I have proof Obamacare will ruin healthcare in America

page: 4
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Perhaps the OP should come and visit some of the UK hospitals, yes they are over worked but that because they can't charge £50 a tablet etc so you can have a playboy bunny at every bedside giving out martini's and sweetmeats and remember why we have socialist aka commy healthcare in the first place as it was due to in the last war a lot of people who needed basic medical care before they could be used as cannon fodder and with populations decimated by war and the cold war looming the last thing the governments wanted was people unable to fight due to basic and easily treated ailments should WW3 happen and also it had the added benefit of increasing tax revenue since sick people could now go back to work




posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   
I'm hopping by to offer this up where it may help. It'd be a shame after the work that went into it if it only saw light on the one thread it started in



In this case, specifically, I think the numbers I discovered all around show the decline and crash of the health care system started well before any modern events. I'm really trying to be an apolitical bunny for awhile and be happier for it but that observation seems safe enough to make in terms of this dating back to 1990 or even the early 80's for roots and origins.

Anyway, an earlier poster is right. Without insurance that is basically impossible to get if you may actually NEED some or anything. I don't mean an ambulance sign up, but just getting into that middle age range when mere check-ups wouldn't be a bad idea. Errr... Bad Cholesterol and Blood Pressure from 2 years ago. Neither of which are an issue after losing a career of bad habits and 45lbs since leaving the truck.

That matters not. The conditions have been a part of my symptoms at a time past and that's plenty. I could get insurance by paying outright....if I weren't a college student and made at least $50k a year to support the premiums on top of base monthly bills. Something has to be done...whatever it eventually becomes. This isn't working when being sick = total destruction in society.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxatoria
Perhaps the OP should come and visit some of the UK hospitals, yes they are over worked but that because they can't charge £50 a tablet etc so you can have a playboy bunny at every bedside giving out martini's and sweetmeats and remember why we have socialist aka commy healthcare in the first place as it was due to in the last war a lot of people who needed basic medical care before they could be used as cannon fodder and with populations decimated by war and the cold war looming the last thing the governments wanted was people unable to fight due to basic and easily treated ailments should WW3 happen and also it had the added benefit of increasing tax revenue since sick people could now go back to work


We reserve the right to pat $50 a tablet and lose our homes when nature takes it course!

Of course dying is good too



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


My point is Tricare isn't great. Most of the good Doctors in town won't touch a tricare patient with a 10 foot pole. I had to be nearly dying for the civilian hospital to take me in after 2 trips to the ER in 2 days because I was tricare, and would have died without admission. They did take me and I was appalled at what tricare paid them. If Obamacare pays like tricare, which the government says it will, then as more and more people get on it, the quality of care has to go drastically down for the doctors and hospitals to make ends meet.

We are now retired military, I spent a total of 50 years "in" the military as a dependent. Yes, it is socialism. We were told when and how short to cut our grass. What temperature to set our heat and a/c at, when we could turn on the heat or a/c. If we wanted something outside the prescribed temperature a MD had to send a letter to housing. We were told how often to water our lawns. We actually lived at one base who penalized people for having brown lawns and then sent out letters telling us to conserve water and specifying watering times (in the desert no less). This has become better since most of on base housing has become privatized.
We lived on one base where we had to use their phone and email service and were told in writing that all our calls and emails would be screened for this "free" service, that's socialism. We were forced to move, sometimes overseas to places that demonstrated against americans, yes I lived through that. It was move or split the family for years, what a choice, that's socialism. I spent most of my life in socialism, ie the military. When we got out after 32 years of service for my husband and 20 years of service for my dad, we had no equity and now in our late 50's are getting our 1st real mortgage. My dad died of complications of PTSD, and post vietnam issues. My hubby has 32 documented health problems from his time in the service, where to admit pain was to be ridiculed. I know a great deal about the military healthcare system and what socialized medicine is about and it's not a good thing. I actually had a base commander once tell me I had to go talk to a women who wanted to talk to me and I wanted nothing more than to ignore her and have her leave me alone and I wanted to leave her alone; when I went to her house as the commander told me I had to do, the witch called the police. That's socialism. You are right, and I am so glad to be free of that. My HMA (home owners association) seems like a dream compared to living on base. I am proud of my father and husband and they made the choice to be in the military and were proud of their service, both retiring as Colonel's, I am also grateful for the post military life benefits, but both men paid dearly for the post military benefits with their bodies, minds, and health. After spending over 50 years of my life "in" the military, I have a great deal of respect for it and am grateful for the positive benefits, but the socialist aspect was difficult and intrusive, but that's part of what we knew we were getting intol But this is off topic, sorry.

Any way, tricare (military healthcare) is socialism and for the majority of the time means never seeing the same Dr. twice, 10 minute or less visits, the best civilian doctors wanting nothing to do with you. So being forced to see doctors who will take the greatly reduced fees.

edit on 16-10-2012 by grandmakdw because: clarification to make it more readable and understandable



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Well i guess doing something is better than doing nothing at all. The way it is now is not working too many people have NO insurance and easily treatable illnesses are left untreated until the person becomes too sick to work so they go on social security disability for the rest of their lives and who pays for that? the tax payers do.

I would rather pay for them to have basic health care and be cured and back to work than to pay a lifetime of disability payments for them.

The government`s primary purpose is to provide for the general welfare of the people.It doesn`t make any sense to have a multi trillion dollar high tech military to protect a nation full of sick,obese and disabled people who can`t even take care of themselves.That`s like having a high tech security system to protect a barn full of cow manure, what`s the point?



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 

I'm sorry, where in the constitution or bill of rights does it say that it is governments responsibility provide for the general welfare of the American people. Please read both and quote where it says that.

Government's responsibility according to our constitution is to protect the citizens and defend them, not to be a daddy for them. Our government has greatly overreached, aside from protecting and defending citizens the rest is supposed to be left to the state governments, not the federal government.

God help us if government thinks it's responsibility to to provide for our general welfare. That's what the military does and look to my previous post and see what that's like.

People today don't want to "man up" and take care of themselves and their families, they want nanny Obama to do it for them. Being dependent on government for your healthcare means Michelle can come into your home and clean out your pantry of junk food if she wants to, in order to protect your health because "they" are responsible for it.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 

I'm sorry, where in the constitution or bill of rights does it say that it is governments responsibility provide for the general welfare of the American people. Please read both and quote where it says that.

Government's responsibility according to our constitution is to protect the citizens and defend them, not to be a daddy for them. Our government has greatly overreached, aside from protecting and defending citizens the rest is supposed to be left to the state governments, not the federal government.

God help us if government thinks it's responsibility to to provide for our general welfare. That's what the military does and look to my previous post and see what that's like.

People today don't want to "man up" and take care of themselves and their families, they want nanny Obama to do it for them. Being dependent on government for your healthcare means Michelle can come into your home and clean out your pantry of junk food if she wants to, in order to protect your health because "they" are responsible for it.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   
England hasn't had "Obamacare" for years.

If you think the English system is Obamacare, you're badly misinformed about one or the other.

England has a free healthcare system, available to all, at no charge to their citizens, fully funded by the Government.

If you weren't in the military, taking advantage of your Government provided healthcare plan (essentially the same as the English system - healthcare provided for free by the Government), I'd shudder to think what you would have paid for the level of healthcare that you were provided with in the United States.

You shouldn't criticize the English system of free Government provided healthcare, if you enjoyed your free stay in an American hospital courtesy of free Government provided healthcare, provided to the military.
edit on 16-10-2012 by babybunnies because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by grandmakdw
 


Funny, my Uncle was retired USN (WWII). My aunt and him had excellent care until they both died of old age. My uncle even had his hip replaced, and his colon cancer treated via tricare. No complaints, no waits.

I have to say though, we have a very new (built last 10 years) state-of-the-art military hospital.

My aunt even had a breast reduction in her 60's via the military hospital here. I guess her back was hurting? (not sure why and older woman would have that done...?)

I did notice that she had "new doctors" all the time though.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by grandmakdw
reply to post by Tardacus
 

I'm sorry, where in the constitution or bill of rights does it say that it is governments responsibility provide for the general welfare of the American people. Please read both and quote where it says that.

Government's responsibility according to our constitution is to protect the citizens and defend them, not to be a daddy for them. Our government has greatly overreached, aside from protecting and defending citizens the rest is supposed to be left to the state governments, not the federal government.

God help us if government thinks it's responsibility to to provide for our general welfare. That's what the military does and look to my previous post and see what that's like.

People today don't want to "man up" and take care of themselves and their families, they want nanny Obama to do it for them. Being dependent on government for your healthcare means Michelle can come into your home and clean out your pantry of junk food if she wants to, in order to protect your health because "they" are responsible for it.


In the preamble of the constitution it says that one of the purposes of creating a federal government is to:


We the people of the United States, in order to ... provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, ..do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


Ensuring that people have basic healthcare would certainly fall under " promoting the general welfare"

edit on 16-10-2012 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 04:33 PM
link   
lollllll, this OP is so misinformed.

It is sad this thread got 12 flags....isn't ATS supposed to deny ignorance? Not...promote it and mindless political party nonsense.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 


Promoting the general welfare is not the same as providing the general welfare

Look up the two words in the dictionary. They have 2 very different meanings.
Providing means giving it to you. Provide means being a nanny or daddy and giving it to you, a government handout.

Promoting means helping people get it for themselves, encourage people to do what is best for the general welfare, not to give stuff to people.

Providing for everyone means the person is totally dependent on the giver and the giver and put whatever strings they want on what is provided. i.e. You can not send a sandwich with your child to school, they must eat the government provided chicken nuggets because we don't know if your sandwich is nutritious enough. You can not drink over 16oz of coke at any meal because it is not good for your health.

Promoting means helping people to do for themselves and taking responsibility and taking pride in themselves.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by grandmakdw
 


Nationalized healthcare isn't a handout, the people pay for it in taxes. Healthcare is way too important for it to be privatized and only given to the people that can afford it.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by grandmakdw
 
The ignorance of Americans never ceases to amaze me. I'm sure the OP knows little to nothing about health care in other countries. I live in Canada and would never trade my health care for an American version, EVER. I pay a lifetime worth of taxes to the government so the least they can do is provide me with top notch health care.

In Canada, everyone gets the same quality of health care regardless of class. That's how it should be. Rich people shouldn't get better health care than the working poor. No one should have to worry about going bankrupt due to illness or injury.

People do not "starve" in hospitals in Canada and I'm pretty sure they don't in the UK either. The OP should know the facts before making statements that simply are not true. Some people might read what you say and think it IS true.

Americans don't even know what they were saying no to, when Obama wanted to bring in a more Canadian style health care to the US. It would have been the best thing the government has done for your country in a very long time. It actually blew me away to see people protesting against it. Stupid people.

edit on 16-10-2012 by Darkmask because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by grandmakdw
 


Since when has the UK/England (England is in the UK by the way) had socialist hospitals???????

You can google and find cases where there have been issues, you can google that for any country and you will come back with the headline stories that are the ones the make the news. They are the exceptions that people see as the norm here - you clearly make that the case. Myself and two members of my immediate family have either been tested or received treatment in English hospitals with nothing but five star treatment. Others may receive differently, but not sure it's a national issue - not sure what your agenda is apart from (yawn) America is better.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 07:53 PM
link   
The way I look at it, hospitals are going to start feeling a lot more like the dmv. Loooong lines no matter when. Workers there have no real desire to help you in any way. Hospitals will close at 4:30p on weekdays.

Take a number.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Well the point is that something needs to be done. Bush was in office EIGHT years, and what did he do for healthcare in America? Absolutely nothing. At least Obama is trying to do something for those millions of people who do not have health insurance. While the other side does not mind leaving things they way they are, with hospitals basically owning anyone who gets sick and is taken to the hospital. I would rather give up some of the comforts available in hospitals, as long as the treatment remained the same, to allow others to receive care and not have their whole financial lives ruined because they do not have insurance.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by grandmakdw
 


Please email the proof to Dumbass@whitehouse.gov ......... I mean B.Obama@Whitehouse.gov



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 10:57 PM
link   
reply to post by grandmakdw
 





Oh you are so wrong. There will be a government sponsored insurance program. We on the military insurance have been told that our insurance will be merged with the new government sponsored insurance program.


News Flash !




My insurance is the military health insurance which pays the same as medicare, and will be merged


you are already are on Government Health Insurance.. & you seem to like it.

who do you think pays the Military?



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   
I'm a Canadian and as flawed as our healthcare system can be, I would never, ever give it up for the system the US currently has. It is as sickening as those "bedsores".

"Obamacare" might not be perfect, but at least it is a step in the right direction.





top topics
 
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join