• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Republican, Conservative option for US Healthcare Reform

tomspug

Absorbant
Wow, what a surprise that when a Republican gives an example of conservative health-care reform, it sounds reasonable and when a Democrat gives an example of liberal health-care reform, it sounds reasonable.

Could it actually be possible that NEITHER side is evil? Surely not!
 

tomspug

Absorbant
Why do you think they didn't propose any of these things when they held the presidency, and majorities in both houses of Congress?
THIS, actually, is the key to the whole argument, in my opinion. Republicans certainly had their chance to make sweeping reform (which, I thought, was part of Bush's original agenda (before 9/11, of course)) and didn't.

I think its noble of Obama that he is apparently eager for bipartisanship. He doesn't exactly owe them anything, but there are a LOT of conservatives in that are sweeped up in a wave of angry (and blind) opposition. Change needs to happen, and it's the Democrat's turn now.
 

yossarian22

Resident Schizophrenic
Wow, what a surprise that when a Republican gives an example of conservative health-care reform, it sounds reasonable and when a Democrat gives an example of liberal health-care reform, it sounds reasonable.

Could it actually be possible that NEITHER side is evil? Surely not!
Guys the answer must be somewhere in the middle :D

No its not. Healthcare is no different from a utility and any attempt to try to foster more competition in the field is misguided as it ignores the fundamental problem of inelasticity.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
Why do you think they didn't propose any of these things when they held the presidency, and majorities in both houses of Congress?

cartoon20070720.gif
 

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
This is the perfect example. I believe that a mixed race boy who was raised without a father can become President. I believe that if you work hard and play by the rules, you can have a good life.

What the other side is saying, you can be irresponsible and have everything given to you for free.
 

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
This is the perfect example. I believe that a mixed race boy who was raised without a father can become President. I believe that if you work hard and play by the rules, you can have a good life.

What the other side is saying, you can be irresponsible and have everything given to you for free.

Actually, no, the people saying that a mixed race boy without a father can become President are called Democrats.
 

Smoke

Done here.
Kelly is still my favorite cartoonist. he is the best satirist out there imo
Cartoon-Childrens-Health.jpg
Based on that cartoon, I'm inclined to think he's an idiot.

The government is not your daddy, and is not there to raise you up in the way that you should go. The government is the people working together. Things that can be more efficiently and economically done by the government than by individuals -- building roads, providing military defense, providing education, providing healthcare -- are all equally proper areas for the government to have a hand in.
 

Jackytar

Ex-member
We have the votes to pass guaranteed issue (no pre-existing conditions), community rating (everybody pays the same, more-or-less) and the individual mandate.

This is historic change that will transform health care in America. The kind of change that eluded progressives for decades. They should be supporting this bill and stop whining about what it doesn't contain. Better is the enemy of good.

Jackytar
 

Engyo

Prince of Dorkness!
I still personally think our lawmakers shouldn't have taxpayer-paid healthcare that is better than most of their constituents have.
 

Attachments

  • Real_Life.Health.jpg
    19.5 KB · Views: 72

Alceste

Vagabond
This is the perfect example. I believe that a mixed race boy who was raised without a father can become President. I believe that if you work hard and play by the rules, you can have a good life.

No, you believe the little babies of parents who work moderately hard (too hard to qualify for medicaid but not hard enough to pay for private insurance) should suffer and / or die to pay for the shortcomings of their parents, and that families should have to choose between keeping their homes and saving their children's lives.

I know you don't "believe" this happens, but your belief has no basis in reality.

What the other side is saying, you can be irresponsible and have everything given to you for free.

The other side is saying your side is deranged.
 

yossarian22

Resident Schizophrenic
Based on that cartoon, I'm inclined to think he's an idiot.

The government is not your daddy, and is not there to raise you up in the way that you should go. The government is the people working together. Things that can be more efficiently and economically done by the government than by individuals -- building roads, providing military defense, providing education, providing healthcare -- are all equally proper areas for the government to have a hand in.
lol
this is why kelly has the best comics.
 

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
I know you don't "believe" this happens, but your belief has no basis in reality.
The reality is, you are saying children are dieing and it is just not so.
The other side is saying your side is deranged.

Your better than that Alceste. You are intelligent and present good arguments. No need to lower yourself with uncalled for insults.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
The reality is, you are saying children are dieing and it is just not so.

Death rates are higher for hospitalized children without insurance compared to those with insurance, the researchers found.

The study appeared recently in the Journal of Hospital Medicine, co-authored by Matthew M. Davis, M.D., M.A.P.P., associate professor of general pediatrics and internal medicine at the Child Health Evaluation and Research (CHEAR) Unit of the U-M Medical School; and Rachel N. Caskey, M.D., M.A.P.P., of the University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine.

“As health care providers and institutions expand their efforts to meet the needs of severely ill children and their families, they need to be aware of the higher mortality rates among the youngest children, those without insurance coverage and those who are transferred from one hospital to another,” notes Davis, who also is the director of the C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital National Poll on Children’s Health and associate professor of public policy at the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at U-M.


Your better than that Alceste. You are intelligent and present good arguments. No need to lower yourself with uncalled for insults.
When you stop doing it, I'll stop too. :)
 

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
The reality is, you are saying children are dieing and it is just not so.

Sadly, Rick, it is. The system you value so much, the one you are willing to spend twice as much for as any other country on earth, is killing children. Children die, in America, because they don't have health insurance.

Why do you think we have a higher infant mortality rate than 28 other countries? Several countries in Scandinavia (Sweden, Norway, Finland) and East Asia (Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore) have an infant mortality rate below 3.5, almost half the US rate. The CDC's 2004 rankings placed the US in a tie with Poland and Slovakia, and only marginally ahead of Puerto Rico and Chile. The US was behind every developed country in North America, Western Europe, and Australasia, as well as Cuba, Hungary, Israel, and the Czech Republic. What do you think all of the countries with a lower infant mortality rate than us have in common? Take a wild guess.

I think you know from experience that I would not make this claim if it were not true, and I could not back it up with cites, right?
 
Last edited:

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
I am not disputing your cites. I want a better health care system as well. I'm not saying we cannot improve health care. The fact that everyone is ignoring is, we will need more facilities to accomplish this goal. We will need more doctors and nurses as well.

If you have a boat that will hold 100 people safely and you load the boat with 150 persons it will sink and everyone will suffer. Now, from my perspective, you want 50 people to get off the boat so a different 50 can board the boat.

Or...... do you want to overload the boat?

I'm saying we need more boats, but they are expensive. If my cost per person to buy another boat is 100 dollars a head, I cannot receive 50 dollars a head and afford another boat. If I only have one skipper, I will need to find more skippers.

Lets say we are on the titanic and have a limited amount of life boats. If we overload the life boats, everyone will suffer. We have some hard choices to make. I say women and children get on the boats first.
 
Top