how is it with any honest recollection of our recent history that patriot Americans can say with any happiness that Republicans will get both houses back in 2010? have you forgotten that both the 108th and 109th congress (2003-2007) were composed of a republican majority and a republican tiebreaker, Dick Cheney? It was their borderline criminal deregulation of wall street and their insistence on pursuing two dead-end wars costing us 1 million dollars PER SOLDIER PER YEAR that has gotten us to the point where we have to question whether or not we can afford to implement something as beneficial as universal healthcare. Eisenhower was right: republicans’ commitment to the military-industrial complex will spell the end for america, not universal healthcare.
p.s. on a different but related note, is it just me or do republicans truly not understand that if money for programs doesn’t come from taxes then it must be borrowed from other nations i.e. what bush did for 8 years? in other words, how do you think bush was cutting taxes and spending exorbitant amounts of money?
[quote]snoopabu3 wrote:
how is it with any honest recollection of our recent history that patriot Americans can say with any happiness that Republicans will get both houses back in 2010? have you forgotten that both the 108th and 109th congress (2003-2007) were composed of a republican majority and a republican tiebreaker, Dick Cheney? It was their borderline criminal deregulation of wall street and their insistence on pursuing two dead-end wars costing us 1 million dollars PER SOLDIER PER YEAR that has gotten us to the point where we have to question whether or not we can afford to implement something as beneficial as universal healthcare. Eisenhower was right: republicans’ commitment to the military-industrial complex will spell the end for america, not universal healthcare.
p.s. on a different but related note, is it just me or do republicans truly not understand that if money for programs doesn’t come from taxes then it must be borrowed from other nations i.e. what bush did for 8 years? in other words, how do you think bush was cutting taxes and spending exorbitant amounts of money?[/quote]
Beneficial Universal Healthcare, to who? It is not beneficial to me at all. So stop saying it is jackass.
Agreed. Yes, compared to two wars of foreign war, universal health care is indeed an investment with serious returns for us as a society. Anyway who cannot see that is blind.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
snoopabu3 wrote:
how is it with any honest recollection of our recent history that patriot Americans can say with any happiness that Republicans will get both houses back in 2010? have you forgotten that both the 108th and 109th congress (2003-2007) were composed of a republican majority and a republican tiebreaker, Dick Cheney? It was their borderline criminal deregulation of wall street and their insistence on pursuing two dead-end wars costing us 1 million dollars PER SOLDIER PER YEAR that has gotten us to the point where we have to question whether or not we can afford to implement something as beneficial as universal healthcare. Eisenhower was right: republicans’ commitment to the military-industrial complex will spell the end for america, not universal healthcare.
p.s. on a different but related note, is it just me or do republicans truly not understand that if money for programs doesn’t come from taxes then it must be borrowed from other nations i.e. what bush did for 8 years? in other words, how do you think bush was cutting taxes and spending exorbitant amounts of money?
Beneficial Universal Healthcare, to who? It is not beneficial to me at all. So stop saying it is jackass.[/quote]
How did you get such a rock solid Insurance program ?
I always proceed under the assumption that everyone on this forum is a paleoconservative or libertarian of one flavor or another, excepting the scant few liberals and scattered neocons who also reside here. There are no Democrats on T-Nation. Am I right or wrong?
Republicans are absurd for thinking that anyone who didn’t want the two wars was unpatriotic, but thinking that wanting to provide Americans with health care is the downfall of society. (Note: whether the current plan is viable or not doesn’t matter)
Democrats are absurd for voting for the wars then badmouthing anyone who supported them. Also, their absurdity continues with crafting a bill that(the last time I checked) was rather ineffective overall, but beneficial to the insurance companies. But, we will have to see what gets hammered out between the two houses in committee. If the bill makes it that far…
[quote]blake2616 wrote:
but beneficial to the insurance companies.[/quote]
It’s actually quite the opposite. As it stands, this bill will destroy insurance as we know it by preventing them from discriminating against people with previously known conditions.
libertarian’s are at least consistent in their argument. decreased taxes, decreased spending, greater economic isolationism. this is AT LEAST consistent. Republicans are simply misleading their constituents with their ridiculous portrayal of their fiscal strategy (see post-script of above post). also, i’m not a democrat. i’m an independent who votes in the best interest of our nation, a position it seems republicans no longer share.
furthermore, to the point about universal healthcare not being universally beneficial: i ask you, what happens when an uninsured individual goes to the emergency room and can’t afford to pay the bill? it gets passed to the government for collection. at this point, the government pays far more than is affordable because they didn’t have the benefit of being in prearranged agreement with doctors stipulating exactly what they are willing to pay. the bill is in turn passed on the taxpayer, i.e. YOU.
[quote]snoopabu3 wrote:
libertarian’s are at least consistent in their argument. decreased taxes, decreased spending, greater economic isolationism. this is AT LEAST consistent. Republicans are simply misleading their constituents with their ridiculous portrayal of their fiscal strategy (see post-script of above post). also, i’m not a democrat. i’m an independent who votes in the best interest of our nation, a position it seems republicans no longer share.
furthermore, to the point about universal healthcare not being universally beneficial: i ask you, what happens when an uninsured individual goes to the emergency room and can’t afford to pay the bill? it gets passed to the government for collection. at this point, the government pays far more than is affordable because they didn’t have the benefit of being in prearranged agreement with doctors stipulating exactly what they are willing to pay. the bill is in turn passed on the taxpayer, i.e. YOU.
[/quote]
Correction the bill is written off by the hospital as “bad debt” then sold to a collection agency. The overall cost of this is passed along in the raising of costs at the hospital for services rendered. Also by and large what a hospital or doctor charges and submits to an insurance company is much higher than what they are actually paid out (medicare and medicaid apply here also) as they have a contract for what they will pay. So you above statement is incorrect.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
blake2616 wrote:
but beneficial to the insurance companies.
It’s actually quite the opposite. As it stands, this bill will destroy insurance as we know it by preventing them from discriminating against people with previously known conditions.[/quote]
Please explain futher why you feel this way as I am interested in hearing this (seriously).
[quote]snoopabu3 wrote:
libertarian’s are at least consistent in their argument. decreased taxes, decreased spending, greater economic isolationism. this is AT LEAST consistent. Republicans are simply misleading their constituents with their ridiculous portrayal of their fiscal strategy (see post-script of above post). also, i’m not a democrat. i’m an independent who votes in the best interest of our nation, a position it seems republicans no longer share.
furthermore, to the point about universal healthcare not being universally beneficial: i ask you, what happens when an uninsured individual goes to the emergency room and can’t afford to pay the bill? it gets passed to the government for collection. at this point, the government pays far more than is affordable because they didn’t have the benefit of being in prearranged agreement with doctors stipulating exactly what they are willing to pay. the bill is in turn passed on the taxpayer, i.e. YOU.
[/quote]
Yes so to be truly beneficial to me insurance reform would allow hospitals to refuse service based on lack of insuracne or inability to pay, then those who truly care would enroll in some form of healthcare. Those who care would also learn to take better care of themselves.
It is the bleeding haeart progressives that have destroyed the idea of personal responsibility and personal accountability. For being such a free thinking group you seem to want to rob everyone of their freedoms and force them to suffer for those who cannot live independently or responsibly.