Confused Briton seeks clarification from right -wing Americans

[Bigeyez]

Because some people are too shallow-minded to see the truth. It happens with just about everybody... well, here at least.

Its a power grab, and Orwellian is just a descriptive of how they are presenting itself. Doing a little research you will easily find that the president is back and forth on exactly what is in the bill (of which there are several different versions, not just one) and honestly if you take a historical, or definitive standpoint it is socialism.

Problem is, "socialism" has been so overused in the last 20 years, both correctly and incorrectly, that it has now become empty rhetoric. Nazi, likewise, but the terms are in essence the same, because Nazi stands for National Socialist. Just look at what socialist governments did in 1915-30 Russia and 1930-36 Germany and make the comparison of what the president is saying.

Also, "free" is not as free as you would expect. I don't want my neighbor paying for my health care because I don't want to pay for his. A tax increase is mandatory to be able to pay for it, so it's not "free." There is also going to be rationing within the bill, as it stands in each version, which is due to the fact that they cannot simply afford it for everyone, and the poor will lose out there still.

Also, I want MY CHOICES not the government choosing what health care I will be able to get. Within each version of the bill there are stipulations saying that all major decisions will be made by a government bureaucrat, which takes time that could, and will cause unnecessary mortality and morbidity, due to the lack of immediate on site decision making. I would rather have a doctor, not a politician, make recommendations and keep myself in charge, rather than have a corrupt power hungry politician in charge of my health.

Maybe I'm too much on the "self responsibility" thing because I'm not some mentally deficient, pathetic simpleton who requires the government to hold my hand for every little thing in the world.

So let me ask you this. What do you tell to parents with kids who make too much to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to pay for private insurance? Or someone with a medical condition and now no insurance company will touch them without charging insane rates? Tough shit work harder? PLEASE

I was raised by a single mother with two kids. She made 40k a year and that measly 40k a year disqualified us from medicaid. That same 40k a year was nowhere near enough to pay for health insurance. I didn't have health insurance as a child until I turned 16, started working and was able to pay it for myself. If I got sick, well too bad because no doctor would touch me without insurance. Sure theres clinics and some hospitals you can go to if you don't have medical insurance but the wait for them is rediculous sometimes requiring people to wait MONTHS to see a doctor.

What about the ER of a hospital you might say. Yeah you go to an ER without insurance. They not only treat you like dirt but as soon as they feel you can move they kick your ass out the door...oh and have you SEEN an ER bill? Lord knows a night in the emergency room without insurance costs upwards of 10,000 dollars; more if you were taken there by an ambulance.

Oh and guess what you already do pay for other peoples healthcare. Directly, your taxes cover all the gov't worker plans,(which happens to be the single greatest joint healthcare plan in the country) and indirectly you also pay for the effects of people unable to afford health care insurance.

Now thats just my personal life experience but there are millions of people out there who have gone through similar things and saying it's because they want to bum off the rest of us, are lazy, or in your words "mentally deficient, pathetic simpleton who requires the government to hold my hand for every little thing in the world" is ignorant assbackwards and just plain stupid.

As far as you having choices go no ones forcing you to give up your private insurance...this simply provides another, (hopefully) cheaper option for people who can't afford private insurance or don't want it for whatever reason.

 

[EnglishMuffin]

Alright, I gotta do this yet again. As an American I personally apologize to Great Britain for the douchebag Republican Party.

The republican party has been pretty much useless since about 2002. It is a whole party centered around being pricks and scaring ignorant people. If you want to see more of this in action just watch fox news for an hour.

 

[Sewblon]

Because increasing spending is a bad idea when your country already has a negative net worth, the government is not good at taking care of people(look at our education system,) and it ultimately gives more leverage to the government.

 

[Vuljatar]

Did you edit your post? I could've sworn you had a line in there about the Repubs using an ass as their image. Sorry for the weirdness either way. Apparently, I'm having a stroke. Too bad anticoagulants aren't covered by my insurance! (see the way I brought it back on topic there? Smoooooooth)

Yeah, he edited his post.

 

[Alex_P]

... but I do not understand the attacks on Britain's health service, calling it "evil" and "Orwellian". I just don't understand why.

There is a very simple answer to that: the British public health system is bad because it's "socialized".

This argument starts with the position that "socialized" medicine is bad. An actual examination of the British system is performed after the conclusion is made, with the sole intent of cherrypicking data to support your side.
Except there's no data, there are just anecdotes. Getting actual data is too hard.
And you don't cherrypick them, you just make them up. Because nobody in America, on any side of this debate, substantively gives a shit about British healthcare anyway.

Does that sound like putting the cart before the horse?
You betcha!

-- Alex

 

[Lord Beautiful]

While I am cautious of rationing and "death panels," those are not the real reasons I don't want this reform. I don't want this reform because I feel the government is, and has been for a long time, financially incompetent. I may find it a tad worrying that Ezekiel Emanuel is a prominent health care advisor for Obama, and his views on health care distribution are sickening, but my major problem is that I'm fairly certain this reform would raise our debt, which is plenty high enough as it is.

 

[Theophenes]

you know i think i am starting to lose interest in politics all because since i started following the news all i have seen is a lack of common sense

I sympathize.

 

[Datalord]

The reason i personally am against it is because the power to establish a NHCS in the USA does not belong to the federal government, according to the bill of rights, powers not specifically delegated to the Federal government belong to the state governments,

Also, even if private healthcare continues to exist, the existence of national healthcare places an unnecessarily large burden on the Doctors themselves, and even though private healthcare may exist, anyone who chooses to use private health care, still pays for public healthcare in taxes, just as any parent who sends a child to a private school still has to support public schools in taxes.

 

[quiet_samurai]

Because most American don't take the time to really look around them and see how systems in other countries are ran. They have a tunnel vision that blinds them to things around them and makes them think it's their way or no way, and any form of change is obviously commie or fascist. We have also had over 60 years of propaganda shoved down our throats on how any form of socialism is terrible, but little do many realize that we have many social programs already implemented in the USA. We just call them "federal" programs. It's also the American media, I have talked to alot of people and many are for the health care reform. It will seem like the entire country is against it when the protestors are the only people you portray. Not only that, but it's probably only going to be the people that are against it that will go to these town meetings to yell at their congressmen.

All in all, it's just people being misinformed, people spreading false knowledge, and bad media coverage.

 

[yami0333]

They fear it because in all likelihood it will successful and become an untouchable part of American politics in the same way social security has become. The Republicans want small government and low taxes, a public healthcare system will mean an increase in both of these.

That's what it's really about, they are just using fear and lunatics to oppose it because if they had a rational debate about it, most people would be in favour of it.

I agree with you here, except for the small Government part, recall the U.S.P.A.T.R.I.O.T. ACT it single handly violated a majority of our rights, and it passed with flying colors in congress

 

[cleverlymadeup]

What I'm worried about is choice: can I choose how I'm covered by a National Healthcare System, or whether or not I'm covered at all? Insurance companies offer customization to meet exactly what you need, while from what I heard a NHS does not.

Why would you want to be covered for anything less than everything? For that matter, why would you want to have zero coverage?

Because I don't think I need insurance for something that will never happen, or I don't want to pay for insurance.

well if you don't need insurance for something that's not going to happen, then you can't drive a car NOR can you ever buy a house. you NEED insurance for both of those things.

frankly without some sort of coverage you are an idiot and probly going to get really sick and then not have the money to pay for it and then you can't get insured cause you're sick and well probly not do so well

the thing about insurance is it's not there cause you need it, it's there for WHEN and IF you need it.

 

[DrDeath3191]

What I'm worried about is choice: can I choose how I'm covered by a National Healthcare System, or whether or not I'm covered at all? Insurance companies offer customization to meet exactly what you need, while from what I heard a NHS does not.

Why would you want to be covered for anything less than everything? For that matter, why would you want to have zero coverage?

Because I don't think I need insurance for something that will never happen, or I don't want to pay for insurance.

well if you don't need insurance for something that's not going to happen, then you can't drive a car NOR can you ever buy a house. you NEED insurance for both of those things.

frankly without some sort of coverage you are an idiot and probly going to get really sick and then not have the money to pay for it and then you can't get insured cause you're sick and well probly not do so well

the thing about insurance is it's not there cause you need it, it's there for WHEN and IF you need it.

I would pay insurance costs for things that are likely to occur, such as breaking bones, or common diseases, or more serious ones if I was particularly at risk for them. To make me have to pay for some disease that I won't or (quite possibly) can't get is silly. I want to pay for services I would use. I would agree that some coverage is wise, but get only what you absolutely need.

 

[nerd51075]

I am proud to consider myself conservative on economic and fiscal issues, and liberal on social ones, so i can see where each party is coming from. The concept of government-run healthcare sounds all well and good, but is now really the best time? We are in the middle of a global economic recession, just passed a $787 billion economic stimulus, which brought our national debt to a record low; can we afford to pay for a $1 trillion healthcare reform? I find the answer is a loud, resounding no. It is a noble idea, but a noble cause is not always the intelligent cause. America simply cannot afford it.