It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Healthcare is 'a privilege...not a right': GOP lawmaker

page: 14
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 7 2009 @ 07:37 PM
reply to post by vkey08

If you support something new but not government mandated, we are likely in complete agreement. This stuff ain't perfect. There are really good people in healthcare who really fight the good fight. Unfortunately, the system is rigged by government, people who've no business arguing the matter (ie the fabulously wealthy and their pet causes) and many in the healthcare profession who, at this point, don't even understand the implications and realities of going with the flow. My husband is waking from the slumber of the last example.

Get this: Last year our federal tax liability alone (sans sales, property, gas, social security and other fees) was ~ $100k. My husband is one of the smartest people I know and a damn fine doctor. He routinely saves the public money because of his specialty. Medicare appears to be his best payer but it has taken him many years to realize that his best payer is people like him. Sort of OT but along the same vein, a stimulus package that adds government jobs as employment is not very stimulating. IOW, paying cash into the system and getting a fraction back isn't very smart and it should be insulting.

Sorry for the rant... played 18 holes in the sun and am well into a bottle of wine. Also, thanks to everybody on this thread- damn it's nice to read people who are respectful even in disagreement.

posted on Mar, 7 2009 @ 09:32 PM

Originally posted by irishchic
Healthy people aren't profitable enough. I have been very ill and chose to become very healthy and have seen the difference first hand.

You got it the wrong way! Private insurance companies prefer healthy people because they will likely spend less on them than people with a troubled history. You don't believe me? Tell them you smoke 2 cigarrete packs a day or that you drink excessively and see what they will ask you to pay. In fact they might not even insure you at all....

Originally posted by Divinorumus

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Instead of more taxation why not add national healthcare to the social security system?

The social security system is a blatant Ponzi scheme. In fact, I challenge anyone to find a more obvious prime example of a Ponzi scheme than the SSS. The fact that it is mandatory is proof that our government is a complete sham and scam!

So anything that is mandatory is a scheme/scam? At least would you care to explain WHY you believe this and why is ss a ponzi scheme? With all due respect you sound more like an anarchist than a well meaning conservative.

Originally posted by irishchic
"Social Security": recently had to get a replacement card.

The San Antonio Texas office was FULL of young men 25-35 with "bad backs" and also was equally full of young women with several small children filing claims.

The "why" of their claims was not my biz: the fact that SO many were in there doing this at such a young age floored me.

I doubt it was the social security office, perhaps it was disability? And IF it was ss then maybe they could NOT work and thus entitled to early payments. Don't know, just guessing......

Originally posted by irishchic
OR,how the parents of the girl who does my nails (Asian) collect Social Security when they've only lived in the US for 3 years?

Can someone "explain to me how this system,obviously in need of serious and strong reform/ re-vamping could possibly absorb anything to do with "health care?"

Yes it needs restructuring and more funds but that doesn't mean we should ditch it. Indeed the easiest solution is usually the WORST solution!

posted on Mar, 7 2009 @ 09:46 PM
reply to post by GrayFox

So $300 really still isn't affordable. It leaves tons of people uninsured.

That is where individual decisions have to be made. It is a better situation than $1,200 a month, with only 300 left a month to live on, our situation.

posted on Mar, 7 2009 @ 09:47 PM

Originally posted by Divinorumus
I know this doesn't sound fair to the Robbing Hoodlum crowd, but .. it really is UP TO YOU whether you can or can't afford it, it's just a matter of how hard you want to work to save your own life, or waste your money on crap instead! Anyone that says they can't afford health insurance should take a look at all the crap they have wasted their money upon before lying about what they can or can't really afford.

Actually the only thing that IS UNFAIR is the pharmacy companies, hospitals and doctors ripping you off when you NEED THEM. Lawyers are the same vegetable and most people avoid going to court because they know it costs a fortune to seek justice.

I don't mind doctors making a decent profit, in fact I think they are entitled to it given the fact they spent 8 years in college but at the same time I refuse to make them insanely rich, just because government wants a "free market system"....

posted on Mar, 7 2009 @ 10:29 PM

Originally posted by skeptic1
reply to post by marg6043

It isn't that I believe people don't deserve health care.

I don't believe that providing health care is the job of the government.

[edit on 3/6/2009 by skeptic1]

I quite agree with you on this point. Government is intended to protect the people so that they can go about their business of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Yes, I wish my grandchildren had better opportunity for decent health care. But while their mother cannot provide this, I can. And I believe families should join together in supporting their loved ones. No, I am not rich. But I care about my family and I wish many other people would care about theirs. I have seen so many people who just let family members suffer and expect the government to provide for them. There's a country singer, her name is Shania Twain, I think that is how it is spelled. Her family decided she was most likely to succeed and they all pitched in to support her and help her become successful and in return, she takes care of them. Gee, what a concept. Family helping family.

posted on Mar, 7 2009 @ 10:36 PM
I personally don't like the idea of our government paying for our health care!

I rarely get sick, and when I do, I struggle through it WITHOUT going to a doctor to get "antibiotics" due to the fact that the less antibiotics you take, the stronger your immune system becomes for fighting the virus/flu/cold.

With a "National Health Care system in place, even though, people like me won't use the system very much AT ALL, we will be getting charged for it through taxes!

WHY charge ME for something I rarely EVER use and can afford myself when I do use it?

posted on Mar, 7 2009 @ 11:15 PM
reply to post by 44soulslayer

First of all I will tell you that I don't have much time to spend on this post. I am currently working on an appellant's brief to the 9th cir. . So to be brief (ha, ha):

While I agree that civilized was a poor choice of words(I minored in Anthropology when I received my first undergraduate degrees-polisci BS/psych BA and think that the better choice of words would have been "western society"), What are these natural laws you speak of? Tomas Hobbes stated that in a state of natural law "the life of man, poor, nasty, solitary, brutish, and short." If that is what you are going for you can count me out (as well as 99.999% of any given population). Before making value statements like immoral you should read some of John Rawls' works. Even if you disagree with him his "A theory of Justice" refutes your analysis completely, logically, and has provided an economic theory and moral justification for most of the western world (including our country for more than half a century).

Second: Would you rather have a doctor/advocate who was only interested in the money. Personally I think that the best Doctors (and yes Lawyers) chose their profession because of a legitimate and sincere will to help people. I would rather have both the advocate and the doctor that were in it to help their client rather than just make money (they make money either way- death, make money; jail -make money)

Third: Really, you think that Merck and the others would go out of business just because a huge population was buying their drugs en mass? Dude, I know stupid and you just crossed the asinine line, so be careful.

Totality: I know you are scared, but you shouldn't be. I have worked with the homeless and indigent for years and they don't want your money, and they dont want to hurt you. They just want to live, let live, and exist in such a way that they are not a bother to anyone and no one bothers them. Oh, yeah, the vast majority of them work.

Oh, if you want to make the argument about desert... My I.Q. is 178 according to an 8 hour battery test that I had to take when I was working for the state; I had a 4.0 in my majors in college. I am currently enjoying the myriad of experiences interlaced with bone death in my right arm because my insurance was on a 6month basis and every time I renewed it, it considered everything I paid for before as a preexisting condition. If you haven't experienced osteonecrosis, try it before demanding that other should not receive health care.


[edit on 7-3-2009 by SicSympreTyrannis]

posted on Mar, 7 2009 @ 11:55 PM
reply to post by Keyhole

Oh, la la, why am I the only one ever awake to deal with your type?

I try not to get caught up in the ball sacks on trailer hitches kind of glory but, honestly, the inflated advert of your IQ sealed the deal here.

You seem to be exactly what a big, nasty, totalitarian government needs in a lawyer- just smart enough to get a dumb person to bend. Go finish your words as mirror changing brief. If you are honest at all, you'd realize that you are a dumb POS trained like a circus monkey.

If you are honestly working on anything important- and somewhat open minded enough to be here- WHY ARE YOU ACTING ENEMY? Why don't you protect real live humans and justice instead of bragging about briefs that you're likely only editing for punctuation?

Mods??? Did I say that I'm into a bottle of red???

posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 12:22 AM
reply to post by micheshi

I assume you are responding to me... I didn't intend to sound arrogant or broadcast anything. I am sorry if I offended you. I simply wanted to dispute a hurtful argument (not censor it), I have had close friends who have been screwed by insurance companies and I take issue with the concept that certain people deserve care while others do not. I can not speak for anyone but myself and I advocated my position honestly and favorably. That is no reason to call me a "POS" or insult me personally.

posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 12:34 AM
reply to post by SicSympreTyrannis

You know what? You're right. (Message me and I'll give you hubby's #- he'll never believe that I'd think of being wrong...)

I'm a little bit drunk right now and may be speaking irresponsibly...I will respond in the morn... You don't live here but it's likely better for us both..

posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 01:28 PM
Typical GOP blathering. I wonder how many GOP execs can't afford good healthcare. I would suspect the answer is ZERO!

posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 01:47 PM
reply to post by 44soulslayer

Although I completely agree with you, the fact is that it is simply not that way in the real world. For example, if a person wants to sit in his living room and smoke some marijuana after he comes home from work, he is not allowed to do that and yet he is infringing upon no-one's rights other than the government's right to collect excise tax. I personally have not used marijuana since shortly after high school some 26 years ago; however, I am not opposed to someone else doing it (and I thought it would be a good example to use); as a matter of fact, I would prefer that to them sitting in their living room getting drunk and then driving to McDonald's.

In the ideal world what you say is true; however, in the real world there remains too strong of a desire for control for that to be possible.

posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 02:14 PM
The United States already spends twice as much money on health care than Germany or the Netherlands. 6000 dollars compared to 3500 dollars and 3000 dollars per capita . So in theory you should already have enough money to give all Americans state of the art treatment in nice hospitals for less than an apple and an egg. If i where American i would ask myself where does all that money go the government claims to spend on health care. There has to be a huge black hole somewhere.

So the whole point is that you're government already spends twice as much on health care than countries with universal health care and they government still claims to need more money.

[edit on 8-3-2009 by HEroX]

posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 02:23 PM
reply to post by HEroX

You must realize though that us Americans are not as healthy as you Europeans are. I mean, just take a look at some of us, ha. We overeat, we don't exercise, our favorite sport is television, we do more hard drugs, we ... .. I could go on about the WHYS but why? We're a sorry lot over here. Heck, we haven't even had our own ethnic cleansing war yet like ya'll, ha, so there are still a lot of genetic defects in our gene pool, ha. (okay, just kidding)

Seriously, people do not take as good care of themselves over here, and I'm sure that is why it costs so much more to toss an American up on the rack to have their transmission overhauled. You should see the junk most people call food over here, it's disgusting.

Anyhow, don't worry, we aren't on the endangered species list yet, so all this health care business is really a non-issue right now.


posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 10:59 PM
My mother had a stroke in 1991 at 50 years old and is paralyzed on one side. She could not get disability and she was fortunate that my father had some good insurance that he just did get to keep by the skin of his teeth. My cousin the drug dealing coke head had a "mild stroke". Not only did he get all his medical costs paid for, but they ran him down to give him a disability check. It is kind of funny, he walks just fine when he thinks that nobody is looking.

posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 11:22 PM
My honest opinion on this matter (and it is dramatically different from what it was a year ago). If you asked me about socialized medicine a year ago, my reply would have been not no but hell no.

But let's look at things.

1). The wealthy can afford it while the poor get it for free. Not to mention illegal aliens also receive free medical treatment for many things. However, the middle class who carries the majority of the tax burden does not receive this. And just because the wealthy can afford it, does not mean they should have to pay for it especially when they, too, are still paying for what others get for free via their taxes.

2). With the hundreds of billions of dollars being squandered on bailouts, stimulus packages, and foreign aid, it angers me to see these tax dollars going to such institutions and frivolous pursuits instead of the citizens for health care. As in, the money is already being spent. Since this is the case, I would rather see the money go to health care instead of bankers. I'm not a die hard fan of socialized medicine but I would prefer the money to be spent on that since it is already being spent. Ideally we would nix the bailouts/stimuli and not even propose national health care but since it's happening, I'd want to see health care before more bailouts.

3). It would be nice if hospitals were set up in similar establishments like the school systems. There is public school and private schools. Likewise, I would like to see public and private hospitals. There are benefits and disadvantages to this but it still seems better than the status quo. I'll spare everyone the explanation of the pros and cons of this type of system as its not too hard to figure out.

DISCLAIMER: No, the above ideas and opinions are not without flaws and I am able to foresee problems with such systems and know of the typical arguments against socialized medicine (I used to use them myself in this debate). It simply angers me to see 'porkulus' before health care for the very people that are paying for it with their taxes for others. I'm not an advocate for national health care. Just an advocate for health before greed.

Analogy: I'm not a fan of any bail out or stimulus package but if it must be done, I'd rather see each tax paying legal citizen receive a $5,000 check from the government before I see tens of billions of dollars given to a bank.

[edit on 3/9/2009 by AshleyD]

posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 12:10 AM
reply to post by AshleyD

I'm with you. I'm republican, work in retail, and am all about personal freedom and responsibility. That said, I've seen way too many people get
screwed by their insurance companies. Case in point, a really good friend of mine's wife was diagnosed with ovarian cancer about 7 years ago. They were prepared to try anything, and wanted to try the Cancer Institute but since he worked in MO, his insurance wouldn't pay for them to go to the Cancer Institute in Tulsa, OK. They lived in OK. She passed away about 2 years ago and it makes me sick. I think the execs who make those decisions should burn in hell, sorry, but there it is. I also agree with the person who said that they'd rather have a doctor who wasn't in it for the money. You know, our Founding Fathers would be appalled at the shape of our health care system. Oliver Wendall Holmes was a doctor, and from what I've read of him his practice was not where he made his money. In the "old days" if a doctor saved your life you gave him some chickens or whatever else you had that you could part with. They didn't come take your whole damned farm. I realize it's not the doctors though as much as the "suits". Perhaps there should be a law passed stating that people who make minimum wage shall not be allowed to contract any diseases that can't be handled with some otc acetaminophen. Oh, but then, people who make minimum wage should better themselves, (which I agree with), but, someone has to do those jobs. Does the child of the guy who does your taxes deserve better health care than the child of the guy who picks up your trash? If so, maybe we should pass a law saying minimum wage workers are not allowed to have children. Oh, wait, that would be wrong. I'm rambling, sorry, I worked 10 hours today, on my 7th straight day of work, but I'm going to bed worried that my 18 year old daughter isn't covered on my insurance because she's not currently enrolled in college.

posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 12:38 AM

Originally posted by djvexd
The fact that you posted something from Michael Moore's head is evidence that you are nothing more than a sheeple. You, nor Mr. Moore understand what is happening ,nor what will happen if socialized medicine is allowed. You see this as FREE DOCTOR VISITS AND TREATMENT FOR ALL!
So far from the truth. Last time I checked the U.S. healthcare system was a leader if not THE leader in treatments and research (aside from stem cells). WHY? Becasue the gov't doesn't have a say in how the money is spent. You can site countries from around the world that have socialized medicine but NONE of them are a republic. Differnt things all together.

Last I checked France turns out to be a republic, with excellent health care at that.

posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 12:59 AM

Originally posted by whaaa
No one yes has even attempted to answer my question.

Why should my tax dollars go to pay health care for my congressmen and Representatives and I have to pay my HMO close to 1k a mo. for me and my SO?

Do not I deserve the same benefits they receive from my hard work?

Are they so special; and I'm such scum that they deserve preferential treatment?

Please answer me all you rightwing nuts that don't want to pay for poor people receiving health care but think the present system is just fine.

[edit on 6-3-2009 by whaaa]

Name me one person that does not recieve health care in this country just one. Haven't you helped to elect the leftwinged nuts that have moved us into socialism.

It is fine with me for you to help the poor out of your paycheck. You must not discriminate against those elitous Congressman because they need free health care also and they help write the new laws that control your life and where your taxes are directed to be spent.

Since you think your entitled and deserve the same benefits as the elected officials why not run for office. Your socialistic government will take care of you and disperce your tax money where they see fit because they know better then you where to spend your hard earned money.

There is no perfect system but The Constitution Of The United States Of America comes closer to being the most perfect document every written by intelligent men by which men and women can live and abide by as a road map to We The Peoples liberty, freedoms, and a more perfect union with individual rights as well as states rights and a decentralized government.

The Constitution clearly limits the government's powers and juristiction. The U.S. government has become a powerful centralized government with out of control spending and legislating more powers to itself that are controlling most aspects of our lives. The choice is We The People's and how much more Freedoms and Liberty We are willing to give up starting with this past administration and continuing on with this current administration.

posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 01:27 AM

Originally posted by amari

Name me one person that does not recieve health care in this country just one. Haven't you helped to elect the leftwinged nuts that have moved us into socialism....


In all fairness it was Treasury Secretary Paulson who was on his knees begging for the TARP bailout as has already been pointed out in this thread.

We've had a socialized educational system for nearly a century.

A system based on medical decisions being determined not by doctors and their patients, but by insurance companies out to make a profit by systematically denying healthcare benefits to those in need is a devolved approach bordering on criminality.

[edit on 9-3-2009 by elfie]

new topics

top topics

<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in