<p>^^ The problem with that is while it makes sense on paper, it is very hard to explain to a person who is about to die if they can’t get care.</p>
<p>The underlying problem is that while medical science now allows us to do amazing things to extend lives, most people simply don’t produce enough economic value during the extended time they get to justify the costs. Thus, it is impossible to maintain that standard for everyone, unless we have somewhere to tap resources from.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But shouldn’t I be able to buy drugs that kill me if I want?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Good.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ya know, primary care doctors provide, well, primary care. Specialists are secondary.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Even if you believe insurance isn’t a right, treatment is. I believe the right to life is just that - a right. Otherwise you’re basically saying “DIE POOR PEOPLE!!!”</p>
<p>I have the feeling that half of you have never even seen a poor person in your lives.</p>
<p>No conscience clause concerning abortion, therefore unconstitutional.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course people have basic rights. That’s what the government’s there for. Did you even read my post?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yep. But not here.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>orly</p>
<p>I’m sorry if I’m not posting regarding the ones above me, but Obama’s policies are FAR from socialistic, in fact he’s trying his best to remain moderate.</p>
<p>On the healthcare reform, I agree that we needed something to be done. All these corrupt private companies are earning $$$ and without government curbing, they’ll continue to take advantage of their clients. It’s funny that we have potentially the best medical technology in the world, yet we don’t have the best healthcare benefits for everyone.</p>
<p>i like your nickname dude</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>yes, I read your post. I’ll quote it here:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In other words, you don’t think people have any basic rights, only pseudo
-rights granted them by the government and revokable by the government.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It depends. Not if your intent is suicide. But if you have a good REASON, and they don’t prevent you from keeping any agreements you make, then maybe yes. Addictive drugs are different, since they cause people to be forced to buy drugs, even if they really wouldn’t choose to do so.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Obviously we have a difference of opinion here. I think the risks of me needed many of those services are small enough that I would save a lot of money by passing on the plan and paying for the services myself. But I believe that is a choice that each individual should be able to make for themselves. At the very least, the plan should provide for people to get their coverage through different means, such as co-ops and savings plans. Also it is ridiculous to require FULL coverage from every American, when for many of us it would be far more economical to carry partial coverage and then pay full price for the few times we need something that isn’t covered.</p>
<p>
Who decides what a “good” reason is? You? Where’s the brightline here?</p>
<p>Opinions are better when backed up with facts.</p>
<p>MM, who are you to stop someone from committing suicide? You claim to not want to regulate people’s lives, and yet you want to stop them from making this choice. Should there be counseling and the like first? Yes. But if someone wants to peacefully pass away for whatever reason, why not allow drugs to help them along?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>MM-
Just out of curiosity, have you read any of the bill? Do you KNOW what the punishment is for not having coverage? A fine. Do you know what the punishment is for not paying the fine?</p>
<p>I’ll give you a hint since I have $100 riding on the opinion that you have no idea. It’s NOTHING. The punishment is NOTHING. They cannot force you to pay the fine. It is an unenforceable fine. So you know what will happen to you if you don’t get health insurance? NOTHING. </p>
<p>I also remember you saying that you have very little money. Well, now you will be eligible for medicaid if you are 133% of poverty level income.</p>
<p>^^ I agree. Who decides what a “good healthcare plan” is?</p>
<p>^^ I’m nobody. If a person really wants to die, I don’t have a right to stop them. But society seems to violate that right regularly, and it’s an issue to complicated for me.</p>
<p>I read the important parts of the bill back in November, and I’ve tried to follow the changes made. I read the requirements for all insurance plans, which included many services I would not consider worth paying for. It also does not allow the insurance we currently have. I’m aware that the bill is unenforcable. My family would easily qualify for medicaid, but we don’t like to accept government aid. This bill will make us accept it, if they are able to enforce it.</p>
<p>You can accept it and not use it. Or you can not fill out the paperwork to get it. Or you can burn your medicaid card when you get it. </p>
<p>So why do you keep saying that the government is FORCING you to get health insurance? They are doing no such thing. You are making bold and unsupported statements. At least back up what you’re saying with true facts, not right-wing radio-spun facts.</p>
<p>^ Ok, correction: The government is giving me the choice between getting insurance or breaking the law. Just because I happen to be able to ignore the law safely, doesn’t mean I shouldn’t care. Also, I’m not so selfish or so foolish to just say “well, it isn’t me that is effected, so why care?” Besides, we will still need healthcare. If we can’t get it from our current (soon to be illegal) insurance, where will we get it?</p>
<p>I don’t even listen to right-wing radio, btw.</p>
<p>^ Why can’t you get it from your current insurance? You can keep your insurance, you’re just getting free medicaid on top of it, unless I’m missing something. You can CHOOSE not to use your medicaid.</p>
<p>And people break unenforceable laws all the time. We do it without even realizing it.</p>
<p>
A lot of money has been put into doing just that. I do not agree that this particular plan constitutes a “good” solution, primarily because it does not match the advantages of a compromise plan like Singapore’s (see post #80). But it certainly is possible to statistically analyze probable outcomes and come up with a plan that minimizes net societal cost and maximizes net societal health.</p>
<p>This is not the same thing as your vague certainty that sometimes people have “good” reasons for doing stupid things. You can’t analyze that because there is no brightline for “good” stupidity.</p>
<p>^My statement was if a good reason exists. That would be answered by logic and statistics. in the case of health care, I believe a “good” plan would be one that empowers consumers to use their judgement and purchase the plan that gives them the greatest protection for the least cost. Ways to do this would be to increase insurance company transparency (so people know what they’re getting) and allow more portability and options (so they can get what they want).</p>
<p>^^“You can keep your insurance.” Biggest lie of this whole debate. It’s been said by more Democrats than I can to count. I read the bill. Within a few years, my insurance plan is illegal. Do you think they will go on selling it to me? They can’t go under the radar like I can.</p>
<p>And yes, people do break laws all the time. That doesn’t mean the laws don’t count, or we shouldn’t repeal them if they are wrong.</p>
<p>^ WHY is your insurance plan illegal? You can keep saying generalities all you like, but I will ask again- WHY? give me a specific reason, please.</p>
<p>^^ You read the bill?.. The thing is a few thousand pages of extremely terse syntax and massive internal logic structure: essentially it’s War and Peace on steroids. I’m impressed if you did read the whole thing but I’m skeptical.</p>
<p>^ Yank: </p>
<p>From MM:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I wonder how he determined which parts were “important” if he didn’t read the whole bill. Actually, it’s more like I wonder WHO decided which parts were important FOR him :rolleyes:</p>