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.

 

Why Does Everyone Bow Down to the Health Insurance Industry?

page: 6
3
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 11:22 PM
link   


Hey, dont smoke and you wont have to worry about lung cancer, and you will not have to suck my tax dollars in for your bad habits.

If you want to smoke, or be an alcoholic, or weigh 400+ pounds and stationary, get your own private insurance, you should not be covered under a tax funded insurance program.


Its not ever called 'insurance' down here.

Its called Medicare. Its medical care.

CARE

As in:

I dont CARE how you got sick, im going to make you better.

or

i am going to CARE for you



Accidents, victims of crime, brain-eating amoebas, and a number of natural causes of sicknesses and contagious sicknesses are all legitamate issues for which a National, tax-funded health insurance program would and should cover.


no, dont you see this is the problem?!

Creating something where a person can be treated for one thing and not treated for another just means that you can create loopholes in the system. Allowing people who need care, to not get it.

A friend of mine who is a doctor says that he cannot understand an American doctor. I understand him, telling a person "Sorry, you cant afford to live"

thats sick.



People who use and abuse manufactured substances for which they have been fully educated about how it will adversly affect their health and that of the peopel around them, should not come around years later and start crying about how they need help because they are dying or suffering from the negative habbits they chose.


Look, if a person OD's, or has a heart attack or gets lung cancer or something. Shouldnt that be enough pain?

They will reform their ways, or at least try to. because they have suffered the pains of their habits.

I will not tell them "sorry, no chances, your #ed now. Here is a cardboard box for you to die in" I will help them, no matter what.



If you want to smoke or binge drink regularly, go right ahead and partake in your supposedly "God-given" right, just know you may not be covered under a tax-deducted health insurance program. You will be required to seek your own private provider.


Will everyone around here stop #ing saying "God given" in front of the word "right"?!

For #s sake!

Its not 'god given' Its given by us. The people. God means nothing to me in this situation.

People need help, and i want everyone to help them.



I would just like to edit my stance on the severe obesity thing. I feel that there should be no problem bringing those of which who do suffer from this under the program, so long as the individual commits to a state-sponsored obesity-reduction program which will help you to attain a healthy weight, and appropriate dietary program to assist you in maintaining a healthy stature.


Sorry no, smokers and drinkers arnt allowed a second chance to survive without destroying their economy. Why should you be allowed a second chance to state your point of view?

Well...alright you can. But you have to pay me $20,000 if you want to change your view.

Thank you, now you have your health, no money, no car, no clothes. Congratulations.




I am just saying, if you truly want to be healthy, then simply dishing out money for suffering the consequences of bad habits you were educated in so that you may continue self-destruction is not the best way of going about such a thing.


So you know what?

I think you need to change your avatar.

Ghandi, Martin Luther King Jnr, Christ.

You are not worthy to have them there, they are people who love unconditionally.

martin Luther king junior preached Non violent resistance, simply because he loved all, even the white people. Even the obese, even the smokers, even the drug addicts.

You are essentially saying that "your only allowed a doctor if your healthy enough not to need it"




posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 11:36 PM
link   
Sorry, I work too hard to not be able to afford health insurance because others who do not care about their lives have enough money to pay a premium for a service that drives the costs way high.

All I am saying is, get your own insurance. Nothing says you cannt be treated in the emergency room, that already happens, but as far as coverage goes, you will just have to figure it out on your own, sicne you chose that route. I can aonly assume you are so emotional because you partake in at least one of the activities I say should not be covered, and yet you do have health coverage.

Its ok 'mate, you have the right to live, just stop taking it away from yourself everyday. Because your friends and family have to pay for it later, and they had nothing to do with it (I hope at least).



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 11:48 PM
link   


Sorry, I work too hard to not be able to afford health insurance because others who do not care about their lives have enough money to pay a premium for a service that drives the costs way high.


Pfff, your as selfish as you are stupid.

"If i can afford health insurance, that means everyone else can!"

get out of your box and into the real world.



All I am saying is, get your own insurance. Nothing says you cannt be treated in the emergency room, that already happens, but as far as coverage goes, you will just have to figure it out on your own, sicne you chose that route.


I have my own insurance, but the best part is that i pay LESS than private insurance, i get the same out of it AND i help my fellows get the service they need.


I can aonly assume you are so emotional because you partake in at least one of the activities I say should not be covered, and yet you do have health coverage.


HA! see how intelligent you are now?

I drink...abit, ive never managed to get drunk (although ive tried. a small keg of Heineken and a bottle of vodka later i could still recite the alphabet perfectly, see and walk straight and hop without falling over
)

although the best part is that i can call you an idiot and i dont even have to give evidence! Your doing it for me!




Its ok 'mate, you have the right to live, just stop taking it away from yourself everyday. Because your friends and family have to pay for it later, and they had nothing to do with it (I hope at least).


My mother had Thyroid cancer. My entire family (except me so far) wears glasses. My sister had an eye infection when she was 12, i had a hole in my eardrum at the start of the year.

All just little things which we were born with.

Are you saying we should pay for it ourselves? That we should seek out expensive private insurance to get help for them?

Im annoyed because your a selfish prat. I spend my life working for others, and you just do things for yourself. It annoys me that some people could be so lacking in human feeling.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 10:39 AM
link   


Are you saying we should pay for it ourselves? That we should seek out expensive private insurance to get help for them?


As you can tell by simply re-reading the post, you would notice that these are the kinds of things that MEDICARE (ill use the word you feel is more appropriate, which probably is) is created for.

Private insruance is expensive primarily because of selfish people who indulge in abusive and self-destructive habbits, and then they want to extend their lives suddenly with these multi-thousand dollar operations and machines that keep them alive. AND THEY STILL INDULGE IN THEIR SELF DESTRUCTION.

The whole concept of medicare, hospitals, and such is for the preservation of life, and maintaining your well being. Everytime someone who is choosing to destroy their lives everyday uses up public funds to extend their life, they are being selfish, and taking away money from others who have simply fallen victim to nature's randomness, or somebodys cruelty, whichever the thing.

I never stated anywhere that they should be denied treatment, because obviously you cannot just leave someone. But if that person is being treated for a personal illness like bad lungs as a result of heavy daily smoking, they are going to leave the Hospital with a huge lean that will not be covered utilizing public funds. Hopefully they had private insurance, or are extremely wealthy. I say a smoker must be wealthy to continue to pay for cigarettes that are ever more taxed at higher and higher rates knowing the health costs down the road. Hey though, that was their choice made with their free will.

I know I know what if the person worked in roofing or AC work and has been exposed to asbestos for years right? What if the person was a firefighter? Well obviously those jobs were nothing close to a selfish self-destructive habit, they were doing services for others, and merely trying to survive.

Binge drinking and chain smoking are not trying to survive, they are habbits trying to kill one's self. No public funds for that, I would prefer the hundreds of thouands of dollars spent on a few smokers to keep them on respirators and full of pescription drugs be spent on more effective Anti-Drug campaigns so the future generation does not make the same selfish and ignorant mistakes.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by DYepes
 

Reasonable points and ones that are already coming into effect in this country, where smokers and the overweight are denied treatment until they meet specified medical targets - such as stopping smoking for at least one month before an operation or losing weight.
In the UK, the fact is that smokers pretty much pay their way in the NHS because of the very high taxation on cigarettes so your argument is baseless.
If the smokers taxes pay for existing medical services why should they not receive them too?

And if you get HIV from unprotected sex is that also your fault? or from contaminated blood or a contaminated needle from sharing IV with another drug user?

And what about people who are pre-programmed to be addicts or alcoholics because of their genetic predisposition?
Doesn't everybody deserve a chance at a healthy life?

No offense, but I find your argument to be extremely simplistic. I don't know if this is through a lack of knowledge or if you just don't care. I would hope it's the former.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 11:06 AM
link   
See now, I never said anything about denying noone treatment, it just is not there, please, for the sake of factual posts, discontinue that accusation.

I don't know what happens in the UK, but if I am not mistaken, we were talking about US healthcare and insurance industry. I praise he UK and Canada, and France, and other socialized healthcare nations, they doing good things, Lets just hope they do not break the bank paying for apathetic people who only want to get better so they can hurry back to destroying themselves.

If you need treatment, you will get it, I just dont feel it should be paid with public funds. Take a loan, if you are going to light your money on fire and destroy one's self in the process, you might as well hand it to a banker also after being treated.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by DYepes
 


Fair comment, perhaps I misinterpreted your posts.



I DO agree that healthcare should be paid out of public funds - and that all the machinations, lobbying and lining of pockets should be illegal. Just think of the money saved that could go towards social healthcare.
I'll also raise again the issue that US citizens don't seem to mind supporting an illegal war and economic imperialism, but draw the line at looking after their fellow citizens - this makes no sense to me at all.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 12:29 AM
link   
Well my cousin just moved to Canada, he is starting a new life basically, things did not work out well here in the states for him.

Tells me they help out ALOT. I do not mind paying higher taxes for medical care, but technically, the money is already there, it just spent on death instead of life.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 05:44 AM
link   


Private insruance is expensive primarily because of selfish people who indulge in abusive and self-destructive habbits, and then they want to extend their lives suddenly with these multi-thousand dollar operations and machines that keep them alive. AND THEY STILL INDULGE IN THEIR SELF DESTRUCTION.


Nice generalisation. Not all people are as unchangable as you say they are. alot of the times i see people change from a close brush with death or incapacitation.



The whole concept of medicare, hospitals, and such is for the preservation of life, and maintaining your well being. Everytime someone who is choosing to destroy their lives everyday uses up public funds to extend their life, they are being selfish, and taking away money from others who have simply fallen victim to nature's randomness, or somebodys cruelty, whichever the thing.


yes, preservation of life, and maintaining your well being.

Blindly. With no difference between one person or the next.

But what your saying means nothing, really. Since noone ever pays more than their 1%. Taking away public funds? Eh, they are made to be used and the government subsidises the rest.

They also create reform programs, usually paid for by things such as cigarettes whos prices climb higher and higher. Good, i say.

Today on the news there was talk about the Aussie drinking license. Basically a person can pay $500 for a licence (with the right credentials such as the RSA) and open a small store which can sell alcohol without food.

Just like those little Cigarette stores.

We are a drinking country, what can i say?




I never stated anywhere that they should be denied treatment, because obviously you cannot just leave someone. But if that person is being treated for a personal illness like bad lungs as a result of heavy daily smoking, they are going to leave the Hospital with a huge lean that will not be covered utilizing public funds. Hopefully they had private insurance, or are extremely wealthy. I say a smoker must be wealthy to continue to pay for cigarettes that are ever more taxed at higher and higher rates knowing the health costs down the road. Hey though, that was their choice made with their free will.


No, your not saying they are denied treatment. You are telling them to get treatment they cant afford, then their whole life suffers because of it. They get depressed, go to their old habits (psychological phenominon, well documented) and then incure MORE debts, and finally die on the pile of hospital bills they cant afford.

Your a saint.



I know I know what if the person worked in roofing or AC work and has been exposed to asbestos for years right? What if the person was a firefighter? Well obviously those jobs were nothing close to a selfish self-destructive habit, they were doing services for others, and merely trying to survive.


What if we have a firefighter who smokes?

Will he be allowed to claim medicare?

This is what happens when destinctions are made between people. Its why everyone is treated equally.

Make an excuse for a good reason, then you can make it for a bad one.



Binge drinking and chain smoking are not trying to survive, they are habbits trying to kill one's self. No public funds for that, I would prefer the hundreds of thouands of dollars spent on a few smokers to keep them on respirators and full of pescription drugs be spent on more effective Anti-Drug campaigns so the future generation does not make the same selfish and ignorant mistakes.


We have both. Net gain for us?


If the smokers taxes pay for existing medical services why should they not receive them too?


Good point, Budski.



See now, I never said anything about denying noone treatment, it just is not there, please, for the sake of factual posts, discontinue that accusation.


No, i wont. Because making people pay through the nose for such treatments just means they wont be able to afford another one.

Consider. A person is depressed after a huge medical bill.

With the little money they have left, what looks better?

Another medical bill?

Or a cheap beer?

or 2 or 3...

If a person remembers that their wellbeing is because of the people as a whole they will aim their bitterness to themselves, usually resulting in them seeking help.



I'll also raise again the issue that US citizens don't seem to mind supporting an illegal war and economic imperialism, but draw the line at looking after their fellow citizens - this makes no sense to me at all.


Budski, again my respect for you increases.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Consider. A person is depressed after a huge medical bill.

With the little money they have left, what looks better?

Another medical bill?

Or a cheap beer?

or 2 or 3...


Cannot infringe on their free will you know. The huge medical bill should be an indicator of what they are doing to themselves and they should learn from it. If you refuse to learn from it, then all you do is take from yourself, and society, just because "it feels good", and that individual is a product of their choices.

It is that refusal to learn or cahnge that causes more problems for the individual. It is not as if anyone held a gun to their head. they get treated, and they see exactly what it cost to maintain that habit and stay alive. If they choose to not change, well then good luck. We all wanted better, and the individual deserved better, but if he/she refused to see it, then they will only destroy themselves no matter what we can say or do.

So in any case, save the reciepts for every single pack/carton of cigarettes purchased, and we can create a new program where that funds will be matched into a private HSA for that individual that can yield money much the same way a money market, CD, or mutual fund would do, but only allowed for medical expenses.

I mean if we are going to debate the issue, we might as well come up with ways that the personal choice must face personal responsibility, and propose the more rational and logical options.

[edit on 10/3/2007 by DYepes]



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 10:12 PM
link   



Cannot infringe on their free will you know.


Ah, see? In Australia we have no problem on infringing on free will when its better.


The huge medical bill should be an indicator of what they are doing to themselves and they should learn from it. If you refuse to learn from it, then all you do is take from yourself, and society, just because "it feels good", and that individual is a product of their choices.


So you condone suicide? Should you not interfere when a person is trying to jump off a building? Or to slice their wrists open?

Doesnt even the bible say that we should be charitable?



It is that refusal to learn or cahnge that causes more problems for the individual. It is not as if anyone held a gun to their head


Yanks always mention this 'gun to their head' phenomenon. Its an interesting Psychological trait.


they get treated, and they see exactly what it cost to maintain that habit and stay alive. If they choose to not change, well then good luck. We all wanted better, and the individual deserved better, but if he/she refused to see it, then they will only destroy themselves no matter what we can say or do.


I want them better. Forcing a person into poverty just to teach them a lesson is wrong. They should learn it on their own terms.



So in any case, save the reciepts for every single pack/carton of cigarettes purchased, and we can create a new program where that funds will be matched into a private HSA for that individual that can yield money much the same way a money market, CD, or mutual fund would do, but only allowed for medical expenses.


Again, its creating classes in devisions in a program. Allowing a small hole means corruption will make it bigger.

In Australia there are 3 kinds of people.

Medicare
Private health
Neither.

I have never met the third kind.



I mean if we are going to debate the issue, we might as well come up with ways that the personal choice must face personal responsibility, and propose the more rational and logical options.


You mean that getting lung cancer isnt facing personal responsibilty.

You hav eto remember that once the person is dead, teaching them a lesson is nothing.

It is a rational and logical option. The only difference i would make would be to extend medicare to Dental and make it a mandatory tax for all citizens.

Everyone needs to see a doctor at some time in their lives. Its our duty to help them. They also help us.

Its a system which everyone gains from. Your problem is imaginary.



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 11:22 AM
link   


You mean that getting lung cancer isnt facing personal responsibilty.


No that is not personal responsibility. It is a consequence of poor choices in manycases, but of course not every case. Personal responsibiltiy is makign sure the choices you knew full well would lead to those consequences, and were advised against it, is taking care of your consequences without taking from those who never wnated you to do it, and now must contribute paying for it.

Like I said, we'll make the program, you keep your tobacco reciepts, and those taxes can contribute to your own private healthcare coverage later on when you begun to suffer the lung cancer, lip cancer, jaw cancer, hole in neck, you know whatever happens to plague them later on, of which they were fully aware.

In any case, I already stated

I am the third kind of person. I do not have any health insurance of any kind. Thankfull,y I choose a healthy living, maintain a healthy weight, and excercise regularly. I really hope that an accident does not happen to me , but that would be a good reason we have the coverage, to cover accidents and natural random untameable illnesses. If a smoker breaks his arm, or gets shot, or catches a cold, theres no reason why none of that could be covered in the plan.

However, he has at LEAST 10 years to make his choices from the first day they start smoking until they begin to develop one of the forms of cancers that will result from it. everyone of those days he will be fully aware of the consequences he will face, and hopefully, If he/she knows that "hey buddy look, you know full well in some time from now you will develop some kind of cancer as a result of all this smoking, so you bette rstart saving, because our Medicare is just not goign to pay for it, it will come out of your own pocket." its a possibility they may decide to quit before it gets bad.

Of coruse if the person has not smoked for 12 years, and later on they develop some kind of cancer, whether related to this or not, of coruse they will get coverage. If that person has been smoking for 15 years, and is still smoking as they suffer from a horrible cancer or something, no they will not be covered. If you can plan to have enough money to purchase tobacco every day or week, you should plan to have enough in 10 years or so to pay for its consequences.



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 08:06 PM
link   


No that is not personal responsibility. It is a consequence of poor choices in manycases, but of course not every case. Personal responsibiltiy is makign sure the choices you knew full well would lead to those consequences, and were advised against it, is taking care of your consequences without taking from those who never wnated you to do it, and now must contribute paying for it.


They do pay for it. 1% of their taxes.

here in Australia we believe in helping others. No matter who they are or what they suffer from. The fact that they suffer is enough.



Like I said, we'll make the program, you keep your tobacco reciepts, and those taxes can contribute to your own private healthcare coverage later on when you begun to suffer the lung cancer, lip cancer, jaw cancer, hole in neck, you know whatever happens to plague them later on, of which they were fully aware.

In any case, I already stated


so what about doing a construction job?

You are told about the risks when you got the job, yet you persist in doing it. Eventually getting injured.

Your not allowed coverage, you were told the risks when you got the job. You even paid for help and you dont get coverage!

How unfair is that? But its the same as your logic.




I am the third kind of person. I do not have any health insurance of any kind. Thankfull,y I choose a healthy living, maintain a healthy weight, and excercise regularly. I really hope that an accident does not happen to me , but that would be a good reason we have the coverage, to cover accidents and natural random untameable illnesses. If a smoker breaks his arm, or gets shot, or catches a cold, theres no reason why none of that could be covered in the plan.


What if the smoker breaks his arm in a freak accident while lighting his cigarette?

Does he get coverage? Why?



However, he has at LEAST 10 years to make his choices from the first day they start smoking until they begin to develop one of the forms of cancers that will result from it. everyone of those days he will be fully aware of the consequences he will face, and hopefully, If he/she knows that "hey buddy look, you know full well in some time from now you will develop some kind of cancer as a result of all this smoking, so you bette rstart saving, because our Medicare is just not goign to pay for it, it will come out of your own pocket." its a possibility they may decide to quit before it gets bad.


Thats too much of a generalisation on the human psyche.

"Do not touch" signs regularily get touched. Some people may have a weak or addictive personality. Im sorry for them. I want to help them, but quitting is a choice they need to do on their own, all i can offer is help.

That is what i am doing. They are thanking me by helping me when i get sick.



Of coruse if the person has not smoked for 12 years, and later on they develop some kind of cancer, whether related to this or not, of coruse they will get coverage. If that person has been smoking for 15 years, and is still smoking as they suffer from a horrible cancer or something, no they will not be covered. If you can plan to have enough money to purchase tobacco every day or week, you should plan to have enough in 10 years or so to pay for its consequences.


as i said, if they pay their medicare bills, they are paying for it. They should get the benefits because they paid.


Do you see what im getting at? if the system is blanket and all get help from it, then there is no chance of a person being turned away unlawfully accidentally.

If you put loopholes into this system, more holes will be exploited. Its human nature to want to gain. Medicare could gain by turning more people away. We wont let them do that.

Smokers are human,So are drug addicts and Alcoholics. they deserve our help



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 01:06 AM
link   
I see what your getting at now, and I think I am beginning to see it from a different perspective. We will definetly have to draw up a better plan for this universal health care though, as we have to make sure there will always be funds there to help every single individual who needs it. Thing is, there has to be better incentives for people to preserve their health in the first place, so as not to just make the healthcare a free pass for carelessness, arrogance, and unsafe behavior.



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 01:14 AM
link   


I see what your getting at now, and I think I am beginning to see it from a different perspective. We will definetly have to draw up a better plan for this universal health care though, as we have to make sure there will always be funds there to help every single individual who needs it. Thing is, there has to be better incentives for people to preserve their health in the first place, so as not to just make the healthcare a free pass for carelessness, arrogance, and unsafe behavior


Actually, here in Australia our measures involve shock tactics, really.

Instead of depriving care (which is inhumane) we show the results on television, bus ads, etc.

We have ads where a dead smokers lung gets dissected and they show all the damage, all the tar and *shudders* its a grim truth.

If your squeemish you may not want to see this (its much worse when she is talking to you)


www.oralcancerfoundation.org...


This is from an Australian Anti smoking ad. This woman has mouth cancer as a result from smoking.

Does she deserve help? Yes

Should she pay for this herself? No, that would be cruel. Look at the damage already wrought on her, she has suffered too much already.



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 01:22 AM
link   
Yea that is pretty gruesome stuff there. We definetly need plenty of that here in the states. I would not deny her care, but you cannot tell me that if she was told earlier in her life what the treatment would cost and that it would have to come out of her pocket, especiall if it meant she would not be able to retire comfortably because all the money she worked hard for just has to treat her bad habits, that she would probably have reconsidered her bad choices? even if we don't even actually force them to pay for it, maybe we should at least scare them into thinking they will?

See, I dunno how it works in australia, but if we do not put a $$$ sign behind anything, whether it be a warning, sustanability, health, education, and whatnot, most people will ignore it.

Perhaps we can add some numbers and statements to the image of the woman like:

"$10,000 out of your pocket towards the end of your life. the only retirement will be early death"

Is that like, too shocking, or does it help to make a case?



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 01:39 AM
link   


Yea that is pretty gruesome stuff there. We definetly need plenty of that here in the states. I would not deny her care, but you cannot tell me that if she was told earlier in her life what the treatment would cost and that it would have to come out of her pocket, especiall if it meant she would not be able to retire comfortably because all the money she worked hard for just has to treat her bad habits, that she would probably have reconsidered her bad choices? even if we don't even actually force them to pay for it, maybe we should at least scare them into thinking they will?


No, Humans have a genetic trait which means they believe in their own invincibility until they are harmed and made impotent. This, combined with the addictive affects of smoking, means that its not only nicotine making people smoke, its routine, peer pressure, etc.

People need to see the results of smoking in their Gruosome entirety. If they are 'protected' from seeing these things, they wont see it. They wont believe it. They will eventually become it.

If someone misses all the signs and gets to this stage, the least we can do is help them get better.

Making someone think they will pay through scare tactics is the kind of manipulation a government shouldnt deal in. these Ads are highly effective as both a stopping and a preventative measure. Not just telling a person "Those will kill you some day" but actually showing the in between bit when a person wastes away.



See, I dunno how it works in australia, but if we do not put a $$$ sign behind anything, whether it be a warning, sustanability, health, education, and whatnot, most people will ignore it.


Maybe we are just more concious about our body and looks here?
Money comes and goes, but imagine having to live with that...disfigurement.

Australians are willing to pay for a good cause, will even vote to make a tax mandatory if they see it will be a good thing. Helping anyone like that poor woman is a good thing, no matter that it was her own fault (in a way) that she got there.



Perhaps we can add some numbers and statements to the image of the woman like:

"$10,000 out of your pocket towards the end of your life. the only retirement will be early death"

Is that like, too shocking, or does it help to make a case?


but is it right to make a person pay?

Can you honestly tell me that you would make a healthy person with the flu feel better for free. but you would tell this woman that she has to pay for her own mouth cancer treatment?

Giving treatment to those who dont need it, and denying it to people who do.

thats not what medicare is for, true?



posted on Oct, 10 2007 @ 09:51 AM
link   
The fact is that if we spent less on war and looking after big corporations interests and lobbyists, then we would have more money for the real business of government - looking after the citizens.

A governments number one priority should be the needs and health of the people.

This surreal approach to healthcare, where insurance companies are treated as more important then the voters is ridiculous.

IMO social healthcare (100% free for all) is a must for any country that wishes to be considered civilized.


[edit on 10/10/2007 by budski]


apc

posted on Oct, 10 2007 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Nothing is free. Government has no money. Government has tax revenue.

A government's number one priority should be to ensure Freedom for the People. Not take it away. It is the responsibility of the individual to ensure their own health and wellbeing. If there is an issue with the insurance industry, so be it. But government is not the solution. It is the problem.



posted on Oct, 10 2007 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by apc
 


I ask again:
Exactly what freedoms do you think you have? You tell me what you think they are and I'll refute each and every one of them.

You're skirting the issue again - government money is the peoples money and should be spent on real issues that the people have, like healthcare, education and transport infrastructure for travel and the movement of essential supplies - not some illusion of freedom that doesn't, and can never exist.




top topics



 
3
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join