Romney praises socialised medicine

[HomerJS]

In an attempt to be the first elected Mormon Super Jew, Mittens while at the wailing wall with his pet billionare said the following...

“When our health care costs are completely out of control. Do you realize what health care spending is as a percentage of the GDP in Israel? 8 percent. You spend 8 percent of GDP on health care. And you’re a pretty healthy nation”

Way to go Romney giving props to socialised medicine. But wait isn't it his position in the United States that the ACA is socialised medicine and constantly rails against it? Even though the ACA isn't but well save that for a later debate.

So is this a flip, a flop or a flipped flop flipped??

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...list-government-controlled-healthcare-system/

 

[Nebor]

IIRC past republicans have done similar things in Europe. When questioned about it, they say, "It's good for them, it wouldn't be good for America." I think that's what Mitt Romney says about Massachusetts, isn't it?

 

[Dulanic]

IIRC past republicans have done similar things in Europe. When questioned about it, they say, "It's good for them, it wouldn't be good for America." I think that's what Mitt Romney says about Massachusetts, isn't it?

Of course it is. What else can he say? He has no clue how to fix US healthcare. Repeal and replace!! with... I don't know but REPEAL AND REPLACE!

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Of course it is. What else can he say? He has no clue how to fix US healthcare. Repeal and replace!! with... I don't know but REPEAL AND REPLACE!

Of course he doesn't know. Hes a politician.

 

[Demo24]

IIRC past republicans have done similar things in Europe. When questioned about it, they say, "It's good for them, it wouldn't be good for America." I think that's what Mitt Romney says about Massachusetts, isn't it?

I don't think I've ever heard a good explanation from them as to why it wouldn't work here. Course at the moment their only goal seems to be repealing aca because Obama had something to do with it. Never mind that it was atleast an attempt to improve a field that clearly has not been working.

 

[nehalem256]

Of course it is. What else can he say? He has no clue how to fix US healthcare. Repeal and replace!! with... I don't know but REPEAL AND REPLACE!

Not that liberals have any clue either. They are always saying that America spend twice as much on health care as other countries such as Israel. The part they leave out is that half of that spending is by the government.

So the question is why is the government failing to provide health care for everyone?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I don't think I've ever heard a good explanation from them as to why it wouldn't work here. Course at the moment their only goal seems to be repealing aca because Obama had something to do with it. Never mind that it was atleast an attempt to improve a field that clearly has not been working.

Precisely, what is "socialized medicine"?

 

[soulcougher73]

Precisely, what is "socialized medicine"?

Really? Playing obtuse i see.

 

[Texashiker]

Way to go Romney giving props to socialised medicine. But wait isn't it his position in the United States that the ACA is socialised medicine and constantly rails against it? Even though the ACA isn't but well save that for a later debate.

There has to be a better solution then what we have right now.

If socialized health care means people can go to a doctor, then so be it.

 

[nehalem256]

Precisely, what is "socialized medicine"?

Socialized medicine means that a crackwhore is entitled to the same healthcare as someone with a PHD in Engineering.

 

[Texashiker]

Socialized medicine means that a crackwhore is entitled to the same healthcare as someone with a PHD in Engineering.

Which is the way it should be.

 

[actuarial]

Socialized medicine means that a crackwhore is entitled to the same healthcare as someone with a PHD in Engineering.

It also means someone striking out on their own to start a business has the same healthcare as someone who works for the government.

 

[nehalem256]

Which is the way it should be.

Why is that the way it should be? Are you opposed to fairness?

 

[actuarial]

Why is that the way it should be? Are you opposed to fairness?

You need to define fairness.

 

[nehalem256]

You need to define fairness.

Fairness is people getting what they deserve. Being born in the United States does not make you entitled to have other people paying for your health care.

EDIT: But perhaps you could explain in what definition of fairness someone with a phd in Engineering deserves to be treated like a crackwhore?

 

[Jhhnn]

Socialized medicine means that a crackwhore is entitled to the same healthcare as someone with a PHD in Engineering.

And as authoritarian rightwing misogynist twits, as well. Her chances of recovery are likely better.

 

[HomerJS]

Fairness is people getting what they deserve. Being born in the United States does not make you entitled to have other people paying for your health care.

EDIT: But perhaps you could explain in what definition of fairness someone with a phd in Engineering deserves to be treated like a crackwhore?

Fairness might also be defined if you lose your job due to long term illness your medical coverage will continue and your family will not be forced into bankruptcy.

 

[HomerJS]

IIRC past republicans have done similar things in Europe. When questioned about it, they say, "It's good for them, it wouldn't be good for America." I think that's what Mitt Romney says about Massachusetts, isn't it?

Since Romney's definition of a leader is agree with everything Isreal wants to do why wouldn't it apply here?

 

[nehalem256]

And as authoritarian rightwing misogynist twits, as well. Her chances of recovery are likely better.

There is no reason a crackwhore has to be a woman.

Fairness might also be defined if you lose your job due to long term illness your medical coverage will continue and your family will not be forced into bankruptcy.

There is no reason you could not design a system of medical care to cover your case, but still not cover those who do not deserve it.

 

[actuarial]

Fairness is people getting what they deserve. Being born in the United States does not make you entitled to have other people paying for your health care.

You need to define other people paying for your healthcare. If you get insurance the healthy pay for the sick.

Certainly, at any given time there are economic class subsidies with universal healthcare (upper subsidizing lower), but that does not mean that any given person that is at one time receiving a subsidy will never be a subsidizer. In addition, at birth neither person is contributing to the system, and we have no clue who is going to be the crackhead and who the PHD in engineering.

If you live in with universal healthcare from cradle to grave (like in Canada), then there's much less obvious subsidy going on. At birth, everyone has access to the same care, and the costs of that care apply to everyone equally (even if the dollar amount is not going to be the same for everyone).

It's like this with tons of other things people use - roads, education, police, fire, etc. Why is one person entitled to have other people paying for their police protection?

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Fairness is people getting what they deserve. Being born in the United States does not make you entitled to have other people paying for your health care.

EDIT: But perhaps you could explain in what definition of fairness someone with a phd in Engineering deserves to be treated like a crackwhore?

Fairness is defined as without bias or prejudice. Your definition is full of both.

 

[actuarial]

EDIT: But perhaps you could explain in what definition of fairness someone with a phd in Engineering deserves to be treated like a crackwhore?

The same definition that says the fire department will show up at both a crackwhore and phd in Engineering's residence if it's on fire.

 

[DrPizza]

There is no reason a crackwhore has to be a woman.



There is no reason you could not design a system of medical care to cover your case, but still not cover those who do not deserve it.

Wouldn't covering the "crackwhore" - providing services to help her eliminate her dependence on crack and return her to being a productive member of society ultimately be better for our society?

 

[DrPizza]

Not that liberals have any clue either. They are always saying that America spend twice as much on health care as other countries such as Israel. The part they leave out is that half of that spending is by the government.

So the question is why is the government failing to provide health care for everyone?

I'm not sure what the point is that you're trying to make. But, did you perhaps leave out the point that pretty much ALL of their health care is spending by their government?

 

[nehalem256]

Fairness is defined as without bias or prejudice. Your definition is full of both.

So according to your definition of fairness. If you work on a project with someone at work and you do all the work, while they spending their time facebooking and flirting with interns and your boss gives each of extra credit... that would be fair