Why do people vote against their own interests? (American Healthcare reform)

[LemonAndLime]

LemonandLime, can I ask you a question? (This is serious, I don’t mean to sound snarky and I hope it doesn’t come off that way.)

You mentioned that you’re British. Do you know the powers of the US Congress and what the US Constitution allows them to make laws about? I think that maybe if you understood some of the Obamacare opponents’ constitutional arguments against the current healthcare reform legislation, you might have a better sense of the full scope of the debate in the USA. It’s just not as simple as the opponents voting against their own interest.

What are their constitutional arguments against the current healthcare legislation? I have a basic understanding of the US law-making process etc.

I’m not really asking about Obamacare in particular, more like the apparently negative thoughts of something like the NHS in America. So not so much about the financial and legal side of it but trying to find out why people wouldn’t want it on principle. It’s hard to take people’s opinions of it seriously when they say “it’ll harm the economy” - yeah, but, that’s not going to have a massive impact on your personal life though is it? You know what I mean? I think some of the financial arguments really don’t get to the real reasons behind people not liking the idea.

 

[JackVk]

I think Christ would rather see help given to the sick and needy on a personal level.

When it’s just a coldly calculating bureaucratic decision, where’s the virtue or merit in that?

I say let it be done on a state level, so that the people have a hand in it. Christ didn’t say “I was sick and the government took care of me”. I don’t think Barack Obama is going to score brownie points in heaven because he “took care of people” by passing his healthcare bill.

Nor did He say “give to Caesar; he’ll be generous enought to give out healthcare.”

It’s not that I don’t want health care nor do I want to deny anyone from having it. It’s because I can smell the rat from a mile away. Once the Baracktopus has health care in the grip of his tentacles, then he’ll grab anything else; religion, academics, even the food we eat! Once all the dominoes fall, we’ll be an Orwellian state, complete with history revisionists and thought police.

 

[shockerfan]

I’m pretty sure that at least one government program has been cost effective. You’re being very irriational to say that one has never ever been. Unless you can prove it first.

By the way, is this as opposed to insurance companies which are in it for a profit, and effectively deciding what treatments they pay for based on… what exactly? Whether they can get away with not paying you? You Americans have a go at the NHS for not allowing some treatments if they’re not cost-benefit effective, but your insurance companies are even more evil. At least the NHS doesn’t refuse treatment on the basis of you forgetting to mention a mouth ulcer.

If you are so sure, then name one. It should be easy for you, no? Also, I didn’t say there has never been one, I say there currently isn’t one significant program now. Feel free to prove me wrong, however, no liberal in this forum has been able to come up with one.

So to you profit is evil? Profit makes it possible to deliver better service, provide better products, and ensure the best and brightest are in healthcare.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Such as? The DOD budget is around a trillion. If you took all of that you’d end up short of paying for healthcare. Plus… you wouldn’t have a Defense budget. So any other spending cut ideas?

The healthcare program is estimated to cost $150 billion per year. Thats less than 25% of the DOD budget.

Yes, the current healthcare bill is too expensive for the 50 states to pay for. The 50 states should come up with their own plans depending on their own number of uninsured people, and their own revenue. An average doesn’t tell me which state has more uninsured people, or which state has the most revenue.

Again, if the States can’t afford their current programs and projects, and most can’t, then what makes you think they can afford a comprehensive and all-inclusive healthcare program?

I believe the healthcare bill shouldn’t fine people if they choose not to go on it, and I believe people who choose not to go on it shouldn’t be paying for it through taxes.

We all pay taxes which go to things we won’t ever or no longer use.

 

[shockerfan]

Price controls are necessary. The pharmaceutical industry is the only industry that is immune from both anti-trust laws and apparently anti- price gouging laws. Would you care to explain why the medical industry should be allowed to charge $500 a pop for a bag of saline-solution (which is medical jargon for a glorified sack of saltwater) that costs them only $2-3 to make?

So when have price controls worked? Enact price controls and see the supply of saline drop like a rock. I have no idea what saline costs, but I do know the cost of healthcare products and services is high when people don’t pay their bill at the hospital. I’m also sure you’ll be able to find other examples, which is why I am for solving those kinds of issues, but having the government do it never works.

 

[LemonAndLime]

If you are so sure, then name one. It should be easy for you, no? Also, I didn’t say there has never been one, I say there currently isn’t one significant program now. Feel free to prove me wrong, however, no liberal in this forum has been able to come up with one.

So to you profit is evil? Profit makes it possible to deliver better service, provide better products, and ensure the best and brightest are in healthcare.

Excuse me? You are the one who is trying to prove that no government initiative has been cost effective therefore YOU should be the one to prove what you’re saying first.

No, profit is not evil. But those insurance companies sure aren’t doing it out of the goodness of their hearts and would very much like to keep income high and expendiature low. Don’t be so naiive to think that their money trickles down to you. USA’s healthcare is one of the worst in the developed world for a reason.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

So when have price controls worked?

They work right now in Europe.

Enact price controls and see the supply of saline drop like a rock.

The supply of saline isn’t going anywhere. The Earth’s surface is 68% saltwater. Toss some salt into a pot of water and you’ve got your own homemade saline.

I’m also sure you’ll be able to find other examples, which is why I am for solving those kinds of issues, but having the government do it never works.

What other entity is going to protect consumers from the price gouging of the pharmaceutical industry?

 

[Romanova]

What are their constitutional arguments against the current healthcare legislation? I have a basic understanding of the US law-making process etc.

I’m not really asking about Obamacare in particular, more like the apparently negative thoughts of something like the NHS in America. So not so much about the financial and legal side of it but trying to find out why people wouldn’t want it on principle. It’s hard to take people’s opinions of it seriously when they say “it’ll harm the economy” - yeah, but, that’s not going to have a massive impact on your personal life though is it? You know what I mean? I think some of the financial arguments really don’t get to the real reasons behind people not liking the idea.

The basic argument is… the US Congress has only the powers that are granted to it by the US Constitution. Powers not granted to the federal government remain the purview of the states (a concept which is made explicit by the 10th Amendment). Opponents of the health care reform law claim that health care does not fall within the powers of Congress. Supporters, of course, claim that it does fall within the powers of Congress (usually they cite the “general welfare” clause or the interstate commerce clause).

Opponents seem to raise the most constitutional arguments to the requirement that all individuals buy health insurance or be fined, claiming that it is an invalid exercise of power under the Interstate Commerce Clause. The interstate commerce clause, as its name suggests, allows Congress to regulate interstate commerce. The scope of this clause, as interpreted by the Courts, has varied over time. But opponents argue that never before has this clause been held to allow Congress to mandate that individuals participate in interstate commerce (e.g. by purchasing insurance).

Many US states, on their part, are suing the federal government claiming that the legislation’s mandate that states expand state-funded Medicaid coverage violates states’ rights under the 10th Amendment, as well as raising the Commerce Clause objections to the mandate that the states’ citizens must purchase health insurance.

That’s sort of a cursory glance of the arguments, and I hope it makes sense. The opposition to the current legislation here in the US is quite diverse, and it’s just not as simple as saying people don’t want health care.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Nor did He say “give to Caesar; he’ll be generous enought to give out healthcare.”

It’s not that I don’t want health care nor do I want to deny anyone from having it. It’s because I can smell the rat from a mile away. Once the Baracktopus has health care in the grip of his tentacles, then he’ll grab anything else; religion, academics, even the food we eat! Once all the dominoes fall, we’ll be an Orwellian state, complete with history revisionists and thought police.

And people say that Americans are paranoid and hypocritical! They’re all wrong aren’t they? Not!

Wow. The government tries to do what its elected to do - govern and make decisions on behalf of the people who elect them - and they get accused of being too controlling and socialist. Why not just have an anarchic state instead then? Why bother with a government?

Personally, I think its un-Christian to vote against free healthcare. Why? A poster a while back worded it very well, I’ll re-post it if someone wants me to.

 

[shockerfan]

Excuse me? You are the one who is trying to prove that no government initiative has been cost effective therefore YOU should be the one to prove what you’re saying first.

No, profit is not evil. But those insurance companies sure aren’t doing it out of the goodness of their hearts and would very much like to keep income high and expendiature low. Don’t be so naiive to think that their money trickles down to you. USA’s healthcare is one of the worst in the developed world for a reason.

OK, lets look at the biggest line items in the budget: military (effective at what they do, but not cost effective. $500 hammers? don’t think so). Social Security (insolvent), Medicare & Medicaid (insolvent). Whew, I’m tired. I’ll end it there.

Do you work for free? Out of the goodness of your heart? Name one business that doesn’t want to keep income high and expenditure low? (OK, I can name an entity likes to keep income high and expenditures high: US Government).

 

[Sabda]

And people say that Americans are paranoid and hypocritical! They’re all wrong aren’t they? Not!

Wow. The government tries to do what its elected to do - govern and make decisions on behalf of the people who elect them - and they get accused of being too controlling and socialist. Why not just have an anarchic state instead then? Why bother with a government?

Personally, I think its un-Christian to vote against free healthcare. Why? A poster a while back worded it very well, I’ll re-post it if someone wants me to.

No, the government did not do the will of the people when they passed this. The majority of Americans have opposed this from the very beginning. When a group is elected to Congress it is their job to do the will of their constituents. This bit of legislation was not passed with the blessings of the people.

 

[shockerfan]

They work right now in Europe.

The supply of saline isn’t going anywhere. The Earth’s surface is 68% saltwater. Toss some salt into a pot of water and you’ve got your own homemade saline.

What other entity is going to protect consumers from the price gouging of the pharmaceutical industry?

1. and just where are the majority of the world’s healthcare innovations coming from? (I don’t think its Europe). Everything has a tradeoff.
2. Perhaps you have a new business you can start. Since the world has this unending supply of saline, and the competition charges high prices, why not go into the saline business. (hint: if the situation were exactly as you said, somebody would have done it already)
3. So you want the taxpayer gouged instead of the person receiving the service? Do you actually believe gouging stops when the government is the buyer? Really?

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

This bit of legislation was not passed with the blessings of the people.

Then it’s a good thing we live in a Republic instead of a Mobocracy.

 

[estesbob]

Then it’s a good thing we live in a Republic instead of a Mobocracy.

Agreed-and the beginning of the end of Obamascare is happening as we speak.

 

[markbrumbaugh]

And people say that Americans are paranoid and hypocritical! They’re all wrong aren’t they? Not!

Wow. The government tries to do what its elected to do - govern and make decisions on behalf of the people who elect them - and they get accused of being too controlling and socialist. Why not just have an anarchic state instead then? Why bother with a government?

Personally, I think its un-Christian to vote against free healthcare. Why? A poster a while back worded it very well, I’ll re-post it if someone wants me to.

What is un-Christian is to steal money away from others, against their will who have earned that income by the sweat of their brow, and then give it to somebody who didn’t earn it, in the name of charity. It is neither charity, nor justice. It may be “social justice” but it violates at least 4 commandments.
If people paid for their own health care, instead of getting it “free” by way of insurance, then the cost WOULD go down. Nobody needs prepaid medical care. They may, and most will, need catastrophic health insurance such as one has for life, their home, car etc.

I am constantly amazed at good hearted people who have no concept of freedom nor logical common sense. Name something in short supply that is free and I’ll show you something that is terribly expensive…just paid for by someone else. Right now it is our children and grandchildren and great grandchildren.

Tell you what, you bleeding heart charitable person. What do you do for a living? I’m sure I would like some and don’t have whatever it is you produce. I’ll vote someone who will take it from you and give it to me, since I need or want more of what you have and I don’t.

 

[Sabda]

Agreed-and the beginning of the end of Obamascare is happening as we speak.

Yep, many of our Congressmen will be handed their pink slips today for their refusal to do the will of the people.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

1. and just where are the majority of the world’s healthcare innovations coming from? (I don’t think its Europe). Everything has a tradeoff.

I don’t believe anyone has ever quantified medical breakthroughs so it’s a matter of opinion but I’d say that Asia and Europe are leading in medical innovation.

1. Perhaps you have a new business you can start. Since the world has this unending supply of saline, and the competition charges high prices, why not go into the saline business. (hint: if the situation were exactly as you said, somebody would have done it already)

The situation is exactly as I said and I have the bill to prove it. It’s also the same with a wide variety of medicines; they’re called generics. The active ingredients are the same as their name-brand counterparts. The only differences are the fillers and the cost.

1. So you want the taxpayer gouged instead of the person receiving the service? Do you actually believe gouging stops when the government is the buyer? Really?

Why would the taxpayer be gouged if the pharmaceutical industry is forced to charge less?

 

[Ridgerunner]

The supply of saline isn’t going anywhere. The Earth’s surface is 68% saltwater. Toss some salt into a pot of water and you’ve got your own homemade saline.

Try doing that and selling it and see how long you remain out of jail.

 

[Ridgerunner]

You’re forgetting the bureaucracy of insurance and pharmaceutical companies, which bring in far greater inefficiencies since their entire purpose is to maximise profits/increase costs.

.

Possibly you are not aware that the government does not actually administer its own health programs except for VA? Medicare, Medicaid, Federal employees benefits. All are farmed out to insurance companies by the government.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

The public option struck fear in the hearts of the insurance companies and their greedy ways. Imagine it, they would’ve had to COMPETE! Maybe even lower costs, frivolity, streamline, lower premiums, and stop letting their CEO’s go party it up in Vegas! The Far Right went out of their way to make sure health care for the masses died. Greed, pure and simple, clothed in a “constitutional” patriotic cellophane.

The government already provides healthcare coverage via Medicare and Medicaide. We’ve heard earfulls of rancor and bile from the Republicans about the government providing healthcare while they screech about saving Medicare and Medicaide and lambast Democrats for proposing a decrease in it’s funding out of the other side of their mouths.

Raising taxes isn’t necessary. The healthcare bill will cost $150 billion per year. The military can’t account for 25% of it’s expenditures which means that it doesn’t need it. Decrease the DOD budget by 25% and shift it to healthcare funding and voila, you’ve got your $150 billion plus another $20 billion for a rainy day.

Which is something we already do.