Thread: Health Insurance in the USA

Originally Posted by AussiePostie

Point 1 - Correct I do not know what you are thinking or feeling.Only what you are saying. You have only ever lived under the private system so you have only ever seen one side of the coin.
I do know what I am talking about because in Australia we have both systems and no one I know has ever been screwed under Medicare but I know people who have had very bad experiences with their private insurers.
Point 2 - So unless someone asks for your help you won,t give it? Has everyone in America got your phone number just incase they need your help? Would it not be easier to do away with all those time consuming phone calls and just chip in a little, you know, help out some fellow human beings without having to be asked. It will make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside!

Do you normally twist peoples words or do you really not get what I have said?

Originally Posted by JMS

Do you normally twist peoples words or do you really not get what I have said?

Dear JMS,
I am sorry if I have appeared ignorant or offended you in any way. I am a simple man and like simple answers and seeing as I have not even visited your country let alone lived there you are probably right in the fact that I don,t know what i am talking about. So I will not bother you again and will keep my opinions on this subject to my self.
I truly mean this,I wish you all good luck in whatever your government decides to do.
Yours Truly Steve.

Originally Posted by JMS

We are not in the habit of letting our fellow citizens die in the streets.

New York City disagrees.

http://www.nyc.gov/html/records/pdf/...-mar08_rpt.pdf

36 reported homeless deaths per quarter. As of early 2008.

Originally Posted by JMS

Lets start with this:10 Surprising Facts about American Health*Care - Brief Analysis #649

Ummm, Mark... have you seen the board of directors of the 'thinktank' that came up with that article?

The mission started to sound a little fishy to me: "The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy research organization, established in 1983. The NCPA's goal is to develop and promote private alternatives to government regulation and control, solving problems by relying on the strength of the competitive, entrepreneurial private sector."

You see, that sounds like a pretty big in-your-face agenda that says to me they have vested interests in keeping the status quo.

SO I looked into who's on the board of the NCPA. Who's calling the shots? Who's driving the agenda? Quite an impressive list it turns out. Amongst all the CEOs of large businesses, they include:

WILLIAM J. GEDWED serves as President and Chief Executive Officer of HealthMarkets®. Mr. Gedwed serves as a Director and Chairman of the Board of Directors of The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company, Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of Tennessee based in Texas, The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company and Fidelity First Insurance Company.

W. Mike Baggett has been Chairman and CEO of the law firm of Winstead Sechrest & Minick P.C. since 1992. The firm has more than 300 attorneys in 7 cities.

John C. Goodman is NCPA president and CEO of the National Center for Policy Analysis. The Wall Street Journal and the National Journal, among other publications, have called him the "Father of Health Savings Accounts," ... Dr. Goodman's health policy blog is the only right-of-center health care blog on the Internet. It is the only place where pro-free enterprise, private sector solutions to health care problems are routinely examined and debated.

Plus some investment bankers (I wonder if their investment funds have any interests in insurance businesses? Hmmm...) and Chairman of the Board is Pete du Pont who has served as a state legislator, U.S. Congressman, Governor, and in 1988 was a Republican candidate for President of the United States.

If you were to put together a team to cherry-pick the studies which will further the agenda of the current US health system, I'm not sure you could find a better crew.

What next? A link in the religion thread to the Vatican website to show how science is not the way forward?

Originally Posted by JMS

We who do not wish to have a national health care system do not wish for a dog eat dog world. We do however believe in the goodness of our fellow man and do not think it is the governments job to twist our arm into doing what the government deems best.

Well, Mark, my friend ...

If the gov will end up twisting your arm, you'll just have to suck it up. Kinda like the 20% of Americans who did not agree with starting a pointless war that ended up costing over 3 trillions of dollars. They had no choice in the matter either.

At least it was money well spent.

.
.
.

Uh...

.
.
.

Wait a minute...

Originally Posted by Bruno

Kinda like the 20% of Americans who did not agree with starting a pointless war that ended up costing over 3 trillions of dollars. They had no choice in the matter either.

At least it was money well spent.

flame baiting!

off-topic!

irrelevant!

foul, no fair, foul!

PS we won

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

Everyone who wants to help her out, get her paypal address and send her some money.

The appeal to pity is lost on me as a valid argument for government-funded socialism though

Thats the perfect arguement for anarchy, which I agree with.
In if someone asks in an anarchic society how would people fund healthcare then you just ask them how much($$$) do you care about health. If people care they will pay , and donate and help , if they do not they will not and have no business bringing up such a point in a discussion if they dont even care enough themselves to contribiute.
Same goes for what happens to the poor in an anarchic society, "You care about the poor? , are you currently devoting any time/energy/resources to helping the poor?, if you are thats how the poor will be cared for, if not then dont be asking because you obviously dont care.

+1 on not letting the pity or over sympathy warp your reason and truth.
Sympathy is usefull and reasonable and very human up to a point, but there is such a thing as over sympathising and then letting somebody get away with things they should not like warping reason/truth.
(that last bit isnt specifically about the lady in the video as this was only present in minor parts of her story, there are other examples in society where its use is far less minor)