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.

 

***Shock Poll*** Report: 83% of Doctors Have Considered Quitting Over Obamacare!!

page: 6
21
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by paxnatus

I have a couple of questions for the ATS community:

Do you think doctors will be able to deliver adequate care to a patient based on time constraints, due to the overload of patients they will be expected to see?

Do you believe you will receive state of the art healthcare under Obama's govt. program?

Do you believe you will be in charge in deciding what procedures, test or surgeries you need or will that be mandated by the govt.?

Finally, do you believe you will receive the medication you may need for a particular illness?


edit on 7/10/2012 by paxnatus because: typo

I think the question should be :

Do you believe a person should be treated based on need or the size of their wallet?

The US system believes the wallet is the driver. All other western economies believe its is need. Every non hypocritical christian will agree with Jesus Christ ie need not money.




posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by xXxinfidelxXx
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


The statistics prove you wrong at every turn. There's no need for me to post them here. They are readily available to the public and back my argument 100%. You are heavily misinformed.


you living in Canada and relying on internet information and me living in the USA and relying on first hand knowledge, perhaps we can agree to disagree.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by yorkshirelad

Originally posted by paxnatus

I have a couple of questions for the ATS community:

Do you think doctors will be able to deliver adequate care to a patient based on time constraints, due to the overload of patients they will be expected to see?

Do you believe you will receive state of the art healthcare under Obama's govt. program?

Do you believe you will be in charge in deciding what procedures, test or surgeries you need or will that be mandated by the govt.?

Finally, do you believe you will receive the medication you may need for a particular illness?


edit on 7/10/2012 by paxnatus because: typo

I think the question should be :

Do you believe a person should be treated based on need or the size of their wallet?

The US system believes the wallet is the driver. All other western economies believe its is need. Every non hypocritical christian will agree with Jesus Christ ie need not money.


ANother question that is applicable is that should people be forced to provide for the needs of others? Christ talked a lot about individual charity but nowhere did he mention that the State should force charity on others either.

Regardless, we are supposed to have a secular government so WWJD should have nothing to do with the decisions of our elected representatives or a government officials.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 09:39 AM
link   
My dad was a surgeon, he died of old age in 1981. I remember him talking about socialized medicine coming to the USA, and how it would make a mess of medical care, and how it would make medical care far more costly than necessary. He was absolutely right.

There is nothing in our constitution that guarantees us medical care. That said, in the old days dad had lots of poor come to his office and were treated, and given medicine for free. Yes FREE. While we lived in the country, his office was in the city, and so was my grade school. So I would come to his office and do my homework and then ride home with him (sometimes as late as 8pm) When he died, his office call fee was $3.00 no misprint. $3.00 and he agonized over raiseing it from $2.00 but he said inflation caused him to raise it. Still patients swelled his large waiting room and sometimes they were lined up outside the front door. Then the back door bell would ring, and someone really poor or Black would be admitted and he would care for them for free.

This was common practice for Doctors prior to any Social Medical scheme.

Now its 2012 and I just had a stent put in my heart, and a pain block in my spine. charges for the year exceed $55,000. Holy Cripe! Dad's yearly income was only about $100,k and he worked his butt off for that.

Prior to the pain block, I spoke with the surgeon. He knew my dad was an MD. He asked me about my opinion of Obama care and I pointed my thumb down. He smiled and nodded. He said "we all feel the same way" then he talked for awhile about what it meant. He said a lot of physicians would quit medicine because essentially Obama Care would be like having the government looking over your shoulder all the time, even to the point of telling you what you can and cannot do to a patient, even though you knew better.

Canada has a Socialized system, but it sure doesn't work like Obama Care proposes, It's a lot better, and frankly a lot of Canadian Doctors came to the USA to practice. Now they will head back to Canada, and possibly retire.

This is going to be one hell of a mess. Stay healthy. You can't afford to get sick.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Everyone says Obamacare will socialize hospital care but the problem is that emergency rooms are today being filled by people who CANNOT PAY the bill and so we're effectively treating people for free and eventually having to pay for it since they can't. That's not very much different than giving everybody "free" care and just putting the burden on the tax payers.

For example, I read about a minority woman who had a child and the bill was $103,000. She is dirt poor and likely can't afford it. This is not her first appearance in an "emergency" room. Obviously, my heart aches for her and her child. I despair that her life is what it's. I want her to get better. But at the same time, she's just one of many who're caught in this circumstance. And the country is paying the bulk of the bill and it seems many of us look away because we pity those who receive the care. Another example are those with mental "illnesses" who do not work but still receive care. Many emergency rooms get these kinds of people who're having panics and ultimately the taxpayers are footing the bill. Obviously, those with mental illness are a special care, but it should be noted.

Beyond that, I am not sure whether to trust this "poll" but I have no doubt it has some reality.

My fear of Obamacare is will it force everybody who can't afford private healthcare to submit to the authority of the bigwigs and stuffed shirts in marble towers? What do I mean exactly? I mean poor people will be forced to meet a common standard. Whether they're actually better off on average is not my concern, my concern is about their freedom. Imagine all of these people being "subsidized" by the nation's taxpayers. The people who're paying will want more accountability. So what will happen is that those who're forced to receive "free" healthcare will be required to eat whatever is considered "healthy" by the national organizations and to consume whatever medication is necessary to compensate for any diagnosed mental "illnesses" and to meet standard recommendations for "exercise" per week and various other criteria listed in the official healthcare manuals.

Right now, people who're too poor to afford private healthcare are still streaming into emergency rooms and costing the taxpayers money anyway, but they're not forced to live a certain way. In fact, it's the hospitals that're choosing to treat them in the emergency rooms. If the hospitals declined to treat them if they do not have insurance then we wouldn't be talking about treating people for "free". So forcing poor people to meet certain standards to receive "free" healthcare is something that's being encouraged by hospitals just by how they behave today. Part of the blame also lies on people who're poor who go to the emergency room anyway, even knowing that they cannot afford it. But what about people who choose NOT to? What about people who know they're too poor and so do not expect somebody else to pay? Under the proposed rules of Obamacare, they now no longer can choose not to go to the emergency room. They're forced to have a lobotomy and march with the rest of the lemmings. We talk about choice in this country as if it means something, but by not allowing people to decline healthcare or Obamacare, we're taking choice away from them. It seems humanitarian on the surface, but it also has a more sinister (and oppressive) character on the inside.
edit on 11-7-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   
We need to figure out how to be healthier and not have so many life threatening or life changing illnesses or infections or disabiilties or take-your-pick. I know it's a long shot to say this.

There has to be a better way than this insanity. Looked at from afar, it appears that humans are crippled creatures that barely can last a few years without medical care. We're terribly taxed.

What happened in our evolution that left us in such a vulnerable and dire strait?

It makes no sense. You'd think nature would have struck a balance. These're pitiful conditions.

And this is precisely why we glorify suffering so much because it's literally certain to happen. We tell each other that hardship and disaster strengthen us because to think otherwise is depressing. In some ways, we're just making the best lemonade we possibly can given our circumstances.

If my speech seems detached and haughty it's only because I have dreamed of better places where the berries are as big as my fist and the humans are healthy and joyous, not bent low. I like to think we dream bold so we have something to hold onto when the grind of work bores us. We need things to aim for to keep us going and believing. Science visionaries write about fantastic futures that have inspired many people to pursue science. The more magnificent the vision the more impressive our resolve is to meet it even in the most trying moments when science is anything but fun.
edit on 11-7-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by yorkshirelad

Originally posted by paxnatus

I have a couple of questions for the ATS community:

Do you think doctors will be able to deliver adequate care to a patient based on time constraints, due to the overload of patients they will be expected to see?

Do you believe you will receive state of the art healthcare under Obama's govt. program?

Do you believe you will be in charge in deciding what procedures, test or surgeries you need or will that be mandated by the govt.?

Finally, do you believe you will receive the medication you may need for a particular illness?


edit on 7/10/2012 by paxnatus because: typo

I think the question should be :

Do you believe a person should be treated based on need or the size of their wallet?

The US system believes the wallet is the driver. All other western economies believe its is need. Every non hypocritical christian will agree with Jesus Christ ie need not money.


ANother question that is applicable is that should people be forced to provide for the needs of others? Christ talked a lot about individual charity but nowhere did he mention that the State should force charity on others either.

Regardless, we are supposed to have a secular government so WWJD should have nothing to do with the decisions of our elected representatives or a government officials.


It is 2012. You own 6 factories.

It is 1917. Lenin and Trotzky finally manage to build a time machine. It travels to 2 places and times.
First they travel to 1945, Wolfsschanze, Berlin. Kill Hitler. It's 5 minutes before his suicide, so it doesn't really matter.
But hey. Build a time machine, kill hitler! Yay!

Next stop: One of your factories, 2012. Being paragons of communism they don't have a hard time to convince your workers that they should be the ones in control of the means of production! Trotzki institutes the death penalty to anybody not willing to defend the factory. Lenin meanwhile organizes the elections to the factory soviet.

Do you
a) Have to hire on your own dime people willing to reconquer the factory?
or
b) Have a right to request police to reinstitute your property rights, that you were unable to defend yoruself?

edit on 7/11/2012 by semperfortis because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by yorkshirelad

Originally posted by paxnatus

I have a couple of questions for the ATS community:

Do you think doctors will be able to deliver adequate care to a patient based on time constraints, due to the overload of patients they will be expected to see?

Do you believe you will receive state of the art healthcare under Obama's govt. program?

Do you believe you will be in charge in deciding what procedures, test or surgeries you need or will that be mandated by the govt.?

Finally, do you believe you will receive the medication you may need for a particular illness?


edit on 7/10/2012 by paxnatus because: typo

I think the question should be :

Do you believe a person should be treated based on need or the size of their wallet?

The US system believes the wallet is the driver. All other western economies believe its is need. Every non hypocritical christian will agree with Jesus Christ ie need not money.


ANother question that is applicable is that should people be forced to provide for the needs of others? Christ talked a lot about individual charity but nowhere did he mention that the State should force charity on others either.

Regardless, we are supposed to have a secular government so WWJD should have nothing to do with the decisions of our elected representatives or a government officials.


if you live in a modern society where YOU benefit from the work of others through the use of roads, trash pick up, money spent on programs to help develop the technology you use everyday etc.

then yes you should be forced to provide for the needs of others
now if you want to go live in the woods living off the sweat of your brow only using things you produce yourself then no you shouldnt be forced to help anyone else
and you should have that option.
but if that option was available would you take it? (i really .....really doubt you would)



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 07:37 PM
link   

edit on 7/11/2012 by semperfortis because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Sooooooo.... Looks I should go to medical school since they're will be a booming demand of doctors in the future... I bet the pay will be even higher than it is now, seeing as they're will only be about 1000 doctors in the US.... lol ....sureee...



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


You have no idea what I rely on. Half of my family still resides in the States (most of which are veterans) for your information. I'd take my outside perspective over your muddied personal perspective any day of the week buddy. Picture it this way, looking at something from within is like a crowd standing on it's knees, wandering around in a cloud of dust. Those that "wake up" are the ones that pick their heads up over the cloudy whirlwind of BS that flows through your country and mine alike like water. Even our supposed "free" healthcare (that they garnish our wages 25% so we can have btw) is highly flawed. If you want to learn about what's really going on, first you must release your ignorance. Until then, I hope you don't get shot or diagnosed with cancer any time soon as only that will give you the eye-opener that you need to see the truth. People never learn until it's too late - The new golden rule.



posted on Jul, 14 2012 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by narwahl

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by yorkshirelad

Originally posted by paxnatus

I have a couple of questions for the ATS community:

Do you think doctors will be able to deliver adequate care to a patient based on time constraints, due to the overload of patients they will be expected to see?

Do you believe you will receive state of the art healthcare under Obama's govt. program?

Do you believe you will be in charge in deciding what procedures, test or surgeries you need or will that be mandated by the govt.?

Finally, do you believe you will receive the medication you may need for a particular illness?


edit on 7/10/2012 by paxnatus because: typo

I think the question should be :

Do you believe a person should be treated based on need or the size of their wallet?

The US system believes the wallet is the driver. All other western economies believe its is need. Every non hypocritical christian will agree with Jesus Christ ie need not money.


ANother question that is applicable is that should people be forced to provide for the needs of others? Christ talked a lot about individual charity but nowhere did he mention that the State should force charity on others either.

Regardless, we are supposed to have a secular government so WWJD should have nothing to do with the decisions of our elected representatives or a government officials.


It is 2012. You own 6 factories.

It is 1917. Lenin and Trotzky finally manage to build a time machine. It travels to 2 places and times.
First they travel to 1945, Wolfsschanze, Berlin. Kill Hitler. It's 5 minutes before his suicide, so it doesn't really matter.
But hey. Build a time machine, kill hitler! Yay!

Next stop: One of your factories, 2012. Being paragons of communism they don't have a hard time to convince your workers that they should be the ones in control of the means of production! Trotzki institutes the death penalty to anybody not willing to defend the factory. Lenin meanwhile organizes the elections to the factory soviet.

Do you
a) Have to hire on your own dime people willing to reconquer the factory?
or
b) Have a right to request police to reinstitute your property rights, that you were unable to defend yoruself?

edit on 7/11/2012 by semperfortis because: (no reason given)


The proper role of the state is to protect the rights of the citizen. How is the police stopping the theft of property, (RE a factory) comparable to the state forcing one citizen to subsidize another? If a citizen buys or builds a factory, it is his property and the state should protect the rights of the owner of said property. If another citizen claims the income he has not earned, he has no right to that income. I do not see the comparison. Lenin organizing the factory Soviet is more apt compared to modern leftists organizing the healthcare Soviet.



posted on Jul, 14 2012 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirhumperdink

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by yorkshirelad

Originally posted by paxnatus

I have a couple of questions for the ATS community:

Do you think doctors will be able to deliver adequate care to a patient based on time constraints, due to the overload of patients they will be expected to see?

Do you believe you will receive state of the art healthcare under Obama's govt. program?

Do you believe you will be in charge in deciding what procedures, test or surgeries you need or will that be mandated by the govt.?

Finally, do you believe you will receive the medication you may need for a particular illness?


edit on 7/10/2012 by paxnatus because: typo

I think the question should be :

Do you believe a person should be treated based on need or the size of their wallet?

The US system believes the wallet is the driver. All other western economies believe its is need. Every non hypocritical christian will agree with Jesus Christ ie need not money.


ANother question that is applicable is that should people be forced to provide for the needs of others? Christ talked a lot about individual charity but nowhere did he mention that the State should force charity on others either.

Regardless, we are supposed to have a secular government so WWJD should have nothing to do with the decisions of our elected representatives or a government officials.


if you live in a modern society where YOU benefit from the work of others through the use of roads, trash pick up, money spent on programs to help develop the technology you use everyday etc.

then yes you should be forced to provide for the needs of others
now if you want to go live in the woods living off the sweat of your brow only using things you produce yourself then no you shouldnt be forced to help anyone else
and you should have that option.
but if that option was available would you take it? (i really .....really doubt you would)


I live in a modern society where we all benefit from the effort and labors of others in an exchange of goods and services. How is having an equitable exchange of goods and services with another free individual comparable to forced provision of the needs of others? Here is an interesting thought: those productive people who are keeping up our modern society are not those people who are demanding that the state forces others to provide for their needs and, being productive people, would not need government intervention to have their basic needs met. That is the definition of a productive person.



posted on Jul, 14 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by paxnatus
reply to post by paxnatus
 

Do you honestly believe doctors are going to treat patients for free.



My grandfather was a Doctor and he would turn in his grave at your ignorance. Do not presume to tar the nature of the Doctor with your agenda.



posted on Jul, 14 2012 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by PW229

Originally posted by paxnatus
reply to post by paxnatus
 

Do you honestly believe doctors are going to treat patients for free.



My grandfather was a Doctor and he would turn in his grave at your ignorance. Do not presume to tar the nature of the Doctor with your agenda.


I'm sorry but I do not understand. Your grandfather never took fee for service? How did he feed his family? Replace supplies. Even in the good old days of the country doctor, they still took fees, even if they were a chicken or a bag of potatoes or a few odd chores. Of course he treated some of the worst off for free but it was of his own violition and out of the kindness of his heart, not by some government mandate. He sounds like a good man.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Interesting people, my daughter is in her last semester of nursing, while she was doing her clinical yesterday at the main none profit hospital in the emergency room, she heard nurses telling new patients on Medicaid that if they didn't have a regular doctor (rather than going to emergency room) they need to get one now, before next year as they are to become scarce when it comes to taking new patients on Medicaid and Medicare.

Just my two cents here, my daughter figure out that it most be because the implementation of Obama care and this thread add more to the fact of what can happen in the next 2 years.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by sirhumperdink

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by yorkshirelad

Originally posted by paxnatus

I have a couple of questions for the ATS community:

Do you think doctors will be able to deliver adequate care to a patient based on time constraints, due to the overload of patients they will be expected to see?

Do you believe you will receive state of the art healthcare under Obama's govt. program?

Do you believe you will be in charge in deciding what procedures, test or surgeries you need or will that be mandated by the govt.?

Finally, do you believe you will receive the medication you may need for a particular illness?


edit on 7/10/2012 by paxnatus because: typo

I think the question should be :

Do you believe a person should be treated based on need or the size of their wallet?

The US system believes the wallet is the driver. All other western economies believe its is need. Every non hypocritical christian will agree with Jesus Christ ie need not money.


ANother question that is applicable is that should people be forced to provide for the needs of others? Christ talked a lot about individual charity but nowhere did he mention that the State should force charity on others either.

Regardless, we are supposed to have a secular government so WWJD should have nothing to do with the decisions of our elected representatives or a government officials.


if you live in a modern society where YOU benefit from the work of others through the use of roads, trash pick up, money spent on programs to help develop the technology you use everyday etc.

then yes you should be forced to provide for the needs of others
now if you want to go live in the woods living off the sweat of your brow only using things you produce yourself then no you shouldnt be forced to help anyone else
and you should have that option.
but if that option was available would you take it? (i really .....really doubt you would)


I live in a modern society where we all benefit from the effort and labors of others in an exchange of goods and services. How is having an equitable exchange of goods and services with another free individual comparable to forced provision of the needs of others? Here is an interesting thought: those productive people who are keeping up our modern society are not those people who are demanding that the state forces others to provide for their needs and, being productive people, would not need government intervention to have their basic needs met. That is the definition of a productive person.


ah i knew this was coming
think of it this way
are you a laborer? do you actually produce anything?
because the people that do are the people that need help the most (they tend to get paid the least)
and without these people there is no support for jobs for lawyers, most doctors, writers, designers, engineers.... etc...etc...etc
they are what prop up the entirety of our society and it is off their backs that the rest of us profit

on top of that if you are not laborer you are most likely selling goods or services and if the labor class cant afford to purchase your product or service the economy stagnates

it is the good for the rich and poor alike that we all be well taken care of and able to contribute to society
after all you cant squeeze blood from a turnip now can you?
edit on 15-7-2012 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by PrinceDreamer

Originally posted by paxnatus
when I made the statement "doctors were not gonna go for this, they will quit", to another poster in another thread I was accused of believing just as Sarah Palin did in the "death panels".

Here you have the results of a nonpartisan and unbiased survey. 83% of the doctors in this country are considering another career!! Now, we will face a massive shortage.


....

I have a couple of questions for the ATS community:

Do you think doctors will be able to deliver adequate care to a patient based on time constraints, due to the overload of patients they will be expected to see?

Do you believe you will receive state of the art healthcare under Obama's govt. program?

Do you believe you will be in charge in deciding what procedures, test or surgeries you need or will that be mandated by the govt.?

Finally, do you believe you will receive the medication you may need for a particular illness?

Thanks as always for your time,
Pax







edit on 7/10/2012 by paxnatus because: typo


And you think this is a true reflection of the medical profession in America? You political bias is very evident here, and this is just a typical partisan scaremongering tactic.




Do you think doctors will be able to deliver adequate care to a patient based on time constraints, due to the overload of patients they will be expected to see?


They coped before Obamacare so why shouldn't they cope after it? I mean people who need medical attention seek medical attention so what's the difference? OH You mean the people who were completely unable to afford medical care before, who had to suffer continually because the medical profession priced them out of the market. Guess doctors are going to be forced to keep their Hippocratic Oath, damn they treat people ethically and honestly, real shame for the doctors that...




Do you believe you will receive state of the art healthcare under Obama's govt. program?


If your worried about your care, then get your own insurance, you are not force to only use Obamacare, you can supplement as well, at least everyone has access to some medical care and wont be turn away from hospitals because they didn't have the "right" insurance




Do you believe you will be in charge in deciding what procedures, test or surgeries you need or will that be mandated by the govt.?


I should imagine it is exactly like now, but governments making the decisions of cost value rather than insurance companies making cost decisions, read the small print on your insurance policy, see how much they can screw you over




Finally, do you believe you will receive the medication you may need for a particular illness?


I think pretty much most people will get their medication, the more experimental ones will be not supported and the overly costly, but then big pharma should not be charging so much, I mean it is all well and good blaming the government but lets face it is the corporate greed of big pharma and the medical companies that have driven America to this point, the exorbitant costs for even basic care is making the insurance companies mega rich is just pricing the bottom 50% out of any sort of medical care.

If there is going to be a huge shortage of doctors, then get on teh back of that other big corporate industry that is killing America, the education system. Make it affordable for people to train as doctors, hell there is enough unemployment I am sure many would like the opportunity for a decent career



wow you said exactly what i was going to say>! !!



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by yorkshirelad

Originally posted by paxnatus

I have a couple of questions for the ATS community:

Do you think doctors will be able to deliver adequate care to a patient based on time constraints, due to the overload of patients they will be expected to see?

Do you believe you will receive state of the art healthcare under Obama's govt. program?

Do you believe you will be in charge in deciding what procedures, test or surgeries you need or will that be mandated by the govt.?

Finally, do you believe you will receive the medication you may need for a particular illness?


edit on 7/10/2012 by paxnatus because: typo

I think the question should be :

Do you believe a person should be treated based on need or the size of their wallet?

The US system believes the wallet is the driver. All other western economies believe its is need. Every non hypocritical christian will agree with Jesus Christ ie need not money.


ANother question that is applicable is that should people be forced to provide for the needs of others? Christ talked a lot about individual charity but nowhere did he mention that the State should force charity on others either.

Regardless, we are supposed to have a secular government so WWJD should have nothing to do with the decisions of our elected representatives or a government officials.



we we kinda pay for the needs of others already. I am single and my taxes go for public education. It also goes to fund the library and I never go. It goes to pave roads even the ones i do not drive on. SO I don't know how this is brand new. Before you say schools are crap.. well yeah they are it is working as intended to keep people dumb. The roads are so so. We pay taxes for the benefits of others all the time.

If you don't want to help others then leave society and make it on your own. Be the guy who provides you with water, electricity, the cable guy, the person who delivers your paper, the pizza guy, your mechanic, your doctor, your nurse, the factory guy who makes your ipods and things, the web designer that makes you webpage..

many of these jobs suck and pay nothing but they make your life better and you are pretty much saying screw you guys.. if you get sick and can't work i don't care I am not helping for you to get healthcare. I will still get all the things you help provide me with by healthy people who take your place and are smart enough to not get sick.

Something that bothers the hell out of me about employers and healthcare.

People spend 8+ hours a day at a job. 40hrs a week unless you are on of those low tier bastards who have mandatory OT whether salary or hourly. They spend more time at work than at home. So they wear and tear their body ON THE JOB WORKING FOR THE COMPANY....... yet employers shaft employees on healthcare any way they can... yet they keep maintenance on their equipment and vehicles... but not their employees..

wtf they care more about inanimate objects than people.

we have really warped mind ..

And those taxes I pay for roads, public school and the library have benefited me or someone i know. GOod roads keep my mother safe on a commute to work, the public school i went to was not so bad and lead me to college and a good career. The library at one point in time for college was a good quiet place for me to study or to supplement my collge library for my research. Someones tax dollars helped me have all those opportunities and my tax dollars are doing the same now for someonelse.

So how bad is it to help someone stay healthy??? why is it so wrong to help someone else?? If government has to step in it is because if we leave up to big business it is not going to happen. Th




edit on 16-7-2012 by votan because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-7-2012 by votan because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-7-2012 by votan because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-7-2012 by votan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by votan
 


Wow! it is not bad to help someone, however, it is pretty damn crappy to MAKE someone who can barely afford their own family have to carry another!!! These tax increases are going to be heaped upon the middle class, you know the hard working individual you were going on and on about!

I have an idea, since you think Obamacare is just dandy, and want to help others sooo much, why dont you write your congressmen and ask them why do they get a waiver to Obama care? or anyone in the administration and on capital hill? If obama care is going to save the economy, and is so wonderful why doesn't
the president and his looney tunes staff subscribe to it??? you doing that, would help many!



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join