Americans Right to Bear Arms

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

EdelBrock wrote: Where Government needs to be in the healthcare system is in regulation NOT as an insurer. Preexisting conditions have been a loophole for many of the insurance companies, but there is a point to it also (but widely abused). You can't have a small percentage of people absorbing all the costs of the rest of the insurance holders, but at the same time, there should be a modified health insurance even if they won't insure you for the existing condition to take care of health outside the condition.

Really? There's a "point" to denying sick people the ability to get medical treatment? And what point is that? Following that logic, only the healthy should be able to get medical treatment.

Of course, if there's a profiteering middle-man bureaucrat-- let's call him an "insurer"-- standing between you and your doctor, and whose only function is to decide whether you can see a doctor or not, based solely on whether he can make a profit at the end of the day, then yes, it does make sense that pre-existing conditions should be excluded. They would sink the system if they were covered.

But denying sick people access to medical care? That makes sense to you? More sense than eliminating a middle-man whose sole function is to make a profit by excluding the sick and charging a fee to the healthy?

???? Not sure what you are on about. There are times when a sickness is too far progressed that throwing money at it is no use. However, as in using Cambo's example, it makes no sense that the individual loses ALL coverage, even for things outside the terminal health issue.

I am not nessicarily against a government program for health care, but AGAIN, Obama is putting the cart before the horse.

FIRST regulation of medical and medicine charges needs to be brought under control. This needs to be implimented and give sometime to take hold in the market. Once this has stabalized, THEN the govt. should put in a health care system. Trying to complete both at the exact same time is too much to tackle all at once. It will become a complete mess and costs will spiral out of control.

Not to mention everyone should pay into the system. The welfare programs in our country need revamping as they are sucking our country dry, and this will only become another such one. If people don't pay into the system, then they don't get the coverage... that's how it should be.

Good Christian attitudes there.

And yeh, Jesus did look upon the lame and say "screw you, freeloaders".

What happens in the service? You're lying there in Iraq with your organs in the sand and the medic says "sorry buddy, your insurance doesn't cover this?". Or did each soldier receive slightly less pay than they otherwise would (sort of a tax), regardless of their rank, so that each soldier would have access to whatever medical care they needed, regardless of rank, but based purely on their needs?

Basic healthcare for all should really be considered as a bare minimum standard in order to call yourself a civilised nation. The costs are microscopic compared with the benefits, as well as compared to the enormous amounts it seems to be OK to spend killing innocents in their own country. What you don't want of course, is people getting tit-jobs on the Govt's coin as has been known to happen in the UK.

Just remember Edel, this is a personal issue for me, in ths US I would have been left to die, I'm less than eager to praise such a system.

PS: For the record, I've got a terribly painful condition Edel, but it's not fooking TERMINAL (in fairness, I found out about 18months ago that it's perfectly capable of killing me, but it's not the normal outcome of the thing). When I think of some of the things people live with every day, egg sized swellings in me pits and me groin that cause unbearable agony FROM TIME TO TIME, seems like getting off REALLY lightly.

When have I ever defended the current system?

I mentioned it needs to be fixed in a specific order, not the all-at-once plan like Obama is trying to do.

We could get a catostrophic mess set up by next year that would never get fixed in the next hundred years, or we could start the process of setting one up slowly and methodically, taking about 20 years to get the system full under way that actually WORKS.

The only people I don't care about are those that live life irresponsibly, don't even try to have any health insurance, and thier health problems are self-induced, yet when they get sick expect that everyone else should be responsible for them and pick up thier slack.
I doubt you or many others fit in that catagory Cambo.

political discussions like this always make me want to pee. i used to listen to talk radio for 8yrs just recently until february when i realized that a bunch of jackasses were about to elect someone who may just do worse than the previous person.

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

EdelBrock wrote:

Jeffari-al-Texani wrote: and another thing...where the fuck was that picture taken???

you can't wear a holstered gun in Texas, and I thought we were the end all/be all for gun rights in the States???

You can wear a holstered gun, as long as EVERYONE can see it and the gun has a permit. (though I'm sure the police would hassle you every block or so). You need a special permit for a concealed weapon.

Yeah, and you can show up at a President Bush appearance with said holstered gun, no problem.

Sure you can.

Does anybody remember "Free Speech Areas"? Anybody?

I remember Billy the fucking kid...stick that up your shitter and draw punk! :bandit:

Edel,I'm all for cliches,they are fantastic..But your beloved 'cart before the horse' is only applicable here on healthcare,outside the fascist elitist context for me. Never the twain shall meet.We could hammer out a million cliches... I know it's a bit different and somewhat gnarly bollocks in your neck of the woods,I've heard a bit of Radio 4,which makes me the new world authority on the matter hahaha

Fact is,we pay our taxes here and in return we get looked after if needs be,even if that promise may be a constant expensive struggle for government the NHS,the taxpayer and everyone involved..

It's the one service we socialists hold dear and don't mind paying for.It would be criminal to not look after WW2 vets for free for just one example..How do you look after yours?

Is Obama trying to usher it in over there?If he is then he is a truely a worthy president.

Some Tory politicians are coming out with rubbish that the NHS is no longer the envy of the world,but they would say that,tossers..Of course it is

Yours is a completely different culture in this regard. Taxes should be spent primarily on Defence(not offence,as it gets abused as) Healthcare,Education and Welfare(which needs a kick up the arse,granted) then infrastucture,development etc etc.In that order,then the job is right...The corrupt wankers get it wrong all over the gaff,but it's not that difficult.

The British system is grand, from what I understand. A proper healthcare system is good for the government to be involved in.

However, where Obama scares me is he is trying to set up a system without first properly solving the real problems plaguing our system.

1. Overpricing by doctors, hospitals and medicine companies

2. Healthcare companies allowed to toss isurers around like dried cow patties.

These need to be regulated properly first, and its such a mess over here, it would take 20years before it really took ahold of the system.

Putting in a British system now only complicated the mess we already have, not to mention that fraud, abuse and over-expense will make the public healthcare system costs fly into astronomical numbers.

Anyone who thinks the government can fix the system with this inplace need only look at our welfare system, which is completely abused and a mess. Why let the government have one mess it can't handle, when it could have two?