Guest Paul Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 As has been pointed out on these pages before, the United States spends more money per capita on health care than any other nation in the world. But it does not result in the best health care. We are wasting money in administrative costs and insurance company profits far in excess of other nations with government-run programs. The only way to increase competition, thereby lowering health care costs, is to allow the American people a public option so that they can obtain their insurance through the government if they so choose. This is necessary to keep the insurance companies honest, which I am sorry to say they will not do on their own. Some so-called conservatives argue that a public option is not fair because no private company can compete with the government. These "conservatives" say that 100 million Americans would choose the government plan. If 100 million Americans want it, isn't that reason enough to have the public option? I could understand if national health care plans were failing in other countries but the exact opposite is true. Our system is the one that is failing its people. Our system is the one that costs the most, by far, without delivering the best care. Our system is the one that leaves nearly one in six Americans uninsured. Our system is the one that sends people to emergency rooms for treatment instead of providing preventive care, which is far cheaper in the long run. Many Americans are afraid of having too large and too powerful a government. That's understandable and reasonable. What's not reasonable is ignoring the power of private insurance companies. They can be just as powerful as the government and can rob you just as blind; it's in their best interests to do so. I do not know whether a decent health care plan will get through Congress. The interests opposed to it are extremely powerful and the people are being fed lies by fear-mongers with an ideological agenda. I urge everyone to become active in this essential cause and to support health care reform with a public option. I welcome a reasoned and civil discussion on this topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Keith Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 As has been pointed out on these pages before, the United States spends more money per capita on health care than any other nation in the world. But it does not result in the best health care. We are wasting money in administrative costs and insurance company profits far in excess of other nations with government-run programs. The only way to increase competition, thereby lowering health care costs, is to allow the American people a public option so that they can obtain their insurance through the government if they so choose. This is necessary to keep the insurance companies honest, which I am sorry to say they will not do on their own. Some so-called conservatives argue that a public option is not fair because no private company can compete with the government. These "conservatives" say that 100 million Americans would choose the government plan. If 100 million Americans want it, isn't that reason enough to have the public option? I could understand if national health care plans were failing in other countries but the exact opposite is true. Our system is the one that is failing its people. Our system is the one that costs the most, by far, without delivering the best care. Our system is the one that leaves nearly one in six Americans uninsured. Our system is the one that sends people to emergency rooms for treatment instead of providing preventive care, which is far cheaper in the long run. Many Americans are afraid of having too large and too powerful a government. That's understandable and reasonable. What's not reasonable is ignoring the power of private insurance companies. They can be just as powerful as the government and can rob you just as blind; it's in their best interests to do so. I do not know whether a decent health care plan will get through Congress. The interests opposed to it are extremely powerful and the people are being fed lies by fear-mongers with an ideological agenda. I urge everyone to become active in this essential cause and to support health care reform with a public option. I welcome a reasoned and civil discussion on this topic. Paul, I just finished watching Mr. Smith goes to Washington. I would encourage eveyone to watch it and and then maybe they could have a better understanding of the tactics used as well as the motivations behind those who oppose a public option. Thier "Red Scare" is effective and the cires of "socialism" are taking root with those who are ingnorant or refuse to even try to see the other side. They use terms like socialism while thier motivations are the most pure form of capitalism. Greed. For politicans to act this way is no surprise but since our inception as a democracy they have relied and the ignorance and apathy of the people. If our country and government are going to be in debt it might as well be for the right reasons. Everying human being should have a right to the best healthcare possible. The level of care received should not be based on one's net worth. Insurance companies are just a business. Profit is thier only motivation not our health and well being. We spend many billions on our Military and no one bats an eye. I have no problem with that but when you think about it doesn't the military and the healthcare system share a commoon goal? That goal being the heatlh and well being of the American people? The military to protect from attack and the healthcare system to protect from Illness? Both designed to protect us from death and maintain our quality of life. I wonder how people would feel if the Military only protected a certain percentage of the population and the rest where on thier own? As Americans we wouldn't stand for that would we? Why should healthcare be any different? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 2smart4u Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 As has been pointed out on these pages before, the United States spends more money per capita on health care than any other nation in the world. But it does not result in the best health care. We are wasting money in administrative costs and insurance company profits far in excess of other nations with government-run programs. The only way to increase competition, thereby lowering health care costs, is to allow the American people a public option so that they can obtain their insurance through the government if they so choose. This is necessary to keep the insurance companies honest, which I am sorry to say they will not do on their own. Some so-called conservatives argue that a public option is not fair because no private company can compete with the government. These "conservatives" say that 100 million Americans would choose the government plan. If 100 million Americans want it, isn't that reason enough to have the public option? I could understand if national health care plans were failing in other countries but the exact opposite is true. Our system is the one that is failing its people. Our system is the one that costs the most, by far, without delivering the best care. Our system is the one that leaves nearly one in six Americans uninsured. Our system is the one that sends people to emergency rooms for treatment instead of providing preventive care, which is far cheaper in the long run. Many Americans are afraid of having too large and too powerful a government. That's understandable and reasonable. What's not reasonable is ignoring the power of private insurance companies. They can be just as powerful as the government and can rob you just as blind; it's in their best interests to do so. I do not know whether a decent health care plan will get through Congress. The interests opposed to it are extremely powerful and the people are being fed lies by fear-mongers with an ideological agenda. I urge everyone to become active in this essential cause and to support health care reform with a public option. I welcome a reasoned and civil discussion on this topic. Are you so naive as to think a "public option" is not Obama's way of driving the private insurance companies out of business, clearing the way for the government to institute a national healthcare program, which will then ration care, deny life-saving measures for the elderly and drive many doctors out of business? This community organizer in an empty suit has you so blinded by his smooth-talking, teleprompter inspired rhetoric that you'll believe everything out of his mouth. He's already lied and broken every campaign promise he's made, what in the world makes you think he's now telling the truth? This guy's on a mission to destroy America as we know it and create a European style socialism where the government provides cradle to grave care. This is not what the founding fathers had in mind when they drafted the Constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SmKat Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Some so-called conservatives argue that a public option is not fair because no private company can compete with the government. These "conservatives" say that 100 million Americans would choose the government plan. For all of the talk from conservatives about "free markets," you would think that they would embrace the fact that Americans would look for competition and fairness in the health insurance marketplace. That's the American way, isn't it? I am a businessman. I own a business and am a consultant for many others. I believe in the free market system and the importance of fairness and equitable competition in the marketplace. These things help to keep our economy going. The problem is that there is an incredible lack of fairness in the system. So what is wrong with trying to incorporate some fairness? Why is there such an outcry? I'd be willing to bet that most of the people at these town-hall meetings are "ordinary Americans." They are not wealthy, executives of insurance companies, or contracted lobbyists. So what do we have to lose by giving the less fortunate a little help? And why are they so upset about it? Will their lives change so dramatically? People complain about increasing deficits and higher taxes. Don't get me wrong - as a NJ homeowner, I cringe at the property taxes I pay. I do believe that, if we try hard enough, we can pay for some of the things we should be doing but cutting back in other areas and eliminating "pork." But the fact is that progressive taxation pays for the services that we enjoy in the United States. Think about how much your life would actually change if vital services were cut off if we stopped asking people to pay taxes altogether (which is what some people want.) I am not for freeloading or extended welfare. I believe that in order to earn, you should work. I believe that everyone who is willing to work be afforded opportunities to advance - both personally and professionally. But there are some people who just don't ever get exposed to opportunity because of the circumstances that surround them. I believe that we have an obligation to provide for those who cannot provide for themselves. That's not socialism. That's basic humanity. I am a person who believes in fair and effective government (not big government) but the simple fact of the matter is the most vulnerable of our population have no champions in the free marketplace. They are forgotten and marginalized. A couple of centuries ago, there were some other people who had no champions in government or influential representatives to speak for them and for their concerns. So they decided to do something about it. Today, we call that "something" the Revolutionary War. I respect the fact that people have objections to what is being proposed. While I respect the fact that objections exist, I am having a harder time truly understanding the nature of the objections. Shouting at town hall meetings won't help us understand other points of view. People who are hard-working and trying to raise families don't have health insurance. They are already scared. They don't need any more anxiety. They need relief. Let's give it to them. It will make our country stronger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lincoln Logger Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 As has been pointed out on these pages before, the United States spends more money per capita on health care than any other nation in the world. But it does not result in the best health care. We are wasting money in administrative costs and insurance company profits far in excess of other nations with government-run programs. The only way to increase competition, thereby lowering health care costs, is to allow the American people a public option so that they can obtain their insurance through the government if they so choose. This is necessary to keep the insurance companies honest, which I am sorry to say they will not do on their own. Some so-called conservatives argue that a public option is not fair because no private company can compete with the government. These "conservatives" say that 100 million Americans would choose the government plan. If 100 million Americans want it, isn't that reason enough to have the public option? I could understand if national health care plans were failing in other countries but the exact opposite is true. Our system is the one that is failing its people. Our system is the one that costs the most, by far, without delivering the best care. Our system is the one that leaves nearly one in six Americans uninsured. Our system is the one that sends people to emergency rooms for treatment instead of providing preventive care, which is far cheaper in the long run. Many Americans are afraid of having too large and too powerful a government. That's understandable and reasonable. What's not reasonable is ignoring the power of private insurance companies. They can be just as powerful as the government and can rob you just as blind; it's in their best interests to do so. I do not know whether a decent health care plan will get through Congress. The interests opposed to it are extremely powerful and the people are being fed lies by fear-mongers with an ideological agenda. I urge everyone to become active in this essential cause and to support health care reform with a public option. I welcome a reasoned and civil discussion on this topic. Your numbers as always are skewed. First of all 100 million don't want it. That is why the public outcry is so great. Secondly, you are asking the working public who currently are struggling to make ends meet to actually spend more to cover the costs of national health care. At least with it being funded by insurance companies, they have stock brokers to answer to. There is no one to answer too once your big government comes in and takes it over. The expenses will be astronomical and you can prove that any different. You are so paranoid with you shouting that everyone is spreading lies and fear mongering going on that you cloud your own truths. America does not want a national health care system. The people have spoken. Whether or not it is a bad reflection of this president should not be a factor to you or the American people. Hoping you are an American. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SmKat Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 This is not what the founding fathers had in mind when they drafted the Constitution. From the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." I'm wondering what they did have in mind by the words "general welfare." I think that health care would be included under that umbrella. From the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." The words "among these" indicate to me that there were indeed more that they had in mind. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness don't really mean a thing if people are stressed, anxious, or impoverished because they can't afford to purchase insurance. Try to talk to people who don't have health insurance for their children or for themselves about life, liberty, and happiness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Your numbers as always are skewed. First of all 100 million don't want it. That is why the public outcry is so great. Secondly, you are asking the working public who currently are struggling to make ends meet to actually spend more to cover the costs of national health care. At least with it being funded by insurance companies, they have stock brokers to answer to. There is no one to answer too once your big government comes in and takes it over. The expenses will be astronomical and you can prove that any different. You are so paranoid with you shouting that everyone is spreading lies and fear mongering going on that you cloud your own truths. America does not want a national health care system. The people have spoken. Whether or not it is a bad reflection of this president should not be a factor to you or the American people. Hoping you are an American. The outcry is so great because its the same loud mouthed ignoramuses who do all the screaming. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that 77% support the public option. http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections...J_poll_Full.pdf Stock brokers? Insurance companies don't answer to anyone except themselves. Now and then regulators throttle them, but the regulator are as effective as whipping someone with a wet noodle. The expenses are astronomical now. We spend twice as much per person on health care as France or Germany. And they are healthier - their birth mortality is significantly lower and their life expectancy is longer. The expenses will be high, but not as high as the current system. Which is why private insurers are fighting the public option. They know people will select it once the public realizes they will be saving tons of money. Your "Hoping you are an American" comment is reprehensible. I know that game. Someone disagrees with you and the "you're un-American" innuendo out of the closet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Radagast Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Are you so naive as to think a "public option" is not Obama's way of driving the private insurance companies out of business, clearing the way for the government to institute a national healthcare program, which will then ration care, deny life-saving measures for the elderly and drive many doctors out of business?This community organizer in an empty suit has you so blinded by his smooth-talking, teleprompter inspired rhetoric that you'll believe everything out of his mouth. He's already lied and broken every campaign promise he's made, what in the world makes you think he's now telling the truth? This guy's on a mission to destroy America as we know it and create a European style socialism where the government provides cradle to grave care. This is not what the founding fathers had in mind when they drafted the Constitution. Did that evil socialist United States Post Office drive out private enterprise? Tell that to UPS and FedEx. The market will always find a way to survive. However, those uninsured folks might not. Why is it that every time a progressive idea on health care is proposed, the right wing can some how get it in there heads there will be a line of grandmas being led off to death camps. I mean ...it's not like you're trying to scare people ...are you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Are you so naive as to think a "public option" is not Obama's way of driving the private insurance companies out of business, clearing the way for the government to institute a national healthcare program, which will then ration care, deny life-saving measures for the elderly and drive many doctors out of business?This community organizer in an empty suit has you so blinded by his smooth-talking, teleprompter inspired rhetoric that you'll believe everything out of his mouth. He's already lied and broken every campaign promise he's made, what in the world makes you think he's now telling the truth? This guy's on a mission to destroy America as we know it and create a European style socialism where the government provides cradle to grave care. This is not what the founding fathers had in mind when they drafted the Constitution. You couldn't have stated the problem any better. Unfortunately, you're the problem. You see a socialist under every bed. You think the President is "on a mission to destroy America." You believe whatever your masters on right wing TV and radio tell you to believe, and then you have the audacity to criticize thoughtful people for supposedly believing whatever they are told. This is sheer madness. You've gone completely out of your minds. And to top it off, you're too stupid to realize that the only way a public option could drive the private insurance companies out of business is if the people choose it. If the people want it, they should have it. How do you answer that? You don't. You're right. This is not what the founding fathers had in mind. They thought the people would be responsible and thoughtful, not fire-breathing ignoramuses like you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Your numbers as always are skewed. First of all 100 million don't want it. That is why the public outcry is so great. Secondly, you are asking the working public who currently are struggling to make ends meet to actually spend more to cover the costs of national health care. At least with it being funded by insurance companies, they have stock brokers to answer to. There is no one to answer too once your big government comes in and takes it over. The expenses will be astronomical and you can prove that any different. You are so paranoid with you shouting that everyone is spreading lies and fear mongering going on that you cloud your own truths. America does not want a national health care system. The people have spoken. Whether or not it is a bad reflection of this president should not be a factor to you or the American people. Hoping you are an American. Then how do you explain the fact that we spend more on our health care per capita than citizens in any other country, including all the countries with single-payer health care systems? And I don't mean just a few dollars more. We are spending two and three times more than all other industrialized countries except for one or two, and even they are spending less than we are. How do you explain that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 2smart4u Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Then how do you explain the fact that we spend more on our health care per capita than citizens in any other country, including all the countries with single-payer health care systems? And I don't mean just a few dollars more. We are spending two and three times more than all other industrialized countries except for one or two, and even they are spending less than we are.How do you explain that? This should be easy enough for even a loony to understand. The healthcare in the U.S. is more sophisticated and employs far more technical expertise. Also, more expensive cutting-edge drugs are used in the U.S. that aren't available in many European countries. This is why many foreigners come to the U.S. for delicate and intricate surgeries that aren't available elsewhere. Understandably, this first-class medicine costs more. I hope you were able to understand this, I tried not to use big words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Paul Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Are you so naive as to think a "public option" is not Obama's way of driving the private insurance companies out of business, clearing the way for the government to institute a national healthcare program, which will then ration care, deny life-saving measures for the elderly and drive many doctors out of business?This community organizer in an empty suit has you so blinded by his smooth-talking, teleprompter inspired rhetoric that you'll believe everything out of his mouth. He's already lied and broken every campaign promise he's made, what in the world makes you think he's now telling the truth? This guy's on a mission to destroy America as we know it and create a European style socialism where the government provides cradle to grave care. This is not what the founding fathers had in mind when they drafted the Constitution. There's a fatal flaw in your argument. When you say that a public option would drive the private insurance companies out of business, please explain how it would do that. There's only one way, and it's good for the people. So by all means, please explain your argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Paul Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Your numbers as always are skewed. First of all 100 million don't want it. That is why the public outcry is so great. Secondly, you are asking the working public who currently are struggling to make ends meet to actually spend more to cover the costs of national health care. At least with it being funded by insurance companies, they have stock brokers to answer to. There is no one to answer too once your big government comes in and takes it over. The expenses will be astronomical and you can prove that any different. You are so paranoid with you shouting that everyone is spreading lies and fear mongering going on that you cloud your own truths. America does not want a national health care system. The people have spoken. Whether or not it is a bad reflection of this president should not be a factor to you or the American people. Hoping you are an American. Wait a minute. Think. There's no one to answer to now. The private insurance companies aren't answerable to you and their behavior proves it. At least you get to elect your government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Paul Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 This should be easy enough for even a loony to understand. The healthcare in the U.S. is more sophisticated and employs far more technical expertise. Also, more expensive cutting-edge drugs are used in the U.S. that aren't available in many European countries. This is why many foreigners come to the U.S. for delicate and intricate surgeries that aren't available elsewhere. Understandably, this first-class medicine costs more.I hope you were able to understand this, I tried not to use big words. I understood it just fine. It's not true. Europe isn't third world. Their doctors are as good as ours and in fact they have more cutting-edge drugs than we have here because their FDA equivalents aren't as strict. Perhaps you can provide us some statistics on the number of Europeans who come here for surgery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 2smart4u Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 There's a fatal flaw in your argument. When you say that a public option would drive the private insurance companies out of business, please explain how it would do that. There's only one way, and it's good for the people. So by all means, please explain your argument. Please, there's your naivete again. Obama's goal is to institute a national healthcare system similiar to Canada's. There's no question about that, it's his stated goal. If he is able to get his foot in the door with a "government option", you can be sure he would go after the private insurers with taxes, regulations, restrictions and so much red tape they would fold. Look what he's trying to do to the CIA, do you think he would hesitate to chop the legs of private insurers? BTW, since that was my only "fatal flaw", I'll assume you agree with the rest of my post concerning the Founding Fathers and the Constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Please, there's your naivete again. Obama's goal is to institute a national healthcare system similiar to Canada's. There's no question about that, it's his stated goal.If he is able to get his foot in the door with a "government option", you can be sure he would go after the private insurers with taxes, regulations, restrictions and so much red tape they would fold. Look what he's trying to do to the CIA, do you think he would hesitate to chop the legs of private insurers? BTW, since that was my only "fatal flaw", I'll assume you agree with the rest of my post concerning the Founding Fathers and the Constitution. That doesn't answer the question, does it. You can make up stuff all day long, as you prove every time you post, but you can't answer a simple question: if the people want a public option, why shouldn't they have it? This is still a democracy last time I checked. If the people don't like the public option, the law could be changed. But they will like it, which is exactly what the insurance companies are afraid of. That's why they're lying about the current proposals. They know that once we have a public option, we'll never go back - just like senior citizens don't want to give up Medicare. That's not because they're forced. It's because it works. Don't believe it? Then name one country that once had a national health care system and then went back to a private insurance system; or one country whose people want to go back to a private insurance system after having the benefits of a national system. You won't be able to name one because there aren't any. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Your numbers as always are skewed. First of all 100 million don't want it. That is why the public outcry is so great. Secondly, you are asking the working public who currently are struggling to make ends meet to actually spend more to cover the costs of national health care. At least with it being funded by insurance companies, they have stock brokers to answer to. There is no one to answer too once your big government comes in and takes it over. The expenses will be astronomical and you can prove that any different. You are so paranoid with you shouting that everyone is spreading lies and fear mongering going on that you cloud your own truths. America does not want a national health care system. The people have spoken. Whether or not it is a bad reflection of this president should not be a factor to you or the American people. Hoping you are an American. You write: "At least with it being funded by insurance companies, they have stock brokers to answer to." Are you serious? The fact that insurance companies are in business to make a profit is the problem. They're making that profit by collecting premiums and then denying benefits. That's why the system doesn't work, even for the people who have insurance. The insurance companies ration care. Your argument is like saying that the chickens are safe because the wolf has to feed its pups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 This should be easy enough for even a loony to understand. The healthcare in the U.S. is more sophisticated and employs far more technical expertise. Also, more expensive cutting-edge drugs are used in the U.S. that aren't available in many European countries. This is why many foreigners come to the U.S. for delicate and intricate surgeries that aren't available elsewhere. Understandably, this first-class medicine costs more. I hope you were able to understand this, I tried not to use big words. You're just making it up. You can answer any question if you just make things up. That's all you ever do. If what you're saying was true, then Americans must be getting the benefits of superior health care, right? All the studies say that's not happening. Here are the facts about health care quality in the United States as compared with other countries. Let’s begin with a study from Johns Hopkins University, the home of one of our best medical schools and hospitals http://www.jhu.edu/~gazette/2004/10may04/10health.html Now look at the World Health Organization’s latest report http://www.who.int/whr/2008/whr08_en.pdf http://www.photius.com/rankings/who_world_health_ranks.html Here is a report from the Commonwealth Fund and a related story http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Pu...ican-Healt.aspx http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/17/business/17health.html http://www.rwjf.org/files/research/quality...rikeaug2009.pdf As you can see if you bothered to read any or all of these, the United States spends the most money on health care per person of any country on earth but is far behind many others nations in quality of care. If 2stupid4words was correct - if we had the best doctors, the most expertise, the best medicines and the best surgeons - that wouldn't be happening. So as usual, 2stupid4words is just making up stuff that isn’t true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Amazing. Foolish and stupid Americans fighting for insurance companies - the companies that ration needed medical services, that rip us off with rescissions and financially rape us with high premiums. I can see insurance executives and even their employees fighting to preserve their racket. But the average American? Fighting agaist what is in their best interest? The US is falling behind the world in many things - education, space race, manufacturing and we're certainly behind in others such as health care, infrastructure, vacation time, retirement benefits, life expectancy, birth mortality. The world is passing us by, the American era is over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 I understood it just fine. It's not true. Europe isn't third world. Their doctors are as good as ours and in fact they have more cutting-edge drugs than we have here because their FDA equivalents aren't as strict. Perhaps you can provide us some statistics on the number of Europeans who come here for surgery. I don't know if 2smart is playing us or he really believes what he is posting. However, many do believe. Our educational system has failed, big time. We are producing high school and college graduates that can't think critically, thus they can't analyze and shoot down the crazy stuff put out there by people who want to bamboozle them to make a buck. We used to be a great country, and I truly want to believe that we can be once again. But, having too many voters who believe nonsense is holding us back and may cause our ultimate fall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 2smart4u Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 From the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution:"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." I'm wondering what they did have in mind by the words "general welfare." I think that health care would be included under that umbrella. From the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." The words "among these" indicate to me that there were indeed more that they had in mind. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness don't really mean a thing if people are stressed, anxious, or impoverished because they can't afford to purchase insurance. Try to talk to people who don't have health insurance for their children or for themselves about life, liberty, and happiness. I'm not against helping the uninsured. For those who can't afford health coverage, the government should provide vouchers and leave the rest of us alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Some so-called conservatives argue that a public option is not fair because no private company can compete with the government. These "conservatives" say that 100 million Americans would choose the government plan. My fear is that my company will drop our insurance plan and I will have to shop for one on my own, which will cost alot more , or I choose the government healthcare. Looks like I'll be forced into it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 Some so-called conservatives argue that a public option is not fair because no private company can compete with the government. These "conservatives" say that 100 million Americans would choose the government plan. My fear is that my company will drop our insurance plan and I will have to shop for one on my own, which will cost alot more , or I choose the government healthcare. Looks like I'll be forced into it. What if the public option lowers the cost of coverage and your employer puts that extra money into your bonus at the end of the year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 I've noticed Paul never mentions what trial lawyers cost the healthcare system. Talk about powerful Washington lobbyists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Paul Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 My fear is that my company will drop our insurance plan and I will have to shop for one on my own, which will cost alot more , or I choose the government healthcare. Looks like I'll be forced into it. But are you really free if you're paying double or triple what the rest of the world is paying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.