Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The healthcare conspiracy

page: 1
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:02 PM
link   
This entire debate about healthcare is a conspiracy from the insurance companies. They have put up enough money and got a pseudo-grassroots mocement going against it.

Here is a valid question to those that believe we do not have a right to healthcare free from the insurance companies dictating what they will pay and what services you get.

If you dont want to pay for others healthcare why do you agree to paying for the Fire Service? Its about all we do is give healthcare. you get hurt we drive to your house at speed risking our lives to fix your boo boo.

So why then do you pay for someone else to have the right to dial 911? I think you should have insurance for that. Here is how it could work.

"911 whats your emergency?"

"Uh my son set the cat on fire and burned his hand, then the cat ran back in the house and now the house if on fire."

"Your insurance carrier please"

"I dont have insurance"

"Thank you for dialing 911, we suggest you get your garden hose out put out your home and give your child some salve and a band-aid."

If you think you should not pay for your fellow countrymen/womens healthcare then you should not pay for theyre emergency mistakes either.


The insurance companies are scamming you.




posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:03 PM
link   
The only CHANGE I see is what's left clinking around in America's pocket after he's done with us.

Obamessiatus; infected believe that the anointed one can do no wrong. Rational thought is the first to go with everything becoming the negative of reality; such as ‘evil’ becoming ‘good’, ‘socialism’ becoming ‘free market’, ‘fascism’ becoming ‘freedom’, ‘higher taxes’ becoming ‘tax cuts’ and ‘governmental extortion’ becoming ‘spreading the wealth’. The infected exhibit glazed over eyes as they mumble, “yes we can” while dribbling at the mouth and standing with their hand out.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Your analogy is poor. Ever hear of volunteer fire departments? Most of the country operates under volunteer fire departments. So your saying just because Im againts this healthcare bill Im involved in some conspiracy with the insurance companies? Come on you can do better that that. Where are your facts?



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by crw2006
Your analogy is poor. Ever hear of volunteer fire departments? Most of the country operates under volunteer fire departments. So your saying just because Im againts this healthcare bill Im involved in some conspiracy with the insurance companies? Come on you can do better that that. Where are your facts?


Who pays for the training of volunteer Fire Depts.? Who pays for the 300-500 thousand dollars for each apparatus? Who pays to keep the volunteer fire depts operating?

You do.

I was talking about city fire not county fire anyway. Most people live in the city. The analogy is actually very accurate and there is no difference.

[edit on 10-8-2009 by LoneGunMan]



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:27 PM
link   
Most definitely agree that the analogy is poor....

If there is a health care conspiracy I guarantee its more sinister than what you speak of...



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by unfndqlt
Most definitely agree that the analogy is poor....



Why is it poor. It is about health care. It is Emergency medicine.

I am an EMT. Emergency Medical Technician.

I am paid by the tax payers to come to your home as a licensed medial practitioner to perform medical service.


Tel me why you agree to pay for that and not the other. Dont just state the analogy is poor tell me the difference.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   
There is a difference though.

No one is denied the right to an emergency room visit. Granted it will be extremely expensive (if you are legal, and actually pay), but you will be taken care of...

there are a multitude of things that are not being discussed within the health care debate that play a large part into the costs. The focus just seems to be on MSM talking points... which can almost 100% if the time be tossed out to factionism...



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by unfndqlt
There is a difference though.

No one is denied the right to an emergency room visit. Granted it will be extremely expensive (if you are legal, and actually pay), but you will be taken care of...



No there is not a difference. We do not bill you. We bill the tax payer.

Now tell me the difference.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   
Take a look at it from a larger perspective... I know it is nice and the whole theme behind "universal health care" just seems righteous, but we aren't exactly talking about a group of individuals that we can trust.....



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by unfndqlt
Take a look at it from a larger perspective... I know it is nice and the whole theme behind "universal health care" just seems righteous, but we aren't exactly talking about a group of individuals that we can trust.....


You trust them to provide you with the Fire service without a bill.

In fact we get hundreds of call for people that having nothing more than the flu and are vomiting. I have been on gall stones calls before.

Tell me the difference.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   

This entire debate about healthcare is a conspiracy from the insurance companies. They have put up enough money and got a pseudo-grassroots mocement going against it.


Funny thing is that there wouldn't be no debate if The Democrats had united their party and had given Obama his birthday present.

Guess the insurance companies got to Congress first.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   
Point taken and I apologize for attacking your analogy as quickly as I did....

I guess I wasn't thinking about it in the emergency situation... if I was to say... get stabbed I wouldn't exactly be wanting to flip the bill....

The debate is about the control... There are better alternatives than giving the control of our very life's to people whom every other day are showing themselfs to be as distrustful as ever...



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by unfndqlt

The debate is about the control... There are better alternatives than giving the control of our very life's to people whom every other day are showing themselfs to be as distrustful as ever...


If you trust the insurance companies more than the government for control then why not trust them to control the Fire Service?



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by LoneGunMan
 



How many times do I have to hear this? Same rhetoric....

I don't care if we have public healthcare as long as it is as GOOD OR BETTER than what I have today!

And I do NOT believe that the current plans are BECAUSE the same Political representatives that are pushing this have VOTED to EXEMPT themselves from it!

Case closed... Until they put their money where their mouth is MOST of us are not going to believe a word they say..... (It's good enough for you but NOT for us... yeah ... I really want the "not good enough for you esteemed politician" plan!) Yeah, that's a winner alright... cmon, think about it!

www.abovetopsecret.com...


OK, Let's be truthful, we work, we have always worked, we pay for the privileges of outstanding healthcare. America "Does" have the best healthcare in the world if you are insured well.

So, why should we (those who work, retired, or on current good medical plans) lower our standard of living, lifesaving diagnostics, instant treatment so we can join that 4-6 hour line and wait months for tests, treatment, seeing specialist ect. (Real or Perceived I don't want to even argue that, When powerful people exempt themselves from the plan they are trying to force on everyone else then not many are going to trust it and many will perceive the worst.)

Really, I am open to a "universal basic medical" plan for EVERYONE. But Let's do it right! Tort reform, Pharma price negotiations, sane costs controls, etc.

Once you start seeing ANY EXEMPTIONS for specific elite or favored groups you know that that a plan is BS. Point blank, if were going to have a "universal care" then it damn well better be "universal" because trying to ram a crap plan down the throats of the middle class while EXEMPTING yourselves is crap. Let's all bear the burden together if were going to do it at all! Anything less is another screwing to the middle class and we all know it.

So, I am a greedy rotten SOB because I do not want to Lose something that I have worked for and because the Politicians, Govt Employees, and Unions EXEMPT themselves to keep what I got! (and they are not greedy rotten SOB's???)

All or nothing baby!!!

Don't try to make the rest of us "take one for the team" if your not willing to do it yourselves!

The same politicians who are pushing this on ME have VOTED OPENLY to EXEMPT THEMSELVES so... you know.... I think I will be against this one, start over and bring us a good healthcare bill this time!

Does this clear up any questions about why so many people are truly up in arms about this... it suddenly impacts them! Yes, they should have been up in arms about the Debt, Bailouts, etc, but finally it hits home. That is why they are getting off the couch and speaking up... sure there are some groups "fanning the flames" but there has to be a fire there to fan. If getting people out to these things was as simple as having a Republican Group telling them to show up it would have happened LONG LONG ago.

www.humanevents.com...

Democrats also voted down an amendment from Rep. Dean Heller (R-Nv.) that would require all Members of Congress to get insurance through the government-run plan. Apparently Democrat members of Congress do not like the government plan they’re trying to inflict on the rest of us. In a straight party line vote, Democrats voted against exempting themselves from the government-run plan by a vote of 21-18.

“We also had an amendment to require that members of Congress must participate in the government-run plan,” Camp said. “If it’s such a great idea, it should be a great idea for members of Congress. The majority voted to prevent that from happening. They voted to exempt members of Congress from the government-run plan.”

Also voted down were amendments that would require proof of citizenship or legal status to sign up for the government plan, that would bar government funding abortion as a plan “benefit,” and an amendment that would bar rationing of health care based on comparative effectiveness data.


So in summary: Stop arguing about the pros or cons of a junk plan, who is organizing who and lying about what and agree we DESERVE BETTER A ONE!!!

We deserve a Healthcare plan or reform bill that is good enough to NOT require EXEMPTIONS for the same people pushing the bill on everyone....

Please... EXPLAIN OR ARGUE with this logic.... Tell me one good reason why (Current Pro-bill supporters) that there should be EXEMPTIONS for the "chosen". I really want to hear this... I want to actually see the justification in your minds. (Of course very few will directly answer this question and will pick a favorite line from above to ridicule but hey, let's give it a shot).



So right now I have insurance from a large provider... and I have had to use it often ... I had to have a couple of catscans and a couple of MRI's and they were approved same day... sure I had to pay a bit on my end but I am freeking alive so until I see a "New Plan" that is as good or better than what I have today AND is good enough for our "Politicians" without the "exemptions" for the "chosen" I will stick with what I have.


[edit on 10-8-2009 by infolurker]



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:56 PM
link   
I'm not defending the insurance companies in the least bit... two heads of the same dragon if you ask me...

But... In an ideal world legislation that would not allow insurance companies to deny coverage to those with preexisting conditions... to drop coverage of those who come up with a condition... and so forth....

There is also the argument about large corporations that get tax breaks for having coverage... If those same breaks could be passed to an individual working for the company and that individual was allowed to buy their own insurance it would create more compotition within the insurance companies...

then there is the question of the illegal alien situation, which I havn't heard a thing about since this health care talk started. I am not for rounding them up and kicking them out, but if we had a combination of making them legal tax paying citizens, and tightening of the boarders there would be more of a chance that they could get insurance and less costs for others...

like I said at the start these things are what I think idealy should happen. Not saying I'm right...



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by infolurker
reply to post by LoneGunMan
 




Case closed... Until they put their money where their mouth is MOST of us are not going to believe a word they say..... (It's good enough for you but NOT for us... yeah ... I really want the "not good enough for you esteemed politician" plan!) Yeah, that's a winner alright... cmon, think about it!


Why would someone that makes as much money as the president or the congress have national health care that is to help out those that cannot afford health care?

This makes zero sense to me. If you have good insurance then why not use it? The problem is that most insurance unless you have a really good job (it sucks even then) doesn't pay enough of its share anymore. It used to before the last administration porked us.

So instead of spewing the rhetoric of what the MSM says address my OP.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 11:02 PM
link   
I think it is a good analogy, although I don't think that fire codes are potentially a civil rights hazard as mandating aspects of care could be.

I think we need something. I'm afraid of 1000 page legislation though.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by LoneGunMan
 


Did you read the post? I STRONGLY OBJECT to the plans laid forth and I have nothing to do with the "Insurance Industry".

Do you get it... I am not being driven by anyone buy myself in resisting this plan... it is common sense to me, If the plan is so bad our LEADERSHIP goes out of it's way not to have why would you think it is a good idea to adopt it?

If public option is cheaper for companies to buy instead of "blue cross" then guess what? We are on the "public option" now to. Companies will jump on it in a heartbeat.


I want healthcare reform... I don't have a problem with a AS GOOD or BETTER National Healthcare. I could care less if Healthcare insurance companies go bye bye but I want a GOOD or Better Plan and that is not going to happen if the "elite" exclude themselves from it.

So I will say it again:

Case closed... Until they put their money where their mouth is MOST of us are not going to believe a word they say..... (It's good enough for you but NOT for us... yeah ... I really want the "not good enough for you esteemed politician" plan!) Yeah, that's a winner alright... cmon, think about it!

[edit on 10-8-2009 by infolurker]



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by hadriana
 


So then the control the insurance companies who are ONLY about profit are going to have your best interest at heart?

If so then let them or any for profit corporation control and mandate the Fire service. It the free market who is only for profit have your best interest at heart then you should be more than happy to hand it over to them.

You could even have police insurance. Neat. :shk:



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by LoneGunMan
 


Actually I dont have a great job, but my healthcare plan is great. I do pay for it out of my paycheck.
Listen I think all children should have coverage, as well as anyone who is sick and in need of care. I just dont want to compromise and take the first package that comes around the corner. There are many options out there. Why cant the powers that be debate this and come up with a fair plan that doesnt penalize private insurance or individuals who want to keep private insurance?






top topics



 
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join