Goodreads Tea Party discussion

120 views
News and Opinion > Healthcare

Comments Showing 1-50 of 132 (132 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1 3

message 1: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 03, 2009 09:46AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Voices for Reason - A health care debate worth having

Posted by Don Watkins: 29 Jul 2009 01:32 AM PDT http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/a-healt...

Ezra Klein asks: What happened to the moral case for health care reform? Why is the Obama administration relying on the argument that its plan will save the government money rather than supposedly ethical notions such as “equal treatment for everybody”? According to Klein, those are the kind of arguments that could sway the American public toward accepting socialized medi…, sorry, “national health care.”

Well, let me register my agreement with Ezra: it is time for a moral debate about health care.

It’s time for a debate between those who demand “equal treatment for everybody” (except those who are to be unequally taxed to pay for it)–and those who demand equal freedom for Americans to purchase as much health care as they can afford.

It’s time for a debate between those who believe it’s proper to force some people to pay for the health care needs of others–and those who believe that individuals should pay for their own health care or else appeal to private charity.

It’s time for a debate between those who think doctors should be made into state employees, taking orders from bureaucrats who will decide which tests to perform and which treatments to offer–and those who believe that doctors have a right to offer their services to willing consumers on a free market.

It’s time for a debate between those who think that the government should be able to dictate the private choices of individuals on the grounds that “society” is picking up the tab for their behavior–and those who think that each individual should be free to act on his own judgment, while taking responsibility for his own choices.

It’s time for a debate between those who appeal to an entitlement mentality that demands the unearned–and those who believe in paying for what they get.

The health care debate is ultimately about morality. We face a choice between European-style health care based on European-style egalitarianism and envy–and American-style freedom in medicine based on American-style individualism. So, Ezra, which do you think is consistent with America’s founding principles?


message 2: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 03, 2009 09:43AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Health Care Is Not a Right - http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/gro...

Excerpt of a speech by Dr. Leonard Peikoff - http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=9

"Most people who oppose socialized medicine do so on the grounds that it is moral and well-intentioned, but impractical; i.e., it is a noble idea -- which just somehow does not work. I do not agree that socialized medicine is moral and well-intentioned, but impractical. Of course, it is impractical -- it does not work -- but I hold that it is impractical because it is immoral. This is not a case of noble in theory but a failure in practice; it is a case of vicious in theory and therefore a disaster in practice.

So I'm going to leave it to other speakers to concentrate on the practical flaws in the Clinton health plan. I want to focus on the moral issue at stake. So long as people believe that socialized medicine is a noble plan, there is no way to fight it. You cannot stop a noble plan -- not if it really is noble. The only way you can defeat it is to unmask it -- to show that it is the very opposite of noble. Then at least you have a fighting chance."


message 3: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 03, 2009 04:28PM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
What 'Right' to Health Care?

By John David Lewis
August 3,2009

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/arti...


message 4: by Ilyn (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Put the health care reform bill online, now

Examiner Editorial
August 4, 2009

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opi...


message 5: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 04, 2009 03:41PM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Rob provided this Atlas Shrugged quote:

"I quit when medicine was placed under State control...Do you know what it takes to perform a brain operation? Do you know the kind of skill it demands, and the years of passionate, merciless, excruciating devotion that go to acquire that skill? That was what I would not place at the disposal of men whose sole qualification to rule me was their capacity to spout the fraudulent generalities that got them elected to the privilege of enforcing their wishes at the point of a gun. I would not let them dictate the purpose for which my years of study had been spent, or the conditions of my work, or my choice of patients, or the amount of my reward...Men considered only the 'welfare' of the patient, with no thought for those who were to provide it. That a doctor should have any right, desire or choice in the matter, was regarded as irrelevant selfishness; his is not to choose, they said only 'to serve'...Their moral code has taught them to believe that it is safe to rely on the virtue of their victims. Well, that is the virtue I have withdrawn. Let them discover the kind of doctors that their system will now produce...It is not safe, if he is the sort of man who resents it--and still less safe, if he is the sort who doesn't."

(Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, 1957)


message 6: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 04, 2009 03:48PM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
One of the main characters of my first novel, Reason Reigns, is Dr. Ari Hugo. He is named after Aristotle and the Ayn Rand Institute (ARI). Here are excerpts:

The delegation demanded that Ari give up the medicine and the red tide buster for humanity. The Union officials pontificated, “It is evil to profit from suffering, from what people cannot do without.”
Ari was direct. “I deal exclusively with traders.” He turned his back and moved away from the delegation.

“Please explain, Dr. Hugo.”

Ari faced the delegation, but kept his distance. “You are free not to buy what I spent four years to create. I am free to sell the fruits of my labors in a manner of my choosing; I earned this right. I transact with people who respect property rights. If you are here as advocates for people who desire the unearned, you have wasted your time.”

“But the people need your creations! The medicine for red tide poisoning is necessary to save lives. The product that eradicates red tide is absolutely essential to the livelihood of fishermen and to increase the food supply.”

“By your reasoning, only those who create products or offer services that have nothing to do with saving or improving lives may trade; that those who do otherwise forfeit their rights.”

“The public needs your medicine and your red tide buster. Poor folks utterly need them!”

“As I will not be ruled by a single human being, neither will I forfeit my rights to the public. An emperor has no claim on me; neither does a poor man. Need is not a claim.”

***
Glenda received an invitation from her parents. While waiting for dinner, Mrs. Ibelyn showed off newspaper headlines praising the passage of a bill.

“Your father’s name appears in all the papers giving him credit for pushing this law. Everybody loves it. It passed unanimously. The masses hail it as great, compassionate, and humanitarian.”

Ari and Glenda stayed quiet. Lola paid close attention.

“Not only will this ensure my reelection, this is my legacy,” Representative Don Ibelyn voiced what had been in his mind since he proposed the policy. “I have provided a valuable gift to the public. Now, by law, every man has the right to medical care.”

He told Ari, “The Medical Association has eagerly concurred.” He read from a press release of the organization, “‘… our sacred goal is selfless service to our patients.’”

“I am no longer a member of the Medical Association,” Ari replied. “I gave notice this morning. I have also sent letters to all my patients; I am closing my practice in two months.”

“Why?” Ari’s father-in-law was aghast!

“How could you?” This was from his mother-in-law.

All eyes were on Ari.

“I refuse to be a servant of my patients. No man has the right to enslave others.”

“You are taking this way too seriously. This has nothing to do with enslavement.” Representative Ibelyn’s tone was most persuasive and sincere.

“If a man has the right to a man-made value, the person who is going to provide it is a slave,” Ari reasoned.

“You don’t have to interpret the policy literally,” Ari’s father-in-law fumed. “How dare you oppose me!”

“This will greatly embarrass your father! This is a scandal. You can’t do this,” Mrs. Ibelyn bemoaned.

“I won’t let you ruin this family’s reputation,” Don Ibelyn glared. “I will not be made the laughing stock of the city. How dare you sully my stature! Glenda, you will leave this man!”

“Father, your moral stature depends on what you do; it has nothing to do with what Ari or I do.” Glenda stood up. “I am proud of Ari. I admire his decision.” She added, “I am selling the school and closing the bookstore. Lola and I are going with Ari to the Saviors’ Isle.”

“You are no longer my daughter.”

“Father, I will always love you. But you have supported legalized robbery in the name of the poor. A moral man keeps his hands off another man’s life or property. It is evil to extort a man’s service or money. It is evil to give away that which you do not own. A moral government protects individual rights. It does not penalize those who create wealth. It does not demand that those who have invested time, effort, and money in acquiring skills to save lives and to heal the sick give up their services, energy, happiness, and their very lives to the public.”


message 7: by Eunice (new)

Eunice | 1 comments The Health Care Reform bill is online. Go to the Energy and Commerce Commission, read the proposed bill, and follow what the Commission is doing.


message 8: by Ilyn (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Thank you, Eunice.


message 9: by Ilyn (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
The unfortunate must rely on the benevolence of others or on private welfare because no one, not even the most unfortunate, has the right to enslave others.

By reason and logic, those who revere freedom are the truly benevolent. State-run ‘humanitarian aid’ and collectivized health care are not motivated by benevolence since they clearly destroy the productive.


message 10: by Ilyn (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Health Care Reform: A Better Plan
by Charles Krauthammer

http://townhall.com/columnists/Charle...


message 11: by John (new)

John Karr (karr) Just got back from the Obamacare debacle-bill protest outside Democrat Rep. Brad Miller's office here in Raleigh. Had approx. 750 show up for what we thought was a town hall meeting but guess what -- he only let you in if you had an appointment before hand. So we TEA Partied on the street. I'll try and get a couple pics uploaded.


message 12: by John (new)

John Karr (karr) I put the link to this photo in the Raleighwood sub directory also.

http://photo.goodreads.com/photos/124...


message 13: by Paul (new)

Paul Dinger It isn't the poor that will soon be rioting for healthcare, it will be the people who have been paying for it thru insurance payments for a worthless policy that isn't intended to help anyone. All this is okay with illyn who thinks insurance companies are heroes and every one else who gets screwed somehow are enslavers.
What a twisted web we weave...


message 14: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 11, 2009 03:28AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
I am preparing the video script for Reason Reigns. Excerpt:

2) RR on the left, 2a/2b/2c on the right
(Superimpose on the RR top) Reason Reigns depicts relevant events evinced by current headlines:

2a) Dr. Ari Hugo (Reason Reigns hero) quotations:

“I am no longer a member of the Medical Association… I refuse to be a servant of my patients. No man has the right to enslave others.”

“As I will not be ruled by a single human being, neither will I forfeit my rights to the public. An emperor has no claim on me; neither does a poor man. Need is not a claim.”

2b) Pope Benedict XVI’s Caritas in Veritate (Charity in Truth - 2009) and Pope Paul’s Populorum Progressio (On the Development of Peoples - 1967):

The encyclicals blame the PROFIT motive for all the world’s problems, and call for a worldwide REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH by a world government as the solution.

“If a man has the right to a man-made value, the person who is going to provide it is a slave,” Ari reasoned.


message 15: by Paul (new)

Paul Dinger Nothing shows more twists that the logic on display here. I enjoyed your post Eugene.
I think the healthcare issue should come down to this. Medical 'insurance' is a scam. What is so terrible about a single payer system? One that truly covers you, not empowers an army of lawyers out to cheat you. It would solve all of our problems.
And it is capitalism at its finest. They are already trying this, it is called conceirage healthcare and some doctors are offering it. You pay and pay every month, and when you need it, the doctor is there. However, insurance companies are using their wealth to stop this too. This is where the solution lies, and if the government invested here, it would be a real solution.


message 16: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 12, 2009 04:24AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Big Business Goes Big for Health Care Reform
by John Stossel
Wednesday, August 12, 2009

http://townhall.com/columnists/JohnSt...

Rights-respecters must not evade that there are two kinds of individuals who go into business: market entrepreneurs and political entrepreneurs. The latter rely on corrupt politicians (those with coercive power).

Political entrepreneurs lobby for regulations, for government intervention. Market entrepreneurs are rights-respecters.


message 17: by Ilyn (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Voices for Reason - “It’s none of your damn business!” (Why Ayn Rand is still relevant)

Keeping government out of government health care?
August 11, 2009 by Jeff Scialabba http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/keeping...

In pushing health care reform, President Obama has continually made two insistent claims: that the reforms will not affect those who are currently insured and will not involve government in health care. These reforms “will keep government out of health care decisions,” he has said. “If you like your plan, you will be able to keep your plan. Period.” The reforms, moreover, will be “deficit-neutral”—they won’t have any negative fiscal impact. Everything will stay the same for those who are content, and everything will change for those who aren’t.

The President’s eight “health insurance consumer protections” demonstrate the contradictions inherent in these claims. The protections are effectively eight mandates that the President intends to place on insurance companies. These mandates would, among others, prohibit them from pricing their plans according to the health risks of the consumers purchasing them, prohibit them from limiting the amount of coverage a customer receives, require that they pay in full for preventive care, and require that they renew plans in perpetuity.

Are we really expected to believe that a whole series of new mandates forcing insurance companies to absorb additional costs while preventing them from making up the losses elsewhere will have no effect on current plans–or that this does not constitute government involvement in health care decisions? Does Obama think he can repeal the law of cause and effect?

We won’t know how insurance companies will react to such demanding federal mandates until they are passed. I don’t envy the employees of those businesses who will be charged with deciding where to cut costs, which plans to change, who to let go and which branches to close. The only certainty is that Obama’s mandates will affect everyone–even those who like their current insurance plan. Cumulatively, we’ll be worse off for it.


message 18: by Rich (new)

Rich | 19 comments Marge, do none of these things happen in 'socialist' countries like the UK? What if you didn't have a good employer? What if you'd been made redundant?


message 19: by Paul (new)

Paul Dinger It is so terrible for people in Canada and England that they would rather go to war than lose their healthcare.
Both countries are democracies and yet niether country has ever tried to get rid of this system. It they thought half as badly as you all are making it sound, they would have run it out of town on a rail. But they don't.
Why?
Because maybe you two don't know what you are talking about?


message 20: by Ilyn (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
The "Preventive Care" Myth
by Charles Krauthammer

http://townhall.com/columnists/Charle...


message 21: by Ilyn (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
'Hands Off' Our Health Care, Obama
by Donald Lambro

http://townhall.com/columnists/Donald...


message 22: by Rich (last edited Aug 14, 2009 05:27AM) (new)

Rich | 19 comments I'm also grateful I didn't have to fight the bureaucracy in the UK or Canada, or any other socialist country. I have always worked hard for any company that has employed me, in fact, that is one way to attract good employees - give them good benefits. When my daughter had her transplants in Minnesota, many other people from Canada brought their children there, too, because they couldn't get the healthcare they needed in Canada.

Marge, you didn't answer my questions. Do liver transplants not exist in the UK and Canada? Is it possible to be made redundant through no fault of your own? What happens then if you fall ill? The NHS is free at the point of service, there is no bureaucracy to go through in order to get treatment. What about checking if someone has insurance before they're treated? Is that bureaucracy and/or poor healthcare?

If these systems are so terrible, why does the World Health Organisation place the US 37th in the world for healthcare with 'socialist' countries like Canada, the UK, Japan and France all coming significantly higher?


message 23: by stan (new)

stan (stanthewiseman) | 27 comments Hi Marge
Yes it's me again The point I was trying to make last time we were in touch. we in the UK have as you know have the NHS. We pay through taxes to enjoy the benefits OK. But we also enjoy post operative care and post operative medication. So as an example if you had a psychiatric problem the NHS would fund the medication for evermore.
We provide some wonderful hospitals in the treatment of rare and terminal illnesses in children. We also have some of the finest rehabilitation hospitals for the military and civilian traumas in the
world and I say this because I was involved somewhat in my career.
Some subscribers mention socialist countries , but we as an democracy voted that way.
In the next election, and read my lips , there will be a change in the leadership but we will still have the NHS.
Many people have the wrong idea of a National Health Service. You have a problem of having a 50 million plus population with no proper health cover.
The other point is, like us, you have a ageing population and like us the retired will outnumber the working.

Happy weekend to all
Stan


message 24: by Paul (new)

Paul Dinger Marge and Illyn's solution to our healthcare crisis appears to be let them die, who cares. What a solution!


message 26: by Paul (new)

Paul Dinger No, I just want to have the healthcare I thought I was paying for.


message 27: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 15, 2009 05:08AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
In freedom, both producers and consumers have equal rights. In free trade: a willing seller and a willing buyer exist.

If the Obama Administration and some citizens think that healthcare providers and insurance companies are defrauding or infringing the rights of their customers, there is no need for any new law because these are already considered crimes.

If what they want does not exist, they do not have slaves to provide it. They do not have the right to coerce anyone to provide it. Paul and other like-minded private citizens are free to go into the healthcare and insurance business to offer what they think is best.


message 28: by Ilyn (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Collectivists (e.g. socialists, moochers, looters, power-lusters) like Paul equate the desire for freedom with wanting others to die. They do not appreciate the Declaration of Independence and the Founders.

Paul, you have no slaves to provide what you need or want. Citizens have equal inherent inalienable rights. The government is not a master and citizens are not slaves.

Only rights-respecters can practice benevolence.


message 29: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 15, 2009 02:59AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
On February 11, 2009, Bank of England Governor Mervyn King unveiled the Bank's quarterly inflation report and announced: "The UK is in a deep recession..."

Mr. King’s announcement followed a bleak assessment by the Bank of the outlook for growth in the UK economy: it expected GDP to shrink by more than 3.5% in 2009 and projected a mild recovery in 2010. The Bank of England and the whole business world knew then that the United Kingdom is the hardest-hit economy in the G-7.


message 30: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 15, 2009 02:44AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
The United Kingdom has suffered brain drain for decades. Fact from dictionary.com:

brain drain: The term originated about 1960, when many British scientists and intellectuals emigrated to the United States for a better working climate.

*
Fact: many doctors have left the UK


message 31: by Ilyn (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Updates on the UK brain drain: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/yourv... - quote from a comment: "Anyone with a brain has either left, or is planning to leave."

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article...


message 32: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 15, 2009 05:05AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
An Unhealthy Tactic http://townhall.com/columnists/BillOR...
by Bill O'Reilly


message 33: by Paul (new)

Paul Dinger Message from Illyn to the rest of the world,
I don't care, why don't you die already?


message 34: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 16, 2009 07:41AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Paul is dishonest. He equates rights with whining. He must hate the Declaration of Independence. He trumpets: If others are free, weaklings will die. This is the credo of parasites, the subterfuge of tyrants.


message 35: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 15, 2009 08:53AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
In capitalism, the great minds can create and produce more. This is good for everyone, especially those who are not as productive.

One who aspires to live at the expense of others is evil.


message 36: by Paul (new)

Paul Dinger Excuse me, where does it say in the Declaration of Indenpendence that government should allow insurance companies to take over healthcare. Did I miss that section?
And as for England, if socialized medicine is SO bad, why haven't they voted it out in any way shape or form?
ANd it isn't evil to expect what you pay for. I have paid most of my life for my health insurance, why is it fair that they can deny it to me when I need it the most. Why is it evil to expect what should be fair?
A person who puts ideals ahead of people is REALLY VILE AND EVIL.


message 37: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 15, 2009 11:23AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
You are free to go to England.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men...

Insurance and healthcare are man-made values. They do not grow on trees. You do not have slaves to give you man-made values. You are free not to purchase from any insurance company. You are free not to engage the services of any healthcare provider. You are free to go into the insurance or healthcare business and put all insurance/healthcare providers out of business.

You, who look at others as rightless, as slaves, are abhorrent.


message 38: by Paul (new)

Paul Dinger You are truly a twisted individual. It is pointless to argue with someone who has so fundamentally lost sight of their humanity to think that victimizers are somehow the good guys and those that stand up for their rights are evil. You would make a great Nazi or KKK member, I am sure you can find a website and sign up.


message 39: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 15, 2009 11:20AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Only rights-respecters can practice benevolence. Rights-respecters value independence, their own and that of all others.

You are no rights-respecter.


message 40: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 16, 2009 07:12AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Kudos, Zach Lahn! http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/mEDLm3...

Political science student/Capitalist Pig Zach Lahn challenges Obama to “Oxford-style” debate…
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/...


message 41: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 16, 2009 08:21AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Zack Lahn (paraphrase): The best way to reduce prices is to increase competition. How in the world can a private corporation compete with the entity that does not have to worry about making a profit, does not have to pay taxes, and is not subject to regulations. I don't want generalities...

* http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/1... Zach Lahn, a student from the University of Colorado at Boulder, pressed Obama on whether the government would have an unfair advantage against insurance companies that have to make a profit to survive.

* http://mobile.politico.com/story.cfm?... The tensest exchange came when University of Colorado student Zach Lahn challenged Obama to a health care debate and then asked him to explain how a public option will not hurt private companies and how the government will manage it.

After answering Lahn’s question, Obama gave the young Republican credit for challenging him.

“I like that,” Obama said. “You’ve gotta have a little chutzpah.”

But after the event Lahn said that Obama did not answer his question

“Generalities, that’s what I got,” he said. “I didn’t actually get to the bottom of it. I’ve been listening on the Internet and I’ve been listening on TV, and I haven’t been getting what I wanted, and I’m leaving here with the same feeling.”

Lahn said he got a ticket to Obama’s event by signing up on the White House website. And he stood by his challenge to face off with the president: “Any time he would like to do a debate, I am open to a debate,” he said.

* http://www.denverpost.com/ci_13131120 Zach Lahn, a University of Colorado student majoring in political science and business marketing, challenged the president, tounge-in-check, perhaps, to an "Oxford style" debate.

Lahn asked Obama how private insurance companies would be able to compete against a government program that would have advantages, including tax advantages and perhaps lower operating costs.

"That's a legitimate debate," Obama said. "I think we can craft a system in which you have a public option that has to operate independently," the president said. Obama noted Blue Cross and Blue Shield as an entity that operates quasi-governmental. "There are ways we can address competive issues."


message 42: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 16, 2009 08:27AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
President Obama cited FedEx and UPS successfully competing with the Post Office. Indeed, private companies usually trounce government-funded/backed companies.

But aside from being outrageously unfair as pointed out by Zach, the following cannot be missed by an honest person:

* taxpayers shoulder the funding - i.e. extorted money is used to fund government-backed companies; thus, more enslavement is needed

* the private companies are at the mercy of the government which has the power of the gun -> regulations are coercive - to an honest person, it is very clear that regulations are rights-infringements

* competing with private companies is outside the function of government. When the entity that has the monopoly on the use of force goes outside its function, it infringes rights


message 43: by Molly (last edited Aug 17, 2009 08:37AM) (new)

Molly Southwick | 19 comments I have a sister who has a step son who lives in a country with socialized health care. He got hit by a car and broke both of his legs severely. When they took him to there government run hospital, guess what the government was willing to pay for? They were going to amputate his leg. We had to find a private clinic, and the family all pitched in to help out so that he was able to keep his leg. This is what you get with socialized health care. Not only will you be denied care because the government doesn't want to pay for it, when they will pay for it you may be put on a long waiting list. In Canada a lady got put on a waiting list for treatment for breast cancer and ended up losing both breasts because her case worsened while she was waiting for care. You never get something for nothing in this world. If your not paying for it someone is. The problem with socialized anything is the money will run out eventually and then what?


message 44: by Monika (new)

Monika (marriedmurder) | 2 comments obama is ruining this country already. i do not agree AT ALL with his health care plan. it will ruin this country, it will ruin you. ANYtime you go to the hospital now for any emergency, the hospital is required to treat you...insurance or not...yeah, sure people say without insurance you're paying a ton of money for being treated, but you can pay small monthly rates as long as you're paying your bill...$10 bucks a month if you want...as long as you're paying...how about just making this health care plan for all those people who do not have insurance, or refuse to get it? leave us with insurance alone...im 25 years old and pay for my health insurance monthly through the comp. i work for...yes, it sucks paying it out of your check (just as it would if i mailed in payments) but it is an expense worth paying for...why should i pay for anyone who's not willing to pay their own? Like I said, I'm 25, newly married, full time job that I WORK MY ASS OFF in yet still struggle as any 20-something does...I dont have the money to pay for someone else. call that selfish, call it whatever you want. my husband got insured before we got insurance, and went to a county hospital. had his surgeries, and was treated (not well-didn't get the necessary surgery, but a cheaper alternative that didnt really fix the problem).....definately not the best place to go to, definately not the best treatment, but it was what we had to do, and we're paying everything off slowly....my father-in-law is a Vietnam vet, and goes to the V.A. hospital.....that hospital is so scary every time we take him...the waiting lists he gets put on last so long they make his conditions worse. he can't choose times or dates that work for him--he has to only go when they can see him, or he's put on another waiting list...he cant get surgeries he needs because they are not "approved" even though they are necessary.. we're going to lose him way before we should because of this government-run hospital.....

ugh...sorry about this tangent, but i really think Obama was just the media-frenzied pop culture choice for a president...greatest marketing campaign ever...completely worthless at his job....



message 45: by John (last edited Aug 17, 2009 02:31PM) (new)

John Karr (karr) Ronald Reagan gave an oratory about how socialism more often as not finds its way into capitalist societies through healthcare. After all, who wants to vote against something that 'helps' people?

From what I've seen lately, he was 100% correct.

No government option in needed in this recent healthcare debacle bill. None. Reform other aspects of health insurance via more competition, greater high-risk pools, but leave the government out of the equation.



message 46: by Ilyn (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
The Fannie Mae Health System
by Ben Shapiro http://townhall.com/columnists/BenSha...


message 47: by Ilyn (last edited Aug 20, 2009 10:59AM) (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Obama appeals to faith-based groups for help on health care

by CNN http://www.laindependent.com/news/537...

The President: "... meeting what I consider to be a core ethical and moral obligation: that is, that we look out for one another; that is, I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper. And in the wealthiest nation in the world right now we are neglecting to live up to that call."


message 48: by Melissa (new)

Melissa K, I have to start by saying, I am not very political. I have never really followed it much. I know I am going to have no chance of changing minds or opinions and I am not meaning to do so. I have not read through this whole post and therefore hope I do not step on any toes or rehash old comments. I just want to put my opinion out here.

So you know where I am coming from, I am a single mom of 3 wonderful teens. I am very proud of what I have taught them and get complements on their actions all the time. As I said, wonderful kids. I also, mostly due to genetics but also partly due to a very bad past am now not able to work. I can barely walk across the floor sometimes to get to the other room. There are days my hands will not hold a utensil (writing or eating) and days my mid section feels like it is going to break in half. This is a very short overview but you get the general idea.

That having been put out there, I live in one of the most difficult states if not the most difficult, in which to get help. I had to fight (which is not an activity I can do on a daily basis) to get medical help for my kids. I got it. I was allowed to have it for one month. Yes, one month. I now have to go through another 6 months of fighting to get it for another month if they decide to put me in again. I currently bring in only my child support of 477.00 a month. The rent is controlled, thankfully. But the other about 370 is not going too far.

I have family and friends in Wales and England. They are shocked at the way we live here. I am sure there are the good and bad in every situation but for the most part, they have it better than us, it seems to me. My in-laws sent for us about 16 years ago. On the plane my daughter got bronchitis and strep. We were able to get her in the doctor immediately. There were no lines and crowded waiting rooms like we have here. There was no waiting for the doc. I think it was about 15 min for us to enter, get seen and be on our way out the door. I have spoke at great lengths with some friends who live in North England and they say that with the exception of mental services, most things are able to be taken care of immediately and there is very little they know of that is not taken care of under the system.

I am not saying that I want to let others take care of me completely and I would love to be able to use my degrees. I went to school with the plans of using the knowledge and now am not able to. I could possibly get to where I could if I were able to get my health in check but no, I am not allowed to have the help I need.

I was taught that we are suppose to be endowed with "rights of life, liberty and the persuit of happiness." Most of America is not given the right of Life and happiness as our life is in the hands of fate and chance. We do not have the option of being happy because we are constantly fighting our bodies in their efforts to destroy our lives. I am jsut one of millions who has illnesses that could take our lives in min. if not taken care of.

I am not saying I know exactly what to do, I however feel that the system in England/Wales is much better than we have here. I feel like we are the "teenage" country that refuses to listen and learn from the adult countries. Something needs done.


message 49: by Ilyn (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
The theocracy threat has become bipartisan.


message 50: by Ilyn (new)

Ilyn Ross (Ilyn_Ross) | 1280 comments Mod
Pope Benedict XVI’s Caritas in Veritate (Charity in Truth - 2009) and Pope Paul’s Populorum Progressio (On the Development of Peoples - 1967):

The encyclicals blame the PROFIT motive for all the world’s problems, and call for a worldwide REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH by a world government as the solution.


« previous 1 3
back to top