DEM Primaries/Candidates thread

[KipWellsFan]

Why does the GOVERNMENT have to do this for you, Balta? I find it to be better if government leaves us the hell alone. Now, not to the levels that RP is talking, but... certainly, I don't want my government telling me what doctors I can or cannot see, for example. And if you think that is not what is going to happen, don't kid yourself.

 

In Canada we have universal health care and no one in my immediate family has been told what doctor to see. Wait times are often an issue here but I don't ever hear people complaining about being forced to see a particular doctor. Perhaps in situations where a specialist is required.

 

Oh, and as for predictions I don't think the local Des Moines paper will be far off. Obama will win tonight.

[YASNY]

In Canada we have universal health care and no one in my immediate family has been told what doctor to see. Wait times are often an issue here but I don't ever hear people complaining about being forced to see a particular doctor. Perhaps in situations where a specialist is required.

 

Oh, and as for predictions I don't think the local Des Moines paper will be far off. Obama will win tonight.

 

Why, then, are we getting reports of Canadiens coming across the border in droves to get health care? From what I've been hearing is that they can't get to specialists when needed for months upon months at a time. No thanks, you keep your 'universal health care'. I want no part of it whatsoever.

[jasonxctf]

personally, i declare shennanigans on those reports.

[YASNY]

personally, i declare shennanigans on those reports.

 

Personally, I believe them.

[KipWellsFan]

Why, then, are we getting reports of Canadiens coming across the border in droves to get health care? From what I've been hearing is that they can't get to specialists when needed for months upon months at a time. No thanks, you keep your 'universal health care'. I want no part of it whatsoever.

 

Like I said, wait times are an issue. But I doubt "droves" would be an accurate description of the amount of Canadians crossing the border to see specialists, particularly in life threatening cases.

[YASNY]

Like I said, wait times are an issue. But I doubt "droves" would be an accurate description of the amount of Canadians crossing the border to see specialists, particularly in life threatening cases.

 

Let's just say I heard reports of dissatisfaction with the system since it's implementation, resulting in many crossing the border to get quality health care. In fact, I've Brits are also complaining due to the lack of timely, quality health care over there as well. When I think of government run health care, I think of the fiasco at Walter Reed Hospital and the cockroaches that were accompanying our wounded soldiers. As I said, I'll pass.

[EvilMonkey]

Let's just say I heard reports of dissatisfaction with the system since it's implementation, resulting in many crossing the border to get quality health care. In fact, I've Brits are also complaining due to the lack of timely, quality health care over there as well. When I think of government run health care, I think of the fiasco at Walter Reed Hospital and the cockroaches that were accompanying our wounded soldiers. As I said, I'll pass.

In the UK, they are pushing a plan whereby if you are a smoker, you go to the end of the already long line for related care. Also for fat people, and alcohol related issues. And the nanny state over there continues.....

[YASNY]

In the UK, they are pushing a plan whereby if you are a smoker, you go to the end of the already long line for related care. Also for fat people, and alcohol related issues. And the nanny state over there continues.....

 

That sounds like universal health care to me. It must be a God send.

[kapkomet]

That sounds like universal health care to me. It must be a God send.

Because after all, it's our government that should give us this stuff. Nevermind bettering yourself and getting to the place where you can take care of things... my government should do it for me.

[YASNY]

Because after all, it's our government that should give us this stuff. Nevermind bettering yourself and getting to the place where you can take care of things... my government should do it for me.

 

And that, in a nutshell, is the liberal agenda. It keeps the downtrodden voting for them. And, in turn, they keep the downtrodden downtrodden so they keep voting for them. Why do think they want all these illegal immigrants to have voting rights? It's all part of the scam.

[NorthSideSox72]

And that, in a nutshell, is the liberal agenda. It keeps the downtrodden voting for them. And, in turn, they keep the downtrodden downtrodden so they keep voting for them. Why do think they want all these illegal immigrants to have voting rights? It's all part of the scam.

To say that is "the liberal agenda" is like saying that giving more money to the rich is the GOP agenda. They may both be reflected in their fiscal policies, but I don't think everyone in either party is truly focused on that above all else.

 

[YASNY]

To say that is "the liberal agenda" is like saying that giving more money to the rich is the GOP agenda. They may both be reflected in their fiscal policies, but I don't think everyone in either party is truly focused on that above all else.

 

It may very well be the GOP agenda, but it's not the conservative agenda. To a certain extent, you have to have an incentive to be successful. If you take the stance of arbitrarily taxing the rich because they are rich, you take away all incentive for an entreprenuer (sp?) to acheive to the utmost of his capabilities. Now granted, there are those that will take advantage of a situation that is over indulgent of the rich. But a smart businessman will pass some of the benefits of success down to those who's sweat and brains helped him achieve that success.

Edited January 3, 2008 by YASNY

[NorthSideSox72]

It may very well be the GOP agenda, but it's not the conservative agenda. To a certain extent, you have to have an incentive to be successful. If you take the stance of arbitrarily taxing the rich because they are rich, you take away all incentive for an entreprenuer (sp?) to acheive to the utmost of his capabilities. Now granted, there are those that will take advantage of a situation that is over indulgent of the rich. But a smart businessman will pass some of the benefits of success down to those who's sweat and brains helped him achieve that success.

I'm actually not criticizing that stance, nor the Dem one. Just pointing out that its not as simple as you painted it.

 

I think most people realize that SOME things have to be handled by the government. SOME of those things are best handled at the federal level. Other things clearly are best left to private citizenry.

 

The question really comes down to the handful of things that are in the fuzzy space between... health care, business law, etc. Those are the areas of contention - how much government involvement is good?

 

[YASNY]

I'm actually not criticizing that stance, nor the Dem one. Just pointing out that its not as simple as you painted it.

 

I think most people realize that SOME things have to be handled by the government. SOME of those things are best handled at the federal level. Other things clearly are best left to private citizenry.

 

The question really comes down to the handful of things that are in the fuzzy space between... health care, business law, etc. Those are the areas of contention - how much government involvement is good?

 

In my opinion, the less the federal gov't is involved the better. I prefer things to be handled on the state level. I'm not saying there aren't exceptions to the rule ( see civil rights, for example) but, in general, that's where I stand.

[KipWellsFan]

Getting way off topic now but what the heck...

 

This isn't that complicated. The liberal agenda is that the rights of the individual to equal opportunity(not conidition) is paramount. This can be transferred to the health care issue in that everyone should have equal opportunity to health care with reasonable exceptions acceptable in a democratic country. I think some conservatives make the mistake of thinking that people of lesser means are neccessarily that way because they have failed in life for this reason or that reason. But not all people of lesser means are that way and deserve to be treated with dignity and humanity.

[kapkomet]

Getting way off topic now but what the heck...

 

This isn't that complicated. The liberal agenda is that the rights of the individual to equal opportunity(not conidition) is paramount. This can be transferred to the health care issue in that everyone should have equal opportunity to health care with reasonable exceptions acceptable in a democratic country. I think some conservatives make the mistake of thinking that people of lesser means are neccessarily that way because they have failed in life for this reason or that reason. But not all people of lesser means are that way and deserve to be treated with dignity and humanity.

The true conservative will tell you that there needs to be incentive for people to succeed. Why should I go and get the education levels to work in a highly technical field, if the government will just hand me everything anyway? That's one thing I give Billy "BJ" Clinton credit for, and that was welfare reform. You have to incentivize people to get off their lazy ass, and actually DO something to earn what they get. Otherwise, we all become mindless drones and just do enough to make the state continue to feed us all. I'm sorry, I'm totally against that. Dignity and humanity is a basic tenet and should be respected as such by all humans, not my government telling me what the definition of dignity and humanity should be. It's not their place.

[Balta1701]

The true conservative will tell you that there needs to be incentive for people to succeed. Why should I go and get the education levels to work in a highly technical field, if the government will just hand me everything anyway? That's one thing I give Billy "BJ" Clinton credit for, and that was welfare reform. You have to incentivize people to get off their lazy ass, and actually DO something to earn what they get. Otherwise, we all become mindless drones and just do enough to make the state continue to feed us all. I'm sorry, I'm totally against that.

And the liberal in me will reply that you are correct, but you also have to give people some basic level of services to allow that incentive to work. It doesn't matter if you have a 0 tax rate on any income over a million dollars, a big incentive to earn that much, if you don't have health care and you wind up bankrupt because you can't afford treatment of that arm you broke.

[YASNY]

Getting way off topic now but what the heck...

 

This isn't that complicated. The liberal agenda is that the rights of the individual to equal opportunity(not conidition) is paramount. This can be transferred to the health care issue in that everyone should have equal opportunity to health care with reasonable exceptions acceptable in a democratic country. I think some conservatives make the mistake of thinking that people of lesser means are neccessarily that way because they have failed in life for this reason or that reason. But not all people of lesser means are that way and deserve to be treated with dignity and humanity.

 

Let's take the totally reasonable and realistic stance that the elite and the ultra rich are going get the best health care regardless of the system in place. If you have a national health care system, then the elits and ultra rich are only going to get richer because they are going to set the rules and they are going to set the rules to their advantage and profit. That's why communism and socialism has never worked. It will never, ever be a level playing field. Let the market set the standard, within limits of course. In fact, we need to reverse the current trend and get back to free market and a reduction of insurance to enable the poor to get back to a close level of reasonable affordable health care. What we currently have is a ripoff of the American people. Go to a national health care system and multiply the inadaquencies and injustices by tenfold, if not more.

[kapkomet]

And the liberal in me will reply that you are correct, but you also have to give people some basic level of services to allow that incentive to work. It doesn't matter if you have a 0 tax rate on any income over a million dollars, a big incentive to earn that much, if you don't have health care and you wind up bankrupt because you can't afford treatment of that arm you broke.

Combine this with tort reform, some reasonable market standards, that's as far as I would take it for government interference. Otherwise, the market needs to take care of it.

[KipWellsFan]

The true conservative will tell you that there needs to be incentive for people to succeed. Why should I go and get the education levels to work in a highly technical field, if the government will just hand me everything anyway? That's one thing I give Billy "BJ" Clinton credit for, and that was welfare reform. You have to incentivize people to get off their lazy ass, and actually DO something to earn what they get. Otherwise, we all become mindless drones and just do enough to make the state continue to feed us all. I'm sorry, I'm totally against that. Dignity and humanity is a basic tenet and should be respected as such by all humans, not my government telling me what the definition of dignity and humanity should be. It's not their place.

 

I don't think many people in a rich country like Canada hope that by working hard one day they'll be able to afford proper health care. The government isn't providing nice apartments or a Lexus. It's something provided because Canadians in general seem to think it's humane, beneficial, and feasable. But that's us.

Edited January 3, 2008 by KipWellsFan

[BigSqwert]

I'm surprised. After this long discussion there's no Ron Paul spam mixed in.

 

[BigSqwert]

DES MOINES — A new ad praising Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards for his positions on behalf of American workers is coming under fire by rival Bill Richardson’s campaign, which says Edwards invested in a fund they allege has a role in the shutdown of Newton-based manufacturer Maytag.

 

entire article

[Balta1701]

 

If McCain pulls 18%, He's a big hero.

 

If Hillary Clinton squeaks by with a win at 33%, she's been rejected by 2/3 of the Democratic party.

 

Thank God the media is on the Dems side...

Edited January 3, 2008 by Balta1701

[mr_genius]

 

If McCain pulls 18%, He's a big hero.

 

If Hillary Clinton squeaks by with a win at 33%, she's been rejected by 2/3 of the Democratic party.

 

Thank God the media is on the Dems side...

 

 

Chris Matthews is a Democrat that has worked as a staffer for many Democrats . Maybe he is just a Democrat that doesn't like Hillary Clinton.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Maybe he is just a Democrat that doesn't like Hillary Clinton.

Which is what? 60-70% of the democrats?