Dismiss Notice
Thanks for being a member of our community. Please donate toward site expenses if you can.

Single payer healthcare is a no-brainer

Discussion in 'Health Care' started by SpaceCricket79, Oct 23, 2012.

Page 2 of 3
  1. FFbat

    FFbat New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2012
    Messages:
    1,023
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither."

    Anybody who would want to give up even the smallest bit of their liberty by allowing the Gov to interfere with their personal business is simply sacrificing it for a little security. It opens up a whole line of thinking that allows the gov to get a little more into your own affairs. And that's unacceptable.
     
    FFbat, Oct 25, 2012
    #26
  2. SpaceCricket79

    SpaceCricket79 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2012
    Messages:
    12,934
    Likes Received:
    108
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I still disagree.

    Plus no one would be forced to use the single-payer care anyway, so it's a moot point. They'd have more 'liberty' since they'd have multiple options.
     
    SpaceCricket79, Oct 25, 2012
    #27
  3. FFbat

    FFbat New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2012
    Messages:
    1,023
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    so Liberty only goes to those who can afford it? the more you describe this, the more Dystopian it sounds.
     
    FFbat, Oct 25, 2012
    #28
  4. The Real American Thinker

    The Real American Thinker New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,167
    Likes Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This assumes that any interference of the government in your life is a loss of liberty. With that ridiculous notion, you might as well do away with the government all together, lest you lose liberty every time the postman delivers your mail.
     
    The Real American Thinker, Oct 25, 2012
    #29
  5. FFbat

    FFbat New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2012
    Messages:
    1,023
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You don't have everything digital? How shameful wasting trees. =P

    But seriously, the mail was originated in the US constitution of the postal clause to facilitate interstate communication. This was necessary for the gov to operate. And even then it had it's detractors among the founding fathers who were gov minimalists.

    There is a difference between seeing a line between the survival of the state / personal liberty of an individual and being an Anarchist.
     
    FFbat, Oct 25, 2012
    #30
  6. The Real American Thinker

    The Real American Thinker New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,167
    Likes Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lol. Hey, I have an iPhone, I'm posting on it now :razz: I do think we take for granted the simplicity of a handwritten letter, or the feel of a newspaper in our hands. I'll never give those up.

    I don't disagree. I guess I just disagree on where to put that line. To me, adequate and affordable healthcare for all is a necessity for both the survival of the state and the personal liberty of the individual. It's all tied together and interwoven like a basket. If you look at our freedoms as just one of those wicker pieces, you miss out on the basket.
     
    The Real American Thinker, Oct 25, 2012
    #31
  7. Collateral Damage

    Collateral Damage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    10,535
    Likes Received:
    8,149
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And the government does suck at it.

    If it goes to private (non-government) single-payer system, do you not think the government would be heavily involved? Regulations, mandatory levels of coverage, much like the ACA? So healthcare would be the government, under another name.

    Not only their involvement in the administrative aspect, but government access to the actual information. That i have major issues with. They have no need to know ANYTHING about my healthcare.
     
    Collateral Damage, Oct 25, 2012
    #32
  8. Collateral Damage

    Collateral Damage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    10,535
    Likes Received:
    8,149
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I ask again, how do you think this 'single-payer system for low income' would be funded? Again, taxpayer money. So it would be paid for the exact same way it's paid for now.
     
    Collateral Damage, Oct 25, 2012
    #33
  9. SpaceCricket79

    SpaceCricket79 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2012
    Messages:
    12,934
    Likes Received:
    108
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Except equally distributed, not left solely on the hands of those who actually pay their own bills.
     
    SpaceCricket79, Oct 25, 2012
    #34
  10. Collateral Damage

    Collateral Damage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    10,535
    Likes Received:
    8,149
    Trophy Points:
    113
    MC/MA is aready 'equally distributed' via taxes. So the savings you tout would be minimal, if existant at all.

    And FYI, the hospitals and medical offices DO go after those who don't pay their bills, and haven't made other arrangements. Collection agencies, deduction from state income tax returns, credit reporting. So there is some monetary penalty for those who shirk their duties.
     
    Collateral Damage, Oct 25, 2012
    #35
  11. tkolter

    tkolter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,134
    Likes Received:
    598
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There is one flaw in this arguement no one in the US will support what your proposing enough to get this done you have to deal with insurance companies, doctors, patiants who would be afraid of such change just look at the ACA and other groups that have the money and/or resolve to kill this idea fast. Look at Hillarycare the Republicans proposed the Obamacare mandates and all and killed Hillarycare then they tried to kill Obamacare and so far failed. Its the best we have in the ACA and your not going to get something seen as more strict in place not without a full collapse of the health care industry.
     
    tkolter, Oct 25, 2012
    #36
  12. SpaceCricket79

    SpaceCricket79 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2012
    Messages:
    12,934
    Likes Received:
    108
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Eh? Let it collapse then and let a new system rise from the ashes. The ACA is not what I want, I want an alternative system, not the govt using the private industry to distribute its own healthcare plan.
     
    SpaceCricket79, Oct 25, 2012
    #37
  13. The Real American Thinker

    The Real American Thinker New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,167
    Likes Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, regulating the private sector does not make the private sector "government, under another name." If that were true, the private sector wouldn't exist.
     
    The Real American Thinker, Oct 25, 2012
    #38
  14. Collateral Damage

    Collateral Damage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    10,535
    Likes Received:
    8,149
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Specifically referenced to the healthcare industry, as put forth in this discussion. The ACA is the government by another name. They are dictating all aspects of it.
     
    Collateral Damage, Oct 25, 2012
    #39
  15. The Real American Thinker

    The Real American Thinker New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,167
    Likes Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The ACA is government control, sure, but the ACA is vastly different than single-payer, and the ACA isn't even really universal healthcare.
     
    The Real American Thinker, Oct 25, 2012
    #40
  16. FFbat

    FFbat New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2012
    Messages:
    1,023
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And there we have an agreement to agree to disagree. And unless you or I somehow get elected to the supreme court, it's above our pay grade to ever consider imposing such standards to the collective of the United States... That doesn't change my views in the slightest, however.

    And on a side note, I could do without handwritten letters, but Books... I have to have a bound stack of papers in my hand if i'm going to read a novel, it only feels natural that way.
     
    FFbat, Oct 25, 2012
    #41
  17. The Real American Thinker

    The Real American Thinker New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,167
    Likes Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I wouldn't have it any other way :) We need to have different views to make the country work. Plus, if everyone agreed all the time, life would be boring :razz:

    I know right? I have a Nook, but I only use it if I'm traveling and can't take a hundred books with me. If I'm at home, it collects dust while my books in their original bindings from as far back as the late 1800s sit in pristine condition.
     
    The Real American Thinker, Oct 25, 2012
    #42
  18. FFbat

    FFbat New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2012
    Messages:
    1,023
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have no respect for E-Readers after the Kindle Content controversy with the George Orwell books. If I have a book in my home, you can pry it from my cold dead hands. Even have a mechanism that could easily promote retroactive censorship is appalling to me.
     
    FFbat, Oct 25, 2012
    #43
  19. The Real American Thinker

    The Real American Thinker New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,167
    Likes Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oooh, what controversy?
     
    The Real American Thinker, Oct 25, 2012
    #44
  20. FFbat

    FFbat New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2012
    Messages:
    1,023
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    FFbat, Oct 25, 2012
    #45
  21. The Real American Thinker

    The Real American Thinker New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,167
    Likes Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wow, that's crazy...and yet, I'm not surprised.
     
    The Real American Thinker, Oct 25, 2012
    #46
  22. SpaceCricket79

    SpaceCricket79 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2012
    Messages:
    12,934
    Likes Received:
    108
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Then that means the publisher of 1984 and George Orwell's books did not want them to be available on Kindle - so you have to blame the publisher of those books, not some big conspiracy theory.
     
    SpaceCricket79, Oct 25, 2012
    #47
  23. FFbat

    FFbat New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2012
    Messages:
    1,023
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    FFbat, Oct 25, 2012
    #48
  24. FFbat

    FFbat New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2012
    Messages:
    1,023
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, these books are available on the Kindle, but they were also available through a counterfeit publisher.

    The point being here is that the Kindle has the ability to monitor and alter our experiences with literature without our consent.
     
    FFbat, Oct 25, 2012
    #49
  25. Collateral Damage

    Collateral Damage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    10,535
    Likes Received:
    8,149
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The single payer system that the OP was wanting would fall under the description of 'government by another name', since it would be paid for via taxes and regulated by the government.

    The ACA is one of the worst pieces of legislation I have ever seen put together. It attempts to pacify those wanting UHC, blended with small gratuitous throw outs to be able to say its NOT UHC.
    r
    ACA has perhaps three good points, and that is all. It is the obvious precursor to UHC.
     
    Collateral Damage, Oct 25, 2012
    #50
Page 2 of 3

Share This Page