Your Republican Nominee for 2012

[Wintermute]

Ahh, the ever-present "I'm perfect myself, so I'll never get sick. So why should a fraction of my premium/tax dollars go to pay for healthcare for that fat slob/smoker/illegal over there."

The truth is you are already are paying for them. Through higher insurance rates and care fees. And you're paying a lot more than if everyone had access to public, sustained preventative care that offered such services as early screening for things like cancer and diabetes, smoking cessation, weight control, and diet training. Preventative care is many orders of magnitude cheaper and getting people regular access to it will cut health care costs across the board.

[dirkterrell]

Noblesse Oblige:

In ethical discussion, it is sometimes used to summarize a moral economy wherein privilege must be balanced by duty towards those who lack such privilege or who cannot perform such duty.

Who does "those" reference?

Dirk

[Shea]

Noblesse Oblige:

In ethical discussion, it is sometimes used to summarize a moral economy wherein privilege must be balanced by duty towards those who lack such privilege or who cannot perform such duty.

You right wing top 2%ers should stop being so stingy. You are over payed (even after taxes) and under worked. You should happily help the system that allows you to be so fortunate.

a. Middle-class and I still don't want it. You have no idea what I make, how I work or whether I am over/under compensated for it. That this is a basis for your argument is as laughable as it is terrifying.

b. You morals and ethics are just that, yours. As soon as you start mandating that all of us "2%-ers" (which is odd since latest polls show 57% oppose your power grab) adhere, through force, to them we might as well throw out the Constitution and start goostepping.

You feel the need to contribute to the poor, cool. I am all for helping my fellow man. However don't feel that you have the right to demand I do.

[Shea]

Ahh, the ever-present "I'm perfect myself, so I'll never get sick. So why should a fraction of my premium/tax dollars go to pay for healthcare for that fat slob/smoker/illegal over there."

Heaven forbid he actually take care of himself. I love how you denigrate personal responsibility at every turn. Why is your behavior/lifestyle/choices/actions something that I should be held accountable for? I keep asking that question of you and you refuse to answer it...

The truth is you are already are paying for them. Through higher insurance rates and care fees. And you're paying a lot more than if everyone had access to public, sustained preventative care that offered such services as early screening for things like cancer and diabetes, smoking cessation, weight control, and diet training. Preventative care is many orders of magnitude cheaper and getting people regular access to it will cut health care costs across the board.

Please provide data to support this assertion.

[dirkterrell]

Ahh, the ever-present "I'm perfect myself, so I'll never get sick. So why should a fraction of my premium/tax dollars go to pay for healthcare for that fat slob/smoker/illegal over there."

Or look at it as "I choose not to smoke. I choose not to do drugs. I choose to lead a healthy lifestyle. Why shouldn't I be rewarded with lower health care costs?"

The truth is you are already are paying for them. Through higher insurance rates and care fees. And you're paying a lot more than if everyone had access to public, sustained preventative care that offered such services as early screening for things like cancer and diabetes, smoking cessation, weight control, and diet training. Preventative care is many orders of magnitude cheaper and getting people regular access to it will cut health care costs across the board.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...ada_is_th.html

Dirk

[JustSomeDude]

Preventative care is many orders of magnitude cheaper and getting people regular access to it will cut health care costs across the board.

Ohhh... so that's why the US Gov't ran out of $1billion for Cash for Clunkers in 4 days... because no one really needed it... it was just ultra-responsible car buyers taking advantage of that program and milking it dry so quickly.

Provide a "free" service for Americans and it will be used/abused way beyond its needs. If you really think a "free healthcare" plan will be cheaper than the private system, then you truly are delusional. If you had just said, "I think it's worth the cost of covering everyone", that's one thing, but to argue it's "cheaper" is insane/foolish.

A good primer on this socialist bull... http://sweetness-light.com/archive/w...-actually-says

[Wintermute]

Heaven forbid he actually take care of himself. I love how you denigrate personal responsibility at every turn. Why is your behavior/lifestyle/choices/actions something that I should be held accountable for? I keep asking that question of you and you refuse to answer it...

Please provide data to support this assertion.

Wow, were you assigned to pay for my fucking healthcare at some point? You bring it up all the time. I'll have to tell UHC to stop pulling money out of my paycheck every period.

I presume you're OK with the poor driving on the roads to which we all contribute? How is that any different than allowing them to use public healthcare to which we ALL contribute?

I'm also not going to spend all day finding links that pass your ever-delicate Political Correctness filter to "prove" a fact that's mind-crushingly, self-evidentally true to any moron since Ben Franklin opined that "An apple a day helps keep the doctor away" 200 years ago. Preventative care is cheap, duh.

How about you prove that letting people rot with cheaply and easily-treatable early-stage diseases and conditions until they require hugely-expensive end-care on the public dime is some kind of public good? Got any links for that self-evident bullshit?

[Wintermute]

Ohhh... so that's why the US Gov't ran out of $1billion for Cash for Clunkers in 4 days... because no one really needed it... it was just ultra-responsible car buyers taking advantage of that program and milking it dry so quickly.

Provide a "free" service for Americans and it will be used/abused way beyond its needs. If you really think a "free healthcare" plan will be cheaper than the private system, then you truly are delusional. If you had just said, "I think it's worth the cost of covering everyone", that's one thing, but to argue it's "cheaper" is insane/foolish.

A good primer on this socialist bull... http://sweetness-light.com/archive/w...-actually-says

WTF is your point on Cash for Clunkers? It was too sucessful? It was part of the stimulus, so "Milking it dry" is a good thing. We WANTED people to quickly lower dealer inventories, because oversupply is a huge problem right now.

I guess the rest of the world is "delusional"? Because they have cheaper and better healthcare than us. Go argue with reality. As far as the wingnut "essay" you link, who the fuck does that asshole think "rations" healthcare now? The tooth fairy? No, the insurance companies whose cock he's got in his mouth.

Our gov't actually has a great track record NOT rationing care. Ask 90% of those in the Medicare or VA system.

[Midget Hellion]

Bwhahahahaha...Cash for clunkers!

[IT WASN'T ME!]

a. Middle-class and I still don't want it. You have no idea what I make, how I work or whether I am over/under compensated for it. That this is a basis for your argument is as laughable as it is terrifying.

b. You morals and ethics are just that, yours. As soon as you start mandating that all of us "2%-ers" (which is odd since latest polls show 57% oppose your power grab) adhere, through force, to them we might as well throw out the Constitution and start goostepping.

You feel the need to contribute to the poor, cool. I am all for helping my fellow man. However don't feel that you have the right to demand I do.

Ah, so you're a wanabe 2%er. It's the wanabes that give the 2%ers the votes they need for their agenda. Did you know that the vast majority of the people that fought for the south in the civil war had no hope of ever owning slaves. They just died for the idea of slavery. In my mind they were just fools manipulated by the rich who benifited from slavery.

[Snowman]

WTF is your point on Cash for Clunkers? It was too sucessful? It was part of the stimulus, so "Milking it dry" is a good thing. We WANTED people to quickly lower dealer inventories, because oversupply is a huge problem right now.

I guess the rest of the world is "delusional"? Because they have cheaper and better healthcare than us. Go argue with reality. As far as the wingnut "essay" you link, who the fuck does that asshole think "rations" healthcare now? The tooth fairy? No, the insurance companies whose cock he's got in his mouth.

Our gov't actually has a great track record NOT rationing care. Ask 90% of those in the Medicare or VA system.

I wouldn’t waste your time trying to convince these guys of anything by stating things like facts. Unless they support their rights, their freedoms and their way, they won’t listen.

[whitebrad]

this may seem off topic, but sarah palin is stupid

now, back to the issue at hand... sarah paliin likes pie!

[JustSomeDude]

WTF is your point on Cash for Clunkers? It was too sucessful? It was part of the stimulus, so "Milking it dry" is a good thing. We WANTED people to quickly lower dealer inventories, because oversupply is a huge problem right now.

So we want people to rush out and quickly use "free" healthcare? Smart.

I guess the rest of the world is "delusional"? Because they have cheaper and better healthcare than us.

I guess that's why everyone continues to travel to the U.S. for critical/time sensitive operations.

Our gov't actually has a great track record NOT rationing care. Ask 90% of those in the Medicare or VA system.

Medicare - which is bankrupt - good analogy.


Quote of the Century
"There won't be any waiting in long lines with my health care plan. It's like the Post Office... wait..." - Barack Obama

[JustSomeDude]

I presume you're OK with the poor driving on the roads to which we all contribute? How is that any different than allowing them to use public healthcare to which we ALL contribute?

Currently in Colorado driver's pay $0.404 of taxes (average local, county and state combined) and a $0.184 federal excise tax on every gallon of gas purchased. That's approximately 60 cents of tax on each gallon of gas, which is strictly used for road maintenance and transportation. So those who are driving more, are paying more, and thus contributing more based on usage.

Perhaps you are arguing that poor people are spending $450/mo. on gas for their commute to/from work??

Good try tho.

[Wintermute]

So we want people to rush out and quickly use "free" healthcare? Smart.

I guess that's why everyone continues to travel to the U.S. for critical/time sensitive operations.

Medicare - which is bankrupt - good analogy.

Quote of the Century
"There won't be any waiting in long lines with my health care plan. It's like the Post Office... wait..." - Barack Obama

1. Yeah, it would suck if everybody got preventative care. I guess you only change the oil in your bike after the motor blows up? If not, why?

2. We do good on the extremely expensive critical/time sensitive stuff because so many people in this country don't get the preventative care they need, so we get a lot of practice.

3. Medicare bankrupt? The projection for that has to do with the shitty overall condition of our current healthcare system.

Currently in Colorado driver's pay $0.404 of taxes (average local, county and state combined) and a $0.184 federal excise tax on every gallon of gas purchased. That's approximately 60 cents of tax on each gallon of gas, which is strictly used for road maintenance and transportation. So those who are driving more, are paying more, and thus contributing more based on usage.

Perhaps you are arguing that poor people are spending $450/mo. on gas for their commute to/from work??

Good try tho.

I'm not arguing that at all. What I'm arguing is that you have no problem with poor people using the roads and other public works, but the poor using public healthcare has you running around with your panties in a twist.

[JustSomeDude]

1. Yeah, it would suck if everybody got preventative care. I guess you only change the oil in you bike after the motor blows up? If not, why?

If it was "free", I'd change it every week - maybe twice. Would that be a proper use of a "free" service? You tell me.

2. We do good on the extremely expensive critical/time sensitive stuff because so many people in this country don't get the preventative care they need.

If you are concerned about lifestyle priorities, it sounds like a personal issue that involves improving public health through education and helping people retake responsibility of their lives and actions. There are plenty of places to volunteer to help further educate the public in your spare time. I'm sure such organizations would appreciate your contribution, and I can point you to some resources if you'd like to investigate it further. Point being, lifestyle choices are private matters, not federal ones.

But if you want the Gov't having that power over your personal life - that's fine - just don't complain when a conservative president, or anyone else you may disagree with for that matter, is in place and mandating lifestyle restrictions upon the American peoples. You can't give that power to the federal gov't, and then complain when you don't like how they handle it. As long as you agree with that - then you get what you deserve - and have no place to complain.

3. Medicare bankrupt? The projection for that has to do with the shitty overall condition of our healthcare system.

You just praised Medicare and VA services in your previous post, and now it's overall "shitty"? Which one is it? You're going in circles on that one.

I'm not arguing that at all. What I'm arguing is that you have no problem with poor people using the roads and other public works, but the poor using public healthcare has you running around with your panties in a twist.

Do you read? I never said I have a problem with poor people using health care, I said I would have a problem with all people using "free" health care. It will get overused and abused. Last I looked, I never saw the "poor", or any sect of Americans, overusing/abusing our roads. Maybe that's because everyone has to PAY TO USE THEM (ie, gas, car loan, maintenance, ...anyone?).

Huh... people pay for their cars, gas, and maintenance on their own vehicles to get access to our highways. How interesting. Wait... is taking care of the costs of those items something we might call INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY? Naahhh... that'd be a crazy notion that has no place in a discussion about something as personal as HEALTH CARE! :P

And why the hell do you keep picking on the poor?!

[Shea]

Wow, were you assigned to pay for my fucking healthcare at some point? You bring it up all the time. I'll have to tell UHC to stop pulling money out of my paycheck every period.

You're kidding right? You're pushing a taxpayer funded (last I checked I paid taxes) to pay for your (and everyone else's) health care. I not only pay for my life, I get to pay for yours as well.

I bring it up all the time because that is the issue for me. You want me to fund other people's lives and I'm sick of doing it. You want my money, you come to my house and ask me. Don't elect some dbag politician to do it for you.

I presume you're OK with the poor driving on the roads to which we all contribute? How is that any different than allowing them to use public healthcare to which we ALL contribute?

I benefit from it. I don't benefit by paying for your healthcare, which is your responsibility...not mine. Yet you think it is. Once again I ask you where this power comes from?

I'm also not going to spend all day finding links that pass your ever-delicate Political Correctness filter to "prove" a fact that's mind-crushingly, self-evidentally true to any moron since Ben Franklin opined that "An apple a day helps keep the doctor away" 200 years ago. Preventative care is cheap, duh.

huh, "an apple a day, keeps the doctor away"...sounds like taking personal initiative (and responsibility) for you your own health. Imagine that... I'm sure Ben is rolling over in his grave that you are using him to justify this crap.

How about you prove that letting people rot with cheaply and easily-treatable early-stage diseases and conditions until they require hugely-expensive end-care on the public dime is some kind of public good? Got any links for that self-evident bullshit?

Once again Winter you entirely misrepresent my position in order to put me in a box so you don't have to "debate" the underpinnings of your stated positions. You think Universal health care is going to be this utopian panacea. That as soon as we get it, prices will come down, everyone will be happy and we will regain the honor that you somehow think we lost because we don't shovel money into some bureaucratic nightmare. Any objective analysis of the current legislation says otherwise...

I just can't get past your extreme level of ignorance. You obviously have no idea what liberty and freedom mean or the promise of what this country is all about.

Funny what you find when you actually read the bill:
http://www.classicalideals.com/HR3200.htm

And thinking this man is anything other then a corrupt politician, willing to sell his own mother for a payday:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art..._in_97861.html

Or that somehow telling people they should die for the "public good" as a means of cost control is moral and ethical, per Dr. Eziekiel Emmanual (Obama's Health Care Czar)

[Shea]

I wouldn’t waste your time trying to convince these guys of anything by stating things like facts. Unless they support their rights, their freedoms and their way, they won’t listen.

Funny that Randall. I believe in your rights too and don't think I have the right to stomp on them for some perceived benefit. Do you? You want to call me names, cold, heartless or some other derogatory terms to make yourself feel superior? Or somehow prove that your position is?

I am MORE then willing to debate any topic ANY time. I believe that our health care system needs to be fixed, but I don't believe that government is the way to do it...

[Wintermute]

[snip]
I just can't get past your extreme level of ignorance. You obviously have no idea what liberty and freedom mean or the promise of what this country is all about.
[snip]

You know, I was going to go through your latest multi-quote monster section-by-section, answering all the strawmen and philosophical challenges when I got to that...and just said fuck it. You're not worth engaging.

[JustSomeDude]

OK.

The naughty language is starting. Let's all just agree to disagree, and have an admin lock this baby up!

[mtnairlover]

You guys still crack me up. You think the government doesn't already have you under its control? You think that by having your company benefits pay for all or part of your health care is good and that you have control in your health care?

Government has always played a role in any economy. When it comes to regulation, it is a necessary part of a healthy economy, as well. Regulation, when done right helps to continue to stimulate healthy competition and profits for companies. But, it's that "when done right" part that so many people seem to have a tough time getting their minds past.

In a capitalist society, the government's role in the economy is to maintain a balance between profit for companies and the well-being of the society. That's where regulation comes in. The government will typically sit back and let companies charge what they wish for goods and services in any capilist society, but sometimes, some companies get carried away. If those companies are not reined in, then society fails. People have a hard time purchasing goods and services and consequently, the companies then begin to fail. That's when regulation needs to happen. What it does is it demands fair and affordable pricing for consumers so that the average citizen can buy again and so that the companies can begin to make their profits again.

As I read the information on government regulation on this site...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation, I began to realize that to be honest, regulating the health care system could reap many more benefits than we could imagine. If you think about it this way...health care and insurance should be made affordable for all...maybe on a sliding scale, cuz I do not believe it will be completely free for all, only for those who cannot work. If we allow for insurance for those 46 million who cannot afford it (but could afford it on a sliding scale), then insurance companies will be taking up 46 million clients. Now, the money they might lose at first by having to lower prices will be gained back by gaining those 46 million new clients. Then, as all people are now insured and health care costs come down, more people will feel more free to see their Doctors and maybe even get those operations they thought they couldn't afford. So, initially, while lowering costs might seem like the health care companies and insurance companies will lose, they will gain as more and more people seek out proper health care. Going even further, now with better pricing, these health care companies can now be more competitive with bordering nations and instead of more of our citizens leaving this country for better priced health care, more citizens from other countries might choose to come to America for their care, again benefiting health care's bottom line.

I understand why people don't like the thought of a regulated system...it's because it's the idea of "big brother" watching and taking care of us. I know this guy who is completely adamant about not having government step in. He refuses to even listen to any of the merits. Mention the words "government regulation" and his brick wall goes up. Oh and he works for the government, so has some keen insight into the shady practices. But, and this is important...government isn't the only entity with shady practices...witnessed over these past several years with mortgage companies, investment agencies, auto companies, and the list goes on. At some point though, there are some parts of each entity that work real well. Regulation, if done properly does work.

A couple more links on economy and the government's necessary role in it:

Government's Role in the Economy

Regulation and Control in the U.S. Economy -- When I read the words "social goals", it struck me that as a nation, it is in our best interest to put forth the effort to care for every citizen in this country, whatever way that care may look. I think of it this way...A healthy worker is a happy worker, and a happy worker makes more profit for his employer. Each hand feeding the other.

[*GSXR~SNAIL*]

...Going even further, now with better pricing, these health care companies can now be more competitive with bordering nations and instead of more of our citizens leaving this country for better priced health care, more citizens from other countries might choose to come to America for their care, again benefiting health care's bottom line.

I've never met anyone in my 41 years that has left our country for better priced health care. Do you have a long list you routinely update with people you know that leave the U.S.A. for better health care?

Additionally, the American people as a whole already abuse the health care system for every little ailment they get...even when paying for it. You don't think the abuse and backlogs for necessary health care will worsen with the proposed plan? I sure do.

[dirkterrell]

If we allow for insurance for those 46 million who cannot afford it (but could afford it on a sliding scale),

I've already posted a closer look, based on the census data, at this 46 million uninsured number and it is quite misleading:

http://www.cosportbikeclub.org/forum...470#post490470

http://www.cosportbikeclub.org/forum...373#post490373

http://www.cosportbikeclub.org/forum...226#post490226

http://www.cosportbikeclub.org/forum...219#post490219

The number who "can't afford it" is nowhere near 46 million.

Dirk

[dirkterrell]

In ethical discussion, it is sometimes used to summarize a moral economy wherein privilege must be balanced by duty towards those who lack such privilege or who cannot perform such duty.

You make the common mistake of those on the left that opposition to government-run support for the disadvantaged means opposition to any support for them.

Dirk