OBAMA CARE...So this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause.

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. This is a statement of our most basic individual rights. Over the centuries our human rights have been abused and eroded but always one could still say (...most of the time, in this country...) one could mind their own business and be left totally alone to live their life with no interference from anyone. But with this new health care bill, soon everyone will have to pay a fee to the government, or insurance company, for being alive.

...our last tiny bit of absolute liberty will be erased.

Views: 614

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The death panel argument... hmm. In any economic system, there will be some sort of mechanism which determines how finite resources are distributed. It seems naive to think that "rationing" will simply "go away" because the government steps in. Is it pleasant? No.

I'm not familiar with all of the various insurance company's "so called death panels", so I can't exactly say that I'm "OK" with all of their practices. Again, I'm not against "health care reform" in general -- I simply want government's involvement to be more limited, and at least have a plan which can realistically pay for it (for if they can't pay for it, then what additional changes are they planning?).

And by the way... I'm not a libertarian. Libertarians (at least the few I've run into) typically go too far to the other extreme of the spectrum. I use to consider myself a "Republican", but I don't fit there either. I'm more liberal minded with respect to certain social issues, but (big surprise) more conservative with respect to fiscal and defense related issues. Do I "dislike" all government? No, but has the federal government become too large? (i.e., too socialist or may I dare say, too "progressive")... I think so (but that's my opinion).
Of course there will always be a need to ration health care. But we should do it in as egalitarian a way as possible, rather than the irrational, unaccountable way we do it now, where health care is "rationed" to those with decent jobs or who can afford to buy their own insurance or just pay out of pocket. Further rationing in our current system is done by for-profit health insurance execs (not medically trained) deciding who is too expensive to allow to buy insurance. The problem is that the "free market" disincentivizes the insurance providers from providing insurance. They make the most money by "insuring" the healthiest people. Those people pay premiums and make fewer claims. People who make more claims are too "risky". The insurance companies don't seem to understand that insurance is about risk pooling, not risk elimination for maximum profit. For-profit health insurance can't work in the long run, because shareholders' goals are antithetical to patients' and doctors' goals.

It's bizarre that anybody would think this particular bill is in any way a government takeover of health care. It doesn't really say anything about health care; it's an insurance bill. It doesn't expand the government's coverage of anybody (though I think it should have), instead mandating that everybody buy insurance thru health insurance companies, while at the same time banning their most egregious anti-consumer practices. There are subsidies for some people and businesses and fines for those who don't want to pay premiums. Simply by expanding the pool of premium payers, health premiums should go down for everybody, or at least not up as fast. This bill gets rid of one of the worst problems with our current system: people who opt out because they are healthy and don't feel like paying a premium until they get older and sicker. Well, that's sorta not the point of health insurance. The point is to get everybody to participate so the cost is spread the widest, and thus thinnest.

The really twisted thing is that this national bill is essentially a Republican plan. It's the spittin' image of the Massachusetts/Romney plan, and the Democrats wussed out on the most progressive elements, so by whining and voting against it and having Fox whip the teabaggers into a frenzy the Republicans got exactly the bill they would have done if they actually gave a damn about people. Mandating premium payments for everybody is a Republican idea to prevent freeloading. But the second the Democrats said the same thing, it became nazi commie socialism and the dead hand of the John Birch Society punched up thru the turf over its grave to grab us by the balls. Great.
But I would be willing to consider the evidence you have to support your belief that we are moving to a socialized health care system.

I'm by no means "an expert" (is anyone really? Has anyone here actually read the thousands of pages in the bill as well as deciphered all of the amendments?) on the health care reform bill, however here are some interesting articles.

Health Care Reform: How You Will Fare:

Congressional Budget Office's health care reform bill assumptions are questioned:

Cost Estimate for Pending Health Care Legislation:
a most interesting excerpt...

That calculation reflects an assumption that the provisions of the legislation are enacted and remain unchanged throughout the next two decades, which is often not the case for major legislation. For example, the sustainable growth rate mechanism governing Medicare’s payments to physicians has frequently been modified to avoid reductions in those payments, and legislation to do so again is currently under consideration by the Congress. The current legislation would maintain and put into effect a number of policies that might be difficult to sustain over a long period of time.

The big questions are: Will there be enough funding? Has the government even come close to estimating the cost of their "health care related" programs in the past? Why are so many people confident that the government will suddenly become experts at estimating future costs? What do you think will happen when this complex plan falls apart? I suspect the "current plan" will be extensively modified so that it increases government control even more, and because resources are not infinite, you will end up with government deciding who gets medical care.
Menuk, this is just silly. Like they have always done with Social Security and Medicare when they get close to insolvency, they adjust the programs, generally by hiking the payroll tax or adjusting the retirement age, or a combination of things. Adjustments can be made in either direction. They're not always in the brain-dead direction of Reagan/Bush unfunded tax cuts. Some presidents (ahem, Clinton) are actually capable of being fiscally responsible. And if we weren't in a Great Recession that needs stimulus spending, the Democrats (the party of grownups, as opposed to the petulant whiner Party of No) would be balancing the budget. Of course, that job would be easier if Bush hadn't trashed the budget and the economy in the first place.
I agree... debating this with you is a complete waste of my time -- for you are very much entrenched in your opinions as am I. We'll just have to wait and see what happens. Take care.
Absolutely. In Europe everyone agrees that the American health care debate looks like a tragicomedy, the only thing we're not sure about is the title of the play - The Imaginary Invalid or Much Ado About Nothing.
"The Liar"* by Pierre Corneille - sort of fits in with Joe "You Lie" Wilson, "kill grandma," FEMA camps, and all the other outrageous lies of the teabaggers and the Republicans.

*I am not actually so learned that I knew this play off the top of my head - I will be seeing it soon at the Shakespeare Theatre Company in D.C.
Your doom and gloom prediction is based on a bunch of teabagger lies and/or libertarian religious zealotry. Please start making sense.

Please see the reply above.
As a German living in Germany, I agree.
Aren't there actually fewer injury lawsuits in Europe, because everyone is covered?
Show me the death panels, the rationed care, the loss of liberty, Rush Limbaugh in Costa Rica as he promised, and the rest ... and I bet you can also show me proof of god.

I looked again at the OP and can't believe that 1 in 6 Americans using the ER as their primary care facility cause they can't afford or can't get health care isn't a human rights abuse. WTF?

Its sooo horrible cause now people with preexisting conditions will be covered, small business will get help covering their employees, college kids can stay on their parent's plans longer, etc. Oh - the HORROR the HORROR!
Hmmm....excuse me while I try to get the connection between the disbelief in supernatural entities and the health care bill......




Update Your Membership :



Nexus on Social Media:

© 2019   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service