Obama care

[Weegee]

I don't go to doctors

[Mr. Wiggles]

In all honesty, that's something that I truly fear with this reform. I would think Congress would do something first about the rising costs of health care before making health insurance mandatory.

I haven't read through this whole thread yet, but what are your (directed at everyone) feelings towards a more socialist health plan if it were to ever be incorporated into the US system? I know the chances of this are probably a complete sliver due to the connotations it carries, but it is an interesting scenario that always brings good points from both sides I've noticed.

[Glorb]

I'm the guy who doesn't miss anything because of a minor cold or something and had perfect attendance in school

[Forest Guy]

So the Senate voted down a motion that would add a statement into any upcoming healthcare bills that would regulate the distribution by requiring citizens to provide proof of their identity before they can collect healthcare benefits. Essentially it's just a measure to prevent illegal immigrants from getting free healthcare.

...why the hell would anyone want to vote that down?

[PaperLuigi]

Having seen firsthand how insurance companies work (I worked for one) -- I think it is a lot more scary to have a group of people doing everything they can to make a profit making decisions about your health than the government.

As for the "we can't spend more money" argument, I forgot, I think there was some kind of conflict we initiated that cost trillions of dollars in deficit spending that happened not too long ago but my mind is fuzzy.

I completely agree. The insurance companies do far worse. In Texas (my beloved home state) alone, 1 in 4 are without health insurance. 1.4 million children are without health insurance, and those fortunate enough to have good insurance spend an inordinate amount to pay for it. In all, Texas has the highest percentage of insured residents at 27%. So are the insurance/private companies really doing their job? I think not.

Forgive me for "bumping" this topic but I've been doing a bit of research on Texas and its health care woes. For example, Rick Perry created a health care privatization scheme that gave $899 million to a private Bermuda-based company, a plan that made it as difficult as possible for parents to get health care for their kids. Hm...I wonder why the Texas Pharmacy Business Council is endorsing Gov. Rick Perry for re-election? He doesn't care about the working poor, he just wants endorsement from businesses and insurance companies. And to think he's running for an unprecedented third consecutive four-year term in 2010....

"The Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) that provided health coverage to over 500,000 Texas children in working families was doing fine until the Republicans gained control of the Legislature in 2003. Since then, the number of children receiving healthcare through CHIP has dropped by more than 213,000, or over 40%." I'm sorry, but the status-quo isn't doing Texas any favors. Immediate reform is needed IMO. "Socialized" medicine, as my father puts it, is better than no medicine at all.

EDIT: Also, we could pay for health-care reform if we cut military spending by 50% or more. Right now, only 2% of the federal budget is spent on science. Simply disgusting.

[Turtlekid1]

I must say that with the recent scramble to ram this bill up our rear ends before the year is out, nay, even before Christmas, CE7's post seems even more accurate in hindsight, and Obama's agenda seems even more frightening.

What is this about making new additions to the legislation even now?  Is anyone reading this bill?  Does anyone know what the consequences will be, whether they be good or bad?  Does anyone even care?

[PaperLuigi]

Obama's agenda seems even more frightening.

The 45 million without health insurance might disagree with you.

[Turtlekid1]

The 45 million without health insurance might disagree with you.

Don't misunderstand my point by taking that out of context.  I'm not saying we don't need to fix health care.  Nor am I apathetic to those 45 million (as a matter of curiosity, where did you get that statistic?).  What frightens me is the aforementioned scramble to rush the bill through before the 25th.  It's obvious that neither side of the issue has read the legislation in its entirety.  That coupled with the hurry-scurry and frantic insistence on passing the bill as quickly as possible gives me the impression that there's something in there that isn't meant to be uncovered until it's too late (as in, when someone finds out they're... heh, un-covered).  Putting aside whether health care is important or not (and it is), I'm only questioning whether this particular bill is the way to help matters.   

Rather like with environmental issues, if someone is opposed to the regulation or government control of a certain area, then suddenly they're branded as unpatriotic, or not caring about the issue at all.  If I don't want to be taxed for the CO2 that my family and I produce, then I hate the environment.  If I don't want to be forced to pay for someone else's medical needs, or even if I just want to examine the bill more closely to see exactly what's being imposed on the People (the politicians seem to have forgotten that they work for us, not the other way around), then I'm opposed to all health care reform and don't care about those less fortunate.

[PaperLuigi]

(as a matter of curiosity, where did you get that statistic?).

http://www.webmd.com/healthy-aging/news/20090910/more-americans-have-no-health-insurance

It's actually more like 46 million.

[PaperLuigi]

Where was your paranoia when Bush was proposing the invasion of Iraq?

[Weegee]

We in Canada already experienced this exact issue forty years ago, when Pierre Elliot Trudeau, backed by a fervorous majority of change-hungry Baby Boomers, was elected Prime Minister. While his decisions to legalize same-sex marriage and abortion remain divisive and controversial (read: suck), practically every breathing Canadian appreciates and benefits from the Universal Health Care he instated. Also,

[Turtlekid1]

Where was your paranoia when Bush was proposing the invasion of Iraq?

There are so many ways to respond to that.

1. I wasn't nearly so politically-minded then, so I didn't really have an opinion.
2. If I had had an opinion, I wouldn't have been on the FF at that point to voice it anyway, so of course you wouldn't have seen me speak (or type) out against it.
3. I'm rather tired of liberals playing the "you didn't complain when Bush did the same thing" card, because:
  a. I, for one, wasn't any happier with Bush's spending than Obama's.  It's just that Obama's is that much more excessive.
  b. It doesn't make Obama's spending right.
4. "Paranoia" is a little harsh.  It's not paranoia, it's expression of misgivings based on simple mathematics: if the people are taxed more, they have less money; if they have less money, the economy suffers; if the economy suffers, Obama's answer is to tax the people even more; lather, rinse, repeat, ruin.  If I said that Obama were the devil or some such nonsense, then you could go ahead and call me paranoid.  My calling him a socialist is verified by the facts.


Also, nice comic, Weegee.

[Chupperson Weird]

I just love how people throw around the word "socialist" without really knowing what that entails.

[PaperLuigi]

Same.

[Trainman]

Where was your paranoia when Bush was proposing the invasion of Iraq?

Apparently his approval rating soared to 90% around that time. Maybe that signaled that everyone was ****ed and wanted revenge. As everyone's rage calmed down, they took a step back and started *****ing about the war.

Siiigh, endless arguments and problems in the U.S. and this world. Isn't there a near-Earth asteroid that needs to hit us soon or something...