Healthcare

[jackman]

sorry to bring up race but c'mooon think about it, most poor people are minortiites, most in the military come from poor or working class families, Their are almost zero wealthy minorities in this country, so when "they" send someone to die it's the white people sending the blacks and hispanics to fight and die for "their" wars, while they simultaneously pass the tax burden (ie bush tax cuts) onto the middle class and/or the parents of those black kids dieing for "their" war. SO not only do "they" start these wars, but "we" pay for them and die in them. Healthcare is taxing white people to pay for minorities. SO, of course, their agianst it. It may be called, tax the rich to pay for the poor, that's why I think it goes over well in other countries, that are more racially homogenous, but not in America.

ok well, i don't know if you're being sold (and subsequently buying) the propoganda, but this ...

CBS points out that only nine percent of Iowans on food stamps are black — and 84 percent are white. Nationally, 39 percent of welfare recipients are white, 37 percent are black, and 17 percent are Hispanic.
*-source http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/01...?mobile=nc

... clarifies it for me. don't get me wrong, am under no guise that black people in this country are doing well. but being only 12% of the pop would make it very very disparaging to have the most poor when we're only 1 of 8 people in the states. so, i don't buy that - perhaps i'm still naive at 41.

also, i understand and appreciate your sentiments dude, but the fact is what you said, the way you said it isn't exactly true.. the jewish people seem to be doing ok financially, as do a lot of asians and they're minorities here. there are many more minorities than blacks here, so that's a very encompassing view to take, saying most poor people are minorities.

then, black are not even close to whites (in numbers) in the military, but per capita, yes, blacks have slightly higher numbers there. i have always said, that a politician needs to have some skin in the game (a child on active duty or themselves) before they can send our troops anywhere to fight. so yes, i do sorta agree with you even tho the numbers don't quite back up every claim you made - and because of that, i don't take a "woe is me" attitude on it.

btw, healthcare will cost me dearly and i'm happy to pay for it even while i'm healthy, so that when i need it and others need it, it will be available, pre-existing conditions or not. repubs need to get on board and stop hindering.

---

The healthcare system even with Obamacare (maybe more so actually) is corrupt to its core and favors big business over the well-being of the American citizens.

have you read the 2000 page document or are you just taking a side blindly? if so, what parts of it make it corrupt? so, let's say you're right and it does favor big business, fine, doesn't it lower the costs of the people who pay anyway for people abusing the system? what about the people who can't get insurance anywhere, because they have hep c? are they just to rot and die? please let me know what would be a better option? i'm open to hear ...

[Autumnlicious]

The biggest victory of Obamacare is forcing health insurance companies to cover sick people who actually need healthcare most of all!

I was in Senator Reid's office two years back. He said that then (what was the big upshot) and he'd probably say it now.

[Polaris]

Being that it helps industry further rape the 99% by forcing them to buy into their failed system....it is flawed because it allows the insurance companies to make out like bandits without actually improving their overall service.

If it was up to me and being somewhat realistic in its implementation in the capitalist trash heap that is the US, I would offer two different plans. For the wealthy (including most middle-class), they can buy or have their jobs pay for insurance if they want...no forced option), but for the poor who have no other option, a fully-sponsored healthcare (no insurance BS) system funded by the expiration of Bush-era tax cuts in addition to tax increases on sin items and increased taxes on foreign goods (within reason....excessive use of tariffs backfired in the 1920s).

[jackman]

so, we're just pipedreaming here and not being realistic about getting something passed, i assume. to me, what you just proposed is equivalent to what the repubs do now in congress - they hold on to their ideals and how they think things should be and if it means nothing gets done because there's no middle ground to meet on, then so be it. nothing gets done and that's better than compromising to accomplish *something*. the plan that's been implemented is not at all what was initially proposed and was shredded down to what would get most people on board. then, no matter how much the administration tried to reach consensus, the goal posts were moved. after while, they said fuckit and pushed it thru, then everyone started bitching about not getting a chance to read it. they had plenty of chance to help write it, and chose to turn the cold shoulder. something got done and it's better than what we have.

so, do you think congress would let *that* (your idea) thru? you just outlined a socialist policy. lol. if anyone's ever tried to reach their state representative and affect a change on a community level, they'll realize it's near impossible short of a bribe. now try that with politicians on the level of power as congress. :|

[Polaris]

The GOP just shut the door on the extension of Bush tax cuts for the largest segment of the population. That's a big start. I hope they know by doing so, they just opened Pandora's Box on the tax cuts for the rich as well.

Most of the advanced countries in the world follow an even more extreme plan than I presented; America is actually the exception. It would not be hard to actually implement the plan seeing as how insurance agencies don't really care about the poor and destitute anyway.