Why Am I for nationa healthcare?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aspawloski4th
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hmm… I must have explained to you have a dozen times that national healthcare doesn’t increase the total amount of care provided.

The system is the fairest way of distributing the limited amount of healthcare we can provide- however, there are winners and losers in every system.
Wow…so the situation I am in is ‘fair’?
 
I said ‘most’ fair. A regulator deciding who and doesn’t get cared for is much less fair.
The free market is anything but fair, it’s survival of the fittest. I can’t see how that could possibly ever work when it comes to people’s LIVES
 
Hmm… I must have explained to you have a dozen times that national healthcare doesn’t increase the total amount of care provided.

The system is the fairest way of distributing the limited amount of healthcare we can provide- however, there are winners and losers in every system.
Blow it off if you like. Im more concerned about giving everyone a fair chance at healthcare who needs it. Increasing the amount of healthcare is another debate, and my solution won’t be accepted around here in this anti education climate place.
 
The free market is anything but fair, it’s survival of the fittest. I can’t see how that could possibly ever work when it comes to people’s LIVES
And all here should remember that “survival of the fittest” is both antiCatholic, and antiChristian. You can’t be both Christian and pro survival of the fittest.
 
Blow it off if you like. Im more concerned about giving everyone a fair chance at healthcare who needs it. Increasing the amount of healthcare is another debate, and my solution won’t be accepted around here in this anti education climate place.
How do you give everyone health care when there isn’t enough? Why do you want some government officials to decide who lives and who dies?
 
The free market is anything but fair, it’s survival of the fittest. I can’t see how that could possibly ever work when it comes to people’s LIVES
And some guy arbitrarily deciding who lives and dies is fair?
 
Says who? In the market, you’re ability to pay dictates whether or not you get care. That’s a hell of a lot more fair then “I like you better, so you get to live”
So whenever anyone gets too sick to pay, they should just die? This doesn’t make any sense.
 
Says who? In the market, you’re ability to pay dictates whether or not you get care. That’s a hell of a lot more fair then “I like you better, so you get to live”
One’s right to anything health related should not be related to how much money they have. Your statement shows you are for the rich and the heck with the poor. Remember Jesus said it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man get to heaven.
 
One’s right to anything health related should not be related to how much money they have. Your statement shows you are for the rich and the heck with the poor. Remember Jesus said it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man get to heaven.
And your statements show you’d like us all to be subjected to the whims of a disinterested regulator. Those same statisticians who decide who does and does not get insurance coverage will be deciding who is and is not going to get care- the difference is, when they deny you care as insurers you can look for other options.
 
And your statements show you’d like us all to be subjected to the whims of a disinterested regulator. Those same statisticians who decide who does and does not get insurance coverage will be deciding who is and is not going to get care- the difference is, when they deny you care as insurers you can look for other options.
Tjm, in any other Western Country pathia would get care.

In France, the sicker you are, the less you have to pay.
 
Tjm, in any other Western Country pathia would get care.

In France, the sicker you are, the less you have to pay.
Most western countries have either a higher patient to physician ratio or a populace that leads a more healthy lifestyle, often both.
 
Most western countries have either a higher patient to physician ratio or a populace that leads a more healthy lifestyle, often both.
We can do better. If France can do this, if Germany and Switzerland can do this, so can we. And we can do it better than those countries, because we have them as test examples to learn from.

Think about it. By having the sickest pay the least, the whole mechanism of wealth = access to treatment is removed.

Have you watched this documentary? Please take the time to watch it if you haven’t.

pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/
 
Most western countries have either a higher patient to physician ratio or a populace that leads a more healthy lifestyle, often both.
Pathia’s ailment/s have no connection to lifestyle whatsoever. They are 110% purely genetic.
 
And all here should remember that “survival of the fittest” is both antiCatholic, and antiChristian. You can’t be both Christian and pro survival of the fittest.
You know what else is anti-Catholic? A few things:

a. taking money from people against their will and giving it to others.

b. telling people who oppose socialism (as does the Church) that they should be ashamed of themselves.

Your lack of charity is a great deal more apparent than any supposed lack of compassion on anyone else’s part.

You and Pathia feel that socialized medicine will fix your problems. It just won’t, but you can’t or won’t see that. For this reason, I have no intention of reading a single additional post. If you have something to say that you feel I must see, feel free to PM me (I can’t promise I’ll answer), but I am done with this thread (for real this time).

I suggest, in fact, that it be closed, since it’s just going in circles now.

Peace,
Dante
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top