Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Tort reform is just a start....its help bring costs down.
Doctors order all kinds of diagnostic test b/c/ they are worried about lawsuits....
Ummm, no.
Read what I wrote.
Something needs to be done.
That something IMO is not to give the govt the power.
How about starting with Tort reform and moving from there?
Am confused as to why people think the government is capable of running health care. They dont do anything with excellance.
Yeah, we got our problems.
But give it to the .gov and it will be "out of the frying pan into the fire".
OK dude, you are saying that me getting in to see my doctor are untruths? Get a life. I'm not going to continue with you anymore if you try to tell me what my own experience is.
You had to wait 6 months. I'm sorry. I dont.
And I live near Detroit, 40 minutes from Canada.
Many Canadians come here for real treatment that they cant get back home, and often the Canadian system will send its people here when waiting time is too long.
ahh IC
I'm not sure I follow you.
Are you saying that the reason the Dems won't do it is that they are afraid of being called names?
Dude, cutting and pasting a bunch of articles does not replace an argument. For every one you post I can find another that says your beloved socialized medicine is shite.
I'm not going there.
LOL!! Livescience.com LOLOLOL!!1
So, then you really do think a Federal Army is the embodiment of the 2nd amendment? Quit playing....your not really that ignorant are you?
So, the health care I'm getting (On demand doctor visits same or next day) equates to eating my least favorite vegetable?
Perhaps I would prefer waiting MONTHS AND MONTHS AND MONTHS to see my doctor (If I see a doctor at all) like they do in Canada.
Thats "whats out there" my friend.
I just looked it up. It seems we have pretty much the same life expectancy as most of Europe....
Wow, please, tell me what is out there that I don't have?
You are making some HUGE assumptions about me....
"Out health care SUCKS. Plain and simple. It is tailored to the rich. Period. "
Hmmm, ok.
I, for one, like my health care and believe me I am FAR from rich.
That is what I'm saying.
I don't think they should get access (for free) to all the diagnostics - unless we can get the price down.
I agree that we need to look at other options, but I think that turning the whole thing over to the .gov is the worst option of all. I'd rather things stay they way they are then do that.
But again I ask:
Does the 14th amendment mean you have to pay for my guns?
Or, like you posted, does the FEDERAL ARMY count as my CITIZENS right to a gun?
I see you are trying to fit me into some pre-judged ideological box that you have made in your mind. I understand though, that way you don't have to really communicate with me. You can just throw some label on me and tell yourself that you know all of my views.
For the record, I am not a republican. They've screwed things up almost as bad as the Democrats.
Oh Lord....for real?
Fair enough, and in the US no one is denied if they don't have enough money.
It is illegal for an Emergency room to turn anyone away.
If you want full-spectrum health care for everyone than I would disagree with you.
I am against it because it will (like everything the .gov des) ALWAYS cost more than you say.
I am against it because it is not the Federal Governments business to be in health care.
I am against it because every country has that has socialized health care has poor quality health care and long waiting periods.
I am screaming about the huge expenditures. We've quadrupled our deficit in the last few months - I'm outraged and don't want more spending.
The Iraq war can be stopped with the stroke of a pen (your beloved Democrats have enough votes to do it btw, they just aren't - are you mad at them?). But another massive entitlement program cannot. This bill, if passed, will take years to fix (if we ever can). There is a huge difference between a military spending bill and a fundemental undoing of our health care system. And, the health care thing is a MASSIVE expansion of federal power- which I am against.
Furthermore, the founders of our country specifically did not set-up a democracy. Rather, they setup a Constitutional Republic. Your misunderstanding may be why you've followed such a tortured view of the constitution.....
No, no, no.
You are attempting to avoid the issue. If you want INDIVIDUALS to have health care for free and cite the 14th amendment to justify it, then you ought to be willing to pay for INDIVIDUALS to have printing presses and guns.
Also, its funny that you equate a standing Federal Army (the US military) with the CITIZENS right to bear arms. Its like you've never read the Constitution.... The whole point of it is to limit the Federal powers, and then you claim a Federal Army is the promise of the 2nd amendment? unreal.....
I don't.
That was the entire crux of his post on government health care.
He posted an article where the author claims that health care is a right, and that the 14th amendment guarantees equal rights. Therefore, we should all have equal health care.
I of course think that is nonsense and stated that if his logic were followed that it would mean that the taxpayers have to pay for everyone to have the same everything.
What I believe is: If health care is a right (and, for the sake of argument lets assume it is) then you are free to go purchase it, just as you are free to purchase a gun or printing press.
A right does not mean that the public must pay for it.
I DON'T expect for people to pay for my guns and likewise, I don't expect to pay for others health care.
The article he post is complete hogwash and every time I talk about it he changes the subject (Iraq, immigration etc)
Again I will ask (concerning your ORIGINAL post):
Does the 14th amendment mean that I get a free printing press and free guns?
You seem to have me confused with someone else.
I've never said anything about mexicans.
once again you are off on a new tangent....
Thats the WHOLE POINT dude! Government can run SHIT on budget. Not the dipshit Republicans OR your beloved Dems.
The war costs more, medicare costs more, medicaid coasts more, Social Security costs (WAY) more, infrastructure costs more EVERYTHING COSTS MORE than they said it would.
So why do you think socialized healthcare will be ANY differant?
So, according to you this health care bill will cost 1 trillion huh? yeah, I know, thats what the dems SAY it will cost. But since when has any government spending project EVER come in on budget? Neither of us know what it will cost in ten years as neither of us know the future. All we can do is look at the past and make our best predictions.
So, on that note, let me give you the FACTS (as in, already happened) of Medicare: When it was enacted in 1966 it cost $3 billion. The house Ways and Means estimated that it would cost only about $12 billion by 1990 (a figure that includes for inflation). The ACTUAL cost in 1990 was $107 billion!
So gee they were off by 800%!!!
And how about social security? If it is not changed or canceled it will literally cost tens of trillions to fund.
Why is it that you think the government can run ANYTHING efficiently?
You still have yet to defend your original post so who is spouting the BS here?
My guess is that were I to post what gave us the right you would again change the subject since you don't seem to be able to debate the facts.
Go study some more bumper sticker slogans.....lol
Wow,
What a claim.
I'm not sure how to respond.
Someone who thinks that a government entitlement project will not cost FAR MORE THAN PREDICTED.
I'm not sure there is any hope for you.
So, basically you are refusing to defend the logic of your first post. Ok.
Government run health care, if passed, will DWARF the cost of Iraq. That is a fact.
Government run health care is FAR inferior to private insurance.
Just look at the gov run options we currently have: Medicare Medicade. Both are running at HUGH deficits but you want to double-down and let the .gov run the whole show. Are you crazy?
And, funny how blame Iraq on Republicans. The Democrats run the show now and what are they doing about it? A Dem Executive and A Dem Legislative (with a freaking super-majority) lol. Yep, must be the republicans fault we're still there lol.
BTW, you still haven't answered me: Do you support tax payer funded 2nd amendment rights? After all, we have equal protection under the 14th amendment dont we? Its not fair that the rich can afford better guns than I can. I demand my right! Also, its not fair that the New York Times can afford such huge printing presses and I only have this desktop printer. According to you, the 14th amendment means that this is unfair and the public MUST pay to buy me an equal printing press.....lol
Ok, what other rights would you like to talk about then? Keep in mind it was you who posted the article that talks about only healthcare.
I guess I did bring up the right to bear arms (btw are you cool with the taxpayers buying me some guns or do the taxpayers only have to fund rights NOT SPECIFICALLY ENUMERATED IN THE CONSTITUTION? lol).
And defense spending being more than the rest by a factor of 10? Your own graph shows that it is 58% of the budget... thats a factor of 2 no?
And good thing we spend more on defense than anyone else. Are you wanting Kim Jung Ill to have a larger army then us? lol.
Furthermore, the whole article seems to hinge upon a grossly warped view of the equal protection clause. The article bemoans the fact that rich people have better health care than the poor.
The author believes that call people, regardless of income, should have access to the same health care. (Could we not also, under this logic, make a case that everyone should have access to the same homes and cars because we all have a right to life, liberty and the persuit of happiness?)
But socializing US medicine will not change the fact that the rich will have better healthcare. Look at countries who have your darling govt healthcare: the rich have the money to pay out of pocket to private doctors because they dont want to go to the sub-par public ones.
Rich people will always have better stuff than the rest of us. Thats an advantage of being rich.
If you are so concerned with liberty (which I doubt is you REAL motivation here) than you would be aghast at the .gov forcefully taking what one person has EARNED and giving it to another who has not.
Government run health care will be a MASSIVE expansion of federal power which is what the Constitution was written to limit.
Not a very good response.
We are talking about health care being a right correct?
You are free to purchase it.
I'm pointing out that the argument that "health care is a right"
is misleading from the beginning since people already have the right to purchase it.
What people usually mean when they say "health care is a right" is "socialized medicine should be mandatory".
I'm sorry, but socialized medicine is NOT a right.
Lets assume (for argument's sake) that health care is a right.
If it is a right, you are free to go and purchase it.
It being a right does not mean that your fellow citizens must pay for it does it?
That would be like saying "since the 2nd amendment affirms my right to own a gun I want the govt (the people) to buy one for me". Or "the right of the press means the .gov ought to buy me a printing press".
"health care is a right". Sure....you are free to go buy your own... just like you are free to buy a gun or publish a paper.....
Well, I'm getting the rest of my poosition out of this one for now. I was in at .0001 and have made some real nice gains. I will save some powder for this one when they address the issue of this last week. GLTUA
ppl hoping for a weekend PR maybe.
Careful there Diamond, you sound as is you are starting The Cult of THJMW lol...... "THE GREAT JUDGE"......lol j/k
Ask that question again when the company does a 1000-1 or even 10,000-1 reverse split....lol.
That pig has 21 billion o/s and 100 billion a/s lolololol
I agree with you.
Kinda like "we're all equal, but some of us are more equal than others". lol