What adds to this is the assumption that since hospitals/ER provide care unconditionally, and taxpayers already pay for this, then the regulations set up were attempts to hold people responsible for their own health care costs such as by requiring insurance.
unfortunately this doesn't solve the problems but makes them worse.
instead of holding the people responsible who are INCURRING costs to the public, the liberal legislation took rights and liberties away from law-abiding citizens without first proving by due process that any such people committed crimes or had any intent of dumping more costs on the public than these citizens pay in.
The first problem, is that the entire premise if false. It is not automatic, that a person who gets treatment at a hospital, is costing the tax payers. I went to the hospital without insurance, and got something called "a bill". I then did something known as "paying the bill".
The BBC did a documentary on Obama care, and discovered numerous people who were paying their own health care bills, and now thanks to ObamaCare, are on government programs, costing tax payers money.
So the entire left-wing premise if false from the start. ObamaCare has done more to increase the cost to tax payers, than reduce it.
one side does not want to pay for war and destroying infrastructure when govt funding could be used to pay for hospital development and health care.
We have already tried that. It's called the "VA system", and it sucks. If I have to choose between my tax money going to the military, which is the fundamental duty of the Federal government, and bad socialized health care, I'll choose the military every single time.
why can't both parties pay for health care by redirecting taxes that they don't want to waste on problems that can be solved instead? why not let all parties pay for health care by reducing or preventing waste or abuses in areas they deem wasteful?
do we really expect to pay for things all the same way?
why not let each party take on problems of govt abuse and waste,
solve those problems, and redirect those funds to pay for health care, education etc.
why not let all approaches work together to solve the problems of waste
and let people pay their taxes into whatever programs they believe are cost effective
who says it all has to be done the same way?
Because when you talk about "waste and govt abuse", all of those things, the other side thinks are great wonderful and a benefit.
For example, I believe that Wind Power is a complete waste. The other side, thinks that the Holy Totems of Power are wonderful.
There is no reconciling these two views. One side has to win, and the other has to lose.
Further, no matter how much we clean out the waste, there will always be waste. Always. Waste is inherent to government.
The only way to eliminate waste from say, medicare... is to eliminate medicare. You will never reach a point where Medicare is waste free. Can't happen. First, there is no "Purity Party", where we can vote for Heavenly Angels, who are perfect, and operate purely on the good of society, instead of partisanship and self interest. Second, even if there was such a party, waste in inherent to very system of government.
Even if you elected *ME* as head of some government agency, it wouldn't make any real difference. Even if my whole goal was to eliminate waste, you have to remember, every year I show money left over, congress is going to cut funding. Now that sounds great, and to me that's wonderful because I'm trying to cut waste.....
But what about all of the people under me? What about all my department heads? What about all my employees? Their entire goal is to prevent those cuts. They want more money, and more raises, and more employees. They have every incentive to make sure there is no money left over at the end of the year. If they have an extra $1,000, they are going to find something to blow it on. Hard to make the case to congress that you need more money, when you have leftover cash.
My entire agency is going to be working 100% against me cutting out the waste.
Do you get the problem? It sounds really easy "just cut waste and use the money to fund health care". That works great in the
movies.... simply not true in reality. "Dave" was a great movie, but it was a horrible portrayal of reality. That's why it's not in the Documentary section, but rather the Fiction section.
