What does communism smell like?
Imagine my personal alarm when hearing on the news this morning that the White House has vowed to "punch back twice as hard." I couldn't even imagine what the 'talking heads' were referring to. I sat closer to the TV to hear just what was happening to the land of the free.
needs this nationalized health care to help the
Democrats push this thru. I think we need to band Wal-Mart.
I wonder if the 60+ know about the health care they will
receive under this plan? I heard about a child in France
taken from a family and put down because he was had down syndrome.
I believe there are reasonable people in favor of national health care, and we should have a rational, open, spirited, and intelligent debate on the issue. As long as people refuse to consider the issue in depth and continue to assault one another with shallow sound bites, the underlying importance of taking care of those in need will be obscured.
I am not sure universal, government-controlled insurance is the best way to achieve universal health care. Still, we live in a wealthy society that I hope will find its way toward helping those in need. Let's think and speak deeply about important issues, and not compare everyone we disagree with to communists, socialists, or fascists.
I have a hard time following the thread from promises to challenge one sides advertisements with a two fold response in advertising and my ability to speak freely in whatever medium I have available.
Both sides spew crap. I just can't decide if I want a cave in the mountains or a boat on the water when I decide to drop out of "society."
I feel the only repair to the Health Care System, as we presently know it, is to reform the torts, and take the ambulance chasers out of the picture. They appear to make the largest contribution
to the high cost of health care, by running up the Dr's and Hospitals, increases in liability insurance costs.
I also find it funny that when Gene Green (D-Tex) asked a group of people, "if any opposed any form of socialized or gov. run health care" ,nearly all did. Then he asked how many of those present were on Medicare and almost half raised there hands. HA!
I'm about to vomit a definition on you:
Medicare is a social insurance program administered by the United States government, providing health insurance coverage to people who are aged 65 and over, or who meet other special criteria.
“It just seems there's no freedom of speech without being attacked,” he said."
You can see some video and the above quote at http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/08/tea-party-protesters-attacked-1-man.html.
These are thugs from the SEIU, a union of mostly healthcare workers, based--wait for it--in Washington, D.C. Yep, that's right. Obama has union thugs at these meetings to "take care of the problem" of any protestors.
Mr. Gladney was a peaceful protestor, handing out flags with one of our most treasured American phrases. He was beaten up. Perhaps you're right--it's not communism. It's called fascism!
The USA ranks 37th in health ratings and it is the most expensive system in the world. Try to get people to look at it objectively and they are either too dumb or too prejudiced.
The guy heading the campaign to stop national health care in Georgia said he wants health care fully deregulated so it can "grow through open competition". That's the biggest joke of all. We deregulated natural gas, California deregulated electricity, and we deregulated banks, Wall St, and savings and loans. How well did that work?
You people better look at facts instead of focusing on Internet falsehoods and Fox News.
In comes President Obama, who, although perhaps not the best president, proposes some reform that infringes on the money-making power of health insurance companies. The result from the insurance companies is a storm of misinformation driven by a great wind of money. Instead of thinking about the issues involved, the people vow to stop reform, hoodwinked once again by willful ignorance of the facts.
Health insurance, including the employer contribution, costs upwards of $12,000 per year. Yet an individual can go into the marketplace and buy his own equivalent coverage for about $2500. Obviously, there is something wrong. Obviously, there needs to be some reform. It's not as though the current system is capitalistic: the customers of the health insurance market are to a large extent captive. It does not work like auto insurance or a grocery store. And frankly, people die every day because an insurance company will not pay for a medically necessary treatment.
As compassionate, reasonable, and Christian people living in a wealthy society, we should offer health care to those who are less fortunate. Of course there are people who abuse public aid. But most do not, and most people are decent and hard-working if given the chance. I think it is very revealing of one's character if one will not help neighbors because one is afraid that they will get something for free.
She said it took several letters and documents and they still refused to pay for the change in medication because the chewable costs about 25% more. They let the poor man vomit up his medicine and waste it all, plus tie up the office time with this fight.
In the last world care PERFORMANCE ranking (1997) the USA ranked 72nd, far behind Canada and England. See:
http://www.photius.com/rankings/world_health_performance_ranks.html
The World Health Organization rated us 37th in their last world comparison, England was 18th.
Those of you who think we are at the top with this wonderful system we want to keep, even if we keep it at the expense of freedom of speech to have meetings. We are number two in one area. We are number 2 in the cost adjusted to gross national product.
If you look at the data on this page:
http://www.photius.com/rankings/total_health_expenditure_as_pecent_of_gdp_2000_to_2005.html
you will see the percentage of cost has been steadily rising. We now pay almost 20% of our adjusted GDP on health care. While we may not be better than the 40th to 70th world position (depending on the comparison of service quality we look at) we are now 1st in cost.
I pay about 13,000 dollars a year myself PLUS my co-pays, deductibles, and non-covered medical expenses. If I could shift the burden on an employer I might be happier and oppose any change. If I was getting free health care as an illegal alien or through a government program I might be happy. Unfortunately I have to work for what I get and pay for it myself so I understand the cost and the red tape.
It's my belief all of this uproar is orchestrated by the people sucking up 15-20% of our gross domestic product when our GDP is on parity with all other nations.
How many of the screaming people at meetings are paying for their own care? My bet is none. Most look like they are old enough to be on Medicare or some other socialized system, or they have placed the burden on the backs of their employers.
So far there are two basic systems proposed. One is a national pool or co-op system that allows people like me pool into a big system, and the other is a Government plan I could buy into. At present no one else would be forced into these plans. The problem is the insurance companies and people earning over a million dollars a year are going to fight these systems with all they have by misleading a bunch of stupid sheep who will follow what they claim.
At all costs to MOST Americans they are going to protect the most expensive health care system in the world, as system that is at best in the 30th and at worse in the 60th range of performance and results. Right now we have Americans flying to India and Mexico for health care, and I can't stop thinking about that poor man with MD the PA was telling me about on Wednesday!
Let's not use common sense and talk, let's fix this difficult problem by using silly words like "communism" or anything that will drum up hate. That is the new American way to handle problems, fear of change.
President Obama, when he was campaigning and talking about health care reform said that the plan would be every bit as good as the plan that all the leadership has. Now that a plan has been prepared, it has an option out clause for leadership. If the plan is so good then why would they want to opt out?
It is because the plan is not “so good”. The only way that a plan can be good is if leadership is forced to use the plan they are developing. Social Security is in trouble because leadership has a different plan. So too will be health care.
The House is presenting you a bill that they consider well enough for you but is not good enough for them. And these are the people that suppose to represent you. They are selling you out while taking care of themselves at the same time.
The American people should be allowed to choose because they don’t have the same input in actually writing the bill. However, those responsible for putting it on paper and signing it in to law should be required to use it. That is the only way the people will get a reform bill that will work. In that bill there should also be no way out later that representatives can take advantage of. Hasn’t anyone ever heard the old phrase “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander”? This is absolutely the best place to apply it.
Take away the option out plan for leadership and make them write a plan that they will have to live with themselves and then I think you will have a fair plan.
I guess you are right and the millions speaking out in opposition are wrong. I'm sure you are gullible enough to believe they are being paid to do it too. They are not the menial ACORN but they do represent the mighty oak.
It was fitting when you and a friend was spotted yesterday and your friend was wearing a shirt that had “I’m With Stupid” written across the front.
I personally believe that health care is not a basic human right. I do not believe society owes anyone free health care.
I do believe we have extreme problems with our current health care system.
I think a national insurance program where everyone could buy into the insurance at group rates would be the best solution. This would provide more job mobility (at times we are bound to jobs by insurance), make it easier for people to start new businesses, and should lower costs.
This would have to be combined with national regulation of the pharmaceutical companies, health care providers, shyster lawyers and all the others profiting off our current mess. But then a large group insurance organization could exert pressure on providers to set more reasonable pricing if the government will take care of the other issues.
I have heard that one proposal will require everyone to have insurance and they would have to pay a penalty if they don't (as long as they are working). This to me is wrong. Why not just say if a person is not part of the program (as either a paying customer or freebie), they do not get treated no matter the issue unless they pay up front in cash. That preserves freedom of choice and puts the responsibilty for that choice on those who make it.
I also believe that those on the program who receive free medical should not get the same premium coverage as those who pay. In other words, if you are riding off the government for free you don't deserve the same treatment as someone who is paying their way. Beggars cannot be choosers, except it seems in the US.
have access to your checking account at all times.
(Check it out-read it)
If you go over- guess what they can do?
Also you have to wait in line to get an operation.
It may take 6 months and you are dead by then. They hope.