National Health Care

[unionj]

You start out with another Myth that has been repeatedly debunked: Long waits. Did you read ANY of those articles? Your lack of information on this important issue and being guided by debunked Myths will do you and your family no good. You are falling prey to the lies and myths of those who profit from the curent system and they are glad that you are so easily manipuated by their PR firms.

Here are the facts on wait times. Would you like my UK relatives phone #'s so you can listen to them in person complain about how bad it is?

[mountaineerwv]

So your mother is is agony and needs surgery but she must wait her turn like everyone else. The fact that your family has paid into the plan for generations does not matter as all your money is being spent on those who have not and who are ahead of your mother in line.

 

If your mother is in agony and requires surgery, the doctors will make that important decision, not the government and she will get her medical treatment expeditiously.

 

It is only the non-emergency, elective medical treatments that might have a wait, not the life-threatening, pressing medical emergencies.

 

And, stop with your boogey man of the illegals. It is very ugly.

[mountaineerwv]

Here are the facts on wait times. Would you like my UK relatives phone #'s so you can listen to them in person complain about how bad it is?

 

What procedures are they waiting for? How much are they paying for their services? Are their lives in jeopardy because they have a wait?

 

We have waits here now in this country. That was also talked about in one of the URLs that I supplied that debunked this myth.

[mountaineerwv]

No this is SAD.

Education in the United States

 

Sure, that is SAD. Is it the fault of the TEA? Is it the fault of today's parents? Is it the fault of our teachers? Is it the fault of our Administrators?

 

Again, what is your solution? I have yet to hear anything but complaints and criticisms. That is easy, solving the problem(s) is the hard part.

[mountaineerwv]

No this is SAD.

Education in the United States

 

But, you do not mention the many students who come out of this system and become Merit Scholars. You do not mention the many individual school districts that produce graduates who attend the Ivy League and go on to great success. You do not mention those stories, you just talk about the total American education system that includes many districts with limited resources and do not have the tax base to supplement what they get from the government.

[Trimdingman]

You start out with another Myth that has been repeatedly debunked: Long waits. Did you read ANY of those articles? Your lack of information on this important issue and being guided by debunked Myths will do you and your family no good. You are falling prey to the lies and myths of those who profit from the curent system and they are glad that you are so easily manipuated by their PR firms.

 

 

Long waits is certainly a hot issue in Canada. The Ontario Liberals promised to cut wait times to get elected. People now are waiting longer than ever. My wife had to wait months for cancer surgery. Then they told her it wasn't cancer. Then they told her that it was. You'll never catch me in a hospital in Canada. Public Health Care is the cancer that this country is infected with. I am afraid that it is terminal.

 

As for education, I would privatize it. We pay about $8000 per student per year in taxes. The private sector could do it for half that. I would send kids to school until age 13. Then they could finish their education on the internet and just go to school for testing. We could get rid of all of the high schools. They could do tests in the evening at the elementary schools. Many billions could be saved, and kids would get a better education.

Edited October 7, 2007 by Trimdingman

[unionj]

Long waits is certainly a hot issue in Canada. The Ontario Liberals promised to cut wait times to get elected. People now are waiting longer than ever. My wife had to wait months for cancer surgery. Then they told her it wasn't cancer. Then they told her that it was. You'll never catch me in a hospital in Canada. Public Health Care is the cancer that this country is infected with. I am afraid that it is terminal.

Thank you Trim.

[mountaineerwv]

The Case For Single Payer, Universal Health Care For The United States

 

Outline of Talk Given To The Association of State Green Parties, Moodus, Connecticut on June 4, 1999

 

By John R. Battista, M.D. and Justine McCabe, Ph.D.

 

Why doesn’t the United States have universal health care as a right of citizenship?

 

The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee access to health care as a right of citizenship. 28 industrialized nations have single payer universal health care systems, while 1 (Germany) has a multipayer universal health care system like President Clinton proposed for the United States.

 

Myth One: The United States has the best health care system in the world.

 

Fact One: The United States ranks 23rd in infant mortality, down from 12th in 1960 and 21st in 1990.

 

Fact Two: The United States ranks 20th in life expectancy for women down from 1st in 1945 and 13th in 1960.

 

Fact Three: The United States ranks 21st in life expectancy for men down from 1st in 1945 and 17th in 1960.

 

Fact Four: The United States ranks between 50th and 100th in immunizations depending on the immunization. Overall US is 67th, right behind Botswana.

 

Fact Five: Outcome studies on a variety of diseases, such as coronary artery disease, and renal failure show the United States to rank below Canada and a wide variety of industrialized nations.

 

Conclusion: The United States ranks poorly relative to other industrialized nations in health care despite having the best trained health care providers and the best medical infrastructure of any industrialized nation.

 

Myth Two: Universal Health Care Would Be Too Expensive

 

Fact One: The United States spends at least 40% more per capita on health care than any other industrialized country with universal health care.

 

Fact Two: Federal studies by the Congressional Budget Office and the General Accounting office show that single payer universal health care would save 100 to 200 Billion dollars per year despite covering all the uninsured and increasing health care benefits.

 

Fact Three: State studies by Massachusetts and Connecticut have shown that single payer universal health care would save 1 to 2 Billion dollars per year from the total medical expenses in those states despite covering all the uninsured and increasing health care benefits.

 

Fact Four: The costs of health care in Canada as a % of GNP, which were identical to the United States when Canada changed to a single payer, universal health care system in 1971, have increased at a rate much lower than the United States, despite the US economy being much stronger than Canada’s.

 

Conclusion: Single payer universal health care costs would be lower than the current US system due to lower administrative costs. The United States spends 50 to 100% more on administration than single payer systems. By lowering these administrative costs the United States would have the ability to provide universal health care, without managed care, increase benefits and still save money.

 

Myth Three: Universal Health Care Would Deprive Citizens of Needed Services

 

Fact One: Studies reveal that citizens in universal health care systems have more doctor visits and more hospital days than in the US.

 

Fact Two: Around 30% of Americans have problem accessing health care due to payment problems or access to care, far more than any other industrialized country. About 17% of our population is without health insurance. About 75% of ill uninsured people have trouble accessing/paying for health care.

 

Fact Three: Comparisons of Difficulties Accessing Care Are Shown To Be Greater In The US Than Canada (see graph).

 

Fact Four: Access to health care is directly related to income and race in the United States. As a result the poor and minorities have poorer health than the wealthy and the whites.

 

Fact Five: There would be no lines under a universal health care system in the United States because we have about a 30% oversupply of medical equipment and surgeons, whereas demand would increase about 15%.

 

Conclusion: The US denies access to health care based on the ability to pay. Under a universal health care system all would access care. There would be no lines as in other industrialized countries due to the oversupply in our providers and infrastructure, and the willingness/ability of the United States to spend more on health care than other industrialized nations.

 

Myth Four: Universal Health Care Would Result In Government Control And Intrusion Into Health Care Resulting In Loss Of Freedom Of Choice

 

Fact One: There would be free choice of health care providers under a single payer universal health care system, unlike our current managed care system in which people are forced to see providers on the insurer’s panel to obtain medical benefits.

 

Fact Two: There would be no management of care under a single payer, universal health care system unlike the current managed care system which mandates insurer preapproval for services thus undercutting patient confidentiality and taking health care decisions away from the health care provider and consumer.

 

Fact Three: Although health care providers fees would be set as they are currently in 90% of cases, providers would have a means of negotiating fees unlike the current managed care system in which they are set in corporate board rooms with profits, not patient care, in mind.

 

Fact Four: Taxes, fees and benefits would be decided by the insurer which would be under the control of a diverse board representing consumers, providers, business and government. It would not be a government controlled system, although the government would have to approve the taxes. The system would be run by a public trust, not the government.

 

Conclusion: Single payer, universal health care administered by a state public health system would be much more democratic and much less intrusive than our current system. Consumers and providers would have a voice in determining benefits, rates and taxes. Problems with free choice, confidentiality and medical decision making would be resolved.

 

Myth Five: Universal Health Care Is Socialized Medicine And Would Be Unacceptable To The Public

 

Fact One: Single payer universal health care is not socialized medicine. It is health care payment system, not a health care delivery system. Health care providers would be in fee for service practice, and would not be employees of the government, which would be socialized medicine. Single payer health care is not socialized medicine, any more than the public funding of education is socialized education, or the public funding of the defense industry is socialized defense.

 

Fact Two: Repeated national and state polls have shown that between 60 and 75% of Americans would like a universal health care system (see The Harris Poll #78, October 20, 2005).

 

Conclusion: Single payer, universal health care is not socialized medicine and would be preferred by the majority of the citizens of this country.

 

Myth Six: The Problems With The US Health Care System Are Being Solved and Are Best Solved By Private Corporate Managed Care Medicine because they are the most efficient

 

Fact One: Private for profit corporation are the least efficient deliverer of health care. They spend between 20 and 30% of premiums on administration and profits. The public sector is the most efficient. Medicare spends 3% on administration.

 

Fact Two: The same procedure in the same hospital the year after conversion from not-for profit to for-profit costs in between 20 to 35% more.

 

Fact Three: Health care costs in the United States grew more in the United States under managed care in 1990 to 1996 than any other industrialized nation with single payer universal health care.

Fact Four: The quality of health care in the US has deteriorated under managed care. Access problems have increased. The number of uninsured has dramatically increased (increase of 10 million to 43.4 million from 1989 to 1996, increase of 2.4% from 1989 to 1996- 16% in 1996 and increasing each year).

 

Fact Five: The level of satisfaction with the US health care system is the lowest of any industrialized nation.

 

Fact Six: 80% of citizens and 71% of doctors believe that managed care has caused quality of care to be compromised.

 

Conclusion: For profit, managed care can not solve the US health care problems because health care is not a commodity that people shop for, and quality of care must always be compromised when the motivating factor for corporations is to save money through denial of care and decreasing provider costs. In addition managed care has introduced problems of patient confidentiality and disrupted the continuity of care through having limited provider networks.

 

Overall Answer to the questions Why doesn’t the US have single payer universal health care when single payer universal health care is the most efficient, most democratic and most equitable means to deliver health care? Why does the United States remain wedded to an inefficient, autocratic and immoral system that makes health care accessible to the wealthy and not the poor when a vast majority of citizens want it to be a right of citizenship?

 

Conclusion: Corporations are able to buy politicians through our campaign finance system and control the media to convince people that corporate health care is democratic, represents freedom, and is the most efficient system for delivering health care.

[Furious1Auto]

The Case For Single Payer, Universal Health Care For The United States

 

Outline of Talk Given To The Association of State Green Parties, Moodus, Connecticut on June 4, 1999

 

By John R. Battista, M.D. and Justine McCabe, Ph.D.

 

Why doesn’t the United States have universal health care as a right of citizenship?

 

The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee access to health care as a right of citizenship. 28 industrialized nations have single payer universal health care systems, while 1 (Germany) has a multipayer universal health care system like President Clinton proposed for the United States.

 

Myth One: The United States has the best health care system in the world.

 

Fact One: The United States ranks 23rd in infant mortality, down from 12th in 1960 and 21st in 1990.

 

Fact Two: The United States ranks 20th in life expectancy for women down from 1st in 1945 and 13th in 1960.

 

Fact Three: The United States ranks 21st in life expectancy for men down from 1st in 1945 and 17th in 1960.

 

Fact Four: The United States ranks between 50th and 100th in immunizations depending on the immunization. Overall US is 67th, right behind Botswana.

 

Fact Five: Outcome studies on a variety of diseases, such as coronary artery disease, and renal failure show the United States to rank below Canada and a wide variety of industrialized nations.

 

Conclusion: The United States ranks poorly relative to other industrialized nations in health care despite having the best trained health care providers and the best medical infrastructure of any industrialized nation.

 

Myth Two: Universal Health Care Would Be Too Expensive

 

Fact One: The United States spends at least 40% more per capita on health care than any other industrialized country with universal health care.

 

Fact Two: Federal studies by the Congressional Budget Office and the General Accounting office show that single payer universal health care would save 100 to 200 Billion dollars per year despite covering all the uninsured and increasing health care benefits.

 

Fact Three: State studies by Massachusetts and Connecticut have shown that single payer universal health care would save 1 to 2 Billion dollars per year from the total medical expenses in those states despite covering all the uninsured and increasing health care benefits.

 

Fact Four: The costs of health care in Canada as a % of GNP, which were identical to the United States when Canada changed to a single payer, universal health care system in 1971, have increased at a rate much lower than the United States, despite the US economy being much stronger than Canada’s.

 

Conclusion: Single payer universal health care costs would be lower than the current US system due to lower administrative costs. The United States spends 50 to 100% more on administration than single payer systems. By lowering these administrative costs the United States would have the ability to provide universal health care, without managed care, increase benefits and still save money.

 

Myth Three: Universal Health Care Would Deprive Citizens of Needed Services

 

Fact One: Studies reveal that citizens in universal health care systems have more doctor visits and more hospital days than in the US.

 

Fact Two: Around 30% of Americans have problem accessing health care due to payment problems or access to care, far more than any other industrialized country. About 17% of our population is without health insurance. About 75% of ill uninsured people have trouble accessing/paying for health care.

 

Fact Three: Comparisons of Difficulties Accessing Care Are Shown To Be Greater In The US Than Canada (see graph).

 

Fact Four: Access to health care is directly related to income and race in the United States. As a result the poor and minorities have poorer health than the wealthy and the whites.

 

Fact Five: There would be no lines under a universal health care system in the United States because we have about a 30% oversupply of medical equipment and surgeons, whereas demand would increase about 15%.

 

Conclusion: The US denies access to health care based on the ability to pay. Under a universal health care system all would access care. There would be no lines as in other industrialized countries due to the oversupply in our providers and infrastructure, and the willingness/ability of the United States to spend more on health care than other industrialized nations.

 

Myth Four: Universal Health Care Would Result In Government Control And Intrusion Into Health Care Resulting In Loss Of Freedom Of Choice

 

Fact One: There would be free choice of health care providers under a single payer universal health care system, unlike our current managed care system in which people are forced to see providers on the insurer’s panel to obtain medical benefits.

 

Fact Two: There would be no management of care under a single payer, universal health care system unlike the current managed care system which mandates insurer preapproval for services thus undercutting patient confidentiality and taking health care decisions away from the health care provider and consumer.

 

Fact Three: Although health care providers fees would be set as they are currently in 90% of cases, providers would have a means of negotiating fees unlike the current managed care system in which they are set in corporate board rooms with profits, not patient care, in mind.

 

Fact Four: Taxes, fees and benefits would be decided by the insurer which would be under the control of a diverse board representing consumers, providers, business and government. It would not be a government controlled system, although the government would have to approve the taxes. The system would be run by a public trust, not the government.

 

Conclusion: Single payer, universal health care administered by a state public health system would be much more democratic and much less intrusive than our current system. Consumers and providers would have a voice in determining benefits, rates and taxes. Problems with free choice, confidentiality and medical decision making would be resolved.

 

Myth Five: Universal Health Care Is Socialized Medicine And Would Be Unacceptable To The Public

 

Fact One: Single payer universal health care is not socialized medicine. It is health care payment system, not a health care delivery system. Health care providers would be in fee for service practice, and would not be employees of the government, which would be socialized medicine. Single payer health care is not socialized medicine, any more than the public funding of education is socialized education, or the public funding of the defense industry is socialized defense.

 

Fact Two: Repeated national and state polls have shown that between 60 and 75% of Americans would like a universal health care system (see The Harris Poll #78, October 20, 2005).

 

Conclusion: Single payer, universal health care is not socialized medicine and would be preferred by the majority of the citizens of this country.

 

Myth Six: The Problems With The US Health Care System Are Being Solved and Are Best Solved By Private Corporate Managed Care Medicine because they are the most efficient

 

Fact One: Private for profit corporation are the least efficient deliverer of health care. They spend between 20 and 30% of premiums on administration and profits. The public sector is the most efficient. Medicare spends 3% on administration.

 

Fact Two: The same procedure in the same hospital the year after conversion from not-for profit to for-profit costs in between 20 to 35% more.

 

Fact Three: Health care costs in the United States grew more in the United States under managed care in 1990 to 1996 than any other industrialized nation with single payer universal health care.

Fact Four: The quality of health care in the US has deteriorated under managed care. Access problems have increased. The number of uninsured has dramatically increased (increase of 10 million to 43.4 million from 1989 to 1996, increase of 2.4% from 1989 to 1996- 16% in 1996 and increasing each year).

 

Fact Five: The level of satisfaction with the US health care system is the lowest of any industrialized nation.

 

Fact Six: 80% of citizens and 71% of doctors believe that managed care has caused quality of care to be compromised.

 

Conclusion: For profit, managed care can not solve the US health care problems because health care is not a commodity that people shop for, and quality of care must always be compromised when the motivating factor for corporations is to save money through denial of care and decreasing provider costs. In addition managed care has introduced problems of patient confidentiality and disrupted the continuity of care through having limited provider networks.

 

Overall Answer to the questions Why doesn’t the US have single payer universal health care when single payer universal health care is the most efficient, most democratic and most equitable means to deliver health care? Why does the United States remain wedded to an inefficient, autocratic and immoral system that makes health care accessible to the wealthy and not the poor when a vast majority of citizens want it to be a right of citizenship?

 

Conclusion: Corporations are able to buy politicians through our campaign finance system and control the media to convince people that corporate health care is democratic, represents freedom, and is the most efficient system for delivering health care.

Dude I'm at an impasse, and between the two of you Imawhosure and yourself I'm quit moderate as unlike Ima I do believe that some form of social medicine is necessary to control health care inflation costs, I do not and will never support a blanketed health care system and for the same reason that people despise illegal immigration. It is not fair for American tax payers to pick up the tab for those who are not suppose to be here at all, or even citizens who refuse to contribute while receiving the benefits of such a system! If you don't work here legally you should receive a bill for doctors services. Why should hard working Americans pay for people who refuse to work, or are working here illegally? Why should they be expected to pay the excess tax necessary to fund these people's health care? I'm sure that you will ignore the highlighted portion of my post because your getting monetary reward to push blanketed national health care! Just like I'm beginning to think that Ima and his cohort Fmccap, are recieving the same for opposing this position. I know this forum well and have been all over it and all of you post only on certain topics, much of which are political and world issues.! I on the other hand do what I do for free, and have the best interests of the people at heart. No, blanketed health care period! If I had to choose between your plan and IMA's position I would have to find satisfaction in the status qua just to reduce govenment control and an open check book from my bank account to fund deadbeats, and illegals! Lastly where were your posts in support of national health care before the democrats added it to their campaign platform for the 08' elections, and before they started paying bloggers to support it?

Edited October 7, 2007 by Furious1Auto

[Imawhosure]

You start out with another Myth that has been repeatedly debunked: Long waits. Did you read ANY of those articles? Your lack of information on this important issue and being guided by debunked Myths will do you and your family no good. You are falling prey to the lies and myths of those who profit from the curent system and they are glad that you are so easily manipuated by their PR firms.

It is "current," not "curent" FOOL!!!

[Imawhosure]

STOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP!

 

To my good friends Furious and Mr Cap.

 

PLEASE LISTEN, PAHLEEZE!!!!!!

 

You guys have let him off the hook but letting him CHANGE THE DEBATE. (you are slick mountain, or whatever your name is)

 

The debate is simple, he stepped into it, and you let him escape. Use your noodles and he will lose hands down cause Mr Cap is correct, along with Furious, Union J, and Trim!!!!!!

 

The debate over IF National Healthcare COULD be better than the current system is not the point!!!! All the prattle back and forth over what is happening in Britain, Canada, and other places that have this system shows the pitfalls of such a system, but also shows some progress that he can point to. It becomes nothing more than a static arguement of taking the good with the bad, and his comeback will eventually be, (for the bad anyway) "that is, (such and such a country) this is the USA, we will do it better.

 

Understand this----------->we can't as reasonable American citizens defend our current healthcare system. It is broken, and we all know it. Every one of us can agree on this I think. (we agree on something, hurray!!!)

 

But your adversary Mr Mountain; wants to OBFUSCATE (is that correct sir?) the issue by first telling everyone something that is obvious, (the healthcare system is broken) then indicates that the only solution is to have a government takeover of same. He then puts you on the defensive by needling you to come up with better solutions to the problem, lolol.

 

THE REAL DEBATE IS----------->Not if the healthcare system is broken, but IF THE GOVERNMENT CAN ADMINISTER his program cost effectively, and if they CAN'T, then HE has no solution at all, just is creating more problems.

 

Now then Mr Cap, all you need do is go into the archives to PROVE his assertion is ridiculous!!!!! Use our country, show what the government projected any one of their so called programs would cost 10 yrs down the road, and SHOW WHAT IT ENDED UP COSTING, lol.

 

This debate is all about the government and its largess fellas, not about healthcare. A healthcare takeover is just about them being able to give MORE LARGESS. Healthcare is just the vehicle for them to get access to it.

 

Pull up what has happened to the supposed SSI lockbox, lololol. Show that it WAS overfunded, how the government put it into the GENERAL FUND, spent it, then insisted it was underfunded!!! Show where all the programs money they put a special tax in for, was NEVER sent directly to the programs to fund them, just spent willy nilly for whatever SPECIAL INTEREST projects they wanted; then they returned to YOU the TAXPAYER and said your PROGRAM WAS UNDERFUNDED!!!!!!

 

Didn't Bush, Clinton, and Bush I all say they were going to make an SSI lockbox? Did they, lololol.

 

His assertion that the government of the United States of America is efficient is absolutely the most assinine statement that anyone who has a command of the English language such as he does, has EVER MADE ON THESE BOARDS. Most liberals will even tell you so, lololol. (of course they blame the opposing party, and the opposing party blames them.........but the government will not be run by just one party forever, so whomever is to blame for you personally, they will eventually regain power, and you gonna have them handling 1.5 trillion MORE? I don't think so)

 

So then pitbulls, show him how efficient our government really is, and that INSTANTLY breaks the case for a government takeover of healthcare. Maybe then we can get down to business of coming together to solve this problem, instead of arguing over a solution that is really no solution at all, just another problem, just another tax; and once the government gets their hands on it, (just as all programs that they tax us for and screw it up) there will be no turning back.

 

Once you choose the government, they will NEVER relinquish that money, no matter how badly they do the job. And from the efficiency they have shown doing all these other entitlement programs; spending the money wherever they see fit, WE WOULD BE SCREWED!!!!!

 

And finally, let me point this out to you------------------>Suppose our government did it this way--------->suppose instead of throwing virtually all the money into the general fund, they earmarked each tax to the program for which it was intended!!!! They could NOT take any money and move it to anything else UNTIL that program for which it was intended was fully funded.

 

Oh boy!!!!! Could you imagine what middle America would say when instead of the government coming back and wanting a raise in taxes to fund SSI or Medicare, they came back and wanted a hike cause they wanted to fund some foreign country? Some save the whales group? Some war that many don't agree upon? Fund the arts where they draw turds claiming it is a master piece, lol!!!!!

 

Now you know why LIBERALS want control of your healthcare bucks. Unlike what mountain suggests, it is THEY who will scare the hell out of you by proclaiming that your healthcare fund is short; namely because they are running a deficit, and were smart enough to FUND things you won't accept a tax hike for, and convieniently NOT funding the ones you will.

 

It is POLITICS, and Mountain is very good at it, lololol. Show him YOU know better!!!!!

[Trimdingman]

Mountaineer, all of these articles that you are quoting from were written by someone with an agenda to get public health care implemented. Why do you think that it is so long-winded? Because it is trying to push something that is wrong. I can see that just by looking around and thinking for myself.

[mountaineerwv]

It is "current," not "curent" FOOL!!!

 

Hey, moron, there is a difference between omitting a character while typing and consistently mispelling and misusing a word like "your" vs. "you're". When you misspell the word over and over, then that is a pattern.

[mountaineerwv]

Mountaineer, all of these articles that you are quoting from were written by someone with an agenda to get public health care implemented. Why do you think that it is so long-winded? Because it is trying to push something that is wrong. I can see that just by looking around and thinking for myself.

 

What agenda? How do they benefit from the change? The Insurance companies and their minions benefit from maintaining the current system finacially. How do these MDs and PhDs benefit?

 

Senator Bill Frist benefits as his family owns HCA stock - the largest for-profit hospital chain in the country, which was founded by Frist’s father and brother

[Imawhosure]

Hey, moron, there is a difference between omitting a character while typing and consistently mispelling and misusing a word like "your" vs. "you're". When you misspell the word over and over, then that is a pattern.

 

 

He has no answers, lololol. Ridicule the messenger since he can't push aside the message, hehehehehehehehehehehe.

 

As far as pattern----------->raise taxes on this, government control of that. Yep, I understand patterns now. Thanks for the help!

[mountaineerwv]

Mountaineer, all of these articles that you are quoting from were written by someone with an agenda to get public health care implemented. Why do you think that it is so long-winded? Because it is trying to push something that is wrong. I can see that just by looking around and thinking for myself.

 

If it is so wrong, then why are we the ONLY industrialized nation that does not cover its' citizens? All the health statistics show that we have worse results than those other countries and we pay almost twice as much.

 

They may not be perfect, but something must be done with our health care system. Do you not begin an exercise program because you can not have a perfect physique? No, you start doing small things to get better, you do not just sit on your arse continuing to stuff twinkies down your mouth. Our health care system is out of shape and needs to pursue a new program.

[mountaineerwv]

He has no answers, lololol. Ridicule the messenger since he can't push aside the message, hehehehehehehehehehehe.

 

As far as pattern----------->raise taxes on this, government control of that. Yep, I understand patterns now. Thanks for the help!

 

I have answers, you do not. I have yet to hear one suggestion/answer, only typical conservative talking points. Nothing new or orginal. HeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHe

[mountaineerwv]

He has no answers, lololol. Ridicule the messenger since he can't push aside the message, hehehehehehehehehehehe.

 

As far as pattern----------->raise taxes on this, government control of that. Yep, I understand patterns now. Thanks for the help!

Here is a pattern: Lower taxes......raise deficit........lower taxes.......raise deficit........lower taxes.......lower benefits......lower taxes......lower benefits.......lower taxes.......raise deficit......lower taxes......

 

 

Another pattern: Lie.....lie.....lie.....lie....lie....lie.....lie.....lie....(obfuscate).....lie

....lie...

 

 

lolololololololololololololololololol

[Imawhosure]

Lets take a WONDERFUL government program as a barometer, and see how they handled the situation, hehehehehehehehehehehe!!!! AND THIS IS OF INTEREST TO AUTOWORKERS!!!!!!

 

PROBLEM------------->Fuel is to high, what can we as the government do about it to HELP, hehehehehehehehehehehee.

 

SUB PROBLEM-------->Lets get away from foreign sources of oil!!!!!

 

GOVERNMENT ANSWER----------->lets subsidize corn, convert it to fuel, and THAT Mr/Ms/Mz America will help you SAVE money, plus address partially, our use of foreign fuel sources. Lets all pat ourselves on the back, America loves us, lololol.

 

REALITY------------->Due to this program, our food sources have skyrocketed in cost as many farmers who grew other foodstuffs for consumption, switched over to growing the crop know as CORN, lololol. Consumers are feeling it in their pocketbooks as beef, poultry, and yes EVEN CORN have skyrocketed.

 

And your part as consumers????? Well, some of YOUR taxes have been redirected to pay for this program on one side. And on the other side you pay more for food, which means YOU CAN ALMOST SAY YOU ARE DOUBLED TAXED!!!!!!

 

 

BRILLIANT, don't you think!!!! Yep, government is the solution to everything, just ask Mountain, he will tell you all about it. Won't you MOUNTAIN, lolololololol!!!!!!!

[mountaineerwv]

Why should hard working Americans pay for people who refuse to work, or are working here illegally?

 

How would that be different with a Single Payer System? We are doing that now for a very high cost at the local emergency rooms.

 

Why? Because when it comes to someones' health, we Americans are a caring people. Right? And, since the corporations who entice the cheap workers to come to this country are unwilling to pay for their health, who else is going to pay?

 

Do you propose that we send them away to die and suffer?

[mountaineerwv]

PROBLEM------------->Fuel is to high, what can we as the government do about it to HELP, hehehehehehehehehehehee.

 

Try to do what the government of Brazil has done - move off oil based fuels.

 

The govt. can subsidize alternative energy programs by having a gasoline tax to do that research. It is in the long term interest of this country. "Check out the people who are

 

HeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHe - You're a moron.

[Imawhosure]

Do you have public transportation in Canada? Have you ever ridden a bus? And, whose roads are you traveling on?

 

Comparing car ownership to medical coverage? What a maroon.

 

It is "MORON not MAROON!"

 

I think it shows a pattern!!!!!

 

Maroon is when you are left on an island or something, heheheheheheheheheheheehe. You must be contemplating Cuba; where your type of ideas seem to have favor!!!!!!

[Imawhosure]

Try to do what the government of Brazil has done - move off oil based fuels.

 

The govt. can subsidize alternative energy programs by having a gasoline tax to do that research. It is in the long term interest of this country. "Check out the people who are

 

HeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHeHe - You're a moron.

 

Oh great!!!!! Now he wants us to be like Brazil.

 

Well, at least he is going South with his ideas. By the time he is done, he will come up with a perfect example we should use from Venezuela. (I know you get the jist of WHO runs Venezuela Mountain. We will just keep it between us, heheheheheh)

[mountaineerwv]

STOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP!

 

To my good friends Furious and Mr Cap.

 

PLEASE LISTEN, PAHLEEZE!!!!!!

 

You guys have let him off the hook but letting him CHANGE THE DEBATE. (you are slick mountain, or whatever your name is)

 

The debate is simple, he stepped into it, and you let him escape. Use your noodles and he will lose hands down cause Mr Cap is correct, along with Furious, Union J, and Trim!!!!!!

 

The debate over IF National Healthcare COULD be better than the current system is not the point!!!! All the prattle back and forth over what is happening in Britain, Canada, and other places that have this system shows the pitfalls of such a system, but also shows some progress that he can point to. It becomes nothing more than a static arguement of taking the good with the bad, and his comeback will eventually be, (for the bad anyway) "that is, (such and such a country) this is the USA, we will do it better.

 

Understand this----------->we can't as reasonable American citizens defend our current healthcare system. It is broken, and we all know it. Every one of us can agree on this I think. (we agree on something, hurray!!!)

 

But your adversary Mr Mountain; wants to OBFUSCATE (is that correct sir?) the issue by first telling everyone something that is obvious, (the healthcare system is broken) then indicates that the only solution is to have a government takeover of same. He then puts you on the defensive by needling you to come up with better solutions to the problem, lolol.

 

THE REAL DEBATE IS----------->Not if the healthcare system is broken, but IF THE GOVERNMENT CAN ADMINISTER his program cost effectively, and if they CAN'T, then HE has no solution at all, just is creating more problems.

 

Now then Mr Cap, all you need do is go into the archives to PROVE his assertion is ridiculous!!!!! Use our country, show what the government projected any one of their so called programs would cost 10 yrs down the road, and SHOW WHAT IT ENDED UP COSTING, lol.

 

This debate is all about the government and its largess fellas, not about healthcare. A healthcare takeover is just about them being able to give MORE LARGESS. Healthcare is just the vehicle for them to get access to it.

 

Pull up what has happened to the supposed SSI lockbox, lololol. Show that it WAS overfunded, how the government put it into the GENERAL FUND, spent it, then insisted it was underfunded!!! Show where all the programs money they put a special tax in for, was NEVER sent directly to the programs to fund them, just spent willy nilly for whatever SPECIAL INTEREST projects they wanted; then they returned to YOU the TAXPAYER and said your PROGRAM WAS UNDERFUNDED!!!!!!

 

Didn't Bush, Clinton, and Bush I all say they were going to make an SSI lockbox? Did they, lololol.

 

His assertion that the government of the United States of America is efficient is absolutely the most assinine statement that anyone who has a command of the English language such as he does, has EVER MADE ON THESE BOARDS. Most liberals will even tell you so, lololol. (of course they blame the opposing party, and the opposing party blames them.........but the government will not be run by just one party forever, so whomever is to blame for you personally, they will eventually regain power, and you gonna have them handling 1.5 trillion MORE? I don't think so)

 

So then pitbulls, show him how efficient our government really is, and that INSTANTLY breaks the case for a government takeover of healthcare. Maybe then we can get down to business of coming together to solve this problem, instead of arguing over a solution that is really no solution at all, just another problem, just another tax; and once the government gets their hands on it, (just as all programs that they tax us for and screw it up) there will be no turning back.

 

Once you choose the government, they will NEVER relinquish that money, no matter how badly they do the job. And from the efficiency they have shown doing all these other entitlement programs; spending the money wherever they see fit, WE WOULD BE SCREWED!!!!!

 

And finally, let me point this out to you------------------>Suppose our government did it this way--------->suppose instead of throwing virtually all the money into the general fund, they earmarked each tax to the program for which it was intended!!!! They could NOT take any money and move it to anything else UNTIL that program for which it was intended was fully funded.

 

Oh boy!!!!! Could you imagine what middle America would say when instead of the government coming back and wanting a raise in taxes to fund SSI or Medicare, they came back and wanted a hike cause they wanted to fund some foreign country? Some save the whales group? Some war that many don't agree upon? Fund the arts where they draw turds claiming it is a master piece, lol!!!!!

 

Now you know why LIBERALS want control of your healthcare bucks. Unlike what mountain suggests, it is THEY who will scare the hell out of you by proclaiming that your healthcare fund is short; namely because they are running a deficit, and were smart enough to FUND things you won't accept a tax hike for, and convieniently NOT funding the ones you will.

 

It is POLITICS, and Mountain is very good at it, lololol. Show him YOU know better!!!!!

 

Hey, Moron, and you are a MORON, Single Payer is NOT GOVERNMENT CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I just hope you and your thinking do not have ONE medical emergeny, because with the current system you are that close to complete bankruptcy. The Number one cause of bankruptcy in this country is medically related.

[mountaineerwv]

It is "MORON not MAROON!"

 

I think it shows a pattern!!!!!

 

Maroon is when you are left on an island or something, heheheheheheheheheheheehe. You must be contemplating Cuba; where your type of ideas seem to have favor!!!!!!

 

I am doubling over with laughter as I write this, a big belly laugh.

 

MORON:

1. A stupid person; a dolt.

2. Psychology. A person of mild mental retardation having a mental age of from 7 to 12 years and generally having communication and social skills enabling some degree of academic or vocational education. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive.

 

 

MAROON:

 

Famous Sayings of Bugs Bunny: "What an imbesile, what an ultra maroon"