State-run health care

[Pingfah]

I ask because everyone who wants UHC is so concerned for those who don't have insurance and parade these people and I want to see how concerned they really are.

Concerned enough to advocate UHC

Not enough to do something yourself, just enought to demand someone else do it.

No Ryan, it's because they are concerned not just about that kid, but about every kid, the kids they won't read about in the news or on the internet, the kid's who's stories are not told. And you Ryan, yes, believe it or not those godless hateful liberals are concerned about you and your poorly old ticker, and what will happen if your insurance fails you, and that is why they support UHC.

But that old chap, is just another in a long list of life's intricacies that I fear you will never grasp.

 

[Miss Chicken]

Australians were very willing for a 1.5% tax to be introduced so that every Australian had basic health insurance. Giving money to people via charity organisations or personal donations isn't as certain to reach everyone - by definition UHC does.

 

[nevermore]

I ask because everyone who wants UHC is so concerned for those who don't have insurance and parade these people and I want to see how concerned they really are.

Concerned enough to advocate UHC

Not enough to do something yourself, just enought to demand someone else do it.

No, we're also happy to pay higher taxes to ensure that UHC covers even those who haven't "earned it" by being successful in life, and to also ensure that those who have "earned it" don't have to worry about being dropped or ruined when they actually use it. Why would I rather pool my money and leverage it by giving up another couple percent of my income over sending a couple hundred bucks to some individual kid? Because that's practical, workable and realistic, and a philanthropy-based system is not. I would post the research on that again, as I do every time you hook this herring, but you wouldn't read it, you never do.

 

[thestrangequark]

Here is a link to congressman Anthony Weiner's petition in support of the public option:

http://countdowntohealthcare.com/

Sign!

 

[Squiggy]

Not enough to do something yourself, just enought to demand someone else do it.

But we are going to be doing something about it...how do you think it's going to be funded?

 

[Awesome Possum]

I ask because everyone who wants UHC is so concerned for those who don't have insurance and parade these people and I want to see how concerned they really are.

Concerned enough to advocate UHC

Not enough to do something yourself, just enought to demand someone else do it.

If I gave money to every person who needed it for health care I'd be broke and forced to prostitute myself.

So business as usual, I guess.

So you decided to nothing at all but expect someone else to do it? If you can't do it then why would someone else be able to do it?

Because one person can't possibly do it. But if we had UHC, everyone would be paying in a small percentage which would quickly add up. I believe most countries pay less per person than we do on our non-government run healthcare.

 

[RyanKCR]

Concerned enough to advocate UHC

Not enough to do something yourself, just enought to demand someone else do it.

If I gave money to every person who needed it for health care I'd be broke and forced to prostitute myself.

So business as usual, I guess.

So you decided to nothing at all but expect someone else to do it? If you can't do it then why would someone else be able to do it?

Because one person can't possibly do it. But if we had UHC, everyone would be paying in a small percentage which would quickly add up. I believe most countries pay less per person than we do on our non-government run healthcare.

But what is wrong with helping someone now when you see that they need help. Why make them suffer until you get what you want?

 

[CaptainStoner]

I haven't heard any reports of the healtcare system in Massachussets falling apart, nor of substandard care.
Strange that MA never seems to come up in these discussions.

But "State-run" is a misnomer. UHC is not government-controlled healthcare. But some people really need their 1984 scenario to feel relevant, or something.

 

[RyanKCR]

I haven't heard any reports of the healtcare system in Massachussets falling apart, nor of substandard care.
Strange that MA never seems to come up in these discussions.

But "State-run" is a misnomer. UHC is not government-controlled healthcare. But some people really need their 1984 scenario to feel relevant, or something.

I'm actually okay with a state-level option offered. But why does it have to be federal?

 

[Awesome Possum]

Not enough to do something yourself, just enought to demand someone else do it.



So you decided to nothing at all but expect someone else to do it? If you can't do it then why would someone else be able to do it?

Because one person can't possibly do it. But if we had UHC, everyone would be paying in a small percentage which would quickly add up. I believe most countries pay less per person than we do on our non-government run healthcare.

But what is wrong with helping someone now when you see that they need help. Why make them suffer until you get what you want?

There is nothing wrong with it. There is also nothing wrong with fighting for UHC with would help everyone. I do find the people against it to be the scum of the Earth though.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I haven't heard any reports of the healtcare system in Massachussets falling apart, nor of substandard care.
Strange that MA never seems to come up in these discussions.

But "State-run" is a misnomer. UHC is not government-controlled healthcare. But some people really need their 1984 scenario to feel relevant, or something.

We all know how sinister the post office is. The lady I buy stamps from is out to get me.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

There is also nothing wrong with fighting for UHC with would help everyone. I do find the people against it to be the scum of the Earth though.

I find it likely that if the user name that posted this message had not been green, there'd be a warning there. I've personally seen warnings given for less.

 

[Awesome Possum]

There is also nothing wrong with fighting for UHC with would help everyone. I do find the people against it to be the scum of the Earth though.

I find it likely that if the user name that posted this message had not been green, there'd be a warning there. I've personally seen warnings given for less.

Then I apologize. I'm used to TNZ and actually don't think of that as a flame anymore than saying I hate people in hats.

 

[Squiggy]

There is also nothing wrong with fighting for UHC with would help everyone. I do find the people against it to be the scum of the Earth though.

I find it likely that if the user name that posted this message had not been green, there'd be a warning there. I've personally seen warnings given for less.

Then I apologize. I'm used to TNZ and actually don't think of that as a flame anymore than saying I hate people in hats.

You awful man.

 

[Warped9]

I ask because everyone who wants UHC is so concerned for those who don't have insurance and parade these people and I want to see how concerned they really are.

Concerned enough to advocate UHC

Not enough to do something yourself, just enought to demand someone else do it.

If I gave money to every person who needed it for health care I'd be broke and forced to prostitute myself.

So business as usual, I guess.

So you decided to nothing at all but expect someone else to do it? If you can't do it then why would someone else be able to do it?

This is disingenuous. The idea behind UHC is that everyone is contributing to help everyone else and thus easing the burden on any one particular person or group.

Everyone pays for road building and maintenance even if they don't drive. Everyone pays for schools to be funded even if they don't have kids of their own or their children are no longer in school. Everyone pays for national defense even if they mightn't agree with how the forces are deployed. Everyone pays into unemployment insurance (of whatever sort) even though (god willing) they're never unemployed. And on and on and on.

The truth is some around here are looking at UHC simply as the government reaching into your pocket for someone else. But if you ever need assistance in time of need then you'd be damned glad that aid was there for you.

People are simply trying to rationalize health care reform as just a government tax grab. This is how it was played by the right during the last federal election. It's played as the deserving being robbed by the undeserving. It's as simple as that.

The forces who are at work against reform are the ones who stand to lose profit and control of things as they are. And they're using the ignorant on the right to raise the protest decibel level. Heaven forbid that anyone within the health insurance industry would be honest enough to say, "I'm against UHC because it'll cost me bags of money that I don't want to give up." If one of them actually admitted that I'd still despise them, but I couldn't question their honesty.

As it is they're making a show of playing nice in front of camera all the while going all out to fuck everyone up the ass to kill reform and maintain the status quo.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

There is also nothing wrong with fighting for UHC with would help everyone. I do find the people against it to be the scum of the Earth though.

I find it likely that if the user name that posted this message had not been green, there'd be a warning there. I've personally seen warnings given for less.

Then I apologize. I'm used to TNZ and actually don't think of that as a flame anymore than saying I hate people in hats.

I usually have a knack for missing the obvious, but even I haven't missed the fact that this isn't TNZ...

Or are mods exempt from all warnings? The double standard is alive and well, apparently.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Hats are the devil's headgear and Missourah ain't a state.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I find it likely that if the user name that posted this message had not been green, there'd be a warning there. I've personally seen warnings given for less.

Then I apologize. I'm used to TNZ and actually don't think of that as a flame anymore than saying I hate people in hats.

I usually have a knack for missing the obvious, but even I haven't missed the fact that this isn't TNZ...

Or are mods exempt from all warnings?

They aren't and if the mods here feel that it justifies a warning I'll take it. But I in no way consider it a flame or trolling considering I didn't name anyone instead I used a vague group of people.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

But I in no way consider it a flame or trolling considering I didn't name anyone instead I used a vague group of people.

Like I said, I've seen warnings given for less. A good friend of mine got warned just recently (for something which I didn't personally think was a flame, unlike this), *also* without naming any specific person.

 

[TheLonelySquire]

I find it likely that if the user name that posted this message had not been green, there'd be a warning there. I've personally seen warnings given for less.

Then I apologize. I'm used to TNZ and actually don't think of that as a flame anymore than saying I hate people in hats.

I usually have a knack for missing the obvious, but even I haven't missed the fact that this isn't TNZ...

Or are mods exempt from all warnings? The double standard is alive and well, apparently.

You've been here for several years bud. You know what you're up against when you post here. At least you're a fellow Yankees fan!