Health Care Not A Right

[Wes Tausend]

...

Double post...

...

[Ron61]

Wes,

If you have time the Bill Number is HR-3200. Go to the Federal Govt. site and spend a day or so reading it and then tell me it will benefit us. I do not believe the Govt.has any right to force me to take something that I don't want, to just go into my bank and take the money they want to pay for this so they can use it for anything they want, and that is what will happen. What next, a Govt.owned chain of restaurants and them telling you that you have to eat there and pay whatever price they set and they will determine what and how much you can eat per day? If this taking away of rights isn't stopped now, then it can't be stopped. I want to be the one that decides how and on what I will spend the little money that I have. Not some air head in the Govt.

Ron

[Wes Tausend]

Originally Posted by Ron61

Wes,

If you have time the Bill Number is HR-3200. Go to the Federal Govt. site and spend a day or so reading it and then tell me it will benefit us. I do not believe the Govt.has any right to force me to take something that I don't want, to just go into my bank and take the money they want to pay for this so they can use it for anything they want, and that is what will happen. What next, a Govt.owned chain of restaurants and them telling you that you have to eat there and pay whatever price they set and they will determine what and how much you can eat per day? If this taking away of rights isn't stopped now, then it can't be stopped. I want to be the one that decides how and on what I will spend the little money that I have. Not some air head in the Govt.

Ron

Ron,

I see the point. I wish, along with a hidden trick question to see if anyone read it, that everybody who sabotages a congressional bill with BS, would be revealed in a "Hall of Shame" fashion. These guys tack stuff in to purposely damage legislation ...and we have to pay for it when it passes anyway.

I guess being forced to buy health insurance is like being forced to buy auto insurance. Of course we all pay for uninsured drivers and uninsured health catastrophries anyway. Darn freeloaders. Darn socialism.

Just like I wish for reining in run-away auto insurance costs, I hope the health costs can be reduced to reasonable levels, one way or another. The biggest hurdle is, it just won't do any good to change anything, if somebody at the top keeps obviously raking in absurd profits.

Wes

...

[Dan40]

Originally Posted by Wes Tausend

Ron,

I see the point. I wish, along with a hidden trick question to see if anyone read it, that everybody who sabotages a congressional bill with BS, would be revealed in a "Hall of Shame" fashion. These guys tack stuff in to purposely damage legislation ...and we have to pay for it when it passes anyway.

I guess being forced to buy health insurance is like being forced to buy auto insurance. Of course we all pay for uninsured drivers and uninsured health catastrophries anyway. Darn freeloaders. Darn socialism.

Just like I wish for reining in run-away auto insurance costs, I hope the health costs can be reduced to reasonable levels, one way or another. The biggest hurdle is, it just won't do any good to change anything, if somebody at the top keeps obviously raking in absurd profits.

Wes

...

Wes,
Not a single person in this nation has ever been forced to buy auto insurance. It is simply one of the requirements of gaining the PRIVILEGE of a drivers license. No different than having to pass a drivers TEST and an eye test for the PRIVILEGE of driving.

Don't drive? You are not forced to buy auto insurance, nor is the Gestapo allowed to go into your bank accounts and purchase auto insurance for you.

Apples and oranges OR American choices and obummer dictatorial excesses.

[Ron61]

Wes, I don't remember the exact section and paragraph, but if I can find it I will post it. One section deals with exemptions and it says if you have SS and the Medicare Part A then you are exempt from having to pay more for this mess. I have that and am hoping that will keep that crook out of my bank account.

Ron

[joe g]

ANYONE who thinks the gov can run healthcare less expensive is NUTS!! Anyone name ONE gov program that did not run 3 fold over there original figures. F- 22 jet a perfect example, 4 fold cost over runs. Private industry tries to cut cost to be effiecnt and make money. YOUR government with all its burden some paper work and forms will make things worst. OBAMA when asked if he would switich over to the COMMONERS PLAN said no. So as usually the liberal elite say its a great plan, BUT NOT FOR THEM.
I'm not happy either with the plans e have, but why change a great system of healthcre for 10% of the population. Just look at canada where you wait months for healthcare.
joeg

[RAZOR]

Originally Posted by Wes Tausend

Ron,

It seems to me that requiring every person to have health insurance as not that big a problem. We already have extensive public health insurance whether we like it or not and it's not that bad. Police protection, fire protection and military are all examples of a form of social healthcare.

Police protection, fire protection and military are all examples of the ongoing process of socialism ...where "the government takes care of us". Whenever government provides for our care and protection, it is essentially socialism. We all pay for it and all reap it's benefits. There is a lot of running around claiming the sky may fall when it comes to taming corporate profits regarding the outlandish cost of healthcare in the USA. I say take it with a grain of salt. Two grains. Follow the money.

Speaking of "outlandish", I don't think it is such an "outlandish statement" to say this country was built with a measure of socialism. I didn't get to answer Razor the other day (had to work). As for his inquiry, "who, when, where", I think I just said it above. Basically any form of democracy is socialism itself, and America is thusly partially built on socialism. The alternative is less and less government ...until there is none at all ...with no restrictions on one another. Unmitigated free enterprise isn't all it is cracked up to be. Our prisons are full of "entrepreneurs" that just wanted a free hand in drug sales. Some things, including the cost of present US healthcare, are just plain immoral and the public has to step in. Of course unmitigated socialism is not the answer either, so watchdogs are a good thing.

I don't believe it's literally true that Obama has stated that Seniors are a drag to society and should just take the pain and not waste money on medical care. I suppose somebody took something out of context, again, for propoganda value. Same goes for Razors assertion that, " ...in England if over the age of 65 you do not get dialysis...". I wonder who made that up. Great scare tactic, anyway. Apparently English get that social benefit ...and a lot more.

Whatever increased public costs are associated with public health care will be more than saved by costs saved by reducing ever more corrupt private profit entities. Leave it to good spin doctors to come up with a sarcastic saying, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you." Now imagine, "I'm from the corporation and I'm here to help you." Hear it in a million corporate ads until people believe commercial advertising is really true, for every ad says exactly that. A bit illogical to say the least. Corporations are certainly, beyond doubt, For-Profit to help themselves. Government is for non-profit to help it's citizens, at least theoretically. I have to admit anything done by a committee of any kind is often a little flakey. Join a government committee; improve it. Most of us aren't, and never will be, allowed to join a corporate committee.

Another popular myth: The USSR and Cuba are socialist countries.
The USSR and Cuba aren't really socialist countries, although that was the revolutionary promise on their way to where they ended up. They are tyrannies, pure and simple. Nobody gets to share equally in anything there, unless you consider that official communist party members are more equal than others. They are single party systems, single ruling party systems. Not governments ...but tyrannical rulers. The tactical scare cry, "The communists are coming, the communists are coming!!", is getting old. Communism and socialism are not the same thing.

Not too surprisingly, the very term, "socialism" has taken on a sinister meaning, probably even before the era of McCarthyism. For the same reason as now ...those that had the gold back then wanted to write the rules that they may keep the gold ...without sharing one bit with the working folks they got it from in the first place. And public propoganda is the best way to achieve this, then as now. We are a long ways from becoming communists as long as we have two parties. It would be nice if they would bolster each other up rather than weaken us all from within.

I guess I can't blame anyone for assuming that socialism is the same as communism. Check out the modern definition of the word socialism.

When Thomas Paine said, "government at its best is a necessary evil" and Thomas Jefferson said, "The government that governs the best, governs the least", they were absolutely correct. Government stepping in to regulate ridiculous runaway healthcare is now the least necessary evil we can do, IMO.

Wes

...

To say the military, police, etc are examples of socialism is just bunk. What Political Science book did that come from? Our founding fathers studied men like John Locke, and Thomas Hobbs in writing the Constitution.Locke wrote of the "Natural State" and the need for social order,that men contract together to form a civil government,for civil peace and for national protection.Government then provides what an individual cannot, national defense, building highways, Jefferson quoted Locke, when he spoke of the "consent of the governed". So it is certainly not as you say "any form of democracy is essentially socialism", that simply is a ridiculous statement.Where in the world did you get your info on what socialism is? Give me some quotes or documentation.

Socialism is defined as a social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and the distribution of capital,land,etc in the community as a whole.

This country was not founded on socialism in anyway, shape or form. The military, and police are a matter of the social contract to bring about civil order and to protect the citizens of this nation. Where as the taking over of the banks, autos industry, and nationalizing health care is socialism. You simply have made up your own definition of socialism to make your argument.Try again.

The only way to control the cost of Nationalized healthcare is to ration it. Obama's plan does exactly that, so if its a scare tactic, we should be scared. One congressman came on today with the example that you must be 25 to be screened for Bladder cancer under Obamas plan, he had it when he was 19, under Obama's plan he is dead. So much for compassion.

Karl Marx, said "take away the heritage of a people and they are easy led", Those following Obamas plan certainly do not know our heritage.

[Jamo]

Well said, Razor.

[Joe Wicked]

From the Google News feed:

WASHINGTON — The Senate will not vote on health care legislation before leaving for its summer recess, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday, as he finally acknowledged out loud the inescapable political reality that has been clear for several days.

President Obama brushed aside the delay on Thursday, burying his reaction 20 minutes into a speech he delivered in the Cleveland suburb of Shaker Heights, where he traveled to make his case for the urgent need to change the nation’s health care system.

“We just heard today that we may not be able to get the bill out of the Senate by the end of August or the beginning of August,” Mr. Obama told a crowd of more than 1,500 people gathered in a gymnasium. “That’s O.K. I just want people to keep on working. Just keep on working.”

finish here
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/24/us...health.html?hp

[Wes Tausend]

Originally Posted by RAZOR

To say the military, police, etc are examples of socialism is just bunk. What Political Science book did that come from? Our founding fathers studied men like John Locke, and Thomas Hobbs in writing the Constitution.Locke wrote of the "Natural State" and the need for social order,that men contract together to form a civil government,for civil peace and for national protection.Government then provides what an individual cannot, national defense, building highways, Jefferson quoted Locke, when he spoke of the "consent of the governed". So it is certainly not as you say "any form of democracy is essentially socialism", that simply is a ridiculous statement.Where in the world did you get your info on what socialism is? Give me some quotes or documentation.

Socialism is defined as a social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and the distribution of capital,land,etc in the community as a whole.

This country was not founded on socialism in anyway, shape or form. The military, and police are a matter of the social contract to bring about civil order and to protect the citizens of this nation. Where as the taking over of the banks, autos industry, and nationalizing health care is socialism. You simply have made up your own definition of socialism to make your argument.Try again.

The only way to control the cost of Nationalized healthcare is to ration it. Obama's plan does exactly that, so if its a scare tactic, we should be scared. One congressman came on today with the example that you must be 25 to be screened for Bladder cancer under Obamas plan, he had it when he was 19, under Obama's plan he is dead. So much for compassion.

Karl Marx, said "take away the heritage of a people and they are easy led", Those following Obamas plan certainly do not know our heritage.

Razor,

I have to agree with Jamo. The above is well written and carefully thought out.

You made me read about John Locke and Thomas Hobbs and their influence on the constitution. This is like college.

"To say the military, police, etc are examples of socialism is just bunk. What Political Science book did that come from?"

Bunk? Book?

I suspect we disagree on just what socialism is or rather how it applies. Note, I did earlier include a FreeDictionary definition link to socialism, as I mentioned the very term, "socialism" has taken on a sinister meaning: (Unfairly, I think).
so·cial·ism (ssh-lzm)
n.
1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.
The word, socialism, has been associated with evil for so long, it is taken to officially mean evil. Yet there is nothing wrong with being social as opposed to being anti-social. One is warm and fuzzy; the other cold and foreboding.

You said, "You simply have made up your own definition of socialism to make your argument.Try again."

Well. Yes ...I did make my own brand-new definition. I offer that "social contracting", as you call it, and the building blocks of socialism are "essentially" the same thing. And I offer it as logical original thinking, much the way Locke and Hobbs formed their opinions and offered their personal conclusions.
So unless I write a book about it, there is nothing to quote and this is documentation, self-evident logic, right here and now. All the building blocks of socialism naturally stem eons before Locke and Hobbs from the limbic area of the warm blooded brain that governs that mammals will care for their young ...and logically extend it to include neighbors like family. The root of compassion and human behavior. The basis of all social politics. Conversely capitalism stems from preying on, and out-surviving, critters not in the family. Not that there is anything wrong with that basic instinct either. Now I have tried again.

"...Government then provides what an individual cannot, national defense, building highways... ...The military, and police are a matter of the social contract to bring about civil order and to protect the citizens of this nation..." All these are socialist public protection industries. So is National Health Care a public protection industry, not necessarily Obama's plan. You said, "Karl Marx, said 'take away the heritage of a people and they are easy led', Those following Obamas plan certainly do not know our heritage." Let the reader go back to even earlier heritage than America ...and think for themselves as did Locke and Hobbs. Let the reader question everything he has read or been told.

And I expect that severe regulation in "the taking over of the banks, autos industry" is necessary when banks and the auto industry severely harms the public. How much regulation, how much government interference, is the same as national ownership? Beats me, but it's way more than "any". Not just Obama, but Bush and McCain knew that too.

It is my understanding that the original hope for the Colonies was to be independent from England and remarkably do so without any formal government or taxes. It did not take long before the cost of war caused the need for some government and some taxes. The second that representatives voted, they created the first form of socialism in a government mandated social-welfare common-cause. It wouldn't of had to be that way. Each settlement could have had their own army, or better yet, each settler could have been totally unsocialized and entirely self-reliant and fought independently. But that wouldn't have worked too well. So there we have the start of the minimal necessity of both democracy and socialism (they go together), the government owned army. So everybody could pursue their capital enterprise in safety. Safety in numbers. Social numbers. America is a mix, right from the beginning. Have no fear.

Wes

...

[cobra de capell]

Originally Posted by Joe Wicked

From the Google News feed:

WASHINGTON — The Senate will not vote on health care legislation before leaving for its summer recess, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday, as he finally acknowledged out loud the inescapable political reality that has been clear for several days.

President Obama brushed aside the delay on Thursday, burying his reaction 20 minutes into a speech he delivered in the Cleveland suburb of Shaker Heights, where he traveled to make his case for the urgent need to change the nation’s health care system.

“We just heard today that we may not be able to get the bill out of the Senate by the end of August or the beginning of August,” Mr. Obama told a crowd of more than 1,500 people gathered in a gymnasium. “That’s O.K. I just want people to keep on working. Just keep on working.”

finish here
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/24/us...health.html?hp

White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel tells NPR he expects a vote on health care in the House "next week."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...re_recess.html

[cobra de capell]

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has set the legislative throttle at full-speed ahead as she plans to bring health care reform to a floor vote by the August recess, a move that could inflame tensions in the party and imperil the bill's passage since fiscally conservative members say they're still not satisfied.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...rats-concerns/

NO on Obamacare.
U. S. House of Representatives
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html

[cobra bill]

Canadians polled on healthcare, asked would you prefer the American style of healthcare,
a resounding 82% said NO!

[cobra de capell]

Originally Posted by cobra bill

Canadians polled on healthcare, asked would you prefer the American style of healthcare,
a resounding 82% said NO!

Do you attract a lot of flies?

This isn't about Canadians.

[427sharpe]

I guess since his 'we the people' comment went down in flames both rhetorically and factually he now has to resort to foreign nations opinion polls to justify his position.
Amazing; the lefts want to use Canadian, Swedish, and Finnish polls to justify their reasoning on US actions? Shouldn't be too surprised since they love the idea of looking at 'world law' in the courts, too.

[cobra de capell]

Originally Posted by 427sharpe

I guess since his 'we the people' comment went down in flames both rhetorically and factually he now has to resort to foreign nations opinion polls to justify his position.
Amazing; the lefts want to use Canadian, Swedish, and Finnish polls to justify their reasoning on US actions? Shouldn't be too surprised since they love the idea of looking at 'world law' in the courts, too.

Spot on - Cobra (space) Bill has the libtard talking point at the ready at all times, now he wants Americans to go with the Canadian way of thinking, next up Kenya.

[cobra bill]

Just pointing out your lies, you say that the Canadians are always coming to America for treatment, then why are they so happy? just quit barfing out what corporate America says to you on Fox and research what the rest of the world is doing and why its better then what we have, or don't have as the case maybe, take your head out of your sphincter and take a look around you!

[cobra de capell]

OK, but why here? Why not join the libtards on one of their sites?

By the way, Cobra (space) Bill, although it's not specifically spelled out in the current version of the ObamaCare bill, under Obama your retirement party and funeral will be on the same day. Aren't you very near to retirement? Thanks for lining up to save Americans health care dollars, WOOHOO!

[Dan40]

You write as tho being social or anti-social are the same as Socialism. One is a personality trait and the other is a punitive form of tyranny.

Like saying BLOOD is the same as BLEEDING.

[computerworks]

Lighten up here...or lose the thread.

Thanks