Why do you think forced healthcare is immoral?

[joe_clark]

You cannot compare health insurance to car insurance or property insurance. They are quite different.

First, car insurance and property insurance are things you only need to carry if you CHOOSE to operate or own those pieces of property.

Second, these insurances are actually a protection for OTHER people FROM you. They are not mandating that you must choose a form of protection for yourself.

This is evident in that the only required forms of car insurance are liability and property damage. This is to protect the people YOU may injure when you cause an accident, making sure that there are resources available to help cover the damages you cause to person or property.

It is similar with forms of property insurance: liability to cover injury to others when you are negligent, and replacement coverage for damages that you must purchase to protect the investment of the lender who is lending you money. Nowhere I know of are you required to purchase property replacement coverage for yourself–it is only to cover the mortgage lender.

Health insurance is a personal coverage only. Forcing someone to choose how they want to cover themselves is a violation of freedom. Requiring someone to carry protection for others against what you might do to them or their property interests (the money they lent) is a perfectly acceptable form of a contract when you choose to acquire or operate those things that may cause such injury to others.

Please check your policy. Beside liability insurance, Property insurance and car insurance also cover : Your and others funeral expenses, limited medical coverage for you and others. If someone injures you in a car accident, your insurance company will foot the bill if the other driver has no insurance. See uninsured and underinsured clauses.

 

[janw]

America is an angry, polarized country. Why? Certain unscrupulous corporations want to divert attention away from the fact they own local, state, and the federal governments. The best defense in protecting your self-interest is an excellent offense.
Americans complain about the large national debt, but why does the tax law allows so many loop holes for multi-national corporations to avoid taxes. Why is “trickle- down economics” an article of faith? Why do corporate farms force feed poultry, cattle, swine, etc wading ankle deep in their manure, and Americans wonder why health care costs increase? The corporate farms have huge taxpayer subsidies for grain, milk, and poultry. These subsidizes are so good that American corporate farmers dump cheap grain in Mexico and Central America, and guess what? We have illegal workers coming to the US for work. Now the big corporate farmers, slaughter house knowingly hire illegal workers and keep them in their place by threats with the INS. Why are not those who hire illegal workers fined and sent to prison—is it because they are part of the power structure? It appears to be these poor workers who are criminals.
Who really paid for all the advertisements about the threats of big government, death panels and health care being forced down the throats of Americans? Now the corporations who caused the WORLD WIDE economic mess are complaining about stifling government regulations, that the executives deserved obscene compensations because they are like super movie stars or athletes. The Supreme Court has allowed corporations to spend unrestricted amounts of money on campaigns as if these poor down trodden corporations did not own enough of our government.
That is why I wrote thank God for Fox News!!

Yes, Yes, and Yes. We have a government of the rich and corporations not of the people. The ugly lies about healthcare are paid for by the insurance companies. This nation needs coverage not just to help the poor but it will help our country to give people preventative care and have then pay what they can rather than have no coverage and show up at the er seriously ill.

 

[Arandur]

Please check your policy. Beside liability insurance, Property insurance and car insurance also cover : Your and others funeral expenses, limited medical coverage for you and others. If someone injures you in a car accident, your insurance company will foot the bill if the other driver has no insurance. See uninsured and underinsured clauses.

My policy has an extra tack on for uninsured and underinsured damages. I do not have to purchase it. Neither Colorado nor Missouri, the two states I have lived in, have required anyone to purchase these coverages. The only coverages required by law are those that protect other people FROM you. That’s what goes along with the privilege and choice of driving.

That’s the point. Privilege, choice, and protection from your actions.

Not required buy-in (no choice) and requiring you to purchase something for yourself. This has no precedent that I’m aware of. Keep trying. It’s not similar in any way to the legal requirements to purchase liability and property coverage in auto and home policies.

Yes, Yes, and Yes. We have a government of the rich and corporations not of the people. The ugly lies about healthcare are paid for by the insurance companies. This nation needs coverage not just to help the poor but it will help our country to give people preventative care and have then pay what they can rather than have no coverage and show up at the er seriously ill.

What tripe. With all the regulations against companies and one of the highest corporate taxes on earth, you think this country is run by them? Please. Why would companies be fleeing the country if they could run it?

Simple logic. Let’s try some more.

How will this bill help the poor when it will just drive up costs and/or require rationing? (see earlier explanation on the laws of supply and demand)
How will this possibly increase preventative care when that requires even that much more care, increasing demand while diminishing supply?

Remember when Obama and the other proponents were talking about REDUCING the amount of testing to save money and cut down costs? Testing is preventative care and Obama & Co. want to reduce it! (It is also sometimes defensive medicine, a product of out-of-control litigation that Obama does not want to curtail with tort reform.) Reference the recommendations on a reduction of breast exams, as well. This was just a first taste of it. Cut down on price by denying preventative care? By rationing? We’ll just have to pay the price later when things that could have been prevented reach emergency levels because we denied testing or because we had to wait-list, like every other country that has UHC has had to do.

By the way, what “ugly lies” have been told about the health care bill? Care to describe them and how they’re untrue? There have been a few, and a few distortions, but mostly when I hear someone just demonize the critics of Obamacare, they are targeting valid criticisms and just trying to dismiss them because they have no other good response.

 

[royal_archer]

How will this bill help the poor when it will just drive up costs and/or require rationing? (see earlier explanation on the laws of supply and demand)

Have you considered that this bill does not help the poor because that was really not the intent. There is just a gullible mass of people who don’t know any better and are being manipulated by the government inorder to get their votes. The outcome aligns with the proposed motive when you consider that the sole motive was a power grab.

 

[markbrumbaugh]

Yes, Yes, and Yes. We have a government of the rich and corporations not of the people. The ugly lies about healthcare are paid for by the insurance companies. This nation needs coverage not just to help the poor but it will help our country to give people preventative care and have then pay what they can rather than have no coverage and show up at the er seriously ill.

At this time, we have a government of a socialist, racist. If you want health care or a TV set, you need to earn it, but that is in a former country, not the one we live in today.

 

[aspawloski4th]

At this time, we have a government of a socialist, racist. If you want health care or a TV set, you need to earn it, but that is in a former country, not the one we live in today.

Equating healthcare to a tv set! Shame shame. Get the planck out of your eye before you get the speck out of somebody eles’s.

 

[Black_Rose]

At this time, we have a government of a socialist, racist. If you want health care or a TV set, you need to earn it, but that is in a former country, not the one we live in today.

Are you implying that those who do not have health care do not deserve it and are worth less of a person? Would say you say (if you were a politician) in public? Do you think the public would agree with your remark or favor a reduction of their liberty (defined in an objectivist) was in exchange of guaranteed health care.

 

[lcpm12]

Thank God we will only have four years of the socialis…oops! I mean the Democrats like Obama…What was I thinking?!? Of course forced healthcare is good. And so is the USSR, commrade. Phrshhhhh! If you believe that, I have a hot piece of property for you.

Like all things we should have free will, free choice. I believe the feds and local government have become too invasive. Today we cannot pray in our public schools if we so choose.(The Atheist is saluting his God.) We cannot own certain firearms. (Do you think the bad guys follow the same rules?) We have to pay taxes on time, or there is a penalty, but if the state or feds don’t pay up on time there is no penalty, how fair is that?

I think it is high time that our governement became “For the people and of the people…” instead of an Oligarchy made up of Whigs, Republicans or Democrats, Independents, the Green Party, etc, etc, etc.

 

[Ed_CA]

My viewpoints have been reinforced by a family member who is a practicing physician and surgeon who wanted this mandatory health care many years ago, even while Reagan was president. Tort reform costs less than 1% of the annual health care costs; these lawsuits could be eliminated if hospitals and surgeons strictly followed the procedural checklist to avoid mistakes. My surgeon relative has no tolerance for sloppy procedures; he has done his share in fixing botched jobs.
This surgeon 's preference is universal manadory health care, and thinks the current legislation is too watered down. He does charity work and complains very loudly that patients should have seen him earlier but did not because they must decide between food and rent versus medical visits. He likes the European socialized medicine and has been to Europe quite often, basically to learn about their procedures. He says there are still plenty of people trying to get into medical schools in Europe and their pay is quite reasonable. Most Eurpoen countries also have physicians in private practice. His major complaint about the health care law just passed is that it is too watered down.
What about all the complaints about the British and Canadian healthcare rationing that will come to America? This is not universally true. Firstly, in Europe. there are various tiers in which one can enroll. Secondly, the more services for which one pays, the fancier the service. Thirdly, there is also the option to see a physician in private practice; most people do not. Some specialized operations are better performed in American and some are better outside the United States.
During all the healthcare hearings, some pundits said the United States had the best health care system in the world. Ergo, the USA should have the best longevity, the lowest rates of heart problems, cancer, etc. Unfortunately, this is no longer true. Some specialized operations are better performed in American and some are better outside the United States.
Depending on a person’s circumstances, such as living far from public transportation, driving an automobile is a necessity to go to work. Thus, depending upon what one does for a living and where one lives, an automobile is a necessity; there is no choice but to purchase liability and collision insurance.
The issue is what is the general common good and the individual’s priviledges. Even though I hate Big Brother telling me I must stop at a red signal light, my right is overruled by the perception of the common good. The constitution gives the right of free speech, but I cannot , for the fun of it, to yell FIRE in a crowded movie theater because the common good overrules my individual rights

 

[royal_archer]

Are you implying that those who do not have health care do not deserve it and are worth less of a person? Would say you say (if you were a politician) in public? Do you think the public would agree with your remark or favor a reduction of their liberty (defined in an objectivist) was in exchange of guaranteed health care.

It is the ones who advocate socialism who think these people have no worth. The rest of us feel they have worth and are just as capable as the rest of us.

 

[royal_archer]

My viewpoints have been reinforced by a family member who is a practicing physician and surgeon who wanted this mandatory health care many years ago, even while Reagan was president. Tort reform costs less than 1% of the annual health care costs;

Does that include the cost of excessive preventative testing and other unnecesary activity to reduce the likelihood of lawsuits?

 

[janw]

My viewpoints have been reinforced by a family member who is a practicing physician and surgeon who wanted this mandatory health care many years ago, even while Reagan was president. Tort reform costs less than 1% of the annual health care costs; these lawsuits could be eliminated if hospitals and surgeons strictly followed the procedural checklist to avoid mistakes. My surgeon relative has no tolerance for sloppy procedures; he has done his share in fixing botched jobs.
This surgeon 's preference is universal manadory health care, and thinks the current legislation is too watered down. He does charity work and complains very loudly that patients should have seen him earlier but did not because they must decide between food and rent versus medical visits. He likes the European socialized medicine and has been to Europe quite often, basically to learn about their procedures. He says there are still plenty of people trying to get into medical schools in Europe and their pay is quite reasonable. Most Eurpoen countries also have physicians in private practice. His major complaint about the health care law just passed is that it is too watered down.
What about all the complaints about the British and Canadian healthcare rationing that will come to America? This is not universally true. Firstly, in Europe. there are various tiers in which one can enroll. Secondly, the more services for which one pays, the fancier the service. Thirdly, there is also the option to see a physician in private practice; most people do not. Some specialized operations are better performed in American and some are better outside the United States.
During all the healthcare hearings, some pundits said the United States had the best health care system in the world. Ergo, the USA should have the best longevity, the lowest rates of heart problems, cancer, etc. Unfortunately, this is no longer true. Some specialized operations are better performed in American and some are better outside the United States.
Depending on a person’s circumstances, such as living far from public transportation, driving an automobile is a necessity to go to work. Thus, depending upon what one does for a living and where one lives, an automobile is a necessity; there is no choice but to purchase liability and collision insurance.
The issue is what is the general common good and the individual’s priviledges. Even though I hate Big Brother telling me I must stop at a red signal light, my right is overruled by the perception of the common good. The constitution gives the right of free speech, but I cannot , for the fun of it, to yell FIRE in a crowded movie theater because the common good overrules my individual rights

This is also the thoughts of my doctor. I think so many have seen what damage and loss of life lack of insurance causes.

 

[aspawloski4th]

Does that include the cost of excessive preventative testing and other unnecesary activity to reduce the likelihood of lawsuits?

What are your credentials to judge whether a medical test is neccesary or not?

 

[Ed_CA]

The world was so much simpler when the aristocracy ruled because they had their exclusive privileges and the peasants knew their place.
Rationing of healthcare has existed with the status quo—if you have the money, then you have the best service money can buy. So if the formerly unprivileged now have privileges, it makes it more inconvenient to obtain the care one wishes at a time and place most convenient to Number 1. Now, such services are now rationed to the club that formerly had exclusive privileges.

 

[joe_clark]

At this time, we have a government of a socialist, racist. If you want health care or a TV set, you need to earn it, but that is in a former country, not the one we live in today.

And can you tell us, what kind of government America had from 2000 to 2008? Can you tell us what they offered the people when in the majority voted in 2004 to DEREGULATE the mortgage industry, and the theft followed to where we are today? Please don’t give me the 911 Junior protected the country, because any person sitting in the presidents chair would have and was compelled to do the same. Other than that, the decade was a disaster and you need to see the people who were in charge when it all hit the fan from 2000 to 2008. This is the time period when the republican party had a lock down and was in the majority, the very people who voted the protections away from the mortgage industry for one purpose and it turned out not to be good. Very selective memories do not serve a person well.

 

[royal_archer]

This is also the thoughts of my doctor. I think so many have seen what damage and loss of life lack of insurance causes.

As an engineer I think the government should force everyone to pay for a full home architectural evaluation and electrical systems diagnostics every year. I am sure Auto mechanics would want the government to mandate their services as well.

I don’t think this can be considered an objective evaluation when the person stating the need will personally benefit from what they are endorsing.

 

[royal_archer]

What are your credentials to judge whether a medical test is neccesary or not?

Being the person paying the bill! If you don’t want me to have a say don’t ask me to pay.

 

[aspawloski4th]

Being the person paying the bill! If you don’t want me to have a say don’t ask me to pay.

You personally are not paying the bill,and you have proven to me you don’t have much medical knowledge. With your love of money and lack of concern about health and wellbeing I wouldn’t trust you with anything concerning health. If I had magical powers I would send an 8 ft ogre to you to pick up you by your feet, shake all the money out of you, then tickle the bottem of your feet relentlessly so you could nothing but to laugh hard at your loosing your beloved money. You said in an earlier post that the mentally ill should not be able to vote. Better be carefull where you say that. You show the possiblity of having the disorder of paranoia. You are utterly paranoid over money, and others taking it from you. Before you judge my ability to know symptoms of that, my uncle and Godfather suffers from that illness as well as 2 others, I have personal experience in dealing with it.

 

[aspawloski4th]

As an engineer I think the government should force everyone to pay for a full home architectural evaluation and electrical systems diagnostics every year. I am sure Auto mechanics would want the government to mandate their services as well.

I don’t think this can be considered an objective evaluation when the person stating the need will personally benefit from what they are endorsing.

Hm for something that doesn’t change year by year in a home. Shows what you know about that type of engineering.

 

[Chochy]

I am Canadian and I can’t imagine life without our socialized health care system. I am quite certain our system isn’t perfect, but from experience I know it is quite good for the most part and people’s health care needs are being met. There are times when we do have to wait our turn for procedures or treatments to take place, but it is understandable to get bumped if someone is in an emergency situation and in greater need of care. When something goes wrong, government looks into the matter and changes are made to improve our system moving forward. We don’t have to deal with insurance companies when we get sick. We don’t have to go into debt or fear losing our homes. We only worry about getting well.

There are Canadians who travel to the United States to seek care rather than waiting their turn. That’s a decision many are able to make. I am in a financial position to do the same, but have never found the need.

I know several Canadians who have required treatment while they are travelling within the United States. They have purchased extensive health coverage prior to travel. More often than not they experience great difficulty in settling their accounts. They have to pay out of pocket and be reimbursed. Sometimes it’s a nightmare even though they have planned ahead and considered themselves well insured. I think insurance companies are causing more of your country’s problems than the government is.

I believe humanity and society have certain obligations towards one another. I have enough left over even though I pay taxes to provide education, health care and other services for others. What’s wrong with tending to the needs of the sick and disadvantaged without seeking wealth?