Jump to content
✨ STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE WORLD TOUR ✨

Americans must now buy bad health insurance policies - even if they don't need them.


Saffire

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Sorry to sound dumb but americans seem so angry with this new law?? Isn't it a good news for you all that more people have access to health care? :thinking:

What bother you so much in this reform?

 

I think France's system (which was rated n°1 in 2001) kind looks like australian's one when I red this

 

 

 

Our system too is based on solidary. Workers pays for a 'commun fund' which pays for yourself AND people who can't afford tp pay health bill. In here, everybody is covered by the national health care provided by the state. We don't think about 'money' issues when we go see a doctor or get to the hospital or buy our drugs because we know that the national system will take care of it. It covers around 70 % of your bill and for the rest, to be totally reimburse, you can get a private insurance that covers the 30 % missing, most of the time, your employer pay it for you. But if you're very sick (like cancer or sthg), national health care covers 100 %. Health came first and it's a great relief I think...

Of course the national found is in debt, it's not perfect but we have good treaments no matter who we are and what disease we have :)

 

Here a little explanation of how it works here compared to US.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92419273

 

Everybody wants cheaper healthcare, all Americans do (even the ones who disagree with Obama's bill).

 

We just recognize the bill doesn't lower costs. It forces the productive class to pay for the non-productive class's healthcare, which drives up prices overall for society.

 

The economy is like an ecosystem - if you force a change in one area, you destroy the entire balance. Sort of like Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth", but real.

 

EDIT: Nick, all government intervention is socialism (in that particular area). You need to be willing to call a spade a spade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks for giving me the liberty of speaking my mind. Look, obviously you were being sarcastic, but if you were making a point you clearly have no intention of arguing or backing it up. (I'm not being as cold and serious as I sound, it's just irking when people make incorrect exaggerations about fox or a politician, and then act as if they've accomplished something)

 

I see why you're irritated, but you can't really argue with people who support Fox News. Either you like it or you hate it. :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see why you're irritated, but you can't really argue with people who support Fox News. Either you like it or you hate it. :shrug:

 

You can't argue with people that don't understand what the issues are or the facts.

 

Half the people arguing for health care haven't a clue what they're arguing for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Bryce- thanks for posting about Australia's system... I especially like this part

 

which I think is what the new healthcare reform is working toward.

What do Australians generally think of their healthcare system, Bryce?

 

I have never heard one Australian complain about our healthcare system. It helps support people who can't afford pay for hospital and doctors fees so that everyone in the country can enjoy good health. It is charged at 1.5% of your taxable income and covers any expenses there may be. If you have privite health insurance then the government will pay for 30% of your premium costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not because of this but it's a huge part of the trend. If you look at the decline of the private sector versus government you see a trend towards socialism. One bill won't do that, but many of them over the years with more involvement in the private sector by government and a growing government point to a clear movement towards socialism in this nation.

 

Not less care at a higher prices.

 

People don't understand this simple fact;

 

Since governments involvement in the health industry prices have kept skyrocketing. Whenever government gets involved in a sector money floods there raising prices. Real wages have been declining while real prices have been increasing, thus more people can't afford things and have to go into debt.

 

 

but I don't agree that there's been a decline in the private sector... everything from the infrastructure (toll roads, etc), to the prison system, education and defense has had major moves toward privatization.

 

and by "government involvement in healthcare" do you mean regulation? I'm not clear about what you're referring to here.

 

We just recognize the bill doesn't lower costs. It forces the productive class to pay for the non-productive class's healthcare, which drives up prices overall for society.

 

 

this is one argument I just don't get. Yes, some "non-productive" people are going to benefit (and have benefited), but what of people who are working and yet still cannot afford healthcare? Or people who are gainfully employed, living comfortable lives, who then get seriously ill or have an accident and are dealing with an insurance company that doesn't want to pay out?? It's not just the "lazy poor people" who need a break sometimes. Also, under the current system, we're forced to pay for the care of people who've chosen not (for one reason or another) to get their own healthcare. Again, not just the "non-productive"

 

 

You can't argue with people that don't understand what the issues are or the facts.

 

Half the people arguing for health care haven't a clue what they're arguing for.

just like half the people who are arguing against health care haven't a clue what they're arguing against.

 

I have never heard one Australian complain about our healthcare system. It helps support people who can't afford pay for hospital and doctors fees so that everyone in the country can enjoy good health. It is charged at 1.5% of your taxable income and covers any expenses there may be. If you have privite health insurance then the government will pay for 30% of your premium costs.

 

That sounds good to me. I personally don't mind being taxed more IF I have a tangible benefit from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Liberals have plenty of media outlets, stop whining like a fucking baby.

 

When you have nothing witty to say you insult. There are and will always be extremists, on all sides who have absolutley no idea what they're talking about. Fox News seems to be a gathering spot for the right wingers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but they don't have their own news channel.

 

yeah, we do... it's called MSNBC :P

 

 

the other major news stations (msnbc, cnn, nbc) tend to lean more to the left

 

I'll give you MSNBC, but meh on CNN and NBC :shrug: unless you're talking about just specific programs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct, but they're not extremists.

 

msnbc seems to extreme imo.

 

 

i think it'd be best for news reporters just to report on the news rather than give their opinion, or make their opinion seen.

 

since that's not really the case I think it's good for there to be different stations w/ various political affiliations. that way people can watch all the different stations, get different points of view and then make their own opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never heard one Australian complain about our healthcare system. It helps support people who can't afford pay for hospital and doctors fees so that everyone in the country can enjoy good health. It is charged at 1.5% of your taxable income and covers any expenses there may be. If you have privite health insurance then the government will pay for 30% of your premium costs.

Sounds like an awful deal to me. Who on earth would want any of that? It's just your government screwing you over don'tcha know?

 

Everyone is ignorant.

Exactly.

 

fox is only one news channel. and it happens to lean more to the right... the other major news stations (msnbc, cnn, nbc) tend to lean more to the left. like mentioned the left have a lot of media outlets

This.

 

Correct, but they're not extremists.

You're an idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

since that's not really the case I think it's good for there to be different stations w/ various political affiliations. that way people can watch all the different stations, get different points of view and then make their own opinion.

 

Or hear what they want to hear.

 

msnbc seems to extreme imo.

 

Msnbc aren't exactly Fox' counterparts :\

 

You're an idiot.

 

Your opinion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but I don't agree that there's been a decline in the private sector... everything from the infrastructure (toll roads, etc), to the prison system, education and defense has had major moves toward privatization.

 

I like you, good debate.

 

I believe aggregate government employment has been on the rise in the country. Also my point is interference in the private sector. There has been a huge increase in the last 60 years. Fannie, Freddie, all the bailouts, more regulation, owning GM, Czars. If you look at laws and the governments movement into the private sector beyond the take overs and aggregate growth in jobs, you see more involvement in the private sector. Also the massive rise in government spending is another example of the massive expansion of government.

 

just like half the people who are arguing against health care haven't a clue what they're arguing against.

 

Too some degree, the majority are against it because they want less government and involvement, they don't know the specifics of the plan. I feel the people supporting are just "Yeah! free shit!", "It's cool to be pro-government". At least that's the vibe I get from the younger college kids I know.

 

At one point I wanted socialized medicine, but after much research realized how horrible it would be.

 

That sounds good to me. I personally don't mind being taxed more IF I have a tangible benefit from it.

 

It in itself is a tax and redistribution of wealth. It's completely unsustainable.

 

Like I said before, more government involvement means more money to that sector, thus higher prices. A broke government and economy can't afford higher prices in that sector.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^could you give me an example? :D

 

like i've seen larry king before and i got the impression that he is more left wing... he seems to always be having bill maher, and from what i've seen at least he has more of a bias towards the left just from his attitude.

 

also their coverage of the election in 2008 seemed to be more sided towards obama... i can't think of a specific example but it's just my overall view of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...