

I'M ALL IN, MUNGEATER!

[Syd]

Also if you want to curb health care costs lift the interstate trade ban on insurance and allow the companies to compete nation wide. Watch the costs fall the market would fix itsel.

Do you understand how destructive that is to states rights to begin with? Beyond that, companies would have no lower limit on necessary care. Care might be cheaper (doubtful, as investors have come to expect a certain increasing profit margin) but the quality of care would plummet.

[Syd]

Furthermore:

http://healthcare.change.org/blog/view/why_health_insurance_dergulation_aint_enough

It was a central piece of John McCain’s health care plan and is usually offered as one of the conservative alternatives to health insurance reform. Instead of adding additional regulations to prevent discrimination on the basis of pre-existing conditions, rescissions, and the practice of charging different premiums on the basis of gender, age and health status, the argument goes, let’s do the opposite. Let’s open up insurance so it can be bought across state lines. What this means is bypassing the various state laws and regulations that require all insurers within that state to provide minimum coverage for "optional" items like mental health, mammograms, prostate cancer screenings or hearing aids. The basic theory is people should be able to purchase less insurance, no matter what the state says. Less regulation means less cost, right?

The problem with this theory of deregulation is it’s testable. We know what the different configurations of state mandates for health insurance look like right now. We also have a good estimate from the Congressional Budget and other sources on what these mandates cost. Removing them wouldn’t drive costs in aggregate down. It would just lead to more underinsured and likely more medical debt-related bankruptcies. (Swell.)

The state with the fewest mandates and regulations is Idaho. In theory, if you opened up insurance to be purchased across state lines to avoid mandates, here’s where you’d shop. So let me start with the bad news. Between 2000 and 2007, Idaho’s premiums have gone up 122%. That’s four times the increase in people’s wages. Ah, but wait, let’s compare free market Idaho with the cruel government regulation in Minnesota, the state with the most regulations. During 2000-2007, Minnesota actually added a couple of mandates, yet their premiums went up 74%. The net result is that Idaho is still cheaper for an average family of 4, but it’s hardly a bargain: $11,432 to $12,090 for Minnesota. Although it has more mandates than Idaho, Wyoming is generally considered one of the least regulated states for insurance – they don’t even restrict insurance companies for denying you at any time, for any reason. The reward for their loose hand on the reins is that premiums have gone up 129%.

[The Jays]

Blah blah blah, take your citations and your links and your reading to the field of flowers, you dumb hippie.

[Syd]

Last but not least, the calls for tort reform are a way of putting an exact price on your own life for insurance companies and nothing else.

http://www.slate.com/id/2145400/

The best attempt to synthesize the academic literature on medical malpractice is Tom Baker's The Medical Malpractice Myth, published last November. Baker, a law professor at the University of Connecticut who studies insurance, argues that the hype about medical malpractice suits is "urban legend mixed with the occasional true story, supported by selective references to academic studies." After all, including legal fees, insurance costs, and payouts, the cost of the suits comes to less than one-half of 1 percent of health-care spending. If anything, there are fewer lawsuits than would be expected, and far more injuries than we usually imagine.

When baseless medical malpractice suits were brought, the study further found, the courts efficiently threw them out. Only six of the cases in which the researchers couldn't detect injury received even token compensation. Of those in which an injury resulted from treatment, but evidence of error was uncertain, 145 out of 515 received compensation. Indeed, a bigger problem was that 236* cases were thrown out of court despite evidence of injury and error to patients by physicians. The other approximately 1,050 cases, in the research team's opinion, were decided correctly, with damage awards going to the injured and dismissal foiling the frivolous suits.*

[Lil oc]

I voted yes, because I live where there's health care. Preventative medicine is much cheaper then wait til you're so damn sick you require extensive, expensive treatment.

The US is the only developed country that doesn't provide national health care yet pays more per capita. Something's wrong there.

[west milly Tom]

That would require federal regulation of the industry. Are you supportive of that?


No, douchebag, if you allow interstate health coverage, then which states' rules regulate it?

dummy

in addition, there shouldn't be any regulation. Regulation chokes markets, waters down product, and ends up hurting the consumer in the long run.

[west milly Tom]

Furthermore:

http://healthcare.change.org/blog/view/why_health_insurance_dergulation_aint_enough

good source btw...why it aint enough. seems like a totally credible source. :wallbash:

[The Jays]

dummy

in addition, there shouldn't be any regulation. Regulation chokes markets, waters down product, and ends up hurting the consumer in the long run.

If there's no regulation, why wouldn't the healthcare companies keep doing exactly what they do now?

[The Jays]

dummy

in addition, there shouldn't be any regulation. Regulation chokes markets, waters down product, and ends up hurting the consumer in the long run.

douchebag.

My point is, since you can't have one state tell another state how the health coverage will be, it has to be federally regulated, since it is interstate commerce.

dummy.

[west milly Tom]

If there's no regulation, why wouldn't the healthcare companies keep doing exactly what they do now?

what they're doing now is working. according to latest data 85% of Americans are happy with their health care. The system isn't broke. There are some things that need to be addressed but the number of actual people uninsured and not choosing to be is hovering at %15. Get a hair cut and a job sir. You don't go out looking for a job like that do you? I've got news for you. Your revoloution is over. Bums lose!

[The Jays]

what they're doing now is working. according to latest data 85% of Americans are happy with their health care. The system isn't broke. There are some things that need to be addressed but the number of actual people uninsured and not choosing to be is hovering at %15. Get a hair cut and a job sir. You don't go out looking for a job like that do you? I've got news for you. Your revoloution is over. Bums lose!

Where is this 85% that you cite? Are you pulling that number out of your ass?

Because I can cite that 56% of American are in favor of health care reform this year, while 33% oppose (http://www.gallup.com/poll/121664/Majority-Favors-Healthcare-Reform-This-Year.aspx).

And I know, it's from Gallup, which is a left wing polling service, of course.

[high fly]

It is worth noting that, 10thers notwithstanding, that the Founding Fathers believed federal government involvement in health care was proper.

On July 20, 1789, the First Congress appointed a committee to study a health care program for merchant seamen (remember, back then our economy was based on import and export of manufactured goods and raw materials).

On July 20, 1790, a bill was passed requiring health care for merchant seamen.

On July 16, 1798, a bill passed to further deal with providing health care for merchant mariners.
The same year, the U.S. Public Health Service was established.
Also in 1798, Congress established the U.S. Marine Hospitals. This was part of the first health insurance program in America. Taxes were collected in ports from shipmasters and hospitals were established in ports and along inland waterways.


here are some links for y'all to show that health care is an American tradition that began with the Founding Fathers who knew more than anyone what they meant when they wrote and adopted the Constitution, and whether the federal government has a role in health care or not:

http://www.os.dhhs.gov/about/opdivs/phs.html

http://www.1798consultants.com/about_us.html

http://www.blnz.com/news/2008/04/23/Describing_Life_Cycle_US_Marine_5422.html

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/exhibition/phs_history/intro.html

http://www.olgp.net/chs/hospital/marine.htm

http://www.npl.lib.va.us/history/history42.html

[Syd]

Where is this 85% that you cite? Are you pulling that number out of your ass?

Because I can cite that 56% of American are in favor of health care reform this year, while 33% oppose (http://www.gallup.com/poll/121664/Majority-Favors-Healthcare-Reform-This-Year.aspx).

And I know, it's from Gallup, which is a left wing polling service, of course.

iirc Medicare has about an 85% approval/satisfaction rate, give or take a few points.

Also, Iraq and Afghanistan have UHC on America's dime. So, we're already doing socialized medicine -- just not for our own citizens.

[epo]

dummy

in addition, there shouldn't be any regulation. Regulation chokes markets, waters down product, and ends up hurting the consumer in the long run.

So much of our economy is fucked up because of deregulation and you want to fix shit by rewarding the problematic areas with MORE deregulation?

Insanity.

[HBox]

Yes, let's deregulate them because in the areas we aren't regulating them they are acting so responsibly. (http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/17/business/fi-rescind17)

[earthbrown]

Do you understand how destructive that is to states rights to begin with? Beyond that, companies would have no lower limit on necessary care. Care might be cheaper (doubtful, as investors have come to expect a certain increasing profit margin) but the quality of care would plummet.


if all you people think it is a "RIGHT" to healthcare, than that would transcend the right of states to regulate it.


do you understand how CAR insurance works???

All the companies must abide by the rules of the state the insurance is bought. for instance, in NYS if your car is totaled, and the insurance company does not want to pay you what you think it is worth, you can MAKE the insurance find and purchase for you same year, make, model, condition, and mileage of the car that was totaled, pre-crash. Not the same in other states.

Why does everyone want others to pay for their life?

The 8% penalty will FORCE all onto the public option.

Here is how.

It costs $274 a week for my family plan.
my 2 co-workers pay $274, and $150 per week.
so total weekly insurance cost, $698, for a yearly cost of $36296

Total payroll for the 3 employees is around $270,000.

If I am wrong I apologize, but as I understand it my boss has 2 options, pay for the insurance in full, or pay penalty.

So he can pay, $36296 to cover the insurance.

or

He can pay $21600 to the gov't as a penalty.

Which do you think he will do?

For a lower paying company it gets way more of a business decision to do this, 8% of payroll is usually WAY less than the cost of paying for the insurance.

So this will FORCE people onto the public option, which is basically MANDATING socialized medicine.






K

[TheGameHHH]

No.

might be the first thing we've ever agreed on.

[west milly Tom]

if all you people think it is a "RIGHT" to healthcare, than that would transcend the right of states to regulate it.


do you understand how CAR insurance works???

All the companies must abide by the rules of the state the insurance is bought. for instance, in NYS if your car is totaled, and the insurance company does not want to pay you what you think it is worth, you can MAKE the insurance find and purchase for you same year, make, model, condition, and mileage of the car that was totaled, pre-crash. Not the same in other states.

Why does everyone want others to pay for their life?

The 8% penalty will FORCE all onto the public option.

Here is how.

It costs $274 a week for my family plan.
my 2 co-workers pay $274, and $150 per week.
so total weekly insurance cost, $698, for a yearly cost of $36296

Total payroll for the 3 employees is around $270,000.

If I am wrong I apologize, but as I understand it my boss has 2 options, pay for the insurance in full, or pay penalty.

So he can pay, $36296 to cover the insurance.

or

He can pay $21600 to the gov't as a penalty.

Which do you think he will do?

For a lower paying company it gets way more of a business decision to do this, 8% of payroll is usually WAY less than the cost of paying for the insurance.

So this will FORCE people onto the public option, which is basically MANDATING socialized medicine.






K

This. Thanks budday.

[Recyclerz]

if all you people think it is a "RIGHT" to healthcare, than that would transcend the right of states to regulate it.


do you understand how CAR insurance works???

All the companies must abide by the rules of the state the insurance is bought. for instance, in NYS if your car is totaled, and the insurance company does not want to pay you what you think it is worth, you can MAKE the insurance find and purchase for you same year, make, model, condition, and mileage of the car that was totaled, pre-crash. Not the same in other states.

Why does everyone want others to pay for their life?

The 8% penalty will FORCE all onto the public option.

Here is how.

It costs $274 a week for my family plan.
my 2 co-workers pay $274, and $150 per week.
so total weekly insurance cost, $698, for a yearly cost of $36296

Total payroll for the 3 employees is around $270,000.

If I am wrong I apologize, but as I understand it my boss has 2 options, pay for the insurance in full, or pay penalty.

So he can pay, $36296 to cover the insurance.

or

He can pay $21600 to the gov't as a penalty.

Which do you think he will do?

For a lower paying company it gets way more of a business decision to do this, 8% of payroll is usually WAY less than the cost of paying for the insurance.

So this will FORCE people onto the public option, which is basically MANDATING socialized medicine.

K

Although there is no agreed upon "final" legislation yet I believe your analysis is wrong in certain ways. I think you are right about the choice that your boss will have. A lot of small (and probably large) firms will want to get out of the insurance business, but with employer's costs in this area rising so furiously a lot will be forced to drop it anyway, with or without any actions by the Federales.

The penalty $ your Company will pay goes into the pool of an insurance exchange which will partially subsidize the cost of the new customers, including yourself. As outlined, private insurers will then offer various plans that you can pick from, with certain baseline features (you can't be dropped if you have a pre-existing condition or if you get seriously sick, etc.). The so-called Public Option would be a plan set up by the gov't. that would theoretically have a big hammer to force health care providers (hospitals, drug companies, etc.) to limit the cost increases they pass along to the insurers and patients. Private insurers would also be able to get the benefit of the government's coat tails on this point. But the Public Option plan would only be one plan for you to choose from and it would have to (after a limited start-up time) pay for itself without additional tax $ with the premiums it charged just like the other insurance providers, so it would have to be run like a business.

If Obama were proposing a "single-payer" system (ie. Medicare for everybody) the calls of "socialized medicine" could conceivably have a bit of traction (although we could debate whether that would be a good or bad thing). But with what will probably be on the table with the public option (or with quasi-public insurance co-ops) the cries of "Government Takeover" are ill-informed at best and deceptive lies otherwise. I can sort of understand people being confused because the Right-wing media organs are shovelling the shit at Herculean rates and the so-called mainstream media outlets are doing a piss-poor job of explaining reality.

[conman823]

So much of our economy is fucked up because of deregulation and you want to fix shit by rewarding the problematic areas with MORE deregulation?

Insanity.

Government Regulation and Universal Healthcare is not the answer. Take your Kid or sick Mother to a Welfare clinic just ONCE in your life and you would realize that.


Yes, let's deregulate them because in the areas we aren't regulating them they are acting so responsibly. (http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/17/business/fi-rescind17)

This article is hardly the normal course of Business or else these companys wouldn't exist.

What it really shows is how much the Mainstream Media leans to the Left.

The answer should be Government run Healthcare where you wait and die for a Kidney or a test that might save your life. If you think that doesn't happen ask some people who fly into this country to escape the Utopia of there Universal Healthcare system.

That is insanity.

[earthbrown]

Government Regulation and Universal Healthcare is not the answer. Take your Kid or sick Mother to a Welfare clinic just ONCE in your life and you would realize that.




This article is hardly the normal course of Business or else these companys wouldn't exist.

What it really shows is how much the Mainstream Media leans to the Left.

The answer should be Government run Healthcare where you wait and die for a Kidney or a test that might save your life. If you think that doesn't happen ask some people who fly into this country to escape the Utopia of there Universal Healthcare system.

That is insanity.

insurance companies can be scumbags, but all in all, they pretty much pay for whatever your doctor recommends.

K

[HBox]

This article is hardly the normal course of Business or else these companys wouldn't exist.

What it really shows is how much the Mainstream Media leans to the Left.

The answer should be Government run Healthcare where you wait and die for a Kidney or a test that might save your life. If you think that doesn't happen ask some people who fly into this country to escape the Utopia of there Universal Healthcare system.

That is insanity.

You should probably educate yourself about this issue before speaking.

Because this is happening. (http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/18/business/fi-rescind18)

A lot. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/07/AR2009090702455.html)

Insurers admit to it, and say they won't stop. (http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2009/06/17/insurers-not-committing-to-end-rescission/)

It goes on and on, and just because you use that tired "liberal media" excuse to refuse to believe anything you don't want to believe won't make it go away. (http://www.slate.com/id/2223680/)

And even in badly run government health care system like Canada and the UK they STILL live longer and have higher satisfaction with their health care than we do. The links have been posted ad nasuem so i'm not going to do it again.

[booster11373]

Doesn't anyone strive for anything anymore? Why cant America have the best health care in the world and allow people to actually be able to afford it?

This fucking idea that the government is some kind of boogeyman and destroyer of everything thinking, is poison!!!

We have done great things as a COUNTRY, A SOCIETY,

[earthbrown]

Doesn't anyone strive for anything anymore?

I dont think so, people simply want the government to hold their hand. They want the government to be like parents, and roll through life without a care.


Why cant America have the best health care in the world and allow people to actually be able to afford it?

Ok, your statement answers its own question.

Because we are the best, things cost money.

Like saying, "why cant mercedes make the best car in the world, and only sell it for $10,000". If something is the best, it is more expensive. If I am the BEST painter in the town, I charge more than the illegal on the corner. IF I am the best tattooist i charge more than the jail-house guy that did the "Sopranos" on Dave's back.


This fucking idea that the government is some kind of boogeyman and destroyer of everything thinking, is poison!!!

We have done great things as a COUNTRY, A SOCIETY,

Because the government spends OUR money like it is nothing, they waste and spend without thinking.

[booster11373]

I dont think so, people simply want the government to hold their hand. They want the government to be like parents, and roll through life without a care.




Ok, your statement answers its own question.

Because we are the best, things cost money.

Like saying, "why cant mercedes make the best car in the world, and only sell it for $10,000". If something is the best, it is more expensive. If I am the BEST painter in the town, I charge more than the illegal on the corner. IF I am the best tattooist i charge more than the jail-house guy that did the "Sopranos" on Dave's back.




Because the government spends OUR money like it is nothing, they waste and spend without thinking.

Your views on how our Government operates and should operate are polar opposite to mine as well as what we as a people should be striving for as well as the definition of the word, Health care should be considered a utility not a commodity

Good luck in thunderdome

[earthbrown]

Your views on how our Government operates and should operate are polar opposite to mine as well as what we as a people should be striving for as well as the definition of the word, Health care should be considered a utility not a commodity

Good luck in thunderdome


IT IS A FUCKING COMMODITY!!!!!

Goddamn, I fucking HATE when people think something is a RIGHT!

It is not your RIGHT to steal from me for your own physical, financial, or other benefit. You wanting the government to pay for health insurance, STEALS MONEY from some, to GIVE TO OTHERS!!!


K

[epo]

IT IS A FUCKING COMMODITY!!!!!

Goddamn, I fucking HATE when people think something is a RIGHT!

It is not your RIGHT to steal from me for your own physical, financial, or other benefit. You wanting the government to pay for health insurance, STEALS MONEY from some, to GIVE TO OTHERS!!!

K

If its a commodity, then explain why hospitals cannot refuse service at an emergency room. Oh that's right....

BECAUSE LAWMAKERS UNDERSTOOD ITS A FUCKING RIGHT!

[earthbrown]

If its a commodity, then explain why hospitals cannot refuse service at an emergency room. Oh that's right....

BECAUSE LAWMAKERS UNDERSTOOD ITS A FUCKING RIGHT!

It is a right to get care in an emergency room, the reason for this is emergency room used to be reserved for EMERGENCIES. Now uneducated poor people take their fucking kids there for a runny nose.

Where does this RIGHT stop, no one seems to explain this to me.

As far as I can see we have 3 basic levels of healthcare in this country.

1. Poor people, who are on medicaid, medicare(old people), no coverage at all.

2. Middle to upperclass people, who have HMO coverage through their employers.

3. Super rich, who get whatever they want, whenever they want. They are either covered by an HMO as well, private policy, or out of their bank accounts.

So me falling into the 2nd category, I would like to have all the care afforded the people in the 3rd category. I want Christopher Reeves style healthcare should I ever need it, I want to be able to travel to the top of the line medical center that treated Ted Kennedy's cancer, I want MILLIONS spent on me. All in the name of making it equal, because we all know if it is a RIGHT it should apply to ALL, unless they disqualify themselves by some other means.

Rights must be applied equally, unless you forfeit it. For instance, felons lose many rights, because they forfeited them by being convicted of a serious crime.

he puts this perfectly and more elephantly(get it), than I can...

Notice: The following article is Copyright 1993 by Leonard Peikoff and is being distributed by permission. This article may be distributed electronically provided that it not be altered in any manner whatsoever. All notices including this notice must remain affixed to this article.
Health Care Is Not A Right

by Leonard Peikoff, Ph.D. Delivered at a Town Hall Meeting on the Clinton Health Plan. Red Lion Hotel, Costa Mesa CA. December 11, 1993

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen:

Most people who oppose socialized medicine do so on the grounds that it is moral and well-intentioned, but impractical; i.e., it is a noble idea -- which just somehow does not work. I do not agree that socialized medicine is moral and well-intentioned, but impractical. Of course, it is impractical -- it does not work -- but I hold that it is impractical because it is immoral. This is not a case of noble in theory but a failure in practice; it is a case of vicious in theory and therefore a disaster in practice. So I'm going to leave it to other speakers to concentrate on the practical flaws in the Clinton health plan. I want to focus on the moral issue at stake. So long as people believe that socialized medicine is a noble plan, there is no way to fight it. You cannot stop a noble plan -- not if it really is noble. The only way you can defeat it is to unmask it -- to show that it is the very opposite of noble. Then at least you have a fighting chance.

What is morality in this context? The American concept of it is officially stated in the Declaration of Independence. It upholds man's unalienable, individual rights. The term "rights," note, is a moral (not just a political) term; it tells us that a certain course of behavior is right, sanctioned, proper, a prerogative to be respected by others, not interfered with -- and that anyone who violates a man's rights is: wrong, morally wrong, unsanctioned, evil.

Now our only rights, the American viewpoint continues, are the rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. That's all. According to the Founding Fathers, we are not born with a right to a trip to Disneyland, or a meal at Mcdonald's, or a kidney dialysis (nor with the 18th-century equivalent of these things). We have certain specific rights -- and only these.

Why only these? Observe that all legitimate rights have one thing in common: they are rights to action, not to rewards from other people. The American rights impose no obligations on other people, merely the negative obligation to leave you alone. The system guarantees you the chance to work for what you want -- not to be given it without effort by somebody else.

The right to life, e.g., does not mean that your neighbors have to feed and clothe you; it means you have the right to earn your food and clothes yourself, if necessary by a hard struggle, and that no one can forcibly stop your struggle for these things or steal them from you if and when you have achieved them. In other words: you have the right to act, and to keep the results of your actions, the products you make, to keep them or to trade them with others, if you wish. But you have no right to the actions or products of others, except on terms to which they voluntarily agree.

To take one more example: the right to the pursuit of happiness is precisely that: the right to the pursuit -- to a certain type of action on your part and its result -- not to any guarantee that other people will make you happy or even try to do so. Otherwise, there would be no liberty in the country: if your mere desire for something, anything, imposes a duty on other people to satisfy you, then they have no choice in their lives, no say in what they do, they have no liberty, they cannot pursue their happiness. Your "right" to happiness at their expense means that they become rightless serfs, i.e., your slaves. Your right to anything at others' expense means that they become rightless.

That is why the U.S. system defines rights as it does, strictly as the rights to action. This was the approach that made the U.S. the first truly free country in all world history -- and, soon afterwards, as a result, the greatest country in history, the richest and the most powerful. It became the most powerful because its view of rights made it the most moral. It was the country of individualism and personal independence.

Today, however, we are seeing the rise of principled immorality in this country. We are seeing a total abandonment by the intellectuals and the politicians of the moral principles on which the U.S. was founded. We are seeing the complete destruction of the concept of rights. The original American idea has been virtually wiped out, ignored as if it had never existed. The rule now is for politicians to ignore and violate men's actual rights, while arguing about a whole list of rights never dreamed of in this country's founding documents -- rights which require no earning, no effort, no action at all on the part of the recipient.

You are entitled to something, the politicians say, simply because it exists and you want or need it -- period. You are entitled to be given it by the government. Where does the government get it from? What does the government have to do to private citizens -- to their individual rights -- to their real rights -- in order to carry out the promise of showering free services on the people?

The answers are obvious. The newfangled rights wipe out real rights -- and turn the people who actually create the goods and services involved into servants of the state. The Russians tried this exact system for many decades. Unfortunately, we have not learned from their experience. Yet the meaning of socialism (this is the right name for Clinton's medical plan) is clearly evident in any field at all -- you don't need to think of health care as a special case; it is just as apparent if the government were to proclaim a universal right to food, or to a vacation, or to a haircut. I mean: a right in the new sense: not that you are free to earn these things by your own effort and trade, but that you have a moral claim to be given these things free of charge, with no action on your part, simply as handouts from a benevolent government.

How would these alleged new rights be fulfilled? Take the simplest case: you are born with a moral right to hair care, let us say, provided by a loving government free of charge to all who want or need it. What would happen under such a moral theory?

Haircuts are free, like the air we breathe, so some people show up every day for an expensive new styling, the government pays out more and more, barbers revel in their huge new incomes, and the profession starts to grow ravenously, bald men start to come in droves for free hair implantations, a school of fancy, specialized eyebrow pluckers develops -- it's all free, the government pays. The dishonest barbers are having a field day, of course -- but so are the honest ones; they are working and spending like mad, trying to give every customer his heart's desire, which is a millionaire's worth of special hair care and services -- the government starts to scream, the budget is out of control. Suddenly directives erupt: we must limit the number of barbers, we must limit the time spent on haircuts, we must limit the permissible type of hair styles; bureaucrats begin to split hairs about how many hairs a barber should be allowed to split. A new computerized office of records filled with inspectors and red tape shoots up; some barbers, it seems, are still getting too rich, they must be getting more than their fair share of the national hair, so barbers have to start applying for Certificates of Need in order to buy razors, while peer review boards are established to assess every stylist's work, both the dishonest and the overly honest alike, to make sure that no one is too bad or too good or too busy or too unbusy. Etc. In the end, there are lines of wretched customers waiting for their chance to be routinely scalped by bored, hog-tied haircutters some of whom remember dreamily the old days when somehow everything was so much better.

Do you think the situation would be improved by having hair-care cooperatives organized by the government? -- having them engage in managed competition, managed by the government, in order to buy haircut insurance from companies controlled by the government?

If this is what would happen under government-managed hair care, what else can possibly happen -- it is already starting to happen -- under the idea of health care as a right? Health care in the modern world is a complex, scientific, technological service. How can anybody be born with a right to such a thing?

Under the American system you have a right to health care if you can pay for it, i.e., if you can earn it by your own action and effort. But nobody has the right to the services of any professional individual or group simply because he wants them and desperately needs them. The very fact that he needs these services so desperately is the proof that he had better respect the freedom, the integrity, and the rights of the people who provide them.

You have a right to work, not to rob others of the fruits of their work, not to turn others into sacrificial, rightless animals laboring to fulfill your needs.

Some of you may ask here: But can people afford health care on their own? Even leaving aside the present government-inflated medical prices, the answer is: Certainly people can afford it. Where do you think the money is coming from right now to pay for it all -- where does the government get its fabled unlimited money? Government is not a productive organization; it has no source of wealth other than confiscation of the citizens' wealth, through taxation, deficit financing or the like.

But, you may say, isn't it the "rich" who are really paying the costs of medical care now -- the rich, not the broad bulk of the people? As has been proved time and again, there are not enough rich anywhere to make a dent in the government's costs; it is the vast middle class in the U.S. that is the only source of the kind of money that national programs like government health care require. A simple example of this is the fact that the Clinton Administration's new program rests squarely on the backs not of Big Business, but of small businessmen who are struggling in today's economy merely to stay alive and in existence. Under any socialized program, it is the "little people" who do most of the paying for it -- under the senseless pretext that "the people" can't afford such and such, so the government must take over. If the people of a country truly couldn't afford a certain service -- as e.g. in Somalia -- neither, for that very reason, could any government in that country afford it, either.

Some people can't afford medical care in the U.S. But they are necessarily a small minority in a free or even semi-free country. If they were the majority, the country would be an utter bankrupt and could not even think of a national medical program. As to this small minority, in a free country they have to rely solely on private, voluntary charity. Yes, charity, the kindness of the doctors or of the better off -- charity, not right, i.e. not their right to the lives or work of others. And such charity, I may say, was always forthcoming in the past in America. The advocates of Medicaid and Medicare under LBJ did not claim that the poor or old in the '60's got bad care; they claimed that it was an affront for anyone to have to depend on charity.

But the fact is: You don't abolish charity by calling it something else. If a person is getting health care for nothing, simply because he is breathing, he is still getting charity, whether or not President Clinton calls it a "right." To call it a Right when the recipient did not earn it is merely to compound the evil. It is charity still -- though now extorted by criminal tactics of force, while hiding under a dishonest name.

As with any good or service that is provided by some specific group of men, if you try to make its possession by all a right, you thereby enslave the providers of the service, wreck the service, and end up depriving the very consumers you are supposed to be helping. To call "medical care" a right will merely enslave the doctors and thus destroy the quality of medical care in this country, as socialized medicine has done around the world, wherever it has been tried, including Canada (I was born in Canada and I know a bit about that system first hand).

I would like to clarify the point about socialized medicine enslaving the doctors. Let me quote here from an article I wrote a few years ago: "Medicine: The Death of a Profession." [The Voice of Reason: Essays in Objectivist Thought, NAL Books, c 1988 by the Estate of Ayn Rand and Leonard Peikoff.]

"In medicine, above all, the mind must be left free. Medical treatment involves countless variables and options that must be taken into account, weighed, and summed up by the doctor's mind and subconscious. Your life depends on the private, inner essence of the doctor's function: it depends on the input that enters his brain, and on the processing such input receives from him. What is being thrust now into the equation? It is not only objective medical facts any longer. Today, in one form or another, the following also has to enter that brain: 'The DRG administrator [in effect, the hospital or HMO man trying to control costs] will raise hell if I operate, but the malpractice attorney will have a field day if I don't -- and my rival down the street, who heads the local PRO [Peer Review Organization], favors a CAT scan in these cases, I can't afford to antagonize him, but the CON boys disagree and they won't authorize a CAT scanner for our hospital -- and besides the FDA prohibits the drug I should be prescribing, even though it is widely used in Europe, and the IRS might not allow the patient a tax deduction for it, anyhow, and I can't get a specialist's advice because the latest Medicare rules prohibit a consultation with this diagnosis, and maybe I shouldn't even take this patient, he's so sick -- after all, some doctors are manipulating their slate of patients, they accept only the healthiest ones, so their average costs are coming in lower than mine, and it looks bad for my staff privileges.' Would you like your case to be treated this way -- by a doctor who takes into account your objective medical needs and the contradictory, unintelligible demands of some ninety different state and Federal government agencies? If you were a doctor could you comply with all of it? Could you plan or work around or deal with the unknowable? But how could you not? Those agencies are real and they are rapidly gaining total power over you and your mind and your patients. In this kind of nightmare world, if and when it takes hold fully, thought is helpless; no one can decide by rational means what to do. A doctor either obeys the loudest authority -- or he tries to sneak by unnoticed, bootlegging some good health care occasionally or, as so many are doing now, he simply gives up and quits the field."

The Clinton plan will finish off quality medicine in this country -- because it will finish off the medical profession. It will deliver doctors bound hands and feet to the mercies of the bureaucracy.

The only hope -- for the doctors, for their patients, for all of us -- is for the doctors to assert a moral principle. I mean: to assert their own personal individual rights -- their real rights in this issue -- their right to their lives, their liberty, their property, their pursuit of happiness. The Declaration of Independence applies to the medical profession too. We must reject the idea that doctors are slaves destined to serve others at the behest of the state.

I'd like to conclude with a sentence from Ayn Rand. Doctors, she wrote, are not servants of their patients. They are "traders, like everyone else in a free society, and they should bear that title proudly, considering the crucial importance of the services they offer."

The battle against the Clinton plan, in my opinion, depends on the doctors speaking out against the plan -- but not only on practical grounds -- rather, first of all, on moral grounds. The doctors must defend themselves and their own interests as a matter of solemn justice, upholding a moral principle, the first moral principle: self- preservation. If they can do it, all of us will still have a chance. I hope it is not already too late. Thank you.

Copies of this address in pamphlet form are available for $15 per 100 copies or $125 per 1000 copies from: Americans for Free Choice in Medicine, 1525 Superior Ave., Suite 100, Newport Beach, CA 92663, Phone (714) 645-2622, Fax (714) 645-4624. Copies of Dr. Peikoff's lecture, "Medicine: The Death of a Profession" may be purchased in pamphlet form for $2.50 each (catalog number LP04E) from: Second Renaissance Books, 110 Copperwood Way, P.O. Box 4625, Oceanside, CA 92052, Phone (800) 729-6149. (Quantity discounts are also available: $1.85 each for 10-99 copies, catalog number LP66E, $1.50 each for 100-499 copies, LP77E; $1.25 each for 500-999 copies, LP88E; and $1 each for 1000 copies and over, LP99E.)

Also available from Second Renaissance is the pamphlet "The Forgotten Man of Socialized Medicine: The Doctor," containing articles by Ayn Rand and Leonard Peikoff. (Catalog number AR10E, $2.95)

Additional information on why national health care programs don't work is available from: Objectivist Health Care Professionals Network, P.O. Box 4315, South Colby, WA 98384-0315, Phone (206) 876-5868, FAX (206) 876-2902. This organization publishes a newsletter on health care and distributes a copy of it in their health care information package.

Almost ten years ago, Leonard Peikoff predicted that our medical system would be dismantled. Looking at the young people in the crowd, he remarked:

"If you are looking for a crusade, there is none that is more idealistic or more practical. This one is devoted to protecting some of the greatest [men] in the history of this country. And it is also, literally, a matter of life and death---YOUR LIFE, and that of anyone you love. Don't let it go without a fight!"

From "Medicine: The Death of a Profession" by Leonard Peikoff from concluding remarks from 1985 presentation with Dr. Michael Peikoff.

Dr. Leonard Peikoff, author of The Ominous Parallels and Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand was a long-time (30 year) associate of the novelist/philosopher Ayn Rand and upon her death in 1982 was designated as her intellectual and legal heir. He received his Ph.D. from New York University in 1984 and taught at Hunter College. Over the years, he has served in the capacity of professor of philosophy, lecturer and chairman of the board of the Ayn Rand Institute and is currently one of the principal lecturers and instructors of the Objectivist Graduate Center. He has lectured extensively at such prestigious speakers' forums as Ford Hall Forum in Boston on several topics including philosophy and current events. Additionally, outside of academia, he has taught courses on philosophy, rhetoric, logic and Objectivism audio version of which are available from Second Renaissance Books listed above.


K

[furie]

It is not a "right". It is a privelage, and a luxury, much like owning a car or a home. If you have the money for it and need it, you get it. However, if you need it and have the money for it and choose to not take advantage of it, that is your "right".

And food. don't forget to include food in that list

----------------
Now playing: Mike and the Mechanics - Silent Running (http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/mike+and+the+mechanics/track/silent+running)
via FoxyTunes (http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/)

[Tenbatsuzen]

It is a right to get care in an emergency room, the reason for this is emergency room used to be reserved for EMERGENCIES. Now uneducated poor people take their fucking kids there for a runny nose.


I usually don't agree with you but this point, I will. A lot of people overtax ER's because of maladies that aren't ER worthy.

People don't understand or use Urgent Care facilities enough. Which are also a lot less expensive than ER's.

[epo]

I usually don't agree with you but this point, I will. A lot of people overtax ER's because of maladies that aren't ER worthy.

People don't understand or use Urgent Care facilities enough. Which are also a lot less expensive than ER's.

Absolutely, but that's an access and education issue.

[Kublakhan61]

The answer should be Government run Healthcare where you wait and die for a Kidney or a test that might save your life. If you think that doesn't happen ask some people who fly into this country to escape the Utopia of there Universal Healthcare system.



This is what people who don't do research say.

[earthbrown]

I usually don't agree with you but this point, I will. A lot of people overtax ER's because of maladies that aren't ER worthy.

People don't understand or use Urgent Care facilities enough. Which are also a lot less expensive than ER's.

I have been in the ER many times, and I have personally witnessed some of the stupidity.


Absolutely, but that's an access and education issue.

Access to education???? Fuck we spend BILLIONS on education. Problem is allot of the education goes to waste because of children with no input at home to give them the basics to life.




K

[epo]

I have been in the ER many times, and I have personally witnessed some of the stupidity.

My office is located in a hospital and can tell you they are working diligently to try to match services to needs.

Access to education???? Fuck we spend BILLIONS on education. Problem is allot of the education goes to waste because of children with no input at home to give them the basics to life.

K

Access to education about health care. As a society, we don't teach people how to access health care services properly, which adds billions to expenses.

[Tenbatsuzen]

I have been in the ER many times, and I have personally witnessed some of the stupidity.



Agreed. A friend of mine actually works in an ER and sees it up close. And she's not even in an inner city hospital, she's in a rural area full of white people.

[Tenbatsuzen]

Here's your education:

If you are bleeding profusely or unconscious, that is ER-worthy.

Everything else: Urgent Care.

[epo]

Here's your education:

If you are bleeding profusely or unconscious, that is ER-worthy.

Everything else: Urgent Care.

I think of health care in five levels:

Emergency Room
Urgent Care
Quick Care
Primary Physician
Put a band-aid on it.

If our culture was educated on those levels, we could remove alot of cost. Instead we play survival of the fittest and bitch about the results.

[Jujubees2]

I usually don't agree with you but this point, I will. A lot of people overtax ER's because of maladies that aren't ER worthy.

People don't understand or use Urgent Care facilities enough. Which are also a lot less expensive than ER's.

Which is another reason for everyone to have healthcare. If you have access to preventative care then the ERs will be much less populated.

[HBox]

Did he really just waste all that space on a 1993 rant from an Ayn Rand lunatic?

[yojimbo7248]

Did he really just waste all that space on a 1993 rant from an Ayn Rand lunatic?

yeah, call me closed minded but I scrolled down to the good doctor's credentials. Just like I am not interested in hearing a Scientologist talk about psychology, I think I will skip on the Any Rand devotee discuss the role of government in society. Let me guess, he said that if we become true capitalists, health care will be private and will cost pennies. I actually read that piece of shit Atlas Shrugged. I would rather have the DMV in charge of our healthcare than the Objectivists.

[earthbrown]

My office is located in a hospital and can tell you they are working diligently to try to match services to needs.


well hey, I will be the first to say, the ER triage nurses are great, they are awesome at assesing peoples problems, and runny nose people sit there for 2hrs, and me needing 17 stitches got right in.


Agreed. A friend of mine actually works in an ER and sees it up close. And she's not even in an inner city hospital, she's in a rural area full of white people.

its a poverty and intelligence thing. You simply have a larger concentration of poor in the cities. I have lived rural and in the city now, there is trash everywhere, we call um white trash in the rural areas and in the cities we call um, well nevermind...

Here's your education:

If you are bleeding profusely or unconscious, that is ER-worthy.

Everything else: Urgent Care.

Urgant care facilities are few and far between in my area, in fact, I dont even know where I would find one, I do know where all the ER's are.



K

[underdog]

I have been in the ER many times, and I have personally witnessed some of the stupidity.


Why have you been to the ER "many" times? You're a risk. I hope your health care provider drops you.

[earthbrown]

Why have you been to the ER "many" times? You're a risk. I hope your health care provider drops you.


I have been to the ER, 2 times in the last 4 years for stitches.

I have been there 5-6 times in the last 5 years, escorting others with illness or injuries from various things.


Fuck for the 12k a year I pay in insurance, my insurance company has broke even even with the birth of 2 children in the last 2 years.

K

[TooLowBrow]

43 percent of the uninsured make more than 2½ times the poverty level and half are under age 35 and single. So a large percentage are relatively healthy, employed young people who have made a rational economic decision to avoid healthcare premiums.

true?

[foodcourtdruide]

yeah, call me closed minded but I scrolled down to the good doctor's credentials. Just like I am not interested in hearing a Scientologist talk about psychology, I think I will skip on the Any Rand devotee discuss the role of government in society. Let me guess, he said that if we become true capitalists, health care will be private and will cost pennies. I actually read that piece of shit Atlas Shrugged. I would rather have the DMV in charge of our healthcare than the Objectivists.

I've noticed this a lot from people who read Ayn Rand:

- For six months they become objectivists, and eventually become libertarians.

[Arkbugark]

I think it should be a right for every man in the US to bang a super model at least once a month. If healthcare is a right then this should be too.

[Tenbatsuzen]

Which is another reason for everyone to have healthcare. If you have access to preventative care then the ERs will be much less populated.

What?

Preventive care doesn't stop Jr from slipping and falling and/or getting a fever.

[TooLowBrow]

What?

Preventive care doesn't stop Jr from slipping and falling and/or getting a fever.

except for scarlet fever

[silera]

Just to clear up something- going to the ER when a kid slips and falls or has a fever isn't stupid or abuse of the ER. I've never had to do it with the kids- I'm knocking on wood- but it's too easy to ignore a fever that could indicate a serious infection or a slip and bump that could be a life threatening concussion.

If there were more primary care doctors, and community clinics, maybe the strain on the ER wouldn't be as bad.

[HBox]

What?

Preventive care doesn't stop Jr from slipping and falling and/or getting a fever.

If people had insurance they wouldn't go to the ER for colds and minor illnesses and instead go to a doctor.

[HBox]

true?

I do not know if it's true but you'd have to jump quite a bit to get to that conclusion. 2 and half times poverty level is approximately $26,000. Even policies for single, young healthy males would take up a significant portion of that kind of salary that could be better be spent on pussy and booze.

[TooLowBrow]

I do not know if it's true but you'd have to jump quite a bit to get to that conclusion. 2 and half times poverty level is approximately $26,000. Even policies for single, young healthy males would take up a significant portion of that kind of salary that could be better be spent on pussy and booze.

and french fries

[Tenbatsuzen]

If people had insurance they wouldn't go to the ER for colds and minor illnesses and instead go to a doctor.

This makes no sense. If anything, the ER would be more expensive than seeing a doctor.

[epo]

This makes no sense. If anything, the ER would be more expensive than seeing a doctor.

Absolutely, an ER is more expensive. However the uninsured often use the only outlet that is legally forced to take them...an Emergency Room.

Greater access to preventative medicine & education about preventative medicine would certainly lower cost and increase health standards in this nation.

[ShowerBench]

It's a right but barely and within conservative limits. Nothing elective unless it is projected to pay off in the longer term with a reduction in disease (devices or drugs that curb smoking for example).

[Jujubees2]

What?

Preventive care doesn't stop Jr from slipping and falling and/or getting a fever.

No, but when my kids have a cold or fever, I call the doctor's office and get them in to see the doctor. People without health insurance have no doctor to call so they go to the ER.

[angrymissy]

This makes no sense. If anything, the ER would be more expensive than seeing a doctor.

If you have no insurance, they have to treat you at the ER and you don't have to pay up front and can ignore the bill.

A doctor will not even see you if you don't have insurance or cash up front.

Hence, people go to the ER for things that could be easily treated at a doctors office.

[high fly]

I think of health care in five levels:

Emergency Room
Urgent Care
Quick Care
Primary Physician
Put a band-aid on it.




You left out Merthiolate...

[high fly]

he puts this perfectly and more elephantly(get it), than I can...




Especially this part:

But the fact is: You don't abolish charity by calling it something else. If a person is getting health care for nothing, simply because he is breathing, he is still getting charity, whether or not President Clinton calls it a "right." To call it a Right when the recipient did not earn it is merely to compound the evil. It is charity still -- though now extorted by criminal tactics of force, while hiding under a dishonest name.




I mean, where do people get off thinking they have a right to a free press when they haven't worked for it?
Or how about those lazy bastards who think they can practice any religion they please if they haven't paid the price?
Then there's those leeches on the butt of society who think they have the freedom of speech any time they feel like it when they have done absolutely nothing to earn it?

Buncha freeloaders, that's all they are.


Our society would be much better off with less rights instead of more of them.
Good thing we have people like the good doctor Peikoff out there fighting the good fight to make sure people have as few rights as possible....

[Bob Impact]

Especially this part:





I mean, where do people get off thinking they have a right to a free press when they haven't worked for it?
Or how about those lazy bastards who think they can practice any religion they please if they haven't paid the price?
Then there's those leeches on the butt of society who think they have the freedom of speech any time they feel like it when they have done absolutely nothing to earn it?

Buncha freeloaders, that's all they are.


Our society would be much better off with less rights instead of more of them.
Good thing we have people like the good doctor Peikoff out there fighting the good fight to make sure people have as few rights as possible....
I generally try to not get involved in these discussions, and especially not when objectivist theory gets involved, but you obviously have no idea what Peikoff is about... the man is a very consistent advocate for individual rights.

[The Jays]

2. Middle to upperclass people, who have HMO coverage through their employers.


Not all middle to upperclass people work for employers. Some, like me, for example, are freelancers, or they work for themselves.

[high fly]

I generally try to not get involved in these discussions, and especially not when objectivist theory gets involved, but you obviously have no idea what Peikoff is about... the man is a very consistent advocate for individual rights.


The part I quoted indicated he was against recognizing health care as a right because the person did not earn it.
I merely pointed out other rights we have which we did nothing to earn.


Throughout our history people have gained more and more rights and they did not come from work done by Libertarians or conservatives.
It was the liberals.
When we fought the Brits for trampling on rights perceived by the Founding Fathers, the conservatives (Tories) sided with the redcoats.
It was those on the left of the political spectrum who fought the Revolution and who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
It was those on the left who abolished slavery.
It was those on the left who gave women the right to vote.
It was those on the left who got the Voting Rights Act passed.
It was those on the left who got the Civil Rights Act passed.
It will be those on the left who establish health care as a right.
It will be those on the left who get gays equal rights.

[earthbrown]

It's a right but barely and within conservative limits. Nothing elective unless it is projected to pay off in the longer term with a reduction in disease (devices or drugs that curb smoking for example).

I agree with that, however it would quickly erode. Mental evaluations say depression could be cured by a boob job, surgical penis enhancement, sex change, or plastic surgery. It happens now, HMO and state health systems paying for SEX change operations based on supposed mental evaluation.

Absolutely, an ER is more expensive. However the uninsured often use the only outlet that is legally forced to take them...an Emergency Room.

Greater access to preventative medicine & education about preventative medicine would certainly lower cost and increase health standards in this nation.


Yes, and many going to the ER use fake names, as it is standard practice that hospitals not ask for proper ID.

People need to be more educated, I agree with you on that point. My theory is the education is there for the taking, but people choose other paths.



Especially this part:





I mean, where do people get off thinking they have a right to a free press when they haven't worked for it?
Or how about those lazy bastards who think they can practice any religion they please if they haven't paid the price?
Then there's those leeches on the butt of society who think they have the freedom of speech any time they feel like it when they have done absolutely nothing to earn it?

Buncha freeloaders, that's all they are.


Our society would be much better off with less rights instead of more of them.
Good thing we have people like the good doctor Peikoff out there fighting the good fight to make sure people have as few rights as possible....

Yep we see how less rights are better in countries like China, russia, cuba, etc.....hell in cuba you get healthcare, but if you get aids you get imprisoned. I like that idea actually, because we as a world community could eliminate HIV/AIDS, in a generation if we interned and allowed these people to die off without infecting others. See when the government has total control of healthcare they can make moves like this to infringe on your overall right to freedom.

Right to speech, religion, GUNS, against self incrimination, etc, does not monetarily effect you in your life. It does not cost anything for RIGHTS, they are automatic and to be applied to everyone in equal manner, unless they abuse their privilege to the right.


Not all middle to upperclass people work for employers. Some, like me, for example, are freelancers, or they work for themselves.

Middle to upperclass people could pay for their healthcare if they wanted to, you said you would need to pay $1000 a month for you and your wife. If you are truely middle to upperclass, you then would have $1000 a month in discretionary spending that could be applied to healthcare, instead of other luxuries you enjoy.

Easy for me to find $1000 a month in most middle and upperclass budgets....

1. $150 for cable and internet.
2. 4 meals a month at a restaurant for you and your wife, $250 a month
3. Daily discretionary spending for meals on the go and coffee, $20.($600 month)
4. pack of smokes a day, $150
5. 12 pack of beer or bottle of wine per week, $20($80 a month)


The list can go on and on....

There is a problem with most peoples priorities, and you as an individual must decide what LUXURIES you want to spend your discretionary income on.

K

[~Katja~]

<object width="512" height="328" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" id="ordie_player_041b5acaf5"><param name="movie" value="http://player.ordienetworks.com/flash/fodplayer.swf" /><param name="flashvars" value="key=041b5acaf5" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed width="512" height="328" flashvars="key=041b5acaf5" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" quality="high" src="http://player.ordienetworks.com/flash/fodplayer.swf" name="ordie_player_041b5acaf5" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object><div style="text-align:left;font-size:x-small;margin-top:0;width:512px;"><a href="http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/041b5acaf5/protect-insurance-companies-psa" title="from FOD Team, Will Ferrell, Jon Hamm, Olivia Wilde, Thomas Lennon, Donald Faison, Linda Cardellini, Masi Oka, Ben Garant, Jordana Spiro, lauren, Drew, and chad_carter">Protect Insurance Companies PSA</a> from <a href="http://www.funnyordie.com/will_ferrell">Will Ferrell</a></div>

[TheMojoPin]

I like how earthbrown just assumes that everyone either can or should live their life exactly like his.

[Serpico1103]

Is healthcare a right is moot?

Is a national highway system a right?
No, but we have one. Sure, the highways were built to benefit big business, while helathcare will "only" help the poor stupid individual. But, I think the only discussion is whether national healthcare will make our society stronger and more efficient. That is all that matters.

[The Jays]

Middle to upperclass people could pay for their healthcare if they wanted to, you said you would need to pay $1000 a month for you and your wife. If you are truely middle to upperclass, you then would have $1000 a month in discretionary spending that could be applied to healthcare, instead of other luxuries you enjoy.

Easy for me to find $1000 a month in most middle and upperclass budgets....

1. $150 for cable and internet.
2. 4 meals a month at a restaurant for you and your wife, $250 a month
3. Daily discretionary spending for meals on the go and coffee, $20.($600 month)
4. pack of smokes a day, $150
5. 12 pack of beer or bottle of wine per week, $20($80 a month)


The list can go on and on....

There is a problem with most peoples priorities, and you as an individual must decide what LUXURIES you want to spend your discretionary income on.

K

Couple corrections in your spending computations, internet is not a luxury in my line of work and a "pack of smokes a day" is throwing money in the toilet to kill myself... but besides that...

Sure, I could scrape together $1000 a month for health coverage, but I would still be getting basic coverage, I'd still have to pay a copay to see my doctor and even more to see my dermatologist, and then pay when he has to prescribe me medication that does not have a generic equivalent yet.

In my opinion, and I know it's totally crazy, but I think the cost of health care could come down. If that was the case, I'd have more freedom to spend my hard earned money on what I desired, whether it be improving myself or society, reinvesting it into my business, or to buy rubber vibrating dildos to shove up my ass. The point is, just like the argument on the other side is not to raise taxes because people would rather spend their hard earned money on what they want to spend it on, applies to health care. And, forgetting my own personal desires, I'd like to see people who struggle to get bay as it is get affordable health care so that they don't go bankrupt, go in debt, and be forced to live in poverty, because it removes people from our economy and from our workforce.

[HBox]

Plus if you or your wife have even the slightest pre-existing condition, let alone something significant you won't be paying anywhere around $1000 a month, if they even agree to cover you at all.

[TheMojoPin]

Plus if you or your wife have even the slightest pre-existing condition, let alone something significant you won't be paying anywhere around $1000 a month, if they even agree to cover you at all.

SHUT UP YOU EVERYONE SHOULD BE LIKE EARTHBROWN

[foodcourtdruide]

Is healthcare a right is moot?

Is a national highway system a right?
No, but we have one. Sure, the highways were built to benefit big business, while helathcare will "only" help the poor stupid individual. But, I think the only discussion is whether national healthcare will make our society stronger and more efficient. That is all that matters.

Exactly. Your last sentence is SO on point.

[The Jays]

Plus if you or your wife have even the slightest pre-existing condition, let alone something significant you won't be paying anywhere around $1000 a month, if they even agree to cover you at all.

I don't even know if they'll cover me, because I've had a pre-existing condition since birth.

[earthbrown]

I like how earthbrown just assumes that everyone either can or should live their life exactly like his.

i am simply pointing out, he claims to be freelance, middle to upper class, then bitches about $900 a month he would have to pay if he wanted insurance.

I was simply showing him how fast you could get to $900 in a month.....

If it is so fucking important that he wants taxpayers to pay for it, than give up some of your luxuries first.


K

[conman823]

You should probably educate yourself about this issue before speaking.
[/color][/size]

This is what people who don't do research say.

SHUT UP YOU EVERYONE SHOULD BE LIKE EARTHBROWN

The best defence ever, just call someone uneducated and mock them for what they believe.

So typical around here.

[HBox]

The best defence ever, just call someone uneducated and mock them for what they believe.

So typical around here.

I wasn't mocking your beliefs. I posted a link. You said it was wrong based on nothing more than what you thought things were like. I posted 4 more links proving my point. You cried like a baby instead of backing up your point.

Again, if you knew what you were talking about you'd know that rescission in the insurance industry is a major issue and regardless of their position in the overall health reform debate going on now on this particular issue there are members of both parties opposed to it.

[TheMojoPin]

The best defence ever, just call someone uneducated and mock them for what they believe.

So typical around here.

I mock earthbrown's "beliefs" because he was made no bones about being an unrepentant racist and he continually insists that how he is able to live his life is a model that anyone can follow.

[earthbrown]

I mock earthbrown's "beliefs" because he was made no bones about being an unrepentant racist and he continually insists that how he is able to live his life is a model that anyone can follow.

I live my life to better provide for my family, I work 80hrs a week to make my 90k a year, I afford myself the LUXURY of decent health insurance so my family can be healthy.

my thing is if you are middle class, yes healthcare may be a struggle, but no one said life is easy. Would I like to have the $14,000 a year I pay for health insurance back? FUCK yeah, but I would rather pay $14,000 a year, than $7,000 a year and $1 more in taxes.

I struggle to pay my bills, I struggle to balance my luxuries and necessities, I dont have $10k in the bank, I spend what I make. I am an injury, accident, or major illness away from bankruptcy, but that is the price we all pay to live our lives.



how am i racist?


K

[The Jays]

i am simply pointing out, he claims to be freelance, middle to upper class, then bitches about $900 a month he would have to pay if he wanted insurance.

I was simply showing him how fast you could get to $900 in a month.....

If it is so fucking important that he wants taxpayers to pay for it, than give up some of your luxuries first.


K

Listen, fuckhead, I can claim to be a freelancer (meaning I don't have a daddy company to help me with the costs of getting good plans) and to be middle class. I can still bitch about how much I have to pay for subpar fucking insurance. Maybe it's the Jew in me, who knows.

And you're showing me how to help me? Cut out cigarettes and 12 packs of beer, got it. Why thank you, you're an awesome financial advisor. Jesus, I'm fucking rolling in money.

So, because I think insurance companies charge too fucking much for health coverage, and because I want them to bring their costs down, it's my fucking fault?? It's not the insurance companies fault whatsoever, right? It's my fault, because I could afford to give them more money if I really wanted to.

[earthbrown]

Listen, fuckhead, I can claim to be a freelancer (meaning I don't have a daddy company to help me with the costs of getting good plans) and to be middle class. I can still bitch about how much I have to pay for subpar fucking insurance. Maybe it's the Jew in me, who knows.

And you're showing me how to help me? Cut out cigarettes and 12 packs of beer, got it. Why thank you, you're an awesome financial advisor. Jesus, I'm fucking rolling in money.

So, because I think insurance companies charge too fucking much for health coverage, and because I want them to bring their costs down, it's my fucking fault?? It's not the insurance companies fault whatsoever, right? It's my fault, because I could afford to give them more money if I really wanted to.

the answer is not the gov't effectively controlling it.

so now you are willing to sacrifice the extra taxes because you are middle class, what happens if your company grows into a monster, and now you are paying 50% of your income in income taxes.

See us in the middle class are striving for greatness, most will not achieve this, but those who do achieve financial greatness are unfairly burdened with higher taxes.

We need to allow companies to compete across state lines, give this 10 years. If it does not work, I will be the first one to sign up for the government takeover.


K

[The Jays]

the answer is not the gov't effectively controlling it.

so now you are willing to sacrifice the extra taxes because you are middle class, what happens if your company grows into a monster, and now you are paying 50% of your income in income taxes.

See us in the middle class are striving for greatness, most will not achieve this, but those who do achieve financial greatness are unfairly burdened with higher taxes.

We need to allow companies to compete across state lines, give this 10 years. If it does not work, I will be the first one to sign up for the government takeover.


K

I think they are fairly burdened, because it was the security and opportunity of living and operating in the USA which afforded them their greatness, and for that, they must sacrifice. I would put health care reform as vital to this country as the troops who are defending our freedom and liberty from the forces of evil that exists in Iraq and in Afghanistan, which also puts our budget into deficit.

Nothing is calling for a government takeover of health insurance. The public option is not a takeover.

[earthbrown]

I think they are fairly burdened, because it was the security and opportunity of living and operating in the USA which afforded them their greatness, and for that, they must sacrifice. I would put health care reform as vital to this country as the troops who are defending our freedom and liberty from the forces of evil that exists in Iraq and in Afghanistan, which also puts our budget into deficit.

Nothing is calling for a government takeover of health insurance. The public option is not a takeover.


it is a takeover when they tax companies 8% for not providing.


K

[earthbrown]

BTW, on another topic....

we dont need to be in iraq and afganistan.

If we controlled immigration properly we would not be in as much danger. Problem is we are so eager to allow people from Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iran, Egypt, Somalia, etc, to come here and work, go to school, or find a trade, that we open ourselves up to an attack.

We allow people to come here, set up shop, and roam freely without checks and balances, ad then act surprised when they kill us.

K

[foodcourtdruide]

BTW, on another topic....

we dont need to be in iraq and afganistan.

If we controlled immigration properly we would not be in as much danger. Problem is we are so eager to allow people from Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iran, Egypt, Somalia, etc, to come here and work, go to school, or find a trade, that we open ourselves up to an attack.

We allow people to come here, set up shop, and roam freely without checks and balances, ad then act surprised when they kill us.

K

At least we're finally seeing that you're against immigration in general.

[booster11373]

the answer is not the gov't effectively controlling it.

so now you are willing to sacrifice the extra taxes because you are middle class, what happens if your company grows into a monster, and now you are paying 50% of your income in income taxes.

See us in the middle class are striving for greatness, most will not achieve this, but those who do achieve financial greatness are unfairly burdened with higher taxes.

We need to allow companies to compete across state lines, give this 10 years. If it does not work, I will be the first one to sign up for the government takeover.


K

You say these things like we people have no control over our goverment

[foodcourtdruide]

You say these things like we people have no control over our goverment

You say that like you're surprised he'd think that way.

[booster11373]

You say these things like we people have no control over our goverment

You say that like you're surprised he'd think that way.

Not surprised but it need to be said

[TheMojoPin]

how am i racist?


K

Your repeated statements as to how you see various non-white peoples as inherrently inferior and how you don't mind (or even support) seeing them oppressed or even killed.

U'm sorry, you're going to play coy about this now? That was basically your entire "gimmick" when you were only posting every so often.

[The Jays]

Well, there's a difference. There's Americans, like you and me, and then there's brown people.

[Jujubees2]

Well, there's a difference. There's Americans, like you and me, and then there's brown people.

And yellow

[The Jays]

And yellow

Hey, let's not be racist. They are called Chinamen.

[earthbrown]

You say these things like we people have no control over our goverment

we dont. The government is a nice idea, we elect officials, but they vote anyway they want, sometimes admitting the disregard for their constituents.


Your repeated statements as to how you see various non-white peoples as inherrently inferior and how you don't mind (or even support) seeing them oppressed or even killed.

U'm sorry, you're going to play coy about this now? That was basically your entire "gimmick" when you were only posting every so often.

How have I ever supported the oppression or killing of non-whites?

I believe there are differences in the races, which is not in and of it self racist, it is looking at scientific and social fact.


Well, there's a difference. There's Americans, like you and me, and then there's brown people.


exactly.

[conman823]

Again, if you knew what you were talking about

Yawn.

Well there is one point I can prove over and over in this forum.

I mock earthbrown's "beliefs" because he was made no bones about being an unrepentant racist and he continually insists that how he is able to live his life is a model that anyone can follow.

Love the racist attack. Also in the years I've been coming here nobody has told more people how "wrong" they are while, at the same time, telling them what you know and believe is great then yourself.

[angrymissy]

Yawn.

Well there is one point I can prove over and over in this forum.

Love the racist attack. Also in the years I've been coming here nobody has told more people how "wrong" they are while, at the same time, telling them what you know and believe is great then yourself.

Take a look at his posting history and decide for yourself.

[conman823]

Take a look at his posting history and decide for yourself.

Please don't get it twisted, I'm not defending him. I'm just pointing out that having a "discussion" around this forum always ends up being 1 or 2 people who are "right" just screaming down anyone with an opposing opinion.

[foodcourtdruide]

Please don't get it twisted, I'm not defending him. I'm just pointing out that having a "discussion" around this forum always ends up being 1 or 2 people who are "right" just screaming down anyone with an opposing opinion.

I think this is the case for certain posters. Don't you think earthbrown and Jezo make outrageous points? What things have they said that posters in this forum have deemed as "wrong" that you agree with?

I have seen badmonkey and wrestlingfan engaged in good debates on here.

Do you want the mods to make a rule that we have to agree with a certain number of conservative points?

[topless_mike]

im not going to scroll through the 7 pages, but my strongest feeling is that if you opt not to have health insurance, that is your right to do so. im not comfortable with the fact that soon you may have to either have insurance or be fined.

[foodcourtdruide]

im not going to scroll through the 7 pages, but my strongest feeling is that if you opt not to have health insurance, that is your right to do so. im not comfortable with the fact that soon you may have to either have insurance or be fined.

How do you feel about mandatory car insurance?

[topless_mike]

How do you feel about mandatory car insurance?

liability or full coverage?

[foodcourtdruide]

liability or full coverage?

Liability.

[earthbrown]

How do you feel about mandatory car insurance?

If you get sick, you most likely are not going effect others, minus virus' , which are either untreatable or treatable with antibiotics.

If you wreck your car most likely there will be some sort of property damage. Mandatory Car insurance protects the victim of property damage, against sustaining a catastrophic loss.

liability or full coverage?

I dont know of any state that mandates full comp and collision. Although many finance companies mandate you to have it as an obligation under the terms of the financing.

Liability simply protects others from your mistakes, it is a price you pay to operate a motor vehicle on public roadways.

K

[Drunky McBetidont]

If you get sick, you most likely are not going effect others, minus virus' , which are either untreatable or treatable with antibiotics.

If you wreck your car most likely there will be some sort of property damage. Mandatory Car insurance protects the victim of property damage, against sustaining a catastrophic loss.



I dont know of any state that mandates full comp and collision. Although many finance companies mandate you to have it as an obligation under the terms of the financing.

Liability simply protects others from your mistakes, it is a price you pay to operate a motor vehicle on public roadways.

K

viruses are not treatable with antibiotics. bacterial infections are. your immune system fights viruses.

[foodcourtdruide]

If you get sick, you most likely are not going effect others, minus virus' , which are either untreatable or treatable with antibiotics.

If you wreck your car most likely there will be some sort of property damage. Mandatory Car insurance protects the victim of property damage, against sustaining a catastrophic loss.



I dont know of any state that mandates full comp and collision. Although many finance companies mandate you to have it as an obligation under the terms of the financing.

Liability simply protects others from your mistakes, it is a price you pay to operate a motor vehicle on public roadways.

K

If you get sick without insurance, tax payers will likely have to pay for your ER visit. So it does effect (affect? Who knows!) Others.

[IMSlacker]

If you get sick without insurance, tax payers will likely have to pay for your ER visit. So it does effect (affect? Who knows!) Others.

affect.

[earthbrown]

If you get sick without insurance, tax payers will likely have to pay for your ER visit. So it does effect (affect? Who knows!) Others.

yes, but this would take someone who does not need healthcare, and is super rich to pay an additional 2% of his income in penalty.

The 8% employer penalty will FORCE many to the public option. If you are a small company, you will be better off paying 8% of weekly $10,000 payroll for 15 employees than $150-250 per person for insurance.

K

[Serpico1103]

If you get sick, you most likely are not going effect others, minus virus' , which are either untreatable or treatable with antibiotics.
If you wreck your car most likely there will be some sort of property damage. Mandatory Car insurance protects the victim of property damage, against sustaining a catastrophic loss.
I dont know of any state that mandates full comp and collision. Although many finance companies mandate you to have it as an obligation under the terms of the financing.
Liability simply protects others from your mistakes, it is a price you pay to operate a motor vehicle on public roadways.

K

I disagree.
A healthy society is a productive one. We have public education because even poor people have a chance of being smart and helping further society's goals.

Every decision is about what is right for society, not the individual. Who prosecutes criminal cases? The victim? No. The state, because it was a crime against the state, as well as the victim.
If you think more attainable health care will help society, be for it. If you think access to healthcare will hurt society, be against. But, leave out the; I work hard for my money and I don't want to pay for lazy people.

[foodcourtdruide]

affect.

I don't believe you!

[earthbrown]

But, leave out the; I work hard for my money and I don't want to pay for lazy people.

thats my fucking right!!!

I work 80+hrs a week, rain, snow, hot, cold, dont matter I work my ass off. Then you tell me that I need to help pay for someone else to have health insurance???? Fuck you.

I am not a fucking rocket scientist, I did not need 10 years of schooling for my job, I needed hard work and attention to detail to get and keep a job in my field. I dont want the government controlling the healthcare in this country. And an 8% payroll tax on employers would effectively do that.

K

[Serpico1103]

thats my fucking right!!!

I work 80+hrs a week, rain, snow, hot, cold, dont matter I work my ass off. Then you tell me that I need to help pay for someone else to have health insurance???? Fuck you.

I am not a fucking rocket scientist, I did not need 10 years of schooling for my job, I needed hard work and attention to detail to get and keep a job in my field. I dont want the government controlling the healthcare in this country. And an 8% payroll tax on employers would effectively do that.

K

People who use the "my right" argument, are basically saying; "because."
"Why do you overeat?"
"Because."

I am not interesting in an argument about your rights or anyone else's. The only question is whether a better healthcare system will help society. I am not nailed down to any one solution. Improve the current system or start over. Sometimes starting over is better; it is more expensive, but more thorough way of removing problems.

You don't have any inherent "rights" because you are a person. All of your rights are because they protect and help our society improve. Your "freedoms" (speech, arms, press) are not to protect you from an oppressive society. They are more to protect the government from overthrow; e.g. freedom of speech prevents dissidence from festering until it results in a revolution. Instead, people gather voice their complaints and the government reacts to pacify the people.
Society continues and hopefully prospers. The individual is secondary.

[Bob Impact]

People who use the "my right" argument, are basically saying; "because."
"Why do you overeat?"
"Because."

I am not interesting in an argument about your rights or anyone else's. The only question is whether a better healthcare system will help society.

That's actually NOT the question that started this thread, you're completely reversed on what the thread topic is.


You don't have any inherent "rights" because you are a person. All of your rights are because they protect and help our society improve. Your "freedoms" (speech, arms, press) are not to protect you from an oppressive society. They are more to protect the government from overthrow; e.g. freedom of speech prevents dissidence from festering until it results in a revolution. Instead, people gather voice their complaints and the government reacts to pacify the people.
Society continues and hopefully prospers. The individual is secondary.
Yet again you are absolutely backwards, at least for the US constitution, which is based on Negative rights which are in place to say what the government can NOT do, to protect the individual against the state.

[Serpico1103]

That's actually NOT the question that started this thread, you're completely reversed on what the thread topic is.


Yet again you are absolutely backwards, at least for the US constitution, which is based on Negative rights which are in place to say what the government can NOT do, to protect the individual against the state.


I am aware, my other posts drifted off the topic. Do I think healthcare is a right? Yes, a certain level. What is the right to the pursuit of happiness worth, if adequate healthcare is unattainable for a person?
Do I think the argument of whether it is a right or not is important to implementing a healthcare system? No.

[high fly]

thats my fucking right!!!

I work 80+hrs a week, rain, snow, hot, cold, dont matter I work my ass off. Then you tell me that I need to help pay for someone else to have health insurance???? Fuck you.

That is what you are doing today.
You are mistaken as to who is being fucked.


Which do you prefer, some people paying for everyones health care or everyone paying for everyone's health care?

[Serpico1103]

Yet again you are absolutely backwards, at least for the US constitution, which is based on Negative rights which are in place to say what the government can NOT do, to protect the individual against the state.

As to this. I did not say your "individual" rights are for the protection of the government. I said, the reason for individual rights, is to protect and promote society. I know people like to think they are an "island", but you are really a cog in a machine, with some protections from being abused; by other cogs or by the machine itself.
If you want to be an individual; find an unoccupied pacific island, set up shop and enjoy. Otherwise, you are part of society with responsibilities to the others in that society. And, as we are seeing, the separation between our society, U.S., and the global community is thinning. So, our responsibilities, as citizens and as a country, expands also. BUT, that is far off topic now. OOPS.

[Recyclerz]

yes, but this would take someone who does not need healthcare, and is super rich to pay an additional 2% of his income in penalty.

The 8% employer penalty will FORCE many to the public option. If you are a small company, you will be better off paying 8% of weekly $10,000 payroll for 15 employees than $150-250 per person for insurance

K

This (the bolded part) is just not true. (See Post 100.)

If you really want to make the health care system more market oriented it would make more sense to eliminate the tax benefits embedded into the employer provided system and have people buy their own health insurance like they do with their car insurance.

However, I don't think that healthcare can really work as an efficient market since none of us (except health care professionals) are informed enough to make economically rational decisions.

[Jujubees2]

im not going to scroll through the 7 pages, but my strongest feeling is that if you opt not to have health insurance, that is your right to do so. im not comfortable with the fact that soon you may have to either have insurance or be fined.

There was an op-ed in the Daily News on Sunday concerning this. One of the problems now is that the young healthy people do not have health insurance since they don't feel they need it which ends up costing the people with health care more. In order for the system to work effectively it needs to have both low and high risk people enrolled. The piece stated that if everyone had health insurance the costs would immediately come down 4%.

[SinA]

yes, but this would take someone who does not need healthcare, and is super rich to pay an additional 2% of his income in penalty.

The 8% employer penalty will FORCE many to the public option. If you are a small company, you will be better off paying 8% of weekly $10,000 payroll for 15 employees than $150-250 per person for insurance.

K

Most small business would be exempt. Medium sized businesses would have a lower cost for participation.
Pasted directly from H.R. 3200:
"If the annual payroll of such employer for the preceding calendar year: The applicable percentage is:

Does not exceed $250,000 - 0 percent

Exceeds $250,000, but does not exceed $300,000 - 2 percent

Exceeds $300,000, but does not exceed $350,000 - 4 percent

Exceeds $350,000, but does not exceed $400,000 - 6 percent"