We're all being hoodwinked!

[TNHarley]

So why shouldn't the government make a profit? After just watching Obama double the national debt, would you agree that government should be run like a business instead of a charity?

Health is a right not a business opportunity.

What kind of right is health?

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness

That's the right I refer to. Healthcare has as it goal the preservation of life.

You mis-quoted the constitution. But let me ask you this: why do you want to keep in effect a law which provides coverage not only for birth control, but abortions too?

Is that the "preservation of life"?

-You are right I copy pasted from wikipedia and they had it wrong. The point stands though.
-Abortions can be argued save people too. There's an inherent risk to childbearing. Not only that abortion is a choice a person makes, you don't like it don't get one. I'm personally not comfortable with them. Not ethically. But I don't presume to make other people's choices. Nor do I pretend, that my opinion by definition is correct.
- I just noticed I didn't answer an important question you asked. No I don't think a government should be run like a business. Bot entities have different goals. A business needs to turn a profit. A government needs to make decisions in the best interest of the population at large.

your point stands when your reason wasnt correct?

 

[Votto]

As we all argue about Obamacare vs. Trumpcare vs. Single-payer vs. no federal healthcare program, we're all falling into a nonsensical narrative. NONE of these approaches deals with the real problem in healthcare:

The cost of healthcare is way, way to high!

I'd like you all to tell us your ideas on how to reduce the cost of healthcare. To forget the typical partisanship.

Heathcare cost could be reduced thru free market mechanisms, it could be reduced by government policies. It could be some combination of both...or perhaps some new innovative ideas.

What are your ideas?

Reagan was right. Once passed, Medicare would lead to socialized medicine.

Once government gets a foothold, they never let go and only seek more power.

Once government take completely over, they you will have no other power to cry to....except maybe Putin.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

As we all argue about Obamacare vs. Trumpcare vs. Single-payer vs. no federal healthcare program, we're all falling into a nonsensical narrative. NONE of these approaches deals with the real problem in healthcare:

The cost of healthcare is way, way to high!

I'd like you all to tell us your ideas on how to reduce the cost of healthcare. To forget the typical partisanship.

Heathcare cost could be reduced thru free market mechanisms, it could be reduced by government policies. It could be some combination of both...or perhaps some new innovative ideas.

What are your ideas?

All the rest of the civilized world has come to the conclusion that getting medicine and seeing a doctor is a right all human beings have. Except in the US. This is the last bastion for the selfish greedies to hold up in. And they have a small but vocal following of water-carriers that have been convinced to vote and act against their own self interest. This is slowly thankfully being overcome. The majority of the American people would like to see healthcare settled and be able to see a doctor and get medicine without going bankrupt or having to choose between medicine and eating dog food.

In the end once all the other detritus is cleared away it comes down to whether you believe all humans have dignity by birthright or whether dignity is something you have to buy like laxative. The rest of the world has already figured this out. Most in the US have already figured it out as well.

How do you figure that's a right? Do you have the right to the doctor of your choice? Or just some doctor the government tells you to see? Do you have a right to the best healthcare that can be provided or do you get the government to decide what you deserve?

You have a right to talk, you have a right to arm yourself if you buy a gun. Where do those rights equal walking into a doctors office and demanding care?

I live in a single payer country and I can choose my doctor. And the best healthcare my government provides is better then that available to any but a few of the richest US citizens.
As to your second paragraph. You're right they don't equal. Not arming yourself has very little effect on someones life. Being healthy has a huge effect.

The key there is the best government provides. Which can change at any moment they decide you're not worth the expense. Americans have access to the same healthcare as the rich. Why do you think European rich people come here for treatment?

 

[Votto]

As we all argue about Obamacare vs. Trumpcare vs. Single-payer vs. no federal healthcare program, we're all falling into a nonsensical narrative. NONE of these approaches deals with the real problem in healthcare:

The cost of healthcare is way, way to high!

I'd like you all to tell us your ideas on how to reduce the cost of healthcare. To forget the typical partisanship.

Heathcare cost could be reduced thru free market mechanisms, it could be reduced by government policies. It could be some combination of both...or perhaps some new innovative ideas.

What are your ideas?

All the rest of the civilized world has come to the conclusion that getting medicine and seeing a doctor is a right all human beings have. Except in the US. This is the last bastion for the selfish greedies to hold up in. And they have a small but vocal following of water-carriers that have been convinced to vote and act against their own self interest. This is slowly thankfully being overcome. The majority of the American people would like to see healthcare settled and be able to see a doctor and get medicine without going bankrupt or having to choose between medicine and eating dog food.

In the end once all the other detritus is cleared away it comes down to whether you believe all humans have dignity by birthright or whether dignity is something you have to buy like laxative. The rest of the world has already figured this out. Most in the US have already figured it out as well.

How do you figure that's a right? Do you have the right to the doctor of your choice? Or just some doctor the government tells you to see? Do you have a right to the best healthcare that can be provided or do you get the government to decide what you deserve?

You have a right to talk, you have a right to arm yourself if you buy a gun. Where do those rights equal walking into a doctors office and demanding care?

I live in a single payer country and I can choose my doctor. And the best healthcare my government provides is better then that available to any but a few of the richest US citizens.
As to your second paragraph. You're right they don't equal. Not arming yourself has very little effect on someones life. Being healthy has a huge effect.

The key there is the best government provides. Which can change at any moment they decide you're not worth the expense. Americans have access to the same healthcare as the rich. Why do you think European rich people come here for treatment?

Never mind Europeans.

Why do those in the VA seek health care outside the VA?

 

[forkup]

Health is a right not a business opportunity.

What kind of right is health?

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness

That's the right I refer to. Healthcare has as it goal the preservation of life.

You mis-quoted the constitution. But let me ask you this: why do you want to keep in effect a law which provides coverage not only for birth control, but abortions too?

Is that the "preservation of life"?

-You are right I copy pasted from wikipedia and they had it wrong. The point stands though.
-Abortions can be argued save people too. There's an inherent risk to childbearing. Not only that abortion is a choice a person makes, you don't like it don't get one. I'm personally not comfortable with them. Not ethically. But I don't presume to make other people's choices. Nor do I pretend, that my opinion by definition is correct.
- I just noticed I didn't answer an important question you asked. No I don't think a government should be run like a business. Bot entities have different goals. A business needs to turn a profit. A government needs to make decisions in the best interest of the population at large.

your point stands when your reason wasnt correct?

Life still implies being healthy.

 

[forkup]

As we all argue about Obamacare vs. Trumpcare vs. Single-payer vs. no federal healthcare program, we're all falling into a nonsensical narrative. NONE of these approaches deals with the real problem in healthcare:

The cost of healthcare is way, way to high!

I'd like you all to tell us your ideas on how to reduce the cost of healthcare. To forget the typical partisanship.

Heathcare cost could be reduced thru free market mechanisms, it could be reduced by government policies. It could be some combination of both...or perhaps some new innovative ideas.

What are your ideas?

All the rest of the civilized world has come to the conclusion that getting medicine and seeing a doctor is a right all human beings have. Except in the US. This is the last bastion for the selfish greedies to hold up in. And they have a small but vocal following of water-carriers that have been convinced to vote and act against their own self interest. This is slowly thankfully being overcome. The majority of the American people would like to see healthcare settled and be able to see a doctor and get medicine without going bankrupt or having to choose between medicine and eating dog food.

In the end once all the other detritus is cleared away it comes down to whether you believe all humans have dignity by birthright or whether dignity is something you have to buy like laxative. The rest of the world has already figured this out. Most in the US have already figured it out as well.

How do you figure that's a right? Do you have the right to the doctor of your choice? Or just some doctor the government tells you to see? Do you have a right to the best healthcare that can be provided or do you get the government to decide what you deserve?

You have a right to talk, you have a right to arm yourself if you buy a gun. Where do those rights equal walking into a doctors office and demanding care?

I live in a single payer country and I can choose my doctor. And the best healthcare my government provides is better then that available to any but a few of the richest US citizens.
As to your second paragraph. You're right they don't equal. Not arming yourself has very little effect on someones life. Being healthy has a huge effect.

The key there is the best government provides. Which can change at any moment they decide you're not worth the expense. Americans have access to the same healthcare as the rich. Why do you think European rich people come here for treatment?

No you don't. Your financial situation determines the level of care. Availability doesn't mean available if you can't afford it. Correct me if I wrong but don't private insurance companies change their rate's and coverage as they deem necessary? At least a government can be held accountable at the ballot box.

 

[TNHarley]

What kind of right is health?

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness

That's the right I refer to. Healthcare has as it goal the preservation of life.

You mis-quoted the constitution. But let me ask you this: why do you want to keep in effect a law which provides coverage not only for birth control, but abortions too?

Is that the "preservation of life"?

-You are right I copy pasted from wikipedia and they had it wrong. The point stands though.
-Abortions can be argued save people too. There's an inherent risk to childbearing. Not only that abortion is a choice a person makes, you don't like it don't get one. I'm personally not comfortable with them. Not ethically. But I don't presume to make other people's choices. Nor do I pretend, that my opinion by definition is correct.
- I just noticed I didn't answer an important question you asked. No I don't think a government should be run like a business. Bot entities have different goals. A business needs to turn a profit. A government needs to make decisions in the best interest of the population at large.

your point stands when your reason wasnt correct?

Life still implies being healthy.

Grasping for air man..

 

[forkup]

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness

That's the right I refer to. Healthcare has as it goal the preservation of life.

You mis-quoted the constitution. But let me ask you this: why do you want to keep in effect a law which provides coverage not only for birth control, but abortions too?

Is that the "preservation of life"?

-You are right I copy pasted from wikipedia and they had it wrong. The point stands though.
-Abortions can be argued save people too. There's an inherent risk to childbearing. Not only that abortion is a choice a person makes, you don't like it don't get one. I'm personally not comfortable with them. Not ethically. But I don't presume to make other people's choices. Nor do I pretend, that my opinion by definition is correct.
- I just noticed I didn't answer an important question you asked. No I don't think a government should be run like a business. Bot entities have different goals. A business needs to turn a profit. A government needs to make decisions in the best interest of the population at large.

your point stands when your reason wasnt correct?

Life still implies being healthy.

Grasping for air man..

If a person has the inalienable right to life doesn't that imply health?

 

[TNHarley]

You mis-quoted the constitution. But let me ask you this: why do you want to keep in effect a law which provides coverage not only for birth control, but abortions too?

Is that the "preservation of life"?

-You are right I copy pasted from wikipedia and they had it wrong. The point stands though.
-Abortions can be argued save people too. There's an inherent risk to childbearing. Not only that abortion is a choice a person makes, you don't like it don't get one. I'm personally not comfortable with them. Not ethically. But I don't presume to make other people's choices. Nor do I pretend, that my opinion by definition is correct.
- I just noticed I didn't answer an important question you asked. No I don't think a government should be run like a business. Bot entities have different goals. A business needs to turn a profit. A government needs to make decisions in the best interest of the population at large.

your point stands when your reason wasnt correct?

Life still implies being healthy.

Grasping for air man..

If a person has the inalienable right to life doesn't that imply health?

It implies their right to take care of themselves. If you seriously think they meant the federal govt should take care of them, you are completely ignorant on our founders.

 

[forkup]

-You are right I copy pasted from wikipedia and they had it wrong. The point stands though.
-Abortions can be argued save people too. There's an inherent risk to childbearing. Not only that abortion is a choice a person makes, you don't like it don't get one. I'm personally not comfortable with them. Not ethically. But I don't presume to make other people's choices. Nor do I pretend, that my opinion by definition is correct.
- I just noticed I didn't answer an important question you asked. No I don't think a government should be run like a business. Bot entities have different goals. A business needs to turn a profit. A government needs to make decisions in the best interest of the population at large.

your point stands when your reason wasnt correct?

Life still implies being healthy.

Grasping for air man..

If a person has the inalienable right to life doesn't that imply health?

It implies their right to take care of themselves. If you seriously think they meant the federal govt should take care of them, you are completely ignorant on our founders.

"Inalienable right to life if they so choose" implies the right to take care of themselves not " inalienable right to life."
Your founders deliberately remained vague on what specific rights a person had. A constitution is not the actual law. It's the framework from which law's are made. The founders lived in a time when there were very few doctors, bleeding was the height of medical technology, people lived on average about 2 decades less long. They knew that they couldn't predict everything. Using the constitution as a fig leaf, so you don't have to feel responsible for people dying or suffering from lack of medical care in the richest country in the world doesn't speak well for your social awareness.

 

[TNHarley]

your point stands when your reason wasnt correct?

Life still implies being healthy.

Grasping for air man..

If a person has the inalienable right to life doesn't that imply health?

It implies their right to take care of themselves. If you seriously think they meant the federal govt should take care of them, you are completely ignorant on our founders.

"Inalienable right to life if they so choose" implies the right to take care of themselves not " inalienable right to life."
Your founders deliberately remained vague on what specific rights a person had. A constitution is not the actual law. It's the framework from which law's are made. The founders lived in a time when there were very few doctors, bleeding was the height of medical technology, people lived on average about 2 decades less long. They knew that they couldn't predict everything. Using the constitution as a fig leaf, so you don't have to feel responsible for people dying or suffering from lack of medical care in the richest country in the world doesn't speak well for your social awareness.

I believe in our constitution, not "social awareness"
They limited the government for a REASON

 

[OldLady]

As we all argue about Obamacare vs. Trumpcare vs. Single-payer vs. no federal healthcare program, we're all falling into a nonsensical narrative. NONE of these approaches deals with the real problem in healthcare:

The cost of healthcare is way, way to high!

I'd like you all to tell us your ideas on how to reduce the cost of healthcare. To forget the typical partisanship.

Heathcare cost could be reduced thru free market mechanisms, it could be reduced by government policies. It could be some combination of both...or perhaps some new innovative ideas.

What are your ideas?

Single payer. Payer will pay what payer finds reasonable. That includes ALL the assorted hoopla that goes along with healthcare. Free market can figure out a way to make reasonably priced stuff or they can go out of business.
That includes to doctors. This started with them refusing to accept any kind of cap on what they could charge. That worked, and everything followed suit.

you do realize your post is a complete contradiction, right? free market and complete govt healthcare in the same post?
Payer will pay what payer finds reasonable.

There's only one payer.

Yeah? Who's that unlucky stoog that gets to pay for everyone?

ALL of us will be chipping in through taxes. I know that.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

As we all argue about Obamacare vs. Trumpcare vs. Single-payer vs. no federal healthcare program, we're all falling into a nonsensical narrative. NONE of these approaches deals with the real problem in healthcare:

The cost of healthcare is way, way to high!

I'd like you all to tell us your ideas on how to reduce the cost of healthcare. To forget the typical partisanship.

Heathcare cost could be reduced thru free market mechanisms, it could be reduced by government policies. It could be some combination of both...or perhaps some new innovative ideas.

What are your ideas?

All the rest of the civilized world has come to the conclusion that getting medicine and seeing a doctor is a right all human beings have. Except in the US. This is the last bastion for the selfish greedies to hold up in. And they have a small but vocal following of water-carriers that have been convinced to vote and act against their own self interest. This is slowly thankfully being overcome. The majority of the American people would like to see healthcare settled and be able to see a doctor and get medicine without going bankrupt or having to choose between medicine and eating dog food.

In the end once all the other detritus is cleared away it comes down to whether you believe all humans have dignity by birthright or whether dignity is something you have to buy like laxative. The rest of the world has already figured this out. Most in the US have already figured it out as well.

How do you figure that's a right? Do you have the right to the doctor of your choice? Or just some doctor the government tells you to see? Do you have a right to the best healthcare that can be provided or do you get the government to decide what you deserve?

You have a right to talk, you have a right to arm yourself if you buy a gun. Where do those rights equal walking into a doctors office and demanding care?

I live in a single payer country and I can choose my doctor. And the best healthcare my government provides is better then that available to any but a few of the richest US citizens.
As to your second paragraph. You're right they don't equal. Not arming yourself has very little effect on someones life. Being healthy has a huge effect.

The key there is the best government provides. Which can change at any moment they decide you're not worth the expense. Americans have access to the same healthcare as the rich. Why do you think European rich people come here for treatment?

No you don't. Your financial situation determines the level of care. Availability doesn't mean available if you can't afford it. Correct me if I wrong but don't private insurance companies change their rate's and coverage as they deem necessary? At least a government can be held accountable at the ballot box.

You've got to be kidding me. Government is never accountable. And no that's not how insurance works.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

As we all argue about Obamacare vs. Trumpcare vs. Single-payer vs. no federal healthcare program, we're all falling into a nonsensical narrative. NONE of these approaches deals with the real problem in healthcare:

The cost of healthcare is way, way to high!

I'd like you all to tell us your ideas on how to reduce the cost of healthcare. To forget the typical partisanship.

Heathcare cost could be reduced thru free market mechanisms, it could be reduced by government policies. It could be some combination of both...or perhaps some new innovative ideas.

What are your ideas?

Single payer. Payer will pay what payer finds reasonable. That includes ALL the assorted hoopla that goes along with healthcare. Free market can figure out a way to make reasonably priced stuff or they can go out of business.
That includes to doctors. This started with them refusing to accept any kind of cap on what they could charge. That worked, and everything followed suit.

you do realize your post is a complete contradiction, right? free market and complete govt healthcare in the same post?
Payer will pay what payer finds reasonable.

There's only one payer.

Yeah? Who's that unlucky stoog that gets to pay for everyone?

ALL of us will be chipping in through taxes. I know that.

Chipping in? You think 50% tax rates is chipping in?

 

[TNHarley]

As we all argue about Obamacare vs. Trumpcare vs. Single-payer vs. no federal healthcare program, we're all falling into a nonsensical narrative. NONE of these approaches deals with the real problem in healthcare:

The cost of healthcare is way, way to high!

I'd like you all to tell us your ideas on how to reduce the cost of healthcare. To forget the typical partisanship.

Heathcare cost could be reduced thru free market mechanisms, it could be reduced by government policies. It could be some combination of both...or perhaps some new innovative ideas.

What are your ideas?

Single payer. Payer will pay what payer finds reasonable. That includes ALL the assorted hoopla that goes along with healthcare. Free market can figure out a way to make reasonably priced stuff or they can go out of business.
That includes to doctors. This started with them refusing to accept any kind of cap on what they could charge. That worked, and everything followed suit.

you do realize your post is a complete contradiction, right? free market and complete govt healthcare in the same post?
Payer will pay what payer finds reasonable.

There's only one payer.

Yeah? Who's that unlucky stoog that gets to pay for everyone?

ALL of us will be chipping in through taxes. I know that.

All of us? Really?

 

[whitehall]

Leave it to ignorant victims of the U.S. education system to offer a single sentence "health care costs are way too high" while they pat themselves on the back for solving the problem. No wonder the ignorant (mostly left) gives democrats a pass when they stonewall and offer no solution to the problem that they created and republicans take the blame.

 

[Darkwind]

As we all argue about Obamacare vs. Trumpcare vs. Single-payer vs. no federal healthcare program, we're all falling into a nonsensical narrative. NONE of these approaches deals with the real problem in healthcare:

The cost of healthcare is way, way to high!

I'd like you all to tell us your ideas on how to reduce the cost of healthcare. To forget the typical partisanship.

Heathcare cost could be reduced thru free market mechanisms, it could be reduced by government policies. It could be some combination of both...or perhaps some new innovative ideas.

What are your ideas?

Single payer. Payer will pay what payer finds reasonable. That includes ALL the assorted hoopla that goes along with healthcare. Free market can figure out a way to make reasonably priced stuff or they can go out of business.
That includes to doctors. This started with them refusing to accept any kind of cap on what they could charge. That worked, and everything followed suit.

you do realize your post is a complete contradiction, right? free market and complete govt healthcare in the same post?
Payer will pay what payer finds reasonable.

If you do not vote for Democrats, it is unreasonable for us to cover your diabetic meds.
You vote Republican, guess your mom didn't really need that gall bladder operation after all.

 

[forkup]

Life still implies being healthy.

Grasping for air man..

If a person has the inalienable right to life doesn't that imply health?

It implies their right to take care of themselves. If you seriously think they meant the federal govt should take care of them, you are completely ignorant on our founders.

"Inalienable right to life if they so choose" implies the right to take care of themselves not " inalienable right to life."
Your founders deliberately remained vague on what specific rights a person had. A constitution is not the actual law. It's the framework from which law's are made. The founders lived in a time when there were very few doctors, bleeding was the height of medical technology, people lived on average about 2 decades less long. They knew that they couldn't predict everything. Using the constitution as a fig leaf, so you don't have to feel responsible for people dying or suffering from lack of medical care in the richest country in the world doesn't speak well for your social awareness.

I believe in our constitution, not "social awareness"
They limited the government for a REASON

Really? Then you should have a major problem with barring people from entering the country on a religious basis? You also should have a problem then with blocking a scotus on the basis of it being the wrong president doing the nominating. If you don't then you don't believe in the constitution but in your ideology.

 

[TNHarley]

Grasping for air man..

If a person has the inalienable right to life doesn't that imply health?

It implies their right to take care of themselves. If you seriously think they meant the federal govt should take care of them, you are completely ignorant on our founders.

"Inalienable right to life if they so choose" implies the right to take care of themselves not " inalienable right to life."
Your founders deliberately remained vague on what specific rights a person had. A constitution is not the actual law. It's the framework from which law's are made. The founders lived in a time when there were very few doctors, bleeding was the height of medical technology, people lived on average about 2 decades less long. They knew that they couldn't predict everything. Using the constitution as a fig leaf, so you don't have to feel responsible for people dying or suffering from lack of medical care in the richest country in the world doesn't speak well for your social awareness.

I believe in our constitution, not "social awareness"
They limited the government for a REASON

Really? Then you should have a major problem with barring people from entering the country on a religious basis? You also should have a problem then with blocking a scotus on the basis of it being the wrong president doing the nominating. If you don't then you don't believe in the constitution but in your ideology.

I do have a problem with it. If they are citizens.
I thought what the republicans did with that childish and partisan. But typical, nonetheless. All washington is is a partisan pissing contest.