We're the Kids of America discussion

54 views
Davis Vs Rachel: Universal Healthcare

Comments Showing 1-50 of 98 (98 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1

message 1: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments Lets do it.


message 2: by Emily (new)

Emily (emilyamazingxx) | 165 comments Oh jeez.


message 3: by [deleted user] (new)

*epic sigh* here we go...


message 4: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments I'm sick of playing cat and mouse, I'm going for the fucking throat and burying this once and for all.


message 5: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments wow


message 6: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments Jrdaπ, Et ipsa scientia potestas est. wrote: "*epic sigh* here we go..."

You are always getting on my nerves. You wanna argue it with me? I will take on EVERY SINGLE CONSERVATIVE in this group about U.H.


message 7: by ♥ Rachel♥ (new)

♥ Rachel♥   (i_got_a_jar_of_dirt) | 2196 comments LOL k so all uh things go back here? (that's b a relief 4 every1 lol)

- no government agency/division runs effectively
- 'free' health care wouldn't b free as we'd have 2 pay 4 it with taxes or spending cuts in other areas like defense, education, etc.
- wanting profit, competition, and personal intelligence always had better cost control and effectiveness
- government-controlled health care would lead 2 a decrease in patient flexibility
- patients rn't going 2 curb drug costs/doctor visits if it's free; so the costs will go up 2 several times what they r now
- just cuz americans r uninsured doesn't mean they won't get health care; non-profit/government-run hospitals give services 2 uninsured ppl, and it's illegal 2 refuse going 2 the er, even if ur an illegal immigrant
- government-controlled procedures will lead 2 less doctor flexibility and poor patient care
- healthy ppl who take care of themselves would have 2 pay 4 ppl who make bad choices
- there would have 2 b a long, painful transition, which would involve every1 in the insurance businesses losing their jobs, businesses closing, and making new patient records
- as u can't do private practice and won't b payed as much, would-b doctors would logically decide 2 get another, better, job
- malpractice lawsuit costs (which r VERY high) would go further, since uh would expose government 2 legal liability, and if u can sue some1 rich...more lawsuits
- government would b more likely 2 pass more restrictions or make higher taxes on smoking, fast food, etc....which means less freedom
- patient privacy would probably have 2 b compromised, since centralized health information will prob b maintained by the government
- like ss, any government benefit will gradually b taken as a 'right' by ppl, which makes it politically almost impossible 2 take it away or even minimize it l8r, when (if, if u prefer) costs get out of control



and g2g


message 8: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments if we can find the money to kill people than we should find the money to save people


message 9: by ♥ Rachel♥ (new)

♥ Rachel♥   (i_got_a_jar_of_dirt) | 2196 comments death penalty is different topic.


message 10: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments *England, Canada, France work fine
*it would be cheaper in the long run because we would start using preventive care
*companies don't make money when the people they insured go bankrupt
*once we reregulate that drug costs won't be a problem
*if you have to wait HOURS in a er that won't help if you are dying
*uh should be a right!



message 11: by Liz (last edited Jun 03, 2009 08:38PM) (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments ♥ Rachel♥ wrote: "death penalty is different topic."

i wasn't talking about the death penalty

i was talking that since we spend BILLIONS of dollars in war why can't we spend money to help better OUR u.s. citizens

instead of finding better ways to kill others


message 12: by Kyle (new)

Kyle Borland (kgborland) Well not all that military spending goes into 'finding new ways to kill people'. A lot of it is to keep you and the other citizens of america safe.

Also, that military spending has some of the biggest break throughs for technology and even medicine.

Also, spending that money on te military keeps us as the strongest military in the world which allows us to use the "big stick" diplomatic policy.


message 13: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments "- no government agency/division runs effectively"

The Army works effectively. The department of Homeland Security works effectively. The postal service works effectively. American public schools are some of the best public schools in the world. This simply isn't true.

"- 'free' health care wouldn't b free as we'd have 2 pay 4 it with taxes or spending cuts in other areas like defense, education, etc."

The point of it isn't to provide free healthcare, it's to provide cheap healthcare.

"- wanting profit, competition, and personal intelligence always had better cost control and effectiveness"

Also not true. Regardless, there will still be competition between doctors to provide the best care because they will be paid according to how well they treat their patients and how many patients go to them. The money is just coming from a different place.

"- government-controlled health care would lead 2 a decrease in patient flexibility"

Well since this isn't true in one of our best allies with the best healthcare in the world, this seems to be false. Patients will have the choice to pay more if they want, and to choose doctors. That defines 'patient flexibility' and there will be plenty of it.

"- patients rn't going 2 curb drug costs/doctor visits if it's free; so the costs will go up 2 several times what they r now"

When the government is controlling the costs, it is easier to regulate. The whole point is for visits to occur so that people get preventative medicine rather then going in when they are already very ill. What is so hard to understand about that?

"- just cuz americans r uninsured doesn't mean they won't get health care; non-profit/government-run hospitals give services 2 uninsured ppl, and it's illegal 2 refuse going 2 the er, even if ur an illegal immigrant"

Right. But what the individuals whose healthcare plants deny them treatment? Believe it or not, this does happen. One man who cut his fingers off had to choose, WITH INSURANCE, to pay 65,000 to get 2 fingers stitched back on, or 12,000 just to get one finger stitched on. Doesn't sound very good to me.

"- government-controlled procedures will lead 2 less doctor flexibility and poor patient care"

Well in other countries with UH, this has proved to be false. And even in theory, this isn't true. The doctors get paid according to how well they do, rather than a flat wage. The patients are the ones who report on how the doctors are doing. So actually, patient care will get better!

"- healthy ppl who take care of themselves would have 2 pay 4 ppl who make bad choices"

Not anymore than the young men in Vietnam and Iraq who have paid with their lives in our leaders poor mistakes. We are a nation, we are a whole. We all make mistakes, whatever they may be. It is our job as a collective to carry each other. I am for you, you are for me, we are all for each other.

"- there would have 2 b a long, painful transition, which would involve every1 in the insurance businesses losing their jobs, businesses closing, and making new patient records"

Not necessarily. The transition could be very easy, provided few things happen. That is also like saying we should leave slavery in place just because the transition was rough. No logic involved there at all. Anyways A) Many doctors offices have started to digitize their records, which are easily transferable. B) Many leftovers from the insurance industry will have jobs helping provide government insurance. That transition will be one of the smoothest. C) Insurance companies provide more than one kind of insurance most of time, so many will be able to keep their doors open.

"- as u can't do private practice and won't b payed as much, would-b doctors would logically decide 2 get another, better, job"

Once again, simply untrue. It will be still be a very profitable especially since the cost of training and of medical school will go down. Debt will be erased for incoming doctors.

"- malpractice lawsuit costs (which r VERY high) would go further, since uh would expose government 2 legal liability, and if u can sue some1 rich...more lawsuits"

The government will be AIRTIGHT on this one with it's waivers and liability. I'm not sure if you have ever read a form for a school field trip or any other school permission slip. They are completely NOT liable and they will be the same with medicine. It will be the personal doctors fault, the same way it is now.

"- government would b more likely 2 pass more restrictions or make higher taxes on smoking, fast food, etc....which means less freedom"

Last time I bought a pack of smokes it was 7 bucks. That shit has done sailed. And ya know what I say: Who gives a fuck? If it helps my country, I'm glad to help.

"- patient privacy would probably have 2 b compromised, since centralized health information will prob b maintained by the government"

News flash: the government has your social security, you DOB, your address, your phone number, your grades from school, hell they don't even need a warrant to tap your phone anymore. That shit has sailed sweetheart. And even if you consider that 'free', the same nurses who always handled that info before will be handling it now.

"- like ss, any government benefit will gradually b taken as a 'right' by ppl, which makes it politically almost impossible 2 take it away or even minimize it l8r, when (if, if u prefer) costs get out of control"

As it should be. It is the governments responsiblity to care for its people. The government is where a nations people meet to solve a problem that effects everyone and healthcare is a huge one. UH is perfect but its the best idea we got.


Any questions?




message 14: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments i don't want the military budget to decrease i am just saying that it is just as important to keep americans alive (healthcare wise) and to keeping them alive (military wise) and the budget should reflect that.

(wow i said the same thing)


message 15: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments Liz wrote: "i don't want the military budget to decrease i am just saying that it is just as important to keep americans alive (healthcare wise) and to keeping them alive (military wise) and the budget should ..."

I think the defense budget should be cut by 1%


message 16: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments how much money would that be?


message 17: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments Liz wrote: "how much money would that be? "

A FUCKLOAD. Enough to feed all of impoverished Africa for a year.


message 18: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments wow...
i know we spend billions a month in iraq (i still don't get the REAL reason we are still there)...


message 19: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments Liz wrote: "wow...
i know we spend billions a month in iraq (i still don't get the REAL reason we are still there)..."


Bush got us in the mess for his and his buddies personal business interests (Oil, no bid contracts for Halliburton, etc), and now we have to stay so it doesn't collapse.


message 20: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments anywho....
back to uh

i don't get the whole doctor/patient flexibility thing


message 21: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments That's a conservative scare tactic, I only refuted it because if I didn't she would keep bring it up.


message 22: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments the conservatives sure have a buttcrack load full of scare tactics...

especially that new commercial that is out. when we close guatemala bay the terrorist are going to live right next door!!!!!


message 23: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments That's their lifeblood. That's how GWB won the 2004 election by one of the narrowest margins in history. People only vote conservative when reason is beaten down.


message 24: by ♥ Rachel♥ (new)

♥ Rachel♥   (i_got_a_jar_of_dirt) | 2196 comments The postal service works effectively. American public schools are some of the best public schools in the world.
------
the postal service so does not work effectively. and i'm not sure where u got the public school thing from

The point of it isn't to provide free healthcare, it's to provide cheap healthcare.
---------------------------------
one of the pros that ppl keep talking about is that it's free. which it isn't.

how many patients go to them.
-----------------------------
well, that's not good 4 the suburban docs, is it?

Well since this isn't true in one of our best allies with the best healthcare in the world, this seems to be false. Patients will have the choice to pay more if they want, and to choose doctors. That defines 'patient flexibility' and there will be plenty of it.
-----------------------------------------------------
but controls on what u can/can't do will still have 2 b put in so costs don't xplode

The whole point is for visits to occur so that people get preventative medicine rather then going in when they are already very ill.
----------------------------------
well, it would b nice if we had a doctor 4 every1 with a cold/flu/headache, but we don't. and right now, ppl with those don't go 2 the doc cuz they'd have 2 pay and they can deal with it on their own. but if it's free, they won't have 2, so then, if some1 actually is sick, the system will already b clogged up with ppl who don't really need 2 c the doctor

One man who cut his fingers off had to choose, WITH INSURANCE, to pay 65,000 to get 2 fingers stitched back on, or 12,000 just to get one finger stitched on.
---
that would b an emergency, as he would bleed 2 death....

Well in other countries with UH, this has proved to be false
--------
riiiiiiiiiiiight. no, it hasn't. u read "obamaland"?

Not anymore than the young men in Vietnam and Iraq who have paid with their lives in our leaders poor mistakes. We are a nation, we are a whole. We all make mistakes, whatever they may be. It is our job as a collective to carry each other. I am for you, you are for me, we are all for each other.
------------------------------------------
that's war. this would b every day.

That is also like saying we should leave slavery in place just because the transition was rough.
--------------------------------------------
it was horrible 4 the south, and many rich ppl lost tons of money. but, other than that, k.

Once again, simply untrue. It will be still be a very profitable especially since the cost of training and of medical school will go down. Debt will be erased for incoming doctors.
------------------------------------
riiiight. u like france, right? http://www.webinfrance.com/france-hop... they're trying 2 recruit ppl.

The government will be AIRTIGHT on this one with it's waivers and liability. I'm not sure if you have ever read a form for a school field trip or any other school permission slip. They are completely NOT liable and they will be the same with medicine. It will be the personal doctors fault, the same way it is now.
----------
if it's funding the healthcare, it would b liable.

Last time I bought a pack of smokes it was 7 bucks. That shit has done sailed. And ya know what I say: Who gives a fuck? If it helps my country, I'm glad to help.
--------
do u want me 2 say "good 4 u" or something...? if u want 2 smoke, @ least do it 4 selfish reasons...
but other than that, prices will go up cuz healthy ppl won't want 2 pay 4 chain-smoker's lung cancer....

News flash: the government has your social security, you DOB, your address, your phone number, your grades from school, hell they don't even need a warrant to tap your phone anymore. That shit has sailed sweetheart. And even if you consider that 'free', the same nurses who always handled that info before will be handling it now.
-------------------------------
but none of that is really considered private, is it? (well, from strangers on the street, yeah.)
patient info is

As it should be. It is the governments responsiblity to care for its people. The government is where a nations people meet to solve a problem that effects everyone and healthcare is a huge one. UH is perfect but its the best idea we got.
-----------------------------
again, if/when costs get out of control, it will b badbadbad



the conservatives sure have a buttcrack load full of scare tactics...
----------------
and u guys don't. cuz ur all saints. right?


message 25: by Lauren, radical atheist...beware! (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 2702 comments Mod
"and u guys don't. cuz ur all saints. right? "

When do liberals use scare tactics?


message 26: by Sarah jean (new)

Sarah jean  blank (Sarahjean) | 2 comments "i was talking that since we spend BILLIONS of dollars in war why can't we spend money to help better OUR u.s. citizens

instead of finding better ways to kill others "

WOW! That is completly untrue and stupid.

do you know why we fight war? cause we want peace. and if we didnt we would have people being all ARGH to our country, so i think war is bettering us, we are keeping it away from america with some of that money, thus saving US citizens. Or we could have socialized health care all going to saving people who got hurt becasue we didnt have a military.


message 27: by Liz (last edited Jun 04, 2009 09:44AM) (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments -#1 I AM NOT STUPID AND IF YOU WOULD REFRAIN FROM ATTACKING THE PERSON INSTEAD OF THE POLICY I WOULD APPRECIATE IT-

if you would have been listening to what i said....

i am not for taking away the war budget, but if we have BILLIONS of dollars to spend on war why can't we spend some on healthcare?


message 28: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments "the postal service so does not work effectively. and i'm not sure where u got the public school thing from"

From fact. Well, my mail always get here and it always gets delivered, I would call that pretty effective. But once again you missed the point: there are American government programs that work effectively.

"one of the pros that ppl keep talking about is that it's free. which it isn't."

I never once said that it is free.

"well, that's not good 4 the suburban docs, is it?"

Well they also get paid according to how well they do, so it will be absolutely fine for the suburban doctors.

"but controls on what u can/can't do will still have 2 b put in so costs don't xplode"

There are controls on what you can and can't do now, from the insurance companies. The reigns are basically just transferring to a much more benevolent insurance company with the government.

"well, it would b nice if we had a doctor 4 every1 with a cold/flu/headache, but we don't. and right now, ppl with those don't go 2 the doc cuz they'd have 2 pay and they can deal with it on their own."

But what about if that cold or flu morphs into a serious illness? And it's not just minor stuff, its PREVENTATIVE MEDICINE. Look up what that says.

"but if it's free, they won't have 2, so then, if some1 actually is sick, the system will already b clogged up with ppl who don't really need 2 c the doctor"

Nope, your wrong. This whole lines thing has been so blown out of proportion. There are plenty of doctors and hospitals to go around. No one is going to be limited to one doc or one hospital. Efficiency will be rewarded in pay.

"that would b an emergency, as he would bleed 2 death...."

No the emergency was stopping the bleeding. The insurance companies actually PUT A PRICE ON PARTS OF THE HUMAN BODY.

"riiiiiiiiiiiight. no, it hasn't. u read "obamaland"?"

No but I read a couple articles about how the guy is a quack and his book is pretty much without merit.

"it was horrible 4 the south, and many rich ppl lost tons of money. but, other than that, k."

I don't know what your saying. Are you saying we should have left slavery in place because the transition was rough?

"riiiight. u like france, right? http://www.webinfrance.com/france-hopes-... they're trying 2 recruit ppl."

Okay. And who's to say that all the kids that grew up wanting to be doctors but couldn't afford to even go to college wouldn't sign up to do it now? Especially since the wages would still be higher than many other American jobs.

"if it's funding the healthcare, it would b liable."

Explain yourself.

"do u want me 2 say "good 4 u" or something...? if u want 2 smoke, @ least do it 4 selfish reasons...
but other than that, prices will go up cuz healthy ppl won't want 2 pay 4 chain-smoker's lung cancer...."

When an economy tanks, prices go up, that is why prices are high on everything right now. If someone wants to maintain a bad habit, they are going to have to pay for it. And what do you mean 'at least do it for selfish reasons'? That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

"but none of that is really considered private, is it? (well, from strangers on the street, yeah.)
patient info is"

And why is that? I'm fairly sure the CIA/FBI/Federal Govt. has a file on me anyway, it doesn't bother me.

"again, if/when costs get out of control, it will b badbadbad"

Right. Just like every time Social Security starts to go bankrupt, we solve that problem. Happens EVERY SINGLET TIME.

"and u guys don't. cuz ur all saints. right?"

Not saints, we just do politics differently.



message 29: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments "do you know why we fight war? cause we want peace"

Is that why we fought the war in Iraq? WRONG. We fought it so that Bush and his cronies could get richer and so that GW could do something his dad didn't have the balls to do. It is a FACT that 6 of the men in the Bush Administration became richer directly because of their involvement in the Iraq war. Bush's oil companies got oil and other natural gas's from Iraq, he gave out no bid contracts to Dick Cheney's Hallilburton (in which Cheney still owned majority stock) and other private firms that were directly linked to Bush. He didn't listen to any of his generals advice and sent in to few of troops. He allowed electricity to shut of for weeks on end and Baghdad suffered rolling black outs. George Bush did not fight the Iraq War for peace. Even Bush's former political cronies agree the war was a mistake.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-502es...

"and if we didnt we would have people being all ARGH to our country, so i think war is bettering us"

For every terrorist we kill in Iraq, we create 1.2 more. The world hates us more as a result, not less. We have killed countless civilians. When asked in 2005 how many had been killed, John Ashcroft replied "Around 25,000". Actually, in 2005, OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL was off by 75,000. In the first year alone, we killed at least 100,000 Iraqi civilians. If Iraq needlessly killed 100,000 American civilians, I would have some pretty strong anti-Iraq sentiment.

"we are keeping it away from america with some of that money, thus saving US citizens."

Iraq wasn't, and never was a threat to us. Ever. Ever. Ever. Saddam could have been in charge for eternity and never bothered us. In fact, we had a safety clause, because Regan was the one who sold weapons to Saddam.
http://www.counterpunch.org/dixon0617...
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines...
Here is them shaking hands:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/N...

"Or we could have socialized health care all going to saving people who got hurt becasue we didnt have a military. "

Or we could bring our troops home, save American and Iraqi lives, cut 1% from the defense budget, and be fine.




message 30: by Lauren, radical atheist...beware! (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 2702 comments Mod
"Is that why we fought the war in Iraq? WRONG. We fought it so that Bush and his cronies could get richer and so that GW could do something his dad didn't have the balls to do. It is a FACT that 6 of the men in the Bush Administration became richer directly because of their involvement in the Iraq war. Bush's oil companies got oil and other natural gas's from Iraq, he gave out no bid contracts to Dick Cheney's Hallilburton (in which Cheney still owned majority stock) and other private firms that were directly linked to Bush. He didn't listen to any of his generals advice and sent in to few of troops. He allowed electricity to shut of for weeks on end and Baghdad suffered rolling black outs. George Bush did not fight the Iraq War for peace. Even Bush's former political cronies agree the war was a mistake."

Plus, Bush thought he was fighting a war for Christianity.


message 31: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments "Plus, Bush thought he was fighting a war for Christianity."

Bush isn't really a Christian.


message 32: by Lauren, radical atheist...beware! (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 2702 comments Mod
How so?

Because there is proof that Biblical verses were placed in the battle plans for his benefit.


message 33: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments what? really...


message 34: by Lauren, radical atheist...beware! (new)


message 35: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments Lauren wrote: "How so?

Because there is proof that Biblical verses were placed in the battle plans for his benefit."


Because he isn't a real Christian. He may say he is, but he doesn't exemplify his savior the way he should. Ya dig?


message 36: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments so he is kinda using it (his religion) as an excuse for all the stuff he did


message 37: by Davis (new)

Davis (davismattek) | 1197 comments Liz wrote: "so he is kinda using it (his religion) as an excuse for all the stuff he did "

Yes


message 38: by Liz (last edited Jun 04, 2009 11:48AM) (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments that is a bunch of crap

that a president would do that


message 39: by Lauren, radical atheist...beware! (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 2702 comments Mod
"Because he isn't a real Christian. He may say he is, but he doesn't exemplify his savior the way he should. Ya dig? "

In that case, no one is a real Christian.


message 40: by Kyle (new)

Kyle Borland (kgborland) Lauren wrote: ""Because he isn't a real Christian. He may say he is, but he doesn't exemplify his savior the way he should. Ya dig? "

In that case, no one is a real Christian. "


How is that even remotely true?



message 41: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments Mother Theresa is a real Christian


message 42: by Kyle (new)

Kyle Borland (kgborland) Yes. Yes she was. Frigin amazing woman lol


message 43: by Jayda (last edited Jun 04, 2009 01:33PM) (new)

Jayda I get what Lauren meant. Even if someone seems like an amazing Christian you don't know what goes on behind closed doors, in their mind, what their hearts true intent is. So I think I kind of half agree with Lauren, if that much xD

We all mess up which would make us unlike Christ.


message 44: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments i guess so...


message 45: by Lauren, radical atheist...beware! (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 2702 comments Mod
"How is that even remotely true? "

Jayda mostly has it. :D If the Bible is false, then know one knows what real Christianity is, and even if it's true, no one obeys even half of the rules, as so many are now realized to be mean, or are just silly.


message 46: by Kyle (new)

Kyle Borland (kgborland) Well no one can possibly follow all the rules..there to many of them. :P

And thats sort of the point. The Bible is supposed to show all these rules that you can't possibly follow and then books/chapters later Jesus comes and dies for you so you don't have to follow all the rules but have to at least TRY.

Its like a horror novel and Jesus is the happy ending where the blonde and her lover get out alive at the end :P


message 47: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments nice metaphor...


message 48: by Lauren, radical atheist...beware! (new)

Lauren (djinni) | 2702 comments Mod
I'm blonde! lololololol




message 49: by Liz (new)

Liz (lizgore) | 498 comments me 2


message 50: by Kyle (new)

Kyle Borland (kgborland) Hey I thought it was a great metaphor :)

Okay I'm gonna go read..ttyl :D


« previous 1
back to top