Actually, the number is 30 million, and our government can't afford a national healthcare plan. You're the one bitching about the deficits, and yet you want to spend hundreds of billions on a healthcare plan? Come on...
Actually, the number is 30 million, and our government can't afford a national healthcare plan. You're the one bitching about the deficits, and yet you want to spend hundreds of billions on a healthcare plan? Come on...
JD50
Lifer
- Sep 4, 2005
- 11,918
- 2,884
- 136
His solution is probably to just put even more of the tax burden on the "rich". See, they are rich, so they do not deserve their money as much as you and I do, so they should give more of it to the government, which then gives it to people that don't feel like working, going to school, bettering themselves, etc... In other words, redistribution of wealth.
And with all of it's inconsistencies, we have a much higher rate of life-saving surgery here than in Canada. De-regulate the industry...it needs it badly.
Nah, conjur doesn't want deficits, because he'll want everyone working from January til July to pay their taxes.
Buddy, redistribution of wealth is a big part of our economy. Without that we wouldn't even have roads, because there wouldn't be taxes to pay for them.
Whine all you want about the supposed 'socialist armageddon' you and your ilk keep predicting, most people who you are talking about work two jobs because they couldn't afford to get higher than a high school diploma, and are probably much 'better' people than you or I.
Your party is not the 'lift yourself by the bootstrap' party, it's the "well I got to where I am, if you can't you obviously are too lazy and don't deserve any help" party. And people wonder why the poor never vote Republican.
Yep, sucks to be you if the liberals have their way... it will be like leftist Cuba, or Soviet Union where you will earn as much as a factory worker even though you spent a good deal of your life training to become a nurse... not to mention getting into debt up the whazzooo...
Did you know there were stories of doctors in Cuba having to drive cabs to make ends meet? In any case, I hope the libs don't get their way... as usual, they mean good, but they just hurt the poor...
-Eleison
JD50
Lifer
- Sep 4, 2005
- 11,918
- 2,884
- 136
I voted republican when I was 18, making $19,000 a year and eating ham sandwiches and 99 cent frozen pizzas because that was all that I could afford. I stayed out of trouble (meaning I didn't get caught), worked hard, and lifted myself up. I worked plenty of 60-70 hour weeks to support my family. Now, 6 years later I am making a very nice salary and have a great job.
Yes, I do think that if I got to where I am than anyone can do it, but it takes a lot of hard work. I have no problem helping the people that can't help themselves. I have a problem with giving free handouts to people that don't want to better themselves. If you are an adult and making minimum wage then there is something wrong with you. If your job does not offer health care then I do have sympathy for you, but I am not going let the government take the food out of my childrens mouth so someone else can have healthcare, welfare money, etc..
By the way, I just started going to college a few months ago, somehow I managed to get ahead in life with just a high school diploma. I guess thats why I am working so hard to get my degree now, I can see how much it is worth now that I have a higher standard of living than I did when I was poor.
- Jul 28, 2006
- 18,161
- 7
- 0
Just curious, how many of you pro-socialized health care people understand how much money the US spends on health care each year?
In 2004 health care spending in the US reached $1.9 TRILLION dollars.
Now the entire federal budget in 1994 was just north of $2 trillion.
Now please explain to me how we can nationalize health care? How will the government come up with the money to pay for this program? Massive tax increases, sound good?
Sure hospital visits will be free, but your taxes will go up drastically, as much as double what you are paying now. Oh? you need an MRI? Get in line, should only take a month or two. Ask someone in the military how long it takes their wife or kid to see a doctor for a non-emergency.
We need health care reform, but turning over the program to the government would be a HUGE mistake.
Proof of this? Government schools, tons of money and still failing in many areas. Medicaid and Medicare: nearly 10% of money spent on them is thought to be wasted in fraud. ($100-200 billion a year wasted on fraud, and we thought the war in Iraq cost to much.) Think of ANY government program and you will find tons of waste and fraud.
Now I am sure one of you will respond with the suggestion that the government should only offer help to those without employee heath plans? sounds like a good idea right? WRONG. Once business know they can get rid of their very expensive health care plans and their employees will still have the government plan to fall back on watch the number of ?uninsured? to increase drastically. And even worse, the people who will suffer the most because of this will be low skilled low paid employees. The Wal-Mart?s of the world will get rid of health care for cashier and throw them to the government.
However, the people making good money will still get the best coverage because companies have to offer them good plans to keep them employed.
How about this... let's offer the 30 million people without health insurance $1000 a year to cover medical expenses. That will only cost us $300 BILLION a year. No big deal right?
We will set out to create some huge plan to help Americans get health coverage, and in the end people will actually end up suffering. Always works that way.
BTW: By 2015 it is projected that 1 out of ever 5 dollars will be spent on health care, god let?s hope it does not get that bad.
In 2004 health care spending in the US reached $1.9 TRILLION dollars.
Now the entire federal budget in 1994 was just north of $2 trillion.
Now please explain to me how we can nationalize health care? How will the government come up with the money to pay for this program? Massive tax increases, sound good?
Sure hospital visits will be free, but your taxes will go up drastically, as much as double what you are paying now. Oh? you need an MRI? Get in line, should only take a month or two. Ask someone in the military how long it takes their wife or kid to see a doctor for a non-emergency.
We need health care reform, but turning over the program to the government would be a HUGE mistake.
Proof of this? Government schools, tons of money and still failing in many areas. Medicaid and Medicare: nearly 10% of money spent on them is thought to be wasted in fraud. ($100-200 billion a year wasted on fraud, and we thought the war in Iraq cost to much.) Think of ANY government program and you will find tons of waste and fraud.
Now I am sure one of you will respond with the suggestion that the government should only offer help to those without employee heath plans? sounds like a good idea right? WRONG. Once business know they can get rid of their very expensive health care plans and their employees will still have the government plan to fall back on watch the number of ?uninsured? to increase drastically. And even worse, the people who will suffer the most because of this will be low skilled low paid employees. The Wal-Mart?s of the world will get rid of health care for cashier and throw them to the government.
However, the people making good money will still get the best coverage because companies have to offer them good plans to keep them employed.
How about this... let's offer the 30 million people without health insurance $1000 a year to cover medical expenses. That will only cost us $300 BILLION a year. No big deal right?
We will set out to create some huge plan to help Americans get health coverage, and in the end people will actually end up suffering. Always works that way.
BTW: By 2015 it is projected that 1 out of ever 5 dollars will be spent on health care, god let?s hope it does not get that bad.
instead of framing it as nationalized healthcare, think of it as a tax cut for businesses who no longer have to pay for health care 
trickle down reaganomics or something. heh.
trickle down reaganomics or something. heh.
Originally posted by: loki8481
instead of framing it as nationalized healthcare, think of it as a tax cut for businesses who no longer have to pay for health care
trickle down reaganomics or something. heh.
Reaganomics is about smaller government.. its the exact opposite of a NATIONALIZED healthcare... for more information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics
-Eleison
ps. yes, reaganomics incorporates tax cuts.. .BUT it does not involve creating big governments...
- Jul 28, 2006
- 18,161
- 7
- 0
I have no clue...
What is your point?
The number of lawsuits will go through the roof with government in charge. Look at the worse HMO in the country and think about that being the government.
"I think I broke my arm"
"Well you will have to come back in 2 days and then we can x-ray it"
Originally posted by: eleison
Originally posted by: loki8481
instead of framing it as nationalized healthcare, think of it as a tax cut for businesses who no longer have to pay for health care
trickle down reaganomics or something. heh.
Reaganomics is about smaller government.. its the exact opposite of a NATIONALIZED healthcare... for more information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics
-Eleison
ps. yes, reaganomics incorporates tax cuts.. .BUT it does not involve creating big governments...
pps. I was joking around
Rangoric
Senior member
- Apr 5, 2006
- 530
- 0
- 71
I don't either, but like you I know its the wrong way to say it, hence the quotes.
And I didn't say they do do this or that. I just know Denmark has one of the most "Out of your Face" governments there is.
But it does boil down to can't do this can do that.
Thats the easiest way to define how free someone is.
Heh, so you think they will loose the votes of everyone who is spending most of there money on medicine right now? This is like buying votes with public money. How many millions of people next election are going to risk loosing that much money a month in savings because of this to vote republican?
How will they fund it?
Pull our of Iraq..oh there ya go.
The elites will critique this because they can afford there health, the middle class/lower class who ends up getting a free medical ride will love them.
Canada also spends 3000$ a year on Health care per person. Say the US will spend 5000$ (since your perscription drugs are not regulated and you pay Doctor's more). So 5000$ X 300 million = 1 500 000 000 000 Trillion Dollars a year..
Now That seems huge...but...
The US...right now..spens
Over
6000$ a person per year on Health care
So, for privatized medicine, you are spending already more than a socialist health care system.
The US will save money going national.
Now That seems huge...but...
The US...right now..spens
Over
6000$ a person per year on Health care
http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml
So, for privatized medicine, you are spending already more than a socialist health care system.
The US will save money going national.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
You don't seem to mind working till July.. should be working until November actually.. to pay for the intrusion into Iraq.. Guns or Butter... I think Conjur prefers Butter.. and you prefer Guns.. can't really have both.. well... I suppose you could but there is only one month left in the working year and you'all gotta pay rent and such..
There really isn't such thing as a radical left in the Democratic Party anymore. A few members perhaps, but no more than that.
Would you like to know the REASON that the healthcare system is ****** today (other than the technical quality and expertise of the doctors and equipment, which is world-class, but hardly relevant if people can't access those services)? Two words, administrative costs. All the people being paid to administer the private healthcare system, with all its infinite complexities, are being paid from the same money pool that the healthcare revenues feed into. All this winds up driving up prices while simultaneously making proper and prompt healthcare unavailable to millions. The end result? Nearly a sixth of our country simply has no way to get healthcare outside of the Tylenol isle. How do you fix that? One, you SOCIALIZE MEDICINE. You know what "socialize" means? No, it doesn't mean we all start wearing berets and goatees and start marching around saluting Our Fearless Leader (although we do a distressingly large amount of that anyway). It simply means that every citizen in the US will have part of their tax dollars diverted to paying for their healthcare. What does this mean? it means many things:
1. Employees no longer need health insurance, so employers stop having to provide it. The result? Salaries go up; sure, some of that extra cash will fatten the employer's bottom line, but monetary compensation will also increase for the employee.
2. Prescription drug prices will go down, since the government as the new HMO on the block can now squeeze the drug companies by the balls until they get the cheapest price possible. Where will the money for that come from in the drug companies? Maybe all those health benefits they no longer have to pay their employees?
3. With every insurance policy in the nation under one roof, in one standardized, streamlined system, administrative cost (and personal greed by executives) would drop dramatically. This would reduce prices across the board, ultimately saving taxpayers money.
4. Now that hospitals aren't burning so much on administration, they can actually afford to hire the amount of doctors and nurses they need. The free market is precisely why the emergency room is always jammed full for hours.
5. Most crucially, every American is now guaranteed good health, or at least as good as modern medicine can provide.
I think it's fairly obvious if you aren't blinded by party affiliation or ideology that socialized medicine is a good idea, and certainly it's worlds better than our current system. My sister is 23, lives in New York City, works 14 hour days five days a week and has no health insurance. That's wrong, and not just because she's my sister. If she gets sick from working so much, it should be her right as taxpayer to have part of the money she pays in taxes, that she EARNS at work, be diverted to keeping her healthy and productive. Lets face it, socialized medicine is good for the economy, good for the citizens, good for pretty much everyone except a few very, very rich people.
"The Democrats are not even in power yet and their supporters are already calling for a radical move to the left."
Ideas like this are why so many of us will not vote Democrat. Sure Bush and the Republicans screwed up the war and spent too much money, but I would rather have a lousy Medicare Drug program than socialized medicine.
But you logic is completely absent here. Your choice is between Republicans who waste billions and billions on war and Democrats who you fear will waste that kind of money on health. The billions are actually gone on the war but the health care plan you fear does not exist and no money has been wasted on it. This is why it is ridiculous that you will not vote Democrat. You are in the frying pan and only fear a leap to the fire. The real disaster of war is not equivalent to the potential waste of national health care. You would see this if you didn't hate yourself and unconsciously love the actual miserable place you find yourself in.
Ideas like this are why so many of us will not vote Democrat. Sure Bush and the Republicans screwed up the war and spent too much money, but I would rather have a lousy Medicare Drug program than socialized medicine.
But you logic is completely absent here. Your choice is between Republicans who waste billions and billions on war and Democrats who you fear will waste that kind of money on health. The billions are actually gone on the war but the health care plan you fear does not exist and no money has been wasted on it. This is why it is ridiculous that you will not vote Democrat. You are in the frying pan and only fear a leap to the fire. The real disaster of war is not equivalent to the potential waste of national health care. You would see this if you didn't hate yourself and unconsciously love the actual miserable place you find yourself in.
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
Ok... I said this earlier but it applies here too. This election was not a rebuke of conservatism or conservative ideals. This was a protest against the total lack of leadership displayed by the Republicans on every level.
The Dem leadership is not stupid. They know they have no mandate beyond "Stop the madness!" The basic proof of this is the people they got elected. Most of the new Dems are fairly moderate and in some cases (Heath Shuler and a few others) are Zell Miller-like conservatives. (DINOs?)
They are going to start small... Minimum wage increases... a reasonable plan to exit Iraq... The last thing they are going to do is yank the wheel to the left and drive their shiny new car off the road.
They have what they wanted... an end to single party rule. They now have a short honeymoon period where they can pass some legislation that most people won't object to but their base has been crying for for a while now. During this period they have to adopt a policy platform that pacifies their base without alienating moderates.
Things you won't see in the next two years:
Socialized medicine
Abortion on demand
More liberal immigration from Mexico
Protection of gay marriage
Impeachment
Those issues are off the table... I'd bet that for the next two years they will adopt a slightly left-of-center agenda that pushes some basic tenets of liberalism without scaring any of the moderate voters. The idea being to let everyone know that they care about america and all the crazy LEFT LEFT LEFT talk from the righties is unfounded.
If they can pull it off they leave two possibilities open.
1. In 2008 they keep or extend their majorities in the house and senate
2. They win the presidency
One party rule
Once that happens (if it happens) all bets are off. We'll see the push for socialized medicine, gay marriage, a chicken in every pot blah blah blah... But for now, they know they won on a protest vote and aren't carrying a huge mandate. If they're smart they will lay low and deal only with the common sense issues that they win with and ignore the more radical parts of their base calling for a leftist agenda.
The Dem leadership is not stupid. They know they have no mandate beyond "Stop the madness!" The basic proof of this is the people they got elected. Most of the new Dems are fairly moderate and in some cases (Heath Shuler and a few others) are Zell Miller-like conservatives. (DINOs?)
They are going to start small... Minimum wage increases... a reasonable plan to exit Iraq... The last thing they are going to do is yank the wheel to the left and drive their shiny new car off the road.
They have what they wanted... an end to single party rule. They now have a short honeymoon period where they can pass some legislation that most people won't object to but their base has been crying for for a while now. During this period they have to adopt a policy platform that pacifies their base without alienating moderates.
Things you won't see in the next two years:
Socialized medicine
Abortion on demand
More liberal immigration from Mexico
Protection of gay marriage
Impeachment
Those issues are off the table... I'd bet that for the next two years they will adopt a slightly left-of-center agenda that pushes some basic tenets of liberalism without scaring any of the moderate voters. The idea being to let everyone know that they care about america and all the crazy LEFT LEFT LEFT talk from the righties is unfounded.
If they can pull it off they leave two possibilities open.
1. In 2008 they keep or extend their majorities in the house and senate
2. They win the presidency
One party rule
Once that happens (if it happens) all bets are off. We'll see the push for socialized medicine, gay marriage, a chicken in every pot blah blah blah... But for now, they know they won on a protest vote and aren't carrying a huge mandate. If they're smart they will lay low and deal only with the common sense issues that they win with and ignore the more radical parts of their base calling for a leftist agenda.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
I find it almost impossible to believe Democrats could spend more than Republicans have been doing for 6 years. Besides Bush has veto pen...like he'll use it though. He's a statist just like the dems but only in a different way.
Bottom line is this country is conservative- if Republicans would have governered conservativly and not started Iraq war they would not have lost. Look for Newt and freinds to make a comback in 2008 with a new conservative "contract"
Bottom line is this country is conservative- if Republicans would have governered conservativly and not started Iraq war they would not have lost. Look for Newt and freinds to make a comback in 2008 with a new conservative "contract"
Siddhartha
Lifer
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
My predictions for what the Demos will do or try to do:
1. Raise the minimun wage.
2. Stop the "faith base"initiatives"
3. Talk about getting out of Iraq.
4. Talk about the environment, global warming.
5. Talk about the national debt.
Ramember:
1. GWB is president and can veto bills he does not like.
2. The Republican, meaning the religious right and the "profile at any cost guys" are a large minority in Congress. It would not take many Demos to cross over for the Republicans to stop anything.
1. Raise the minimun wage.
2. Stop the "faith base"initiatives"
3. Talk about getting out of Iraq.
4. Talk about the environment, global warming.
5. Talk about the national debt.
Ramember:
1. GWB is president and can veto bills he does not like.
2. The Republican, meaning the religious right and the "profile at any cost guys" are a large minority in Congress. It would not take many Demos to cross over for the Republicans to stop anything.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter