It makes no sense to call anything a “right” that someone else must be forced to pay for.

“It makes no sense to call anything a “right” that someone else must be forced to pay for.”

Pay for? How about perform? If other people have a right to your services, that means you have an obligation to provide it. If you’re a doctor or nurse, Harkin thinks you’re a slave. Don’t you think slave labor is a great thing to base our health care system around?

Fitting that the Democrats, who fought so hard to keep slavery 150 years ago and to stop civil rights 50 years ago, are the ones bringing it back now.

Yes, a few hundred hospitals will close…
We will have several hundred thousand homeless Seniors…
Posted by fiscal_conservative 2010-01-13 13:53:36

OK, who ordered the parody-troll?

Am I wrong Stan? What Socialist programs are you for? Medicade? Welfare? Post office? FDA? Fire Department? Police Department? EPA? DOT? Military? I bet I know….Politicians!
Posted by fiscal_conservative 2010-01-13 14:06:36

Close hospitals and throw seniors into the street just so you can get your 60 cents back? All of the typical Liberal lies… talking points, about Conservatives.

And you think the Fire and police departments, as well as the military are “Socialist programs”?

Sorry, not buying it. What name did you used to post under? Was it crthns and whats_up??

Posted by fiscal_conservative
2010-01-13 14:21:06

Retard alert.

It is Socialism. The implementation of collectivist principles. Just think about what you are saying if you think what I am saying is so ridiculous.

Posted by fiscal_conservative 2010-01-13 14:36:01

I know precisely what you are saying and you are an idiot.

Bu-Bye!

Pay for? How about perform? If other people have a right to your services, that means you have an obligation to provide it.

Good point. Let me change my statement to It makes no sense to call anything a “right” that someone else must be forced to provide.

Looks like hoggo’s back.

My thoughts exactly.

Wow, y’all are weak.

Wow, you’re a troll. Thanks for playing.

Your Socialist tax payer funded public education has failed you! You say you are against paying for someone else, yet you want me to foot the bill so you can have a massive amout of social programs and departments. You sissy hypocrites need to go post on your communist websites, and leave the conservative websites alone.

Ignorant Stain in Texas,
I supposably have no clue, yet you want me to explain the socialism aspect of paying for the military. If I do that then you must explain why Democracy is the best system of government in the world, yet the military operates not as a Democracy, but as a dictatorship. I told you that you were robbed by your Socialist public education system. If you are posting on a conservative website “conserve” the verbage and make your point. I am not a part of your Socialized education system, take your homework and place it in your orafice.

yet the military operates not as a Democracy, but as a dictatorship.

Proof of being mentally challenged right above. Thanks for playing.

Wow not_so_conservative, you do know that SOCIALISM is taxing one to give to another, with no benefit for those being taxed.

The police, fire, military, are services provided by the govt as a way to benefit ALL. Since we all pay taxes and all benefit from the services they provide it’s a an equitiable contract.

Stain,
You have not heard me be “insulting.” This is the kinder more gentle me, I thought it appropriate when commenting amongst people who use “bu-bye.” Obviously you are no Social Conservative, they don’t like you queers. I am still trying to determine exactly what kind of stain you are. A couple come to mind. You don’t seem to know that a Republic is a form of Democracy. Wow! That explains a lot. I have not backtracked on anything I have said, just tried to explain it to a moron. Where in our Constitution does it say that “I” have to pay taxes in order to fund the defense of this nation? I may pay for goods and services, but the taxes imposed on businesses and corporations selling products, should have to pay for the infrastructure from which it benefits. That allows for an economy able to purchase such goods and services. If you need a road to deliver your goods, then you pay for it. If you a build a subdivision on your land and you want a road into the subdivision, then you pay for it. If an enemy foreign or domestic threatens the market that allows a business or corporation to sell its products or services, then it should pay for the defense of said market. The revenues from natural resources being extracted and sold, should be paid to the government, and any remaining revenues should be paid to the citizens.

Where in our Constitution does it say that “I” have to pay taxes in order to fund the defense of this nation?
Posted by fiscal_conservative 2010-01-13 16:41:19

Seriously? Namecalling and you come back with this? No rebuttal from me is needed here.

Am I wrong Stan? What Socialist programs are you for? Medicade?[sic] Welfare? Post office? FDA? Fire Department? Police Department? EPA? DOT? Military? I bet I know….Politicians!
Posted by fiscal_conservative
2010-01-13 14:06:36

“Medicade?” Looks like whats_up created a new ID.

Military? Read the Constitution dumbass, then get back to us.

Democracy is the best system of government in the world,

Hey dumbass, we’re a constitutional republic not a democracy.

But if you have been banned and are returning to post freely under a new screen name, then you are no better than m@rtha, pal.

And somehow, you are telling me to go fuck myself? If you are still held in high esteem on this board, then that tells me all I need to know about the state of the right wing in this country.
Posted by Tom_pinko_Delay 2010-01-13 17:01:41

Give it a rest, you pompous ass. You don’t post on here for weeks at a time. There are several hugely important topics just begging for discussion. And all you can do is jump on and flail in your righetous indignation that I would post here? How petty.

But, that is the state of the Left Wing in this country. Ignore issues that are of great importance to the future of this country, and rather focus on personal attacks and insignificant issues.

You are a credit to your party.

Fiscal_conservative really got the better of all of you by rubbing your noses in the same sort of idiocy you espouse.

WHAT I CALL DEMOCRATS…

I call the modern liberals SECULAR SOCIALISTS…its how they talk and vote…so why are we still using the false names they prefer like liberals or progressives? Ask Cuban refugees how “progressive” the secular socialism of Castro has been for their country.
Take it to them…I have over 2,000 posts on various Forums and work that in as often as possible. Go on offense.
Every single time you type liberal or progressive put (aka secular socialist) behind it. They are what they are.
I frame all debates in terms of the degree of secular socialism. Why don’t you start? It will tie those kooks in knots.
I simply oppose secular socialism…no names, just secular socialism. If your record or words reflect secular socialism…I oppose you on those grounds, not some personal or party baloney.
http://conservablogs.com/theconservativecrawfish

Fiscal_conservative really got the better of all of you by rubbing your noses in the same sort of idiocy you espouse.
Posted by Jack Schite 2010-01-13 18:09:37

No other proof needed that FC was a parody troll and a plant that the endorsement of SchiteHead.

Posted by Jack Schite
2010-01-13 18:09:37

Sure thing sparky. You at the truck stop or the internet cafe? How is the weight problem going?

America is still so young, you’ve got souch growing up to do. you’ll learn though. I expect by then though it may be too late.

Posted by sinister bob
2010-01-13 18:48:01

Great, another refugee from the third world.

why so aggressive? what are you trying to prove? no, Im not from your redneck of the woods. I just think you should embrace change a bit better. you live in a democracy, so just accept the system… or kill all the commy bastards with your handgun. you could start on a university campus, I’ve heard that’s where they hide.
Posted by sinister bob 2010-01-13 19:32:06

I sense a lot of hatred and anger there, Bob. Sterotype much?

Redneck? Handguns? Death on college campus?

And change is not always for the better. We disagree with the change and are trying to stop it. That is how our system of government works. If you don’t like that, I don’t care!

Posted by sinister bob 2010-01-13 19:50:49

Change is not inevitable, Bob. And we will continue to fight this, thank you very much!

And no, not all on the Right beleive in God. However, for those of us that do, it is our greatest strength.

And a piece of advise for you. Get your own country in shape before you try to lecture us about our’s you had your chance, 200+ years ago. Remeber how that turned out?

Alright, all liberals (including those undercover–very poor disguise, I must say!) get lost until you have educated yourselves on the conservative ideology. Don’t come here ranting about rednecks, guns, God, and all the other stereotypes that you have heard from watching Keith Olbermann. It is pretty difficult for you to insult our intelligence when you are so utterly and obviously clueless (and, judging from the misspellings, uneducated as well).

I just think you should embrace change a bit better.

I’ll keep my liberty, you can keep the change.

But if you have been banned and are returning to post freely under a new screen name, then you are no better than m@rtha, pal.
Posted by Tom_pinko_Delay 2010-01-13 17:01:41

Stan, Tom’s a pussy so he’ll obviously avoid any issue. Cowards always act like that.

I may pay for goods and services, but the taxes imposed on businesses and corporations selling products, should have to pay for the infrastructure from which it benefits. That allows for an economy able to purchase such goods and services. If you need a road to deliver your goods, then you pay for it. If you a build a subdivision on your land and you want a road into the subdivision, then you pay for it. If an enemy foreign or domestic threatens the market that allows a business or corporation to sell its products or services, then it should pay for the defense of said market. The revenues from natural resources being extracted and sold, should be paid to the government, and any remaining revenues should be paid to the citizens.
Posted by fiscal_conservative
2010-01-13 16:41:19

So you don’t benefit from roads? Water lines? sewer lines? electric lines? rail lines? phone lines? internet cables? If you don’t then I can see where you wouldn’t wnat to pay for them, but I’m sure you do and therefor can share the tax burden.

If an enemy threatens a business, retard they are going to be KILLING you!!! Don’t you think you might pay for the govt to provide a defense for your seriously STUPID ass?

If the private business bought the rights to extract that resource, which is the current system on public lands then they get to keep the profits or there is NO motive to extract the resources. DUH!!! You’re not very wise to why businesses exist are you?

I’ve shown that clip of the shouty man to a few people. it’s hilarious. I like the way he breaks off from his rant to show footage of himself. and the way he thinks that writing a word on a blackboard makes it appear authoritative. brilliant. thank you! :)

sorry, last thing- bthewolf (nice name. very masculine) I’m not interested in putting anyone down. and noone is jealous of you over here, believe me. but I don’t understand why you think your current health system is working. I would hate to trust my life to an insurance company. I barely trust them with my car. business and money is not the be-all-and-end-all. making lots of money is fine but very transient. I know that’s what America was founded on but one day you’ll wake up and realize the greed that engulfed you and the power you’ve obtained was all for nothing. I predict a similar downfall to the roman empire. unless someone helps you see the light. someone like…Obama!

well, he can only try.

Posted by bthewolf
2010-01-13 23:06:08

You need to be deprogrammed. Our resources belong to the American people. Why are we leasing the land for them to rape as many mineral resources from the land they can before the lease runs out. Don’t you think a better approach would be to allow bidding on barrel extraction. Companies can bid to extract oil from the land. Lowest bidder gets the contract and we, the citizens, have the natural resources.

“If an enemy threatens a business, retard they are going to be KILLING you!!!”
A business can be threatened electronically, financially, their resources can be inhibited, death to a business, does not equate to a death of people.

Where in the constitution does it say I have to pay for sewer with tax money, when I receive no sewer service? Why do I have to pay for roads in states to which I have never been? Why do I have to pay for water lines if I am on a well? Why do I have to pay for phone lines if I have no land line?

BTW needs to change his name to Hugo Chavez….

Posted by fiscal_conservative
2010-01-14 08:27:27

Wow where to begin with the assininity of your entire post?

Our resources, who said they were OURS? If I buy the land THEY ARE MINE. If I lease the land from the govt, I get the right to extract the resource for EVERYONES gain, because the govt can’t do an efficient job in extraction and has no need of the resources in the first place. So in a MUTUAL beneficial exchange the govt SELLS(they get money to pay for some of their services) a lease that the a private company can then go out and make a profit with. That profit provides jobs, payroll taxes, and benefits everyone that does business with the company even as far down as the the guy who buys the toaster that was built from the iron that was mined from the leased land.

True collectivism is saying that WE THE PEOPLE own the resources and should get to share the profits form it’s sale. You really are clueless about capitalism works as compliment to our Republic aren’t you?

Where in the constitution does it say I have to pay for sewer with tax money, when I receive no sewer service? Why do I have to pay for roads in states to which I have never been? Why do I have to pay for water lines if I am on a well? Why do I have to pay for phone lines if I have no land line?

See the 10th amendment, and all SCOTUS cases regarding states rights. We live in a Federalist Republic, not a Nationalist Representative Democracy, That meaning that not all laws are created on a natioanl level that local and state govts get to create laws to, including how and why they tax your ignorant ass.

Posted by bthewolf
2010-01-14 09:01:01

I learn from your post. Thanks!

you didn’t answer my question btw.
Posted by sinister bob 2010-01-14 09:43:30

And you didn’t shut up and go away like we asked. I guess that makes us even.

Of course they do Bob, havent they made that obvious.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 10:22:28

Utter and complete BULLSCHITE, exactly what I expect of you, crthns.

And to Robert, nice try at totally confusing the issue. And by nice, I mean petty and pathetic.

Yes, only those that can afford health insurance should be able to get health insurace. After all, health insurance is a purchased commodity, just like food and clothing. On the other hand, healthCARE is available to all. Anyone who needs medical attention can get it in this country whether they have health insurance or not.

Of course they do Bob, havent they made that obvious.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 10:22:28

You have that proof yet? Three years in March

They cant get check ups or preventive care, only after they have a heart attack can they go to the hospital.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 10:40:10

And they can’t eat the healthy food that they sell at World Market, or live in the high class neighborhoods, or send their kids to the best school.

I’m sorry everyone cannot have the very best medical treatment in the world. That does not mean the government should take my money to give someone else something they haven’t worked for. People that cannot afford health insurance need to take care of themselves. It is not my fault they can’t get a doctor’s undivided attention every time they have the sniffles.

And besides, if you and the other Liberals are soooooo very concerned about people with no health insurance, why does the plan you are bribing you way into law not start for four years? How many people are going to die without health insurance until your wonderful plan kicks in?

sorry, stan. I don’t mean to be annoying. now we’re even though, can I ask the question again?

Posted by sinister bob 2010-01-14 10:44:13

In oyur very first post on this thread you called us stupid and young. You are definitely trying to be annoying.

And whats_up is even more of a pompous ass than you are.

Your question was answered. Deal with it.

And besides, if you and the other Liberals are soooooo very concerned about people with no health insurance, why does the plan you are bribing you way into law not start for four years? How many people are going to die without health insurance until your wonderful plan kicks in?

Posted by StanInTexas
2010-01-14 10:47:28

Stan,

I am upset that it doesnt start right away, however I will take it over the alternative.

I am upset that it doesnt start right away, however I will take it over the alternative.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 11:08:23

The alternative is a majority of American that love their healthcare and don’t want their taxes raised.

And you are upset, sure you are. So upset that you haven’t said a single word about the wait. If you were so upset, you woudl be complaining about it instead of just blindly following the Dems off the cliff. But with your head jammed so far up Obama’s ass, it is no wonder you are blind!

And thats it in a nutshell for you isnt it Stan. So sad, I am glad that I dont live in your world Stan what a ugly place that is. I hope that you are never put in this position, but I wouldnt be surprised if it happened, karma and all.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 11:11:08

FUCK YOU, CRTHNS!

I worked hard for what I have and I didn’t always have it. When I can’t afford something, I do without and do the best I can. I do not go whining to the government and tell them “Go take money from whats_up so I can have XXX and not have to work for it!”

If you want people to have health insurance that they can’t afford YOU PAY FOR IT!

If you want people to have health insurance that they can’t afford YOU PAY FOR IT!

Posted by StanInTexas
2010-01-14 11:19:06

No problem, I am willing to pay more in taxes to get this accomplished, I thought you understood that allready.

If this bill has to be passed RIGHT NOW, like the Democrats say, and it has to be done because “People without insurance are dying”, asd the Democrats say, then why doesn’t it start for four year.

Posted by StanInTexas
2010-01-14 11:22:03

I dont know Stan, perhaps you should ask the lawmakers, however if my choice is a plan that starts in four years or one that doesnt start at all, I will wait for the four years.

I dont know Stan, perhaps you should ask the lawmakers…
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 11:24:10

Actually, I don’t want it to start at all and I have told my Representatives that.

If you were so concerned about the people, it is YOU that would be calling your lawmaker DEMANDING that coverage start immediately. But you won’t do that, will you?

If you were so concerned about the people, it is YOU that would be calling your lawmaker DEMANDING that coverage start immediately. But you won’t do that, will you?

Posted by StanInTexas
2010-01-14 11:28:16

Unfortunatly all of my Reps and Senators oppose the bill, however I have written them telling them that I support it and want it to pass. Try not to espouse on things you know nothing about, makes you look like a fool.

however I have written them telling them that I support it and want it to pass. Try not to espouse on things you know nothing about, makes you look like a fool.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 11:35:47

And you didn’t even mention that it should start now or more people will die without health insurance? Why would you leave that out crthns?

Because you are an ass that doesn’t care!

Try not to espouse on things you know nothing about, makes you look like a fool.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 11:35:47

You may want to look that word up and see how it is used, FOOL!

you should be who, lol.

Why waste the time.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 11:42:07

Because maybe, just maybe they would support it if it bagan now. In any case, if you cared about the people like you lyingly claim, that would be a major part of the bill.

But since we have already established that this is about raising taxes on people and has nothing to do with healthcare or health insurance, you can now shut the fuck up!

Stan, we are talking about life and death, big difference.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 11:49:37

No we are not.

We are talking about Health Insurance, a commodity, something you want and you pay for. It is not a right and it is not a necessity. It is no different than food, or a car, or a TV, or a house.

Get that thrugh your thick skull, asshole!

What utter tripe Stan, we arent talking about cars or television sets Stan, we are talking about life and death, big difference.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 11:49:37

Food, shelter and clothing are also necessary for survival. In fact, food and water are more important than health care for survival. People can live for decades without health care. Try living for a year without food or water.

Why are people required to pay for those items?

Bullshit Stan, health and health insurance should not be a commodity to be bartered to the highest bidder. Get that through your thick skull, dumbass!
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 11:53:54

You mean like food, water, clothing and shelter?

Bullshit Stan, health and health insurance should not be a commodity to be bartered to the highest bidder. Get that through your thick skull, dumbass!
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 11:53:54

Health is not but Health INSURANCE is. Chocolate shoudl not make you fat BUT IT DOES!

Health insurance is for those that can afford it. I can and use it for my families healthcare. Some others cannot and must find alternate ways to get their healthcare. The pan before Congress right now ruins the health insurance I worked for and pay for so that they can give some slightly better healthcare to people that don’t have it IN FOUR YEARS!!!

We have ways to get food to people that don’t have any without running every grocery store out of business. Health Insurance should be handled the same way.

Whats_up’s post is proving, once again, the true agenda of liberals.

Liberals don’t really care about health care, they only care about destroying profits of entities that do not agree with their agenda.

Whats_up disagrees with health care bartering “to the highest bidder.” What’s wrong with that? I barter (in the form of money) for my food, clothing and shelter. I choose the location where I can purchase these items, what’s wrong with purchasing health care?

Whats_up, once again, has proven his lies. Health care is a need not a right. The real agenda for the left is to destroy companies. The left cares more about destroying those who disagree with them over saving lives. Once again, their true objective is their own selfish needs.

The federal government will have limited funds regarding health care so they will have to barter as well to meet costs. The govt. will have to barter with various medical practitioners to keep their costs within limits. The only difference here is that the government, not the individual, is the customer.

Whats_up has absolutely no clue on how this works. Argue if you wish, but whats_up suffers from some disease which prevents him from gaining knowledge.

Those who cant afford them are not, thankfully. That is why they have help King.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 11:54:59

Let me guess, there are 47 million of them, right?

It’s amazing how fucking stupid you are to buy that. If you disagree then provide an ACCURATE number of uninsured.

It’s amazing how fucking stupid you are

Really? I gave up being amazed at Cretins Cleese’s idiocy long ago.

Let me guess, there are 47 million of them, right?

It’s amazing how fucking stupid you are to buy that. If you disagree then provide an ACCURATE number of uninsured.

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 12:06:17

King,

I have no idea how many people in this country get food stamps either from the state or federal level, however they do get help. Why shouldnt they get help with health insurance?

The only difference here is that the government, not the individual, is the customer.

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 12:03:02

And what exaclty is wrong with that? The government is the customer in a lot of transactions with private businesses for various services, why would that be a problem?

I have no idea how many people in this country get food stamps either from the state or federal level, however they do get help. Why shouldnt they get help with health insurance?
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 12:13:54

If you don’t know then how can you claim that a public option is a better option?

Millions of people get assistance from charities. Why do you hate this idea?

I disagree with stan. I think you had FOUR bowls of stupid this morning.

In the same manner, anyone (even people here illegally) can get healthcare when they need it. They just can’t go to the very best cardiologist in the country if they have chest pains… UNLESS THEY CAN AFFORD IT!

Posted by StanInTexas
2010-01-14 12:17:38

Actually they cant go to any cardiologist and that is the point, their only option is to go to an emergency room after the heart attack, they dont get to see a cardiologist and maybe prevent the heart attack. Again health shouldnt be based on how much money you make Stan.

They do…it’s called Medicaid. What’s wrong with that government option?

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 12:19:11

Would you support that? I wouldnt have a problem if they wanted to expand it, would you?

Yesterday, President Barack Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and nine other lawmakers met face-to-face for seven hours to resolve differences between the House and Senate health care bills. At the same time these talks were going on, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, Service Employees International Union President Andy Stern and United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger met with other Obama administration officials in a separate room in the White House. This all comes after these same labor leaders met personally with Speaker Pelosi yesterday, and after they met face-to-face with President Obama in the White House on Monday. Despite then-candidate Barack Obama’s explicit promises to the American people, absolutely none of these meetings were open to the public or televised on C-SPAN. In fact, Politico reports: “Those involved in the talks sought to keep details of their progress under wraps.”

And just what deals were Big Labor, the leftist majorities in Congress and the Obama administration making behind closed doors? How to pay for President Obama’s likely $1 trillion health care plan without raising taxes on one of the President’s most loyal constituencies: labor unions. Specifically, Big Labor reportedly has struck a deal with health care negotiators to exempt union members from the 40% excise tax on high-priced health insurance premiums. By some estimates, the tax would hit one in four union members. Now Big Labor will get all of the big government health care spending they always wanted, but they will not have to pay for it.

From Heritage.org lifted from Michelle Malkins website.
It ain’t about the poor folks you leftist twits. Nice to see crths spouting off the party line over here still.

Crthns, since conservatives give more to charities than liberals, why don’t you people pull your own weight and those charities could do a better job?

Do you think if you keep saying that, that it will magically become true?

Posted by StanInTexas
2010-01-14 12:23:58

Unfortuantly no it wont, because there are people like you that think only those that have money have a right to be healthy. However that wont stop my from trying to make it a reality.

Another lie. Medicaid proved cardiac preventive care.

Please learn the truth before making an ass of yourself.

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 12:26:05

We arent talking about those on Medicaid King, trying following along before you make an ass of yourself.

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 12:27:27

Except thats not medicade dumbass! What part of that are you failing to understand. Thankfully hospitals dont turn away patients, that is due to the doctors who take their oaths seriously.

You have no clue what you’re talking about. We’re still waiting for this so-called “evidence” that people are being denied preventive health care, even with Medicaid, SCHIP, etc.

As I wrote before, you’re only interested in destroying companies and using the poor as pawns. Typical.

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 12:29:05

King,

I never claimed that people where being denied preventive care under Medicaid or SCHIP not once, where did you get that idea, really try following the conversation. We are talking about those without anykind of medical insurance that those programs dont cover.

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 12:31:35

King,

As usual you failed to read the all of the information, here is the important point:

Medicaid is available only to certain low-income individuals and families who fit into an eligibility group that is recognized by federal and state law.

Now if we can expand that eligibility group to include those that have not been included we would have a winner, would you support that?

I’ll repeat my question: Why won’t Medicaid assist these people? This is a public option.

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 12:33:15

Because some of them dont quality because the make too much money, but not enough to afford the high cost of health insurance, you really cant be that dense.

Unfortuantly no it wont, because there are people like you that think only those that have money have a right to be healthy. However that wont stop my from trying to make it a reality.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 12:26:57

Typical crthns. The only way you can converse is by telling lies.

I never said only those with money have a right to be healthy. I said only those that could afford health insurace should have it, just like only those that can afford ribeye steaks should have those.

Or do you expect us to believe that there was no healthcare BEFORE health insurance?

Whats_up, you still haven’t answered my question: If I need to pay money for food, clothing and shelter then what is wrong with paying money for health care?

You claim that some people cannot afford health care. Explain this, how can those same people afford other needs?

Why do you run away when faced with facts?

You claim that some people cannot afford health care. Explain this, how can those same people afford other needs?

Why do you run away when faced with facts?

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 12:45:35

Why is this so hard for you to understand King? Everyone prioritizes, thankfully food bills dont run into the thousands every time you go to the store, unlike when you go to the hospital.

food bills dont run into the thousands every time you go to the store, unlike when you go to the hospital.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 12:48:11

HYPRBOLE ALERT!

Nixon also notices that tort reform and allowing insurance sales to cross state lines, both of which would reduce healthcare costs, are not addressed in Obamacare. Nixon won’t hold his breath waiting on the trolls to condemn Obama for this oversight.

You really are that stupid.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 12:50:24

If Medicaid is such a great program, then why do we nned another, crthns?

And you still have not shown how not having health INSURANCE means that anyone does not get health CARE!

The part I cannot grasp is your lie that Health INSURANCE is a right and that Government taking over the healthcare industry is the answer.

Posted by StanInTexas
2010-01-14 12:49:05

Its not a lie Stan, its an opinion, just like you are of the opinion that health insurance is not a right, I believe it is. If the healthcare industry had provided an alternative it might not have reached the point where the government had to step in. However their only concern is profit not health, so consequently they deny the most people that they can get away with so that they can meet that profit expectation.

Its not a lie Stan, its an opinion, just like you are of the opinion that health insurance is not a right, I believe it is.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 12:53:24

Are you that fucking stupid? Health Insurance is a product, a commodity. You do not have a RIGHT to Health Insurance! There is no such thing as a right that requires someone else to pay for it or provide it.

Saying Health Insurance is a right is the same as saying cable television is a right.

What an imbicile!

Then provide evidence. Or do you always believe George Soros?

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 12:52:14

Seriously, you believe everyone that doesnt qualify for Medicaid can afford insurance, I never thought a thinking adult in this country…oh wait you werent thinking, gotcha. Here is one such story out of Oklahoma, how many exactly do you need?

http://www.allbusiness.com/government/government-bodies-offices-heads-state/11900139-1.html

However their only concern is profit not health,

Most private companies are supposed to make a profit for their stockholders. Nixon guesses economics isn’t your strong suit.

Saying Health Insurance is a right is the same as saying cable television is a right.

What an imbicile!

Posted by StanInTexas
2010-01-14 12:56:04

Stan,

Health and cable tv are much different, try keeping up.

Health and cable tv are much different, try keeping up.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 13:04:27

STOP DOING THAT!

We are not talking about HEALTH, we are talking about HEALTH INSURANCE.

THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING!

You must be learning disabled!

Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 13:00:58

Then why has not one liberal group come to her aid, hmm?

Charities are available. If you’re so concerned then donate some of your own money. $60.00 for health insurance isn’t so bad.

You said that you would be willing to pay higher taxes. Instead of paying taxes, put the money into helping others buy the health care they need.

All you did was prove my point.

Health and cable tv are much different, try keeping up.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 13:04:27

Yeah, Nixon is unaware of any poor people who don’t have cable tv. Or a car. and a ton smoke and drink booze and do drugs.
Maybe poor people need to be sent to Dave Ramsey, and then they could budget for health care instead of blowing their money on lottery tickets and booze.

I don’t know how you’re managing to stay at it, what’s_up. it’s become a very silly argument.

the fundamental belief that only the wealthy are allowed to be healthy sickens me to the core and no arguing will change their greedy, selfish, stupid little heads.

it’s gonna happen, kids. and I will very much enjoy watching you weep pathetically over the demise of your health superiority. bring on equality!

King:

Here is another of those people you dont think exsist:

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2010/January/05/affordability.aspx

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 13:08:49

Well its a start, at least you finally admit that there are those who dont qualify for Mediciad but cant afford insurance. Thats a beginning.

Then why has not one liberal group come to her aid, hmm?

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 13:08:49

Why has not one conservative group come to her aid, being you are so charitable and all?

In this country right now they very much are the same thing, that might be your problem, you just dont get it.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 13:15:51

WRONG, ASSWIPE.

People can get health care without having health insurance. They are not the same. The fact that you continue to lyingly treat them the same is why you are such an asshole!

Until you can stay on topic, fuck off and die!

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 13:20:55

King,

You make the assumption that she had all the kids while she was single. Perhaps her husband left here and she is now on her own to raise the children, perhaps he died. We dont know, that doesnt change the fact that she cant get Medicaid because she makes to much but still cant afford health insurance, and their are millions more like her.

Catholic Charities is one such group. Now, what do you have on your end?

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 13:23:22

I would think if Catholic Charities had come to her aid she would have said so and wouldnt be having this problem. Also what are the requirements of Catholic Charities, do you have to convert to Catholicism to join? What restrictions do they have in place? Why havent they offered to help this poor woman?

Also what are the requirements of Catholic Charities, do you have to convert to Catholicism to join? What restrictions do they have in place? Why havent they offered to help this poor woman?
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 13:25:34

I’ll answer your questions when you start answering mine.

You’re out of your league, give it up.

In fact, my company provide 100% coverage for every medical need we had in 2009.
Try again.
Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 13:29:53

HA! Apparently in Europe if you’re not living in abject poverty, you’re classified as wealthy!

You make the assumption that she had all the kids while she was single. Perhaps her husband left here and she is now on her own to raise the children, perhaps he died. We dont know, that doesnt change the fact that she cant get Medicaid because she makes to much but still cant afford health insurance, and their are millions more like her.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 13:23:48

The article states that her employer offers health insurance. Perhaps she can give up her monthly cable TV bill.

But stan makes an excellent point. If this is so important then why wait four years for the new law to take effect? If so many people are uninsured, why not take effect now?

Well bully for you, there are alot of folks who dont have that option since their employers have dropped their health coverage.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 13:31:31

And the healthcare bill that you support will make life worse for them. And still you do not care.

Stan,

In this country right now they very much are the same thing, that might be your problem, you just dont get it.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 13:15:51

Uh NO dumbass, they are not. Their COST is intertwined, but they are not now, nor will they EVER be the same thing.

No there certianly was, but it was affordable, so no need for insurance, what part of that are you failing to grasp?
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 12:45:58

WHEN, WHERE, and HOW did this change?

Posted by cretins_cleese
2010-01-14 13:34:04

Yes it is.

WHEN, WHERE, and HOW did this change?

Posted by bthewolf
2010-01-14 13:33:14

When: Sometime early last century.

Where: All over the US

How: Insurance companies and health care companies decided that profit was more important than health.

No it will make it better for them, see you really dont get it.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 13:34:04

Some number of people (a number no one knows BTW) do not have health insurance. They either cannot afford it or are unwilling to pay for it.

If ObamaCare passes and becomes law, these people will STILL not have health insurance for the exact same reasons. What they will have is a higher tax bill for four long years until the coverage part kicks in. So not only will they have no health insurance, they will have less money to pay for ANYTHING!

So yours and the Democrats solution to the problem will make a bad situation worse for the next four years.

Like I said, you are a heartless bastard.

No it will make it better for them, see you really dont get it.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 13:34:04

This, coming from someone who hasn’t read the bill and has no clue what is contained.

Uh-huh, sure they are.

Another lie.

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 13:37:06

Proof is in the pudding King, Health care insurance companies provided bonuses for those employees who could find ways to deny the most claims, that is putting profit over health.

No it will make it better for them, see you really dont get it.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 13:34:04

Yes, of course, the Leftist plan for everything… Power it with wishes and unicorn farts…

Just saying “it will make it better” doesn’t just make it happen.

Health care insurance companies provided bonuses for those employees who could find ways to deny the most claims, that is putting profit over health.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 13:39:26

You guys let Nixon know when crthns proves this statement. 34 months ago he claimed David Duke voted for Bush in 04, and Nixon still is waiting on the proof from that lie.

Oh, come on, crthns. Don’t run away now. This was just getting good.

Please, tell us all how raising taxes on people with no insurance FOR FOUR YEAR while providing them no additional insurance is helping them!

Inquiring minds want to know!

Whats_up, it is a well-known fact that insurance companies have been reducing their premiums to keep their customers during the recession.

That means you’re a liar. Big surprise.

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 13:47:12

Really,

That is why insurance costs continue to rise, because they are reducing their premiums? What math did you take? Yes lets look at how Aetna is reducing their premiums shall we:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/04/aetna-forcing-600000-plus_n_380130.html

Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 13:59:18

The Huffington Post? SERIOUSLY?

Whats_up, you do realize that the article that was linked to the HP stated that lower Medicare reimbursement levels and regulation challenges were also included as part of the problem?

I wonder why the HP didn’t mention that?

Whats_up, let’s go back to your previous article.

You claimed that the single mother cannot afford her $60.00 monthly premium. I noticed that you never bothered to offer the idea for the government to temporarily provide $60.00 to cover the amount.

The only solution you have is for government intervention because you’re incapable of providing for your own needs. Your wife must be ashamed of you.

A man used to be ashamed if he couldn’t provide for his family. Thanks to feminized libs like you, that is now a badge of honor.

Whats_up, you do realize that the article that was linked to the HP stated that lower Medicare reimbursement levels and regulation challenges were also included as part of the problem?

I wonder why the HP didn’t mention that?

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 14:09:16

Yes the article does state that, but it clearly states that Aetna was raising premiums, are you still trying to claim that they are lowering them?

The only solution you have is for government intervention because you’re incapable of providing for your own needs. Your wife must be ashamed of you.

A man used to be ashamed if he couldn’t provide for his family. Thanks to feminized libs like you, that is now a badge of honor.

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 14:14:53

King,

I pay for my health coverage just fine, where did you get the idea that i didnt?

Another interesting note from the same LA Times article:

“I think a company does have a right to make sure there’s no fraudulent information,” said Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.). “But if a citizen acts in good faith, we should expect the insurance company that takes their money to act in good faith also.”

Late in the hearing, Stupak, the committee chairman, put the executives on the spot. Stupak asked each of them whether he would at least commit his company to immediately stop rescissions except where they could show “intentional fraud.”

The answer from all three executives:

“No.”

Another insurance company that was fined for rescinding health insurance:

thinkprogress.org/2009/09/17/insurance-10-million/

The South Carolina Supreme Court has ordered an insurance company to pay $10 million for wrongly revoking the insurance policy of a 17-year-old college student after he tested positive for HIV. The court called the 2002 decision by the insurance company “reprehensible.”

Also I notice you failed to address the point of them giving bonuses based on rescinding policies,
whats up

Health care insurance companies provided bonuses for those employees who could find ways to deny the most claims, that is putting profit over health.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 13:39:26

caught in the act. One of these things is not like the other crthns, are you retarded? Please folks, no applause for Nixon, you are embarrassing him.

You originally claimed that they got bonuses by denying claims, yet you provided proof of getting bonuses by rescinding policies. Two Entirely Differnt Things. Why am I not surprised.

Posted by StanInTexas
2010-01-14 14:30:05

What exactly do you think rescinding policies is Stan, its denying coverage, of course after taking money on premiums for months or years.

What exactly do you think rescinding policies is Stan, its denying coverage, of course after taking money on premiums for months or years.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 14:34:55

PS you claimed denying claims. Hard to juggle them lies, along with user names, isn’t it?

Gentlemen, denying a claim is denying coverage, as is resciding a policy, one is for one specific thing that needs to be covered, the other is cancelling the whole policy. Again standard practice for your vaunted insurance companies as they put profit over health, despicable.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 14:48:50

They are two separate actions, having two spearate meanings, done by two completely different deaprtments within the company.

You lied and were caught. Deal with it.

Now, stop being such a pussy and answer my question.

Again standard practice for your vaunted insurance companies as they put profit over health, despicable.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 14:48:50

Right, because governments would NEVER deny basic treatment to save money! Governments NEVER allow the cost to effect the decision making process (which patients are largely excluded from).

Only a moron would look at state run healthcare anywhere it has been instituted and think it’s better for everybody.

Gentlemen, denying a claim is denying coverage, as is resciding a policy, one is for one specific thing that needs to be covered, the other is cancelling the whole policy. Again standard practice for your vaunted insurance companies as they put profit over health, despicable.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 14:48:50

Hate to burst your bubble, w_u but Medicaid and Medicare do that all the time. They deny coverage to people who don’t meet their specifications. They can deny coverage at any time and do so often.

I’m sure it is now acceptable since when the government does that.

Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 14:58:00

Answer my question or shut the fuck up, crthns.

Hate to burst your bubble, w_u but Medicaid and Medicare do that all the time. They deny coverage to people who don’t meet their specifications. They can deny coverage at any time and do so often.

I’m sure it is now acceptable since when the government does that.

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 14:57:12

But they dont rescind the entire policy now do they King? Are you supporting this behavior as well, as a good Christian I thought you would condemn this practice for the amoral travesty that it is, instead you support it.

But they dont rescind the entire policy now do they King?

Yes they do. My mother-in-law was one example.

Are you supporting this behavior as well, as a good Christian I thought you would condemn this practice for the amoral travesty that it is, instead you support it.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 15:00:05

You condone lying in support for a government option.

He who is without sin may cast the first stone.

Whats the matter Stan, cant handle being called on the carpet for supporting this crap, tough shit, you are known by who you support, you have made your bed now you have to lie in it.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 15:01:57

Stan seems to handle the fact that he kicked your ass and now you’re desperately trying to save your sorry-ass integrity.

Accept defeat like a man, pussy.

LOL, you should be a comedian King, the fact is that you conservatives have supported this unethical and amoral policy by the insurance companies and will be called on the carpet for it. The practice needs to end and if the companies wont do it for themselves we will force them to be ethical, you decide which side of the fence you want to be one. If you were truly a Christian it would be an easy call, unless of course you have sold your soul for a thousand pieces of silver.

LOL, you should be a comedian King, the fact is that you conservatives have supported this unethical and amoral policy by the insurance companies and will be called on the carpet for it. The practice needs to end and if the companies wont do it for themselves we will force them to be ethical, you decide which side of the fence you want to be one. If you were truly a Christian it would be an easy call, unless of course you have sold your soul for a thousand pieces of silver.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 15:06:20

Aw gee, whats_up is repeating himself again. That’s a good indication that he has nothing to provide.

*YAWN* NEXT!

Keep telling yourself that w_u. In fact, do so publicly so people will know how stupid you really are. Don’t be behind an anonymous name, go public with that.

You’re afraid to answer my response. In fact the Huffington post you provided was not accurate if you go directly to the Aetna site.

Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 15:06:20

Still waiting, pussy.

With any luck, we’ll have ObamaCare defeated and TRUE Christians (unlike liars like you) will keep our freedoms.

I hear Cuba provides good health care this time of year. When are you leaving? LOL!

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 15:10:11

You keep harping on how much of a TRUE Christian you are, do you support this policy of rescinding by the insurance companies? Wait never mind I know how you stand, tsk tsk.

the fact is that you conservatives have supported this unethical and amoral policy by the insurance companies and will be called on the carpet for it.

And where did we say we supported it? Oh, we didn’t. LIE#1

The practice needs to end and if the companies wont do it for themselves we will force them to be ethical

WE? Are you the government now, crthns?

you decide which side of the fence you want to be one.

I choose the side of the fense opposite a lying and heartless bastard like you.

If you were truly a Christian it would be an easy call, unless of course you have sold your soul for a thousand pieces of silver.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 15:06:20

And now you display your ignorance and intolerance of Christianity. Will you never learn?

we will continue to elect those people who will hold the insurance companies accountable for these actions.
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 15:24:38

Except you have no clue what those actions ever are or what they mean, crthns. But you want government intervention anyway.

So, are you going to answer my question?

He said exactly the same thing, they are raising rates to cover the expectations of wall street, nice to know that a health insurance company cares so much about its consumers.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 15:15:43

Then why does the Aetna article itself state that lower profits are a result of rising costs?

Dumbass.

What exactly have you done to correct it?

What exactly have YOU done to correct it?

You still haven’t provided a response why you’re allowing this new bill to wait four years before its implemented.

What exactly have YOU done to correct it?

You still haven’t provided a response why you’re allowing this new bill to wait four years before its implemented.

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 15:30:02

Complained to my State AG, asking him to join the other 10 state AG’s investigating this. Talked with my Senator and told him the same thing, what have you done?

I have no control over when this bill is implemented, I wish it was sooner but it wont be, however I will take something over nothing any day of the week. Its a start, but we have a ways to go.

Complained to my State AG, asking him to join the other 10 state AG’s investigating this. Talked with my Senator and told him the same thing, what have you done?

Sure you have. Which ID did you use? LOL!

I wish it was sooner but it wont be, however I will take something over nothing any day of the week. Its a start, but we have a ways to go.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 15:32:34

You’re saying, with this statement, is you’re OK with people dying due to a lack of insurance until its implemented.

Duly noted.

1) It was ONE COMPANY, not the entire industry.

Posted by StanInTexas
2010-01-14 15:36:22

Wrong again, I have given examples of two seperate companies just today, havent you been following along. Would you like more examples, they are there.

Another lie, you didn’t post ANY articles that prove this statement.

Posted by Kingfisher
2010-01-14 15:32:39

Jesus King you are as bad as Stan, here is the article again:

thinkprogress.org/2009/09/17/insurance-10-million/

The South Carolina Supreme Court has ordered an insurance company to pay $10 million for wrongly revoking the insurance policy of a 17-year-old college student after he tested positive for HIV. The court called the 2002 decision by the insurance company “reprehensible.”

Notice King it says AFTER, you do know what that means dont you?

we arent talking Life Insurance, we are talking strictly health insurance, you cant even follow along, hurt much trying to justify this practice?
Posted by whats_up 2010-01-14 15:46:29

I am talking about health insurance, you asshole. The 10-year-term was just an example I though a simpleton like you would understand. Everything else I said refers to health insurance and is in answer to your direct question.

Now answer mine!

Now answer mine!

Posted by StanInTexas
2010-01-14 15:48:17

Which was?

And yes if the insurance companies wont stop this practice and they have said they wont, then the government does need to step in.
Posted by whats_up
2010-01-14 15:29:29

You provided one link. That is a very small minority of health insurance companies in existence.

My coverage has never been denied on any of the seven carriers that I’ve had during my career.

GOD, you are a pissy little bitch!

He STILL hasn’t answered my question why he supports cancellations by Medicare and Medicaid but demands that we answer his.

Again I provided links to two seperate companies

Even if that is true (which is questionable), that accounts for less than 10% of the insurance carriers out there.

Try again.

bu-bye!
Posted by sinister bob 2010-01-14 16:11:44

PLEASE let the door it you in the ass on your way out!

Good Riddence!

I really can’t keep up,

I can type slower if that will help.

so I’m gonna sneak off gracefully.

By announcing it?

i obviously dont know enough about the health plan or US healthcare in general.

So you’re admitting that you’ve been commenting on a subject you know nothing about.

finally, two things: I’m really, really, truly, honestly, sincerely not another person.

And we really, really, truly, honestly think you’re lying.

I can only assume your loathing to share a service equally that you pay for equally comes from America’s root ideology that if you work hard, you earn hard and the harder you work the more you earn. Not just money but also rights.

Thank you for admitting your stupidity. I pay for my health insurance right now so you REALLY don’t know anything about this subject. I don’t get my insurance free.

the right to be healthy is in my view equally as important.

Then, by your argument, you have the right to food, clothing and shelter. Why aren’t those rights as well? When will Britain provide those needs free of charge as well? Good luck with that.

it is an absolute masterpiece of a service.

You work for the NHS, don’t you?

I can only assume it’s because that’s the easiest way to change the system to help those in need.

Really? Then why hasn’t Obama done anything to lower costs?

since the conception of the NHS it has been a triumph across the political spectrum.

Really? Better tell the UK press:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/letters/letters-nhs-failures-425056.html

If you’re going to lie, at least put some effort into it.

In a nutshell, you admit that you have no knowledge of the US health care system and end up complaining about its shortcomings. Maybe you should shut the fuck up while you’re ahead.

(with respect, you really can’t say that Britain’s NHS has ‘failed’.

BWAHAHAHA OH THE HU FUCKING MANITY OF IT!!!!!!!

oh, and another

http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0117-32.htm

and this I quite like

http://iphone.ezinearticles.com/?Health-Care-in-America-is-Desperately-Flawed—Find-Out-How-to-Fix-It&id=3046244

and I didn’t say I knew nothing about about your crap system, I said I don’t knos enough. I’m a record producer.

You say it is a crap system, and with your background as a record producer Nixon is sure you are qualified to judge.

and I didn’t say I knew nothing about about your crap system, I said I don’t knos enough.

You know nothing. Your comments prove it.

I’m a record producer.

That explains it. What kind of shitty labels to you produce?

while we’re on the links game, here’s a study showing up your flawed healthcare system
http://www.industryweek.com/ar…companies_18706.aspx
Posted by sinister bob
2010-01-14 16:45:01

That’s it? That article simply states that the US health care system has problems.

Of course it has problems, you dumb piece of shit. Two obvious examples are:

- Too much regulation.
- Lack of tort reform.

The Democrats in Congress have refuse to address any of these issues.

By the way, commondreams.org is a partisan liberal web site. They’ve been proven to have lied in the past.

my parents live on long island, NY. I visit regularly and have witnessed first hand someone who had run up a huge debt with a local health centre. no lie.

If that’s true then why didn’t your parents move back to Britain? You’re bitching about it but yet, you have provided no solutions.

why is every opinion or point made that you dont agree with, a lie.

Opinions are acceptable provided that you make it clear that they’re your opinions. You’re entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts.

his solution is not an ideal, but the facts are there.

The only fact that your have proven that your head is jammed firmly up your own ass

Sinister bob, you realize that one of your articles states that MORE private options are the answer.

How much cocaine do you snort as a record producer?

I noticed that whats_up ran away as soon as I showed him the questions I asked him.

At least he is a consistant coward!

According to the Commonwealth Fund, a private foundation that promotes better access, improved quality and greater efficiency in health care in America, the United States ranks 19th of 19 industrialized nations in quality of care. Further, the United States spends twice as much money per person as any of the others, and 101,000 Americans die each year just because they didn’t have insurance.

Then explain Congressman Mark Weiner’s statements (emphasis mine):

Frankly, every single day when people go into a hospital emergency room, you know, there’s some questions asked, “Let me see your insurance card,” but at the end of the day we care for them. So we really don’t have a discussion in this country about whether or not we’re going to have health care for everyone. We really do. The only question that we’re having now, it seems almost silly it’s so petty, is how are we going to distribute that health care.

Sucks to be a dumb shit like you, doesn’t it?

According to the Commonwealth Fund, a private foundation that promotes better access, improved quality and greater efficiency in health care in America, the United States ranks 19th of 19 industrialized nations in quality of care. Further, the United States spends twice as much money per person as any of the others, and 101,000 Americans die each year just because they didn’t have insurance.

Bobbie, lad, I’m assuming you’re a reasonable adult person so you really should know better than to accept unquestioned one organisation’s POV on any topic. Commonwealth Fund has an agenda. You said so yourself – they promote better access. Beware agenda-driven organisations and take what they say with a large measure of salt. They weave whatever statistics they provide around their agenda; they never release any statistical data that doesn’t agree with their agenda; some of them even manipulate the raw data upon which the stats are built (see Phil Jones, Michael Mann, Hadley CRU@UEA for a living, breathing example of all three of those principles). So, if you’re going to wade into the health care debate, please educate yourself first about the agendas of the organisations you’re citing as “fact” and also about the differences between EU/UN health care state reporting and US stats reporting. As an aside, another example of agenda-driven organisation is the Beeb World Service. Back in the ’50′s BBCWS used to be the single most reputable news source in the world rivaled only by VOA who were a distant second. Just the facts and very little opinion to be had. Now, the Beeb WS is so busy flogging the climate change agenda that one has to wonder about their ability to accurately cover and report most other stories without bias.

Personally, I’ve been in the health care business for a number of decades and worked with several dozen hospitals, health care systems, large clinic providers and one managed care organisation, both as a consultant and an employee. Throughout my entire tenure in health care, I’ve never once heard of a patient flat out being denied care due to an inability to pay. Ever. I’ve heard of insurers denying particular treatments. I’ve heard of insures denying immediate care for people with pre-existing conditions. I’ve heard of patients being stabilised in an ED and then shipped to another hospital. I’ve heard of a lot of things, but I’ve never heard of someone being turned away from an ED because they didn’t have the resources to pay. In most states, that’s illegal, and even where it’s not illegal, most institutions have policies which prevent such practices.

In case you’re wondering about my knowledge of the NHS, my sainted mum was born and raised on the South Coast in the Plymouth area. All my life I’ve heard my aunts, uncles, grandparents and cousins talk about the National Health. And contrary to your statements, it hasn’t all been praise and nice platitudes. I’ve watched my aunts and uncles all experience a decided drop in the quality of care offered as they became OAPs and were deemed expendable by the National Health. I’ve consoled cousins who’ve had the physicians of the National Health tell them that their parent was just “too old” to save. I’ve had family who’ve been denied life-saving cancer treatment drugs by the National Health because the drug is “too expensive”.

Additionally, I’ve been reading Brit press for years (these day I read the Telegraph, the Daily Mail, the Guardian and the Independent almost daily) and hardly a day passes that I don’t read a story about the shortcomings of the National Health. Having worked in many hospitals, when I read about NHS’ problems with c. difficile over the past couple of years, I shudder with revulsion at health care facilities which can’t keep themselves clean enough to prevent these needless deaths. Why just last month I read this nice piece in the Daily Mail about how poor the survival rates for a few conditions are in old Blighty.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1234276/Britain-sick-man-Europe-Heart-cancer-survival-rates-worst-developed-world.html

So, in summation, please don’t come in here and try to blow smoke up our butts about how everyone loves the National Health and how it’s better than what we have. That’s your judgment, and you’re welcome to it. But it’s not an objective fact upon which public policy should be drawn. Yes, our health care system has it’s faults. But a sizable majority of Americans are very happy with our system. What it needs is some tweaks to expand coverage and some commonsense regulation. But we don’t really need a NHS/Health Canada overhaul.

There’s a reason why most of the best docs in the world end up in America, and it isn’t because they like our country so damn much.