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.
That's pretty funny, considering there is a post directly above yours contradicting that claim with personal experience.
If you look at an unbiased source, such as the World Health Organization, you will see that the United States ranks in at a lowly 37th in overall health system effectiveness, and a staggering 72nd on overall level of health.
Canada, Switzerland, the UK, even Cuba beat us on these statistics, and all have socialized healthcare plans.
Originally posted by jdub297
And, the Obama plan and Congressional drafters explicitly eschew adherence to any of these programs! They insist that the Obama plan will compete with insurance, not replace it.
Originally posted by jdub297
I'm not happy with our current system, either. I believe that if we gave Americans the $4,600 they 'spend' on health care to decide where, how and when to use it, the system would be more efficient and less costly.
I want a fully nationalized, European style health care plan that will provide the same exact care to everyone, despite if they make $1 a year or $1 million a year.
Well, the problem with that is, most medical procedures cost more than that to perform. If we simply take health coverage out of the picture entirely, then people are going to go broke paying for their procedures.
The only truly fair way to handle health care, is to collect through taxes (not private companies that can change rates or refuse service), and then unquestioningly provide every citizen with every procedure their doctors recommend for their well-being.
Only someone with no real-life experience would be oblivious to the fact that some doctor some where will say whatever you pay him for. Ever heard of "junk science?" Or "insurance whores?" Or "Plaintiff's whores?"
The only procedures that people should pay for out of pocket are unnecessary things like elective cosmetic surgery (not accident victims), sex change operations, psychiatric sessions, chiropractic work etc. Of course in situations where these procedures are determined necessary for well-being by a doctor, then they would be covered by the fed.
But then again, I'm a pinko commie socialist, so what do I know?
Originally posted by jdub297
Here's an objective view of the Obama Health Care agenda from one of his biggest supporters:
The other day my wife and I were listening to WTOP's Mark Plotkin criticize Senator Max Baucus (D - MT) for not fast tracking President Obama's plan to nationalize health care in the United States. Without provocation, my wife (a Canadian), who finds my infatuation with listening to WTOP whenever I am in the care pretty funny, said:
"They tried that in Canada. It didn't work. The Canadians come here for their operations just like their nurses and doctors come here to work."
Originally posted by breakingdradles
There are a few things I believe people should not make money on, health insurance being one of them!
The government themselves have a pool they all throw into and no one makes profit off of it, why can't we get that too?
When you have to call a corporation and see if they approve a medication/service, there is a fundamental problem with they system.
"Every step we take towards making the State our Caretaker of our lives, by that much we move toward making the State our Master."
Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature.... If the next centennial does not find us a great nation ... it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces."
James Garfield, the twentieth president of the United States, 1877
CNSNews.com) - Voters in Arizona will decide next year whether residents will be subject to mandates in the pending health care reform that President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats are promoting.
At least five other states – Indiana, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota and Wyoming – have considered proposals to take pre-emptive action against the pending federal mandates, but those proposals have either not made it out of committee, failed to get enough votes from one side of the legislature, or are still being crafted.
Only the Arizona Legislature introduced an initiative (HCR2014), which if passed, would amend the state constitution to codify that no resident would be required to participate in any public health care option. Arizonans will vote on the initiative in November 2010.
“HCR2014 is proactive and will protect patients’ fundamental rights,” Arizona State Rep. Nancy Barto, a Republican, said in a statement. “We are a front-line battle state to stop the momentum of this powerful government takeover of your health care decisions. Health care by lobbyists thwarts your rights and can be stopped here.”
Originally posted by KaginD
We need something different, something fair and balanced, something that won't cost a fortune and then not be there when you need it
Judge Awards Canceled Cancer Patient $9 Million