If the USA doesn't give 100% 'Basic' Medical Coverage to its People - It is Evil

My god there are so many incredibly callous and selfish people on ats. Presumably ones who have not had their partner or child struck down with cancer.

Get some perspective. Christ.

america is basically an amalgamation of 3rd world countries for the most part and not a single super rich state like many are led to believe.

maybe if the US government actually controlled every part of the economy then we probably could afford everything people seem to expect us to, like universal healthcare, but it just doesn't work that way.

a reply to: Xcathdra

If Abe Lincoln was POTUS today, would he give Basic Health Care as a citizen right?

FIRST - Notice - I did not say comprehensive medical coverage [ie. the best doctors, reconstructive beautification surgery, etc] - I am talking about basic cradle to grave medical coverage for every American citizen as is the case in almost, if not all, developed industrial nations [ie. England, France, Canada, Australia, etc., etc.].

That is an 'untruth' to put it nicely.

Medicaid to medicare.

Cradle to effing grave.

The largest single insurer in the country. The US government.

Which has more people on those programs than most EU countries combined.

Spin us another tale.

originally posted by: Doxanoxa
a reply to: Xcathdra

If Abe Lincoln was POTUS today, would he give Basic Health Care as a citizen right?

YES !!!

Abe Lincoln is quoted as having said:

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time".
-Abraham Lincoln, (attributed) 16th president of US (1809 - 1865)


The Abraham Lincoln of tomorrow will say:

We can partially insure some of the people all of the time, and fully insure all of the people some of the time, and if we are to advance as a nation, as a world, into the future, we must insure all of the people all of the time.
- Abraham Lincoln II [aka: the alter ego of Donald Trump, current President of the US]

Number of first world countries that don't have socialized (wOwOwo spooky word!) healthcare:

USA

a reply to: Groot

I like taxing all politicians lobby money, political donations and special interest money at

.......mmmm....

100%

Way I see it is life ain't free. Nothing is free. Healthcare is immensely expensive and no matter what you do people are going to die because the finances or other resources weren't there.

So t he question then is how much do we become our brothers keeper? We'll never save everyone, but we can stretch selflessness to its limits trying to care for everyone.

My fear is in our pursuit of being the brothers keeper, we'll lose our essential liberties. Especially if it's coming from above, from government. I don't think we'll ever be a perfectly eusocial collectivist society. I think all societies will fall somewhere inbetween individual and collective. Whilst I might have fear of what we become, I can't change the fundamental rules of this universe, whatever they might be. It may be the case losing some of our former liberties is natural and fit, and the vast majority of us will deem it a righteous and due thing.

This is one of the reasons I voted libertarian. It might be a dumb choice. I tend to be weary of government. Mostly because I think people in power don't represent us well and we the people are mostly selfish or otherwise misguided. Sometimes I think we should be blaming our universe, but I know that'll never work. We have to blame something we can fix. Nevertheless, being things as they're, I favour smaller government and more personal accountability and decentralization.

Maybe someday we'll have our utopia, but I hope it's not forced on everyone. It reminds me of that action flick from the 60's. It went something like "It's your perfect world. I don't want your perfect world."

I believe out in the universe in time or space there're many alien societies of different kinds. There're selfish ones. Unselfish ones. More or less perfect ones, yet others genuine hells. No matter what happens here, how good or bad it gets, somebody(s) out there are enjoying life.

Healthcare is NOT a right

a reply to: jonnywhite

this is how I see it though....
I've watched the gov't expand and expand the programs, increasing the amount of income that one can have to be eligible, making more and more subsets of special people who are accommodated even more...
every time they have expanded the healthcare programs, soon afterwards, the health insurance companies have not only increased the rates but also have given themselves nice really big bonuses and salary increases. so, although the expansions have taken care of some who were left out of the loop so to speak, more have been added by the increased rates... and up the incomes scale it's climbed...

"freedom" and "liberty" requires independence! the more and more people who find themselves unable to meet their own needs, the more and more the government will find ways to ensure that they are able to, be it gov't handouts or lax credit policies... either way, freedom and liberty goes up in smoke. and it's not just those who's income fall below the standard of living, it's the businesses who depend on those people to be customers, of their employees to be healthy enough to work, and usually find themselves having to go deeply into debt to keep their businesses running..

in my area of the country, over 50% of the revenue brought into the healthcare providers come from those gov't programs... and those healthcare providers are some of the biggest employers in some areas.
to put it plain and simply we are all dependent on a cycle that is a self feeding, devouring monster.

and neither party is even coming close to offering a solution to it! the dems want to just keep feeding the monster more and more...
the republicans seem to think that they can just stop the handouts and the people will just pick themselves up by the bootstraps and continue going to their low wage jobs and working hard...
neither is in the least bit realistic.

a reply to: cleverhans

good, then stop the handouts!! let's see what happens..
should be interesting.

a reply to: AlienView

So you're saying that people have a right to the labor and services of others? Do we enslave doctors if they are unwilling or unable to provide adequate care? Do we limit care or tell those with terminal illnesses that they need to "die with dignity?" Do we tax the rest of the country at 40% to pay for all this like the other countries do? What then of the illegals that continuously enter our country for free services?
We had affordable healthcare for most. In California we had county clinics that offered low cost healthcare, as well as private clinics. You could go to a hospital without being able to pay and they would often waive your fees. Once Obamacare came into play suddenly people were forced to pay for expensive healthcare, most county health clinics closed, and even private clinics closed. Most private clinics will now not take you unless you have obamacare coverage. Meanwhile the rest of us are paying 30% or more for our premiums. But hey its a one sided moral issue right?
I'd say we have a right to access to healthcare, and if the government didn't meddle and allowed a free market prices would be more affordable.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: AlienView

Please point out in the US Constitution where its required.

4 things greather than the constitution are;
Jesus, Texas, The Marine Corps and Ford Trucks.
And #1 believes the golden
rule is better than someone losing everything
because they or a family member got sick.

a reply to: 200Plus

you have the right pursue happiness but you don`t have the right to achieve it,but if your right to life isn`t being upheld how can you even pursue your right to pursue happiness?

if a person dies because they couldn`t afford whatever it was that they needed to stay alive then hasn`t their right to life been revoked merely on the basis of their financial status?

if it`s a god given right then it doesn`t matter how much money or how little money you have it`s still a right.
but if you only retain that right if you have enough money to pay for it then it isn`t a right.

in America your right to life is revoked if you can`t pay for healthcare,people who can afford to pay for healthcare retain that right,how can it be a god given right if ability to pay is the deciding factor in whether you retain that right or the right is revoked?

It's funny, a lot of liberals are atheists. These are the people who are scared as hell of dying. Some want to live forever, especially the very rich ones. Well, I've got news for you, dying isn't the worst thing that can happen to you. Matter of fact it is actually the only thing that is guaranteed to happen to you. They say taxes are too, but if you get stranded on an island you may not get taxed, but you will eventually die. Maybe if they would get a better god, they wouldn't be so scared of dying.
The real problem with healthcare is price. Prices are high because of third payer systems. Insurance companies only take a cut of the costs. They do not care about the costs (reducing them anyway). The more the better. Government doesn't do anything right, and since they are taxing and then paying out, they too are only taking a a cut (bear minimum of administrative costs, but much more in reality). Insurance and government need fixed payouts for all procedures, and health care providers should have to lists out all costs inclusively, so the patient can shop it and if they come in under, they get to pocket the difference. IMO, this is the only way to ever reverse the rising costs of healthcare.
And this whole notion that healthcare is a right is just plain stupid. What if there is no doctor? What about your right then? And since a doctor is required, does that mean someone is obligated to provide you with the doctor? If there is no money, do you get to force the doctor to work for free to provide you service. If you are taking the taxes from someone and paying the doctor with it, then you are forcing the laborer who paid the tax to work for free. If he doesn't want to do that, then that is involuntary servitude (THE PROBLEM WITH ALL DIRECT TAXATION!!!). So who here thinks that they have any right to force involuntary servitude?

a reply to: AlienView

Im sorry but in the US you can recieve emergency care or hospitlization at zero cost already.
Hospitals are not allowed to deny people care at all.

Those are basic medical rights in the US and long established.

Can they bill them, yes, can they ask for $500 up front, yes , do you have to pay it, No.
If its truly a problem are you more worried about your credit based on an unpaid bill or your life?


The problem the US has is abuse of the system already in place.

I work in healthcare and see able bodied men and women in their 20s coming in over and over trying to find something wrong so that they can get disability, cash a monthly check, and not pay for their insurance.

Thus they can live on their addiction of cheap or free narcotics without working and not paying back into a system that is supporting the old and infirmed already.

No one paying in, means double the burden. Its lost income to the system of funding and its also costly to support an able bodied person for 50 years of their life when you put them on the government tit at 24 years of age.

All the last 7 years has accomplished was to increase the costs of those buying healthcare by thousands of percent, while also increasing the out of pocket costs to unrealistic amounts.

I hope 50 million people lose medicaid, because i guarantee that 75 million are abusing the system.

We didnt become the greatest nation by sitting on our ass, we did it by hard work and blood shed protecting the very countries that are enjoying those benefits.

You wont see England, France, and Germany step up to police Europe or the middle east. Even thought theyre half a world closer.

You wont see Mexico ask for its 45 Million taxpayers back? Not if we're footing the bill on their costs here and theyre allowed to freely send US dollars back.

You also wont see a single insurance company in any business willing to operate at a loss. which is clearly what a single payer government system would have to do.

You also have to stave off other socioeconomic issues that are right around the corner.

Robotics/drones/ self driving cars will knock off 40% of the workforce in the next 20 years.

Millions more will lose their jobs to an AI system , Billions less will be collected in taxes.

Europe will be majority muslim, continuing their long tradition of welfare and destruction.

Who will fund their system of freebies?

a reply to: AlienView

I wonder if the people of the U.S. would be better off finding a way to become invincible..? I really hope this healthcare thing really straightens itself out in a way that benefits everyone..one can only hope..

a reply to: fencesitter85

I can tell you first hand that healthcare whether free or at any cost still doesnt save people my daughter included.

Its not a Right, its a Responsibility of each person and Family.

You go to work to provide for your family, and one of the things you ought to provide for them is healthcare. End of Story.

a reply to: AlienView

They already do it's called Medicare and Medicaid. lol idiots... Everyone else that works should have sufficient money to buy insurance if they are not wasting their money on hookers. However, Obozocare destroy all that, now most can not afford it if they are making over 35k

a reply to: AlienView

I had a frank discussion with a German friend of mine, he said he'd rather fly home to Hamburg then get locally treated.

Everyone has a right to healthcare. Taxes as always will pay to keep people alive but we are now entering the industrial-pharmaceutical age thanks to the baby boomers who smoked and chewed bacon to oblivion. Anti smoking advertisements entice people to smoke, and any smoker will attest to that. Then we have the food groups that recommends that we need to eat eight serves of vegetables a day and guess who these 'food doctors' are sponsored by? mega markets.