I am 23, an American Citizen with government run health care.

reply to post by mental modulator


I am not arguing with any of what you listed.

You are trying to assign meanings that match your own belief system.

Neither Madison nor Jefferson supported what you do.

reply to post by TheAftermath


So I can get in trouble? No thanks.

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows


U2U it to me then

Stop making excuses and just admit you cant do it.

reply to post by TheAftermath


Read the history. Or do you not consider yourself better than a parasite?

Originally posted by TheAftermath
reply to post by mental modulator

 

Odd you bring up Madison since his own words spoil your argument.

May want to try reading the whole thing next time before you make a fool of yourself

HE is referring to people who misconstrue words -

I have not - And I am not sighting the limit or any of that--

You are making up your own constitutional ideals- refuting the English language, several dictionaries, Jefferson's words and contradicting Madison's caution...

What is going on with you?

you started off about the constitution and now you don't care.

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows


I said I consider myself more responsible than those on public assistance. Never (as in not once) did I ever say I thought I was better.

You are wrong, and you know it.

reply to post by TheAftermath


Semantics. But hey, if that helps you sleep at night good for you.

reply to post by mental modulator


I seem to be the only one here who cares about upholding the Constitution.

You are the one supporting an unconstutional program.

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows


Translation: I'm wrong but not man enough to admit it.



Gotcha.

reply to post by TheAftermath


Then we'd have to bring back child labor, votes only for male landowners, slavery, and more than a few other old practices.

reply to post by TheAftermath


Keep telling yourself that.

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows



Wow, evidently youve never heard of Amendments.

Want healthcare? Why not have your representatives amend the Constitution?

Originally posted by TheAftermath
reply to post by mental modulator

 

I am not arguing with any of what you listed.

You are trying to assign meanings that match your own belief system.

Neither Madison nor Jefferson supported what you do.

How do you know?

Have you consulted them?

I sighted the constitution of the united states which agrees that the nation should provide certain basic necessities one of them - protecting GENERAL WELFARE.

HEALTH

REMEMBER THE CONSTITUTION?

reply to post by TheAftermath


Another abstraction based on assumptions you have made yet I have never stated. I am jack's complete lack of suprise.

Originally posted by TheAftermath
reply to post by mental modulator

 

I seem to be the only one here who cares about upholding the Constitution.

You are the one supporting an unconstutional program.

Sir I spelled it out clear as day -

you just said you are not arguing with my points?

what??????

NO

you want to uphold you own beliefs which are contrary to a small portion of the document, the portion that dictates federal responsibility...

I don't support any program - I support the notion that maintaining the citizens general welfare is clearly stated...

You are picking and choosing I am not...
an obligation

Originally posted by TheAftermath
reply to post by mental modulator

 

I am not arguing with any of what you listed.

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

what are you doing then?

My point is that providing for citizens health is in the document

which I listed -

So according the above you agree...

[edit on 17-8-2009 by mental modulator]

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by TheAftermath

 

Another abstraction based on assumptions you have made yet I have never stated. I am jack's complete lack of suprise.

the one that got away...

And he accused you of drinking...

DID you just witness that???



What was that?

[edit on 17-8-2009 by mental modulator]

I’ve been reading this very long thread with, mostly, disbelief.

Firstly that in what is the richest country in the world that whether or not to provide universal healthcare is even a debateable issue. And secondly I’m just stunned that some poor guy can hold his hand up to being a recovering addict in page one, and then receive what amounts to 40 pages of abuse; from people who would clearly rather he had just died because he didn’t pay for his own doctors visits.

Furthermore it appears that the most vociferous keyboard warriors here don’t even seem to understand what an insurance company is, what it does, or how it works. They do not exist to provide cover against emergencies for individuals. They exist to make profit for their shareholders, and this business model conflicts with paying out for claims. You (the general you who have criticised the OP) really need to get your heads around this because it informs why most of what you have written is nonsense.

If your car keeps getting vandalised you can expect your premiums to go up and up until you’re either refused insurance or you cant pay them anymore. In the meantime whichever garage is fixing your car is pretty much guaranteed to load the bill if they think you’re claiming from your insurance. This is inflationary and contributes to making non insurance jobs more expensive too.

Sucks for you, move to a better part of town or do without a car some people might think (I appreciate the issue of who is responsible for protecting your car is seen quite differently in the US to how it would be in the EU).

But this free market model provides a very poor base for distributing health care. A big proportion of the money collected in premiums is never spent on directly treating sick Americans. People who most need cover most are quickly priced out or refused insurance. Furthermore Americans pay a lot more for treatment and pharmaceuticals than just about any other country. This is because insurance companies frequently have vested interests in the profits of pharma companies.

A non-American can, for example - obtain a years worth of travel insurance to go to any country in the world, online in about 5 minutes, for about 40USD.

Except the US.

If he want to go there his travel insurer suddenly starts asking a lot of questions about his prior health, medicines he is taking, how long he’s going for. Presuming all this (and I mean everything) is ok he will still be lucky to get cover for a short trip for less than $200. This is because health care is so expensive in the US that most insurance companies don’t want to risk fully covering people who go there.

Well how about company insurance schemes – they work well don’t they? Yes – but only because pesky government intervention you all hate so much prevents employers refusing cover to higher risk employees, if they do they lose those juicy tax breaks that corporations crave.

Just from an efficiency point of view – having 47 million people with no real access to preventative medicine, and millions more underinsured is nonsensical. If people are happy and healthy they can work, pay tax, and support themselves. If they are sick, or sick with worry about getting sick, they can’t.

Originally posted by DarkSecret
affordable healthcare is a right for any human being.

Actually, it's a commodity. It's a service for sale. It's not a 'right'.
The doctors worked their butts off in medical school.
They deserve their income.
The 'big drug' companies poured their $$ and time into developing drugs.
They deserve their income.
The companies that develop and build medical equipment worked hard.
They deserve their income.

Health care is a service and a commodity. It must be paid for. It's not a 'right'.

Life, Liberty, and the search for happiness includes MY RIGHT not to have to support and/or enable those who refuse to work and just leech off society.

Help those who fall on hard times to get back on their feet ... absolutely.
But VOLUNTARILY. You can't force it.

And throwing money at a gov't entity that will just enable leeches who make their living by milking the system isn't helping the leeches, it isn't helping me, and it isn't helping this country.

For those that are truly in need, private organizations can help.

Obamacare is, once again, putting the gov't into business for itself.
And as a taxpayer that would make me a stock holder.
If any regular business was run the way the gov't was .. it would be bankrupt.
That's not the kind of management that should be running the country's health care.



[edit on 8/17/2009 by FlyersFan]