National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

mnottertail -> National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 8:14:26 AM)

To assure access to basic medical care for all our people, we support a program financed by employers, employees and the Federal Government to provide comprehensive health insurance coverage, including insurance against the cost of long-term and catastrophic illnesses and accidents and renal failure which necessitates dialysis, at a cost which all Americans can afford. The National Health Insurance Partnership plan and the Family Health Insurance Plan proposed (xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) meet these specifications. They would build on existing private health insurance systems, not destroy them.



kalikshama -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 9:04:35 AM)

Republican Party national platform, 1972.



tazzygirl -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 9:44:15 AM)

They had that chance... they blew it. Now they want to whine that they cant do it. Why didnt they do it when they had that chance?



mnottertail -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 9:50:38 AM)

Because they would seen as having a social agenda?  That was the old republicans....not the republicans of today.

(And FirmHandKY, some of the reasons I don't hold much with beyond Goldwater, or Buckley days as the final hurrah.)

Although I guess of guys alive I am in agreement with some of *GASP* Patrick Buchanan *GASP*......not all mind you, but I wouldn't go out a hating on all his views.




popeye1250 -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 9:59:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

To assure access to basic medical care for all our people, we support a program financed by employers, employees and the Federal Government to provide comprehensive health insurance coverage, including insurance against the cost of long-term and catastrophic illnesses and accidents and renal failure which necessitates dialysis, at a cost which all Americans can afford. The National Health Insurance Partnership plan and the Family Health Insurance Plan proposed (xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) meet these specifications. They would build on existing private health insurance systems, not destroy them.



The only way it'll work is through a "single payer" system.
And, we can't continue to provide medical care to illegal aliens, that's just too expensive, not fair to our own people and just encourages more illegals.



mnottertail -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 10:19:04 AM)

I agree that single payer is going to have to be the way this ends up.  It is what is good for America. 



kalikshama -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 10:27:26 AM)

quote:

Although I guess of guys alive I am in agreement with some of *GASP* Patrick Buchanan *GASP*......not all mind you, but I wouldn't go out a hating on all his views.


I didn't like him on WWII isolationism and the allegations of anti-semitism disturb me, but when I used to watch MSNBC, he often made sense on current events.



mnottertail -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 10:40:01 AM)

I don't know about any anti-semitism, but like anything that isn't pure Catholicism, it is anti-christ, so I wouldn't put it past him having a hard-on for them. I detest the religious aspects (and their subsequent basis of thought) from anybody, especially the all in guys.

I do not know what you refer to regarding a WW2 isolationism, but I do sort of agree with his take on the post-WW2 actions we have taken to rebuild those countries industrial and manufacturing base  and lay our markets open to them without let or hinderance, and not requiring a quid pro quo throughout, and our headlong dive into our own undoing.



Musicmystery -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 11:25:35 AM)

quote:


The only way it'll work is through a "single payer" system.


Agreed. Everyone knows we'll have to end up there too. The rest is theater, political plays, and profit-grabbing.



tazzygirl -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 11:27:19 AM)

Lining their pockets with Insurance lobbying money, all the while knowing the end result will be the companies will lose.

Gotta love political games.



defiantbadgirl -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 2:05:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:


The only way it'll work is through a "single payer" system.


Agreed. Everyone knows we'll have to end up there too. The rest is theater, political plays, and profit-grabbing.


Do you think the US will have single payer within the next 50 years or more like a century?



Musicmystery -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 2:07:00 PM)

Sooner than within 50 years. Economic forces will necessitate it.

If we had any sense, we'd be doing it now.



mnottertail -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 2:27:14 PM)

We should have did it when we became the world power after WW2.  We should have done it in 72, we should do it now......




tweakabelle -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 2:31:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Sooner than within 50 years. Economic forces will necessitate it.

If we had any sense, we'd be doing it now.

In the end, this argument might prove the difference.

Americans already pay twice as much per capita for healthcare than citizens in comparable Western countries. And that doesn't take into account that the US fails to provide universal coverage, whereas almost all comparable Western healthcare systems succeed in providing universal coverage.

Put simply, the current system over charges US citizens on a colossal scale for a second rate service. How long can Americans afford to let this rip off continue?



tazzygirl -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 2:44:34 PM)

The system overcharges for many reasons.

It overcharges for those who do not, or cannot, pay.

It overcharges due to greed.

It overcharges due to stockholders.

It overcharges due to technology.

It overcharges due to bureaucracy and paperwork.

It overcharges due to fraud.

The service isnt second rate. The system is.



defiantbadgirl -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 2:55:40 PM)

I've often wondered if lack of single-payer in the US is partially responsible for off-shoring. I know that's the reason there's so much age discrimination. The more older workers a company has, the higher their health insurance premiums. Health care should not be directly tied to employers. It causes too many problems. Single-payer is definitely the way to go. Republican leaders don't want to replace the Affordable Care Act with single-payer. They want to repeal it, which means bringing back pre-existing condition clauses for children. Single-payer is far better than the Affordable Care Act, but the Affordable Care Act is better than nothing. Every time I hear "repeal Obamacare," I lose more hope that our health care system is ever going to change.  



tazzygirl -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 2:56:36 PM)

It all comes down to control.



Musicmystery -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 2:56:54 PM)

Single payer would also open job opportunities. Currently, workers who would otherwise retire early remain employed to keep health benefits.



mnottertail -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 2:59:04 PM)

No, off-shoring is due to wages and followed closely by our intransigence in providing a cohesive economic industrial policy.  Not taxes, not healt hinsurance, not any of these other  canards.

But that is mixing metaphor and thread alike.



tazzygirl -> RE: National Healthcare: for it before they were against it? (1/16/2012 3:00:50 PM)

I believe national health care is the way to go. As a society, we have become sicker. Some of it is due to natural disease processes. Most of it is due to lack of health care period. NHC would correct this problem, everyone is taken care of. Preventative health care becomes the norm, instead of the curative system we have.

High blood pressure can be hereditary, or it can be lifestyle. I have always maintained its far cheaper to provide blood pressure medication and teaching than treating stroke victims.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875