Sicko

[GoSox05]

There's a distinction in this argument. I've never said I'm against giving people health care, I'm against labeling it as a right. Once you label something a fundamental right it forever changes the nature of the beast.

 

Personally I was a big advocate of Henry Ford Jr. (guy from Tennessee) and his plan. He essentially said if you work hard society should reward you by helping out when you get in a bind. But it wasn't (a) forever and (B) for those who do not deserve it.

 

And I don't think I back rich medical companies anymore than you and I and the rest of the country backs rich automobile manufacturers, rich energy companies, rich communications companies, etc. I sure hope you don't own a cell phone. God knows you're stuffing money in the cofers of the devil.

I agree costs have gotten out of control in some circumstances, and for this I have no problem with the government intervening and setting up some rules. I don't see how this relates to giving everyone health care though.

 

 

I actually didnt mean you. sorry about that.

 

 

I know we all to support big companies, but we dont have to like it. When we start liking it, than they can do what they want.

 

Thats the problem with the right. They believe that big comapnies can do no wrong. The boss is always right king of mentality. They think that people are the problem. Poor people. The right always complains about people on welfare, yet they never complain about big companies ripping people out of things they worked there whole lives for.

 

Some people will work 30 years for companies and that company can't give them helath care. Its bulls***.

 

I also believe that Health care is a human right. I believe its a coutries responsibilty to take care of each other. Its a goverments job to make sure it takes care of its people.

[kapkomet]

Why do "big companies" in your mind rip people off?

 

Do you shop at Walmart? (Serious question). If not, why not? If so, why do you?

[GoSox05]

Why do "big companies" in your mind rip people off?

 

Do you shop at Walmart? (Serious question). If not, why not? If so, why do you?

 

 

do not shop at Walmart. for alot of reasons. one they dont give their employes health covergage. second they sell a high amount of items made in countries that a have child workers. third they move into towns and kill local stores. Fourth they sell music and movies that are censored.

 

 

I live in chicago and I think theres only one and we liked to keep it that way.

[Jenksismyhero]

do not shop at Walmart. for alot of reasons. one they dont give their employes health covergage. second they sell a high amount of items made in countries that a have child workers. third they move into towns and kill local stores. Fourth they sell music and movies that are censored.

I live in chicago and I think theres only one and we liked to keep it that way.

 

 

Gripe #1 This is the typical left 'I hate money' mentality. Instead of complaining about what Wal-mart, why don't those workers leave? Why don't they band together and strike? Don't give me this BS 'some people are in tough situations' crap. If it can be done it should be done. If people are tired of their lot in life, go out and change it. This country has more opportunity than anywhere else in the world, and it also has the most lazy, unmotivated citizenry as well. That's the big difference between the left and the right. The left asks 'why should i have to do X when it can be given to me.' The right says 'go out and get what you want.'

 

Gripe #2 is legitimate and I agree it should stop.

 

Gripe #3 That's called business. Where are the people boycotting other national chains? McDonalds, Starbucks, HIlton, Best Buy, Jewel, etc etc. All of these huge chains killed local stores. Do you shop at all? I'm willing to bet you've shopped at a big coporation that's killed numerous mom and pop shops just in the last week. Why do you continue to shop there?

 

Grip #4 Why is this a problem? So they pick what their standards are and sell merchandise that fits it? Do they not have the right to pick and choose what they sell in their stores?

[Balta1701]

Gripe #1 This is the typical left 'I hate money' mentality. Instead of complaining about what Wal-mart, why don't those workers leave? Why don't they band together and strike?

Because Walmart will immediately close the store and fire every one of them with even a hint of union organization. They've done so repeatedly and will continue to do so until the labor laws in this country are finally loosened. And when you're living paycheck to paycheck, as a huge number of Walmart workers are, the option to strike and lose a job just doesn't work, because that week on the picket line winds you up in bankruptcy. And oh yeah, we just tightened the bankruptcy rules too.

[mr_genius]

Because Walmart will immediately close the store and fire every one of them with even a hint of union organization. They've done so repeatedly and will continue to do so until the labor laws in this country are finally loosened. And when you're living paycheck to paycheck, as a huge number of Walmart workers are, the option to strike and lose a job just doesn't work, because that week on the picket line winds you up in bankruptcy. And oh yeah, we just tightened the bankruptcy rules too.

 

unions are always great for workers, just ask the auto industry... oh wait....

[Balta1701]

unions are always great for workers, just ask the auto industry... oh wait....

Of course, if you really want to bring the auto industry into this, I could cite in reply the decision Toyota made a few years ago, when they whittled down their choices for a new factory's location to Alabama and Canada, and chose Canada...in no small part because the government provided health care system in Canada would keep their costs dramatically lower.

[mr_genius]

Of course, if you really want to bring the auto industry into this, I could cite in reply the decision Toyota made a few years ago, when they whittled down their choices for a new factory's location to Alabama and Canada, and chose Canada...in no small part because the government provided health care system in Canada would keep their costs dramatically lower.

 

i don't think Canada stealing American auto jobs is a big issue. the amount of damage done by American auto unions is far greater than the damage done by Canada.

Edited June 22, 2007 by mr_genius

[Balta1701]

i don't think Canada stealing American auto jobs is a big issue. the amount of damage done by American auto unions is far greater than the damage done by Canada.

And it is only rivaled by the damage done by America's auto companies themselves in the choices they make about which cars to emphasize, and then is only beaten by the damage done by America's disintegrating health care and retirement systems.

[kapkomet]

And it is only rivaled by the damage done by America's auto companies themselves in the choices they make about which cars to emphasize, and then is only beaten by the damage done by America's disintegrating health care and retirement systems.

Again, it's about CHOICE. You can CHOOSE to put money away in retirement, or you can depend on social security (the government). You can choose to better yourself to where health care isn't so much of an issue, or you can depend on some (insert name here) program provided by the government. WHY DOES THE GOVERNMENT HAVE TO DO EVERYTHING FOR YOU?

[mr_genius]

and then is only beaten by the damage done by America's disintegrating health care and retirement systems.

 

if that were the case , the entire American economy would be down the drain. all employers would have been affected.

 

there's no way we can afford to give every one in the US, and Mexico free health care. these proposals that democrats want don't work: have an open border, anyone from anywhere can came to the US and be a citizen.... and of course they all get free health care, housing, education, and retirement money.

Edited June 23, 2007 by mr_genius

[Rex Kickass]

unions are always great for workers, just ask the auto industry... oh wait....

Actually, they are. Why do Toyota plants have problems getting union representation? Because Toyota doesn't actively unionbust (some plants are represented.) However, Toyota appears to have made a decision to offer similar benefits packages without having to be negotiated to it by a union. But if GM, Ford and DaimlerChrysler didn't have these contracts, do you think the benefits Toyota workers receive would be nearly as generous? My guess is no.

[mr_genius]

Actually, they are. Why do Toyota plants have problems getting union representation? Because Toyota doesn't actively unionbust

 

keep telling yourself that.

[GoSox05]

Gripe #1 This is the typical left 'I hate money' mentality. Instead of complaining about what Wal-mart, why don't those workers leave? Why don't they band together and strike? Don't give me this BS 'some people are in tough situations' crap. If it can be done it should be done. If people are tired of their lot in life, go out and change it. This country has more opportunity than anywhere else in the world, and it also has the most lazy, unmotivated citizenry as well. That's the big difference between the left and the right. The left asks 'why should i have to do X when it can be given to me.' The right says 'go out and get what you want.'

 

Gripe #2 is legitimate and I agree it should stop.

 

Gripe #3 That's called business. Where are the people boycotting other national chains? McDonalds, Starbucks, HIlton, Best Buy, Jewel, etc etc. All of these huge chains killed local stores. Do you shop at all? I'm willing to bet you've shopped at a big coporation that's killed numerous mom and pop shops just in the last week. Why do you continue to shop there?

 

Grip #4 Why is this a problem? So they pick what their standards are and sell merchandise that fits it? Do they not have the right to pick and choose what they sell in their stores?

 

 

 

response to grip #1 - If most workers go on strike at wal-mart, they will be fired and replaced by someone cheaper. As Wal-mart employee you have no rights, to ask for more money that is. If you don't like it your fired and in small towns with not alot of jobs you are forced into this.

 

resronse to grip #2 - argeed

 

response to grip #3 - I dont eat or shop at McDonalds, starbucks, hilton, best buy, jewel and other major corps. Its hard to avoid them, but you can make strong effort to. It may be just "buisness", thats kinda the cold right wing mentality. Its just "buisness". I like mom and pop stores. You may pay more, but you get better service and better product. You get what you pay for.

 

response to grip #4 - you have a right to sell what you want. But when your the only store in a small town and you carry dvd's or cd's that are edited and cut down to christian standards, than in my opnion you are censoring.

[NorthSideSox72]

Health Care provided by government is not a right. I see no logical argument that can be made otherwise.

 

However, health care is a matter of high priority, of national pride and of practicality. So clearly, it needs attention and money.

 

And while I am usually in favor of private business over government buearacracy, in the case of healthcare, I actually think we need more government involvement. This is for one simple reason - providing healthcare, like providing police and fire protection, is incongruous to the aims of for-profit business. Their goals stand in direct opposition to one another in many ways. Therefore, any for-profit business in those areas by nature will result in lower quality product. The government needs to be involved, to at least the level where it incentivizes all involved to target actual quality output. I do not know how exactly to accomomplish that, but simply handing over healthcare to private insurance and providers clearly is not the answer - as evidenced by this country's lackluster system.

[kapkomet]

Health Care provided by government is not a right. I see no logical argument that can be made otherwise.

 

However, health care is a matter of high priority, of national pride and of practicality. So clearly, it needs attention and money.

 

And while I am usually in favor of private business over government buearacracy, in the case of healthcare, I actually think we need more government involvement. This is for one simple reason - providing healthcare, like providing police and fire protection, is incongruous to the aims of for-profit business. Their goals stand in direct opposition to one another in many ways. Therefore, any for-profit business in those areas by nature will result in lower quality product. The government needs to be involved, to at least the level where it incentivizes all involved to target actual quality output. I do not know how exactly to accomomplish that, but simply handing over healthcare to private insurance and providers clearly is not the answer - as evidenced by this country's lackluster system.

I wonder where the happy medium is. I've yet to hear of any plan that is a happy medium. I think private healthcare is 100% the way to go, for many reasons, but I also realize that there has to be a saftey net. The problem I have is social security was supposed to be a safety net, and now most people see it as a "right". I know right now that the 7.65% of my paycheck going to Social Security is something I have lost forever. I will never see a dime of it, so really, it's just another income tax. That's going off topic, but we're going to have to have another X% come out of our checks for health care.

 

I am extremely blessed to be working where I work, where the company WANTS to take care of their people, at an affordable cost. My insurance is EXTREMELY cheap compared to 99.99% of the companies out there. I know that's not the case for everyone, and I also know that there's some people who try very hard and end up not wanting to put almost their entire pay into health care. So again, I ask, where's the happy medium?

[Jenksismyhero]

Health Care provided by government is not a right. I see no logical argument that can be made otherwise.

 

However, health care is a matter of high priority, of national pride and of practicality. So clearly, it needs attention and money.

 

And while I am usually in favor of private business over government buearacracy, in the case of healthcare, I actually think we need more government involvement. This is for one simple reason - providing healthcare, like providing police and fire protection, is incongruous to the aims of for-profit business. Their goals stand in direct opposition to one another in many ways. Therefore, any for-profit business in those areas by nature will result in lower quality product. The government needs to be involved, to at least the level where it incentivizes all involved to target actual quality output. I do not know how exactly to accomomplish that, but simply handing over healthcare to private insurance and providers clearly is not the answer - as evidenced by this country's lackluster system.

 

I think once you take out the for-profit aspect of it, the health care industry will start going downhill. You'd be relying solely on government grants and private donations, something that's hard enough to accomplish as is.

 

I want to know how a universal healthcare system would actually work. Where would the money come from? Isn't it going to be a system just like Social Security where there are too many people using it and not enough people funding it? And it's even worse because with health care one patient could literally spend millions of dollars on treatment. If you're the government how do you limit that? Can you? Do you have to be fair? Are you going to tell patient X he can get a certain procedure but patient Y can't? How would hospitals be funded? There will be arguments and lawsuits and a legislative headache to adequately fund every hospital. What about abuses of the system? Wouldn't bums go into a hospital daily to get food because they are malnourished?

 

What about pre-existing conditions? What about people who smoke 4 packs a day? What about people who drink a bottle a day? Should society pay for their health care when they know from day one what will happen to them? Or the 21st century issue: obesity. How would such a system handle it? What about national disasters? What if New York gets hit with a bomb or something and the system is flooded with a million sick/injured? At least now, privately, the insurance companies can just up the premiums to cover their costs, but when the government does that, won't it really effect the lower-income people the most?

 

I think the biggest problem is that unlike welfare or social security, you start at the beginning of the year with X amount of dollars. Over the course of the year you hand that X amount out to the country and when it's gone, it's gone. With healthcare its more like a budget we would try to hit but never will. It'll be a blank check at the end of the year that the government will have to write and hopefully have enough funds to pay off.

[Balta1701]

What about national disasters? What if New York gets hit with a bomb or something and the system is flooded with a million sick/injured? At least now, privately, the insurance companies can just up the premiums to cover their costs, but when the government does that, won't it really effect the lower-income people the most?

I think that in the case of these sorts of disasters, usually the government winds up paying a big chunk of the bill anyway, because otherwise all of the insurance companies go out of business.

[Cerbaho-WG]

No you don't, in comparison. Trust me. I've seen it from all sides.

 

Bullf***ings***. I'm sick and tired of seeing conservatives mindlessly blabber about Canadians facing long lines because of socialized health care. It's absolute and utter s***, and the only reason why conservatives spout off this lie of an argument is because a good percentage of them have never used a socialized health care system and also negatively react to the stigma of the word "socialism". I've lived in Germany for ten months now and have had several encounters with the German health care system which is socialized. And you know what? It's fabulous. I come from an upple-middle class family that luckily can afford good health insurance and the German system is comparable if not better in every single aspect. The only negative aspect is that because I am not German, I am unable to receive the benefits that every German receives, namely the almost lack of doctor's fees and perscription costs.

 

One of the questions I had when arriving in Germany that I wanted to pose to my flatmates was how they thought the health care system was run here in Germany and if it was inefficient or not. I have yet to hear a major qualm from my roommates, friends, professors, etc. I then asked about waiting months for an operation, and they debunked it as a load of s***. If you need an MRI or CAT scan, you will get it within a matter of days just like in America. If you need an operation that is not needed ASAP, it's put off for a bit, one or two months usually. But if you need a medical procedure shortly, you'll get it and not get charged up the ass for it.

 

But I forget, this is America. Home of the free, land of the brave, and country sandwiched between Turkmenistan and Senegal for income equality.

[kapkomet]

Bullf***ings***. I'm sick and tired of seeing conservatives mindlessly blabber about Canadians facing long lines because of socialized health care. It's absolute and utter s***, and the only reason why conservatives spout off this lie of an argument is because a good percentage of them have never used a socialized health care system and also negatively react to the stigma of the word "socialism". I've lived in Germany for ten months now and have had several encounters with the German health care system which is socialized. And you know what? It's fabulous. I come from an upple-middle class family that luckily can afford good health insurance and the German system is comparable if not better in every single aspect. The only negative aspect is that because I am not German, I am unable to receive the benefits that every German receives, namely the almost lack of doctor's fees and perscription costs.

 

One of the questions I had when arriving in Germany that I wanted to pose to my flatmates was how they thought the health care system was run here in Germany and if it was inefficient or not. I have yet to hear a major qualm from my roommates, friends, professors, etc. I then asked about waiting months for an operation, and they debunked it as a load of s***. If you need an MRI or CAT scan, you will get it within a matter of days just like in America. If you need an operation that is not needed ASAP, it's put off for a bit, one or two months usually. But if you need a medical procedure shortly, you'll get it and not get charged up the ass for it.

 

But I forget, this is America. Home of the free, land of the brave, and country sandwiched between Turkmenistan and Senegal for income equality.

 

So know I don't know anything? Whatever.

 

I know for a fact of people I know that have had issues in Canada with the healthcare system. I'm not going to go into it, but it has problems, and limited choices compared to what we have here.

 

And, this is not Germany, it's America, where the government gets ahold of any program, they screw it up.

[Cerbaho-WG]

So know I don't know anything? Whatever.

 

I know for a fact of people I know that have had issues in Canada with the healthcare system. I'm not going to go into it, but it has problems, and limited choices compared to what we have here.

 

And, this is not Germany, it's America, where the government gets ahold of any program, they screw it up.

 

Please tell me where I said that. I said "a good percentage", not once did I say all, the vast majority or whatever you're construing it to be.

 

And like I alluded to in my post, you're basing your judgement on the US health care system on anecdotal experiences. I invite you to go to various places that have socialized health care or talk to people who come from said countries, but until then, it's a lot sound and fury signifying nothing.

 

Lastly, could you please extrapolate on why whenever the American government gets a hold of something they f*** it up, but in many european countries they do just fine? Does economics and decision making enter an alternate universe when you go over the Atlantic?

[kapkomet]

Please tell me where I said that. I said "a good percentage", not once did I say all, the vast majority or whatever you're construing it to be.

 

And like I alluded to in my post, you're basing your judgement on the US health care system on anecdotal experiences. I invite you to go to various places that have socialized health care or talk to people who come from said countries, but until then, it's a lot sound and fury signifying nothing.

 

Lastly, could you please extrapolate on why whenever the American government gets a hold of something they f*** it up, but in many european countries they do just fine? Does economics and decision making enter an alternate universe when you go over the Atlantic?

Actually, yes. My argument centers around the fact that NOTHING gets done in our government today without boatloads of money from lobbyists to get it done.

 

It's interesting, to me, that healthcare really has pretty much dropped off the radar for the most part. I think a lot of it is this stupid immagration bill right now, but that's a different subject altogether. The reason that I think it has gone away as a subject, save for Obama and Hillary, is because the money got to their campaigns. This is sort of a contradiction, in a sense, from what we're talking about (that the issue is up front on a lot of people's minds).

 

You're right, in the fact that most people, who need something done, gets it done. As I stated, I know people personally that have had issues and that can skew my point of view. I've been fortunate to be able to afford health care all my life (once I got off my parent's insurance). That certainly makes it easier for me to sit here on my pearch. I agree with that part. Having said that, I've talked to my fair share of foriegn folks, and they say by far the US has the most innovative health program in the world, and if the government took it over, that facet would die. Is that every day "going to the dr.'s office"? No. But I will argue that the industry must be looked at as a whole.

[Cknolls]

My two month old son just received a letter from United Helath Care wanting to know if he had any other insurance. F****** hillarious. Administrative costs are a huge part of the problem. Cut the paperwork and you solve a huge problem.

[Balta1701]

So know I don't know anything? Whatever.

 

I know for a fact of people I know that have had issues in Canada with the healthcare system. I'm not going to go into it, but it has problems, and limited choices compared to what we have here.

 

And, this is not Germany, it's America, where the government gets ahold of any program, they screw it up.

Yes, it does have problems in Canada. But it's also worth noting that at the same time, Canada spends just over 1/2 as much as the U.S. on Health care. The exact number depends somewhat on which year and which source/which way of counting costs you look at, but under any way of looking at it, the U.S.'s system is BY FAR the most expensive in the world.

 

That Canada's system is not the best in the world is not a point I'll debate (i'll argue in favor of France's in that regard). However, The U.S. is spending hundreds of billions of dollars more than Canada each year on Health Care. So you better not just be arguing that Canada has problems; you better be arguing that Canada's Health Care system has such huge problems that the U.S. is correct in spending something like 1.5 to 2 times as much per year on our current system. We better not just be on par with them; we better be a lot better.

[Steff]

So know I don't know anything? Whatever.

 

Way too easy...