GayPatriot

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.gaypatriot.net/2010/07/30/obamacare-democrats-bridge-too-far/trackback/

  1. Again, I don’t see health-care as “liberal” issue. Wanting everyone to have equal access to healthcare is not liberal, socialist, communist, or fascist. It’s just compassionate. If we are willing to all contribute taxes to pay for our mutual military protection, then there is nothing wrong with all of us contributing taxes so that we can all have health care.

    If health insurance was no longer the employer’s responsibility, then employers would be able to hire more people. They’d also be less inclined to ageism and looksism and homophobia since they wouldn’t have to worry about hiring people who might potentially raise their premiums.

    The thing this horribly incompetent administration did wrong was that it took a compassionate issue and make it look like a “liberal” issue. It took something which most Americans could have agreed on and made it look like they were being forced by the Black Panthers. ACLU, and ACT-UP working in tandem to accept Mussolini’s own blueprint for insurance. The way Obama was explaining it, I was almost rooting for old people to die rather than accept his version.

    I believe that a better President (Hillary? Romney?) could bring us to understand the need for government-backed universal health coverage in a way which both conservatives and liberals could accept. But we have to get rid of Obama, who could give AR-15s to every citizen and make it look liberal.

    Comment by Ashpenaz — July 30, 2010 @ 10:17 pm - July 30, 2010

  2. It isn’t a compassion issue. When the government put wage controls in place during WW2 employers had to find other ways to entice ppl to work. They started providing health insurance.

    If insurance companies had to gear their prices to individuals instead of deals for corporations, it would make it more affordable for everyone. And don’t get me started on malpractice insurance for doctors.

    The way to help people would be to look at the way the system worked fifty years ago when you could stay at the hospital a few weeks and owe about $200. What in the system changed? Watch the system work and make small adjustments as you see more positive results. That’s how you find a solution that fixes a problem. I prefer it to using theory and then hoping.

    This HCR bill as it stands is just going to make the people who almost can or barely can afford health insurance poorer. It will raise the cost of their coverage, to the point where they will not be able to afford it, so they will lose their coverage, be A) without health insurance and then B) the government will keep their tax refunds which they have earned and need to live.

    This going to kick people from lower middle class into poverty to the point where they will start needing more and more help from the government simply to live. I don’t want people to lose their independence, their integrity and sense of worth, or the hope that they can improve the quality of life for themselves and their families.

    Not to mention that the quality of the private care they will lose will be superior to any government health insurance they (may or may not) qualify for.

    This is like kicking people who have barely escaped poverty right in the teeth. And sticking them with the dental bill. And telling them it’s a lollipop & that they should say “Thank you.”

    Comment by X — July 30, 2010 @ 11:12 pm - July 30, 2010

  3. “If we are willing to all contribute taxes to pay for our mutual military protection, then there is nothing wrong with all of us contributing taxes so that we can all have health care. ”

    But we aren’t contributing. It isnt’ a contribution, it’s a mandate. A contribution is something you give a candidate running for office, Cancer Research, Church fundraisers, etc.

    And it isn’t something that “all” can do. Your compassion is misdirected.,

    Compassion is something people do freely and voluntarily. When the government does it people who pay taxes see them increase. Something I’m sure is not done voluntarily or with a glad heart.

    “If health insurance was no longer the employer’s responsibility, then employers would be able to hire more people. ”

    Health insurance has never been the responsibility of employers. It’s always been a benefit to those who work for certain (but not all)employers.

    And until now, employees never had to pay taxes on the amount of insurance benefits their employer paid into the system. Starting this year, they’ll have to. Your taxable income is going to rise by that amount. More directly, your taxes are going to go up.

    Is that compassionate?

    And it has never been the responsibility of the employee to have insurance. So ObamaCare requires participation, and participation raises your taxes.

    That’s not only not Compasionate, it violates Obama’s promise that Americans earning under $250,000 won’t see any (…Read My Lips, No New Taxes…) of their taxes going up.

    Comment by bk334t — July 31, 2010 @ 1:13 am - July 31, 2010

  4. If they failed to press the unpopular legislation, they would depress their base.

    Their base is always depressed. Ergo, it wouldn’t have made a whole hell of a lot of difference either way. It occurred to me in the shower today that if it’s so damn great, surely the libs in congress wouldn’t object to holding town hall meetings IN PERSON to explain how wonderful it is.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 31, 2010 @ 1:37 am - July 31, 2010

  5. Wanting everyone to have equal access to healthcare is not liberal, socialist, communist, or fascist. It’s just compassionate.

    “Compassionate™” is used to push liberal, socialist, communist and fascist. That and the fear card that if you oppose those pushing any/all of the above, you’re a cold, heartless bastard.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 31, 2010 @ 1:41 am - July 31, 2010

  6. Ooops! I forgot to add:

    If we are willing to all contribute taxes to pay for our mutual military protection, then there is nothing wrong with all of us contributing taxes so that we can all have health care.

    One’s constitutional, the other isn’t. Therefore the latter is non of the government’s damn business.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 31, 2010 @ 1:43 am - July 31, 2010

  7. Ash, you’re way off on this.
    Your argument sound reasonable.
    Just one problem:
    It. Does. Not. Work.

    I’ll contribute to defense, but because I know it will be wasteful, I am willing to put up with that. We tend not to try to save money on military items. I want our guys and gals to have the best we cane give them, and much is going to be destroyed in use, ergo, it is “Waste”.
    Health Care?
    You really want some LIFER Beurocrat deciding to save some money on You, or Your family?
    You know who denies far more treatment and payments than the worst of the insurance industry?
    That’s right.
    The Feds.
    What, other than wasting money, does the gov’t do better than the private sector?
    Postal?
    No, if you really want it there, no doubts, no hassle, you use either Fed Ex, or UPS. They are cheaper than the USPS, and more reliable. Yes, they don’t do regular mail (Fed Ex actually flies much of the post. They tried to fly it all but failed there, so the Gov’t went back to it’s original model of the Airlines, more private enterprise, flying the mail on regular scheduled flights)
    Charity?
    Welfare, Medicare, Medicaid, disaster relief (long term. Short term is very lacking as well, but they use some military for that as well) is not as efficient as most “private” charities. Give a Dollar to say the Mennonites, and a Dollar to the Feds, and most of your dollar is going to get through the Mennonites, but the gov’t will need someone else’s Dollar to “help” yours get there.
    The Gov’t is a net loser at such things, spending more that it takes in (hence the sizes of the budgets, even those not over laden with porcine spending), and just by nature being as inefficient as possible, and you want them to take over your healthcare? My Dad uses the VA. A DAV, he recently had a hip replaced.
    All his retirement, they planned where to winter on A: is there decent weather? and B: is the VA worth a damn?
    There are some places they really like to visit, but he will not do an extended stay due to the poor VA care there ’bouts. For his hip, He planned on where to stay, and when looking at things decided to deal with a horrid winter back home so he could get the VA help he needed. Luckily, our little backwater has a better VA clinic. The operation was in Milwaukee, but he did not have to deal with them other than show up to check in and get the operation. All other visits were back home. Otherwise, they’d have gone to one in Florida he likes.

    What if you live in an area that has a clinic like the Bad Ones in the VA system? Getting your money’s worth? Not likely. What if you can’t move around the nation to get a better version of the care?
    Your stuck.

    I know some Native Americans.
    The Father used private insurance from his job until he retired, then turned to the VA.
    The kids?
    They all got insurance from their jobs, so they don’t have to use the “Fine” version of Gov’t Run Health Care.
    None of them are all too happy about health care “reform”. Poorer members of their family have suffered through the Indian Care and they want none of the Gov’t “help”.
    As they tend to vote Dem, they are starting to see the folly of their voting. They all now want it repealed.

    Yikes, I could go on (and on, and on. . . . )
    sorry for the long post

    Comment by JP — July 31, 2010 @ 2:17 am - July 31, 2010

  8. On a similar note, the family across the street moved out of the house they were renting. The mother told me that her unemployment ran out and she just can’t afford the rent anymore. Didn’t the compassionate™ liberals just shovel $34 billion out the door to prevent such a thing from happening?

    How does that work?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 31, 2010 @ 5:40 am - July 31, 2010

  9. See how much better things go when we all talk nice to each other? :)

    If the solution isn’t government-run health care, what is?

    My trust in the compassion of corporations has been soured by my own experience with health insurance. Plus, it seems to me that Toyota, BP, the coal industry, etc. has shown us how much compassion corporations have for their workers.

    Government, because it is not working for a profit, can do a better job with health care. It doesn’t require that so many people have to die so it can make money, so it’s in a better position to deal with helping people live.

    Comment by Ashpenaz — July 31, 2010 @ 11:42 am - July 31, 2010

  10. Government, because it is not working for a profit, can do a better job with health care. It doesn’t require that so many people have to die so it can make money, so it’s in a better position to deal with helping people live.

    Which is why government health care offers assisted suicide instead of chemotherapy.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 31, 2010 @ 2:40 pm - July 31, 2010

  11. Plus, it seems to me that Toyota, BP, the coal industry, etc. has shown us how much compassion corporations have for their workers.

    It’s starting to look like your beloved Big Government had more to do with the oil spill than BP. You want them to run your health care too? The same folks that have misplaced about 6,000 people at Arlington?

    Government, because it is not working for a profit, can do a better job with health care.

    The government doesn’t need revenue? Really, Ass? Really?

    It doesn’t require that so many people have to die so it can make money, so it’s in a better position to deal with helping people live.

    Neither do insurance companies. But the government can deny care to people because they decide it’s too expensive. Medicare and Medicaid forces doctors to justify tests and procedures for payment, but the federal government doesn’t have to justify a damn bit of their spending. If what you say is true, why does Medicare and Medicaid deny treatment all the time? Why don’t they just pay 100% of everything?

    Further, why is it that government housing is usually pretty shitty? Why don’t they spend more money on keeping that up and providing better homes?

    If the government doesn’t need to make a “profit”, why not free cars from Government Motors? Why not free food, clothes, computers, internet, Kindles? Why not?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 31, 2010 @ 2:49 pm - July 31, 2010

  12. it seems to me that Toyota, BP, the coal industry, etc. has shown us how much compassion corporations have for their workers.

    And it’s slowly coming to pass that the Toyota kerfuffle was more hype than substance. Perhaps to benefit Government Motors and they’re union donors? Why won’t the NHTSA, under the most transparent government, release their findings?

    Did Ray LaHood really misspeak when he told people not to buy Toyota?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 31, 2010 @ 3:15 pm - July 31, 2010

  13. Their union donors, rather.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 31, 2010 @ 3:15 pm - July 31, 2010

  14. And it’s slowly coming to pass that the Toyota kerfuffle was more hype than substance.

    Actually, it’s now gone over into a full-blown Obama Party government cover-up.

    Since March, the agency has examined 40 Toyota vehicles where unintended acceleration was cited as the cause of an accident, Mr. Person said. NHTSA determined 23 of the vehicles had accelerated suddenly, Mr. Person said.

    In all 23, he added, the vehicles’ electronic data recorders or black boxes showed the car’s throttle was wide open and the brake was not depressed at the moment of impact, suggesting the drivers mistakenly stepped on the gas pedal instead of the brake, Mr. Person said.

    “The agency has for too long ignored what I believe is the root cause of these unintended acceleration cases,” he said. “It’s driver error. It’s pedal misapplication and that’s what this data shows.”

    Now, Ashpenaz, remember that “Catholic social doctrine” you cited? It says that OWNERS and EMPLOYERS have rights.

    And you and your Obama Party government not only slandered Toyota, you are now covering up the fact that you lied and slandered Toyota.

    Reconcile that with your “Catholic social doctrine”, Ashpenaz. How do you explain the fact that you and your Obama Party told lies about Toyota in order to slander them?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 31, 2010 @ 3:24 pm - July 31, 2010

  15. Government is a cold, moribund, mediocrity as people became simple math equations for Death Panels & rationing; ObamaCare–like it’s Federal Government sister–takes & destroys. It does not create & flourish. ObamaCare–like the Dodd-Frank Bank Takeover–is too big that it collapses under its own weight of endless, inefficient bureaucracies. ObamaCare is Obama’s political tombstone & perhaps the Democrat Party as well….

    Comment by Sebastian Shaw — July 31, 2010 @ 5:01 pm - July 31, 2010

  16. Guess Ass didn’t see the video of Anthony’s Weiner using 9/11 first responders as political fodder. Yeah, I want those assholes running our health care.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 31, 2010 @ 9:28 pm - July 31, 2010

  17. Might I add one other point Ash is missing?

    A private insurer can’t deny service. They can not pay for the service, they can deny coverage, but they can’t keep you from having the service.

    As we see in England and Canada, government controlled healthcare can.

    When we were concerned about my second wife having cancer (she didn’t, thank the Divine) the house,m the cars, nothing would have been too much to lose to buy her life. I’d have given both kidneys if it would have bought Donna one more day. Debt can be worked off. The government can make it illegal to get that life saving treatment. Tell me Ash, what insurance company can do that?

    Comment by The_Livewire — July 31, 2010 @ 10:39 pm - July 31, 2010

  18. to add some from my own experience.
    I got a Gastro Enteritis without any insurance. The fact I had $150 in my bank to spend at the ER kept me from waiting a whopping ten more minutes to see the doc to do more paperwork. I eventually got it all paid off, and was lucky it was not the appendicitis it could also have been.

    Now, I have a decent High Deductible/HSA form of coverage from my job. It is so cheap, they do not charge me like they do for the PPO they also offer, and as I tend not to use my coverage at all, I took it and the amount they used to charge I have put into the HSA Account. It is now high enough to cover my high deduction ($3000/year). Thanks to the Fine “Reform” and the false promise of “If you like your coverage, you can keep it” I will likely be losing it. The Dems hate the HSA as it is taken pre-tax. They are working to add to the “reform” bill even now, adding a Public Option, and as we know, they refuse to let us see what exactly is in these things before they pass them. . . . What are they planning to put in that?

    Imagine the outcry if in 2001-2006 the Republican controled Gov’t had tried this kind of tactic.

    Comment by JP — August 1, 2010 @ 3:01 pm - August 1, 2010

  19. Hmmm. Ass doesn’t seem to want to engage, but hit & run. I’d like to him to explain how if “Central Planning” is so great, where the hell is the Soviet Union and Cuba on the world stage.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — August 1, 2010 @ 3:02 pm - August 1, 2010

  20. JP,

    I know what you mean about the HSA, both from having one, and being in the industry. Leave it to the left to take a private idea that works and slag it.

    Standard Disclaimer: I work health insurance. I don’t speak for them, nor do they want me to.

    Comment by The_Livewire — August 2, 2010 @ 7:04 am - August 2, 2010

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

**Note: Your first comment is held for moderation. Avoid profanity, avoid personal attacks on fellow commenters, and avoid complaining about personal attacks (even on you). Feel free to disagree with anyone, but focus on their ideas; give us the information that you think they overlooked.**


Live preview of comment

Close this window.

0.137 Powered by Wordpress