So the republican solution to our healthcare system is as little government as possible right?

[danielpalos]

I beg liberals to show me the gov't document stating that people have a "right" to healthcare.

the power to provide for the general welfare is general, not common.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

Liberals want someone else to pay for EVERYTHING.

The concept of health care for all is wonderful. But to me, it's like anything else. You get what you pay for. Nobody pays for my health insurance. I work for it. Why is that such a bad concept to liberals? 70% of America was against Obamacare from the beginning. Later polls showed about 60% opposed. If Trump's approval rating at 40% is "dismal" according to liberals, why is ACA approval at 40% wonderful and amazing?

80% of workers in this country live paycheck to paycheck. People have no choice but to work shit jobs because wages are way behind on the cost of living.

You provide absolutely no substance to support your claim so I'll pretty much ignore it. 78% report living paycheck to paycheck, but the WHY is far from what you claim.

They live paycheck to paycheck because they spend more than they make, not because they don't make enough. Having high speed internet at your house, digital cable or satellite, netflix, 65" 4K tvs, new cars, the latest iGadget or Galaxy S X phone with unlimited everything, brand new houses, etc is not REQUIRED to live. People living beyond their means doesn't mean they don't make enough. It means they don't want to give up any creature comforts.

I make very very decent bill and I do not have any service except a prepaid cell phone. My TV is antenna. All cars paid for in cash. House about to be paid in full only 7 years after purchase. The newest car I own is a little Fiesta 2012. My TV is from 2012. My cell phone is 4 generations old, it's a Note 5 with a burned in screen so I got it cheap. I could go on and on.

Don't live beyond your means and you don't need to live paycheck to paycheck. My expenses even WITH my housenote could be paid in full by someone making minimum wage working full time.

9 Ways To Stop Living Paycheck To Paycheck

Lol I love how you just assume these people over spend with no basis of facts. They definitely don’t buy new cars. They buy used. Stuff like TVs is a one time expense. And yes, they have Netflix accounts. God forbid they entertain themselves! Oh the horror. How selfish of them.

It’s also worth noting many of these people are parents.

Want to entertain yourself? Go to the park, go for a walk. Godforbid our fat American asses get outside and DO something.

Why do you people make all these stupid assumptions about poor people? I get that it makes you feel manly and superior to belittle them, but you’re just making shit up.

I was in the EM room in Tenn, a Blk woman had her kid in with a cold and she was dressed in her Sunday best driving a Newer Caddy better than mine. All covered by the Government I noted. That cost the Government about 600 bucks for a cold. That was abuse to the system.

 

[airplanemechanic]

General welfare is not health care.

General welfare clause - Wikipedia

I've stated many times I was in Wal Mart one time with a hand full of items I could barely afford and they had 2 black women in front of me with a basket piled so full it kept falling out on the floor. She checked out and her total was 281 dollars. I saw her pull out her food stamp card and swipe it. All free food.

My total was 53 dollars and I had to pay 100% of it.

 

[danielpalos]

General welfare is not health care.

General welfare clause - Wikipedia

I've stated many times I was in Wal Mart one time with a hand full of items I could barely afford and they had 2 black women in front of me with a basket piled so full it kept falling out on the floor. She checked out and her total was 281 dollars. I saw her pull out her food stamp card and swipe it. All free food.

My total was 53 dollars and I had to pay 100% of it.

Our federal Constitution is Express, not Implied. The Power to Provide for the general welfare is General; it Must be so to be able to Promote the general welfare at every opportunity.

 

[Wyatt earp]

So the republican solution to our healthcare system is as little government as possible right?


Damn right bro, walk 90 miles a day like me..


(And lay off the ding dongs)



.

 

[airplanemechanic]

General welfare is not health care.

General welfare clause - Wikipedia

I've stated many times I was in Wal Mart one time with a hand full of items I could barely afford and they had 2 black women in front of me with a basket piled so full it kept falling out on the floor. She checked out and her total was 281 dollars. I saw her pull out her food stamp card and swipe it. All free food.

My total was 53 dollars and I had to pay 100% of it.

Our federal Constitution is Express, not Implied. The Power to Provide for the general welfare is General; it Must be so to be able to Promote the general welfare at every opportunity.

Our constitution is absolute. If it is not in the constitution, our gov't does NOT have the right to do it. Period. Now that we have a majority in the SC maybe we can get some logic back in our system.

 

[danielpalos]

General welfare is not health care.

General welfare clause - Wikipedia

I've stated many times I was in Wal Mart one time with a hand full of items I could barely afford and they had 2 black women in front of me with a basket piled so full it kept falling out on the floor. She checked out and her total was 281 dollars. I saw her pull out her food stamp card and swipe it. All free food.

My total was 53 dollars and I had to pay 100% of it.

Our federal Constitution is Express, not Implied. The Power to Provide for the general welfare is General; it Must be so to be able to Promote the general welfare at every opportunity.

Our constitution is absolute. If it is not in the constitution, our gov't does NOT have the right to do it. Period. Now that we have a majority in the SC maybe we can get some logic back in our system.

sure; let's abolish our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror so we can promote and provide for the general welfare.

 

[airplanemechanic]

The "war on drugs" has cost more people their lives than anything else.

And you liberals have been against the "war on terror" since it started, saying it wasn't a declared war and that only congress can declare war. Remember that?

Criticism of the War on Terror - Wikipedia

 

[flacaltenn]

In many respects reflected from world history, it is reasonable to suggest that too much government is not a good thing. However, “too much” is a very relative concept. There really is such a thing as “too little of government” and I mean that beyond the measure of anarchy as an alternative. Government, when designed properly, can benefit the lives of its citizens.
ACA is an important point to raise in the this topic. While it is certainly flawed and has failed in some of its promises in terms of affordability, it’s never the less improved healthcare in many ways. It has not changed that ACA has protection for pre-existing conditions for anyone who has health insurance. There is also a much higher cap for how much an insurance policy will cover for a medical event. The cap used to be 500,000 but it became 1,000,000 thanks to ACA. Now you can argue that ACA undermines the definition of insurance, but the point here is that healthcare should not be treated like insurance.

Corporate lobbyists own our politicians. Both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are slaves to big money. They are guided more by money than by principle. Both parties are bitches to special interests.

The goal of these lobbyists is to strengthen the power of the corporation’s will and to have less regulation by the government. With less government, what is to prevent the healthcare industry from undermining the healthcare their consumers need?

This is already true.

Insurance company: “Hey guess what, if you pay $600 a month, we will eliminate your deductible for basic healthcare needs!”

The point is that Big Pharma has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit for their shareholders. This includes undermining the plan the consumer signed up for to save money. Business is business after all.

Only government can ensure that consumers get basic healthcare services.

Which Congressional reps are insurance experts? Which ones know beans about healthcare? They foisted crappy insurance on the working poor to boast about how many folks were "covered". And they HID the "medicare expansion" costs in the pool rather than funding them.

Even the NAME of the program is an evil taunt. Because NOTHING about actual market costs of services or premium control was ever part of the plan. Other than putting more debt on the Treasury.

You want to solve healthcare? Focus on the 10 to 15% UNINSURED. And give some BARE MIN guidelines for individual insurance plans that includes a REASONABLE definition of "pre-existing".. 60% of every person over 40 right now is declared "pre-existing" simply because they are taking cholesterol drugs or blood pressure meds . That's stupid. It's preventative medicine. NOT necessarily an indicator of outcome.

SHOULD BE MINIMAL dictates on insurance from the FEDERAL level. Let the states experiment WITHOUT Federal intervention. Find the concepts that work.

Here's a concept for you.

Hows that Trump alternative thing working out for you?

Not seeing any faces there. And I'm not usually impressed by random photos from the Internet.
In ADDITION, there were about 22 resignations on the GOP side. Some on the Dem side as well. This means nothing.

 

[flacaltenn]

In many respects reflected from world history, it is reasonable to suggest that too much government is not a good thing. However, “too much” is a very relative concept. There really is such a thing as “too little of government” and I mean that beyond the measure of anarchy as an alternative. Government, when designed properly, can benefit the lives of its citizens.
ACA is an important point to raise in the this topic. While it is certainly flawed and has failed in some of its promises in terms of affordability, it’s never the less improved healthcare in many ways. It has not changed that ACA has protection for pre-existing conditions for anyone who has health insurance. There is also a much higher cap for how much an insurance policy will cover for a medical event. The cap used to be 500,000 but it became 1,000,000 thanks to ACA. Now you can argue that ACA undermines the definition of insurance, but the point here is that healthcare should not be treated like insurance.

Corporate lobbyists own our politicians. Both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are slaves to big money. They are guided more by money than by principle. Both parties are bitches to special interests.

The goal of these lobbyists is to strengthen the power of the corporation’s will and to have less regulation by the government. With less government, what is to prevent the healthcare industry from undermining the healthcare their consumers need?

This is already true.

Insurance company: “Hey guess what, if you pay $600 a month, we will eliminate your deductible for basic healthcare needs!”

The point is that Big Pharma has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit for their shareholders. This includes undermining the plan the consumer signed up for to save money. Business is business after all.

Only government can ensure that consumers get basic healthcare services.

Which Congressional reps are insurance experts? Which ones know beans about healthcare? They foisted crappy insurance on the working poor to boast about how many folks were "covered". And they HID the "medicare expansion" costs in the pool rather than funding them.

Even the NAME of the program is an evil taunt. Because NOTHING about actual market costs of services or premium control was ever part of the plan. Other than putting more debt on the Treasury.

You want to solve healthcare? Focus on the 10 to 15% UNINSURED. And give some BARE MIN guidelines for individual insurance plans that includes a REASONABLE definition of "pre-existing".. 60% of every person over 40 right now is declared "pre-existing" simply because they are taking cholesterol drugs or blood pressure meds . That's stupid. It's preventative medicine. NOT necessarily an indicator of outcome.

SHOULD BE MINIMAL dictates on insurance from the FEDERAL level. Let the states experiment WITHOUT Federal intervention. Find the concepts that work.

Less Government the better. I would like to note that Conditions can be determined to DNA and could be listed as precondition condition.

Needs to be a clear Civil Liberties ruling that your DNA is completely private. No access to it by anyone other than medical providers. If you post segments up on an ancestry site -- that's your choice and maybe harmless.. But Insurance companies should never have the ability to rate you on your DNA.

 

[flacaltenn]

In many respects reflected from world history, it is reasonable to suggest that too much government is not a good thing. However, “too much” is a very relative concept. There really is such a thing as “too little of government” and I mean that beyond the measure of anarchy as an alternative. Government, when designed properly, can benefit the lives of its citizens.
ACA is an important point to raise in the this topic. While it is certainly flawed and has failed in some of its promises in terms of affordability, it’s never the less improved healthcare in many ways. It has not changed that ACA has protection for pre-existing conditions for anyone who has health insurance. There is also a much higher cap for how much an insurance policy will cover for a medical event. The cap used to be 500,000 but it became 1,000,000 thanks to ACA. Now you can argue that ACA undermines the definition of insurance, but the point here is that healthcare should not be treated like insurance.

Corporate lobbyists own our politicians. Both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are slaves to big money. They are guided more by money than by principle. Both parties are bitches to special interests.

The goal of these lobbyists is to strengthen the power of the corporation’s will and to have less regulation by the government. With less government, what is to prevent the healthcare industry from undermining the healthcare their consumers need?

This is already true.

Insurance company: “Hey guess what, if you pay $600 a month, we will eliminate your deductible for basic healthcare needs!”

The point is that Big Pharma has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit for their shareholders. This includes undermining the plan the consumer signed up for to save money. Business is business after all.

Only government can ensure that consumers get basic healthcare services.

Which Congressional reps are insurance experts? Which ones know beans about healthcare? They foisted crappy insurance on the working poor to boast about how many folks were "covered". And they HID the "medicare expansion" costs in the pool rather than funding them.

Even the NAME of the program is an evil taunt. Because NOTHING about actual market costs of services or premium control was ever part of the plan. Other than putting more debt on the Treasury.

You want to solve healthcare? Focus on the 10 to 15% UNINSURED. And give some BARE MIN guidelines for individual insurance plans that includes a REASONABLE definition of "pre-existing".. 60% of every person over 40 right now is declared "pre-existing" simply because they are taking cholesterol drugs or blood pressure meds . That's stupid. It's preventative medicine. NOT necessarily an indicator of outcome.

SHOULD BE MINIMAL dictates on insurance from the FEDERAL level. Let the states experiment WITHOUT Federal intervention. Find the concepts that work.

Read up about oz and Canada and the U.K.
90% approval.
They laugh at us.

You mean the UK where the Ambulances WAIT to unload the patients until the queue clears out to make the government "service numbers" look good? I ain't looking to the UK or Canada where radiologists work only 6 or 8 months of the year because the reimbursements are so low?

Nope.. I WANT CONTROL of my healthcare. I want to be able to BOLT from one doctor to another when I'm not satisfied with the care. And I want a CONSISTENT doctor who understands my history.

 

[Claudette]

In many respects reflected from world history, it is reasonable to suggest that too much government is not a good thing. However, “too much” is a very relative concept. There really is such a thing as “too little of government” and I mean that beyond the measure of anarchy as an alternative. Government, when designed properly, can benefit the lives of its citizens.
ACA is an important point to raise in the this topic. While it is certainly flawed and has failed in some of its promises in terms of affordability, it’s never the less improved healthcare in many ways. It has not changed that ACA has protection for pre-existing conditions for anyone who has health insurance. There is also a much higher cap for how much an insurance policy will cover for a medical event. The cap used to be 500,000 but it became 1,000,000 thanks to ACA. Now you can argue that ACA undermines the definition of insurance, but the point here is that healthcare should not be treated like insurance.

Corporate lobbyists own our politicians. Both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are slaves to big money. They are guided more by money than by principle. Both parties are bitches to special interests.

The goal of these lobbyists is to strengthen the power of the corporation’s will and to have less regulation by the government. With less government, what is to prevent the healthcare industry from undermining the healthcare their consumers need?

This is already true.

Insurance company: “Hey guess what, if you pay $600 a month, we will eliminate your deductible for basic healthcare needs!”

The point is that Big Pharma has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit for their shareholders. This includes undermining the plan the consumer signed up for to save money. Business is business after all.

Only government can ensure that consumers get basic healthcare services.

Which Congressional reps are insurance experts? Which ones know beans about healthcare? They foisted crappy insurance on the working poor to boast about how many folks were "covered". And they HID the "medicare expansion" costs in the pool rather than funding them.

Even the NAME of the program is an evil taunt. Because NOTHING about actual market costs of services or premium control was ever part of the plan. Other than putting more debt on the Treasury.

You want to solve healthcare? Focus on the 10 to 15% UNINSURED. And give some BARE MIN guidelines for individual insurance plans that includes a REASONABLE definition of "pre-existing".. 60% of every person over 40 right now is declared "pre-existing" simply because they are taking cholesterol drugs or blood pressure meds . That's stupid. It's preventative medicine. NOT necessarily an indicator of outcome.

SHOULD BE MINIMAL dictates on insurance from the FEDERAL level. Let the states experiment WITHOUT Federal intervention. Find the concepts that work.

The VA is a prime example of Government in Health care.

Kick health care back to the private sector where it belongs.

 

[danielpalos]

The "war on drugs" has cost more people their lives than anything else.

And you liberals have been against the "war on terror" since it started, saying it wasn't a declared war and that only congress can declare war. Remember that?

Criticism of the War on Terror - Wikipedia

Yes. We also have capital criticism. We get what we Pay for under Capitalism. The right wing refuses to pay serious tax rates for their right wing fantasy. Proof, they are not Real but only imaginary insecurity on the part of the right wing.

 

[danielpalos]

Solving simple poverty means markets can be "free to play within the goalposts".

 

[Rustic]

In many respects reflected from world history, it is reasonable to suggest that too much government is not a good thing. However, “too much” is a very relative concept. There really is such a thing as “too little of government” and I mean that beyond the measure of anarchy as an alternative. Government, when designed properly, can benefit the lives of its citizens.
ACA is an important point to raise in the this topic. While it is certainly flawed and has failed in some of its promises in terms of affordability, it’s never the less improved healthcare in many ways. It has not changed that ACA has protection for pre-existing conditions for anyone who has health insurance. There is also a much higher cap for how much an insurance policy will cover for a medical event. The cap used to be 500,000 but it became 1,000,000 thanks to ACA. Now you can argue that ACA undermines the definition of insurance, but the point here is that healthcare should not be treated like insurance.

Corporate lobbyists own our politicians. Both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are slaves to big money. They are guided more by money than by principle. Both parties are bitches to special interests.

The goal of these lobbyists is to strengthen the power of the corporation’s will and to have less regulation by the government. With less government, what is to prevent the healthcare industry from undermining the healthcare their consumers need?

This is already true.

Insurance company: “Hey guess what, if you pay $600 a month, we will eliminate your deductible for basic healthcare needs!”

The point is that Big Pharma has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit for their shareholders. This includes undermining the plan the consumer signed up for to save money. Business is business after all.

Only government can ensure that consumers get basic healthcare services.

 

[danielpalos]

Our welfare clause is General not Common.

 

[Rustic]

In many respects reflected from world history, it is reasonable to suggest that too much government is not a good thing. However, “too much” is a very relative concept. There really is such a thing as “too little of government” and I mean that beyond the measure of anarchy as an alternative. Government, when designed properly, can benefit the lives of its citizens.
ACA is an important point to raise in the this topic. While it is certainly flawed and has failed in some of its promises in terms of affordability, it’s never the less improved healthcare in many ways. It has not changed that ACA has protection for pre-existing conditions for anyone who has health insurance. There is also a much higher cap for how much an insurance policy will cover for a medical event. The cap used to be 500,000 but it became 1,000,000 thanks to ACA. Now you can argue that ACA undermines the definition of insurance, but the point here is that healthcare should not be treated like insurance.

Corporate lobbyists own our politicians. Both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are slaves to big money. They are guided more by money than by principle. Both parties are bitches to special interests.

The goal of these lobbyists is to strengthen the power of the corporation’s will and to have less regulation by the government. With less government, what is to prevent the healthcare industry from undermining the healthcare their consumers need?

This is already true.

Insurance company: “Hey guess what, if you pay $600 a month, we will eliminate your deductible for basic healthcare needs!”

The point is that Big Pharma has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit for their shareholders. This includes undermining the plan the consumer signed up for to save money. Business is business after all.

Only government can ensure that consumers get basic healthcare services.

Which Congressional reps are insurance experts? Which ones know beans about healthcare? They foisted crappy insurance on the working poor to boast about how many folks were "covered". And they HID the "medicare expansion" costs in the pool rather than funding them.

Even the NAME of the program is an evil taunt. Because NOTHING about actual market costs of services or premium control was ever part of the plan. Other than putting more debt on the Treasury.

You want to solve healthcare? Focus on the 10 to 15% UNINSURED. And give some BARE MIN guidelines for individual insurance plans that includes a REASONABLE definition of "pre-existing".. 60% of every person over 40 right now is declared "pre-existing" simply because they are taking cholesterol drugs or blood pressure meds . That's stupid. It's preventative medicine. NOT necessarily an indicator of outcome.

SHOULD BE MINIMAL dictates on insurance from the FEDERAL level. Let the states experiment WITHOUT Federal intervention. Find the concepts that work.

Here's a concept for you.

Hows that Trump alternative thing working out for you?

It’s impossible for conservatives to benefit from Obamacare, not only they cannot afford it and will never use it...
When will progressives understands that Obamacare was made for progressives... And only progressives

 

[Rustic]

Liberals want someone else to pay for EVERYTHING.

The concept of health care for all is wonderful. But to me, it's like anything else. You get what you pay for. Nobody pays for my health insurance. I work for it. Why is that such a bad concept to liberals? 70% of America was against Obamacare from the beginning. Later polls showed about 60% opposed. If Trump's approval rating at 40% is "dismal" according to liberals, why is ACA approval at 40% wonderful and amazing?

80% of workers in this country live paycheck to paycheck. People have no choice but to work shit jobs because wages are way behind on the cost of living.

The easiest thing in the world is to spend less than what you have... fact

 

[danielpalos]

Liberals want someone else to pay for EVERYTHING.

The concept of health care for all is wonderful. But to me, it's like anything else. You get what you pay for. Nobody pays for my health insurance. I work for it. Why is that such a bad concept to liberals? 70% of America was against Obamacare from the beginning. Later polls showed about 60% opposed. If Trump's approval rating at 40% is "dismal" according to liberals, why is ACA approval at 40% wonderful and amazing?

80% of workers in this country live paycheck to paycheck. People have no choice but to work shit jobs because wages are way behind on the cost of living.

The easiest thing in the world is to spend less than what you have... fact

not for the right wing.

 

[BS Filter]

Yes, the solution is as little government interference as possible. Allow competition just like in the market place. Allow the insurance companies to compete interstate.