DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Universal Health Care: Yay or Nay?

It is not income redistribution in the slightest. Just take a look at the numbers I cited in my post, let alone the numbers in the link. The rich are getting richer, and the poor...are about where they've always been (but not getting poorer, as the saying goes).

There is no socialist income distribution that you fear...only politicians in Washington wasting more and more and more money.



You've got to be kidding me...yeah, those $18,500 folks are coming out ahead. Future's so bright they need shades. <img src="/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" />



Again...$18,500. That's hard for me to fathom. Sure it's hard for you to. And they're supposed to give money towards the government? What money? If they ever make money, they'll pay it back. And don't give me the line about it 'teaching' them sit be lazy and do nothing and get rewarded...no one's taking a vacation with the tax refund from their $18,500 salaries. They're paying past due bills. To the companies of the guys who make up the 80%. See, it's cosmic? <img src="/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Pit I do understand what you'd like your plan to look like. I also believe that you think that it would be a difficult transition in some respects,but one that can be managed.
Those who work but make very little will pay a token amount to be a participant and help in some small way to pay for their entry into the program.
That sounds like a reasonable plan and we all wish it would be easy to install the plan. The problem is shown in your own words,"...I'm not advocating tax raises,even though it would finally go for something worth wild for a change. But to be so kind to the rest of the world while denying our own citizens decent health care isn't very American at all. "

Why bother stating that you do not advocate tax increases when in the same breath you say that it would be a better use of new money.

We could bring home our military from overseas,cut way back on foreign aid and claim to cut back "pork" spending...yes we could! If you think that the money saved would be effectively used to improve our citizens lives now and for the future I would agree with your plan...but.....
We both know that the money will be wasted and tied up in bureaucracy paperwork and special "earmark" programs while the real cost of Hillary Care will escalate exponentially.

When that happens who will pay for the overruns? The same ones who are carrying the load now...the top 20% of earners. We will then have a bloated overloaded system of bureaucrats working on wholesale purchases of Viagra available to all men who pass a government screening to see if they are using the proper "protection".

My overall point is that the government delivers mail,fights real wars and gets roads built very well....but nothing else and it should not be expected to do so.

"...But don't you get it Pit? If you can't afford to spent 10,000 a year on health care, and you don't have 1,000,000 in the bank, then your a good for nothing bum who is sponging off of everybody else."

You need to turn that negativity and anger into something positive....can you afford to spend some time meditating? or is that too expensive too?

The progressive income tax program is in itself a socialist technique to fund government. Hell it is so ingrained in our psyche these days everyone accepts it as the norm. Certainly back in the mid to late 1800s a couple of guys named Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels developed the plan as the cornerstone of the "Communist Manifesto".
I am not trying to link our tax system to the Heathen Commies but explaining why some people dislike the theory of it.

I realize that many folks in the $18,500 group are working hard and to their maximum efficiency but really folks. Poor life choices are GENERALLY the cause of these lives of near poverty. If you are going to be trapped in a near minimum wage position throughout your adult life...unless you work on a farm...only have kids when you can adequately provide for them... and that includes health services when necessary.

And I agree with you also.

But that's the entire purpose of having a bi-partisan government. See,being realistic here,there WILL BE some form of national health care in this country within the next twenty years. It just has to and will happen. The public outcry is growing and eventually,we're going to have it.

The question is when and who will be in control and issue the guidelines for such a program? Right now,we have the good fortune of having at least a few moderate to conservative dems in the senate. Webb,Tester and Lieberman to name a few. And we have a GOP president and dem. congress.

So you can pass a moderate program that earmarks the money to this program and set the guidelines "with GOP input" and a moderate passed plan. Or,you can wait untill the entire shooting match is ran by the Dems at some point in the future and have "Hillary Care" as you like to phrase it.

The GOP has a chance to help create moderate health care now,or have a totally liberal give away program stuffed down their throats at a later time. That's why I feel the time is right for such a program to be open for discussion in our government.

I know your perception of me is a bleeding heart liberal,and that's okay if you feel that way. But I don't like monopolys in our government by either party. The GOP can choose to work with the dems for a moderate,more common sense approach to health care now,or have a liberal giveaway program later.

I don't want this left in the hands of the democrats. But unless the GOP accepts the fact that this WILL HAPPEN in the future,they may miss out on the oppertunity to help in creating a more efficiant and common sense approach to it than the Dems ever would or could.

That's my point here. Common sense legislation can be passed on this issue with bi-partisan input. But to believe national health care won't happen,they are fooling themselves and opening the door for a far more expencive and liberal plan in the future.

JMHO

Why should I contribute money towards other peoples health care? People I don't know or care about?

I already pay for ultra poor people, why should I give to the rest of the moderately poor?

What would they do for me?

You don't seem to mind doing it for the people of Iraq.
Do you care so much more about them than our own citizens?

You can do it now with GOP input,or wait untill later when the Dems control Washington. Which do you prefer? Because it will be a reality in our lifetime.

Hopefully you prefer to have GOP input,or you will deserve exactly what you end up with.

I think that by creating a democracy in Iraq we deal a significant blow to fanatical Islam. With democracy in Iraq we bring an example of the possibilities of life in a free country.

This is a way to protect the people of the U.S.A.

I think saying democracy in Iraq only benefits Iraqi's is a skewed opinion. It will benefit us as well. We will be more secure because we will have created an alternative to theocracy, an alternative to the hopelessness that fuels fanatical Islam.

In this way we help all Americans for now and the future.

But I don't see why I should spend my money on the health care of moderately poor Americans. To me America is about personal responsibility.

No,we won't.
We'll be withdrawing troops soon. A gradual withdraw,but it's coming. Italy just finished pulling out the last of its troops and more nations will follow. It's just the way it is.

Even now,both Shia and Sunni insurgents are embedded in Iraqs police and military. It's a civil war,not a freedom agenda. Soon you will see what I'm talking about. But for some reason,I feel you will have to see it to believe it.

And soon you shall. It's a reality many have seen for some time and many others are starting to grasp. Hanging on to lofty dreams defy the face of reality often times.

Hey, this is a health care thread. <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Anyhoo. If we withdraw now---we will be back.

Its unfortunate, but the Middle east will remain a threat to America--we have to address this problem. We can cut and run--let theocracy reign and count this as victory over the evil American war mongers. This will do nothing but rush a streak of boldness and a sense of purpose through every muslim fanatic in the Middle east.

Is that what we want? A whole lot lies in the balance in Iraq.

If we withdraw our troops will terrorism still exist--will we still be a target?

Of course.

Iraq may not have been the birthplace of Al-Qaida or fanatical muslim or theocracy, but it has become their war. We leave, they will shout victory. They have great PR. They have a greater recruitment tool.

<img src="/images/graemlins/rofl.gif" alt="" /> Maybe you didn't see the <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> You know wink, wink. I was <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> when I typed Ralphie <img src="/images/graemlins/rofl.gif" alt="" />