How Americans Continue to Relegate Themselves to Serfdom

[All Else Failed]

I think it is hilarious that the cartoon suggests that everything will be sunshine and rainbows if we had single payer


Our healthcare issues go far deeper than who pays for what

 

[Accountable]

I understand where you coming with this... but I don't see it as unfettered reach into peoples lives.

You're lying to yourself.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;

If general welfare means universal healthcare then it means everything else, too. Where's my house? Where's my dinner? Where's my wardrobe? Food and shelter are more critical to welfare than getting a checkup.

There are some things that are not specifically spelled out in the constitution that are still considered under the purview of it.

Consider the department of highways, with it's establishment, the federal government was able to create an amazing interstate highway system that benefited all of the citizens. It enhanced our security and provided for interstate commerce. Do you believe that it was unconstitutional?

Also from Section 8:

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

Post roads are roads used to deliver the mail. That definition was stretched to mean the superhighway system we know today. IMO, it was abuse of the clause. Keep that Machiavellian crap at home. The ends do not justify the means. There are always other alternatives to abusing, purposely misinterpreting, or circumventing the Constitution. Yes, it takes longer. It's supposed to. Yes, it's inconvenient. It's supposed to be.

 

[Johnfromokc]

You're lying to yourself.If general welfare means universal healthcare then it means everything else, too. Where's my house? Where's my dinner? Where's my wardrobe? Food and shelter are more critical to welfare than getting a checkup.

I'm sorry, but this is an absurd statement repeated by right wing libertarian talk show types and then repeated by their listeners in conversations and on forums like this.

Where in the constitution does it specifically state that corporations are people and that money = free speech?

The only reason we don't have an affordable universal health care system right now is because of those corporate "persons" excercising their "rights" with lobby money so that they can keep and increase their profits at the expense of the general welfare of working class Americans.

There is no constitutional prohibition of universal health care - your argument falls flat. Stop being a pawn of the corpratocracy and begin advocating for what is morally right for your fellow citizens.

 

[HK]

Just to throw this out there as well - I can sort out my own shelter and food, just about. But I can't take out my own appendix.

 

[Guyzerr]

Yes I would consider any Hospital, Doctor visit a basic

Because of this I won't respond to the remainder of your post, which I did read. The reason is because you and I will never agree on the simplest issue right off the bat. ie: A elderly gentleman that I knew very well was going to the hospital for a " basic " procedure. It involved cutting out a cyst he had on his neck. The day before he was due to go in my wife and I had dinner with him and his spouse. During the dinner he started to talk about his upcoming visit to the hospital ( we were unaware at that time ). I said" I hope it's nothing serious " to which he replied " anytime you walk into a hospital it's serious. He had a massive stroke on the table and died during that basic procedure. So ya... we won't agree on the word basic.

 

[All Else Failed]

I'm sorry, but this is an absurd statement repeated by right wing libertarian talk show types and then repeated by their listeners in conversations and on forums like this.

Where in the constitution does it specifically state that corporations are people and that money = free speech?

The only reason we don't have an affordable universal health care system right now is because of those corporate "persons" excercising their "rights" with lobby money so that they can keep and increase their profits at the expense of the general welfare of working class Americans.

There is no constitutional prohibition of universal health care - your argument falls flat. Stop being a pawn of the corpratocracy and begin advocating for what is morally right for your fellow citizens.

Nah, he has a point. At what point do you draw the line?


It is certainly in my general welfare to have all of those things that he listed. Why can't the government give me all of those? Unless you want people to suffer by not having them?

 

[Tim]

Nah, he has a point. At what point do you draw the line?


It is certainly in my general welfare to have all of those things that he listed. Why can't the government give me all of those? Unless you want people to suffer by not having them?

The government can provide all of those things to you... but it wouldn't be free, taxes would need to be raised in order to cover the costs.

NOTHING is free, there is always a price to be paid.

 

[JuggsBunny]

Husby and I had one of the best private health insurance policies in the US when I was diagnosed with cervical cancer. The first year of treatments, we paid well over $12,000.00 in co-pays ALONE. The second year, we paid over $14,000.00 in co-pays ALONE. The amount we owed after 2 years of treatments for services that were deemed "not necessary" OR "not covered" by the insurance company topped $40,000.00. $66,000.00 for medical services while we were still paying $800.00/month for the privilege of having health insurance... there is something VERY wrong with our system.

I live in Germany currently. VAT (Value Added Tax) is at 19%. That's right - every time you go to a store, the tax percentage placed on goods is 19%. Germans also get about 41% of their paychecks taken in taxes. However, there ARE trade-offs. Health insurance, paid. Dental, paid. Want to have a baby??? You get paid 3/4 of your salary to stay home for the first FIVE YEARS of your child's life. If you decide to go back to work before your child goes to kindergarten, daycare costs little-to-nothing as it is subsidized by the State.

Why is the United States so fucked up when it comes to healthcare??? There are many successful models worldwide that we could emulate. Why don't we??? Why does quality healthcare have to be considered a "privilege" and NOT a right???

 

[Tim]

Why does quality healthcare have to be considered a "privilege" and NOT a right???

There is absolutely no valid reason. Only the bullshit talking points provided by those who are making a fucking killing at the expense of our health...

If anyone thinks we as Americans are free-er with our health care the way it is, doesn't look at the whole picture.

 

[Alien Allen]

How about free hookers

That would sure be part of my general welfare

Those are some obscene taxes in Germany

One is sadly mistaken if they think having national health care would reduce costs

Obamacare even in its bastardized attempt has done nothing but raise the costs. We are being hit with I believe a 1% increase the first of next year. Anybody who thinks that is insignificant probably is not paying that bill. Anybody who thinks it will stay at 1% is dreaming. The proof in that is how the tax rates of all sorts have risen from when they were started at token amounts. Like giving candy to a baby once you get it then it is hard to take away and one accepts to pay just a bit more and a bit more every year. Until those cents turn into real dollars.

 

[Panacea]

Why is the United States so fucked up when it comes to healthcare??? There are many successful models worldwide that we could emulate. Why don't we??? Why does quality healthcare have to be considered a "privilege" and NOT a right???

I see the United States as a withered old man, bloodied and foolish, led by the nose with righteous conviction in every direction that doesn't benefit him. Completely bought and sold by the powers that be. People like to argue over which powers those 'be, but that's just another diversion, because both powers are the same. They feed off one another, and the unanimous decision is not to look out for the citizens.

 

[Accountable]

I'm sorry, but this is an absurd statement repeated by right wing libertarian talk show types and then repeated by their listeners in conversations and on forums like this.

Why is it sensible to say that that phrase mandates universal healthcare (because it is welfare) and absurd to say the same phrase mandates those things critical to staying healthy?

Where in the constitution does it specifically state that corporations are people and that money = free speech?

Oh, I'd love to hear anybody come up with an answer to that one, too.

<- taking notes
eta: In fact, where does the Constitution even imply that??

The only reason we don't have an affordable universal health care system right now is because of those corporate "persons" excercising their "rights" with lobby money so that they can keep and increase their profits at the expense of the general welfare of working class Americans.

That, and not enough people use your and Tim's, um, novel approach to interpreting the Constitution.

There is no constitutional prohibition of universal health care - your argument falls flat. Stop being a pawn of the corpratocracy and begin advocating for what is morally right for your fellow citizens.

Of course there's no constitutional prohibition of universal health care ... only to federal universal healthcare. I'm sure you can find several times where I've said the state-level approach is a much smarter way to go, regardless of whether I agree with it or not. State systems reduces the workload to a population size much closer to those countries you keep touting, plus it allows for benchmarking, which encourages innovation. A national system is a monopoly. Monopolies are stagnant . Anti-innovation. Innovation means change, and change costs money. It would be much smarter to have 50 nimble systems.

 

[Accountable]

Why does quality healthcare have to be considered a "privilege" and NOT a right???

Because it doesn't fit the definition of a right. At most, you can make it a legal entitlement.
A right doesn't require that someone else provide anything. Healthcare requires that someone provide it to you - give you a check-up, fill your cavities, take out your gall bladder, etc. would a healthcare professional be allowed to refuse you the healthcare you desire? Shouldn't that be a right as well? And if a healthcare professional is denied that right by threat of some kind of legal punishment, what is that if not subjugation?

 

[Tim]

Because it doesn't fit the definition of a right. At most, you can make it a legal entitlement.
A right doesn't require that someone else provide anything. Healthcare requires that someone provide it to you - give you a check-up, fill your cavities, take out your gall bladder, etc. would a healthcare professional be allowed to refuse you the healthcare you desire? Shouldn't that be a right as well? And if a healthcare professional is denied that right by threat of some kind of legal punishment, what is that if not subjugation?

First and foremost, a health care provider cannot deny you care if it's needed to stabilize you.

Would you be against universal health care if it were specifically written into the constitution? Or do you only oppose it because it's not provided for?

 

[HK]

Because it doesn't fit the definition of a right. At most, you can make it a legal entitlement.

Hey, I never use multiple question marks to emphasise a point :ninja

 

[Accountable]

Just to throw this out there as well - I can sort out my own shelter and food, just about. But I can't take out my own appendix.

So you are the baseline? We shouldn't consider anyone less able than HK? I can sort out my own retirement, so we can throw out SS retirement checks, right?

First and foremost, a health care provider cannot deny you care if it's needed to stabilize you.

Foremost?? Universal healthcare isn't about stabilizing a dying patient. We already have that, so your statement, while absolutely (probably) true, isn't relevant.

Would you be against universal health care if it were specifically written into the constitution? Or do you only oppose it because it's not provided for?

Of course I would vote against it if anyone ever had the balls to actually bring it up for public vote rather than circumventing the system. If the constitution were amended, you bet your ass I'd be right there in line to get my freebies, Just like These people:
(Click on about the 6:00 mark)
[video=youtube;XcPxtEVsY1E]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcPxtEVsY1E[/video]

 

[HK]

So you are the baseline? We shouldn't consider anyone less able than HK? I can sort out my own retirement, so we can throw out SS retirement checks, right?

I mean that, pretty much anyone earning a paycheck can get a home, and buy their own food. They can choose where they shop and which neighbourhood they live in. You can plan those things for your budget. But you don't generally get to choose if you get cancer, and how much treatment you'll need.

It seems incredibly miserable to live in a world where being in an accident or just being unlucky could land you in thousands of dollars of debt. And from the sound of it, that could happen even with insurance.

Like I said before our system isn't perfect over here, but at least if I get unavoidably sick it won't cost me financial peace of mind on top of everything else.

 

[Accountable]

Are you saying we should ban gambling?

 

[All Else Failed]

The government can provide all of those things to you... but it wouldn't be free, taxes would need to be raised in order to cover the costs.

NOTHING is free, there is always a price to be paid.

You're missing the point. Those things shouldn't be offered by the federal government if it can be avoided.

 

[HK]

Are you saying we should ban gambling?

I.... what?