Buzz wrote on Sep 17^th, 2009 at 6:14pm:

I see NOTHING here that says fellow sufferers do not deserve to have treatment.  I DO see that there are some who believe in personal responsibility for their own lives, which includes securing a job, purchasing insurance, etc.  We cannot be the nanny for everyone in this nation.  Now I understand how difficult that is at this time in our struggling economy, but pushing through a Federal program such as a public option is not helping the situation, it's just adding to a multi-trillion dollar defecit.  Not only that, it's unconstitutional.

Multimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or

Buzz wrote on Sep 17^th, 2009 at 6:43pm:


The fact is health care companies (insurers, hospitals, doctors, pharma, medical supply, convalescent care, rehabilitation, therapists, nurses, technicians, etc.etc. etc.) are all in it to make a profit. Every single last one of them, and THANK GOD THEY ARE!  If there was no motive to provide these services (i.e. profit) and all we depended on was the heavy hand of the government to make doctors, nurses, hospitals, technicians, medical suppliers, therapists (i.e.everybody in the business) provide these services "for the good of the nation", well we would be SCREWED.

That's where this is going.  Today, it's the insurers that are evil (because they are only in for evil profits).  Tomorrow, it's your doctor (because he charges enough to pay for his education).  The profit motive is WHY we have the best health care system on the planet.  With 300 million people in America, you're going to have some people who are unhappy.  You're going to have some unethical behavior by almost anybody, anywhere at anytime.  So, I guess the only way to fix that is to destroy the system instead of addressing the real issues like tort reform, illegal aliens, and insurance companies malfeasance. 

Many of us support the kind of reforms that would actually help the system rather than fundamentally removing yet another one of our freedoms.

Claiming that opposing a public option is akin to denying the helpless their medical care is disingenuous. We have over 170 Federal government programs to help the less fortunate... and nearly every one of them is broke or going broke because the Federal government has shit for brains when it comes to managing our money.

Callico wrote on Sep 17^th, 2009 at 9:27pm:

Jerry, to answer your question about fairness, it is "fair" that any American can use America's road system regardless of the amount of tax that he/she pays; Mr Rich has no more right to use the road system than Mr Poor.   The same argument could be applied to a universal healthcare scheme in which all Americans could participate so that they get the medical care that they NEED as opposed to just what they can AFFORD.

I do realise that there are countless schemes already in exisitence - Medicaid being one of them, yet you yourself have said that being on Medicaid is an experience not worth repeating. Why should Medicaid not be better? You weren't being punished. You were a victim of circumstance in a very difficult situation, suddenly placed in a position of financial hardship and in deep NEED of good medical treatment.

Coincidentally, I have a story that is very similar to you having also had a business collapse etc just as my CH got to a point that I was in need of regular, expensive medical care. Care that I got. Medication that I got. All thanks to the National Health Service.

My view from the outside looking in is that America is blessed with thousands of brilliant people running brilliant organisations that have the potential to benefit many more people than they do already. All I'd like to see is some way of joining all of these enterprises together in a way that a national asset, like your wonderful road system, is created for the benefit of all people. I'm NOT advocating that they stop making profits but I am strongly advocating that any PROFITEERING is brought under control.

Again, I reiterate, the system works pretty well here in the UK and its benefits to the country as a whole are many.

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on Sep 18^th, 2009 at 5:27am:

In WI, we have BadgerCare.

In California it's MediCal

Jimi wrote on Sep 18^th, 2009 at 9:59am:



Now THAT seems like a plan I could admire!!!

Buzz wrote on Sep 18^th, 2009 at 8:54am:

No, the main drive for socialized medicine is political power. "If you vote for the other guy, he's going to take this away from you." (And give it back to the guy I stole it from to give to you).

Buzz wrote on Sep 18^th, 2009 at 11:34am:


Exactly like Social Security here, on so many levels.  That doesn't change the fact that it's going broke.

Quote:


A quick guess would say over $225,000, but thats pretty conservative. 
Don't forget, though, your employers over the years have matched your $90k through employer taxes.  If your employers could give it to you instead of the federal government, you would now have around $500,000 just sitting in CDs.....and CDs have one of the lowest rates of return of any investment out there.

I'm sure an extra half million at your age wouldnt really make that much of a difference for your and your family.  You'll get to collect maybe $1500 a month starting the decade after next....so I don't know what you're complainin' about.

Batch wrote on Sep 18^th, 2009 at 2:55pm:


I take it you're on the fence with regard to this issue then?

I guess the current government needs to listen to the will of the people that elected it, not spend so much time deriving new ways to blow smoke up its collective skirt.

Americans don't take well to being told what to do. Our elected officials are supposed to work for us, not the other way around.