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 is Dr. Paul the man for the Job?

page: 3
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raoul Duke
The government is involved in that it regulates HMO's, but it's private currently. It would actually cost less to have a universal single payer system, as compared to what people are paying for healthcare now...

Most if not all countries with universal healthcare have longer lifespans than Americans do...


That's kind of a wild statement to make, and i'd like to see you back that up with a source. Nothing personal. I just don't believe you.

Even if this were true, it doesn't mean those countries have universal healthcare to thank for their longer life spans. If you want to find out why Americans are dying earlier and earlier, look no further than the FDA. They are directly responsible for the regulations that bring us garbage like McDonalds, Banquet Chicken, and BBQ in a box. It's sickening and even worse, our children aren't just growing up on it, they're growing OUT on it.

Did anyone here know that for the first time since the Civil War, the life expectancy is expected to DROP?




posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Cyfre

That's kind of a wild statement to make, and i'd like to see you back that up with a source. Nothing personal. I just don't believe you.


It may be a wild statement to you, but it's something I've been aware for quite some time:


U.S. Life Span Shorter


Saturday August 11, 2007 8:01 PM

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Americans are living longer than ever, but not as long as people in 41 other countries.

For decades, the United States has been slipping in international rankings of life expectancy, as other countries improve health care, nutrition and lifestyles.

Countries that surpass the U.S. include Japan and most of Europe, as well as Jordan, Guam and the Cayman Islands.

``Something's wrong here when one of the richest countries in the world, the one that spends the most on health care, is not able to keep up with other countries,'' said Dr. Christopher Murray, head of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.

A baby born in the United States in 2004 will live an average of 77.9 years. That life expectancy ranks 42nd, down from 11th two decades earlier, according to international numbers provided by the Census Bureau and domestic numbers from the National Center for Health Statistics.

Andorra, a tiny country in the Pyrenees mountains between France and Spain, had the longest life expectancy, at 83.5 years, according to the Census Bureau. It was followed by Japan, Maucau, San Marino and Singapore.

The shortest life expectancies were clustered in Sub-Saharan Africa, a region that has been hit hard by an epidemic of HIV and AIDS, as well as famine and civil strife. Swaziland has the shortest, at 34.1 years, followed by Zambia, Angola, Liberia and Zimbabwe.

Researchers said several factors have contributed to the United States falling behind other industrialized nations. A major one is that 45 million Americans lack health insurance, while Canada and many European countries have universal health care, they say.

But ``it's not as simple as saying we don't have national health insurance,'' said Sam Harper, an epidemiologist at McGill University in Montreal. ``It's not that easy.''


www.guardian.co.uk...

[edit on 6-12-2007 by Raoul Duke]



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797


If there is a government out there that fits your views more than this one, maybe you should head over to it. Here, in the US, we have a different kind of government. We don't want a nanny state, nor do we want any group of people trying to turn it into one. Ron Paul stands for this desire to ward off the people who want to transform this nation into one of those nanny states.


Nanny state? Look at a country like the Netherlands, smoking pot, and prostitution are legal... I'm against a nanny state. Ron Paul is beholden to the religious right from what I've seen of him...


If you want universal healthcare and such to so bad, there are many european countries that have it. I don't see why it is necessary to stay here and force a faulty system on people who don't want it, and know that isn't what their government was created for. If you want a government that will take care of you, protect you, and general treat you like a 5 year old, then the land of the free and the home of the brave might not be for you.


Your comment is too ridiculous to justify with a response... And oh by the way, I'm assuming you're a native american to have the audacity to be telling another American citizen to leave the country. Ever heard of the first amendment?


Personally, I'm voting Ron Paul, because I'm an adult, and would like the government to treat me like one.


You're an adult? Congratulations, when did you reach your 18th birthday? But, what does that have to do with the discussion...



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raoul Duke



The government is involved in that it regulates HMO's, but it's private currently. It would actually cost less to have a universal single payer system, as compared to what people are paying for healthcare now...


Actually, Insurance is regulated by each State.

The reason health care is so expensive is that 1)no one knows how much it costs anymore...insurance pays for it so they don't care, 2) Lawyers, 3) unnecessary tests and procedures (because of lawyers), 4) freeloaders



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Raoul Duke
 


I appreciate the article! Very good read.



Researchers said several factors have contributed to the United States falling behind other industrialized nations. A major one is that 45 million Americans lack health insurance, while Canada and many European countries have universal health care, they say.


So there are actually several factors, and lack of health insurance is one of those several. Okay, i get it. 45 Million people lacking health insurance doesn't prove to me that a universal health care system is going to fix the problem. I was one of those 45 Million until recently. I could afford it, i just didn't want it because i didn't think i needed it. I just got my first checkup in over 15 years and they couldn't find a thing wrong with me. Moreover, i just went to the dentist after 15 years and no problems.

So maybe it isn't lack of health care that is the problem. Maybe it's the quality of our life.



But ``it's not as simple as saying we don't have national health insurance,'' said Sam Harper, an epidemiologist at McGill University in Montreal. ``It's not that easy.''


Oh, really?



Adults in the United States have one of the highest obesity rates in the world. Nearly a third of U.S. adults 20 years and older are obese, while about two-thirds are overweight, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.


That number will GROW regardless of whether or not health care is mandatory. Until your Doctor can prescribe a pill that will allow you to eat McDonalds four times a week, and corn syrup the rest of the time, you'll just have to diet and exercise like the other healthy people.

Besides, mandatory health care isn't going to change the way we approach sickness. Forced health care isn't going to speed up the cure for cancer or the common cold.

To get back on topic, Ron Paul actually supports free trade and privatization of health care. In other situations this has been proven to actually reduce costs and increase competition. This leads to more advancements in medicine and more availability, especially if you're not paying an arm and a leg so some obese house wife can get her prescription diet pills.

Please, please wake up.



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 08:47 PM
link   

To get back on topic, Ron Paul actually supports free trade and privatization of health care. In other situations this has been proven to actually reduce costs and increase competition. This leads to more advancements in medicine and more availability, especially if you're not paying an arm and a leg so some obese house wife can get her prescription diet pills.


Nice utopian idea... I'd rather go with a tested system like single payer universal health care (Germany has it now, and I think Canada, but I might be wrong)....


Please, please wake up.


I'm awake just fine, maybe I need a cappuccino...



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:04 AM
link   
These are the main reasons why I support him:

1) His non-interventionist policy just speaks to me. Just the same way as I don't like people getting involved in my personal affairs, I wouldn't like foreigners to get involved in the internal affairs of my country. It just makes sense to me.

2) As far as I know (and I've done quite a lot of research on him) he has never ever voted to raise taxes and he strongly believes in cutting spending and returning to a balanced budget. The current level of spending and the increase in debt will lead to no good.
He will work to get rid of the IRS and income tax. I simply don't like the idea of working for the government. It should be the other way around.

3) He's a state's rights supporter and wishes to decrease the size and power of the Federal government. The US is a very big and diverse country; the more local the better an issue can be handled.

I think the following picture summarizes his position rather well:




posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raoul Duke


Nanny state? Look at a country like the Netherlands, smoking pot, and prostitution are legal... I'm against a nanny state. Ron Paul is beholden to the religious right from what I've seen of him...


Ron Paul is and has always been against the war on drugs.

Watch this clip, it's hilarious

ca.youtube.com...



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:22 AM
link   
reply to post by NuclearHead
 


That's ok, Dennis Kucinich is also opposed to the war on drugs, and he's also for publically financed elections, and universal single payer health insurance, and probably a whole bunch more Ron Paul would never touch with ten foot pole...



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raoul Duke
Nice utopian idea... I'd rather go with a tested system like single payer universal health care (Germany has it now, and I think Canada, but I might be wrong)....


There is nothing utopian about a free market health care system. Listen, we're both looking for change in the health care system. My wife worked for a Dr. for the last six years, and their end-of-year bonuses depended 100% on how much money they saved. This meant that if an 80 year old woman needed an MRI, she likely wasn't getting one because she was going to die soon anyway. This is completely wrong and unacceptable. They don't want to spend money on patients because then they don't get to put as much of that money in their own pockets. Her entire day revolved around how much service they could with-hold without looking like they were being negligent. She couldn't take any more and had to quit because her ethics weren't in line with it all.

I'm simply not interested in being taxed for something i don't want. I'm not interested in being forced to have health care. I wouldn't be opposed to having health care as an option, but NOT mandatory, and i don't want to be paying for it if i'm not using it.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Cyfre


There is nothing utopian about a free market health care system. Listen, we're both looking for change in the health care system. My wife worked for a Dr. for the last six years, and their end-of-year bonuses depended 100% on how much money they saved. This meant that if an 80 year old woman needed an MRI, she likely wasn't getting one because she was going to die soon anyway. This is completely wrong and unacceptable. They don't want to spend money on patients because then they don't get to put as much of that money in their own pockets. Her entire day revolved around how much service they could with-hold without looking like they were being negligent. She couldn't take any more and had to quit because her ethics weren't in line with it all.


Oh really stuff like this goes on in the great U S of A, I thought it only happened in 'socialized medicine'...

Btw, where in the world is the free market health program you think is great? And if it would work so well why aren't more countries doing it?


I'm simply not interested in being taxed for something i don't want. I'm not interested in being forced to have health care. I wouldn't be opposed to having health care as an option, but NOT mandatory, and i don't want to be paying for it if i'm not using it.


I'm not sure how many people are in your company. You're already taxed for plenty of things that you have no option on like road construction, police, fire, state and federal bureacracy, national defense, social welfare, and a great deal more. Health care seems like a good thing for government to do especially considering IMO it 's working in nearly every other industrialized country...

[edit on 7-12-2007 by Raoul Duke]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 11:24 AM
link   
nuclear: thanks for the short clip. it's always interesting to watch him when he was a bit younger. some will say that his comment was uncalled for but it made his argument very clear.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raoul Duke
Oh really stuff like this goes on in the great U S of A, I thought it only happened in 'socialized medicine'...

Btw, where in the world is the free market health program you think is great? And if it would work so well why aren't more countries doing it?


Of course stuff like this goes on in the United States. I never said this only happens in socialized medicine. It happens wherever there is money to be made. This will happen MORE if health care is mandatory, because we'll all be forced to be a part of it. That's more overall money in the till, and doctors and HMO's aren't going to start singing a different tune. They'll continue to cut costs and withhold care as long as there's more money to be made in that kind of practice.

I'm not going to sit here and rattle off a list of free market health care plans across the world because i don't have that information. I'm also not convinced that mandatory health care equals great health care. I have a friend in Denmark who needs to see the Doctor, but can't get in because the line is too long and his issue isn't important enough. If he were living here in the States, he would be able to make his appointment and get his medication. So in that sense, our health care system works better.


Originally posted by Raoul Duke
I'm not sure how many people are in your company. You're already taxed for plenty of things that you have no option on like road construction, police, fire, state and federal bureacracy, national defense, social welfare, and a great deal more. Health care seems like a good thing for government to do especially considering IMO it 's working in nearly every other industrialized country...


There are a lot of people in my company who don't want to pay for forced health coverage. There are a lot of people who do want it as well. It's an important issue and lots of people have lots of opinions on it. They all have their points. I think it would be great if everyone had access to health care. I just don't think it should be mandatory.

You're right, i am taxed on plenty of things that are out of my control. I have no problem with paying for the things where i see a benefit such as roads, police, etc. Critical infrastructure is important. However, there are things i don't feel i should have to pay for, and one of those things is health care.

I mean, how can the United States be a beacon of freedom if i lose the freedom of choice when it comes to my own health care coverage? MY health shouldn't influence YOUR pocketbook. Plain and simple.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 06:25 PM
link   
Universal Health Care is extremely dangerous. Government wants to get bigger and the family unit to become extinct. Once we give up our right to freely choose our healthcare, be it holistic, alternative, or mainstream... then we lose control of our interest in our own well-being. This is too dangerous and could lead to forced vaccinations, forced experimental surgery, forced clinical drug trials... Who knows? I have chosed to skip my child's vaccinations until I can be sure that they're safe, I wouldn't have that ability with UHC and if she ends up autistic, I guess I'm s$%^ out of luck, but I bet her chances are less now then they would have been.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 09:47 PM
link   
What i like about Ron Paul is he's a Consititutionalist. He has a central Philosophy and he sticks to it. This REPUBLICAN is talking about many issues that i NEVER hear about in the news. In a debate he's asked openly if he believes a conspiracy theory about a North American Union; To which he responds, "...This is an idealogical battle, some people believe in globalism, others of us believe in national sovereignty. And there is a move ..toward a North American Union, just like on early on there was a move on for a European Union, and eventually ended up so we have NAFTA, and we're moving toward a NAFTA highway, these are real things.. its not somebody made these up. It is not a conspiracy..theres been money spent on it, there was legislation passed in the Texas legislature, unanimously to put a halt on it. They're planning on millions of acres taken by imminent domain for an international highway from Mexico to Canada, which is going to make the immigration problem that much worse. so, its...a contest between ideologies, whether we believe in our institutions here, our national sovereignty, our constitution, or are we going to further move in the direction of international government...knowledge is out there- if we look for it you'll realize that our national sovereignty is under threat." www.youtube.com...

This man's actions tell me:
1. He believes the people are smart enough, and deserve to know exactly what is going on in our government.
2. He is not afraid to tell people the truth, has no need for secrets, and respects the law.
3. He doesn't like the trend of big government, and will oppose it from within, so long as it follows the laws of this nation.

He has been nicknamed 'Dr. No' in Congress, because he WILL NOT vote for anything beyond his power. I respect him for sticking to his principles no matter how much opposition he receives. Ron Paul and Rosa Parks: www.youtube.com...

Vote for Hillary or Obama if you want gradual change. If, however, you would like to see a dramatic change, find out more about Ron Paul. He wants to abolish the (unconstitutional) Income tax, and the Federal Reserve (For more information, watch the film Zeitgeist.), he is against the Patriot Act and the National ID card, supports local governments, and hes the only candidate that would withdraw troops immediately. I agree, our money should be spent taking care of ourselves, and not policing the world. Ron Paul wants to bring back REAL Liberty: people taking responsibility for their own lives, and benefiting from the effort they wish to give. The current trend of government appears to be a lot of control, which is fine.. Its simply a different way to go. This type of government is likely to lead to universal healthcare, which a lot of people want. I would rather have my rights protected and my responsibilites back. This country will choose which direction it wishes to go (unless the vote is hacked--eep!). If it doesnt suit my ideals, i have the freedom to leave, find a different country--or some island i can be a recluse on
.
Its wonderful to see a politician like Kucinich! i am thankful that honest people who TRULY want change can be elected. More and more, everyday!
I feel pretty sure that the democratic party will pass Kucinich by. I believe the republican party noticies the dramatic grassroots movement and monumental support for Ron Paul, and will give him the nomination. When the people choose between two DIFFERENT political ideals (for once!), we will see what United States chooses for itself. Either more of the same, or back to what forged us into a nation in the first place.
Its wonderful to see more citizens educating themselves on issues.. if we were all just watching the television, there would be NO support of Ron Paul (after all--they say he's CRAZY!
)

Choice is a beautiful thing! Hooray!


[edit on 7-12-2007 by RosieFawn]



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raoul Duke

Nice utopian idea... I'd rather go with a tested system like single payer universal health care (Germany has it now, and I think Canada, but I might be wrong)....



I would say your belief that a universal health care would work just fine in such a large country as the US is utopian.



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 03:28 AM
link   
You don't need universal health care, you just need universal health coverage. Leave everyone with coverage alone and provide everyone else who doesn't have it with a basic plan. Easy. Oh yeah, one problem. Access to healthcare isn't a right, it's a privlidge for the wealthy. That's the problem here, not the fact that the US is a large country, it's the mindset of dog eat dog. You can't afford it so tough luck, Just go crawl into a gutter and die, just don't do it in my sight. That's the mentality. It has to change. If it doesn't then you guys are going to face a serious health crises in the coming years. I wouldn't be surpised if the USA's life expectancy drops below 70 in the near future.



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 06:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Raoul Duke
 


I can see how you're skeptical, and how much you want a universal health coverage, but that shouldn't be allowed until we have the crooks kicked out or sorted out. We all would be in favor of a universal healthcare system if we had major reforms in other aspects of our government. Canada, France, even England are all good examples in the beauty of a UHC, but if the slate isn't wiped clean before we create a new social program like that, we'd be negating it's full potential and overall success.

Let's clean up shop with the IRS, FED, big stick diplomacy and then make a critical move towards reforming our social programs!

I want to vote Ron Paul in so he can wipe the slate and allow people like Kucinich, Gravel, and Biden to build from that. All we need is someone to get in office and clean up shop We can't expect to build off #, you know? We have to have a clean, stable platform to build from. We'd be making a mistake if we were to build off our current situation.

I do have a lot of respect for you, Kucinich, and his other supporters. I just feel if we don't rally as one, all our causes will be driven into obscurity.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join