BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: CarolC
Date: 17 Mar 10 - 01:33 AM

McIntyre is useless. I hope we get a viable candidate to oppose him in his next primary. I've been calling him, but in light of the kinds of ads he was airing in the run-up to the vote on the house bill, I don't hold out much hope. I don't think his office will take anyone who isn't in his district very seriously, though, because last time I called, they asked for my name and address.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: katlaughing
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 12:32 AM

We shall see now, won't we! Yes! They did it!! The day when Dems grew a backbone, again!

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 01:28 AM

The Senate still has to vote on the reconciliation. So we're not quite there yet, but even if that doesn't pass, we still have the bill that was passed today.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 03:00 AM

Hooray! It's about time that bill passed! Now my kids will have insurance.

My wife said there was a dignified, capable black woman presiding over the proceedings in the House today. Anybody know who that would be?

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 03:52 AM

Well I broke down and wept with rage (for Andie) and relief (for every one else) this morning.

Wonder how I am going to make it through work today. Everyone will be talking about it. I think Americans would be surprised how much this has been wished for by our UK cousins.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: freda underhill
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 04:35 AM

Congratulations. he's done it. now here's Michael Moore's open letter to Republicans.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: freda underhill
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 08:45 AM

V Tam, I came back in, read your post, and then found your thread about Andie and her life. I've just finished reading it, what a wonderful, vibrant girl, and such a great loss to you.

I hope you made it through the day ok.

all my best wishes

amalina

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 12:24 PM

Good letter by Michael Moore.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 12:46 PM

When I try to open the letter from Moore, it takes me to Moore's website, but it says, "The page you were looking for could not be found." Can someone post a little bit of the text so I can do a search on that?

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 12:46 PM

Never mind. Found it myself.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: katlaughing
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 02:04 PM

Fuck, of course the Republicans are at it...ten States are going to challenge it as unconstitutional...without even seeing how it works..they do not give a damn about any of us.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 04:14 PM

Looks as if the country is in for a long slobberknocker over not only health care reform but just basic sane policies... No matter how intellegent and sane the policies that the Dems come up with the Repubs are going to say "no"... But it's beyond just Congress here in that the Repubs have their *perfect storm* of a suprme court which will turn back one of the main parts of the health care reform bill in requiring people to participate... That alone will so cripple the system that the rest of the stuff will more than likely not make up for losing the "mandate"...

The progblem is even bigger than just losing the mandate portion because once the Radical-Roberts/Alito court turns down the mandate portion the Repubs will follow up with cases agaisnt Social Security, soemthing that the Repubs have hated for 7 decades... And they will use the mandate precidence to argue that people shouldn't be required to give the government money for their retirements... And once they rid the country of Social Security, it'll be Medicare and then the biggie: income tax!!!

This is not at all far fetched, folks...

B~

BTW, I enjoyed Michael Moore's letter... Too bad FOX has no interest in having him on their shows...

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: gnu
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 05:19 PM

Barden.... Canada here... I have been waiting for an appointment with an ENT since July 13, 2009. That is a little too conservative for me. Don't get me wrong... if it's an emergency, you get cared for reasonably quickly. However, if not, you may not get cared for until it's an emergency. It's not so cut and dried.... here.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 06:38 PM

"Even a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step."

Perhaps the only sensible "Thought" Chairman Mao ever had, and it applies here.

Now the Democrats need to get behind it and shove...HARD!

This isn't what was required, and it doesn't come close to average, let alone perfect, but it is a start.

The trick is to watch the road ahead carefully, and avoid the inevitable ambushes by the thick and stupid.

Above all there needs to be a constant refutation of the crap spouted by self centred dickheads like Ichmael (Yecchmael?), and the media who would make more money selling their rags if people kept on dying.

Remember the vested interests of the Media..... "Good news is NO news"!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: DougR
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 07:27 PM

As is so often the case, Bobert, you are wrong. Michael Moore has been on Fox News Channel and I saw at least one interview with Bill O'Reilly, perhaps two. He and Bill had a lively and interesting debate. Of course, since you probably never watch Fox News you probably just weren't aware if it.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 07:46 PM

Yep... I saw those... Michael Moore is known for WANTING to talk directly to the opposition. He relishes the opportunities..

(I DO see what's going on at Fox... I just take their stuff with 2-3 grains of salt.)

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 07:56 PM

Congratulations, with reservations,

to modify how Cliff Richard might sing it...

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 08:16 PM

Yo, Doug... First of all, I am very rarely wrong!!! No brag, just pure fact!!!

Second of all, great that FOX has Michael Moore on... FOX, I'll have to admit, is something I know very little about... Every time I have attempted to watch it I immediately see that it has nothing to do with reporting facts or news and everything to do with whipping Redneck Nation into a lather...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 08:43 PM

Yeah, I think I may have seen at least one of those interviews. Whenever Michael Moore said anything that Bill O'Reilly didn't like (which was about every time he opened his mouth), O'Reilly responded with, "Shut up! Shut up! I don't want to hear it! Shut up!!!"

Example of O'Reilly in action:    CLICKY.

One tends not to hear much rational discussion on Fox News.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: ichMael
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 09:13 PM

Have any of you read this bill? I haven't looked at this latest version but isn't it 2,300+ pages? It probably encompasses all that the earlier version did, and more.

And in the earlier version, it was mentioned that payment would also be accepted in "other forms than cash." So this is the government/insurance mob going after your PROPERTY. When you go in for treatment and say you don't have money, they'll look at the tax records to see whether you rent or own.

This bill is a bailout for the bankrupt insurance industry. It's broke. The insurance companies invested their money in worthless derivatives, lost their money, and now they need a cash infusion. The government proposes to give it to them by strongarming taxpayers.

Fascism.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 09:35 PM

Oh??? The insurance industry is bankrupt???

Something doesn't add up here, doesn't pass the smell test, doesn't cut the mustard, is void of critical thinking...

If the friggin' insurance companies were so bankrupt where did they come up with the hundreds of millions they spent on lobbiest and negative ads against this bill and...

...why didn't the Repubs get on board to save their buddies in the insurance industry...

This is some seriously flawed thinking here...

(But, Boberdz... This is the new 'n improved Republican lie... Obama is in bed with the insurance industry... Over the next couple of days the Repubs will offer all kinds of "liberal" ammendments in the reconciliation in the Senate... Heck, they might even propose single payer, who knows???? No matter, at the end of the day the Repubs will try anything... They will say that Obama bailed out the insurance industry because their *control group* studies have found that ignorant voters don't like the term "bailout"... Yeah, Boberdz... Just hang on there, son... Yer gonna love the Repubs actin' like commies fir a a weekend...)

Okay, bring them on... I am loving this... Repubs trying to distance themselves from reform because it was all just a socialist plot to help the insurance industry???

Beam me up, Scottie... It's getting too funny down here...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: ichMael
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 09:43 PM

Bobert--the insurance companies WROTE this bill. The insurance companies BENEFIT from this bill. We will have a group of insurance companies that are government-approved. You will have to buy insurance from one of them or face prison time.

But on the bright side, we'll now see the states' Tenth Amendment Resolutions kick in around the U.S. The federal government can't FORCE you to buy health insurance. If they can do that, then next month they can force you to buy green Levis. I expect my state will nullify it.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 10:17 PM

Well, if the insurance companies wrote this bill then why did they spend so much effort trying to defeat it???

We got some serious fuzzy math goin' on here...

I mean, if the insurance companies wanted to quit the practices that this bill now makes illegeal why didn't they just do it???

If the insurance companies wanted to have to pay out "x percent" of premiums on health care why didn't they just do it???

Hey, it's a free country... They could have just done alot of this stuff and prevented all this...

I don't buy the argument that this is the insurance companies bill... Yeah, they got a few things, including 30,000,000 new customers... That ain't chump change... But they are now under the scruntiny of the feds... They didn't want that... Thay didn't wnat to have to spend "x percent" on health care... They don't ewant the feds in their hair... Now they have the feds in their hair... There's gonna be a lot more regs...

Nah, ichM-zer, me thinks that you ain't using critical thinking but listenin' to some talkin' points by folks who stand to lose and who want very much for all this to just go away... Lotta politics being played here but when you follow the money you usually find the truth... The insurance lobbiest have spent hundreds of million$$$$$ trying to stop what has just occured... Don't think there's too many campaign corks being popped in their circle tonight...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: DougR
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 10:23 PM

Several state AGs are filing law suits against the federal government due to the mandates in the Bill, chiefly, requiring that every citizen in the U.S. purchase health insurance. If one cannot afford it, the government will provide a subsidy to help purchase it. If the subsidy is not enough, the citizen will be fined for not adhering to the law.

The law suits will claim that it is unconstitutional to require citizens to purchase anything. I believe they may be successful.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: ichMael
Date: 22 Mar 10 - 11:09 PM

They didn't try to "defeat" it, Bobert. That was just sleight of hand for the masses. Pro rasslin. Don't throw me in the briar patch.

And it's not a free country. We've been taken over by bankers. Insurance companies are essentially banks. Banks own this country. The outright banks got their turn at the trough with Bush's bailout and Obama's stimulus, and now it's the insurance companies' turn.

And the insurance companies don't have the feds in their hair, they're MERGING with the feds. Fascism--government/business merging. The government and the insurance companies will now work together to strongarm Americans into buying "insurance." You've probably seen the mafia movies that revolve around this theme. The people have to buy "protection" so they don't get blown up. That's what the mafioso government is doing with this.

And yes, DougR, suits are going to be filed, but I expect the corrupt supreme court will find in favor of the feds. That's why state sovereignty resolutions are so important. I guess this week or next I'll start contacting my state rep and state senator about this. The states have the final say over this kind of garbage. Within a year I expect upwards of 10 states will nullify this unconstitutional action within their borders. Hope so, at least.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 01:01 AM

It's worse in New Brunswick than in other provinces, though, isn't it gnu? I understand that the premier of your province has set things up in a way that discourages doctors from practicing there. In provinces where my relatives live, they haven't had to wait any longer than people do here in the US (people with good insurance, that is).

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 01:03 AM

Insurance companies are experiencing record profits. They're hardly bankrupt.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: DougR
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 01:13 AM

The margin of profit for Insurance companies is less than 3% Carol. That's about the same as your neighborhood grocery store.

I join you ichMael in hoping that the challenge to the legislation is successful. If it's not, the next time you need to buy a new car, the federal government will decree that you must buy one made by General Motors.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 01:34 AM

Please show some documentation for that 3% figure, DougR.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 01:36 AM

DougR, they're not telling people which insurance to buy, so it's pretty ridiculous to suggest that making it possible for more people to have insurance is going to cause them to tell us which car to buy. But I expect ridiculous was what you were going for.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 07:19 AM

Well, add my state, Virginia< to the list of Redneck Nation states that have filed suit even before the law goes into effect??? Little knee-jerkin' going on in Redneck Nation these days...

The problem with the concept of these law suits is that, yeah, the Repubs did a very nice job in the "lost decade" in creating the perfect storm of a Supreme Court... I mean, the Roberts/Alito court will more than likely take the case and override the US Congress... But the scarey thing is that their reasoning will be that yhe federal government really shouldn't have any power at all to force folks to do this of that... One of those this or thats is Social Security... That has me a little concerned 'cause I can see Cowboy Roberts and his sidekick Alito overturning the "mandate portion" of the act, thereby gutting it, and then Redneck Nation will go for Social Security with the precidence that is set in knocking out the mandate...

I tell ya'll that the passing of this bill, unless the progressives can tell a better story to the moderates in this country, may be the beginnin' of the unraveling of the New Deal...

Think about it... You know that the Repubs have hated the New Deal ever since the Dems got it going... And this hatred has been passed down from generation to generation much the way Redneck Natioon has passed down racism and bigotry....

Gonna be interesting...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 09:34 AM

Waste of breath Bobert, trying to talk sense to people who haven't got the brain power to look at what the rest of the world is doing, and realise that, with everybody paying a share, the individual yearly cost is one tenth or better of what they are currently paying themselves.

Anyone too stupid to recognise that "the more people who share the cost, the lower the individual premium" isn't likely to be taking notice anyway. Too busy buying tickets for the next Nascar Merry-go-Round, and trying to figure out how a ring pull can of Bud works.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 10:17 AM

DougR: The law suits will claim that it is unconstitutional to require citizens to purchase anything. I believe they may be successful.

Put your tinfoil hat back on, Douggie-boy. Everyone's required to purchase automobile insurance, for one example of many.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 03:13 PM

You have to pay taxes don't you? The onlty difference is that these are taxes paid to private companies, but that's only because the public option got excluded.

Any politician in any country with a universal affordable health care system in place - that's virtuually everywhere apart from some Third World countries and the USA - would be committing political suicide if they proposed to abolish it. Once the USA joins the human race the same will be true there as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 03:18 PM

Even some Third World countries have universal affordable health care.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 03:24 PM

By the way, a lot of our taxes already do go to private companies rather than to the government. Since so many of the services our government uses come from private contractors, some of my tax dollars, for instance, are going to the company formerly known as Blackwater, and these people are known murderers. And my tax dollars are going to KBR, a private company, who are responsible for the electrocution of several of our service members in Iraq. I was never given any choice about whether or not my tax dollars would go to them. I am forced to pay for their services whether I want to or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: DougR
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 04:42 PM

Greg F.:I would think that someone with such a brilliant mind would know that driving an automobile is a priviledge, not a right. Therefore one who CHOOSES to drive an automobile is REQUIRED to purchase auto insurance because the possible damage he/she might do to others.

Carol: I NEVER said people will be REQUIRED to purchase health insurance from a particular company. That's not the point. The point is the federal government cannot force a citizen to purchase ANYTHING!

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 05:06 PM

The government forces us to purchase stuff all the time, DougR. The most obvious example is car insurance. You will probably say that we are not being forced to buy that insurance because we don't have to own a car if we don't want to pay for car insurance. But I could just as easily say that we don't have to pay for health insurance if we decide not to have any income. Both are true, and both are equally reasonable (or not reasonable) arguments.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Charley Noble
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 05:21 PM

It would be nice if the Republicans focused positively on making specific improvements to the new health law, instead of trying to repeal it. Lord knows there is room for improvement but that doesn't seem to be their goal.

Well, we'll see how many of them survive the campaign carnage in November.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 05:49 PM

Fine, Doug... I'd be all for an ammendment that any Neaderthal who wants to opt out can opt out but that means that they go one a registry and no matter what the circumstance they will not be treated in any health care system... Period!!! I don't care if they get shot, they get in an accident, they get cancer, etc., etc...

The only exception would be people who can and will prepay for any treatment they get...

I mean, I hear ya'll talkin' about personal responsibility... Hey, I don't wnat my premiums going up 'cause some dumbass redneck opts out, then accidently shoots himself while deer huntin', can't afford treatement so the hospital treats the moron, he doesn't pay the bill and it gets passed on to all of us...

Yeah, opt out means opt the *f* out... No excuses!!!

But these folks won't do that... I live in the heart of Redneck Nation... Thay hate the government but when they want somethin' then they can't get enough of the governments help...

Let's just pose this scenerio... You got to any danged nursing home in America and it is filled with folks who are just layin' in their beds, pooping themselves and having to be fed... Millions of these folks are there because of Medicaid... I'd love to see Redneck Nation if Obama were to say, "Sorry, ya'll but granny is gettin' kicked out of nursing home so ya'll gonna have to start taking care of her in yer double-wides...".... Yeah, talk about the Tea Baggers screamin'... There would be the loudest scream ever heard... It would sound like a nuclear bomb was detonated over every town in America... That is reality, folks...

Yeah, Redneck Nation is all about screaming... Heck, I heard it as a socail worker... No matter what it was that they thought granny should be gettin' from the government if the programs weren't there to give (YES, GIVE!!!) granny what Redneck Nation thought granny ***deserved*** from the governemnt then they were real pissed off!!! You know, just like the Tea Partiers... Talk about hypocrits????

Beam me up, Scottie... The morons are trying to take over...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 06:16 PM

When you pay taxes you are paying for all kinds of things, including things you might not particularly want, but which the government thinks you need. Including "the nation's largest health insurance program", Medicare, ifyou are old enough to qualify for it, like Doug for example.

So what is the significant difference when it comes to a statutory insurance program for people who aren't old enough to get their health insurance through Medicare?

Apart from the fact that it's private insyrance companies getting the money - but then for opponents of health reform to complain about that is a bit like the old definition of chutzpah - a man who shoots his parents and then asks the court to be lenient on him because he's an orphan...

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 08:21 PM

"" By Angie Drobnic Holan
Published on Friday, March 19th, 2010 at 3:21 p.m.
Related rulings:
Pants on Fire!
The president's health care proposals will cause "most Americans to have their premiums increased, not decreased, and hundreds of millions of people lose their current insurance coverage."

Nancy Pfotenhauer, Wednesday, January 27th, 2010.

Ruling: Pants on Fire! | Details False
______________________________________________________________________

"Forcing Americans off of their current health coverage and onto a government-run plan isn't the answer, but that's exactly what the Democrats' plan would do."

John Boehner, Monday, October 26th, 2009.

Ruling: False | Details False

______________________________________________________________________

In the health care bill, "The 'Health Choices Commissioner' will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None."

Chain e-mail, Tuesday, July 28th, 2009.

Ruling: Pants on Fire! | Details
Bookmark this story:
Buzz up!
ShareThis

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats on their way to winning votes on health care reform.

We've been fact-checking claims about health care for more than a year now, and have noted several distortions that won't seem to die. Here's five that resurface again and again.

1. It bans private insurance in favor of a government-run plan. Opponents have repeatedly said the plan would force Americans off their current plans, even though most current plans would be allowed to continue. Republican House Republican leader John Boehner said that "forcing Americans off of their current health coverage and onto a government-run plan (is) exactly what the Democrats' plan would do." We rated that False.

2. Preventive care saves the whole health care system money. People who favor the plan regularly imply that preventive care will lower its overall cost. While early treatment can save individual patients money, research shows that the benefits don't outweigh the costs of the additional screening procedures. President Barack Obama said preventive care "saves money." We rated that False.

3. Millions of people will lose coverage. Opponents of the plan have argued that millions of people would lose their health insurance. But the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has projected that the proposal would result in insurance for 94 percent of the country. Republican commentator Nancy Pfotenhauer said that "hundreds of millions of people (will) lose their current insurance coverage." We rated that Pants on Fire.

4. The plan will lower health insurance premiums for most people. A few people will see significant reductions in what they pay for health insurance if they qualify for low-income tax credits to buy their policies. But the vast majority of Americans will see no decrease or a very slight decrease in premiums, according to projections. Obama said, "The costs for families (in the individual market) for the same type of coverage that they're currently receiving would go down 14 percent to 20 percent." We rated that Half True. Obama's statement is true only for those in the individual market who are buying comprehensive plans right now. For people buying high-deductible, low-cost plans, the premiums will increase, because they'll have to buy plans that offer more coverage.

5. Bureaucrats will dictate treatment for patients, or tell you what insurance plan you have to buy. The proposal does include new boards to make recommendations on evidence-based treatment. But they won't consider any individual cases or deny procedures for specific patients. The bill also sets minimum standards for insurance companies, creating a baseline for basic coverage. People will still be able to pick the plan they prefer. We received a chain e-mail that said, "The 'Health Choices Commissioner' will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None." We rated that Pants on Fire..""

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 08:34 PM

While early treatment can save individual patients money, research shows that the benefits don't outweigh the costs of the additional screening procedures. But if it saves your life...

Of course, if you die sooner I suppose that's likely to come a lot cheaper than if you live and continue to require medical treatment from time to time. Infant mortality is the biggest healthcare moneysaver there is.

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 10:56 PM

Yup. Denying people preventative care and thereby causing their deaths at an early age is the ultimate money-saving "death panel".

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: DougR
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 01:25 AM

McGrath: Your last post deleniates a major differenc between your country and mine. We enjoy a freedom that few countries enjoy except the U.S. If we were so bad, there wouldn't be so many risking their lives to sneak into our country. We do not rely on our government to dictate what we need. Our country was founded on the freedom to choose. Our government is not omnipotent, our elected representatives are supposed to work for us, we do not work for them. I think this difference accounts for the frustration many of our friends across the pond experience when it comes to debating US politics.

There are some who MAY benefit from the health care Bill that Obama signed today, but I wonder if in twenty years that will be the case. The figures supplied by the CBO are unreliable because the information provided them is flawed. Their projections must be based on the information they are provided. There is a real possibility that this program will bankrupt our country.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 02:34 AM

I just came in to check it out...I've been REAL busy(in case you needed a 'Sanity check')...but I saw this:

CarolC: 'Even some Third World countries have universal affordable health care."

GfS: "Well, were on our way, too!"

Just reading to catch the spins, or to check out the approval, and/or apprehensions'...and second thoughts......

Waving,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 02:56 AM

I am somewhat bemused, that, to an outsider, the public attitude of many US politicians and their supporters seems to be highly 'anti-social'...

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 02:59 AM

Not sure what your point is GfS.

On a humorous note, Rush Limbaugh said he would leave the country if the health care bill passed. The country he said he would move to is Costa Rica. Costa Rica has nationalized (socialized) health care.

I think he would be happier in Somalia where they don't really have any government to speak of to screw things up. Bon Voyage, Rush!

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 03:32 AM

Not sure what your point is GfS.

Haven't been on much...just thought I'd check out re-actions, and what people were thinking, as the details are coming out....wasn't making a point...I don't think...

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 03:37 AM

!2oo...Whoop-Ty-Doo!