Who do you trust more on health care?

[dblack]

You can always push for a one payer system that still allows for private supplemental insurance for those who want it. Of course, I'm sure you are against the idea of single payer also.

Single payer would be much better than the corporatist shit-pile of PPACA. But there are much better solutions.

You're right that I'd prefer government stay out of health care altogether, but if the consensus is that we must make our personal health a government responsibility, we could do it sanely. We could provide basic health care in much the same way we provide basic education, locally controlled and financed. But that won't happen because getting people the services they need isn't the point. It never has been. It's about centralizing control of our basic needs. It's about funneling money and power to the institutions and people who run our country.

 

[Greenbeard]

We could provide basic health care in much the same way we provide basic education, locally controlled and financed.

Education is primarily a state-level responsibility. So is this.

There's a reason health and education are the two biggest slices of any state's budget. That hasn't changed.

 

[dblack]

We could provide basic health care in much the same way we provide basic education, locally controlled and financed.

Education is primarily a state-level responsibility. So is this.

That's simply not true. It's a federally controlled, federally financed, federally mandated program designed to funnel tax money to corporate insurance.

 

[Greenbeard]

If it were truly federally controlled, every state's exchange and every state's Medicaid program would look the same. They don't and they never will, as states design both within broad guidelines set by the feds.

If you don't like corporate insurance, buy from a CO-OP. Or don't buy at all.

 

[xsited1]

Who do you trust more on health care?

I choose neither.

 

[dblack]

If it were truly federally controlled, every state's exchange and every state's Medicaid program would look the same. They don't and they never will, as states design both within broad guidelines set by the feds.

If you don't like corporate insurance, buy from a CO-OP. Or don't buy at all.

"Allowing" variation from state to state, but still broadly dictating what they must provide IS still "truly" federal control.

We aren't free to not buy at all - you will be punished for not doing so.

 

[Greenbeard]

We aren't free to not buy at all - you will be punished for not doing so.

Such is the price of citizenship. You're "free" to go any place else in the world you like and try and foist your risks upon others at no cost to yourself.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Odd that you dont mind the government telling you what to do with your body when it comes to health care

The government doesn't tell you what to do with your body when it comes to health care.

True.

Yabut rw's don't know that cuz they believe everything assholes like lushbo tell them to believe.

These idiots actually believe the government is somehow involved in ObamaCare.

The funniest part of this is that rw's would rather their family go without health care rather than use the benefits that are available to them right now today.

Now, THAT is some kinda hate they got going.

Joe Walsh, teepot nimrod and dead beat dad to the tune of more than $ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS has said he will continue to vote against ObamaCare even though his wife is now able to cover their kids on her policy.

rw's will gladly let their kid's health suffer just so they can keep hating Obama.

Funny how Mittens is changing his tune, gettin all mushy for ObamaCare. Asshole is lying in hopes of getting more votes.

Has there ever been a time when the right as been this corrupt and this willing to steal from Americans?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

We aren't free to not buy at all - you will be punished for not doing so.

Under the current SOCIALIST system, I'm stuck paying for you if you don't.

But, rw's are always happy to be able to scam the system if it means they don't have to pay for their own.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

If it were truly federally controlled, every state's exchange and every state's Medicaid program would look the same. They don't and they never will, as states design both within broad guidelines set by the feds.

If you don't like corporate insurance, buy from a CO-OP. Or don't buy at all.

And, if you can't afford to, you don't have to.

 

[dblack]

We aren't free to not buy at all - you will be punished for not doing so.

Such is the price of citizenship. You're "free" to go any place else in the world you like and try and foist your risks upon others at no cost to yourself.

Selling out our freedom to corporate interests is not a proper "cost of citizenship" and is a betrayal of the people's trust in government. In my view it renders the social contract null and void, and I'll do everything within my power to throw a monkey-wrench in any such plans.

 

[driveby]

Well, if you're like most Americans, the answer is Barack Obama.

Poll: Obama has double-digit advantage on health care, Medicare - POLITICO.com

More from the new CNN poll out this afternoon: President Obama has a double-digit lead over Mitt Romney on both the issues of health care and Medicare.

According to the poll, 54 percent of likely voters think Obama would better handle the issue of health care, compared with 45 percent for Romney. Before the conventions, on Aug. 22-23, Obama led by only 1 point on the issue, 49 percent to 48 percent.

On Medicare, the disparity is even more pronounced: Obama leads Romney by 11 points, 54 percent to 43 percent, compared with a 1-point lead back in the pre-convention August poll.

Health care is an issue on which the public has been deeply divided, even in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling earlier this summer. And Medicare, though it's been a traditionally winning issue for Democrats, is something Republicans have sought to play offense on after Paul Ryan joined the GOP ticket. These numbers suggest that, at least in terms of messaging at the conventions, Democrats have the upper hand on both issues.

Perhaps that's why Mitt is starting to embrace Obamacare.

When did 51 senators become most Americans?.......

 

[alan1]

The government is telling people that they need to have health insurance so that if they get sick, they are covered. It has nothing to do with the government telling anyone what to do with their body. Now I understand that there are people out there who would rather take their chances and not be forced into buying health insurance, but when everyone who is insured ends up paying for them in the end, do we not have an obligation to those who pay to see to it that those who don't want to actually do?

At what point do you think the government shouldn't force you to engage in commerce?

I'm pretty sure the automobile manufacturers would love it if the government forced you to engage in an automobile purchase.
I'm pretty sure the apple growers would love it if the government forced you to purchase apples.
I'm pretty sure the carpet industry would love it if the government forced people to carpet their living rooms.

At what point do you think the government shouldn't force you to engage in commerce?
What commerce do you find acceptable for the government to force you to engage in?

When it is something you will almost certainly use and cannot afford to pay for without it should you need it. You know who doesn't need it? People with lot of money, that's who. If you are a multi-millionaire, you don't need insurance because you have the money to pay for just about anything that you would need medically. How many multi-millionaires do you think go uninsured?

Now, there are big companies who self-insure, but that is because they have a big enough pool of employees that it becomes cost effective. I'm talking about everyday people. Would you go without insurance? If so, how would you pay for an extended hospitalization? Just curious.

Insurance has more than paid for itself with my family. Here is a list of medical expenses that insurance covered.

Wife: Kidney stones, $15,000
First Son: NICU, (born premature) $80,000
Second Son: NICU, (born premature) $300,000+
Wife: Leukemia, $1,300,000
Myself: Hemochromatosis, $60,000

How many families could absorb those costs without insurance? Who would pay if they didn't have insurance?

You are missing my point.
Since when is it in the governments authority to force you to engage in specific commerce?
You may or may not own and drive a car, the government doesn't force those that don't own a car to purchase gasoline in order to fund the interstates used by the truckers that deliver the goods they want.

Yes, I admit that I am cold-hearted, If one chooses to not carry health insurance, then let them die. It is their choice. You chose health insurance, your choice, and it worked out for you. I carry medical insurance, so far I have paid way more than I've used because I am a healthy individual. I weighed my options and the risk and I made a calculated decision. A decision that is costing me way more money than if I had chosen to not purchase medical insurance. My decision, my choice.

 

[dblack]

We aren't free to not buy at all - you will be punished for not doing so.

Under the current SOCIALIST system, I'm stuck paying for you if you don't.

But, rw's are always happy to be able to scam the system if it means they don't have to pay for their own.

So change the system so it can't be scammed.

Seriously, seeing so many of the liberal supporters of PPACA showing their "inner-stingy" is disheartening. If you really have such a chip on your shoulder regarding "freeloaders", then repeal the laws that force hospitals to treat them.

 

[Big Black Dog]

Well, if you're like most Americans, the answer is Barack Obama.

Poll: Obama has double-digit advantage on health care, Medicare - POLITICO.com

More from the new CNN poll out this afternoon: President Obama has a double-digit lead over Mitt Romney on both the issues of health care and Medicare.

According to the poll, 54 percent of likely voters think Obama would better handle the issue of health care, compared with 45 percent for Romney. Before the conventions, on Aug. 22-23, Obama led by only 1 point on the issue, 49 percent to 48 percent.

On Medicare, the disparity is even more pronounced: Obama leads Romney by 11 points, 54 percent to 43 percent, compared with a 1-point lead back in the pre-convention August poll.

Health care is an issue on which the public has been deeply divided, even in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling earlier this summer. And Medicare, though it's been a traditionally winning issue for Democrats, is something Republicans have sought to play offense on after Paul Ryan joined the GOP ticket. These numbers suggest that, at least in terms of messaging at the conventions, Democrats have the upper hand on both issues.

Perhaps that's why Mitt is starting to embrace Obamacare.

What a crock of shit this is... More than half of the America population wants ObamaCare eliminated. Go sell your crap elsewhere.

 

[The Rabbi]

Odd that you dont mind the government telling you what to do with your body when it comes to health care

The government doesn't tell you what to do with your body when it comes to health care.

Yes it does. The government under Obama will have a panel of "experts" who will decide that you've used up your QALYs and its time to die.
The Democrat war on citizens.

 

[LilOlLady]

Myself. I dont trust the government at all.

Odd that you dont mind the government telling you what to do with your body when it comes to health care

******* moron, Government is the reason your sorry ass is here today.Plus your GOD say you need a government. Rom 13; 1-7.


We need only read the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution to understand why a government is needed: "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." We need government to keep the territory held together (more perfect union). We need government to protect us from law breakers (establish justice). We need government to keep our day-to-day lives stable and safe (domestic tranquility). We need government to protect us from foreign invasions (provide for the common defense). We need government to help the exchange of money, goods, and trade with other countries (promote the general welfare). The purpose of a government is to provide for the safety and protection of the citizens. It protects the nation from foreign and domestic enemies and violence, provides services like post office, fire protection, state and local police, armed forces, and regulates things like interstate commerce and trade with other nations. A government also has the obligation to protect the rights of the citizens, though not all governments do that. A national government must protect the rights of citizens and of states' rights. The government's functions are to provide social order, security, public services, and economic systems for the citizens.

Why do we need a government

 

[Peach]

Its up to Congress actually but if the Pubs take the Senate, the gay marriage 'crisis' will again be a #1 concern; that and slashing Vet benefits.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Umm that WAS what I said.

You agree then. ACA's purpose is to put the private insurers out of business..

It is the first step.
We need to reduce profits and overhead in the health care industry to lower the costs.
A single payor system is the best way to do that.

ACA still had the insurance industry but their profits are limited to 20% I think?

Reduce profits? Hmm..There is another buzzword deemed evil by the left..
How dare a business make money?....
Single payer DOES NOT WORK. There is not a one single payer system that is not costing less money than it costs to operate. If it is even close to break even it is because care is rationed and otherwise heavily controlled by government bureaucracy. In cases of serious illness or injury care is often delayed or denied. That because there simply are not the resources.
The people of this country will NEVER accept single payer and quite frankly the very idea is a political nuclear bomb. No politician who wants to keep his job or become and elected official would ever utter the words "single payer" unless they were rejecting the idea.
The bottom line is, those of you who want single payer will just have to relocate to a country that has it.

 

[blimpo]

Odd that you dont mind the government telling you what to do with your body when it comes to health care

The government doesn't tell you what to do with your body when it comes to health care.

Yes it does. The government under Obama will have a panel of "experts" who will decide that you've used up your QALYs and its time to die.
The Democrat war on citizens.

You're insane.

I'd trust anyone before I'd trust my FOR PROFIT health insurance company. That is now who decides like a dictator whether I will have treatment or not.

My medical treatment is the exact opposite of their bottom line.

My care hurts their profit and they'd kill to make a profit.