Joe Wilson's Free Health Care

[tonymctones]

...I know, it's technically taxpayer-funded government-run socialised healthcare.

But hey, that's what we Europeans mean when we say "free healthcare".



The Luke

Its not free as in they work for it brain child

do ppl who work for a private company and recieve health care from them get free health care?

you dont seem to understand that the same options that are afforded to soldiers etc. are afforded to citizens that work for public companies as well.

you seem to want to justify giving healthcare to all b/c a soldier has health care they work for  

[The Luke]

In exchange for work, the military provides its employees and their families healthcare. 

...you're right.

The soldiers work for their taxpayer-funded government-run socialised healthcare... their wives and kids get it for free.



The Luke

[grab an umbrella]

...you're right.

The soldiers work for their taxpayer-funded government-run socialised healthcare... their wives and kids get it for free.



The Luke

You're laughable. 

[Skip8282]

...yeah, I read that. But it's hardly what I was asking for: a reason why certain people get free healthcare that doesn't equally apply to all those who don't.

Sorry, I thought you were being dismissive and evasive... seems you simply don't understand.



The Luke

Again, you just don't agree with them and you're not bright enough to make that distinction.


And again, why are you crying about something that has absolutely no effect on you?  (I love how you keep dodging this one)

[tonymctones]

...you're right.

The soldiers work for their taxpayer-funded government-run socialised healthcare... their wives and kids get it for free.



The Luke

so do other ppl who recieve health care through their work their children get covered as well...

[The Luke]

See how much progress we're making in this thread...


After all the reguritated Republican propoganda, after all the parroted soundbytes... after several pages of continuosly calling the healthcare reform naysayers on their misconceptions and challenging their illogical preconceptions... finally, finally we've have reached some agreement:

-soldiers (and some government workers) DO receive taxpayer-funded government-run socialised healthcare

-the spouses and children of soldiers DO receive FREE taxpayer-funded government-run socialised healthcare

-dependants of soldiers need make NO contribution whatsoever towards their FREE socialised healthcare


Now that we are all agreed on that, I assume it will be an easy step from this point of agreement to reach a consensus that all of the above is a good thing (if you disagree, you dont support the troops!).

And seeing as there is no good reason why some Americans (dependants of sodiers) should receive FREE taxpayer-funded government-run socialised healthcare WITHOUT ever working for it (or ever even working at all), while coverage is denied other Americans.

I think the only logical conclusion is that healthcare reform (even universial healthcare) poses no real danger to the status quo, considering:

-Americans over 65 already have taxpayer subsidised government-run socialised healthcare

-American veterans already have FREE taxpayer-funded government-run socialised healthcare

-the dependants of soldiers (can) already have FREE taxpayer-funded government-run socialised healthcare WITHOT ever enlisting in the army; WITHOUT ever paying taxes; WITHOUT ever woking a day in their lives


So what's the problem?



The Luke

[tonymctones]

first of all its not free

giving health care to all would be free as they arent working for it soldiers are...

families are included by employers in their healthcare to workers here in the US try and understand that.

[The Luke]

first of all its not free

giving health care to all would be free as they arent working for it soldiers are...

families are included by employers in their healthcare to workers here in the US try and understand that.

...well then, we agree.

SOLDIERS actually WORK for their healthcare.

The FAMILIES of soldiers (who work for their healthcare), the FAMILIES get FREE taxpayer-funded government-run socialised healthcare.

The families of soldiers don't have to work for this free socialised healthcare. The families don't have to enlist to get this free socialised healthcare. The families don't even have to work for this free socialised healthcare, many have never worked a day in their lives. The families don't have to pay taxes for this free socialised healthcare they receive, many have never paid any taxes in their lives.

Just once we are clear eactly what we are agreeing on...

..and we do agree.


Soldiers WORK for their healthcare... soldiers dependants sponge free healthcare from taxpayers without ever contributing to society.


The Luke

[tonymctones]

...well then, we agree.

SOLDIERS actually WORK for their healthcare.

The FAMILIES of soldiers (who work for their healthcare), the FAMILIES get FREE taxpayer-funded government-run socialised healthcare.

The families of soldiers don't have to work for this free socialised healthcare. The families don't have to enlist to get this free socialised healthcare. The families don't even have to work for this free socialised healthcare, many have never worked a day in their lives. The families don't have to pay taxes for this free socialised healthcare they receive, many have never paid any taxes in their lives.

Just once we are clear eactly what we are agreeing on...

..and we do agree.


Soldiers WORK for their healthcare... soldiers dependants sponge free healthcare from taxpayers without ever contributing to society.


The Luke

what a jack ass you are

its part of the soldiers health care benefits that they include their family if it helps you to look at all of the family as one do that dip shit

the children of private company employees dont contribute either you want to cut their health care? no b/c guess what that was the agreed upon contract...

get the fuck over it

[Skip8282]

See how much progress we're making in this thread...


After all the reguritated Republican propoganda, after all the parroted soundbytes... after several pages of continuosly calling the healthcare reform naysayers on their misconceptions and challenging their illogical preconceptions... finally, finally we've have reached some agreement:

-soldiers (and some government workers) DO receive taxpayer-funded government-run socialised healthcare

-the spouses and children of soldiers DO receive FREE taxpayer-funded government-run socialised healthcare

-dependants of soldiers need make NO contribution whatsoever towards their FREE socialised healthcare


The Luke

We came to this agreement 2 pages ago.  Obviously shot way over your head.

[The Luke]

its part of the soldiers health care benefits that they include their family if it helps you to look at all of the family as one do that dip shit

We came to this agreement 2 pages ago.  Obviously shot way over your head.

...so this is the healthcare system that doesn't need to be reformed?

You get healthcare based on who your daddy is, and whether your daddy has family coverage?


So your objection to reform is that it might be "socialist"... and you prefer the current system which is best described as "feudalist"... or is it "fascist"?


The Luke

[tonymctones]

...so this is the healthcare system that doesn't need to be reformed?

You get healthcare based on who your daddy is, and whether your daddy has family coverage?


So your objection to reform is that it might be "socialist"... and you prefer the current system which is best described as "feudalist"... or is it "fascist"?


The Luke

hahahah the majority of americans are for health care reform you dumb fuck get a damn clue

we simply arent for govt single payer health care or paying for another govt hand out programs is all...

[Skip8282]

...so this is the healthcare system that doesn't need to be reformed?

You get healthcare based on who your daddy is, and whether your daddy has family coverage?


So your objection to reform is that it might be "socialist"... and you prefer the current system which is best described as "feudalist"... or is it "fascist"?


The Luke

Nope, told you earlier in this thread that we need severe health reform and that I'm leaning towards socialized medicine.  Read, THINK, post, repeat...

I take issue with your argument that because the military has a benefit, all should have that benefit.

Again, just because the POTUS and his FAMILY have access to a TAX PAYER FUNDED personal chef, does not mean that everybody is entitled to a tax payer funded personal chef.

[The Luke]

we simply arent for govt single payer health care or paying for another govt hand out programs is all...

...good idea.

You wouldn't want to end up like the first 36 countries in this list:

WHO World Health Report ranking of the top heathcare systems by country (2000)
1         France
2         Italy
3         San Marino
4         Andorra
5         Malta
6         Singapore
7         Spain
8         Oman
9         Austria
10        Japan
11        Norway
12        Portugal
13        Monaco
14        Greece
15        Iceland
16        Luxembourg
17        Netherlands
18        United  Kingdom
19        Ireland
20        Switzerland
21        Belgium
22        Colombia
23        Sweden
24        Cyprus
25        Germany
26        Saudi Arabia
27        United  Arab  Emirates
28        Israel
29        Morocco
30        Canada
31        Finland
32        Australia
33        Chile
34        Denmark
35        Dominica
36        Costa Rica
37        United States of America

...to the best of my knowledge America is the ONLY country on this list that was smart enough to avoid the dangers of universial government run healthcare.

Luckily, nearly 80% of Americans now enjoy a 78% chance of being covered should the worst ever happen... and thanks to the efficiencies of the free market all they have to do is pay roughly three times in premiums what the French pay in taxes.

You guys sure are smart... pay through the nose all your life, then roll two dice... if either one comes up snake-eye you go bankrupt (and untreated).


The Luke

[The Luke]

Again, just because the POTUS and his FAMILY have access to a TAX PAYER FUNDED personal chef, does not mean that everybody is entitled to a tax payer funded personal chef.

...maybe that's the problem. Those with good coverage have no incentive to change the system.


If the French President needs an operation, he goes into the same system as everyone else... on the same priority list as everyone else... gets the same care as everyone else.

France has the best healthcare system in the world, and it costs them roughly 60% of what America (37th best) spends... and only 80% of Americans are covered, only 78% of the time.

A health insuance premium payer in the US pays approximately 3 times what the average Frenchman pays via taxes for his healthcare.


The PROBLEM in the US is inequality... some have benefits others DON'T have.


The Luke

[tonymctones]

LOL nothing you have said cant be resolved with simple health care reform and not govt single payer health care dip shit congrats on making my point

the only reason to go to a single payer is to grant another govt hand out program billions in tax payer money...

[Skip8282]

...maybe that's the problem. Those with good coverage have no incentive to change the system.


If the French President needs an operation, he goes into the same system as everyone else... on the same priority list as everyone else... gets the same care as everyone else.


The Luke

I think we can agree here.  Our law makers like to make themselves exempt and give themselves ridiculous perks.  12 years of the Bush's and not a single health care reform.  And I think there's a good chance that because it didn't affect them, they didn't give a damn.

[The Luke]

the only reason to go to a single payer is to grant another govt hand out program billions in tax payer money...

...and those billions should go to HMOs with their 30% overheads; 80% coverage; 21% denial of coverage; "pre-existing condition" exclusions; cherry-picking of cutomers; dropping of unprofitable customers and punitive premiums.

...it would be terrible if those billions went to doctors; hospitals and a Medicare style system with its 4% overhead; universial coverage; no denial of coverage; no "pre-existing conditions" exclusion; no cherry-picking of customers; no dropping of coverage and premiums so low HMOs couldn't compete.


Medicare works... but is underfunded.
The VA works... but is underfunded.
Medicaid works... but is underfunded.

With single payer the government programs get all the profitable healthy young working people that the HMOs have been cherry-picking and fleecing (then refusing to cover when they get too old, or too sick). Funding problem averted.

It boils down to a simple question...
Do you want to pay wholesale (single payer) or retail (HMOs) prices?


The Luke  

[tonymctones]

...and those billions should go to HMOs with their 30% overheads; 80% coverage; 21% denial of coverage; "pre-existing condition" exclusions; cherry-picking of cutomers; dropping of unprofitable customers and punitive premiums.

...it would be terrible if those billions went to doctors; hospitals and a Medicare style system with its 4% overhead; universial coverage; no denial of coverage; no "pre-existing conditions" exclusion; no cherry-picking of customers; no dropping of coverage and premiums so low HMOs couldn't compete.


Medicare works... but is underfunded.
The VA works... but is underfunded.
Medicaid works... but is underfunded.

With single payer the government programs get all the profitable healthy young working people that the HMOs have been cherry-picking and fleecing (then refusing to cover when they get too old, or too sick). Funding problem averted.

It boils down to a simple question...
Do you want to pay wholesale (single payer) or retail (HMOs) prices?


The Luke  

again nothing youve stated cant be solved with health care reform by itself without universal health care

so why go to universal?

[The Luke]

again nothing youve stated cant be solved with health care reform by itself without universal health care

so why go to universal?

...it's cheaper, doesn't discriminate and stops profiteering.

Also, every county with better healthcare than America uses universial coverage.


The Luke

[tonymctones]

...it's cheaper, doesn't discriminate and stops profiteering.

Also, every county with better healthcare than America uses universial coverage.


The Luke

reform will lower health care cost, can eliminate discrimination and govt run programs especially one as big as this one have to work for profit or the loss and burden on the tax payers would be enormous.

universal health care isnt synonomous with better health care then the US we can improve with simple reform and not universal.

now that this issue is resolved

please answer skips question why the fuck do you even care?

[The Luke]

reform will lower health care cost, can eliminate discrimination and govt run programs especially one as big as this one have to work for profit or the loss and burden on the tax payers would be enormous.

...what makes you think this?

If a universial system just breaks even (via taxes) then there is NO "burden" on the taxpayer, they just get the healthcare they paid for... Americans currently have to pay for their (shitty) healthcare AND the exorbitat costs and profits of HMOs.

This is basic intoductory economics... how can you believe otherwise?

universal health care isnt synonomous with better health care then the US we can improve with simple reform and not universal.

...what makes you think this?

As per the list I posted, the top 36 healthcare sytems in the world are universial healthcare systems. That's pretty synonymous.

One thing is for sure, universial healthcare is certainly synonymous with better healthcare if you define "better" as "Better than America's".


Where do these blatant lies and mistruthes come from? How can rational adults believe such patently absurd notions? Who is feeding you this propoganda?

Turn off your television... FOX News is lying to you.


The Luke

[tonymctones]

...what makes you think this?

If a universial system just breaks even (via taxes) then there is NO "burden" on the taxpayer, they just get the healthcare they paid for... Americans currently have to pay for their (shitty) healthcare AND the exorbitat costs and profits of HMOs.

This is basic intoductory economics... how can you believe otherwise?

...what makes you think this?

As per the list I posted, the top 36 healthcare sytems in the world are universial healthcare systems. That's pretty synonymous.

One thing is for sure, universial healthcare is certainly synonymous with better healthcare if you define "better" as "Better than America's".


Where do these blatant lies and mistruthes come from? How can rational adults believe such patently absurd notions? Who is feeding you this propoganda?

Turn off your television... FOX News is lying to you.


The Luke

LOL and what makes you think health care run by the US govt will break even?  apparently you dont know much about our govt programs lol

LOL again why do you care?

[The Luke]

LOL and what makes you think health care run by the US govt will break even?  apparently you dont know much about our govt programs lol

...why do you refuse to believe it might be efficient?

It's pretty efficient in 36 other countries? Even if it cost twice as much as the French system, it would still work out cheaper for the average American (the same cost, but spread over everyone via taxes... not just the pemium payers).


Maybe you should consider the source fom which you gleamed such a viewpoint...?

No rational person could develop such an opinion from independent research and logical analysis, as such beliefs are entirely at odds with reality.

So your opinion on this matter is obviously some learned conditioning or propoganda... so who supplied it?

Well, who benefits? The HMOs? Corporate culture? Those who profit from the staus quo?

Remember, if you buy into the propoganda... if you accept it as your own opinion, your own thoughts... you aren't just controlled by the propogandists... they own you.


FOX News is lying to you... boycott it.


The Luke

[tonymctones]

...why do you refuse to believe it might be efficient?

It's pretty efficient in 36 other countries? Even if it cost twice as much as the French system, it would still work out cheaper for the average American (the same cost, but spread over everyone via taxes... not just the pemium payers).


Maybe you should consider the source fom which you gleamed such a viewpoint...?

No rational person could develop such an opinion from independent research and logical analysis, as such beliefs are entirely at odds with reality.

name one us govt run program that runs in the black? go ahead, now name the govt programs that run in the red go ahead that will take a while

you know nothing of our situation so stfu

its common fucking sense that a public option will drive private insurers out of business, its our track record that it will run in the red what else do you need dumb ass?

you still never asnwered why you care or addressed the point that all your problems can be addressed with health care reform and do not need a universal system