Live gaslighting, no cover charge

a reply to: network dude

That's why the globalists are pushing the idea of the country being a "democracy." Not that they actually think the peasants should be able to vote for laws, as in a true democracy. They want to use their propaganda machine to tell people that they want what the government wants.

The majority of people want government health care? As many people here pointed out, you can see many examples of what government health care would be like. Veteran's care being one example. Another would be the recent "Covid Pandemic." You want health care? You must take this new, untested drug with unknown efficacy and unknown side effects. If not, you receive no health care and may possibly lose your job. You will have no recourse in the event of malpractice.

You think our current health care system is bad? With insurance companies denying medical procedures based on cost over the doctor's judgement? With government health care, you will only get the health care the government decides to give you. A sex change operation for your pre-teen? Sure, covered. Treatment for your cancer? Meh, have you considered dying with dignity?

Instead of conducting a poll, how about a national referendum on securing our border and evicting all illegal aliens. If such a referendum were to say yes, would the government try to make it happen?

originally posted by: dothedew
a reply to: network dude

I'm going out on a limb and assuming that the portion of "mix of Government and Private Programs" goes above and beyond the Medicaid and Medicare, and also includes the marketplace plans that were subsidized through the Government through the Cares Act. You know, the ones that tripled everyone's premiums and raised deductibles by 1000%.....

Nobody can be for sure without the actual data in place of vague wording, but that would be my guess.

Won't we have to pass the plan to know what's in it?

originally posted by: network dude
www.pewresearch.org...

Among the public overall, 63% of U.S. adults say the government has the responsibility to provide health care coverage for all, up slightly from 59% last year. Roughly a third (37%) say this is not the responsibility of the federal government, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted July 27 to Aug. 2 among 11,001 adults.

Now this is a respectable organization, with respectable polling and high standards. But in reality, they aren't. And I can prove it, so can you.
Just look at the chart in the link.

36% went for the socialist pic, and then there are three other choices. Now what might they be?
"MIx of government and private programs", "continue medicare and medicade", and 6% chose no government involvment at all. But look at those middle two choices. What is "some govmernment and some private" look like? Is that different than what we currently have? And what about the "continue medicare and medicade" question? How is that different than "some govmernment and some private"?

The paragraph I quoted from the source, clearly lied, and that's the story that's being told.
and used as a source. For numbers that are a lie.

This garbage has to stop. There isn't anyone telling the truth anymore. Why is everyone OK with this? And if you feel you must bring an example of someone on the right doing this, I bet you can't.

I don’t think you read that chart correctly.

The basic question that was asked was “does the government have the responsibility to see that everyone is covered?” In other words should we have universal health care like they do in other advanced countries? All the responses to the left of the center line of the chart say “yes”. But they have different opinions on how to do that. All the responses to the right of the center line say “no” and they think we should either keep what we have or that it’s not the government’s job.

All the responses to the right of the line don’t cover everyone, but all the responses to the left do. That’s how the middle two categories are different from one another.

The article is not lying, based on the data that was presented. You just didn’t read it carefully.

a reply to: Boomer1947

this is like me asking Elvis for an Autograph, I doubt he will be coming back to sign it, just as you won't be coming back to this thread, but on the off chance you do somethin you never do, and you come back to back up your lies, can you explain the difference the poll responders were asked to differentiate between those who want a mix of govt. and private programs, and those who want to continue Medicaid and Medicare?

I won't hold my breath.

originally posted by: Moon68
a reply to: Aardwolfington

Most of the "useless eaters" will use emergency services as their healthcare. That was one of the major points of Obamacare was that, by requiring insurance for all, thereby spreading the cost out, it would eliminate the use of emergency services as regular healthcare. Due to bureaucratic bullsh*t it failed to deliver, just like pretty much anything government run.

So obamacare privatised the profits (nothing changed, due to bureaucracy) and socialised the losses (spread the cost to everybody)

a reply to: Dalamax

Woah now, I never said I agreed with Obama's BS.

Important to point out the facts:
Insurance companies can not be FORCED
to operate in every state.

When Obamacare was forced on people,
many healthcare companies just said ...
OH WE DO NOT operate any longer in
such and such state.

This then eliminates any competitive rates
in many states.

Therefore the GOVERNMENT ends up
controlling the monopoly, 100 times
worse than it was before OBAMA.

a reply to: network dude

You have to hope people can conclude there's no difference between the left middle and right middle.

I'm gonna differ and say the left middle refers to WITH ACA and the right middle is WITHOUT ACA. Go with that and it says 26% support keeping ACA and not a single payer, and 30% support keeping some funding but dropping the ACA, while 6% say no to all and 36% want Bernie Sanders socialism. It also says 63% of all want at least The ACA and around 57% of those want a single payer system.

I don't feel gaslit, I assumed what the difference between the two middle choices were. Because I felt there needs to be a choice that includes it. Socialism - ACA - No ACA - Nothing

It takes assuming there's no difference in the middle two choices, and changing the poll to 36% say socialism, 56% say "stay the course, including ACA", and 6% say end it all. And that sounds less right than it does with 4 options.

ETA:

And I assume that because 63% lines up with other polls.

www.statista.com...

As of March 2023, 62 percent of the respondents had a favorable opinion on the health reform, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) otherwise know as Obamacare, highest share in the provided time interval.

Biden did not make a mistake when he said:

"we finally did away with Medicare".

This will happen if kamala is appointed.

What is known as Medicare will be replaced,
what it is called is irrelevant but what WILL happen:

What WILL happen is the cost for seniors and
others on Medicare will SKYROCKET.

Medicare prices will go from 159.00 to
500.OO or MORE. This will be due to the
MASSIVE increase in cost of insuring
ILLEGALS that will be given FREE medical.

You heard it here first.

Mark it down, and tell everyone you know
all Seniors and disabled on Medicare it will
increase the costs 5 to 10 times fold.

This is deducted OUT OF Social Security.

You think things are bad now, just wait.

I have venn diagrams that prove you all wrong 😂

originally posted by: Aardwolfington
a reply to: Dalamax

Woah now, I never said I agreed with Obama's BS.

It was an observation not a criticism Aard. Apologies if my post came across other than intended 👍

originally posted by: TheSingleBillie
What I have seen from reports in the news for years is:

Where there is universal health care. Little health issues are well taken care of.

Big life threatening issues are poorly taken care of - with long (life threatening) waits for tests, treatment, necessary medical devices.

So as long as you are healthy. Universal health care is great.

Once you have a chronic or life threatening illness in Canada, you get a visit or call from the euthanasia centers suggesting you let them kill you to stop your pain and suffering. That is instead of getting care that could greatly help your pain and suffering. A woman desperately needed a new wheelchair in Canada and said she could not wait the very long time it would take to get a new one, it was suggested she consider euthanasia if she could not wait.

That is how I see the reports of universal health care in action.

Universal health care is great until you become a "useless eater" and society (the government) decides you are worthless and too expensive, then you are encouraged to die, or have your treatment delayed until you die.

Remember, one day you WILL get a chronic health problem, if you don't drop dead suddenly, it is as certain as death and taxes, and then YOU will be the useless eater the government allows to die through neglect or suggests you let them kill you. That is unless you are part of the 1% elite influential class then you will get excellent care until you die.

A culture that has 9 states allowing a healthy mother to kill a healthy 9 month full term fetus for no reason, with a VP candidate who supports this as "necessary" health care. Think of what this culture will do when you get chronically ill.

I guess I’m not really surprised about Canada. I’ve been hearing for years that people wait a long time for any care in Canada, and yet people keep saying he great it is there.