patrick.net

michaelsch says

atritium says

It is IMMORAL to demand money (i.e., time and effort) from some people so as to support other people. You are free to do so voluntarily. Why do you want to make it mandatory that some people should be forced to support other people?

Right, imagine I’m a slave of all those who can’t protect themselves. I (a healthy man with military training, who can just carry a loaded M14 with me everywhere, M16 would be even better) am forced to pay for police, whose only use is to fine me for speeding. I’m a slave of idiots who own wooden boxes (they call houses) that burn nicely, - I’m forced to pay for fire departments to protect them.
It’s insane to think about all those of whom I’m a slave.
It’s immoral, Immoral, IMMORAL, IMMORAL!!!

Criminal aggression is different in that it is the only reason governments are formed; to provide law and order and protect citizens from predators.

Without it law enforcement, there is anarchy by definition: people imposing their will on other people.

Without government health insurance, there is only people living their lives but without imposing their will on others.

This is why mandatory government health insurance is immoral.

atritium says

michaelsch says

atritium says

Criminal aggression is different in that it is the only reason governments are formed; to provide law and order and protect citizens from predators...

Again,

I wasn’t talking about government health benefits. You neglected the appropriate question for the bill that just passed and what it would mean to repeal it. Answer the question:

Are you OK with paying your premiums for a lifetime and you are 60 and get cancer and you’ll die without treatment, but the treatment costs so much money that your insurance company denies you because now you cost too much and only sick people get insurance so there isn’t money for you to get treatment, so you die without treatment or even pain meds to ease your death?

simchaland says

atritium says

I don’t want government health benefits…

I wasn’t talking about government health benefits. You neglected the appropriate question for the bill that just passed and possibly repealing it. Answer the question:
Are you OK with paying your premiums for a lifetime and you are 60 and get cancer and you’ll die without treatment, but the treatment costs so much money that your insurance company denies you because now you cost too much and only sick people get insurance so there isn’t money for you to get treatment, so you die without treatment or even pain meds to ease your death?

It depends what the insurance contract was. If they were following the terms, I wouldn't have a legitimate complaint.

The problem would lie with my paying premiums on a lousy policy which is my problem, no one elses.

I would avoid all but catastrophic insurance if I could. And would look at it carefully if I did get it.

Note that I have been required by law to pay social security tax, although I have known all along the money is immediately spent and the system will be bankrupt by 2019-2020 unless tax rates go to 60-70%, the US defaults, or inflation is allowed to run at 15-20% a year for years on end.

That is, I am compelled to fund a Ponzi scam I know I will never get any return from because it is mathematically impossible.

Am I OK with that? It's another form of slavery.What I would be OK with is if the program was immediately cancelled. This would cut the loses and allow me to start using that money to plan for my retirement myself, instead of lighting it on fire en route to totally bankrupting the country by having the government force me to let other people spend it under threat of imprisonment.

atritium says

Am I OK with that? It’s another form of slavery.What I would be OK with is if the program was immediately cancelled.

We all accept that you're not okay with a lot of things. Can we move on now that you've had your tantrum?

There is no where else for you to move on to. You are done.

Social security is another manifestation of the liberal desire to make the state into a surrogate parent.

Mature adults plan for the future and don't need social security. The thought is vaguely disgusting.

But because liberal thinking instead emanates from childhood security issues and emotional structure, they cannot envision the world of adults who take responsibility for themselves. Hence all these mandates from Mommy and Daddy government ... now with guns to back them up.

atritium says

It depends what the insurance contract was. If they were following the terms, I wouldn’t have a legitimate complaint.
The problem would lie with my paying premiums on a lousy policy which is my problem, no one elses.

lol. I'm sure you would just shrug your shoulders and start writing your will after the insurance company dropped you. Especially since you've been paying premiums your whole life. Give me a break.

tatupu70 says

I’m sure you would just shrug your shoulders and start writing your will after the insurance company dropped you. Especially since you’ve been paying premiums your whole life.

That's what's going to happen with social security. That's what happened at the fall of the Soviet Union.

All these liberals programs will fail because they have a child's understanding of resources dispensed by Mommy and Daddy after appearing from nowhere.

The real world is based on things like conservation of energy, conservation of mass, conservation of momentum, not magical appearances from nowhere.

Money for insurance has to come from somewhere. Trace where it comes from and where it goes and learn what mature adults have learned.

atritium says

There is no where else for you to move on to. You are done.
Social security is another manifestation of the liberal desire to make the state into a surrogate parent.
Mature adults plan for the future and don’t need social security. The thought is vaguely disgusting.
But because liberal thinking instead emanates from childhood security issues and emotional structure, they cannot envision the world of adults who take responsibility for themselves. Hence all these mandates from Mommy and Daddy government … now with guns to back them up.

A little fixated on mommy & daddy, aren't we? Were you breast fed?

atritium says

michaelsch says

atritium says

It is IMMORAL to demand money (i.e., time and effort) from some people so as to support other people. You are free to do so voluntarily. Why do you want to make it mandatory that some people should be forced to support other people?

Right, imagine I’m a slave of all those who can’t protect themselves. I (a healthy man with military training, who can just carry a loaded M14 with me everywhere, M16 would be even better) am forced to pay for police, whose only use is to fine me for speeding. I’m a slave of idiots who own wooden boxes (they call houses) that burn nicely, - I’m forced to pay for fire departments to protect them.

It’s insane to think about all those of whom I’m a slave.

It’s immoral, Immoral, IMMORAL, IMMORAL!!!

Criminal aggression is different in that it is the only reason governments are formed; to provide law and order and protect citizens from predators.
Without it law enforcement, there is anarchy by definition: people imposing their will on other people.
Without government health insurance, there is only people living their lives but without imposing their will on others.
This is why mandatory government health insurance is immoral.

There are no differences (moral differences) between criminal aggression, aggression of infections, aggression of peoples' own cells or their immune system, nature aggressions like hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, fires, floods, etc.

They are all emergencies and any sane society has MORAL obligations to deal with them.

>There are no differences (moral differences) between criminal aggression, aggression of infections, aggression of peoples’ own cells or their immune system, nature aggressions like hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, fires, floods, etc.

>They are all emergencies and any sane society has MORAL obligations to deal with them.

No. Aggression requires intent. Infections, hurricanes, earthquakes, tornados, etc., are events. They have no intent, no aggression, only power. A hurricane has no moral nature.

People have intent ... criminal aggression is the intent to of one person to impose his or her will on another.

Like government healthcare, where people INTEND to deprive others of their freedom so as to live at their expense. They believe their life and health is more important than the life of the person they are having the government forcibly take from. They have the exaggerated sense of their importance ... the raw, naked ego of the child who demands what he wants.

Lack of government healthcare is a world where people are simply living their lives in response to the world as it comes (good and bad), as they choose. That is freedom. Sometimes bad things happen along with good.

I may get cancer, but I can't justify -- nd am repulsed by the thought of -- forcing other people to work and pay for the event, as if I was a dependent child.

atritium says

I may get cancer, but I can’t justify and am repulsed by the thought of forcing other people to work and pay for the event, as if I was a dependent child.

I'd recommend you file some paperwork then so you are never treated for sickness or injury, unless you are conscious and able to agree to said treatment and it's payments. Just so we don't find you crushed to a bloody pulp and paralyzed in an accident, and mistakenly take care of you over and above your dollar value.

atritium says

Lack of government healthcare is a world where people are simply living their lives in response to the world as it comes (good and bad), as they choose. That is freedom. Sometimes bad things happen along with good.

Yes--I believe they have a few countries like that in Africa. Perhaps you should check them out?

>I’d recommend you file some paperwork then so you are never treated for sickness or injury, unless you are conscious and able to agree to said treatment and it’s payments.

Tried, but employer will only let me opt out of the program while still requiring I pay anyway. I wonder why that is (rhetorical question, I already know the answer).

As I said, there is a role for catastrophic insurance to handle accidents, etc.

>Yes–I believe they have a few countries like that in Africa. Perhaps you should check them out?

Yes, I've already been to Africa ... and see our future there, once the $74 trillion dollars of unfunded liabilities the US government has racked up on liberal utopian fantasies come due as it will over the next few years.

The US distinctive was guarantees on citizens freedom from tyranny of the state.

This does not exist in Africa (never mind health care), and is only cruising on momentum in the US but essentially ended in the minds of the citizens who want government to take care of them at the expense of everyone else.

atritium says

Money for insurance has to come from somewhere. Trace where it comes from and where it goes and learn what mature adults have learned.

There are now a lot of news reports out there of companies that will be taking large charges against earnings this coming year, such as AT&T reporting it will need to charge $1B.

michaelsch says

There are no differences (moral differences) between criminal aggression, aggression of infections, aggression of peoples’ own cells or their immune system, nature aggressions like hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, fires, floods, etc.
They are all emergencies and any sane society has MORAL obligations to deal with them.

If it is true that there is no moral difference between something that is a purposeful action by one person against another and something that occurs naturally (often with eventual beneficial effects on nature if not on people), then how is it possible for you to argue that there is any "MORAL" obligation for anything at all? And based on what "MORAL" code, religion, or philosophy do you claim such an obligation?

Mebbee I'll be his social worker! I can ask how he feels and explain the out-of-pocket costs.

Nomograph says

Until you get cancer, at which time you will cry for treatment like, well, like a dependent child who failed to take responsibility for themselves.

I say this with 100% confidence. Ideological convictions go right out the window when they require you to die.

I take this as an example of being unable to imagine what an adult life is like.

Well, I've been trapped out in a blizzard in -50 deg. Antarctica for 4 days with the 100 mph winds ripping the panels off the tent and no possibility of rescue ... don't recall crying for help like a dependent child. Nor did the Brits we pulled out of the crevasse they had fallen into during the storm, despite having to amputate blackened fingers due to frostbite.

Freedom comes with risk and there's more to an adult life than waiting at home for someone to send you a check taken at gunpoint by the government.

I notice how none of my questions in the messages above were answered. Instead, it turns to content-less personal attacks. I take this to mean there are no answers.

Remember, no conservative is out there preventing you from mailing a check to cover the medical costs of someone. Go ahead. The problem is this need to FORCE other people to do so. The belief you know better how to spend their money than they do.

There's a provision in the bill ("ommunity Living Assistance Services and Support Act") that will start extracting $150-$240 a month from everyone's paycheck next year to go into a fund for long-term care.

Ultimately this boils down to a failure of character. The country was built by people who took risks, moving out to take a continent.

They would find our current country tangibly insane: everyone with their hand in everyone else's pocket, convinced they are getting a great deal, even that it's the civilized way to be.

The modern citizens brains and characters are so warped, they can't even recognize the impossibility of what they are trying to do (get something for nothing). Or don't care, thinking they can get theirs before it all falls apart.

It's been building for a long time, but the very success of the settlers of this country made it possible to shield subsequent generations from reality and infantalize them. There are are almost no mature adults to serve as role models and open people's eyes to the realization of what they have become.

Here's another glimpse of the future: the Senate of the United States of America just voted 57 to 43 to provide Viagra coverage to sex offenders. Aren't you glad your tax dollars will go for a such an enlightened program? How many minutes a day will you have to work to be sure a sex offender has his supply of Viagra from the government?

To their credit, then then exempted themselves and most leadership in Washington from the health programs they are MANDATING for the rest of the country. This should cut back on the support going to sex-offenders, but still ...

Why would they want to exempt themselves if it is so good? They know the answer very well.

Instead of medical decisions being made between millions of patients and their doctors, medical decisions will be voted on by committees, sometimes looking at the bottom line, other times in response to pressure groups.

What makes you think you will get your cancer treatment when you need it? Suppose they are highly over budget and need to cut back ... which do you suppose they will vote to cut first, the program for noisy, politically-connected AIDS groups or for responsible citizens with boring old cancer?

atritium says

Well, I’ve been trapped out in a blizzard in -50 deg. Antarctica for 4 days with the 100 mph winds ripping the panels off the tent and no possibility of rescue

Great interweb access in that thar antartica...

atritium says

Here’s another glimpse of the future: the Senate of the United States of America just voted 57 to 43 to provide Viagra coverage to sex offenders. Aren’t you glad your tax dollars will go for a such an enlightened program?

C'mon dude,at least stick to the facts. Next you'll be spilling about the death camps for seniors again or something... if you ahve an argument, great, lets hear it, but how long until we can just move past the BS...

http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/03/24/dems-vote-for-viagra-for-sex-offenders-and-other-stories/

"Republicans have something of a free shot in the reconciliation bill. Democrats have already signaled that they will whip against any amendments and changes to the bill, in an effort to pass it intact and send it directly to the President, avoiding another vote in the House. So Republicans can write virtually any amendment, forcing Democrats into terrible votes, without much consequence, knowing they will be defeated and providing campaign ad fodder.

Some Senators are better at writing such amendments than others. David Vitter’s amendment concerned no federal funding for ACORN, an organization that just folded on Monday. But Tom Coburn has brought this kind of poison pill penning to something of an art form. His list of particulars this time is kind of a thing of beauty. Start with the first:

No Erectile Dysfunction Drugs To Sex Offenders – This amendment would enact recommendations from the Government Accountability Office to stop fraudulent payments for prescription drugs prescribed by dead providers or, to dead patients. This amendment also prohibits coverage of Viagra and other ED medications to convicted child molesters, rapists, and sex offenders, and prohibits coverage of abortion drugs. (Note: the creation of exchanges could allow sex offenders to receive taxpayer-funded Viagra and other ED drugs unless Congress expressly prohibits this action – see additional background attached)

The creation of exchanges could allow blind people to receive taxpayer-funded eyeglasses, or Floridians to receive taxpayer-funded Snuggies. That’s all for the implementation phase, making this amendment superfluous and ridiculous. But the campaign ads saying “Senator X voted for Viagra for sex offenders” is priceless. This is how Coburn got firearms allowed in national parks in the middle of a credit card bill.

..."

atritium says

Instead of medical decisions being made between millions of patients and their doctors, medical decisions will be voted on by committees, sometimes looking at the bottom line, other times in response to pressure groups.

...and again, c'mon, at least respect the discussion enough to write with some degree of honesty.

What Shangri-La of direct patient/doctor communcation-land do you live in? It's not the US. I can't remember when the last time in the US I went to a doctor and didn't hear "Okay, we'll just run this by the insurance company and see what they approve..." when it was anything more than an bottle of aspirin being prescribed.

Nomograph says

Dishonest al hominem says

Well, I’ve been trapped out in a blizzard in -50 deg. Antarctica for 4 days with the 100 mph winds ripping the panels off the tent and no possibility of rescue … don’t recall crying for help like a dependent child. Nor did the Brits we pulled out of the crevasse they had fallen into during the storm, despite having to amputate blackened fingers due to frostbite.

You should try to keep your examples at least somewhat believable; the amputated blackened finger thing was a bit over the top.
Moron.

He forgot to mention that it was in the dark and they only had a lighter to keep them warm, no water to drink because none of them cried like children... They had to eat raw penguins and used their shoelaces to saw off the offending british digits. And, since there was no possibility of rescue, I'm assuming he's still there.

So tax-payer funded Viagra can be provided to sex offenders because the Senate was afraid to send the bill back to the House for a vote on it (i.e., politics).

Legislating apparently isn't rocket science. More care is spent getting the floor mats on a Toyota properly placed than health bill regulating the publics medical options. Lots of fear of voting over something so good.

I see they forgot to put in the part about non-denial of coverage for infants with pre-existing conditions this year. It's being advertised as a selling point, but they actually forgot to put it in.

Again, no answer to the question of why Congress exempt themselves and Washington politicians from the bill. There have been no answers to any questions posed.

24 hour days in Antarctica ... the Sun circles the sky without setting summer ... plenty of water since you melt the snow ... no penguins inland in the Vinson Massif ... don't know what was used for the amputation, but that occurred later ... and yes, no chance of rescue. We were down to a half day supply of fuel for snow melting, then made a break for base camp where the plane could get in. It was a great trip. We were going to ski on to the south pole, but too many injuries and burned provisions. Another time.

The only time I've been to a doctor in the last 25 years was when I came back. Went to have someone look at my mild frostbite. Gotta love LA hospitals as you shout at the receptionist behind 2 inch bulletproof glass. Sat in a waiting room for three hours, the only English-speaking person there the whole time. The things I saw and odors I experienced. The doctor had never seen such a thing in So. Cal before, so went off, probably to look it up on the Internet. Prescribed me an irrelevant $25 bottle of Ibuprofen I could have bought for $5 in a store, which I threw away when I got home. The price was jacked up because that's what was negotiated with the true customer, the insurance company.

Then they wanted to schedule follow-ups, but every few days sent a postcard unilaterally rescheduling it to a later date. It was healed by the time the actual follow-up was scheduled 7 weeks later, so I cancelled. Probably what they wanted to happen, so as to cut costs due to some mandate handed down from above. For that I had been forced to pay umpteen dollars through my mandatory health plan at work over the years? OH: there was a $5 copay as well. They were very serious about that.

atritium says

24 hour days in Antarctica … the Sun circles the sky without setting summer … plenty of water since you melt the snow … no penguins inland in the Vinson Massif … don’t know what was used for the amputation, but that occurred later … and yes, no chance of rescue. We were down to a half day supply of fuel for snow melting, then made a break for base camp where the plane could get in. It was a great trip. We were going to ski on to the south pole, but too many injuries and burned provisions. Another time.
The only time I’ve been to a doctor in the last 25 years was when I came back. Went to have someone look at my mild frostbite. Gotta love LA hospitals as you shout at the receptionist behind 2 inch bulletproof glass. Sat in a waiting room for three hours, the only English-speaking person there the whole time. The things I saw and odors I experienced. The doctor had never seen such a thing in So. Cal before, so went off, probably to look it up on the Internet. Prescribed me an irrelevant $25 bottle of Ibuprofen I could have bought for $5 in a store, which I threw away when I got home. The price was jacked up because that’s what was negotiated with the true customer, the insurance company.
Then they wanted to schedule follow-ups, but every few days sent a postcard unilaterally rescheduling it to a later date. It was healed by the time the actual follow-up was scheduled 7 weeks later, so I cancelled. Probably what they wanted to happen, so as to cut costs due to some mandate handed down from above. For that I had been forced to pay umpteen dollars through my mandatory health plan at work over the years? OH: there was a $5 copay as well. They were very serious about that.

Do you tell this story to make us think you're more of a "man?" 'cause we don't, we think you have a poor command of the english language and present a convoluted message. In one post you claim you amputated some british guy's fingers, in another you say they were chopped off at the pole. You also present crying as something a child does, that real men don't cry.

Nor do they require healthcare. Ibuprofen fixed what ailed your body, but not your attitude. The fun thing is that, if your mythical antartic explorer was severely injured during the expensive expedition down there, your coverage probably would have denied you due to your being reckless and placing yourself at risk.

A real man is one who is able to feel real feelings: joy, happiness, love, fear, sadness, compassion, loneliness... not one who claims to have spent days on end with other manly men grunting and sweating- then posting the experience on a real estate crash forum to attempt to impress us. You aren't being taken seriously.

Libs how does it feel to be on the wrong side of History?

This Bill is one Republican administration away, from being nullified and undone.

I wonder how many Federal law suits will win against this SHAM?

It's wrong on every level, and is NOT health care. Well for the few that get it on a free ride. And if I wanted to be to be a free loader and not provide for my family, or more likely by chance thanks to this bill, I get it for free.

This legislation is OPPRESSIVE to the working middle class that is just trying to make it, and not ask the Government or anyone for Nothing.

Just wait until Sarah Palin works all of the hostility toward this plan, into her running platform.

Please Don't forget, this plan was crammed through, with dishonesty and quick blow jobs for favors. More than 70% of the people were against it, and not one Republican voted for the damn thing.

It has Zero credibility for at least 50% of the American people.

My buddy last night a Diabetic, was ecstatic, jumping up and down yelling "Yippie" getting short fused by my lack of enthusism, then I asked him.

Right now your on your wife's insurance plan, which she has a some government job. She hasn't been there that long mind you. How will you feel, when you wife loses that job. And you are on the hook, for the full payment? I suspect if this doesn't reverse, companies will start opting out of paying, and let the impetus default to their workers for professionals making 75K or more.
Will you be as gun ho, when you are forced to $1800 a month for your own insurance, by this law?
He laughed and said it will be more like $3500 a month at least for me I'm a diabetic on insulin.
Then he started this whole thing, well this is a start, they will work on it.

Silly Rabbit tricks are for the insurance companies, it was not the "Medical Patient Lobby" that descended on Washington and entrenched them selves there from start to finish of this legislation. It was the Insurance company. This bill is a Boone for them.

But rest assure, my friend was not ready to hand over half of what he makes to the insurance companies.

Tenouncetrout says

Libs how does it feel to be on the wrong side of History?
This Bill is one Republican administration away, from being nullified and undone.

Your unbridled joy at other people's pain & suffering is duly noted.

When you have mandatory health insurance, this is what happens:

Healthy people pay in. The healthier they are, the less they get back.
Sick people pay in. The sicker they are, the more they get back

That is, mandatory health insurance amounts to forcing healthy people to pay for sick people. By definition.

This is WHY advocates always want to make health insurance mandatory. They need healthy people for the scheme work. They need slaves who are compelled to pay but not get a return.

Why are people sick? The AMA says 80% of health costs are due to behavioral choices people make: obesity, smoking, drugs, alcohol.

So mandatory health care amounts to using the power of the state to force people who make good decisions to pay for those who make bad decisions, so as to attempt to shield them from the consequences of their bad decisions. How can any society survive that? History shows they don't.

The fall of the Soviet Union ... taxation rates approaching 60% in socialist Europe.

Government healthcare reflects the desire of the child to be taken care of, to make the government into a surrogate parent.

Adults recognize life involves risks; there are no guarantees; and that is GOOD. Freedom ends when people are forced to support the needs of others, because the needs of others are unlimited.

The state cannot act as a surrogate parent, because the state by definition is a “psychopath” — it acts without regard to the individual (something parents do), but instead according to policies specifically designed to disregard the individual in favor of an assumed “average”.

It is IMMORAL to demand money (i.e., time and effort) from some people so as to support other people. You are free to do so voluntarily. If you want to mail a check to someone to help with their medical costs, is any conservative trying to stop you? Why do you want to make it mandatory that some people be forced to work support other people?

Do you yearn for the security of childhood, a Mommy and Daddy who will always be there to make the boo-boo better? Healthy adults do not.

atritium says

Do you yearn for the security of childhood, a Mommy and Daddy who will always be there to make the boo-boo better? Healthy adults do not.

Wow, you're sure fixated on mommy & daddy. You might want to see someone about that - is therapy included in your health insurance package?

elliemae says

Tenouncetrout says

Libs how does it feel to be on the wrong side of History?
This Bill is one Republican administration away, from being nullified and undone.

Your unbridled joy at other people’s pain & suffering is duly noted.

Elliemae, it may be time for honest disclosure on your part ... what is it you think you will get from government healthcare and why is it worth other people losing their jobs and opportunities so as to support you?

Explain the morality of forcibly taking money and resources from people who've earned it so as to give to other people who didn't, so they don't have to face the consequences of their behavior.

I'm starting to imagine a room with cigarette and Haggen-Dazs cartons, fear of the future, and thoughts of how nice it would be if you didn't have to change and other people could be forced to pay your expenses when there is a problem ...

Here's a link to audio of Democrat Dingell admitting the ultimate goal of the bill is to "control the people":

http://www.breitbart.tv/shocking-audio-rep-dingell-says-obamacare-will-eventually-control-the-people

Controls will have to be implemented to regulate population behaviors as costs escalate. Only certain behaviors will be controlled; Big Macs may get scarce, but be sure that every effort will be made to keep gay bath-houses open as billions pour into the urgent AIDS issue. There will be the favored and the unfavored. Your medical treatment will be determined by politics.

Cost control via behavior regulation will always be only partly successful, so at the same time rationing will become part of daily life, with committees from the 150 agencies constantly tweaking rules about who does and doesn’t not get health care and when. Decisions formerly made by millions of people in consultation with their doctors will now be made by committees.

This is what happens in every country with mandatory government healthcare, and part of what is bankrupting the world right now. Everyone's hands are in everyone else's pockets, no one realizes the sheer magnitude of what has been spent and promised to be spent. Because it comes from someone else's pocket.

The 1800s saw the abolition of slavery of the culturally weak. Immediately the masters cast around for new slaves to live off of, instead enslaving free men as communism and socialism rose from the rubble of slavery abolition. The trick was getting free men to enslave themselves …

atritium says

That is, mandatory health insurance amounts to forcing healthy people to pay for sick people. By definition

That's how all insurance works. But since you don't know whether you'll be one of the sick people or one of the healthy people, it's not unfair. You're hedging your bet.

atritium says

This is WHY advocates always want to make health insurance mandatory. They need healthy people for the scheme work. They need slaves who are compelled to pay but not get a return.

Incorrect. You need to make it mandatory to stop people from gaming the system--waiting until they are sick to buy insurance.

atritium says

Why are people sick? The AMA says 80% of health costs are due to behavioral choices people make: obesity, smoking, drugs, alcohol.

Do you have a link to this--I've not heard this one before. I find it very hard to believe.

atritium says

So mandatory health care amounts to using the power of the state to force people who make good decisions to pay for those who make bad decisions, so as to attempt to shield them from the consequences of their bad decisions. How can any society survive that? History shows they don’t.

Wrong again. It ensures that the US will have a healthy workforce so we don't lost productivity due to sickness.
atritium says

Adults recognize life involves risks; there are no guarantees; and that is GOOD. Freedom ends when people are forced to support the needs of others, because the needs of others are unlimited.

As others have pointed out--bullshit. When you get cancer you will be the first in line to get government sponsered treatment. And as a society, that is as it should be.

atritium says

It is IMMORAL to demand money (i.e., time and effort) from some people so as to support other people.

You are paying for your own health insurance.

atritium says

Elliemae, it may be time for honest disclosure on your part … what is it you think you will get from government healthcare...?

Wow - you'd like honest disclosure from little ol' me? I'm so flattered! From government healthcare, I shall be able to rest on my laurels and receive free healthcare. I'll quit my job, probably qualify for unemployment or disability (or a mixture of both), and go to as many physicians as possible. There are several hundred in the town in which I live, and if I drive a few hundred miles in either direction I can see hundreds more. I'll milk the system, not for medications, but merely because I can.

I'll laugh callously as I access as much free healthcare as possible - and will make up all sorts of symptoms in order to get as much MD face time as possible. I'll also do a couple of slip & falls in the grocery store, and will walk directly into the path of oncoming traffic (jumping away at the last moment but injuring my hand when I slap the fender of cars as they pass). I'll go to homeless shelters and gather stool samples on the cheap, and will use makeup to make myself appear to be sunken-cheeked and sallow.

I'll take up smoking, gain a considerable amount of weight, drink like a fish and take up dangerous sports just because I can. I'll travel to antartica and have my fingers amputated by brits. I'll take up bull-riding and skydiving, will wash the windows of tall buildings and hand out liberal propaganda at tea parties (I'm on my way to Searchlight, NV right now!).

atritium says

and why is it worth other people losing their jobs and opportunities so as to support you?

Silly, it's because I'm so friggin' awesome!

atritium says

Explain the morality of forcibly taking money and resources from people who’ve earned it so as to give to other people who didn’t, so they don’t have to face the consequences of their behavior.

Many people said this, in so many different ways:
Our society must make it right and possible for old people not to fear the young or be deserted by them, for the test of a civilization is the way that it cares for its helpless members.~Pearl S. Buck (1892-1973), My Several Worlds [1954].

Ellie I'm for a full blown Government ran Health "AUTHROITY".

Even if it meant I actually paid more in taxes. I could not have a problem with that. It would be on the up and up, and it would my Government I was paying. Not third party Shyster Corporations, that have been running this country into the ground for well over Two decades.

Have you people not had ample proof, of what this type of system is Doomed for????

Are you really that slow?

In this country a Government managed Health Agency, working separate from Private Medical industry, will only serve to make Private healthcare even more affordable for those that opt to go that route, or for elective stuff a federal system wont address.

There would be no need for INSURANCE with is the ROOT of all America's healthcare problems.

The Dems essentially took a pack of hungry Wolves, Jackels, and Foxes and thrown them in Hen house.
Now they have the nerve to think that they have addressed the Health issues in the Hen house.

Tenouncetrout says

There would be no need for INSURANCE with is the ROOT of all America’s healthcare problems.

You're right. This could have been done simpler and easier. But it's a step in the right direction. I'm frightened of hurting myself as I hop on, or off, my soapbox - Healthcare should never be an option.

I'm continually impressed by the system. Ellie recently had an MRI and the auto insurance company will receive a bill of $290.00 for the doc to read the films. Had the health insurance been billed, it would have been less than half of that. Billed charges vs. actual charges, etc. The MRI will be over $1,000; same thing. If health insurance paid it would be substantially less paid out.

The system needs an overhaul. It's been getting worse over the past 30 years - and now we're making baby steps. It's something.

Yes, this is the first step. I want a single payer nationalized health system. It would give us economies of scale and allow us to eliminate the insurance middle men. No more expenses for having to hire "experts" on medical billing just so you can get reimbursement when you provide a medical service. No more need to have your bills expensively "handled" by insurance paid hacks who get to sit on the bill and examine it in detail making sure all of their secret "codes" are on the form in the proper spots for weeks on end only to deny the claim it because someone forgot to simply dot an "i" or cross a "t."

Last time I was in the hospital it took a year for the bill to go back and forth between the hospital and United Health Care because United Health Care kept claiming that the "codes" weren't correct even though I had pre-authorized properly. The thing is that it seemed that they would change their minds on what the correct "codes" were over the course of the year and between the hospital medical billing administrators and the billing administrators at the United Health Care "claim" department there were considerable health care dollars wasted over the course of a year just trying to get my bill paid. And in the end, United Health Care ended up paying as billed because it was inevitable since everything had been done with pre-authorizations and according to their rules. Basically this kind of back and forth system only keeps these unnecessary middle men in a job. That's the kind of waste I want to see eliminated.

Also I want to see the end of the $50 aspirin in hospitals. Too many forms, too many hands passing the pills, and too many phone calls to doctors and to insurance to "authorize" the aspirin. All of this because they are scared of being sued if they give me an aspirin and I die (even if I'm in intensive care on my last breath). Tort Reform needs to happen and hospital administrations need a complete shake down to eliminate the unnecessary levels of bureaucracy that create $50 aspirin tablets.

But, saying all of that, this bill is a crack in the death grip that the health insurance industry and the "for profit" medical establishment have on sucking sick people dry sending thousands to bankruptcy every year for simply getting sick.

Our economy would improve if we had workers who could access real health care at reasonable prices and have enough actual sick leave when they shouldn't be at work so that they don't bring the rest of the workplace down with some virulent plague. It would make workers more efficient. The sick ones go home and get proper treatment and rest so that they can come back and give their 125% and the ones that are still well and giving their 125% at the workplace could rest assured that they won't get whatever the sick ones have who are staying away from the workplace so that the well ones could continue to keep giving their 125% productivity.

Getting sick is a fact of life. It's time that our economy, society, and body politic acknowledge this and handle it in a way that is sensible, fair, equitable, morally correct, and efficient.

it seems that the socialized medical system removes the need for each end-user to compete for services with their own earned income. it seems like that will result is no wage earner market forces to set the price scale for services rendered. How will price scales be created for provider payments?