Colorado to vote on single-payer state health-care system

[Arianrhod]

^Both are issues of "states rights as long as they do what I want."

 

[Sun Devil 92]

If the people of Colorado want to do this then that's up to them. This is exactly the way it should be done. We have 50 states who can experiment with their own systems and see what works best for them. We don't need a one size fits all plan from D.C. This is country is too large and too diverse for something like that to not be a complete train wreck.

You'll never get the homoginizers (the left wing) to agree to that.

 

[Arianrhod]

You'll never get the homoginizers (the left wing) to agree to that.

You prefer your milk with the cream on top? Kind of a nuisance to shake it up, isn't it? Besides, where would you buy that? Even raw milk is homogenized.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Obamacare was nothing but a fake plan by the left to try and get single payer.

You've got the timeline backwards.

You've got your priorities backward if you support single payer but you're a freeloading lefty so we understand why.

Well, they may not be freeloading....yet.

 

[Arianrhod]

Obamacare was nothing but a fake plan by the left to try and get single payer.

You've got the timeline backwards.

You've got your priorities backward if you support single payer but you're a freeloading lefty so we understand why.

Well, they may not be freeloading....yet.

And you may be using English words, but they do not mean what you think they mean.

Working+paying for one's own health insurance =/= "freeloading."

Someone should write a USMB RWNJ-to-English dictionary...

 

[Conservative65]

Obamacare was nothing but a fake plan by the left to try and get single payer.

You've got the timeline backwards.

You've got your priorities backward if you support single payer but you're a freeloading lefty so we understand why.

Well, they may not be freeloading....yet.

And you may be using English words, but they do not mean what you think they mean.

Working+paying for one's own health insurance =/= "freeloading."

Someone should write a USMB RWNJ-to-English dictionary...

Supporting other freeloading makes you no different than the pieces of shit that do. It equals freeloading.

What problem do you have with others providing their own insurance without someone else being forced to fund a subsidy for them? What makes you believe someone that can't provide it him/herself is owed coverage?

 

[Arianrhod]

Obamacare was nothing but a fake plan by the left to try and get single payer.

You've got the timeline backwards.

You've got your priorities backward if you support single payer but you're a freeloading lefty so we understand why.

Well, they may not be freeloading....yet.

And you may be using English words, but they do not mean what you think they mean.

Working+paying for one's own health insurance =/= "freeloading."

Someone should write a USMB RWNJ-to-English dictionary...

Supporting other freeloading makes you no different than the pieces of shit that do. It equals freeloading.

What problem do you have with others providing their own insurance without someone else being forced to fund a subsidy for them? What makes you believe someone that can't provide it him/herself is owed coverage?

What problem do you have with nonprofit organizations? Would you classify them as "freeloaders" as well?

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear Arianrhod:

I think this stands a better chance of being worked out on a STATE level. That way people of that STATE can represent how they want to manage their health care.

1. for NON PROFITS people get to VOLUNTARILY CHOOSE which/who and how/when to pay for what services.

They can change their minds at any time and pick a different charitable group to fund. Like donating to Universities for development of programs.

 

[emilynghiem]

2. Trying to manage this through GOVT is NOT so easy because the ENTIRE population of that jurisdiction has to be "equally represented." So if people of a state DON'T agree on things like:
* abortion
* drug use and how to pay for damages to health or life caused by drug abuse addiction or consequences
* life choices, when to support life and when to terminate etc etc

 

[emilynghiem]

Then guess what? Voting on "one policy fits all" ends up compromising people's personal and spiritual BELIEFS about life, health, govt limits and functions, prochoice/prolife, etc. Govt is NOT supposed to be abused to DICTATE the BELIEFS of any one person or group for anyone else!

 

[emilynghiem]

3. if people AGREE WHAT parts of which policies/programs to fund publicly, that's fine. We can have public health on a general level.

But if isn't AGREED how to pay or charge for it, and what are the terms for useage, then this imposed on people who DON'T believe in paying for "free loaders" .

 

[emilynghiem]

So that's why the more SENSITIVE decisions may be better left to individuals to work out by free choice/voluntary contributions, participation and affiliation.

Similar to choosing what school to go to, what church programs to support. Not everyone agrees to go through or pay for the same programs and requirements. People need and have rights to free choice UNLESS they've "committed a CRIME and are forced to pay, serve or meet certain requirements as PUNISHMENT for a conviction" -- unless citizens go through DUE PROCESS to prove what wrongful action or intent they are guilty of, the govt is NOT supposed to deprive people of liberty.

 

[emilynghiem]

Lack of health care due to "poorly run govt programs that waste taxpayers money so it doesn't cover everyone's health care" is NOT something to PUNISH Citizens and Taxpayers for by forcing them to fund more expenses against their will.

It has to be something that the Specific Citizens have done wrong before their liberty can be deprived as a consequence of that abuse, crime or violation.

Just because the charities we have now aren't invested in and expanded enough to cover all the demand for health care ISN'T justification for depriving citizens of liberty to FORCE this "charity through govt."

 

[emilynghiem]

However Arianrhod, by going through State govt and voting on it through representation, at least the people have access to a democratic process and a chance to work out a plan that will likely rely on a combination of public, business, nonprofit, religious and other institutions to cover access to health care.

 

[emilynghiem]

It should be agreed to by CONSENT and FREE CHOICE of the people, not coercion, since personal liberties and religious/political/spiritual beliefs are involved in health care and quality of life decisions. The freedom to choose is part of that, also. Constant oppression, abuse and imposition by govt can lead to similar PTSD as legal and religious abuse, so that's totally contradictory to good mental health and public health collectively.

 

[Arianrhod]

Lack of health care due to "poorly run govt programs that waste taxpayers money so it doesn't cover everyone's health care" is NOT something to PUNISH Citizens and Taxpayers for by forcing them to fund more expenses against their will.

It has to be something that the Specific Citizens have done wrong before their liberty can be deprived as a consequence of that abuse, crime or violation.

You mean like kidney failure? Was that caused by this woman's sin or that of her parents?

 

[Arianrhod]

It should be agreed to by CONSENT and FREE CHOICE of the people, not coercion, since personal liberties and religious/political/spiritual beliefs are involved in health care and quality of life decisions. The freedom to choose is part of that, also. Constant oppression, abuse and imposition by govt can lead to similar PTSD as legal and religious abuse, so that's totally contradictory to good mental health and public health collectively.

People on dialysis don't have much in the way of free choice.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Dear Arianrhod:

I think this stands a better chance of being worked out on a STATE level. That way people of that STATE can represent how they want to manage their health care.

1. for NON PROFITS people get to VOLUNTARILY CHOOSE which/who and how/when to pay for what services.

They can change their minds at any time and pick a different charitable group to fund. Like donating to Universities for development of programs.

A

However Arianrhod, by going through State govt and voting on it through representation, at least the people have access to a democratic process and a chance to work out a plan that will likely rely on a combination of public, business, nonprofit, religious and other institutions to cover access to health care.

I appreciate your thoughtful responses. They are well reasoned and resonate with me.

I am certainly in agree with your argument here.

 

[emilynghiem]

Lack of health care due to "poorly run govt programs that waste taxpayers money so it doesn't cover everyone's health care" is NOT something to PUNISH Citizens and Taxpayers for by forcing them to fund more expenses against their will.

It has to be something that the Specific Citizens have done wrong before their liberty can be deprived as a consequence of that abuse, crime or violation.

You mean like kidney failure? Was that caused by this woman's sin or that of her parents?

Arianrhod What are you talking about?

Just because people have heart or kidney failure
does not mean anyone has to 'deprive liberty from other people'.

And certainly does not mean blaming or judging anyone for their sickness. What???

What is wrong with microlending so people can make money if they invest in business costs.

Why can't citizens get paid interest like the investors/banks who lend money to the Federal Reserve.

To keep the costs DOWN, YES I would recommend SPIRITUAL HEALING to cure any generational issues being passed down but THAT'S NOT JUDGING ANYONE but the opposite. it works by forgiving and healing any blockages preventing healing and preventing people from cooperating with doctors to restore their own health.

We are talking past each other, Arianrhod because your question does not even address what I am saying.

You are like shooting blanks through the ceiling over my head. Can we get on the same page, and start from there?

 

[Arianrhod]

Lack of health care due to "poorly run govt programs that waste taxpayers money so it doesn't cover everyone's health care" is NOT something to PUNISH Citizens and Taxpayers for by forcing them to fund more expenses against their will.

It has to be something that the Specific Citizens have done wrong before their liberty can be deprived as a consequence of that abuse, crime or violation.

You mean like kidney failure? Was that caused by this woman's sin or that of her parents?

Arianrhod What are you talking about?

Just because people have heart or kidney failure
does not mean anyone has to 'deprive liberty from other people'.

And certainly does not mean blaming or judging anyone for their sickness. What???

What is wrong with microlending so people can make money if they invest in business costs.

Why can't citizens get paid interest like the investors/banks who lend money to the Federal Reserve.

To keep the costs DOWN, YES I would recommend SPIRITUAL HEALING to cure any generational issues being passed down but THAT'S NOT JUDGING ANYONE but the opposite. it works by forgiving and healing any blockages preventing healing and preventing people from cooperating with doctors to restore their own health.

We are talking past each other, Arianrhod because your question does not even address what I am saying.

You are like shooting blanks through the ceiling over my head. Can we get on the same page, and start from there?

You're right in saying we're talking past each other. You're talking accounting. I'm talking humanity. It's amusing that you'll talk religion when it suits you, but you'll dissociate it from compassion.