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.

 

Is Access to Health Care a Basic Human Right?

page: 4
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife

Spoken like someone who has never dealt with a pencil pushing administrator in a HMO, or insurance company! WHAT'S THE FRAKKIN' DIFFERENCE?? I mean other than the government is at least answerable to the people....


The government answerable to the people? When and where did I miss something? Last time I checked they just keep shoving anything they want down our throats.

If you can't tell the difference then there is no need to even continue this debate. The government are the ones that have legislated our way into this mess, and you want to them to "fix" what they themselves created?

Come back to reality. You're living in fantasy land.




posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:11 PM
link   
All I can say for those who want Universal Health Care is you are dreaming a sweet dream. You better call on the UNIVERSE TO PAY FOR IT because this government is so frigging deep in debt all of our creditors are running away already scared. The FED is buying US treasuries because no one else is buying enough for crying out loud.

This means that the free money train is coming off the dang rails. They raise personal income taxes we will be even more broke then we are now. They raise taxes just on the rich. The Rich will move the heck out of here and take their money with them. The same with corporate taxes. Microsoft has said if the president's plan is put into place they will likely move off shore.

The largest industries are running out of the US because of short sighted socialist stupidity run rampid. You can not socialize a rich nation and expect it to remain rich. These fairyland ideas will come to their own end and the amount of suffering we all do will be dependent on how long it takes us all to wake up.

The exact opposite is what needs to happen. Instead of socialist bailouts those institutions need to fail. The people who caused the failure need to be sued by their share holders. Instead of stupid short sighted stimulus packages that only profit the rich we should slash the government budget until it is balanced. We should cut everything that is not essential to operating the country. We should roll back every obligation we have made in the past until we can actually pay for those obligations.

We should repeal the personal income tax. Government should pay for itself with tariffs and duties. Whats left of it that is.

We live in an age of the greatest social integration we have ever experienced. Children can be educated in small community school houses and they should have open source educations using open source software.

The only thing we really need government for is to enforce the law and defend the nation. The law in fact should be greatly simplified and the military should stop policing the world. If what you do harms anyone you should be sued or be compelled to repay them. That should be the whole of the law. Common law and common sense should be practiced.

All government subsidies should end immediately and let the free market control prices for goods and services. The complexity and expense of the central government is a direct result of increasing demands by the people and mostly by special interest. Government must become greatly simplified.

Efficiency is bred of competition. Government through taxation has taken over services that would be far better accomplished by the competitive private for profit sector. This includes of course health care. Health care should be greatly reformed. The first reform should be to end medicare and medicade. They should be replaced by services provided by charitable institutions.

Since we have in this concept model ended the income tax people will have more money for helping good causes. Those causes will receive more money because Americans care about the suffering of others and are willing to help out their fellow man. They do not need to be forced at gun point to help others believe it or not.

Taxes are tyranny. Forced taking of money from one party and giving it to another has always been theft. If the government does it they call it taxes.

In this internet connected age we can do far better at providing services with voluntary participation in distributed cooperative systems than we can by sanctioned forced government collectivism. Look at open source software and other open source technology development efforts if you doubt this.

We need open source medical technology, open source education, and not government institutionalized greed and corruption of central by force collectivism that only profits the special interests.

Well that is all I have to say on this. They all tie together. Universal Health Care is just going to be the straw that breaks the camels back in my opinion. We really need to move the heck away from this socialist corporatist statist collectivist mentality. We need to be more personally responsible and individually sovereign in our lives not more centralist statist and government dependent. That dog just cant hunt.


[edit on 6/14/2009 by UFOTECH]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


Well then if you were in so much pain I guess a big doctor bill seemed kind of worth it at the time now didnt it?



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by UFOTECH
 


Wow can I move to the country you just described. A country full of people who own up to the fact that they are resposible for themselves and government was not designed to be their moooommmmyyyyyy!



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife
 


You want someone to blame for the mess the government has gotten us into? Go find the nearest mirror... They didn't vote themselves into office! Unless of course, you don't vote. In that case, get two mirrors for not exercising the biggest right that millions have served and hundreds of thousands have died to ensure that you have. I would be one of those who have served to ensure you have the right. Why is it that so many are ready to blame everyone else, but don't even acknowledge their contribution to the problems. I don't know about ATS, but I have found that those who whine and complain the most about the government usually don't vote, and in my opinion, if you don't exercise your right to vote, you don't have the right to complain.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


The hospital bill, which covered the nurses, the supplies, the xrays, etc. was well worth it and I paid it. The overpriced 'consultation', no.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


Don't blame me, I didn't vote for these people, I voted against them. There really isn't much more I can do, but you keep wanting the government to play big brother isn't helping anything.

America is doomed to fail, just the way it is. We are bankrupt we can't afford any more spending. Just wait till the tax increases get here. Then you will really be screaming.

And if this health care bill passes you will be wishing you could be afforded the pleasure of receiving 102,000.00 bill.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


Good point. I do blame myself, and everyone else in this country. Too many people keep voting for their own selfish interests as opposed to the long term good of the country. I have voted religiously. I have voted down every tax increase that has ever come my way. Thought I have to admit its hard to pick a decent politician. Most of them tell everyone what they want to hear instead of what they need to hear.

If we had sense we would vote down every tax increase and every politician asking for one until they learn to balance their budget and learn to decrease it religiously.

But we are all guilty, including me, because we should have changed the landscape years ago. I remember Ross Perot talking about this stuff 20 years ago. We should formed new parties and supported them, and we should have formed a huge group to bitch at every congress person until they start to learn the fundamentals of economics. You know the little things, like you can not spend more than you take in forever and bankruptcy is a painful process for a person, company, state, or country.

[edit on 14-6-2009 by grapesofraft]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:36 PM
link   
I would love Universal Healthcare as much as the next man. However this scheme proposed by the President is at the wrong time. People are about to be taxed to the gills and yet he wants another tax and spend policy to be approved as well.

Moreover, how are people going to pay for it because many of our people are out of work as it is. The squeeze on the middle class is getting tighter and tighter each passing day. Of course he probably thinks he is doing some good with the Universal Healthcare proposal of his, however, what he is doing right now can be considered callous and unsympathetic to the people that are struggling. In other words, free-healthcare isn't free and it must be payed for by you and I. His proposal is not practical given our current state of affairs economically. So I say: "Mr. President, stop spending so much of our damn money and give us a chance to catch our breath." Maybe in future it is do-able but now is not the time.

[edit on 14-6-2009 by Jakes51]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:47 PM
link   
You know what a better question is.. not is health care a right, but what percentage of YOUR income are you willing to give up in taxes?

10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by LeftyBrown
 


That only happens because people all go to the emergency room for stuff they dont need to go for. It is just a way for people to get away for free or to not have to pay their copay on the spot.

Nobody should have their kids in the emergency room for the flu when a doctors office is open somewhere.


Yes, they should, when their child is sick enough for an EMERGENCY visit. hello ER emergency room, for emergencies. People die of the flu. But you are right, that for MINOR issues, an ER is not the place to go.

But just so you know, a visit to the dr the last time my son was sick, he ended up with strep throat, was one hundred thirty five dollars. $135.00 to get his throat swabbed, and a yep strep throat. Took about ten minutes for the full exam, swab, write the prescription. The prescription was far less than that. Not too bad for ten minutes worth of work eh?

I have said this before, and the confusion that you can get free health care by going to the ER is an old fable that gets passed around and believed.

When you go to the ER, yes they have to treat you, but only to stabilize you, and nothing more past that.

You then, a few weeks later receive a HUGE inflated bill for this ER visit, and they charge more when you do NOT have insurance than when you do to recoup what they feel are their losses. When you have insurance a hospital is capped on what they are allowed to charge for services. When you do not have insurance, they can and do charge you what they want to. IE $20 for a single dose of aspirin when you come in having a heart attack.

An ER visit is not free health care. When all they have to do is stabilize you, so you do not die on hospital grounds, I do not consider that "health care" I consider that emergency care ie ER. If you go to the ER having a heart attack, they do not do follow up care, and they do not do anything for you other than make sure you do not die on their doorstep. Nothing more.

Everyone should have health care, especially children. If you are not an advocate for health care for at least children, you are cold hearted and greedy in my thinking. What ever happened to compassion and assuring that all children can grow up healthy, so that they CAN work and make a good living to be productive citizens.

Greed, I fear will be the end of us all, as if we cannot learn to care for each other, who will care for us when we need it? NO ONE. We should all be looking out for each other. Grow a little compassion, and show some humanity with some humane emotions.

Harm None
Peace



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by amazed
 


What about being responsible and not having children when you cannot afford them? I agree that all children should have healthcare and insurance, but I think it should be provided by their parents.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by amazed
 


What about being responsible and not having children when you cannot afford them? I agree that all children should have healthcare and insurance, but I think it should be provided by their parents.


I agree with you that people shouldn't have children if that can't feasible support them and give them decent quality of life. However, that is not the case and it never has been so.

People are having children out of wedlock and are having them younger and younger. It's just the way things are now and have always been that way. People never evaluate the seriousness of their decisions and sex is one of those decisions. I believe too many act on impulse instead of rational thought. However, I do agree that children should have healthcare and insurance regardless of the parents' economic status. The children have no choice what family they are born to and shouldn't be deprived of decent medical care because of economic limitations of the parents.

[edit on 14-6-2009 by Jakes51]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 11:24 PM
link   
Here are some points for why the single payer system would save us money.

* Duplicate staffing at doctor's offices working with multiple insurance companies and medical plans no longer exist thus reducing the doctors cost to deliver healthcare
* Exorbitant salaries to multiple managements vis-à-vis multiple CEOs, CFOs, presidents, and the like no longer exist and as such more monies to deliver healthcare
* Stock holder dividend payments no longer exist yet again more monies for healthcare
* Health Insurance salesmen's' bonuses and salaries no longer exist yet again more monies for health care
* Given that every American at some time gets sick or gets into an accident that ultimately we all pay for directly or indirectly, every working American should contribute to the single payer pool. The unemployed must be covered as well

tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com...

So who is it that benefits from keeping the status quo?



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Jakes51
 


But dont you realize you are just subsidizing and in many ways encouraging people to make stupid decisions? Not that it wouldnt be terrible, but what do you think would happen if peoples kids started to starve to death or die from illness because the parents were idiots? I bet some people would get their crap together and fast.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Tinman67
 


We should not HAVE TO pay into the single payer pool. I guess if they can make that work it would be an option to opt in or opt out. I do not like the idea of being forced to pay into a pool.

That and the fact that in an idea world that might save money, but when the government is involved you can count on it becoming totally corrupt and expenses becoming totally off the charts of whatever they predict.

They do not exactly have the best track record of managing things efficiently or cost effectively.

[edit on 14-6-2009 by grapesofraft]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Jakes51
 


But dont you realize you are just subsidizing and in many ways encouraging people to make stupid decisions? Not that it wouldnt be terrible, but what do you think would happen if peoples kids started to starve to death or die from illness because the parents were idiots? I bet some people would get their crap together and fast.


Some parents are just pieces of slime and they care not if their children are sick or hungry. They would rather drink beers or go to the club than care about their children. Sad I know, but there are people in this country just like that. Your rationalization is correct to a degree but flawed. If things were as black and white as your rationalization implies I would be all for it.

However, in the world we are part of a lot things reside in that gray area.
Realistically there are parents that don't intend on improving and are downright cruel to their children. Because of this, why should we deprive the children of food or medicine.

[edit on 14-6-2009 by Jakes51]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Jakes51
 


We are not depriving their children of anything, they are. The thing is once their kid dies of starvation or illness because the parents spent all their money getting high or jacking around then the parents go to jail for neglect or whatever charge we can come up with.

We did not bring their children into the world, so why should we be expected to cover up for the parents irresponsiblity?



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Tinman67
 


You know what I see in that list? People with families and millions of jobs being lost.

So how is it saving us money when all those once taxpayers are no longer paying taxes? The people with jobs end up soaking up the loses.

We need health care reform no doubt, but you won't ever get me to agree with government run health care. The reason is real simple, I don't want people like Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, John Bohner, George Bush, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Michelle Bachman, go ahead and add any of the 450+ corrupt politicians to finish that list out, deciding what kind of health care I get.

Not only that but single payer will end up with Health Care Rationing, it always does. Then comes the ever increasing tax rates to support a program that has an unknown cost associated with it, that varies from year to year.

Cheaper? Not in the real world.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Jakes51
 


We are not depriving their children of anything, they are. The thing is once their kid dies of starvation or illness because the parents spent all their money getting high or jacking around then the parents go to jail for neglect or whatever charge we can come up with.

We did not bring their children into the world, so why should we be expected to cover up for the parents irresponsiblity?


I don't think we would be covering for the parents. I think we would be covering the child because they are the ones caught in the middle of it.

I guess we could be a little sympathetic or compassionate to a sick or hungry child.

However, in regards to the parents they will get what is coming to them whether through jail or other means. I am in no way subsidizing irresponsibility. I'll quote the old African Proverb, "It takes a whole village to raise a child." That is my view on it.




top topics



 
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join