Is socialized healthcare the answer?

[Againsheila]

I think we need to find a combination. We already have waiting lists...and the rich can already buy their way to the top. I think in a socialized system, they'd have to wait their turn like everybody else.

I think healthcare should be available to everyone and I think Canada's healthcare system is a good example. We do have to stop corruption in our government first though and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

I think a revolution is way past due.

 

[Againsheila]

We have been over this before, the supposed Welfare clause is NOT a statement granting power to the Government. If it were there would be no need to have then gone on to LIST any powers at all. Since all the Government would need to do is make the nebulous statement " it is for the welfare of the Country, people, what ever".

So you don't think it's good for the "welfare" of our country for it's people to have access to healthcare?

 

[editec]

I think we need to find a combination. We already have waiting lists...and the rich can already buy their way to the top. I think in a socialized system, they'd have to wait their turn like everybody else.

I think healthcare should be available to everyone and I think Canada's healthcare system is a good example. We do have to stop corruption in our government first though and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

I think a revolution is way past due.

Don't you know we'd all love to see your plan?
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao,
Don't you know that you can count me out?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Yes, speculation about the future is rather hard to prove, isn't it?

Hence my inclusion of such tip off phrase about the fact that I was speculating like ending my speculation with the words: "I think".

Nice try, but no one's talking about your speculations on the future. I'm talking about your assertive statements concerning the present, which never seem to have any substantiation along with them. I could not possibly care less what you think is going to or should happen in the future until you've established that you even know what's already happening now.

What premises would you like me to substantiate?

Pull your head out of your colon and scroll back and read the two or three times I very carefully laid out the questions you're not answering in very simple language even you should be able to understand.

The rising cost of medicine in comparison to other things?

Do I really need to prove that to you?

If I wanted you to define the debate solely according to your own narrow views, I wouldn't be asking for elaboration and substantiation, so this isn't even a good try at diversion.

Because that is basically the premise I actually thought was a given.

I'm not even going to bother explaining yet again what the problem with your premise is, because I've already done so and you have steadfastly pretending not to see it so that you can come up every three pages or so with this faux-innocent "What was the question?" bullshit. Again, pull your head out and go back and read the question, or just admit that you're too ignorant and cowardly to deal with real questions. Your choice, and your next post WILL be taken as evidence of which you chose.

Do I need to prove to you that the cost of HC (in relation to the GDP) has risen dramtically since 1966?

You need to prove to me that you're not too big of a poltroon to actually read other people's posts and respond to them.

And if I do prove that to you, will you grovel and apologise for your rude response to my post?

Try proving ANYTHING to me that's worth knowing, and then we'll talk about how I plan to deal with it. Right now, all you're proving is that you're not worth the electricity my computer uses while I read your nonsensical drivel.