[Re: Abortion and Universal Healthcare] If Politics is about compromises...

You are one of the few conservative posters on this message board who I think is genuine and isn't trolling a right wing caricature.

Which makes the quoted comment even more sad.

 

You live in Mexico? Do you dine with Industrialists?

 

Dude... with every post you are making it more and more clear you don't even understand the core concept of insurance. There is no inherent trait of insurance that has anything to do with forcing or not forcing people to obtain it.

When you buy automobile insurance, do you buy it with the intent of filing claims or are you assuming that you hopefully will never get in an accident but just have it in case the worst case scenario happens?

Are you saying healthy people should not have health insurance because they are healthy? Before my aunt was diagnosed with breast cancer, she was very healthy. Do people with immaculate driving records not need car insurance? Who's fronting the bill for those 'healthy' people who end up being 'not healthy' and needing medical care with no insurance? Who's paying for them Space Ghost? The hospital? People who pay for insurance? A magical fairy? Who?

 

*Hears soft guitar notes strumming the beginning of a bolero in the distance, floating on the wind*

 

Car Insurance comparison has been beat to death and it doesn't support your cause. Car Insurance doesn't support pre-existing conditions. Nuff said.

I carry short term insurance. it cost me $75 a month with zero co-pay and $2500.00 deductible with a million dollar coverage. It obviously doesn't pay for pre-existing conditions ... and guess, what, I have no pre-existing conditions. This is exactly what I should be paying. I also should have the ability to pay for catastrophic insurance that would cover major illnesses....but thats not allowed.

Again, since you have a reading comprehension issue, my position is not that people shouldn't have coverage. My position is private corporations should not be the ones managing the all inclusive (single payer) healthcare umbrella. I support socialized medicine.

Private corporations only care about one thing; Their bottom line. They do not give a **** about the health of a single person. Please, stop defending this idea.

 

Let's not confuse term. Single payer refers to one payer, not multiple of same type of payers. Even then, the US does not have multiple of same type of payers - our system is quite r****ded. But we agree - government as single payer is one path there.

 

I support it also but pragmatically, it won't happen with the current GOP having any hint of political influence.

 

Did you support socialized medicine when Obama wanted in 8-9 years ago?

 

I did not support it initially, but once Obamacare was passed, I did.

 

lots of people realize what the end game should be, once they get to know more about the broken system

 

I believe a true altruistic free market is the best answer, but that will never happen. We have too much regulation and too much irresponsibility. I dont think the government has a responsibility, but I do believe the government will provide the best all around fair coverage for what we need.

Im not one of those who believes everyone should have access to the best doctors on the planet. That is irrational thinking. The truth is single payer will be an a system for the poor and/or economical. Those who are well off will have access to the best doctors by paying cash or through premium insurance. I am fine with that.

 

I support a hybrid system. The government should provide a certain minimum level of care to which everyone has access. Parallel to that, there would be private health care facilities that don't accept government care patients. They provide superior, cutting edge care to people who pay out of pocket or have insurance coverage for their condition. It is the best of both worlds. The people happy with the old system can keep their doctor, have reasonable wait times, etc. The people that want single payer would have taxpayer provided coverage.

 

So one side of the government can use Christianity to promote their bills with confused church goers but the government should stay away from providing health care? Talk about having your chili frito pie and eating it too.

 

If the sick/and or old people would hurry up and die(except my family members) everything would be so much better.

Then, the insurance companies could make more money, and my portfolio goes up. Everyone wins. Well, except for the sick and old. But who cares about them?

 

This is pretty much what I want. Essentially medicare for all and a free market for insurance companies to gap the poor service in gov ran healthcare. I doubt this will get much support because there are those who believe everyone is entitled to the best doctors.

 

not the best doctors but rather the most expensive treatments that are life saving such as extended cancer treatment.

 

Relative to the United States, your position is on the extreme left (though it polling further to the middle, thank god). Most republican voters would call you a socialist wacko for believing this. You realize that the top obstructions to your wish becoming reality are 1) the republican party and 2) conservative ideology? I mention it because I've seen you taking frequent pot shots at liberals, so congrats for being bipartisan, I guess?

 

Canada.

 

I think I would be more critical of conservative policy if they actually tried to pass anything vs being a party of resistance. But to be fair, that is what anti-progressiveism is all about.

I believe in a lot of the core principles that are found ingrained in the left. I believe in saving the environment. I believe in equal rights and fairness. I believe in taking care of the poor. I believe in sensible gun control. However on most of these subjects, I do not agree on the way it should be handled...from either side.

The reality is those who are ingrained into a certain belief are intentionally being stubborn and refuse to acknowledge anothers belief. Being around conservatives most of my life, I can assure you this is the case with them. I think the right leaning people on this site are more middle of the ground than the left leaning posters.

 

A Republican Senator actually said the goal was to make Obama a one term President

The Republican Senate leader

Thanks for your version, but that's what really happened