The Right Wing's Latest Argument Against Public Health Care -- We'd Like It Too Much

[mox 298]

Dieing in line, wating to get care is good? Just like Carol's mom did. Now thats disgusting!

That's a straw man argument.

[Danno 1,228]

Wow this thread sounds like a socialist revolution just waiting to happen!

If "quality Healthcare" is a "right" than why isn't quality housing or quality food or quality transportation.... or or or...

The list can go on and on when it comes to basic human needs.

I wonder if the "big hearts" on here who feel so strongly about giving all this healthcare away are doing that right now with your own resources??? Do you help pay for a neighbors premium?

Then why would you, who feel so strongly about doing it... yet don't....

demand it of others?

The bottom line is we are talking about Insurance here, if want person "A" to have coverage they can't pay for, then person "B,C,and D" will have to go to work and pay for it (on top of their own coverage).

I'm always amazed at the people who actually believe the Govt is going to get (even deeper) involved in healthcare... and it will be more affordable, that defies logic.

But let's be honest, you want the Healthcare system to run like the Post office; ya know..

you pay 42 Cents for a stamp and pretend you actually just paid the full postage to deliver a letter.

(as if the post office is self supporting).

You want to pay a cheap monthly premium and the rest is picked up by the Gov't.

Bush gave us a Prescription-Drug entitlement, Obama will Give a Healthcare Entitlement.

Where is all this money going to come from?

When we demand that someone elses labor pay for our benefit... that's like SLAVERY.

[mawilson 2,133]

I wonder if the "big hearts" on here who feel so strongly about giving all this healthcare away are doing that right now with your own resources??? Do you help pay for a neighbors premium?

Yes, I do. Unfortunately my tax money went to Iraq instead of my neighbor.

[mox 298]

Wow this thread sounds like a socialist revolution just waiting to happen!

If "quality Healthcare" is a "right" than why isn't quality housing or quality food or quality transportation.... or or or...

The list can go on and on when it comes to basic human needs.

This argument is a fallacy. How about "If quality healthcare isn't a right, then why is the fire department, police department, air traffic control...or or or...the list can go on and on and on."

I wonder if the "big hearts" on here who feel so strongly about giving all this healthcare away are doing that right now with your own resources??? Do you help pay for a neighbors premium?

Then why would you, who feel so strongly about doing it... yet don't....

demand it of others?

Also a non-starter. You could say that about anything. If you believe in the Iraq war so much, why aren't you out there fighting it? If you believe in low taxes so much, why aren't you withholding what you consider to be excessive from the government? Just because you aren't willing to throw your entire life into a belief doesn't mean it's not a strong, serious belief.

I'm always amazed at the people who actually believe the Govt is going to get (even deeper) involved in healthcare... and it will be more affordable, that defies logic.

And yet study after study shows that it *can* be done. It doesn't have to be 100% government. And this is the United States, we are leaders in innovation. I think we can do socialized medicine better than France or Canada or whoever you care to list as a nation that does national health care poorly.

But let's be honest, you want the Healthcare system to run like the Post office; ya know..

you pay 42 Cents for a stamp and pretend you actually just paid the full postage to deliver a letter.

(as if the post office is self supporting).

You know why it's only 42 cents? Because everybody pays 42 cents. How much does it cost to send just a regular letter via FedEx? At least $7-$8. That's the difference between national health care and what we've got now in a nut shell.

When we demand that someone elses labor pay for our benefit... that's like SLAVERY.

Again...we demand that someone else pay for our police and fire protection, does that make us slaves? Are we slaves because we only fly once or twice a year and yet we are always paying for air traffic control? Are we slaves because we are paying for a military that keeps our borders safe?

If it were just a problem of cost, I could understand. But I do not understand the dogmatic resistance to a national health care system. If a socialized health care system could be shown to be a net overall positive to this country (in terms of curtailing disease, increasing worker productivity and increasing the US's ability to compete in international markets) wouldn't that be something worth supporting? Or do you oppose it based purely on ideology that paying for your neighbor to be healthy is bad?

Edited December 25, 2008 by mox

[Danno 1,228]

I wonder if the "big hearts" on here who feel so strongly about giving all this healthcare away are doing that right now with your own resources??? Do you help pay for a neighbors premium?

Yes, I do. Unfortunately my tax money went to Iraq instead of my neighbor.

Don't feel bad, I am on the hook for educating a one and a half million kids who have no business even being in this country. (good thing I like kids so much)

Let me offer some advice, if you WANT to help out any cause (and many really need help), never use Gov't channels to do it.

They are less efficient than the United Way.

The top dog of the United way in my city was Pulling in over 2 million in salary and benefits, so what does that tell you?

[mox 298]

The top dog of the United way in my city was Pulling in over 2 million in salary and benefits, so what does that tell you?

I don't understand this point. Look at what the top dogs at the pharmaceuticals are pulling in.

[Empress of Groovy 373]

If you're paying insurance premiums, you're paying for the care of others. That's how it works.

[Danno 1,228]

The top dog of the United way in my city was Pulling in over 2 million in salary and benefits, so what does that tell you?

I don't understand this point. Look at what the top dogs at the pharmaceuticals are pulling in.

Pharmaceuticals are a Business, they sell products.

The United Way is a Non Profit organization. (which shakes down many employees in their drives)

Since we are not compelled to give money to either, (unlike the Gov't), I could not care less how much they make or spend.

[Danno 1,228]

Wow this thread sounds like a socialist revolution just waiting to happen!

If "quality Healthcare" is a "right" than why isn't quality housing or quality food or quality transportation.... or or or...

The list can go on and on when it comes to basic human needs.

This argument is a fallacy. How about "If quality healthcare isn't a right, then why is the fire department, police department, air traffic control...or or or...the list can go on and on and on."

I wonder if the "big hearts" on here who feel so strongly about giving all this healthcare away are doing that right now with your own resources??? Do you help pay for a neighbors premium?

Then why would you, who feel so strongly about doing it... yet don't....

demand it of others?

Also a non-starter. You could say that about anything. If you believe in the Iraq war so much, why aren't you out there fighting it? If you believe in low taxes so much, why aren't you withholding what you consider to be excessive from the government? Just because you aren't willing to throw your entire life into a belief doesn't mean it's not a strong, serious belief.

I'm always amazed at the people who actually believe the Govt is going to get (even deeper) involved in healthcare... and it will be more affordable, that defies logic.

And yet study after study shows that it *can* be done. It doesn't have to be 100% government. And this is the United States, we are leaders in innovation. I think we can do socialized medicine better than France or Canada or whoever you care to list as a nation that does national health care poorly.

But let's be honest, you want the Healthcare system to run like the Post office; ya know..

you pay 42 Cents for a stamp and pretend you actually just paid the full postage to deliver a letter.

(as if the post office is self supporting).

You know why it's only 42 cents? Because everybody pays 42 cents. How much does it cost to send just a regular letter via FedEx? At least $7-$8. That's the difference between national health care and what we've got now in a nut shell.

When we demand that someone elses labor pay for our benefit... that's like SLAVERY.

Again...we demand that someone else pay for our police and fire protection, does that make us slaves? Are we slaves because we only fly once or twice a year and yet we are always paying for air traffic control? Are we slaves because we are paying for a military that keeps our borders safe?

If it were just a problem of cost, I could understand. But I do not understand the dogmatic resistance to a national health care system. If a socialized health care system could be shown to be a net overall positive to this country (in terms of curtailing disease, increasing worker productivity and increasing the US's ability to compete in international markets) wouldn't that be something worth supporting? Or do you oppose it based purely on ideology that paying for your neighbor to be healthy is bad?

That you would compare the obligation of "national security" or Courts and public safety with the Right to quality Healthcare, Housing, transportation, education or any other "elective" act of Gov't shows me I still have a lot of work to do here.

Honestly, my biggest concern is with everyone jumping off the cliff at once.

Why not do some of these Healthcare programs in a few states and see how it goes?

Once we start down this road, we know the natural reflex of Gov't is to fix failure with more Gov't. It will take over more and more of healthcare in order to "fix it".

If we at least had different states, doing it different ways we could compare and know if one style is working better than another.

I don't want to take a pot-shot but isn't that exactly what has happened with Education?

Can anyone say the average child has a better education today than a child 50 years ago?

(even with nearly unlimited dollars).

-------

As for the Post office, I am stunned that you think .42 cents is all it cost to send a letter.

I forget how much in tax dollars it takes to keep the Postal service door open (so your stamp is only .42) but I did just read, the US Postal service received 1.265 Billion (with a B) ..in just "emergency funds" since 2001.

How much money did or does Fedex get or UPS from the Federal Budget?

The Post office also has a Monopoly on mail, thats why you can't even put a flyer in a neighbors mail box without breaking the law.

In fact Fedex and UPS are the best thing that's happened to the US post office, remember the old days?

We are already now operating "In the RED" , let's just keep adding more Gov't give-a-ways before we figure out how to deal with existing ones that are snow balling on us now.

[mox 298]

That you would compare the obligation of "national security" or Courts and public safety with the Right to quality Healthcare, Housing, transportation, education or any other "elective" act of Gov't shows me I still have a lot of work to do here.

Ahhhh, you just made my point for me. A healthy and productive work force IS part and parcel of "National security." A worker who is too sick to work is a drain on the economy, and the costs ripple through our infrastructure far worse than shelling out the money that it would have taken to keep that worker in good health in the first place.

Honestly, my biggest concern is with everyone jumping off the cliff at once.

Why not do some of these Healthcare programs in a few states and see how it goes?

Once we start down this road, we know the natural reflex of Gov't is to fix failure with more Gov't. It will take over more and more of healthcare in order to "fix it".

If we at least had different states, doing it different ways we could compare and know if one style is working better than another.

I certainly wouldn't be opposed to the states taking a lead, but I would oppose any unfunded mandates made by the Federal government, even as a "test."

As for the Post office, I am stunned that you think .42 cents is all it cost to send a letter.

I forget how much in tax dollars it takes to keep the Postal service door open (so your stamp is only .42) but I did just read, the US Postal service received 1.265 Billion (with a B) ..in just "emergency funds" since 2001.

How much money did or does Fedex get or UPS from the Federal Budget?

The Post office also has a Monopoly on mail, thats why you can't even put a flyer in a neighbors mail box without breaking the law.

In fact Fedex and UPS are the best thing that's happened to the US post office, remember the old days?

The USPS is one of the few Federal departments that is required to support itself. I'm not read up on any bailouts the USPS might be currently receiving, but under normal operating conditions the USPS has a directive to be self funded.

We are already now operating "In the RED" , let's just keep adding more Gov't give-a-ways before we figure out how to deal with existing ones that are snow balling on us now.

See, this is what's so short-sighted about national health care opposition. Keeping our work force healthy and able to work, as opposed to being a drain on the system, is exactly why we need it right now. It's spending a lot of money right now so we don't have to spend a LOT LOT LOT of money down the road. It is an investment into the future of this country.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Dieing in line, wating to get care is good? Just like Carol's mom did. Now thats disgusting!

That's a straw man argument.

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "set up a straw man," one describes a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view, yet is easier to refute. Then, one attributes that position to the opponent. For example, someone might deliberately overstate the opponent's position.[1] While a straw man argument may work as a rhetorical technique—and succeed in persuading people—it carries little or no real evidential weight, since the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.[2]

She died in her home just after coming home from a public health facility! She collapsed on her mother from massive internal bleeding, but of course the anti-biotics they gave her for it, didnt help!

Have some STRAW,man.

[mox 298]

Dieing in line, wating to get care is good? Just like Carol's mom did. Now thats disgusting!

That's a straw man argument.

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "set up a straw man," one describes a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view, yet is easier to refute. Then, one attributes that position to the opponent. For example, someone might deliberately overstate the opponent's position.[1] While a straw man argument may work as a rhetorical technique—and succeed in persuading people—it carries little or no real evidential weight, since the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.[2]

She died in her home just after coming home from a public health facility! She collapsed on her mother from massive internal bleeding, but of course the anti-biotics they gave her for it, didnt help!

Have some STRAW,man.

You should probably cite your source.

You're using ONE incident to say that the entire concept is broken. THAT is a straw man argument--you are distilling the entirety of the argument down into one single incident for you to easily attack. It doesn't address the actual merits of the argument at all. Sometimes the Fire Department fails to save a home from burning down. That doesn't mean the entire concept of a fire department is flawed.

[Mags 112]

Dieing in line, wating to get care is good? Just like Carol's mom did. Now thats disgusting!

That's a straw man argument.

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "set up a straw man," one describes a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view, yet is easier to refute. Then, one attributes that position to the opponent. For example, someone might deliberately overstate the opponent's position.[1] While a straw man argument may work as a rhetorical technique—and succeed in persuading people—it carries little or no real evidential weight, since the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.[2]

She died in her home just after coming home from a public health facility! She collapsed on her mother from massive internal bleeding, but of course the anti-biotics they gave her for it, didnt help!

Have some STRAW,man.

But, this happens with many patients regardless of whether or not it is privately or publicly funded...

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Dieing in line, wating to get care is good? Just like Carol's mom did. Now thats disgusting!

That's a straw man argument.

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "set up a straw man," one describes a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view, yet is easier to refute. Then, one attributes that position to the opponent. For example, someone might deliberately overstate the opponent's position.[1] While a straw man argument may work as a rhetorical technique—and succeed in persuading people—it carries little or no real evidential weight, since the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.[2]

She died in her home just after coming home from a public health facility! She collapsed on her mother from massive internal bleeding, but of course the anti-biotics they gave her for it, didnt help!

Have some STRAW,man.

You should probably cite your source.

You're using ONE incident to say that the entire concept is broken. THAT is a straw man argument--you are distilling the entirety of the argument down into one single incident for you to easily attack. It doesn't address the actual merits of the argument at all. Sometimes the Fire Department fails to save a home from burning down. That doesn't mean the entire concept of a fire department is flawed.

Yep! Thats it, she was the only one! Your fireman analogy is on fire son. Hope the sheep dog comes soon to put you back in the herd.

Lets just replace your loved one in the place of my wifes mom in my distilled facts. Im sure you wont be comparing firemen to fcking burning buildings.

[mox 298]

Yep! Thats it, she was the only one! Your fireman analogy is on fire son. Hope the sheep dog comes soon to put you back in the herd.

Lets just replace your loved one in the place of my wifes mom in my distilled facts. Im sure you wont be comparing firemen to fcking burning buildings.

Ok well I can see it's pointless to engage with you at all on any subject. Best of luck to you.