I personally do not agree. If I don't want health care, I do not see why I have to get it. To me, Obama is taking radical steps to government take over. I am afraid that soon we will have a one world order. When that happens, we are screwed. Truely and utterly screwed. Do you agree, or was the bill a good thing?

And don't get into some fight or call me an idiot or blah blah blah! Please.

Personally, I think Obama is going to be blown up while in office. Not by me, but many kids in my school talk about it, and we are going to DC in April...

Has anyone actually read the five thousand pages of the actual bill?

I voted yes. It is desperately needed, as with 30+ million uninsured and spiralling insurance costs for more folks (from all classes), something had to be done. Everything that deals with infrastructure is already regulated/provided by the government, but protecting the citizens' health somehow fell out of that boat -- that's just plain stupid and it's a disgrace that the representatives of the people let this situation fester for so long. (Probably another example of malicious lobbying against the interests of the people).

It's wait-and-see on how it'll play out, but I'm pretty certain that private insurers are now thinking about how they can just go flatout for profit and try to get as much money as possible from that public institution (putting penalties on dealing with those who are publicly insured, for example, or chosing litigation each time instead of settlements) so it may be a while before the system balances out.

I would have liked the introduction of an opt-out register on this one, that allows people to register if they want to be denied the public option for the rest of their lives. Having seen the filth that those 'tea party' folks came up with: racial stuff, abuse, general ignorance, ..., incited by rightwing media (aka Murdoch's cruel joke on Americans), I would've liked a nice 'let's see if you mean what you say' register to help natural selection a bit. But I guess that would've gone against the idea of the proposal that the poor/weak have the right to protect themselves against misfortune, uninsured folks *, and greedy company cartels.

* I saw little mention of the fact that offering the uninsured an option to get insured, also protects the insured from rising insurance costs if they happen to run into an ordeal with an uninsured person. Insurance companies have to recuperate their costs somehow.

Ive voted yes as i think everyone no matter where they live should be able to get treatment not only the ppl that can afford it its something that a lot ppl from the UK take for granted

Not a single person I know are happy about the bill. I don't like the manner in which it came about, if Louisiana wants an extra $300 million dollars for medicaid, they they alone should have to pay the taxes to pay for it(same goes for the $100 million that they gave Nebraska). I am kind of irate that people in my state get less but have to pay more because some politicians held their votes hostage until they got what they wanted, which was special treatment for their states. I think the fact that they did that undermines the whole process. I mean, the goverment literally bought their vote, there ought to be a law against that somewhere. I don't know, I feel like I fell through the cracks on this one. I am at an age where my parents don't have to still cover me, but I can't really afford to purchase the insurance. To receive the money that the bill says will be paid back to those not making more than 400% of poverty will probably be a tax credit, in which case I will probably lose the roof over my head before I get said money thats supposed to help pay for it. So anyways, I voted no because I don't believe that this is the right move and I don't believe it was done the right way.

Everybody is already able to get treatment. It just a matter of whether or not you have insurance or what your insurance policy is that determines how much it is going to cost. If I choose to not have insurance and go without seeing the doctor for something that needs to be treated, then that is my choice.

I really feel that with everybody having insurance you will see a rise in Munchausen syndrome. Everybody will be wanting to go to the doctor because they think that something is wrong with them.

-Universal Health Care - Scene 1 Script
loosely based on Charles Dickens - Christmas Carol

Scene: Mr. Blue-Collar Worker is leaving his place of employment where he works to contribute every day to his health insurance. All the sudden he is bombarded by two law men.

First Law Man: At this time, Mr. Collar, it is more than usually desirable that we pass a law that gives those who will not work Health insurance.

Blue Collar: Are there no jobs at McDonald's?

First Law Man: McDonald's is hiring sir

Blue Collar: And does McDonald's still offer decent health insurance for cheap?

First Law Man: They do sir

Blue Collar: Oh, from what you said at first I was afraid that something had happened so that people couldn't get a job and pay for insurance.

First Law Man: I don't think you quite understand us, sir. The jobs at McDonald's are all taken by illegal immigrants

Blue Collar: That must be because we have no border security sir and we let millions of undocumented people enter our country. Those people should not be able to leech off of our system. We should be focusing on fixing systems like border security to get Americans back into American jobs.

Second Law Man: Do you wish to put down a yes vote?

Blue Collar: No!

Second Law Man: What if we make your Yes vote as Anonymous

Blue Collar: I wish that this government would stop increasing the debt that I pay for and my Children will have to pay for. Since you ask me what I wish sir, that is my answer. I help to support the fast food restaurants by eating there. Those establishments have more then enough money to subsidize decent insurance and THEY DO. Those who need insurance should get a job there.

First Law Man: Many won't go there because it's not glamorous work.

Second Law Man: And others can not because they have chosen a life of drugs and prostitution. But those people still need health insurance sir.

Blue Collar: Then that is their choice. Stop forcing me and my children to support those that will not help themselves

-Writers Notes-

I realize this note may make me seem like a cold bastard and you may never think of me the same. But I need you to understand where I am coming from. I have worked at McDonald's and I know for a fact they do offer pretty damn good insurance for cheap.

I feel this bill could be a good thing for those that:

• Have contributed to society
• Seniro Citizens who need a littel extra help
• Those who have served the country and can not get a job due to serious health reasons
• Those who have a job but are waiting for insurance to kick in
• If you got fired and need SHORT term coverage while you find a new job

But, this law was not designed for those people who contribute to society. It was designed to help those who will not / have not done anything to contribute. The "Americans with out insurance" are nothing more then illegal immigrants or those who chose life paths they are also illegal.

I feel there are other things this country needs to focus on like making it possible for Americans to get work. Lets focus on getting those people who are on drugs off of drugs so they can work for their insurance. Lets focus on getting the illegals out of this country so that Americans can get work.

Many years ago I was working and I tried to go to college. I didn't have any money to pay for college so I applied for FAFSA. Even though I didn't have any money, all they looked at was that I "made enough" to pay for my own. They didn't take into consideration my bills. All they saw was the figure. Even though I was a contributing member of society, a tax paying citizen, I couldn't collect on the services that I was paying for. I guess that's why I am bitter about the passing of this health bill because I know that people who don't do anything will be able to get support easier then me.

This is not about there being no jobs so that people can't get insurance. There ARE JOBS. They may not be glamorous jobs but you need to buckle down and do something for yourself.

Ultimately I guess I wouldn't complain if I knew this system would work. But frankly I'm a contributing member of society and I simply don't feel that this system will be there for me if I ever need it.

A few points about why we need this

Who are the uninsured?

Drug addicts that don't work? No they qualify for welfare, and generally take advantage of it.

Single mothers who irresponsibly had a bunch of kids with no way of supporting them? No they qualify for welfare as well.

So it seems that we already take care of those who can't or won't work by providing them full health care, food stamps, cash assistance, section 8 housing, free lunch and breakfast programs at school, and daycare.

Illegal immigrants have never qualified for assistance but we have been paying for their health care already (back to this in a moment)

The bulk of the uninsured in this country have jobs, low paying jobs that don't offer benefits but pay just enough for these folks not to qualify for health care. While McDonald's might have good benefits most small businesses don't.
I know a woman who has 2 kids and makes $11 an hour, she complained a few times how she makes just a bit to much for assistance but after she pays
$500 a month rent (cheap any where here)
$300 a month in utilities
$250 for insurance and gas for the car she has to have because public transportation is a joke
$300 for food (if you can feed 3 people a healthy diet for less, let us know how)
$250 a month left for all the other needs her and her children have like
car maintenance and repair
Shoes and clothing
Sanitary needs and necessities
Over the counter medical needs which are higher when you don't see the doctor but in an emergency
Day Care because even though she does qualify for that program the more you make the less they pay so in
her case the state picks up 25%

Can she afford to pay for a private insurance policy, maybe if she stops feeding her kids.

And mind you this is a woman doing the honorable thing and choosing to work when she could easily fudge up and live better on welfare.

If some one doesn't have health insurance they are billed at the highest rate as both medicaid and private insurance companies get huge discounts. They pay an average of 40% more for the same office visits and procedures.

Now take these same Uninsured Working Americans and lump them together with also Working Illegal Immigrants. When they get sick they can not afford a high priced doctors visit (payment due at time of service) because, face it, they are just scrapping by, so they go to the only place that has to treat them whether they have the money or not, The County Hospital Emergency Room. Now every one knows the ER rates are severely higher than a doctors office visit these folks couldn't afford. So a couple hundred dollar illness just became a couple thousand dollar illness which they can't afford to pay.

So when these people can't pay these big bills who do you think pays it? d you think the doctor and Nurses don't get paid, or the Hospitals utilities and suppliers say that's OK you don't owe us because you weren't paid.
We (the people) pay by way of our tax money when these hospitals that are owned or subsidized by the local, state, and federal governments file these claims as a loss on their taxes.

We have been paying for them all along at full uninsured prices, if we are going to pay any ways we might as well get them signed up into medicaid and save ourselves 40%. Now consider the savings to the tax payer if these people had access to decent preventive care.

If your problem with the bill is the cost,then you should support full government control of health care, its better to have every one in strictly controlled and managed health care. Just like your car or house the expense of diligent maintenance is far cheaper in the long run. So I never have understood Conservatives knee jerk reaction to government control of social problems, just leads me to believe all they spout to the people is just a front for a bunch of greedy S.O.B.'s getting rich at our misfortune.

If you really, truthfully want to cut the costs of health care in general and save millions on Medicaid then use the laws on the books to fight the $2 billion a year in medicaid fraud.

Legalize marijuana, that save $11 billion a year that the government spends on prohibition directly, god knows how many billions on prosecuting and jailing people for possession and pull in an estimated nation wide $10 billion in tax revenue from the sale of a dried cut flower. Not to mention the economic boom from the cultivation of this flower in our farm communities, but also the growth of the hemp industry and yet more tax revenue. Then when you consider the savings in medical costs for conditions caused by the medication people were prescribed for other conditions that could be treated by marijuana, which doesn't have the side affects of these other toxic drugs... It all adds up to more than $40 BILLION A YEAR that we could use to fund social programs. Just from weed folks.

Here is a link to a very in depth article on the possible revenue and tax on marijuana when prohibition ends. Potential tax revenue from from a regulated marijuana market: a meaningful revenue source

If you really, truthfully want to do some thing for your nation lynch a lobbyist today.

This is what I mean. And to me, you don't sound like a cold hearted bastard. People like, for example, the octo-mom. COME ON! "Knock me up with 8 kids, let's see what happens!" I mean, really. We pay for the stupid stuff people like this do.

@ PH8AL: That's not the kind of people I mean. If it didn't force you to get it, It would be better. I completely uderstand your point about that woman. BUT there are those people on drugs and prostitutes and everything. WE pay for that! I might not follow the news like its sports, or get involved in politics (personally I couldn't give a rat's ass what this politician said and blah blah), but this affects us all! And our children and grand children and however far you want to look into the future! This country is no longer "one nation under God". We do not live by the law of the land where everything is equal and fair, but by the law of the jungle were the strong devour the weak. When Obama is done, there wil be no Middle Class. You will be really rich or really poor. There will be no in between.

~your outspoken Darksider,
Nicki

We already cover the people you are talking about, drug dealers and prostitutes and this Bill won't affect that. a prostitute most likely has a few unplanned kids and an income she can't claim so is already eligible for welfare as are most drug addicts that are known drug addict because they are unemployable due to their "disease"

We take care of these people because it is proven cheaper and better for society if we just pay now than deal with the social backlash if we don't.

The people this Bill gives Health Care Coverage to are the working poor like the woman I used as an example and is only giving them health care when we should be adjusting the income levels set to qualify for welfare to give these folks other benefits that would greatly improve their lives and ability to compete and live in society.

The cost, the cost you always here from conservatives about the cost of this or the cost of that. I have already stated how paying to insure these people and giving them access to preventative care is cheaper than doing things the way we have been.

But we can talk about cost, how about the cost of the failed drug war. Other nations have proven its far cheaper to treat this as a social matter not a criminal matter. Prohibition creates a black market and a higher consumption rate. Both of which cost us money. We spend $11 billion dollars a year to fight marijuana and that figure doesn't include the price of convicting and housing drug addicts, drug dealers, drug traffickers, and pot smokers, smokers, dealers and traffickers.

Quote from the CCR song "Bootleg Bootleg" "Take you a glass of water n make it against the law, see how sweet that water tastes when you can't have any at all" need we talk more about how prohibition cause higher use especially amongst the young?

How about war spending.

Or government funding for "scientist" doing junk science on our dime like trying to prove creationism.

Pork projects for states like the bridge to nowhere.

Or maybe the Billions of dollars we spend in aid for other nations, I believe in helping others, but I also believe in making sure my own are taken care of first.

Maybe a closer look at the real things that are running our country into debt that our grandchildren will be paying and you will see the amount of money this might cost over all the savings it will bring are just a drop in the bucket to our real issues.

Just a little note about the state-specific payola that are in the main Bill: I believe there is a follow-up Bill lined up to take those things out again. But in the grand scheme of the budget, even 100s of millions are pretty small figures anyway

I have been following this debate for sometime and have time and time again been absolutely amazed at the total heartlessness of some (read heavily conservative) American's.

Time and time again I see the worries of a 'big' government encroaching on the so called 'liberties' of the people. I hear time and time again about how it is 'unfair' to force people who earn over $200,000 to pay additional subsidies.

It stagger's belief that some American's feel hum bridged for 'paying for someone's medical bills' and the boogie word of socialism rears it's ugly head.

Is giving health care to everyone at a minor expense to all really that bad? Is working together as a society to make sure that everyone has access to medical care really that bad?

We are talking about human beings after all, flesh and blood like all of us, who would be left to die by people who don't care. Think if it was you and you needed chemotherapy, or a heart by-pass but had no insurance.

It staggers my belief that we would let someone DIE because you don't feel that it is your obligation.

I'm going to be really mean and play Devil's Advocate.

Is death wrong?

And at what point did it become someone's obligation to care for you?

What amazes me is the assumptions people make about the "unwritten social contract," and what someone owes someone else.

I see your point, in business, industry and life in general there is no obligation for aid and that there is no real social contract.

But my personal morals lend themselves to a belief that an education and access to a healthcare professional are essential to the functioning of a modern society.

Would you punish a child because their parents can't afford healthcare?

Would you justify the refusal for treatment for someone who had insurance, but had their policy canceled?

Now you're touching on some age-old adages.

I don't think your first question is valid as most states, I believe, provide free medical insurance to minors if their parents can't afford it.

Now for you justification. Some people might decline treatment for those who do not have insurance, but it goes back to someone not adhering to expectations of another. It is along the same lines as punishing your child for not getting good grades. You want them to adhere to your expectation and the hospital want you to adhere to theirs. I would think adherence to anyone's expectation other than your own is a path of misery and powerlessness, but that's just me.

You can't tackle this one with Philosophy.

States only pay for minors health care when their parents qualify for for medicaid. There are Millions of children in this country who's parents work and can not afford health care.

The cold hard fact is that our Tax Money is already paying for these peoples health care when they show up at the ER with no way to pay the bill. So we don't really have a choice unless you would prefer closing county hospitals or allowing hospitals owned or subsidized by the government to refuse treatment.

As a moral person I feel responsible for those in my community who can not do for themselves, if you are a christian, jew or muslim your religion demands that you take responsibility for them.

What tax money is that, considering your income tax goes to pay the interest on the national debt, not social programs?

There are many ways to fix the health care we have with legal reform, Plans were put on the table and refused by this current administration, no one is denying the fact we need reform, but complete take over of 1/6 of theeconomy is not constitutional. All history has shown that there has been failure to every program run by the government. Social security broke, medicare and medicaid broke, fanny mea and freddy mac broke, You must be careful how you tread on this issue, you do not want the government controlling your health care, if we are broke now imagine adding 35 million more with no jobs, and no citizenship to pay taxes. We must be creating jobs, tax credits to small business, tax cuts to the middle class, We as a free country with awsom thinkers and innovators can figure out a better way to do this, we will be broke and can not afford to sustain the currant administrations outragous spending.



everyone has access to medical care,citizens or not, the real problem waste, that needs to be fixed, there needs to be tort reform, there is no tort reform in this current bill, Dr's will still have to practice on the defense, Why did the premiere of Canada come to Florida for heart surgery, why do Canadians come here for health care. We need reform but not at the expense of big government, in 200 years we have become the strongest nation the only reason why the other leaders of the other communist nations want to see this happen is so they see us fail this country is the last of the free, our founding forfathers fought to be free from englands rule, the premiums will continue to go up just wait till a fixed tax come can you imagine paying 50% of what you earn to the government think of that.

Whilst I cannot fault your reasoning over the governmental failings, your thought on the 35 million not paying taxes is flawed.

From what I understand the people on social security in your country are medically covered. It is those working poorly paid jobs with little or no benefits that are suffering from having no insurance.



Why would the government take 50% of your pay? The UK has universal healthcare and I only pay 20% tax, This is just the same scaremongering I have encountered on the Fox 'newz' network. In fact isn't your government proposing a 2.5% increase on premiums?

There is some paranoia and flag waving going on here, and it is the same debate I see everywhere else on the internet. I don't recall the only remaining communist nation on earth (china) saying anything about health care reform in the U.S, and the other countries in the world with a socialized health care system are not 'communists'.

are system is broke. are government is broken, the united states has a document that says the government can not force this will on their people. The united states is suppose to honor their constitution, the current administration went against it and in our country that is illegal. They already take 29% of my pay and thats with out health care, I have to pay extra for that. policy premiums are high but lawyers sue and illegals get free care because we deny no one here. If you only pay 20% lucky you. If I want socialized medicine I will live where they have it. (no Offense) We are are divided here, not good. Its not fox news, people here are angry at their leaders. Our insurance companies are heavily mandated by state and federal laws, they can only profit like nothing. I do not want someone telling me what I can or can not do with my health care, called me spoiled

as for the 35million that is what we are going to insure, and we have high unemployment and millions of non us citizens who don't pay taxes will receive free health care on an already broke system





BTW Cuba can be added with China on communists I did not man to offend Castro hails Obama thats the country i was talking about.

this is taken from Executive Order 13457 of January 29, 2008



statutory criteria in this refers to a statutory source, more specifically for my point, the healthcare bill

so therefore I have come to the opinion that when they agreed to add in the money for Louisiana and Nebraska, they would of had to of had some sort of oral or written contact to know what it took to get the votes of those politicians. Therefore, they have violated Executive Order 13457 to get the bill passed.

Im not going to bother with the big quote boxes

Lao Tzu,
I was active with the Michigan Militia from 1994-1998, they recruited my right out of the Gladiator School so I know exactly what you are saying about the Fed taxes and agree to a point. But a look at my pay stub from last week will shed some light on it
$936 gross
$61 FICA
$79 Soc Sec and Medicaid
$19 State

17% in taxes

50% of my payroll taxes directly supports social programs

12% of my taxes go to my State

So I pay less than half my payroll taxes to the interest on the national debt (by the way, right or wrong our elected officials spent that money so we do owe it)

The way we pay for the uninsured is the debt they leave at the County Hospital which is always in the red due to all the patients that can not pay and are uninsured. Where does the extra money come from to keep the hospital solvent, you guessed it, State and Local tax money along with what money trickles down from the FED
Here is a look at my State and Local taxes annually
$2028 in sales tax (5% on every thing including food, and I usually spend my entire net)
$988 payroll tax
$313 cigarette tax (1 1/2 packs a day at $.57 a pack tax /2 smokers)
$2190 gas tax ($.40 on the dollar $15 a day average fuel use both cars)
$3000 a year in property taxes
0 on alcohol tax as I don't drink
Im sure Im missing some like the 1% tax local tax on prepared food (I spend to much eating out so won't even try to add that one up)

$8519 total yearly State and Local taxes This money is supposed to fund schools and roads and what not but a huge chunk is being used to pay off the debt of these uninsured people in my community while I have to drive around pot holes and my kid's bus breaks down once a month and the schools are always begging for more money.

My yearly Fed Taxes are
$7280

None of this takes into account my wife's income which is slightly higher than mine (we file married but filing separate)

Now that we have dealt with the State and Local lets think about the hidden revenue for the fed that is already in the price of goods. Import tax and tariffs, use fees, regulatory fees... this is the money that really funds the government since our payroll tax goes to the national debt.

How much of this money ends up making up the difference in State Budgets that fall short because of social ills like uninsured patients? My state got over $700 million in just the stimulus money last year on top of all the other money we usually receive. We spent that money on teachers police officers and our health care system (which is supposed to make a profit not a loss)

wh2gbs

Lets take a look at these "Illegal Aliens" who don't pay for anything but get all this stuff from us because we deny no one.

I think we can agree that the motivation for them to come here is jobs and most do work.
I work in Construction and see these people daily on a person to person level not as some vaguely defined group.

They do pay, in a lot of cases they pay more than the average. Lets make a list of what they pay in taxes

Property taxes, their landlord pays property taxes on the rental out of the rent they pay

Sales tax

Sin taxes

Fuel taxes

All the Fed and state taxes figured into the price of goods and services (including utilities)

State and Federal payroll taxes, those who have fake Soc Sec cards or give a fake number pay just like you but don't file a return at the end of the year.

Employers who pay their illegal and legal help cash, the easiest way for them to stay out of trouble is to claim the money as their own income and pay taxes on it. I have worked for a couple of companies that do this.

Now the myth that they live on beans and rice and send all their money back to Mexico, that is strait bunk, look around you they spend their money, and even if some do send it all back and those that send some, the easiest way is Western Union and there are Fed Fees on that to.

Now what do we give them in return? Not much but grief.


Lastly and pointed at no one in particular as it seems to be a common misconception.
The 20-40 million (as no one really agrees on the exact number) of people that will get health care thanks to this Bill.

THESE ARE NOT UNEMPLOYED OR DISABLED DREGS OF SOCIETY!

I already pay 50% of my payroll taxes to take care of those unfortunate souls.

They are the working poor and their children who pull themselves up by their boot straps every day and go out and work for next to nothing yet pay the highest average tax by percentage of income. I pay more in taxes than most of these folks make gross but am fully for paying a little more if need be, but that is not the need as this will be offset by the savings it will produce.

It would be easier for most of them to just quit and live a better, healthier life on welfare, but they don't, they get up every day and go on with it.


As for the legality of this Bill, it has been processed the same way as every other Bill so the true problem of the Constitutionality is across the board and is a far bigger issue than this one Bill.
While I am in favor of this Bill I see it as the "PORK" is something we have to deal with in this case until we take care of that problem, but it doesn't constitute a reason for not insuring these people.

IN MY OPINION if you live in a community and society and you see your neighbor struggling unfairly just to survive and you not only choose not to personally help them but to use the law to further hinder them, then you are a "Cold Heartless Bastard" and the Universe will square up with you sooner or later.

People who believe that health care is a right instead of a privilege embrace a fundamental principle of Marxism.

This philosophy is built on the idea that workers are the source of productivity and must not be exploited by kings or capitalists; that workers must control their own destiny. This is the foundation of socialism. The Democrat Socialists of America admit that:
We are not a separate party. Like our friends and allies in the feminist, labor, civil rights, religious and community-organizing movements, many of us have been active in the Democratic Party. We work with those movements to strengthen the party's left wing, represented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

This belief system, articulated eloquently by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in their Communist Manifesto, envisions the perfect society to be one in which everyone shares equally in work and wealth, coordinated by a hierarchy of representatives chosen from the workers. The Democratic Party considers its leaders to be that hierarchy, empowered to do whatever it takes to redistribute society's wealth more equitably.

Who's getting richer under the Obama regime? Find out in "Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses"

Despite the ridicule and denials that spew forth from the Democrats, the enactment of Obamacare is a victory for Marxism in the United States, recognized and publicly acknowledged by Al Sharpton. What Democrats have done is absolutely consistent with Marxism; the way it was done provides a course in this Marxist principle: The end justifies the means.

Marxists, Socialists, Communists and Democrats have been trying for most of the century to advance a Marxist agenda. Woodrow Wilson implemented two major Marxist principles: the central bank and the income tax.

Germany, in particular, and Europe in general, were much more successful in advancing a Marxist agenda, including universal health care. The influence of Marx and Engels, and other collectivists, was much greater in Europe than in the United States early in the 20th century.

Franklin Roosevelt pushed the Marxist agenda quite hard and was partially successful. Social Security, enacted in 1935, was a major step. While the goal of creating a mechanism to ensure that senior citizens had retirement income was laudable, the Marxist notion that government could do it better than free enterprise condemned the program to constant shortfalls, ever-increasing taxes and eventual failure. How much better would it be now, if Congress in 1935 had chosen to simply allow the creation of individual retirement accounts in which untaxed principle and interest would be the property of the citizen for use after retirement?

Roosevelt and the Democrats believed the time was right in 1943 to introduce the first real legislation to create a universal health-care system. A bill, known as the Wagner-Murray-Dingell Bill (H.R. 2861), launched a congressional debate that continued until the 1964 election of Lyndon Johnson. He brought an overwhelming majority of Democrats to Washington: 66 to 34 in the Senate and 295 to 140 in the House.

Medicare and Medicaid were highlights of his "Great Society" in 1965. Originally, the plan cost each beneficiary $3 per month. In 2009, Medicare Part A cost 2.9 percent of payroll, and Part B cost $96.40 per month. This program, combined with Social Security shortfalls, faces unfunded liabilities totaling $106.8 trillion – that's TRILLION with a capital T. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that to meet this liability, the range of income-tax rates will have to increase from the current 10 to 35 percent, to 26 to 92 percent.

Marxists, Socialists, Communists and Democrats are unfazed by this reality. They believe it is their moral duty to take whatever is necessary from the rich, to give to the poor whatever they consider to be a civil right. Like Marxists around the world, Democrats have always believed that universal health care is a right, not a privilege. Just as the cost of Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid have exploded way beyond the projections promised at the time of enactment, the real cost of Obamacare will make a mockery of the published estimates. Democrats couldn't care less because, like all Marxists, they believe in the second principle from the Communist Manifesto: that government should impose "a heavy progressive or graduated income tax" to pay the costs of their agenda.


The Marxist agenda being advanced by the current Washington majority will not stop with Obamacare. Another principle from the Manifesto is the "centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the state." The new push to create a federal ID card is the means toward controlling transportation, and Obama's choice for the FCC diversity czar, Mark Lloyd, is on the record supporting the Marxist principle of government-controlled communications.

The first principle of the Communist Manifesto, the abolition of private property, has been high on the Democrats' priority list for most of the century. They continue to use tax dollars to buy private property when necessary, take it whenever possible, or control it through regulations when all else fails.

Passage of Obamacare is the most dramatic step forward for the Marxist agenda in more than a generation. It must be undone. The U.S. Constitution does not authorize the federal government to force people to purchase insurance – unless the people allow it. The people must not allow it. This Marxist agenda must be stopped, and the only way to stop it is to remove the Marxist advocates from Congress and the White House.

@ stinkbug

If you would take a moment to look at the rules for Banana Republic, you would see:


If you are merely going to copy & paste huge swathes of text from another source (in the instance of your last post that source being this web-page) please say why you are doing so by indicating why you think the facts/opinions presented on that page have a bearing on any discussion here.
Otherwise you are basically just spamming a debate topic.

So, is Obama a filthy capitalist pig, an evil socialist, or a simpleton communist? Your post paints him in all 3 lights, which are completely at odds with each other.

You are wrong about Marx as well, one of the 3 main tenants of Marxism is that there will be no government.

Here in brief are the 3 main tenants of Marxism... (working from memory here, any Marxists here want to clarify, please do)
1.There will be no Government or controlling body. If something has to be done for the benefit of all, people will step up and just do it.
2.There will be no private ownership. Everything is owned by every one, if you have a need then take what you need.
3.There will be no religion. Marx viewed religion as a means for the rich to pacify the poor with the promise of riches in the after life.

Marxism is an Utopian society that fails on the face of it because of human nature. It relies on people to be at their best.

This is were Communism comes in, the realization that human nature needs to be tweaked, so an interim Communist Government needs to be set up to keep order while people are re educated.

Example- We institute Marxism today, I go and toil every day doing my part for the community and human nature being what it is my neighbor will only do the least he has to. How can I keep working and doing my fare share while I see my neighbor doing far less and still reaping the same reward?

Who is wrong here, well the truth is both of us, human nature is undermining us both, the neighbor for laziness and myself for envy that leads to hard feelings for my neighbor.

So we give power to this Interim Communist Government to strip all wealth and enforce a fair share of work until the people have reached the point that they have over come human nature and are ready to live in this Utopia.

Problem 1. Its called Human Nature for a very good reason.

Problem 2. "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" When it comes time for the Interim Government to be dissolved (which it never will, see problem 1) what is there to make these people in power give up that power as they are slaves to human nature as much as the rest of us.

To often people throw these different titles around with out understanding them and use them interchangeably.

Communism takes Marx's unattainable utopia and institutes a governing body of law ruling over a classless society. Also a nonstarter (see problem 2) and is not socialism by definition.


In the west we have been brow beat and brainwashed into fearing Communism as the enemy of Democracy, when some simple research of history shows Communism rose in opposition to Fascism not Democracy.

Nothing like finding out that you and your enemy are actually on the same side as Democracy and Fascism are at complete odds with each other while Communism and Democracy could be seamlessly blended.

Meaning a classless, ownership less society with an elected government of the people with a strong core belief in the right of the people to keep and bare arms. The last part is the only way to offset human nature and prevent Tyranny and balance the economic forces of Capitalism and Socialism.

The "Communist States" really aren't communists they are dictatorships. The Peoples Revolution that created the Soviet Union failed and fell into tyranny almost immediately yet still claimed to be Communism with a lot of lip service to the "people" and communal ownership while these dictators used the flaws in communism to control access to the communal property, ie control of everything.

These dictatorships parading as communism are actually far closer to the dark age style fiefdoms such as the Tzars and Emperors they ousted. (USSR and China)

Capitalism and socialism are not modes of government, they are in fact competing economic models.

They are the extreme opposites of each other, yin and yen. As with any polar opposites balance is found half way between them. Each have their good and bad. Pure socialism strips you of everything and pure capitalism leads to the disenfranchisement of the majority.

If you can not understand the need for balance, well we lost you some time ago.

Now back to the present and a case of 2 more polar opposites. Democrats and Republicans. I am an independent, I don't follow either party line but give consideration to both points of view and make my own mind up on which side I think better serves society. In my country this actually makes me a radical (it fits, see the definition of free radicals, sorry, physics joke) even though the majority of people in both parties would find themselves in my political camp if they would stop letting the extremes of their party whip them into a fervor with party rhetoric.

The far left are economically socialists and politically communists, the far right are economically capitalist and politically fascists.

This shows in the lefts goals of spreading the power as broadly among the people as possible while the rights goal is to centralize power as much as possible preferable down to just a few.

A closer look at the debate over "big government" proves this theory.

Now back to Stinkbugs post, the way you throw these terms about and the constant twists on Obama's name lead me to believe your entire post is cut and paste NeoCon rhetoric lifted right off of right wing blogs.

While I agree with some of the core beliefs of the the conservatives such as gun rights, abortion, and states rights, I disagree with almost every other view they hold and even on abortion I'm split as I do consider it murder, BUT, I would not condemn a woman to birthing and raising a child conceived by rape or incest.

The thing that really bothers me about the extreme right is they are fear mongers, while I will concede that the left uses fear as well it is no where near the level that of the NeoCons who make it their first choice in almost any debate. Which by the way also points out one of the biggest problems with democracy, people are free to be as ignorant as they wish, which is on par with apathy in my opinion.

This fear mongering and preying upon ignorance is also why you see so many poor, uneducated, white Americans drawn in by the NeoCons and why the States that are the most Red are also the states that were left to dissolution and economic ruin after the Civil war, failed society with failed schools. By the way that is also what led to segregation and the rise of an other group of fear mongers, the KKK, who touted that if blacks were treated equally white women would father mixed children and White America would cease to exist. They were right by the way as my lovely wife, the daughter of a black man and white woman is proof. But that is its own debate.

You ever wonder why the Christians in this country flock to the right when the teachings of Jesus would lead them toward the left? Its not the wedge issue of abortion, that is simply the tool of the fear mongers.
It is because the Christianity of today is not a path of enlightenment that Jesus laid out for us, it is the corruption of fear mongers that led to the dark ages. Fear mongering is at the heart of it. (Hell, the Devil, the Infidel)

Side Note
If any one would like to start a separate debate with me on Christianity's History and Doctrines please start a thread. Warning though, I am an Agnostic raised by a Deacon of a Baptist Church and my views on Christianity do not stem from rebellion against my parents or how they raised me. I became disillusioned with the church because it just doesn't add up, yet I try to live my life by the morals of Jesus and know his words well.
Please keep in mind though that this debate, here, will completely side track this discussion.

Stinkbug I would ask you to site references for much of your post as most of it has the stink NeoCon rhetoric on it whilst you present it all as fact and we should be able to determine the Bias behind it for ourselves. You give very specific facts about individuals and dollar amounts not just broad ideas.

As for my post references, this is all off the top of my head as I have studied politics deeply and most of what I have said can be found in Dictionary and Encyclopedia definitions of the key words themselves, so no reference list.

Sorry if this was to long winded or jumbled up, age old strategy to win a debate, bore them into submission

Edit, I was posting when swollen_nose posted the demand for references, I will leave my comments on this in for continuities sake.

Something like decent health care for everyone in the US, has been non-existant for too long. In that p.o.v. I've always considered the US as a third world country. We in Europe have this health care since decennia. Finally and slowly America will stop to be a 3th world country.

Bravo

I

Communism, Socialism, KKK, Christianity, Marxism, Fascism Dictatorships, human nature, racial segregation, the American economy after the civil war.
You have tied none of this into the topic of the health care bill and because of this your whole long-winded post is off topic.


The US had Medicare and Medicaid systems at least fifteen years ago when I lived there. A government health care system is not a new thing in the US.


If you agree (or disagree) with a post please state why you agree (or disagree). Just posting 'Bravo I' doesn't really contribute anything to the debate.

Wow, almost makes me want to be a commie! Except for their iron fist of course. But if you think that universal health care is synonimous with communism/marxism then most of the world is already that way, and enjoying it too I might add. I don't know a country I would mind getting sick in except the USA. I've been in hopitals in Nicaragua, Brazil, Peru and Canada that I can remember at the moment where I got friendly free service. Note: Canadian health care only caters to residents, so be aware of that limitation.



Couldn't agree more! What a third world country the US is. I hear even Cuba can afford good free health care. If you don't offer that to your citizens then you are too poor to pay for it! Even Scrooge was too poor to take care of himself well as he never spent his money on himself but just kept it in a miserly way and stayed in an unheated room.

The bill has nothing to do with health care, its primarily just mandated insurance. What the congress has done, is mandated that insurance companies cannot deny coverage to anyone--essentially the same thing they said to the banks when they told the banks that they had to give loans to people who didn't qualify. We all know how that worked out. The US constitution was written by the people, specifically to limit the powers of government. Today, the government ignores those parts of the document that do so, and use the remainder to limit the freedoms of the people.

It was in direct response to the cut and paste from stinkbug and how the original author throws alot of terms around that he doesn't even understand the meaning of. That is a big issue here as the first thing right wing conservatives spout about any bill put up by the Dems is to call them Socialist or Marxist and then say they want big government which is why I went into it at length about the meanings and how they are miss used and some history to support it.
I didn't use the quote box because I meant for it to be directly under his comment but SW beat me to the post button.

This was all included in the post by the way.

I'am a Canadian , and our health care over here is great it does not matter what you make a year you will get help , everything is payed for by the goverment " 100% free health care " we don't evan pay a monthly premuim , and this is the way it should be . Now if your goverment can spend millions every day on a bullshit war ,than they can afford to do this for all of you .I think that Obama has done somthing great for your country and I hope he does lots more .

For some reason I still find myself at a loss when I realize I'm surprised at the pure ignorance I hear and read everyday. Let me start by saying this: I do not wan't to pay for your healthcare, your children's shoes, or the shortfalls between what you can afford and what you actually owe on your mortgage. I also do not expect anyone else to do any of these things for me. Most of the above posts had me shaking my head in disbelief. If universal healthcare was so wonderful, then explain to me why people who can afford to, will go someplace else to receive services. 30 million uninsured in America is laughable. Who are these 30 million people? Am I one of them because I choose not buy healthcare? I can afford it if I wanted it, but I don't, so... I don't. Its not anyone else's place to tell me otherwise. When I need to go to the doctor, I go and I pay for it. The uninsured in America (those that actually can't afford it) have other choices, such as going to an emergency room, or a free clinic. They exist, and they're everywhere. Or how about this... Those that can't afford can stop buying LCD TV's, cigarettes, new Nikes, 20" rims and so on and so forth. When did we decide to leave personal responsibility by the wayside? I listen to people try to defend the current administration when someone says Marxist, or Socialist, or Progressive, and if it wasn't so scary I would probably laugh. Its time for people to wake up. The government now controls the housing, automotive, banking, AND healthcare industries. Cap and Trade will secure the energy industry as well. So then what happens? Any takers? Step back and look at what is going on. Put aside your party affiliations for just a minute and really look. Is anybody in Washington telling the truth anymore? Do any of them really have our best interests in mind? Yes I'm conservative, but no, I don't agree with what most Republicans are doing either, so anybody who feels the need to flame me with their rhetoric, please do so after reading this sentence a few times and understand that you're a fool. Europeans need not respond at all, as you've been indoctrinated and I read enough ignorant statements every day. Not to mention that Obamacare doesn't concern you in the slightest. If America was such a horrible place, why do so many people emigrate from their homelands to come here? The founding fathers specifically set rules as to what the government could and could not do. The bill is unconstitutional and there is no way to logically argue that it is. I know, I know... How callous of me. People need to be taken care of. Well not if they are able to care for themselves. I'm all for helping the needy, the disabled, the eldery. But you can't tell me that I need to help provide for somebody simply because the choose not to provide for themselves. Yes, Jesus said that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter Heaven. But he did NOT say that it is a sin to be rich and that the rich should shoulder a heavier burden simply because they worked hard enough and pushed themselves hard enough to get where they were. California is in the toilet. Some 20-odd Billion dollars if I'm not mistaken. In a recent study, it was calculated that if they simply did not provide medical services to illegal immigrants that the state could be back in the black in 5 years. Ah, but now I'm a racist, right? You don't know if I'm black, white or green, but if I said something so horrible I must be racist. I'm not going to defend myself against that, because I don't feel like it. What I like is logic. It plays no favorites, and while it may be cold and heartless, I can wrap my mind around common sense. Something which I fear many others cannot these days. I vote no for healthcare. i vote no for bigger government. I vote no for more taxes. And I vote no to anybody telling me that I HAVE to do anything. I'm sick and tired of all the 'touchy feely' crap that's being regurgitated by the left wing. Personal responsibility is what led the founders here, and its the reason that America was and still is the greatest country on the planet. Unfortunately, due to ignorance, laziness, incompetence, and downright greed, we are at risk of losing it all. Anyone who doesn't like can get out for all I care. I raise my kids to understand right and wrong, to obey the laws, torespect the people that they meet and to handle their own business. They don't need to be punished for those that don't. I suggest starting a new poll as to whether someone is for or against the healthcare bill, and ask only those in America to vote. i bet the results would be different.

O/T

Actually Jesus was saying it was a sin to be rich. He states clearly that a man cannot serve two masters and that it the rich will inevitable serve money more than their God.

He also said that the rich should give up their riches to the poor for their need is greater.

I don't know how American's can ignore this but Jesus was essentially a socialist, if not an actual Communist ideologically.

And If we are going down the Jesus route the you have to consider that Jesus would almost certainly be for this bill. The people caring for one another, be it in kindness or in paying for others health care is exactly what he advocated. Think about it, he went around healing everyone he met of their ailments FOR FREE.

/O/T

very well said, thank you

1)Actually, Jesus was saying no such thing. It serves your argument to state it as so, but that will never make it true. Abraham, Issac, Jacob, King David, Solomon, Boaz, Zacchaeus, etc. All were blessed with wealth (Deut 8:18 & Eccl 5:19). Are we to believe that they were considered to be in sin? After all, according to the Bible it says they were "blessed with wealth". Putting money, or the accumulation thereof, before God is the sin. I also hardly can picture Jesus as making gross generalizations such as "the rich will inevitably serve money more than their God." Jesus always came across as a pretty non-judgemental type of guy to me. What was said was, "For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, for which some have strayed from the faith in their greediness, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows." (I Timothy 6:10). Note the word 'some' in the context here. Those that comprise the 'some' would be the sinners, not the rich men or women in general, because that would mean that ALL strayed from their faith, which is simply not true.

2) He also never said "the rich should give up their riches to the poor for their need is greater.". What was said was "Instruct them to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share," 1 Timothy 18. Doesn't exactly say to give away all your money to the poor because they need it does it? I would actually posit that giving money to someone who is poor, simply because they are poor, and without regard as to why they are poor (drugs, sloth, etc.) may actually be a sin in and of itself. After all, its been said, "Give a man a fish and feed him for a day... Teach a man how to fish and feed him forever." (Not exact I know, but you can catch my drift. Should we do good works? Yes. Should we help the less fortunate? Yes. Should we feel bad about ourselves because we are more fortunate? No. Should we give to our own detrement? No. I keep hearing Americans this, or Americans that. Americans give more, and do more than any other country on the face of this planet. Americans like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, and the late Sam Walton each gave more than all of the people you know personally and are related to combined.

3) Jesus was a communist? I won't even touch that one. Its absurd.

4) "And If we are going down the Jesus route the you have to consider that Jesus would almost certainly be for this bill. The people caring for one another, be it in kindness or in paying for others health care is exactly what he advocated. Think about it, he went around healing everyone he met of their ailments FOR FREE." Jesus did say we are our brother's keepers. Does this mean that the rich have to keep more brothers than, say, the well-to-do, or the upper-middle class? Jesus never advocated paying for healthcare. He said to love eachother and to do good works, be generous, and be prepared to share. I challenge you to find any passage in the Bible where its said that you should go to the lengths that this healthcare bill does. Jesus never forced anyone to give, and the Bible never says that we should be forced to give. It also never says that you will not go to Heaven if you don't give. My responsibilities lie with my Wife and children foremost. Not with someone else's wife and kids, whether they have 2 or 12. The greatest teaching of the Bible is that in the end, as a Christian, you are held accountable for your actions, inactions, and decisions, and you may or may not enter Heaven based on the sum of these criteria. Communism, Marxism, Socialism and all of their tenets betray that most basic of teachings. Sitting on one's ass, drinking and getting high, not working, and having 4 and 5 and 6 children without the ability to support them and expecting a check on the 1st and wanting others to pay one's doctor's bills is hardly being accountable, don't you think?

So was what you posted 'well said'? Hardly.

I'm an Atheist by the way.

Perhaps communist was the wrong phrase, Communitarian would perhaps had fitted better.

Introducing things like Jesus into a political debate beings to the fore such ideas as Civil ideals Vs. Moral ideals in this case America's weight on Individualism and Christianity's leanings towards Communalism.

The problem of using the bible is that it can be used to pretty much support any position if one chooses to cut it up. Your rightly point out some places where your ideas are supported, I can call on other areas, such as Matthew 19:

"21Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

22When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth."

Being one of many examples.

I would also like to direct you to this interresting article on the subject of Jesus and Healthcare. and this blog post on the subject. They put it better than me.

As I feel this may be taking the subject off topic, this will most likely be my last comment on Jesus in Healthcare.

P.S I am also an Atheist.

The end of the body of your post is what irritates me about this whole topic. The example of lazy drug addicts benefiting from this bill is absolutely wrong. we have been paying the way for that lot since the '30s this bill is about giving aid to the working poor, follow that closely, the WORKING POOR. People that would do better if they just gave up and live off of welfare. No they get up every day and trudge off to a low paying job and at least they are trying, for you to insinuate that they are irresponsible and lazy is wrong of you.



As to your first post which I was going to ignore
I know exactly where your argument stems from and a little tidbit, the republican gutting of Federal Banking Regulation is what led to the banking industry collapse not the fact the Fed was trying to get the WORKING POOR into homes they own, instead of section 8 rentals or government housing.

The Republican desire to end all Federal Regulation of Industry is a thinly veiled play for their Corporations to strip the lower classes in this country of what little wealth we have.

If you believe so much in logic how can it be logical for you to have Millions of people in this country clogging up our Emergency Rooms for basic care needs at a far higher cost than a doctors visit and then that being passed on to us. You don't mind paying their bill at 300% mark up when we could put legislation in place to save us money.

As for California go and figure up the amount that those same illegals pay into the coffers of that State in direct and indirect taxes. Im sure the figure they cost in health care is far South of $20 billion I would like to see some reference before I even consider that legit.

Im not a bleeding heart I also believe in logic and the logic I see here is we are already paying across the board for Health Care so we should be worried about taking the matter in hand and doing so in a way that saves us money. And if it means Government Regulation well thats what it is.

We are the only country in the G8 with out National Health care and we spend the most GDP per capita of all of them on Health Care and as a Nation we don't even rank among them when you compare the General Health of the Citizens, we rank lower than some 3rd world nations.

As for not being made to do something you've been made to do things your whole life. Sure you can afford to pay now for your own medical care and if you handle your finances properly Im sure you have some stacked away. But keep in mind you are only a health related job loss and a $100,000 medical bill away from being a burden on your children and the rest of US! I support you not being allowed to do that the same way I support some one having to have the means to pay the bill if they cause a car wreck that would injure me or damage my property.

Even the Democrats don't know what’s all in it. I do know some of it. One why the hell do taxes have to pay for abortions, they play they pay, and our taxes pay for abortions all over the world WTH. Two, Obama snuck in an ok for his private army? Why does he need that? Three, He or the Democrats didn't listen to the people, they past it any way. Four, they exempted themselves from it? It’s definitely against the constitution. Why should you be penalized for not taking it out, not to mention the cost of it? Anybody say raised taxes. As soon as that past Hilary went to the UN to except a small arms treaty that would help take our guns away at the same time Obama wants control over the internet. I don't know about you people but that spells Nazism to me. Oh yea you voted for change without asking what that consisted of, kind of what Germany did when they elected Hitler. Wow look what that caused. And talk about Racism, They both attended a church for 20 years that hated America and Whites, well you figure it out. I’m waiting to see if he gets impeached before he destroys America. Let’s see the disabled doesn’t get a raise for 2010 & 2011 because the cost of living didn’t raise, but the house and congress gave themselves a raise from House over $4,000 and Congress over $5,000 can you spell greed, corruption and power. I could fill this post up LOL. I guarantee I will be disputed called names ect. But please research and watch candidates before you vote, don’t just punch a hole. Oh that’s right our vote don’t count it’s the electoral votes.

Are you serious? Take a gander at this: "The Community Reinvestment Act (or CRA, Pub.L. 95-128, title VIII, 91 Stat. 1147, 12 U.S.C. § 2901 et seq.) is a United States federal law that requires banks and savings and loan associations to offer credit throughout their entire market area and prohibits them from targeting only wealthier neighborhoods with their services, a practice known as "redlining." The purpose of the CRA is to provide credit, including home ownership opportunities to underserved populations and commercial loans to small businesses. It has been subjected to important regulatory revisions."

The CRA enacted into law by good 'ol Tricky Dick and then strengthened by none other than your buddy Bill Clinton was the cause of of our current crises. It forced entities to make home loans more equally across the board to people who couldn't afford homes. It allowed Frannie and Freddie to hold only 2.5% of capital to back their loans instead of the requisite 10% for actual banks and when they ended holding about half of the 12 Trillion dollar pie, what did you expect was going to happen. You want to argue that Republicans are trying to end federal regulation. Give me one, just one, government program that has been succesfully implemented and maintained! You can't because they don't exist. USPS, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Amtrak, Medicare/Medicaid, Social Security, Welfare... All of them are a joke and have been run into the ground, and you have the audacity to blame Republican's attempts to deregulate? Thats the definition of Cranial Rectumitis if I ever saw it. Somehow you managed to twist a Democratic clusterf$*& into a Republican mishandling and its totally assinine.



Wow... Really? Your argument is we're already paying for it so why not write the check to Uncle Osama? I mean Uncle Sam? When has legislation saved us money? Again, when has regulation saved us money? When has government regulation succeed in anything other than crapping all over the nice white paper they type their laws on? Comparing general health is hardly a guideline to how well our healthcare stands up to that of other countries. People in America have horrible diets and lousy exorcise regimens. Its got nothing to do with the healthcare we have at our finger tips. Hell, if that was the case why would the Canadian Premier come here for care when he can have it for free in Canada? Why do many people travel here for our healthcare? Riddle me that.

We're also the only country in the G8 with the standard of living we all enjoy.


So let me get this straight. You're equating the slim possibility of my getting sick and adding another drop into the healthcare debt bucket to someone injuring you or destroying what belongs to you because they fail to have auto insurance? You're actually equating your tax dollars (assuming you don't actually get a refund every year and do pay in) to someone taking away or diminishing your ability to provide for yourself? Or even another way; You're equating my decision which may or may not INDIRECTLY affect you IF you even pay taxes to some jackass that might maim or kill you or take away your ride to work if they don't have insurance? Are you beginning to see the ignorance of your statement yet? My decision not to pay for healthcare, because I'm young and healthy, probably never has and never will affect you at all. Auto insurance on the other hand makes sense. Every driver out there puts both themselves and every other person on the road with them at risk every time they start their car, hence state laws requiring insurance. STATE laws. Not an unconstitutional federal law. You are at no risk if I decide not to pay for healthcare. At the same time, nobody, other than the people I deem to be, are my responsibility. I've never asked for a handout and as long as I can get up and go to work or even mow lawns if I lose my job, I will never ask for handout. Why? Because I'm not entitled to it. Nobody is. If everyone would get off of their duffs and do what needs to be done and hold themselves responsible for the decisions they make or have made this world would be a better place. I for one am sick and tired of getting stuck in line at the grocery store while some pale woman in overalls holds us all up to pay for bread and cheese with WIC vouchers, groceries with food stamps, and beer and cigarettes with cash. Those are my tax dollars.

I do actually have health insurance. I'm good enough at what I do to have landed a job where my employer covers 100% of my healthcare coverage costs. Should my boss also be required to pay for the healthcare coverage of the guy that washes our windows?

America has one of the worst infant mortality rates in the western world, that is directly related to healthcare. The World Health organization ranks American healthcare at 37th in the world. It was not the Canadian Premier who came to Florida for health care it was the State premier of Newfoundland and he only did so on the recommendation of a friend.



Like every country in the world not all Americans share the same standard of living. There are the extremely poor and the extremely rich, what sets America apart is the vast gap between the two.



Thats rather Naïve. Getting ill or injured is not a slim possibility, it is an almost certainty. At some point in your life you will need medical care. You keep making these generalizations about the people on benefits. Not everyone who gets good stamps wastes the money and your being overly judgmental.

You have to ask yourself this. If the current American model of healthcare is so good and so great who does no other country in the developed world use it? Good ideas travel fast and governments are quick to copy ideas that work well from other countries.

The simple point is that the American system is not fair. It discriminates against the working poor and can lead to situations where people find them selves in need only to find that their insurance company doesn't cover that particular procedure.

I admire your work ethic, but the fact remains that you may find yourself one day out of pocked and dying from a preventable illness.

First off if you want to debate a Liberal go find one. I am pro gun pro militia and anti abortion. Bill Clinton is a Douche that sold his own party out repeatedly and any thing he did do was marginal and passed the buck on the issues down the road til he was out of office. Look at him now out pandering for money with no other than W. himself.
Nixon was a freaking Neoconservative and even he saw that banks were abusing and excluding the lower classes in this country. Im sure you would rather the working poor were left to be prayed on by slime ball businesses like Title Loan and Check Loan companies where they are charged 300% interest and caught in a cycle of debt that sucks what little they have dry.

You want to talk about the constitution and loosing our freedoms how about we talk about the Patriot Act. The single biggest hit to Freedom this country has ever taken, passed by a far right White House and a Republican majority in Congress.

As for Fed programs and agencies that work I can give you more than one

Department of Agriculture
Bureau Of land Management
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Wic
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Small Business Administration
Welfare
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Just to name a few

Here are a few links to show you just how Federal Regulation benefits us

Costs and Benefits of Government Regulations
They show several areas where Federal regulation saves US the tax payer money.

this is where the got the info
Office of Management and Budget
Draft 2003 Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations

So yes I would rather have legislation in place to regulate the way we are made to pay for things we are already paying for with out this protection

Social Security is failing in this Country for 2 reasons

1. Congress will not stop dipping into the Social Security fund borrowing for unrelated projects (read PORK)

2. We have known for a generation that the baby boomers were going to stress the system. Regan and Bush1 tried to kill the program. Clinton once again passed the buck. Bush2 did everything in his power to block legislation that would shore up SS. The Republican Majority in Congress from 1994 until 2004 gutted most of any bill that would have been affective while passing further legislation that cripples SS effectiveness.

This is all well documented and discussed so I will not bother with references.

When I was in my early 20's I thought much the same way you do. I didn't feel that I was owed anything or owed any one anything. It angered me to see over 20% of my check go out the window to pay for things I get no benefit from.
As I matured I realized what it means to live in a community, the understanding that I am not a rock unto myself.
That my good fortune is tied directly to every other member of my community whether I like it or not.

Now I have a challenge for you Name 1 piece of legislation that the Republicans have ever passed that benefited any one but the rich elite.

I voted no, only because im a struggling college student who doesn't need another bill.
If i had to pay this bill right now, i would not be as far ahead as i am.

I voted yes, though I wanted the public option and it would have been nice to also let folks opt out. Some things are clear: health care should be covered by our country as we as taxpayers pay into systems already that provide

1. free schooling for everyone's child (should they choose it)

2. emergency services to save your life or property in the event that you're attacked etc. (whether or not it's actually your own fault)

3. postal services which allow you to receive parcels and whatnot that you order (and mail letters if you go that way)

and a host of other services most people aren't complaining about paying because they benefit from them. (The key terms here being "they benefit from them."

Insurance companies are the same as universal health care in that Bob the Taxpayer gives Insurance Company X a certain amount of money every month plus he might also pay a deductible to have them "cover" him. In most cases your average Bob isn't going to go to the doctor more than maybe twice a year, so his money goes into a pool so other folks who are also paying Insurance Company X can use it if they need to file a claim.

People have been complaining about the people "who don't work" as if working and health insurance go hand in hand. They also have been complaining about not wanting to pay for someone else's health care. Well, if you pay into an insurance company, that's exactly what you're doing, anyway. You didn't think the company was going to use their OWN money, didja? ;)

Insurance companies are just a go-between and taking a nice healthy profit out of the scheme. They can deny coverage, they can refuse to pay a claim, they can refuse to pay for prescribed meds and try to push you into taking something your doctor did not prescribe simply because it's cheaper.

Cases in point: I had lower right abdominal pain and had to sit in the radiologist's office doubled over in pain waiting for my insurance company to OK my CT scan to see if it was an appendicitis.

My mother's insurance company refused to pay for a drug she was prescribed and thus the pharmacy gave her a generic, cheaper drug which she then took and became very sick on. The doctor was pissed when she found out, as was my mom. Mom's 76, yo. She isn't looking at her prescriptions when she picks them up (though she SHOULD!).

I myself had an insurance company consistently complain about my taking one drug and they pushed and pushed to give me a cheaper one that was not as effective for me. A few times my pharmacy actually filled the alternate based solely on the insurance company's refusal to pay for the original. Way to go.

Yes, I'm writing a book here but it has to be said. Insurance companies are not the answer. They provide a false sense of security. The ONLY people who are actually paying their own way are the ones who pay for everything in CASH. Everyone else is a proverbial "leech" whether it is through using other folk's money to pay your insurance claims or being covered by the government and so on.

I work 2 jobs and don't have insurance with either. I pay everything in cash. Last year I paid over 10 grand in health care costs, all out of my own pocket. I applied for insurance and it would cost me $300+ a month plus a $2500 deductible. For the average guy on the street, that's not going to wash.

This isn't about Obama or any other President; it's about people believing they're being self sufficient when they're leeching off their fellow taxpayer but who then complain about the people who don't have insurance being the leeches. It's all an illusion to make themselves feel superior to others while the insurance company makes a huge profit.

We should have a public health care system. All people should be covered for all non elective services (i.e. if you want bigger breasts you can pay for it yourself) including mental and dental and vision. If we all helped each other instead of paying the giant companies, we might have healthier folks in the country and more people physically and mentally able to work.

/rant *bows*

At $400/month + your $2500 deductible thats only $7300 a year (relying on my math, so correct me if I'm wrong). That leaves $2700 worth of copays/partial coverage before you hit your 10k... So I'm confused as to where the problem lies. Yes I realize other factors are involved in paying this before the $2500 deductible is met, but under the proper circumstances one would never even begin to approach the 10k mark, so again, I don't see the problem. The fact of the matter is this: Yes there is a problem with healthcare. Something needs to be done about it, and whatever that thing might be, it needs to be properly thought out so that it actually is effective. That being said, the government telling us that we have to pay for healthcare is not the right way. It goes beyond making sure people are healthy and fit, its a violation of our rights. Further more, as doctors begin to get payed less and less, and their clinical experience/decision making skill are questioned, what do you suppose might occur? This is not rocket science. I for one don't want to trade my freedom for security. I'd rather die frail and sick than die a subject of a socialist regieme.

Thank you. This is exactly what I mean.

I like to look at a track record to judge how well its going to work in the future.
There is already a government run healthcare system called Medicare.
I am enrolled in Medicare. When I moved to a new town I started looking for a doctor by calling around.
At least 4 or 5 refused me when I told them I was on Medicare.
Their excuses:
"We are at our limit of medicare patients."
"We are now charging a monthly fee"
"We don't have any openings."

Now if the people who deal with a federal run health care system day to day refuse to accept patients,
this means the federal run system really stinks.

I think the Bill has some good aspects and some not so good. Too much Government is never a good thing, so I am kinda middle of the road on this one. If you really want my opinon, I think we need to clear congress out of anyone who has served more more than 3 terms, take away their self voted on life health care and retirement plans. I think that the congress health care should be taken away and be forced to take tricare like the other people that serve, then we we actually see how fast S**t will get fixed when it comes to health care. They preach from the pulpit about how bad it is for the masses, but they all have a golden spoon in thier own mouths when it comes to their health care they have. The problem is spending in the Government and always will be.................... I do not feel that you should be forced to buy health insurance as a matter of law.... I think that is unconstitutional!

Has anyone in Congress actually read the five thousand pages of the bill...? I mean that's what they're there for... If the government can force us to buy health care WHAT ELSE CAN THEY MAKE US BUY?

At least you got the point. Hmm, they can make people buy hookers, latex pants, Ford Pinto's, vending machines full of fruit, expired milk, you name it.

An addition:

Did you know since this has past, it is now impossible to get private individual/family (group insurance excluded) maternity coverage? That means those who are self employed or choose to get a better insurance package are now up the creek when it comes to having a child unless they can get state medical card.