Obama Healthcare

[Locke4God]

I just wanted to start off with a simple explanation, and a rational one, defining my views. I'm against the Healthcare bill and generally against Obama, but I wanted to explain why instead of extending an emotional response.

The Healthcare debate initially was premissed on the idea that it's a right.

A right, such as the rights to own a gun, drive a car, or smoke cigarettes, is always accompanied by responsibility. You have the responsibility to use them safely and accept their consequences. If you use or missuse your rights, you may go to jail, loose your liscense, or get lung cancer, and you accept the responsibility for those consequences by exorcising your rights.

But getting Healthcare which you wouldn't pay for doesn't bare you any responsibility. In fact it puts the responsibility for paying for your care on others, and there is no such thing as a right you can possess that forces responsibility on others. It's really not even debateable. It's not a right.

[Clint]

There should have been universal health care ever since the concept of health care came into... conception. I'm on my dad's insurance still, due to the fact that I'm still in school and younger than 24, but the company that he works for is suffering, so now, he has to pay full price for health care, which leaves him and my mom about 30 bucks for food and shit. His company is likely to go out of business within a year, which would leave my dad, my mom, and myself without health care. Now my dad and my mom could apply for Medicaid if that happened, however, that would leave me out in the cold. If that happened, I would have to get arrested in order to receive medical treatment. Let me repeat myself, I would have to get myself arrested and become a prisoner in order to receive medical treatment.

If health care is a true right, then why the hell do prisoners get it for free when the working class has to struggle to have it? It takes 300,000 dollars a year to hold one prisoner. 300,000 dollars a year. That's 265,000 dollars more than my family makes in a year. People who go to prison may lose some rights, but they still have it made better than most people out in the general population.

[Alpha]

I'm no American, but the concept of having to pay to receive healthcare just seems so foreign, and, dare I say it, Third World. Where I'm from, if you're sick, then you'll be treated. One can opt for private healthcare, where you get gourmet salad instead of cold potatoes, but everyone receives treatment for any illness, and, for the most part, you do not have to pay (exceptions include very expensive treatments for very rare conditions, but we do have grants that can go towards them, and private organisations regularly fundraise for funds for such cases)

The whole concept of paying for healthcare suggests says that rich people will be treated, and the poor won't. But which group has greater health issues? Answer: the poor. But, oh wait, they can't afford it. Too bad.

New Zealand is not a rich country, but we give the right to health a big enough priority. America, as the largest economy in the world, should be able to do this very easily. Good on Obama for attempting to catch up with the rest of the Western world.

[loaf]

For someone who was just discharged from the hospital a month ago, part time badly paying job with no insurance? Yea I wish this thing would have happened long ago. I had no insurance, but I had to go to the hospital...why? Cause I would have DIED. If I had this free health care shit, my bills wouldn't be through the roof. Who are you to say getting free health care is not responsible. I'm a broke ass part time working not going to school 20 year old whos parents make him pay rent at their house.

[Locke4God]

Points taken gentlemen, and I appreciate the commentary,

I saw it come up a few times by each of you that you have an idea that the poor aren't covered in America. But of course you do have medicaid, and nobody is refused treatment at a hospital, so you do have coverage. Now is it great? That might be another debate, and I did see the comment about medicaid not covering children. Perhaps a good point that needs looking into.

However let me state that America does in fact have the best healthcare in the world. I'm not sure what country you came from, the person commenting from another country, but as foreign as our system may feel, a person diagnosed of cancer or aids, and several other terminal conditions has a longer life expectancy here, than in any other country in the world. So we do have great healthcare.

If you're against it, as I am, what you also have to consider is that it's never been America's position to "catch up" to other countries. As a couple of you pointed out, we have the largest economy in the world, and so there's nobody to catch up to. My boss from Morroco tried to say that Morroco has National Healthcare, so why shouldn't we, as though America were somehow supposed to follow Morroco's lead. I just love this country and believe it's the best in the world as many immigrants have felt and we got that way on the belief that nobody here gets anything for free, but you can keep everything you earn. The first settlers and all immigrants since have made this country the land that invented the light bulb, the car, flight, space travel and much more, and we did it because we didn't provide social safety nets. Nobody leaves this country for Healthcare. They come here, and they've come here for centuries because they know that America is the land of "opportunity" not guarantees.

Lastly I'll just point out, that only 11-13 Million people out of our population of 300 Million are without healthcare. The figure of 47 million that was floated out includes nearly 20 Million illegal immigrants, another 7 that are temporarily between jobs for 2-3 month periods, and still another 7 million teenagers who willfully choose not to purchase it. So we're talking about a major overhall to satisfy a small minority of people. Granted it is an important issue, but I think things like tort reform, which is not included in any proposed bill, will do a better job of reducing costs to make it more affordable for those people. If I were for this bill as you 3 are, I would ask myself why Obama and the others trying to sell it are not talking about Tort reform. It's highly suspicious that they aren't.

Oh and the Congretional Budget Office in an independant analysis says that costs would rise if this plan were passed, not go down as promissed.

And quite frankly I just don't trust the government to manage this and I'm not willing to take the risk. Obama was off 2 Trillion dollars the wrong direction in his 10 year deficit analysis, he claimed that it was absolutely vital to pass the stimulus act immediately and yet he's only spent 7% of it and even that has shown very little positive effects. In fact again he estimated only 8% unemployment and yet we're near 10%, and overall I think all this government intervention into private industry is very disconcerting. I don't believe what he's saying and he's given plenty of reason to doubt that he either knows what he's talking about and/or is being honest about it.

Why take the risk? Why trust him?

Why not reduce costs through tort reform that will lower insurance costs on doctors so your costs go down, expand medicaid to cover children, and lower taxes on businesses so they can expand coverage and hire more workers who could be covered.

[Alpha]

However let me state that America does in fact have the best healthcare in the world. I'm not sure what country you came from, the person commenting from another country, but as foreign as our system may feel, a person diagnosed of cancer or aids, and several other terminal conditions has a longer life expectancy here, than in any other country in the world. So we do have great healthcare.

Where are those statistics from? Because I thoroughly dispute them. Did you know that a male Bangladeshi has a greater life expectancy than a black male from Harlem, New York? Your so-called "great" healthcare system clearly discriminates against the poor, something which does NOT happen in the vast majority of industrialised nations.

If you're against it, as I am, what you also have to consider is that it's never been America's position to "catch up" to other countries. As a couple of you pointed out, we have the largest economy in the world, and so there's nobody to catch up to.

You have plenty of countries to catch up to in terms of your national priorities to healthcare. Stop pouring money into the military and give basic healthcare to your poorest citizens. New Zealand has only one plane in it's air force. Laugh all you want, but I'd take free healthcare over global military hegemony any day.

My boss from Morroco tried to say that Morroco has National Healthcare, so why shouldn't we, as though America were somehow supposed to follow Morroco's lead. I just love this country and believe it's the best in the world as many immigrants have felt and we got that way on the belief that nobody here gets anything for free, but you can keep everything you earn.

I've always wondered if Americans are aware how much the rest of the world does not like them, and my suspicions are confirmed - they do not know. Now I have no idea if Morocco has socialised healthcare, but if they do, then, as a developing country, they have their priorities straight. Lowering infant mortality, lowering the incidence of HIV/AIDs - all pertinent issues that need to be at the top of any political agenda in any country. Yet American's stand by their Third World health system, and do all they can to prevent Obama from carrying out much needed reforms.

The first settlers and all immigrants since have made this country the land that invented the light bulb, the car, flight, space travel and much more, and we did it because we didn't provide social safety nets. Nobody leaves this country for Healthcare. They come here, and they've come here for centuries because they know that America is the land of "opportunity" not guarantees.

FLIGHT: New Zealanders were (albeit arguably) the first people to build a working plane.

SPACE TRAVEL: Sputnik; the world's first satellite. Russian.

And what the Hell do they have to do with the absence of social safety nets? Oh look, welfare! Well, there goes space travel. Get over your phobia of welfare, America.

Lastly I'll just point out, that only 11-13 Million people out of our population of 300 Million are without healthcare. ... So we're talking about a major overhall to satisfy a small minority of people. Granted it is an important issue, but I think things like tort reform, which is not included in any proposed bill, will do a better job of reducing costs to make it more affordable for those people.

As the world's largest economy, and with such a 'small' number of people without healthcare to cover, it should be no problem.

Oh and the Congretional Budget Office in an independant analysis says that costs would rise if this plan were passed, not go down as promissed.

I don't pretend to know the details of this report, but providing free healthcare has many flow-on benefits to any economy. People are more willing and completely able to get treatment for illnesses (big or small), and then get back to work - providing tax money for the government. Granted, this is a simplification, but if my logic is challenged, I can expand on this.

Why take the risk? Why trust him?

Exactly what is the risk?

Why not reduce costs through tort reform that will lower insurance costs on doctors so your costs go down, expand medicaid to cover children, and lower taxes on businesses so they can expand coverage and hire more workers who could be covered.

That all sounds nice - but so does free healthcare.

[RagnaToad]

However let me state that America does in fact have the best healthcare in the world.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!! !!


You crack me up.

Anyway, America is a pretty young country and ironically, the country that is most conservative about change in Western society. They all claim to be the greatest country in the world, arrogantly refusing to see how Europe is doing better in numerous ways. I find it hilarious how 'socialist' is an insult in the US. I love Republicans. Good humour is priceless.

On the healthcare thing: It is sad to see how Americans refuse to see that nothing will change unless they vote for this health care bill. I find it tragic how all those people who are against it (or some of them) claim that it will bring more problems than anything else. I guess the healthcare system in Northern European countries has been failing for decades, right?

Not really.

Everyone is so afraid that the government will take over their medical decisions and decide who can have euthanasia and who can't (DEATH PANEEELS!!!), while they are trying to do what they are suppose to do. Take care of their people.

only 11-13 Million people out of our population of 300 Million are without healthcare.

Ahum...
'only'?
Those people don't have any health insurance whatsoever, and many more have to dig into their savings to pay for surgeries or even small accidents.

I'm sure you wouldn't think it was 'only' 11-13 million people if you know all of them.

That's more people than all Belgians together. (All Belgians who all have health insurance, by the way.)

[Jeordam]

And please here this and take it into account before responding. I do not say anything within this post to insult, belittle, or otherwise diminish someone's point of view, or even the actions of another country. I'm not here to be whatever, but to simply ask questions and speak my mind.

Many have brought up the actions/prioritites of many nations in this world...from those of Europe, Africa, N.America, and even New Zeland. The priorities of the people's from each of these nations is different, and I honestly don't think that any of us are *really* equipped to pass a determination that one or another countries priorities are out of order.

Does the US spend a large amount of money on the military? Yes, we do. Is it worth it? I believe that it is, because it allows other nations of the world to not have to. New Zeland can get away with having 1 plane in the Air Force, because it knows that if some agressive nation invades them, that they have Australia, and ultimately the US, watching their back.

Let's turn our attention to history...its a really good thing that the US had a big military (with ramp-up capability) in World War II. If that wasn't the case, Europe would be split into different german states, and the only Jews left in existance would be those living in the US.

Quality of health care, cost of health care, and tort reform aside, what I think that this debate comes down to is this. Why should I pay for you? One poster to this thread (please forgive me for not remembering your name/exact circumstances) related how his medical bills are high, because of a lack of coverage (again, please forgive me if I got it completely wrong). But my question still stands...why should I be forced to pay it for you?

Someone else related how paying for health care is good for everyone, because when they are better, they can go back to work & start paying income taxes again. How is this guarenteed? There are huge swaths of individuals with no health care because they have no jobs (for whatever reason). We're putting food on their table & keeping a roof over their heads(through welfare/other government aid) and we would be keeping them healthy (if this legislation goes through). What motivation does such an individual have to go back to work?

I have a tough enough time paying for myself as it is. The last thing I need is to be further taxed to pay for someone else.
~Jeordam

[Che]

I would just like to point out that you are not speaking to America, you are speaking to an American. So stop generalizing about it. I sure the **** don't think America is the greatest country in the world. We might have been on the right track and one point, but we've since took a dead end somewhere and our tracks got blown the **** up and we're trying to backtrack to get back on the right god damned path. Timmy is telling me it was left, but I sure the **** thought it was to the right. We'll get there.

We're young. We still have old people who won't die off and who are so sure in their old ways and are teaching their children what they know to be true (things that need to be changed). Then our education sucks and these children grow up and never learn what really needs to happen on their own, so they follow the steps and it's a never ending cycle of bullshit. It's like watching the scene in Top Gun where Maverick's plane spirals out of control and they have to eject and Goose dies over and over.

If I'm sick, I should be cured. If I'm dumb, I should be educated. I should be given these as a right. How the **** we got ourselves into this debt I do not know, and I could ramble on all day about where our government is wasting it's money, but I'd rather not. We're a young country, we went off and tried to do shit on our own. We're not doing so great right now, but that's called learning.

America stuck it's hand in a pot of boiling water thinking it couldn't get burned, and it happened. Then we passed out from the pain. And as soon as we wake the **** up, we're gonna understand that we can't just go putting our hands in hot water anymore, and our hand will heal up and we're gonna use it to throw a ****ing knock-out punch towards getting shit right.

[Locke4God]

@ Jeordam - Great comments, thanks for the post

@ Alpha & Ragna - Guys I just want to point out that I love America. It's my country, and I believe it to be the greatest in the world.

The founding principles of this country are based on protecting the population from a ruling dictatorship above all else. That's the point of our nation. You have to understand that.

Why people don't like Obama Care, is that it gives more power to the government. It's not that we're unconcerned with poor people, it's that we above all else, do not want to relinquish our freedoms.

As we often say, and as Obama has himself said, here you can make yourself anything you want to be. You can make it through school, you can further your education, you can find any job you wish and make the most of it. So, why is there this view that we have a lot of helpless people out there who are in some magical way incapable of helping themselves. Nobody in this country is incapable. We believe in the strength of the individual to better themselves and thus better the country. We're a country that believes in working hard for what you get and so why didn't more of these people graduate high school? Why didn't they work their way up in the work force? Why aren't they responsible with the money they do have? Why am I supposed to support them when they've done little for themselves? Why would I believe in the most free country on earth that there is somebody who just can't do it for themselves?

GET UP!!! Go work. Finish School. Be Responsible. I'm not talking about the guy who was crippled from birth. I'm talking about a girl I knew in high school who stone cold refused to finish school. Who wouldn't think of going to college. Who didn't dream of anything more than being a hotel housekeeper. I'm talking about the low glass guy with the $200 cell phone and a $600 Playstation 3 who is now asking for me to pay for him to go the doctor. And I so NO! You get off your couch, stop smoking pot, and get your ass to work.

And that brings me to the idea of personal responsibility. In America we believe equally in success and sadly failure. You have the freedom of any success you can earn, and you have the freedom to fail. There is no true freedom without the freedom to fail and so you're told growing up, or you should be, that nobody is going to do it for you. You learn that if you don't work hard, then you're going to find yourself living on the street, and thus you're motivated to go out there and work to better your own life. You learn not to be dependant on others.

The problem with Obama Care is that it requires the government to reappropriate money from those who have it, to those who supposedly don't, and that is a fundamental dissagreement with the principles America was founded on.

Our Government collects taxes and is charged with spending them only in service to everybody. It paves roads, for everybody. It prevents corporate monopolies, for everybody. It enforces laws, for everybody. It defends our boarders, for everybody.

But Obama Care doesn't promiss to help everybody. It promisses to help those who for whatever reason have not aquired it on their own. Tax dollars in America are not given to help any one segment of society, and that is a major problem with this plan.

We're not a socialist nation, and we don't want to be. Our nation works, and it is strong. Cuba, the former Soviet Union, and many other Socialist countries have found themselves in economic ruin and under social dicatatorships. Our country is strong and lives in freedom. For over 2 centuries America has been the beacon of freedom for the entire world, and there is no reason to change now at the whim of those who fail to see our strength.

[Aerif]

Why people don't like Obama Care, is that it gives more power to the government. It's not that we're unconcerned with poor people, it's that we above all else, do not want to relinquish our freedoms.

The thing is that basically every country in the world, and most likely a lot of Americans, see this stand-offish approach to Universal Health Care to be completely selfish.

Some people CAN'T pay for their health-care and it's not fair that such a basic human right should be taken from them. The right to live.

I know that there are special clinics that give free treatment to the poor and many other different iniatives that try to stop poor people from dieing on the street. But think about it this way, because you're rich does that give you anymore right-to-life than a poor person?

With the current situation, a rich person can afford that life-saving surgery wheras a poorer person would not be able to. In the eyes of the world, it definetly looks like America is unconcerned about it's poor.

As we often say, and as Obama has himself said, here you can make yourself anything you want to be. You can make it through school, you can further your education, you can find any job you wish and make the most of it.

That's of course assuming that you're rich enough. You can't go to college if you're poor unless you get a scholarship in America. In 'socialist' Scotland every student has the right to a free University education assuming they have acceptable grades.

We're a country that believes in working hard for what you get and so why didn't more of these people graduate high school?

Most likely because they're parents couldn't afford to keep them in high school, they needed to get a job to help support the family.

Why didn't they work their way up in the work force?

There are only so many upper-level positions in any company. Most of these positions will go to college-graduates, another missed opportunity for the poor.

Why aren't they responsible with the money they do have?

They most likely are. The problem is that some things such as food and shelter do normally eat into pay-cheques.

Why am I supposed to support them when they've done little for themselves?

That is a rather selfish statement. You don't know what these people have to go through.

As a country you support every student under the age of 18. Remember the public school system? You're helping them with that, as everybody else did with your education. Do you think America would be as 'civilised' as it is today without free basic education.

Why would I believe in the most free country on earth that there is somebody who just can't do it for themselves?

The only countries in the world that believe that are the U.S. themselves, alongside a few poverty-stricken countries that don't know any better. Clearly a country that shuns the impoverish sick and refuses to allow legal immigration to unskilled workers cannot be considered free.

I'm talking about a girl I knew in high school who stone cold refused to finish school. Who wouldn't think of going to college. Who didn't dream of anything more than being a hotel housekeeper.

Do you really think every poor-person has this mentallity?

I'm talking about the low glass guy with the $200 cell phone and a $600 Playstation 3 who is now asking for me to pay for him to go the doctor.

This guy likely came from a fairly well-off family if he could afford this. However he has as much right to free health-care as anyone else in the world.

Also remember that it isn't just you who is paying for him to go to the doctor. Everyone is. The same as everyone would be paying for you to go to the doctor.

Bypass heart-surgery apparently costs $20,000. I'm not sure how insurance works in the US, however I doubt most insurers would cover the entire cost of the operation. Especially if there is a history in the family of heart problems.

In the UK, this procedure would be entirely free to the patient. And any other patient who needed the procedure. They may need to wait a little while longer than an American. But any cost of the surgery would already have been paid for by the tax-payers.

And before anyone starts about the taxes, remember this, America does not need to have such a massive millitary. They have alliances, and their 'friends have adequete millitaries. Why should America need a bigger millitary that requires funding that could easily be spent on healthcare with little changes to tax.

And that brings me to the idea of personal responsibility. In America we believe equally in success and sadly failure. You have the freedom of any success you can earn, and you have the freedom to fail. There is no true freedom without the freedom to fail and so you're told growing up, or you should be, that nobody is going to do it for you. You learn that if you don't work hard, then you're going to find yourself living on the street, and thus you're motivated to go out there and work to better your own life. You learn not to be dependant on others.

Freedom should have nothing to do with life or death.

The problem with Obama Care is that it requires the government to reappropriate money from those who have it, to those who supposedly don't, and that is a fundamental dissagreement with the principles America was founded on.

That's what taxes already do with education.

Our Government collects taxes and is charged with spending them only in service to everybody. It paves roads, for everybody. It prevents corporate monopolies, for everybody. It enforces laws, for everybody. It defends our boarders, for everybody.

But Obama Care doesn't promiss to help everybody. It promisses to help those who for whatever reason have not aquired it on their own. Tax dollars in America are not given to help any one segment of society, and that is a major problem with this plan.

Health-care does help everybody. It means that those who are paying too much need to pay less for the same services. Taxes would pay for health-care for everybody, like in Britain, France, Cuba, Belgium and countless other countries.

We're not a socialist nation, and we don't want to be. Our nation works, and it is strong. Cuba, the former Soviet Union, and many other Socialist countries have found themselves in economic ruin and under social dicatatorships.

Socialism is not directly related to dictatorship. To my knowledge there are no dictatorships in Europe, whilst there are plenty of Scoalist countries.

Our country is strong and lives in freedom. For over 2 centuries America has been the beacon of freedom for the entire world, and there is no reason to change now at the whim of those who fail to see our strength.

Except to those who know better. Then they see that America is often as oppresed as third world countries. Especially concerning things such as health-care.

[Locke4God]

I'm curious why those of you who are pro socialized healthcare assume poorer people are incapable. Do they not have access to free education? I paid my own way through college by working full time to go to a reasonably pricey school at the University of Florida. Paid the whole thing myself working an entry level job. And there are much cheaper options. Is a person from a poorer background than I not capable of doing this? I'm just curious why there's this vision that poor people somehow have no chance or opportunity to better themselves in this country as though they're stupid and useless. When you see a person of meager standing do you simply assume they can't do better? Do you pass them off as lost causes? Do you think their children have no chance? To me, if you're going to offer somebody free healthcare, you're taking away their dignity. You're robbing them of the human condition. My view is simply tough love. Your kids don't grow strong because you spoil them. They don't learn indepedance if you do things for them. You have to instill people with the will to succeed and make themselves better, not take it away by babying them as though they're helpless children. I believe in everybody, and I believe everybody is strong and capable.

[Alpha]

@ Alpha & Ragna - Guys I just want to point out that I love America. It's my country, and I believe it to be the greatest in the world.

I look at America, and think "God, I do not want to live there." I respect your nationalism, but be objective about it. Your country has some fundamental flaws.

Why people don't like Obama Care, is that it gives more power to the government. It's not that we're unconcerned with poor people, it's that we above all else, do not want to relinquish our freedoms.

Obamacare will give the freedom of healthcare to anyone who requires it. He's not going to take your children.

Why would I believe in the most free country on earth that there is somebody who just can't do it for themselves?

"Most free" country?

And people can't "do it for themselves" because not everyone can be rich. There are only so many top jobs, and if there were anymore, then people would be holding them already. Any capitalist nation is going to have inequality. It's what they are based on. But when inequality gets to the point where people cannot afford to be healthy (and thus to have a decent standard of living), then someone needs to step in and take responsibility. This someone is the government. I mean, are you going to do it?

And that brings me to the idea of personal responsibility. In America we believe equally in success and sadly failure. You have the freedom of any success you can earn, and you have the freedom to fail. There is no true freedom without the freedom to fail and so you're told growing up, or you should be, that nobody is going to do it for you. You learn that if you don't work hard, then you're going to find yourself living on the street, and thus you're motivated to go out there and work to better your own life. You learn not to be dependant on others.

So people have the freedom to fail. So what happens when they do (inevitably) fail? We can't all succeed. Should we just leave them be, and say, "well, should've tried harder when you were twelve." That is not a free society. That is not a fair society. That is why people look at America and realise how lucky they are to not live there.

The problem with Obama Care is that it requires the government to reappropriate money from those who have it, to those who supposedly don't, and that is a fundamental dissagreement with the principles America was founded on.

So it does not accord with the Protestant work ethic. Does that mean that it can't be done? Look to the future, not the past. We don't live in the 1700s anymore.

Our Government collects taxes and is charged with spending them only in service to everybody. It paves roads, for everybody. It prevents corporate monopolies, for everybody. It enforces laws, for everybody. It defends our boarders, for everybody.

It does not provide (free) healthcare, for everybody.

For over 2 centuries America has been the beacon of freedom for the entire world, and there is no reason to change now at the whim of those who fail to see our strength.

A beacon of freedom which has invaded multiple countries, notably Iraq, when the international community largely denounced an invasion? A nation which has propped up corrupt governments, given weapons to the Taleban to fight the Soviets, and then gone and fought the Taleban? Strength, or abuse of power? [Yes, this is off-topic.]

[Zardoch]

EDIT: Didn't want to double post, so I'm adding my response to Alpha as well.

The thing is that basically every country in the world, and most likely a lot of Americans, see this stand-offish approach to Universal Health Care to be completely selfish.

Selfish? SELFISH?! How is allowing people the FREEDOM to succeed (or fail depending on THEIR responsibility) selfish? Are Europeans or non-Americans in general some enlightened group of intellectual free thinkers that tolerate anything except anyone or thing that disagrees with them? Universal healthcare destroys societies (which has been historically proven) and you have the balls to call Americans selfish because they don't want to give up the one thing that makes America greater than any other country. It's not selfish to want to protect the freedoms that were bestowed upon us because we don't want to jump onto the universal healthcare bandwagon.

Some people CAN'T pay for their health-care and it's not fair that such a basic human right should be taken from them. The right to live.

But most CAN pay for it. Out of the supposed 50 million who can't pay for it (which is mathematically improbable in itself), only 3 or 4 people out of 10 in the entirety of that 50 million can't truly afford health insurance. Quite often, these people also seem to be illegal, which creates a wall between actually helping immigrants and the law. Even then, no hospital refuses treatment to anyone.

Here's the thing about your argument. You're talking about semantics, NOT the basic God given freedoms of America. Yes, everyone has the right to live, but no one has the right to force other people to bend over so they can reap the benefits of leeching on the system. Furthermore, as sad as it sounds, illegals have no rights because they are illegal. It doesn't mean we won't treat them when they require medical assistance since they are human beings after all, but it also doesn't mean we're going to pay for their insurance out of our own pocket when we already have so much other economic issues besides health insurance.

As for those who are legal and don't have insurance, I can tell you most of them are people who choose to not have insurance. Hell, here are some figures for you.

About 201.7 mil have public or private insurance. 80.3 mil have government insurance. That totals to 282 million people who have insurance out of--wait for it--300 million people. So that leaves 18 million who are actually uninsured, for which most are--again--people who choose not to have insurance.

GetLiberty.org >> Home

I know that there are special clinics that give free treatment to the poor and many other different iniatives that try to stop poor people from dieing on the street. But think about it this way, because you're rich does that give you anymore right-to-life than a poor person?

First, how about the fact that a lot of those poor people are poor because they made the wrong decisions? And then, despite that, some of these same people choose to use any money given to them for drugs, alcohol, or sex instead of saving up and actually having the ambition or motivation to get a job. Again, these people are humans beings and deserve the right to be treated, but again we shouldn't have to pay for other peoples' mistakes.

Second, do you know how many rich people are actually in the U.S? About 1% of the freaking population. That's about 3 million. That leaves 297 million people who aren't rich, and for the most part, try to make it through the day working off debts and other economic issues. What you're trying to do is get a knee-jerk reaction out of people with the idea that rich people are some how an evil entity. In such a case, I have two questions for you.

Where do you think this country gets its' freaking jobs? Do you think someone with a 250,000 yearly salary would make a difference by being forced to donate money he or she earned for the sake of the commonwealth? Or do you think that it's even ethical to force someone to donate ANY of their money to people who more or less are leeches upon a society? Hell, here's a third question. Don't rich people (or people who are better off in general) have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness just as much as any other American?

You know wanna know another fact? The more wealth people gain, the more common such people are willing to donate to groups such as the poor, illegal immigrants, minorities, or any other people who truly are suffering. And if you take that wealth away from them, they are less inclined to donate money when you take away the support that helps feed their families and their business and their communities.

With the current situation, a rich person can afford that life-saving surgery wheras a poorer person would not be able to. In the eyes of the world, it definetly looks like America is unconcerned about it's poor.

America is the most giving, donating, charitable country in the world, including all people within its borders. If you don't know that, you really are uninformed as the average obama supporter, and I don't say that to insult you. What I'm saying here is you need to gain a perspective and turn off your TV so you can actually learn about the issue; the why, the how, the what. Anyone who has watched Jon Stewart can make a statement such as yours and call it genius.

That's of course assuming that you're rich enough. You can't go to college if you're poor unless you get a scholarship in America. In 'socialist' Scotland every student has the right to a free University education assuming they have acceptable grades.

You know, some people--who also happen to be poor--actually decide to pick themselves, get a GED (which is equivalent to a HS diploma these days), and get into many colleges of their choice through hard work and the motivation to succeed. In a Socialist America, that wouldn't be possible. You would get a terrible education, especially since there would be a decrease in teachers the same way there will be a decrease in doctors and people studying to be doctors if this healthcare bill passes. You see, the compromising price for communistic socialism is the quality of everything decreases. Though, at this point, with liberals running our schools as it is, it's no surprise how bad education is now, but it's not because of capitalism, rich people, or selfish Americans.

There are only so many upper-level positions in any company. Most of these positions will go to college-graduates, another missed opportunity for the poor.

Yeah, because people who go to college, including those poor people who actually get off their ass to make something of themselves, work and learn enough to get the positions they deserve. You know the great thing about America though? More opportunities are created everyday. That won't last the way this country is going and again, it's not capitalism, rich people, selfish Americans, or college graduates fault.

They most likely are. The problem is that some things such as food and shelter do normally eat into pay-cheques.

Yeah, it's called getting a job, paying your bills, and having a life. It sucks, but at least you gain such things from your own work and responsibility.

That is a rather selfish statement. You don't know what these people have to go through.

Oh shit, my knee jerked into a 180 spin.

On a serious note, YOU have no idea what ANYONE has to go through but YOURSELF. Don't sit there in a seat a judgment and think that because some people don't want to be forced to pay for someone else when that someone else could get a job a pay for themselves that that they're any better or worse. Yeah, it sounds selfish, but it wouldn't be called freedom if it were selfish.

As a country you support every student under the age of 18. Remember the public school system? You're helping them with that, as everybody else did with your education. Do you think America would be as 'civilised' as it is today without free basic education.

What makes you think public schools are free? I'm pretty sure on the day before I went to my first day of school I remember my mom talking about paying the money required to enroll me into the public school. The money to PAY for all the crap schools use has to come from somewhere. Again, free education means less quality, which means less intelligence from kids who can't get the best education because people like you want everyone to get a cookie.

The only countries in the world that believe that are the U.S. themselves, alongside a few poverty-stricken countries that don't know any better. Clearly a country that shuns the impoverish sick and refuses to allow legal immigration to unskilled workers cannot be considered free.

Where the hell did you get such facts? America ENDORSES people such as legal immigrants because those immigrants have the balls to do the job many other people want. THAT is what started America in the first place as immigrants from all over the world worked their ass off to pay for their family and IF (a big IF) they ever were able to find some comfortable wealth, they'd pay for their communities as well.

Do you really think every poor-person has this mentallity?

I doubt he does, but he probably is explaining the very type of people who--in the millions--suck on the government programs like vampire sucking on a person who has an infinite amount of blood. Some poor people live their lives because they made it way. The poor people who actually had everything taken away, however, are in the few.

Also remember that it isn't just you who is paying for him to go to the doctor. Everyone is. The same as everyone would be paying for you to go to the doctor.

Yeah, which also means that the quality of both care and doctors will be worse. Yay for universal healthcare!

Bypass heart-surgery apparently costs $20,000. I'm not sure how insurance works in the US, however I doubt most insurers would cover the entire cost of the operation. Especially if there is a history in the family of heart problems.

Yeah, that's the point of insurance. It doesn't cover everything, but MOST of it so that you can comfortably pay off the rest with the money you earned from working your ass off. Sounds like a good deal to me.

In the UK, this procedure would be entirely free to the patient. And any other patient who needed the procedure. They may need to wait a little while longer than an American. But any cost of the surgery would already have been paid for by the tax-payers.

Yeah, and a lot of people were denied surgery and the like because they HAD to wait, which if they would have, they would've died. That's a bad thing. Furthermore, places like Canada bans private insurance or in the U.K. people are penalized for going to other countries (i.e. USA) to NOT die. There was even one issue where women who had breast cancer would either be denied coverage and it became illegal for them to seek outside help, mostly because the law-makers deemed such women worthless because of their disease.

-chants English anthem-

And before anyone starts about the taxes, remember this, America does not need to have such a massive millitary. They have alliances, and their 'friends have adequete millitaries. Why should America need a bigger millitary that requires funding that could easily be spent on healthcare with little changes to tax.

You know, this is one thing I almost agree with you on, but one other fact you have to remember is most people in the military volunteered. We have a massive military because there are people who want to serve their country AND the fact that our economy has done so well that we could afford it.

Freedom should have nothing to do with life or death.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

It most certainly has nothing to do with death, but everything to do with life; Socialism, communism, universal healthcare; they are the bringers of death upon a civilization.

Health-care does help everybody. It means that those who are paying too much need to pay less for the same services. Taxes would pay for health-care for everybody, like in Britain, France, Cuba, Belgium and countless other countries.

Paying too much? How is that a bad thing? If someone is paying premiums on healthcare and getting what they pay for, where's the problem?

Socialism is not directly related to dictatorship. To my knowledge there are no dictatorships in Europe, whilst there are plenty of Scoalist countries.

No, but if socialism continues to gain ground, there WILL be dictators. I can predict that very thing happening within the future. You see, creating a commonwealth among everyone has a huge flaw. Not EVERYONE is exempted from the laws created under a socialistic country. Read up on the Soviet Union and you'll understand what I mean.

Except to those who know better. Then they see that America is often as oppresed as third world countries. Especially concerning things such as health-care.

Know better? That's why the U.K. is bankrupt, right? Because they somehow 'know better'.

BigGovHealth | Learn the Facts

Gain a new perspective.

I look at America, and think "God, I do not want to live there." I respect your nationalism, but be objective about it. Your country has some fundamental flaws.

That's your right to believe that and I won't deny there are flaws with our system. Most, however, are not created by the people who believe on the Constitution.

Obamacare will give the freedom of healthcare to anyone who requires it. He's not going to take your children.

And Obamacare is also going to happen to force everything into a single-payer option, which includes such things as forcing employers to force their employees to accept Obama's option or else pay overly expensive fees.

"Most free" country?

You betcha. When I look at Europe, South America, Africa, China, Australia, and Japan, I think to myself, "Good lord, I wish no one lived over there or at least had a chance to have the kind of freedom and prosperity we have." We are the most free, the most strong, the best of the best. Here's a video to help prove that.

Pajamas TV - Afterburner with Bill Whittle - Bill Maher, Barack Obama and the Truth About American Exceptionalism

There's your objectivity.

And people can't "do it for themselves" because not everyone can be rich. There are only so many top jobs, and if there were anymore, then people would be holding them already. Any capitalist nation is going to have inequality. It's what they are based on. But when inequality gets to the point where people cannot afford to be healthy (and thus to have a decent standard of living), then someone needs to step in and take responsibility. This someone is the government. I mean, are you going to do it?

Either you have some twisted understanding of what capitalism is or you simply are as uninformed as the average anti-war protestor. Capitalism creates the oppurtunity to get out from under the rock by having the determination to support yourself, your family, and in some cases, your community (as I said). If you think it's unfair, well, I suppose it is in the sense that it's about competition. If you're smarter than the other person who was interviewed for the same job, chances are you'll get the job. That's what drives a free economy; the ability to either do better than the next man or give the best deal to the person who requires your service. If you destroy that competition, then quality goes down (as I said) and it no longer increases economically.

So people have the freedom to fail. So what happens when they do (inevitably) fail? We can't all succeed. Should we just leave them be, and say, "well, should've tried harder when you were twelve." That is not a free society. That is not a fair society. That is why people look at America and realise how lucky they are to not live there.

Alright, well here's something I'm not sure you're familiar with. People have the freedom to succeed OR fail due to their responsibility. If someone makes responsible decisions and takes care of whatever wealth they have, gaining knowledge and investing in somethings, they might do well. In the case of failure, in the end, they still have what's most important; life. Which means they have another chance to succeed. In a socialistic or communistic society, you wouldn't have any chance, period. You're just another robot to get in line and do your job.

Furthermore, such things like socialism and communism take away individuality. When you have a country dedicated to helping every single person, it destroys the chance to have your own wealth to do the things you want to do and how you want to do it.

So yes, life not be may not be fair, but capitalism at least gives people a greater chance to succeed. That's the point.

So it does not accord with the Protestant work ethic. Does that mean that it can't be done? Look to the future, not the past. We don't live in the 1700s anymore.

Yeah, we're not in Soviet Union either, thank God.

It does not provide (free) healthcare, for everybody.

As well it shouldn't. In fact, it's against the Constitution and the bill of rights for the congress to even try to provide healthcare. Yes, it's actually illegal.

A beacon of freedom which has invaded multiple countries, notably Iraq, when the international community largely denounced an invasion? A nation which has propped up corrupt governments, given weapons to the Taleban to fight the Soviets, and then gone and fought the Taleban? Strength, or abuse of power? [Yes, this is off-topic.]

Invade? How about set free, minus Vietnam? I guess someone such as yourself wouldn't mind defending a man who killed thousands upon thousands of his own people to keep himself in power (i.e. Saddam). Or you might defend Hitler because he was such a misunderstood individual, especially since a lot of what he propagated was liberal and socialistic too.

Again, I won't deny such things as certain people in our government selling shit to our enemies (something that angers me quite a bit), but compared to any other country in history, the U.S. of A. has done such things the world never even knew existed. Great things, free things, wondrous things. And it's not because we're simply better than everyone. Hell, like the video I linked you to mentioned that after WW2, we had such military power that NO ONE could have challenged at that time. Yet what did we do? We went home. We even sent aid to those who would spit in our face.

If you were to judge us upon our actions and not our words, you'd stop and think for a moment what America truly represents. It may not be perfect. It may not be socialistic. But by God in heaven, it's the only thing that keeps this world sane even in the screams of people who hate us. You don't want to live here? That's a pity because as an America, even I would give you my bed if it meant giving you the feet to walk on your own.

[Alpha]

Universal healthcare destroys societies (which has been historically proven) and you have the balls to call Americans selfish because they don't want to give up the one thing that makes America greater than any other country. It's not selfish to want to protect the freedoms that were bestowed upon us because we don't want to jump onto the universal healthcare bandwagon.

Aside from the fact that I disagree with you on every conceivable level, how does universal healthcare destroy societies? Is that the reason the Soviet Union collapsed? Besides, they were communist, not socialist; there's a distinction. Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Europe, many non-Western states (such as Morocco, apparently), have socialised healthcare. When exactly did they crumble?

...do you know how many rich people are actually in the U.S? About 1% of the freaking population.

Do you know that the richest 20% of the American population earns 80% of the wealth? And that the top 5 richest people in the united states have a combined wealth equal to that of multitudes of poor nations? That 1% sure are rich, and that bottom rung of society sure is poor. Fancy sharing some of that around?

[Violet]

Did you also know that by "Rich" they don't just mean THEE rich? They also mean people in middle class. People who are well off and not using wellfare.. and are citizens. People like me.

[Zardoch]

Aside from the fact that I disagree with you on every conceivable level, how does universal healthcare destroy societies? Is that the reason the Soviet Union collapsed? Besides, they were communist, not socialist; there's a distinction. Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Europe, many non-Western states (such as Morocco, apparently), have socialised healthcare. When exactly did they crumble?

If you would have read more of my response, you would have realized the how. Socialism leads a country where the quality of things degenerates. You can't suspect anything to get better when even the government can't pay for the services people like you want so bad. No civilization can live on such a system unless there is one global currency controlled by the largest central bank and that, my friend, is exactly what is described in revelations as the system of the beast. Not only that, but such a system would be the scariest thing when it comes to controlling peoples' lives on a maximum level. One of Obama's czars said they wouldn't mind a global currency too. Nothing can go wrong there, huh?

Do you know that the richest 20% of the American population earns 80% of the wealth? And that the top 5 richest people in the united states have a combined wealth equal to that of multitudes of poor nations? That 1% sure are rich, and that bottom rung of society sure is poor. Fancy sharing some of that around?

Did you know that 20% (probably less, actually) are the ones who pay for jobs, which in turn allows people to use the money they earned giving services to other people?

As for the 1%, why don't you ask them? I'm pretty certain they donating TONS of money to charities in the billions if not trillions, though half of the reason is based on taxes. I'd call that a win-win.

Did you also know that by "Rich" they don't just mean THEE rich? They also mean people in middle class. People who are well off and not using wellfare.. and are citizens. People like me.

Lol, if there's more people of the middle-high class in America, that's a good thing. It means more people are getting enough money to live comfortably, take care of their family, and in a lot of cases donate their money.

[Jin]

Socialism leads a country where the quality of things degenerates. You can't suspect anything to get better when even the government can't pay for the services people like you want so bad. No civilization can live on such a system unless there is one global currency controlled by the largest central bank and that, my friend, is exactly what is described in revelations as the system of the beast. [Was this put in for dramatic effect or is that actually an argument?] Not only that, but such a system would be the scariest thing when it comes to controlling peoples' lives on a maximum level. One of Obama's czars said they wouldn't mind a global currency too. Nothing can go wrong there, huh?

Just a clarification in case I've misinterpreted. Are you actually comparing a country with socialized medicine to a fully socialist country or are you claiming that civilizations decay simply as a result of socialized medicine? Or is it something completely different that I've missed? The former two don't make much sense, so I'm guessing it's the latter.

[Alpha]

Socialism leads a country where the quality of things degenerates. You can't suspect anything to get better when even the government can't pay for the services people like you want so bad. No civilization can live on such a system unless there is one global currency controlled by the largest central bank and that, my friend, is exactly what is described in revelations as the system of the beast.

Things can only improve in a system where some people cannot access the services they need and deserve due to a lack of money. They can afford socialised healthcare in New Zealand, but not in America?

And the Book of Revelations does not predict Obamacare, in fact it speaks of Conquest, War, Famine, and Death. Does Obamacare bring these?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._vasnetsov.jpg

It would be kind of cool if it did, but it doesn't. It brings equal and equitable access to healthcare - a First World luxury, no doubt.

[Locke4God]

@ Alpha - Listen I don't care if you don't want to live here, but America is great and always has been. We won WWII for the whole world.

And I don't understand how you can belief that socialism is somehow supperior. We're the richest country on earth as you keep pointing out. I love capitalism. I know I can be as successful as I can be.

And it seems, since you appear to be in jubilation not to be living here, that you think the country is some crap hole with beggers running around all over the place. You do realize that this whole healthcare thing is being fought over for the benefit of just 5 million people. Maybe 7. We have 300 Million living here. Almost all of us are doing pretty darn good thank you very much.

Perhaps you'd like Cuba. Socialism seems to be working great there. Or maybe in Russia the entirety of the entire 20th Century. Oh yeah those were some good times. Are there any places in the world where Capitalism seems to be a bust. If there are it'd be a first. Socialism has already failed numerous times. Not everywhere of course, but it's pretty clear that it's not the stongest system.

America's interest has been always first and formost to prevent dictatorship & tyranny. And we do that by giving strength to the individual. If you start taking that away, the entire point it mute. We do not socialize industry here in America. It's just not what we do. The day that fails, I'll listen to what you have to say, but it hasn't failed, we're strong, and proud of our military might, and I'm not standing around while some freshman poser president like Obama tries to tear down what we've built.

[Sean]

I'm for this bill, and I knew it would be coming and this was a major reason I supported Obama. This country is ~ half and half Republican vs Democrat, and for some reason the Republicans are so ****ing scared of anything resembling communism or socialism it's sickening. But then you look at the fact that most republicans are racist, uneducated, backwoods ****tards and you realize why it's the case.

I'm all for a strong centralized government. I'd rather see the local governments begin losing power, because all they're doing is wasting money here and there, and certain states are in massive deficits and eating the profits from the states that are not.

This bill will help lower the overall cost of health care in America. The United States government will become a Health Care Provider, the same as any other Health Insurer in the nation that currently overcharges and gouges people, lowering the overall income a family is able to have and hurting companies. I don't see why it's such an issue that, basically, the US government is trying to enter the private market sector of business.

Hell they own a huge portion of GM now. Why is that? Because no one would invest money into the would-be dead company besides the US Government.

Obama's Health Care will not impact the private sector, it will, however, force private companies to lower their rates to be actually affordable. I'm sure this also has something to do with the corporations that own and control hospitals, as well, since if you end up getting a hospital bill that insurance doesn't cover (or you don't have any) then you're more than likely being billed more than they would've billed your insurance company.

And while you cannot be refused medical treatment under any circumstances, you can be completely financially ruined for the rest of your life as a result of a severe and life-threatening illness.

Personally? I worked a full time job for 40-50 hours a week and made 26,000 a year doing it. That wasn't enough for me to even get my own place on, much less buy health insurance (which, when I got a quote, was $300/mo). That's the median income for a LOT of workers who don't have a college education. I'm also white and "middle class", which means I don't qualify for a free college education, yet I cannot afford to pay for it myself.

Instead just to get ahead I'm now working for $500-600 a month and digging massive holes of debt to get my education so I CAN make it into a job field that will pay me more than $26 grand/year. Even though I was in a job field that was one of the hardest and most demanding, and that 9 out of 10 people or more would completely sink if they were attempting to do.

Where's that leave me if I get sick with a severe illness? I can't afford the $250/mo it costs me to own a car, the $60 a month it costs me in gas for travel, the law-required car insurance I have to have for $200/mo, the insane prices food costs, which ranges upwards of $200/mo. (That's ~ 6 dollars a day. I'd really like to see someone live on less than $150/mo on food) Where am I supposed to shit $300/mo for health insurance on top of that?

[Locke4God]

@ Sean - Did you just say you support Communism? Is that not what we spent the entire 20th Century trying to defeat? Need I say more?

[Andromeda]

Did you also know that by "Rich" they don't just mean THEE rich? They also mean people in middle class. People who are well off and not using wellfare.. and are citizens. People like me.

Just a further note to that amusing thing. Politicians play with numbers for their needs. Did you know that when I was working I was considered in the poor category for the wealth by government standards? I made $12 an hour I was considered poor. That's better than McDonalds and minimum wage and they still said I was "poor". Because I made under a certain amount each year. Poor is no longer an very accurate term to be using and nor is rich, in the definitions that government and public institutions use them. And what's better? The government wanted to increase the bar that would be called poor, so suddenly there are more poor people who are actually living sustained lives on their own feet and they're poor. I had full benefits too. I certainly wasn't middle-class, but I never saw myself as poor either.

I found that pretty entertaining when I heard that I was considered poor by the government standards.

As for the main subject at hand. I completely agree with Griffith. I had a lot more to say, but there's been others that have said what I said.

A fun article about European Health Care when I googled searched.

Europe's free health care has a hefty price tag - USATODAY.com

From USA Today and the AP. France's health care is in debt and continues to be for years. Other European's countries facing similar issue and now forced to make cut backs on insurance.

Medicine for breast cancer that the US had been using and been approved didn't even make over for patients in the UK for another 4 years when they could have been getting help from it.

It doesn't sound like Europe has all the answers for health care either. They're still trying to make it work and not run into debt. The US is already in a huge debt and going to be even bigger soon. We don't need to be going further into debt and then cutting back on coverage because we can't afford to support the massive structure.

[Sean]

@ Sean - Did you just say you support Communism? Is that not what we spent the entire 20th Century trying to defeat? Need I say more?

Yes. That's exactly what I said.

Read my post above. The words "I support Communism" were there. Exactly like that.


Edit: I should clarify this a bit.

1. Nothing Obama has done or has proposed is Communist or Socialist. However Republicans try to always spin it as such in order to scare the rest of the country into not supporting anything. That's what I meant with my comment.

2. I do like the idea of socialized health care, though it has been proven to have failed miserably in Europe, fiscally at least.

The Public Option, however, is what the Obama Administration is pushing for. This is nothing but the US Government paying for one of many health care options that US Citizens have the ability to choose. The main reason I support this is I feel that the Public Option could, in a way, become the Wal-Mart of health insurance. People will flock to it because it's more affordable, which will cause other health care companies to lower their premiums in order to compete.

But this could go one of two ways since I'm pretty sure health care companies have to charge so much because hospitals charge so much. The issue is probably more related to the companies that own and operate the hospitals vs the companies that provide health insurance.

All in all, there's not enough information available to the public to answer all of the questions one can have, but I fail to see how affordable health care can be something people would not want to support. Unless, of course, you're watching too much Fox News and buying into their bullshit fairy tales of it being a socialist health care system where the government will control hospitals, doctors, and all health insurance companies.

[Che]

Everyone seems to be so caught up in these labels. Democrat, Republican, Communist, Socialist, etc. Where are the people who have an idea on each issue themselves. I can be democratic on one thing, and republican on the next. Oh wait, that's not what they are anymore. It's just another ****ing cult to join, like religion. Get, the fuck, OUT.

Sean, your breakdown of monthly spending was a great thing to post. It's ****ing true. Do people just argue about Obama because he's not ****ing Jesus like they were fooled to believe? You can argue with any president. What they have to do to get in office is irrelevant, because that's the game. That's how it works. The president can really only change so little, and Obama seems to be doing just fine. I'm not saying he's Abraham Lincoln. **** all you haters. Like you could do any better.

[Zardoch]

1. Nothing Obama has done or has proposed is Communist or Socialist. However Republicans try to always spin it as such in order to scare the rest of the country into not supporting anything. That's what I meant with my comment.

Funny you say that because just this week Glenn Beck revealed Van Jones (green job czar appointed by Obama) was a self-admitted communist and he is apart of the Apollo Alliance, a group of communist who also happened to write the freakin' stimulus bill that was pushed earlier this year, including the cap and trade bill. Not only that, Sean, but the Apollo Alliance has been writing these bills (or at least the stimulus) for nearly a year before Obama was even elected. You scared yet? I need a new pair of pants.

Communist-Linked Apollo Alliance Dictates to Congress

AGORAVOX - Actual Journalism in this video. Van Jones: Apollo Alliance, Self-Decribed Communist, and Obama’s "Green Jobs" Czar.

Jones had planned to move to Washington, DC, and had already landed a job and an apartment there. But in jail, he said, “I met all these young radical people of color — I mean really radical, communists and anarchists. And it was, like, ‘This is what I need to be a part of.’” Although he already had a plane ticket, he decided to stay in San Francisco. “I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary.” In the months that followed, he let go of any lingering thoughts that he might fit in with the status quo. “I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th,” he said. “By August, I was a communist.”

Furthermore, Sean, if you go on to read the second link, you'll see this.

..."Not many people seem to know Obama himself was once a member of the Democratic Socialist Party, as well as a Marxist political party, called the "New Party", in the 1990’s...."

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/g...asp?grpid=7434

2. I do like the idea of socialized health care, though it has been proven to have failed miserably in Europe, fiscally at least.

At least you're honest to admit that.

The Public Option, however, is what the Obama Administration is pushing for. This is nothing but the US Government paying for one of many health care options that US Citizens have the ability to choose. The main reason I support this is I feel that the Public Option could, in a way, become the Wal-Mart of health insurance. People will flock to it because it's more affordable, which will cause other health care companies to lower their premiums in order to compete.

And what a lot of people don't understand is EVERYONE is going to jump onto this new health care option like a Scrooge McDuck in a vault of gold, which in turn will DESTROY the private options altogether. That's not all what it's going to do.

51 Major Errors in the Proposed Health Bill
By a Medical Doctor

Here's how the logic works. You wave something free in someones' face, chances are they're going to grab it. You see most people when they're faced with an issue of paying for something or getting the same thing free (as misguided as they are) are no doubt going to be making the easiest decision in their life.

This is not what economic competition is about. You couldn't even fit such logic into capitalism because capitalism requires two opposing businesses with the same product trying to compete for the best deal/price for the customers. However, when one of the businesses just get rid of the price altogether, are you going to tell me no one will hit that like a rapper in a strip club?

All in all, there's not enough information available to the public to answer all of the questions one can have, but I fail to see how affordable health care can be something people would not want to support.

^ -points to my earlier points-

Unless, of course, you're watching too much Fox News and buying into their bullshit fairy tales of it being a socialist health care system where the government will control hospitals, doctors, and all health insurance companies.

I just proved to you that that fairy tale is very real. The question now is are you going to create your own fairy tale where none of what I've shown you is true and I'm the wicked witch of the right. Carrying swastikas and organizing astroturf movement at my disposal.

I'll get you and your little czars too, nyah!

[Govinda]

See, what I don't get here is that America is already pretty socialist. (Locke and Co, SOCIALIST and COMMUNIST are DIFFERENT THINGS.) You guys even have a nationalised post office. Why should you pay so that others can recieve their mail on time? Right now, one of your American post people is ferrying a letter of mine to New Mexico. You're paying for my foreign letter to be transported, you filthy Communists you.

People do not have more opportunity in America. I don't know why people keep saying this. Life is not easy as a poor person in Europe; but if you work hard (which you have to do) and better yourself they'll help you along the way. Locke, I think you said you worked full time to fund your university career? Dude, that must have sucked. My government helps me to pay my rent, and also covers my tuition fees, so that I only have to work part-time, and if I wasn't so fond of having a comfortable life I wouldn't have to work at all. Doesn't that sound better? Not only do you have more time to socialise and gain contacts this way, but there's plenty more study hours too.

Socialism does not degrade the quality of anything. America is not going to be at the helm for much longer. Japan, Socialist cesspit Japan, has you trumped in technology. China's military is almost bigger, and you owe them a lot of cash. And Europe isn't, as some people like to think, dead. We've got plenty of advanced projects on the go here. Hell, even the European Union itself; ladies and gents, it's the first supranational organisation anywhere, a testament to Europe's desire to work together for the best results. Also, we're totally going to blow y'all up with CERN, so chill.

Diverting funds from America's military to its healthcare is silly. They will never go for that. Anyone who suggested it would be called a Communist.

I think that all Americans deserve affordable healthcare. I don't get why everyone's so opposed to it over there, seeing as your taxes pretty much pay for a lot of things for other people anyway. Roads, schools... and mail. Mail could easily be nationalised, but you won't do it, because then it won't be the American postal service.

If some smart PR guy comes along for Obama and convinces Americans that universal healthcare is patriotic, which it is*, it will pass. Otherwise it's going to crash and burn.

Another thing that gets me is that you guys are already using a universal model; you're just paying the wrong people, and thus being charged more than you should. If you pay $500 per month for healthcare, chances are you're not going to need that $500 every month. That money goes as profit, and to pay for the healthcare of others. Now then. Why not cut out that profit section? This is how you pay less under universal healthcare. You just pay for everyone's treatment; end of. It's cheaper for you, and everyone gets treatment. Americans find this hard to understand sometimes, but there will be nobody between you and your doctor. The government just pays the wages. End of.

(Healthcare is patriotic because it is you giving your money to support your nation and its citizens. It's selfish not to; how can you sit there comfortably while other people in your own country are poor and get bankrupted by hospital bills? Yes, any emergency department in America is obliged to take you in and treat you. But they'll also charge you massively once you're gone. Pulling yourself up by your bootstraps is not easy, and we're all trying to work towards a world where nobody has to. America's rampant individualism and disregard for poverty is one of its defining characteristics. How the hell are you meant to see yourself as a career person if all you've ever known is your parents selling crack in the living room?)

[Locke4God]

I was thinking about the famous JFK quote, JFK being a guy Obama likes to compare himself too, and both were quite popular. JFK of course said, "Ask not what your country can do for you," and he was right. I might wonder why we're doing the exact opposite of that now?

@ Sean - I mean seriously if you support the idea of Communism you've got no business making decisions in this country. I'm sure you're a great guy, but communist ideas are just flat out not acceptable here.

All countries are social experiments, and some formula's work better than others. I fully admit that communism on paper looks great, and if some country out there can get it right, then more power to them, but the United States is simply not interested in that approach.

[RagnaToad]

Funny you say that because just this week Glenn Beck revealed Van Jones (green job czar appointed by Obama) was a self-admitted communist and he is apart of the Apollo Alliance, a group of communist who also happened to write the freakin' stimulus bill that was pushed earlier this year, including the cap and trade bill. Not only that, Sean, but the Apollo Alliance has been writing these bills (or at least the stimulus) for nearly a year before Obama was even elected. You scared yet? I need a new pair of pants.

You did not just mention Glenn Beck... Even Sasquatch knows what a retard that is.

This thread is starting to get sad.

I can't even begin to explain how ridiculous the 'fear' for (so-called) socialist health care changes in the US is.

If you won't even allow your government to take care of her own people, you might as well tell all politicians to go suck a hard one. You would earn more respect from yours truly too.

The thing is that Americans are so hung up and paranoid about their 'freedom' being taken away by the state, communist nigger being in office deciding if you're granny is going to be unplugged or not and just don't want the government to do what they are supposed to do. If the US is the greatest nation in the world (I'm playing along here), why are Northern Europeans the people who are happiest about their country?

And guess what. 'socialist' isn't even a bad word over here. I'm a socialist. Imagine that.

It cracks me up when Republicans and conservatives call Obama a communist.

You wouldn't know a communist if it bit you in the ass.

(On a sidenote and to back Govinda: I'd rather be a poor fucker in Belgium than anywhere else in the world. Especially the US.)

[Jeordam]

the more that I think about it, the more that I just don't like the government running something of this importance. Two things come to mind....the first is the "Cash for Clunkers" program. Besides being...well foolish to begin with...the estimates on both cost & time scale were completely off. Do we really think that the government is able to accurately estimate the cost of this program (which will be huge) or the time scale of effectiveness?

And then the second thing that comes to mind is the US Postal Service (which we all use). Every single year, it runs a deficit...and it seems that every single year, they raise the prices for stamps. The government has a very long track record of not being able to effectively run a business. They have no reason to even try...since they immediately undercut any competitors. They can do this since they *can* run in the red...no business can do that for very long.

As for why the concepts of socialism (or the application to communism) doesn't sit well with Americans? Because by its very nature, socialism assumes that every is entitled to what everyone else has. That isn't true. Some work harder than others. Some are smarter, more innovative, and just more accomplished. This isn't a matter of equality in our persons, but instead a distinction that there is an inherant inequality of what we each accomplish in life.

The crack-head or the high-school drop out or even the unlucky person does not *deserve* the flat screen TV....or the PS3....or their hybrid car. We are not "entitled" to good things....and guess what. We are not even entitled to necessary things. We have a bill of rights which ennumerates our rights...and health care is *not* one of them.

~Jeordam