YAY for healthcare!
03-23-2010, 10:38 AM
#182
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Melboure australia
Posts: 165
Total Cats: 0
I honnestly beleive (from the media shown in OZ) that Obama is a better president then gwb, but lets be honest they are all puppets including our old cocksucking PM, between John howard, GWB & Tony blair they should all be charged with war crimes.
is that too out there???
Reply
0
0
03-23-2010, 11:00 AM
#185
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
North Korea and Iran have been getting pretty big for their britches lately now that they have nothing to fear. I'm sure Iran could invade Israel and we'd still be having sit downs about them building houses that Pakistan doesn't approve of...
Reply
0
0
03-23-2010, 01:25 PM
#189
Elite Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,642
Total Cats: 36
I find it funny that the percent of Americans that don't have healthcare is almost the same as the percent of Americans that don't have cellphones. The problem with this statistical comparison....the majority of those that don't have cellphones are older, or under the poverty line, and already covered by government health programs.
That means that 10% of Americans CAN afford a cell phone (which none of us had a few years ago), but CAN'T afford this inalienable right called health care?
Seriously, look at your cell phone bill. Now look at your paycheck and see how much your health plan costs per month. If you're unemployed then call around about some private insurance plans.
Priorities people. It is not the government's job to cover your poor prioritization.
That means that 10% of Americans CAN afford a cell phone (which none of us had a few years ago), but CAN'T afford this inalienable right called health care?
Seriously, look at your cell phone bill. Now look at your paycheck and see how much your health plan costs per month. If you're unemployed then call around about some private insurance plans.
Priorities people. It is not the government's job to cover your poor prioritization.
But keep in mind there are folks who dont have cable, have the cheapest cell they can for about 36/Mo after taxes, and who just plain dont have enough for healthcare because even if they did spare 100 bucks or so for a private plan they would be absolutely hosed financially if they had to go to the hospital for any reason because the deductible would sink them anyway. Or they cover their kid and skip themselfs. Lots of jobs dont provide healthcare and lots of people are taking multiple part-time work (if they are lucky) which doesnt provide it either.
Thats where competition, making the entire litigation process fair and sensible, and well-run assistance programs are the solution.
Reply
0
0
03-23-2010, 01:39 PM
#190
Elite Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,642
Total Cats: 36
I still have not seen anything to show me how more governmental control and regulation somehow guarantees cheap and effective care for all.
Its like somehow in this debate the assumtion that everyone has is that new laws and regs and oversight will result in poor people getting better care. I am pretty skeptical on that. What constitutes 'essential', 'good', and 'cheap'?
I think what we are on the road to doing is replacing one bolloxed up system with another that ends up costing even more. Its not a matter of IF people ought to be helped. People can potificate all they like about how some should not be cared for. The fact is that you are not going to find a health professional who will deny care to a dying man who stumbles into the ER. The issue is HOW to help people. And I dont think the correct course is to regulate the insurance companies into the ground. It is to force them to be competitive and to build a truly well-run safety-net program, as opposed to the mess we have now. I am very skeptical that this bill will do that. I sincerely hope I am wrong.
Its like somehow in this debate the assumtion that everyone has is that new laws and regs and oversight will result in poor people getting better care. I am pretty skeptical on that. What constitutes 'essential', 'good', and 'cheap'?
I think what we are on the road to doing is replacing one bolloxed up system with another that ends up costing even more. Its not a matter of IF people ought to be helped. People can potificate all they like about how some should not be cared for. The fact is that you are not going to find a health professional who will deny care to a dying man who stumbles into the ER. The issue is HOW to help people. And I dont think the correct course is to regulate the insurance companies into the ground. It is to force them to be competitive and to build a truly well-run safety-net program, as opposed to the mess we have now. I am very skeptical that this bill will do that. I sincerely hope I am wrong.
Reply
0
0
03-23-2010, 05:14 PM
#194
I'm a terrible person
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 7,174
Total Cats: 180
As for dropping the military a few notches, we are already stretched so far with these wars that I don't see how we could possibly drop anything. Now optimize spending and try and run **** more efficiently, ya we could really use some of that.... but yea.. go healthcare, woooowooooo
Reply
0
0
03-23-2010, 05:19 PM
#195
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 7,930
Total Cats: 45
I don't think the US will ever be "Invaded". The next war between large powers will be pretty horrific. No invasions, just missiles. The good thing about it is that it won't last 10 years like the current "wars". But I can guarantee more people will die. I mean the current firepower on this earth could probably end life as we know it fairly quick.
As for dropping the military a few notches, we are already stretched so far with these wars that I don't see how we could possibly drop anything. Now optimize spending and try and run **** more efficiently, ya we could really use some of that.... but yea.. go healthcare, woooowooooo
As for dropping the military a few notches, we are already stretched so far with these wars that I don't see how we could possibly drop anything. Now optimize spending and try and run **** more efficiently, ya we could really use some of that.... but yea.. go healthcare, woooowooooo
Reply
0
0
03-23-2010, 07:17 PM
#198
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
I'm saying for the vast majority of people, you probably will get out what you put in. No, I can't cite proof. Based on income distribution, it's probably 75% of the population--give or take.
And then you have the top 1.5% covering the bottom 20something%. Depending on how it all really works.
So I guess if you really want the "free government healthcare", you're going to have to quit your job and work somewhere horrible.
And then you have the top 1.5% covering the bottom 20something%. Depending on how it all really works.
So I guess if you really want the "free government healthcare", you're going to have to quit your job and work somewhere horrible.
Reply
0
0
