It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kamalla Harris "i will get rid of private health care".

page: 9
20
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 10:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: ADVISOR
a reply to: TheRedneck

I believe it's crony capitalism you speak of, capitalism in general has improved lives around the world.

The USofA is not solely the only capitalist entity in the world. Every Country doing trade, is capitalist. Same with any business...

It's when crony capitalism is factored in, that it gains a bad reputation.

If the people who are against capitalism, took themselves seriously or the subject, they wouldn't be hypocrites and buy the next iPhone or Android.



Sweden and Norway trade. As do Australia and New Zealand. Their healthcare is also much cheaper (and better) than ours, and their healthcare systems lean significantly towards single payer, administered through the government, as Redneck pointed out.
How can they be Capitalist if they have single payer healthcare? I thought all countries like that were Commies?
My point is, single payer can work in our society. It's better for the entirety of our population, and we should implement it. It isn't a Communist idea.




posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: narrator


A LOT of people in America struggle on a daily basis. What's wrong with trying to help others out? Jesus sure liked to do that. Aren't Republicans supposed to be God fearing Christians?

I really wish people would stop trying to use that excuse. All it does is infuriate those they are trying to convince.

It is not possible to legislate or institutionalize charity. Once that is done, the resulting forced charity is no longer charity as defined by the Bible. True charity must come from the heart, so forcing charity on believers is essentially robbing them of their ability to give freely as they are commanded to do.

The Christian belief centers around a personal relationship with Jesus, and by extension, with God. No part of that relationship can be legislated, or it ceases to become a personal relationship and instead becomes a forced one.

TheRedneck



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Wardaddy454


What countries have you been studying that implement it so well that its worth considering now?



Too much socialism is a disaster. And yes, I will mention Venezuela, just for narrator, because Venezuela is a great modern example of runaway socialism. As long as socialist policies are applied in moderation, socialism is a good thing, but apply too much and it becomes a mess. People have to have "skin in the game" to get what they want, else getting what they want means nothing.


TheRedneck


Haha, thanks for that. I almost missed it. What I meant was, I hope no one says "You want to become Venezuela? Because that's how you become Venezuela!" without any actual information to back it up.
I'm glad you brought it up though, as you bring rational thought to it. Yes, runaway socialism would definitely not be a good thing. Moderation is key, as you say. It seems that a lot of people view it as an all-or-nothing situation though. "We're implementing single payer? Well, here come the Gulags."
It wouldn't be like that, and a lot of people turn a blind eye to what good could come of it, most likely out of fear. It's frustrating.

Also, it seems more and more likely that Venezuela is closer to a dictatorship these days. Your point stands, just wanted to mention that.



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: narrator


A LOT of people in America struggle on a daily basis. What's wrong with trying to help others out? Jesus sure liked to do that. Aren't Republicans supposed to be God fearing Christians?

I really wish people would stop trying to use that excuse. All it does is infuriate those they are trying to convince.

It is not possible to legislate or institutionalize charity. Once that is done, the resulting forced charity is no longer charity as defined by the Bible. True charity must come from the heart, so forcing charity on believers is essentially robbing them of their ability to give freely as they are commanded to do.

The Christian belief centers around a personal relationship with Jesus, and by extension, with God. No part of that relationship can be legislated, or it ceases to become a personal relationship and instead becomes a forced one.

TheRedneck


You're right. I tend to get a bit sarcastic when in discussions like this, with all the hypocrisy flying around from both sides, I tend to get frustrated.
But you're right. I'll rein that in, it doesn't help the situation.



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 10:21 AM
link   
we already have medicaid
we already have welfare
we already take care of the disabled
we already treat anyone who shows up at an emergency room that needs medical treatment

now you would like to subsidize the abled ?
what else will you be subsidizing for the abled? automobiles? cell phones?(oh wait obama already did that one)



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: narrator


I'm glad you brought it up though, as you bring rational thought to it.

I'd be careful saying things like that too loudly; I'm one of them evil conservatives, so I am told.



I really don't think an arrangement like Australia would work here. We are simply too deep in debt and too highly taxed without it. There is a limit as to how much taxation is reasonable, and our present government is simply too corrupt to properly implement it. Trump appears to me to be trying to change that, but he has a long way yet to go.

On the other hand, there are ways to implement universal healthcare for all, without outlawing insurance, without requiring insurance, and without a medical issue destroying one financially. The biggest problem is, half of the population don't want to hear anything about helping the poor and the other half aren't happy unless everything conceivable is paid for with taxes. Middle of the road solutions that could actually work are not welcome.

TheRedneck



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody


what else will you be subsidizing for the abled? automobiles? cell phones?(oh wait obama already did that one)

While we normally agree, that is a fallacious argument this time. Look at my explanation on the previous page.

One can choose not to have an automobile (well, in the city anyway)... one can choose not to have a cell phone. One cannot choose not to use healthcare, without dying as a direct result.

And yes, Obama was a complete idiot for giving out free cell phones. I will agree with that.

TheRedneck



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck




One cannot choose not to use healthcare, without dying as a direct result.

People go YEARS without seeing a doctor.
The "mandated" wellness checks that obamacare attempted to force on everyone were bs.
Seems choice for some is an issue?



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: ADVISOR
a reply to: TheRedneck

I believe it's crony capitalism you speak of, capitalism in general has improved lives around the world.

The USofA is not solely the only capitalist entity in the world. Every Country doing trade, is capitalist. Same with any business...

It's when crony capitalism is factored in, that it gains a bad reputation.

If the people who are against capitalism, took themselves seriously or the subject, they wouldn't be hypocrites and buy the next iPhone or Android.



Sweden and Norway trade. As do Australia and New Zealand. Their healthcare is also much cheaper (and better) than ours, and their healthcare systems lean significantly towards single payer, administered through the government, as Redneck pointed out.
How can they be Capitalist if they have single payer healthcare? I thought all countries like that were Commies?
My point is, single payer can work in our society. It's better for the entirety of our population, and we should implement it. It isn't a Communist idea.


Those countries are barely 1/10th the size of the US. They also don't have the other expenses (i.e military) and they are also much stricter on immigration. Not too mention more homogeneous societies and high tax rates.

Universal care could probably work at the state level, but I don't see it working well federally. We already have the VA as a proxy and few would say it is run well or efficient.

I think the mindset of people needs to change in regards to their healthcare and insurance. Everything can't be free. People need to take responsibility for their own health and associated routine expenses.

I'd like to see catastrophic care guaranteed but I don't govt or insurance should be paying for routine healthcare like physicals, colds, etc. This is why insurance and healthcare is so expensive now because people expect insurance to pay for every little cough, splinter, and stubbed toe.

Think about what your homeowner's insurance would cost if it had to pay for your lawn care? How about if your car insurance paid for your oil changes and tire rotations and tune ups?



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody


People go YEARS without seeing a doctor.

Yes, they do. I have gone decades.


The "mandated" wellness checks that obamacare attempted to force on everyone were bs.

Yes, they were.


Seems choice for some is an issue?

Not for me.

What if I told you there is a way to have everyone who needs healthcare to have complete access to it, without completely destroying them financially, without mandating insurance, without doing away with insurance, including dropping insurance rates drastically, costing less than Obamacare, covering pre-existing conditions, without any mandates on employers or individuals, while improving quality of care and maintaining capitalism? Would you be interested?

TheRedneck



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: ADVISOR
a reply to: TheRedneck

I believe it's crony capitalism you speak of, capitalism in general has improved lives around the world.

The USofA is not solely the only capitalist entity in the world. Every Country doing trade, is capitalist. Same with any business...

It's when crony capitalism is factored in, that it gains a bad reputation.

If the people who are against capitalism, took themselves seriously or the subject, they wouldn't be hypocrites and buy the next iPhone or Android.



Sweden and Norway trade. As do Australia and New Zealand. Their healthcare is also much cheaper (and better) than ours, and their healthcare systems lean significantly towards single payer, administered through the government, as Redneck pointed out.
How can they be Capitalist if they have single payer healthcare? I thought all countries like that were Commies?
My point is, single payer can work in our society. It's better for the entirety of our population, and we should implement it. It isn't a Communist idea.


Those countries are barely 1/10th the size of the US. They also don't have the other expenses (i.e military) and they are also much stricter on immigration. Not too mention more homogeneous societies and high tax rates.

Universal care could probably work at the state level, but I don't see it working well federally. We already have the VA as a proxy and few would say it is run well or efficient.

I think the mindset of people needs to change in regards to their healthcare and insurance. Everything can't be free. People need to take responsibility for their own health and associated routine expenses.

I'd like to see catastrophic care guaranteed but I don't govt or insurance should be paying for routine healthcare like physicals, colds, etc. This is why insurance and healthcare is so expensive now because people expect insurance to pay for every little cough, splinter, and stubbed toe.

Think about what your homeowner's insurance would cost if it had to pay for your lawn care? How about if your car insurance paid for your oil changes and tire rotations and tune ups?



I'm not saying we should implement it exactly like they do. I'm just giving examples that show that it works.
You're right, everything can't be free. I'm not expecting healthcare to be free. I'd like it to be affordable for everyone though. There's no reason that someone getting a hip replacement in "the greatest country in the world" has to pay 3-5 times MORE than someone in a country with arguably better healthcare. That makes zero sense to me. People go bankrupt in America paying for required medical procedures/medications that cost people in other countries a couple thousand. Something is terribly wrong in this picture.

I'd also argue that our "military expense" you brought up has no business being as high as it is. Our military budget is more than the next 7 highest countries in the world, combined. WHY? That makes zero sense. Yet we INCREASE that budget every year and no one bats an eye. Are we in some world war I'm not aware of?



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck




What if I told you there is a way to have everyone who needs healthcare to have complete access to it, without completely destroying them financially, without mandating insurance, without doing away with insurance, including dropping insurance rates drastically, costing less than Obamacare, covering pre-existing conditions, without any mandates on employers or individuals, while improving quality of care and maintaining capitalism? Would you be interested?

Sure, who wouldn't?



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Be sure. This is not a GOP plan, nor is it a DNC plan. It is a complete revamping of the medical industry, and I would bet that everyone who sees it will have some objection... but the end result is the advantages I mentioned above.

Still interested? The outline I posted to the cloud is gone, but I still remember it.

TheRedneck



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 11:21 AM
link   
You would think this fantasy would be long gone by now...

Kamala...lol.....that name.....there are more people in the u.s. who will never contribute one dime towards health care then there are ones that do.

It would be economically unacceptable to force some to pay for everyone.

There are a lot more losers out there then the Democrats think



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: ADVISOR
a reply to: TheRedneck

I believe it's crony capitalism you speak of, capitalism in general has improved lives around the world.

The USofA is not solely the only capitalist entity in the world. Every Country doing trade, is capitalist. Same with any business...

It's when crony capitalism is factored in, that it gains a bad reputation.

If the people who are against capitalism, took themselves seriously or the subject, they wouldn't be hypocrites and buy the next iPhone or Android.



Sweden and Norway trade. As do Australia and New Zealand. Their healthcare is also much cheaper (and better) than ours, and their healthcare systems lean significantly towards single payer, administered through the government, as Redneck pointed out.
How can they be Capitalist if they have single payer healthcare? I thought all countries like that were Commies?
My point is, single payer can work in our society. It's better for the entirety of our population, and we should implement it. It isn't a Communist idea.


Apples to oranges. Sweden has no where near the social systems and people using those social systems in place as the United States does. The amount of money the US taxpayer pays to support current social systems in the US is the highest in the world. To move to a single payer system violates the fundamental and most basic of a free trade society based on competitive pricing. Comparing the US to Sweden is unreasonable. Sweden has no where near the population diversity as the US and since Sweden localizes its medical practices to do the same in the US would result in certain areas within the US having better medical practices than others. People want the best but why should a medical practice in Chicago be forced to admit people from Florida? So the people in Chicago should take a back seat to allow everyone else not a citizen of Chicago access first? You can't make all medical practices the same.

Healthcare is no different. Anyone who equates single payer with equal access is fooling themselves. Doctors in the US do not work for the federal government. They do not have to serve anyone on a socialized healthcare program. If a doctor can't price his services based on his/her qualifications and capabilities in a competitive market place then why would they ever agree to a fixed monthly fee payable by the federal government? Why should a doctor who is the top 1% of his field be relegated to the same compensation as the guy/gal who graduated last in their class and lacks the ability to administer procedures as the 1% of doctors?

What we would have would be 100 times worse than what we currently have under the affects of Obama care. Sky high premiums for those who earn an income that will subsidize those who do not have an income. Healthcare will become unaffordable for the working class because they are the ones who will shoulder the burden of the expense. At some point it becomes impossible. Premiums have already increased as much as 300% and deductibles are as high as they have ever been.

For argument's sake let's say all of healthcare were to be socialized including doctors becoming federal employees. Within a decade the quality of our healthcare would be shlt. Once you remove the incentive to compete and grow you instead establish a baseline of absolute ineptitude and incompetence stifling advancement.

Capitalism and a free market economy where people have choices is the only way to guarantee advancement and innovation. It's such basic economics.



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: ADVISOR
a reply to: TheRedneck

I believe it's crony capitalism you speak of, capitalism in general has improved lives around the world.

The USofA is not solely the only capitalist entity in the world. Every Country doing trade, is capitalist. Same with any business...

It's when crony capitalism is factored in, that it gains a bad reputation.

If the people who are against capitalism, took themselves seriously or the subject, they wouldn't be hypocrites and buy the next iPhone or Android.



Sweden and Norway trade. As do Australia and New Zealand. Their healthcare is also much cheaper (and better) than ours, and their healthcare systems lean significantly towards single payer, administered through the government, as Redneck pointed out.
How can they be Capitalist if they have single payer healthcare? I thought all countries like that were Commies?
My point is, single payer can work in our society. It's better for the entirety of our population, and we should implement it. It isn't a Communist idea.


Those countries are barely 1/10th the size of the US. They also don't have the other expenses (i.e military) and they are also much stricter on immigration. Not too mention more homogeneous societies and high tax rates.

Universal care could probably work at the state level, but I don't see it working well federally. We already have the VA as a proxy and few would say it is run well or efficient.

I think the mindset of people needs to change in regards to their healthcare and insurance. Everything can't be free. People need to take responsibility for their own health and associated routine expenses.

I'd like to see catastrophic care guaranteed but I don't govt or insurance should be paying for routine healthcare like physicals, colds, etc. This is why insurance and healthcare is so expensive now because people expect insurance to pay for every little cough, splinter, and stubbed toe.

Think about what your homeowner's insurance would cost if it had to pay for your lawn care? How about if your car insurance paid for your oil changes and tire rotations and tune ups?



I'm not saying we should implement it exactly like they do. I'm just giving examples that show that it works.
You're right, everything can't be free. I'm not expecting healthcare to be free. I'd like it to be affordable for everyone though. There's no reason that someone getting a hip replacement in "the greatest country in the world" has to pay 3-5 times MORE than someone in a country with arguably better healthcare. That makes zero sense to me. People go bankrupt in America paying for required medical procedures/medications that cost people in other countries a couple thousand. Something is terribly wrong in this picture.

I'd also argue that our "military expense" you brought up has no business being as high as it is. Our military budget is more than the next 7 highest countries in the world, combined. WHY? That makes zero sense. Yet we INCREASE that budget every year and no one bats an eye. Are we in some world war I'm not aware of?


Yes, the MIC is out of control and I think most reasonable people would agree even if constitutionally we need to fund the military. Healthcare isn't mentioned in the constitution.

The problem is our military is bloated because the US has to play world police protecting people who live in sh*t hole countries from their tin pot dictators. While citizens complain about our military spending, everytime some arm pit country runs itself into the ground, you get a group of people start asking for the US to intervene for the children...

We can't do both. We can't on one hand say that our military is too big and bloated and then turn around expect them to play bodyguard for every country in the world.



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Outlier13

I never said we should implement it exactly as they do. I'm just giving examples that it works in countries that are very well off.

I'd argue the exact opposite of your point that prices would skyrocket. They'd go down, that's the entire point of it. America already has sky-high medical costs, the entire point is to make them affordable for everyone. Single payer is how multiple (very well-off) countries do this. Why shouldn't we try to do some form of that in order to get prices down?

Capitalism and free-market economy are what has caused the overpriced medical care we have today.

Medical care shouldn't be considered "economics". Everyone deserves to be able to afford health care.
edit on 30-1-2019 by narrator because: spelling



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: ADVISOR
a reply to: TheRedneck

I believe it's crony capitalism you speak of, capitalism in general has improved lives around the world.

The USofA is not solely the only capitalist entity in the world. Every Country doing trade, is capitalist. Same with any business...

It's when crony capitalism is factored in, that it gains a bad reputation.

If the people who are against capitalism, took themselves seriously or the subject, they wouldn't be hypocrites and buy the next iPhone or Android.



Sweden and Norway trade. As do Australia and New Zealand. Their healthcare is also much cheaper (and better) than ours, and their healthcare systems lean significantly towards single payer, administered through the government, as Redneck pointed out.
How can they be Capitalist if they have single payer healthcare? I thought all countries like that were Commies?
My point is, single payer can work in our society. It's better for the entirety of our population, and we should implement it. It isn't a Communist idea.


Those countries are barely 1/10th the size of the US. They also don't have the other expenses (i.e military) and they are also much stricter on immigration. Not too mention more homogeneous societies and high tax rates.

Universal care could probably work at the state level, but I don't see it working well federally. We already have the VA as a proxy and few would say it is run well or efficient.

I think the mindset of people needs to change in regards to their healthcare and insurance. Everything can't be free. People need to take responsibility for their own health and associated routine expenses.

I'd like to see catastrophic care guaranteed but I don't govt or insurance should be paying for routine healthcare like physicals, colds, etc. This is why insurance and healthcare is so expensive now because people expect insurance to pay for every little cough, splinter, and stubbed toe.

Think about what your homeowner's insurance would cost if it had to pay for your lawn care? How about if your car insurance paid for your oil changes and tire rotations and tune ups?



I'm not saying we should implement it exactly like they do. I'm just giving examples that show that it works.
You're right, everything can't be free. I'm not expecting healthcare to be free. I'd like it to be affordable for everyone though. There's no reason that someone getting a hip replacement in "the greatest country in the world" has to pay 3-5 times MORE than someone in a country with arguably better healthcare. That makes zero sense to me. People go bankrupt in America paying for required medical procedures/medications that cost people in other countries a couple thousand. Something is terribly wrong in this picture.

I'd also argue that our "military expense" you brought up has no business being as high as it is. Our military budget is more than the next 7 highest countries in the world, combined. WHY? That makes zero sense. Yet we INCREASE that budget every year and no one bats an eye. Are we in some world war I'm not aware of?


Yes, the MIC is out of control and I think most reasonable people would agree even if constitutionally we need to fund the military. Healthcare isn't mentioned in the constitution.

The problem is our military is bloated because the US has to play world police protecting people who live in sh*t hole countries from their tin pot dictators. While citizens complain about our military spending, everytime some arm pit country runs itself into the ground, you get a group of people start asking for the US to intervene for the children...

We can't do both. We can't on one hand say that our military is too big and bloated and then turn around expect them to play bodyguard for every country in the world.


It's a rare instance, but I agree with you 100%. I wouldn't call them armpit countries though.

We need to stop playing world police. At least the level that we currently do needs to be toned way down.



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: narrator

You do seem to be in agreement with quite a few unusual posters for you today.

Who are you, and what did you do with narrator?


TheRedneck



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 12:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: narrator

You do seem to be in agreement with quite a few unusual posters for you today.

Who are you, and what did you do with narrator?


TheRedneck


Right? Twilight Zone.


edit on 30-1-2019 by narrator because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join