Majority of Americans Say It Not the Government's Responsibility to Insure Everyone

[ShawnChris13]

The deaths caused by our Pubscam health ''system'', not mentioned on the Pub propaganda machine, Pub dupe...

Not a pub. I try not to be a dupe.



600k people die from malpractice every year. Is that Republicans' fault too? And what pub scam system are you referring to? Republicans never took control of healthcare.

The system greedy rich Pubs have been defending for 100 years...600k sounds ridiculous, btw.That's 15 TIMES AS MANY AS DIE IN TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS LOL...

Just think of how it compares to gun violence.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Healthcare is a freedom?

No, health care is a service that someone else must provide for you. No one has the 'right' to be taken care of.

Why not?

I have explained this to so many liberals. Their ignorance is astounding. In America we have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights.


The only rights that exist are under those two documents.


You are promised the rights contained in those documents, and the opportunity to succeed. That is all. No where does it say any citizen is entitled to healthcare or free shit. Your paradigm does not exist. It is a liberal fantasy.

 

[dblack]

Healthcare is a freedom?

No, health care is a service that someone else must provide for you. No one has the 'right' to be taken care of.

Why not?

Because such a 'right' imposes an obligation on others to serve you. The only way to guarantee such a 'right' is to enslave others to your will. That's wrong.

 

[Noomi]

No, health care is a service that someone else must provide for you. No one has the 'right' to be taken care of.

Why not?

Because such a 'right' imposes an obligation on others to serve you. The only way to guarantee such a 'right' is to enslave others to your will. That's wrong.

I don't see it as having others 'serve me'. They pay taxes. I am just not seeing the issue here, but then, I have grown up with my health care system the way it currently is. I don't know any different - just as you guys don't know any different.

 

[ShawnChris13]

They are denied the same health care that rich people have access to.

I am denied many things rich people have access to. So what?

As am I. I don't have a big house, or a flash car, and I can't afford to go to University. I can't afford to live in the big city, either, or fly on a plane, or go on a holiday. I am not entitled to any of those things. I am, however, entitled to health care, regardless of my income.

Your entitled to the Bill of Rights, yet I don't hear you complaining about the patriot act or the NDAA. You wish to be given things, no matter what the government takes from you.

 

[Noomi]

I am not an American, for the record, so I don't have any idea what your 'Patriot' act is...

 

[dblack]

Why not?

Because such a 'right' imposes an obligation on others to serve you. The only way to guarantee such a 'right' is to enslave others to your will. That's wrong.

I don't see it as having others 'serve me'. They pay taxes. I am just not seeing the issue here, but then, I have grown up with my health care system the way it currently is. I don't know any different - just as you guys don't know any different.

That's fair. I can understand having a government that provides you with basic health care. Ours provides us with basic education. But the concept of 'right' is something more fundamental. A 'right' is a freedom that you have regardless of whether anyone else does anything for you or not. In other words, if no one was around to provide you with anything, you'd still have all your freedoms. So the 'right to health care' makes no sense. It's not a freedom. It's a service that someone else provides for you - which will always depend on them providing it for you. I don't see how I have a right to demand that anyone else serve my needs by default. I hope they will, but it's not my right.

 

[TemplarKormac]

 

[WelfareQueen]

Why not?

Because such a 'right' imposes an obligation on others to serve you. The only way to guarantee such a 'right' is to enslave others to your will. That's wrong.

I don't see it as having others 'serve me'. They pay taxes. I am just not seeing the issue here, but then, I have grown up with my health care system the way it currently is. I don't know any different - just as you guys don't know any different.

I am not opposed to single payer, but our current system will not support it, primarily because Liberals support a wide open legal system that allows lawyers to sue doctors and hospitals for the most frivolous bullshit. Data suggests it adds about $250,000,000,000 a year to everyone's health care costs.

I know Canada and England do not allow this kind of nonsense litigation to attack their healthcare system. My guess is your country does the same.

In America, the Democrats aew bought and paid for by trial lawyers. They will never stop the senseless lawsuits which mean single payer will never work in America.

 

[Noomi]

Because such a 'right' imposes an obligation on others to serve you. The only way to guarantee such a 'right' is to enslave others to your will. That's wrong.

I don't see it as having others 'serve me'. They pay taxes. I am just not seeing the issue here, but then, I have grown up with my health care system the way it currently is. I don't know any different - just as you guys don't know any different.

That's fair. I can understand having a government that provides you with basic health care. Ours provides us with basic education. But the concept of 'right' is something more fundamental. A 'right' is a freedom that you have regardless of whether anyone else does anything for you or not. In other words, if no one was around to provide you with anything, you'd still have all your freedoms. So the 'right to health care' makes no sense. It's not a freedom. It's a service that someone else provides for you - which will always depend on them providing it for you. I don't see how I have a right to demand that anyone else serve my needs by default. I hope they will, but it's not my right.

I believe that you certainly have the right to expect people to pay taxes to cover your healthcare costs. It just seems like the right thing to do. Besides, its about looking after one another, isn't it?

Thanks for the respectful debate, too. Its much appreciated.

 

[Noomi]

Because such a 'right' imposes an obligation on others to serve you. The only way to guarantee such a 'right' is to enslave others to your will. That's wrong.

I don't see it as having others 'serve me'. They pay taxes. I am just not seeing the issue here, but then, I have grown up with my health care system the way it currently is. I don't know any different - just as you guys don't know any different.

I am not opposed to single payer, but our current system will not support it, primarily because Liberals support a wide open legal system that allows lawyers to sue doctors and hospitals for the most frivolous bullshit. Data suggests it adds about $250,000,000,000 a year to everyone's health care costs.

I know Canada and England do not allow this kind of nonsense litigation to attack their healthcare system. My guess is your country does the same.

In America, the Democrats and bought and paid for by trial lawyers. They will never stop the senseless lawsuits which mean single payer will never work in America.

Yeah, the 'sue happy' crap has to stop. I think people should have the right to sue, but not over the tiniest things that don't really affect them. People have sued for stupid things over here, too, but I doubt that a judge lets it get far.
Most recent case in memory was a woman suing her doctor because she had IVF and wanted only one baby, but got pregnant with twins.

 

[francoHFW]

Democrats agree with you, Noomie, greedy rich Pubs and silly ugly American hater dupes don't. They're the most arrogant jerks in the modern world- and proud of it. At least they're in the white party lol, and the biggest chumps in the world...their arguments are un-christian idiocy- always turns out they're totally misinformed, and one accident or illness from homelessness- thanks to how they vote...

 

[Noomi]

Democrats agree with you, Noomie, greedy rich Pubs and silly ugly American hater dupes don't. They're the most arrogant jerks in the modern world- and proud of it. At least they're in the white party lol, and the biggest chumps in the world...their arguments are un-christian idiocy- always turns out they're totally misinformed, and one accident or illness from homelessness- thanks to how they vote...

The Christian thing I have wondered about. If Jesus were still around, would he expect people to go broke paying for their treatment, or would he want everyone to help each other out?

 

[JakeStarkey]

I have explained this to so many liberals. Their ignorance is astounding. In America we have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights. The only rights that exist are under those two documents. You are promised the rights contained in those documents, and the opportunity to succeed. That is all. No where does it say any citizen is entitled to healthcare or free shit. Your paradigm does not exist. It is a liberal fantasy.

WQ, share your astounding reasoning with SCOTUS.

 

[WelfareQueen]

I have explained this to so many liberals. Their ignorance is astounding. In America we have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights. The only rights that exist are under those two documents. You are promised the rights contained in those documents, and the opportunity to succeed. That is all. No where does it say any citizen is entitled to healthcare or free shit. Your paradigm does not exist. It is a liberal fantasy.

WQ, share your astounding reasoning with SCOTUS.

Jake, you amuse me. Please explain to all of us the rights that exist for us as U.S. citizens outside of those enumerated in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

I'll be anxiously waiting to be educated.

 

[lakeview]

Obamacare isn't the government paying for everyone's healthcare.

Yes it is. USSC ruled the PPACA is a tax.

 

[francoHFW]

All the malpractice reform Pubs want would add up to 2 per cent of health costs- NOT MUCH, hater dupes...Total bs brainwashing, like all your arguments...

 

[francoHFW]

Obamacare isn't the government paying for everyone's healthcare.

Yes it is. USSC ruled the PPACA is a tax.

NO, the penalies are a tax- ACA is an ACTUAL FUNCTIONAL HEALTH SYSTEM- What next lol...but thanks for the dumbazz talking point, dupe...

It's the capitalist alternate to socialist single payer...

 

[dblack]

Obamacare isn't the government paying for everyone's healthcare.

Yes it is. USSC ruled the PPACA is a tax.

NO, the penalies are a tax- ACA is an ACTUAL FUNCTIONAL HEALTH SYSTEM- What next lol...but thanks for the dumbazz talking point, dupe...

It's the capitalist alternate to socialist single payer...

Almost. It's the "corporatist" alternative. Capitalism entails free markets.

 

[Londoner]

There is a new poll out today by Gallup that shows a major shift in American's thinking, and is very bad news for the Democrat Party. A clear majority of Americans are now saying it is not the Government's responsibility to insure everyone. This shows a dramatic change in thinking since Obamacare has become reality. Only 42% of people in America now agree with the premise. Here is a link to the story and the data.


Majority in U.S. Say Healthcare Not Gov't Responsibility

It's not government's job to give no bid contracts to large corporations. It's not government's job to provide subsidies and bailouts to large corporations. It's not government's job to provide patent protection for the investments of the private sector. It's not government's job to protect the oil fields and trade routes of private corporations.

But government does these things. [It would be nice if the OP at least knew what government did for the wealthy. Without having all the information about who government serves, the OP runs the risk of appearing like an apparachik for the concentrated wealth that owns his party and his news sources.]

The economy dies when consumers are bankrupted by health costs. Any economy which allows special interest to rape consumers w/monopoly pricing is going to die because the economy requires a minimum level of consumption. [You get this right? When people don't buy enough stuff the capitalist is forced to layoff workers - and this removes even more consumers from the economy, which leads to more layoffs: it's a toxic cycle] Meaning: we don't provide affordable health care because we want to help the welfare queens. We provide affordable health care because we have an interest in not destroying the consumer.

Obama should have broken up the health care monopolies with the public option. He should have forced those monopolists to compete. But he didn't.

The OP's news sources have not explained to him why health costs were rising at five times the rate of inflation, and how this rise in health care costs destroyed the consumer's purchasing power (which meant consumers insufficient funds to consume and meet the demand requirements of economic growth).

Here is something the OP's news sources NEVER mention. Over the past twenty years Health Insurance and big pharma have poured trillions of dollars into Government. They did this to create a regulatory structure which effectively divided much of the nation into fixed no-compete zones. This allowed them to raise rates without being disciplined by market competition. (Prior to ObamaCare we didn't have a free market, rather, we had a government protected monopoly, one that invested a portion of its profits in the Republican election machine. Unfortunately, the Republican voter doesn't believe that health care devolved into a special interest monopoly. Why? Because he doesn't have the analytical skills to question his news sources, which are heavily funded by the monopolies.)

But...

To answer the OP's question. The government does have an interest in restoring a competitive market to what has become a Republican protected monopoly. If we can educate Republicans on the need to bust up these health care monopolies, than we can restore competition and lower prices (like when Carter busted up telecom, which is why we've seen so much innovation in this sector. When corporations are forced to compete, they must innovate and lower prices to retain/grow market share. Problem is: corporations don't want to compete and risk losing market share. They want captive consumers. They don't want to risk being put out of business by a competitor. This is why, say, the cable/internet companies have agreed not to go into each other's territories. [The entire economy is marked by anti-trust agreements which insulates the major players from competition] The Republican Party and its news sources are owned by these monopolists - and they manipulate uneducated voters with the culture war).

We have an entire generation of voters who have been duped into protecting special interest monopolies.

ObamaCare was designed to bring down prices by bringing more payees into the system and broadening the risk pools with healthier people. Time will tell if this works, but I suspect the Republicans have and will be able to sabatoge it.