… Santorum said, what he and Paul Ryan (LIBERTARIAN HACK!) want to do is “give people the resources to go out and choose for themselves choose what’s best for themselves.”

Santorum Wrote:Unlike Obama, he continued, who is spitting in the face of those Americans who fought on D-Day, 67 years ago today. “Almost 60,000 average Americans had the courage to go out and charge those beaches on Normandy, to drop out of airplanes who knows where, and take on the battle for freedom,” Santorum said.

“Average Americans,” he added. “The very Americans that our government now, and this president, does not trust to make a decision on your health care plan. Those Americans risked everything so they could make that decision on their health care plan.”

Can someone explain your "public" healthcare system out there? I'm not sure who to believe; some people say it's a step in the right direction, but other people say it's basically a law that forces everyone to purchase healthcare.

I've always seen the best way as somewhere between the two. In the UK, we pay a heck of a lot of tax just to fund the NHS, a service that some people go their entire lives without using. It isn't fair to take that service away from the people who really need it of course (e.g. poor people who have conditions they can't help), so some basic form of healthcare should exist. However, if you pay for private healthcare over public healthcare, that should be adjusted in your taxes.

Maybe some form of "step" program, where there is a minimal amount that everyone has to pay (provided you earn enough money to be taxed), which provides you with a basic service. Then have different levels of extra care, which are provided as long as you pay the required amount in tax.

...P.S. : If you Libertarians do not like us using the word "Republidertarianazi", then STOP voting for, and rooting for Republican and Nazi type scum.

Australia is a bit of the "step" system you are talking about Tiberius.

We have the medicare system (paid for via general taxation)that everyone can access and then we have the private health care insurance that those who want privilege (and can afford it and paid privately) can access.

I cannot fathom the American Health care system and so am unable to comment.

(August 30, 2011 at 8:02 am)Tiberius Wrote: Can someone explain your "public" healthcare system out there? I'm not sure who to believe; some people say it's a step in the right direction, but other people say it's basically a law that forces everyone to purchase healthcare.

Sure. You only get public health care if you are very, very poor. The average paycheck around here is about $380 bucks after tax. The average insurance price is about $500 to $600 a month, and that is just bare minimum coverage. The healthcare law does force people to buy private health insurance, and that is one of the reasons why it is failing so badly against the lawsuits taken against it. In return for forcing everyone to pay for insurance, the insurance companies are told that they cannot deny coverage for certain things. Like the policy holder forgetting to mention he suffered from acne as a teenager (which was a popular way ins companies denied claims to make more $$$). Its a step in the right direction by telling ins. companies they cant dick us around. I personall support a single payer option (universal healthcare).

Quote:I've always seen the best way as somewhere between the two. In the UK, we pay a heck of a lot of tax just to fund the NHS, a service that some people go their entire lives without using. It isn't fair to take that service away from the people who really need it of course (e.g. poor people who have conditions they can't help), so some basic form of healthcare should exist. However, if you pay for private healthcare over public healthcare, that should be adjusted in your taxes.

That is also the kicker. Healthcare can no longer be claimed on your taxes. Ultimately, the new "affordable health care" law screws the common citizen and guarentees profit to the ins. and big Pharma.

Quote:Maybe some form of "step" program, where there is a minimal amount that everyone has to pay (provided you earn enough money to be taxed), which provides you with a basic service. Then have different levels of extra care, which are provided as long as you pay the required amount in tax.

THAT would be a step in the right direction. But in the end I would not settle for anything less than 100% unviersal coverage for all proven citizens

---

The number one American argument against unversal healthcare..believe it or not:

"I dont want more of my tax money going to the niggers and spics!"

(August 30, 2011 at 8:03 am)reverendjeremiah Wrote: ...P.S. : If you Libertarians do not like us using the word "Republidertarianazi", then STOP voting for, and rooting for Republican and Nazi type scum.

I don't vote for Republican and Nazi scum. Are you going to stop using the term? No? Didn't think so.

You'll be glad to know that since I'm a mature and educated adult, I'm not going to respond by calling you "Democraticommusocialists". That would be stooping to the level of a child.

People do these things to relieve the frustration they find within the subjects. Politics is in the shitter over here, and there really isn't anything left to do but call names. Reasoned arguments are ignored almost as a point of policy. It's all about who has the lungs.

Lots of people are generally stupid due to environmental factors out of their control. Bad prenatal care, bad upbringing, bad home life, abuse.... could go on for ever.
Bottom line in health care.
Should all human citizens have access to health care. Yes.
Should their be a middle party in-between healthcare and the human(insurance company). No. How can you have profit in a system designed to help sick people. If profit relies on sickness, or the blocking of health care, you have a serious ethical problem. I can heal 9 people, but not 10, because that 10th person would destroy my profit. Only hypothetically of course, but the logic is there.
If someone is sick you help them. Bottom line. Cause we all know if we are sick and in need we want that ability to get better, and it is sick to not provide that to every citizen of the planet.

I personally couldnt care less if you called me that.. those three words combined obviously have much more to offer the common man than a "rebuplibertatianazi". All three of which have a proven track record of fucking over everyone except the upper, select plutocrats.

I would rather be left than right wing.

And calling me childish for calling a black pot a "black pot" does nothing to me except make me laugh.

Now, I know you live in another country, so you obviously cant vote for them.

..do you root for them? Numb skulls like Paul Ryan and such? I will go out on a limb here and flat out say if you were voting in America, you would have already voted Republican WAY more times than you would have voted independent Libertarian...just like what all of the rest of American Libertarians do: Vote Tea Party.

Sure, you might think Palin is an idiot, but the chance that she might dissolve a third of our government gets your dick hard..doesnt it?

---

(August 30, 2011 at 12:51 pm)paintpooper Wrote: No. How can you have profit in a system designed to help sick people. If profit relies on sickness, or the blocking of health care, you have a serious ethical problem. I can heal 9 people, but not 10, because that 10th person would destroy my profit. Only hypothetically of course, but the logic is there.

In reality its more like "I dont want to heal ANYBODY, but I want them to keep sending in their monthly payments for my insurance service."

THAT is the reality of American Ins. , and America in general. In America GREED is king. When they say "freedom" they mean "GREED".

'paintpooper' Wrote:If someone is sick you help them. Bottom line. Cause we all know if we are sick and in need we want that ability to get better, and it is sick to not provide that to every citizen of the planet.

That generally isnt the attitude here. First off you have the fuckload of Republibertarianazis who say things like: "aint no nigger getting my tax money..fuck em..let them and their kids die for all I care... because we whites are being persecuted!"

Here...look at what some of the Rebublibertarianazis are saying about racism and Obama

(warning, following this link and reading its contents may make your head explode: high amounts of hypocrisy, hatred, greed, stupidity, racism, and general loathyness.)

http://moonbattery.com/?p=1490

For every ONE Libertarian that votes in a tea bagger "not because I like his social views, but for his economic views", you have 30 guys voting right behind him just like on this moonbat site for his social and economic views.

by the way, you will see a general theme over there: If you call a racist a "racist", then it is proof that YOU are the real "racist", not the racist.

Yup..thats the new race card the right wing has been using. And guess what.. it works over here...yup. Only in America.

Quote:Can someone explain your "public" healthcare system out there? I'm not sure who to believe; some people say it's a step in the right direction, but other people say it's basically a law that forces everyone to purchase healthcare.

I can't.


It's a bad compromise of the worst possible ideas and has far more to do with enriching corporate scumbags than it does with healthcare.