Lindaland
  Global Unity
  National Health Care (Page 3)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 3 pages long:   1  2  3 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   National Health Care
LittleLadyLeo
unregistered
posted September 16, 2004 12:21 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Isis -

(personal opinion here - no politics) Your body, your health, your responsibility. If people started taking care of themselves (eating right, exercising, lowering stress levels, etc.) and maintained a preventative medical plan MOST major diseases could be avoided (not all, most!). Why should my tax dollars go to pay for cancer treatment for someone who smoked two packs a day for 30 years? Why should my tax dollars go to pay for dialysis for someone who drank a 1/5th of whiskey every day since they were 18? Why should I bust my rear everyday just so the government can take my money to give to some one who hasn't worked a day in their life? The issue for me is not whether people deserve medical treatment, it's whether or not we allow our government control over every aspect of our personal lives (which is called communism.)


LLL

IP: Logged

Isis
Newflake

Posts: 1
From: Brisbane, Australia
Registered: May 2009

posted September 16, 2004 12:23 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Isis     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
*applauds*

IP: Logged

LibraSparkle
unregistered
posted September 16, 2004 12:41 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
That is a good point LLL. People don't really take very good care of themselves.

You can't exactly make that a requirement.

IP: Logged

Isis
Newflake

Posts: 1
From: Brisbane, Australia
Registered: May 2009

posted September 16, 2004 12:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Isis     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
That's why in countries w/ socialized medicine, they usually have wickedly high taxes on things like cigarettes, liquor, etc - stuff whose use puts its users at higher risk to burden the medical system.

IP: Logged

LibraSparkle
unregistered
posted September 16, 2004 12:47 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Sounds good to me. I like to call it a *stupid tax*. Should include fast food.

IP: Logged

LibraSparkle
unregistered
posted September 16, 2004 01:10 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Washington has the 6th highest *stoopid* tax on cigarettes in the nation. (New Jersey's the highest)

I smoke rollies, cuz it's too expensive, but sometimes I'll splurge and grab a pack of Marlbros and that costs about 5 bucks.
http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/cigarett.html

IP: Logged

Isis
Newflake

Posts: 1
From: Brisbane, Australia
Registered: May 2009

posted September 16, 2004 01:26 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Isis     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
When I moved to NZ in 1989, cigarettes were $5.20/pack. By the time I left in 1992, they were $7.20/pack. When I first arrived, I saw all these people smoking what looked to me like joints, in the streets. I remember thinking, OMG, everyone's smoking weed out in public. Then I later found out the joy of rollies. I smoked rollies for several years: for a good part of my stay in NZ, as well as a good part of my stay in Seattle. They're actually better for you than pre-made cigarettes; they contain a fraction of the chemicals in them that pre-made smokes do. I'm too lazy to roll my own anymore, not to mention, I have a couple of friends that lost jobs because they were smoking rollies at work and were accused of smoking weed on their breaks...if you're smoking a rollie around here people think you're smoking weed...

------------------
“The good things which belong to prosperity are to be wished, but the good things that belong to adversity are to be admired.” Seneca

IP: Logged

quiksilver
unregistered
posted September 16, 2004 11:55 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
LS,
Since that is the most slanted explanation of the "right's" views that I have ever seen, I cannot in good conscience debate the point any further. To do so would serve no purpose here.

IP: Logged

LibraSparkle
unregistered
posted September 17, 2004 11:37 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
What slanted view of the right? The quote I got from an encyclopedia?


Hmm... I don't have a slanted view toward the right... Anymore than JW has a slanted view of the left.


It's interesting how quick people here will jump on board to smear the left and defend the right.

There are very few people left over in here to defend the left becaue of JWs constant biased attacks from the right.

I never see anyone wag their finger at him for his slanted view of the left.

It's closed minded, one sided, and frankly, quite disgusting to me.

If you're going to single me out on some BS like this... you'd better be prepared for me to start throwing up in your face all the times you *could have* done the same to the those from the right.

Sorry... but I'm more than just a little ****** off.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted September 17, 2004 01:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
LS, it's no secret that members with a left leaning view vastly outnumber those who lean right on this site.

Nevertheless, I completely understand when those on the left are angry because their long held feelings about issues are demolished by factual information.

Edit*
Recogzining that I lack the proper language skills to talk to liberals, I'm going to purchase Ann Coulters book, "How to Talk to a Liberal". Perhaps that will foster more understanding.

I posted that article to show what happened in Canada with socialized medicine. Many Canadians have to come to America to get prompt and competent treatment.

Some are not aware but Britain has refused to treat some people for certain diseases when they reach a certain age. They also take into account a person's lifestyle to determine if a course of treatment or treatment at all should be given.

The fact citizens from nations which have such systems come here for treatment speaks for itself.

I'm not interested in socialized, government run health care for America. Nor would I ever support anyone politically who proposes or advances a system that is or would become, over time a socialized health care system.

If the government got completely out of health care, prices for health services would plummet like a rock. The people and institutions who would scream the loudest are physicians, hospitals and insurance companies and those are the biggest promoters of government involvement in healthcare. Uncle Sam has the deepest pockets of all and the sky's the limit when pricing services.

Listen carefully now. I remember when an office visit to a physician cost $4 and that included prescription medication like Penicillin or another antibiotic.

I was in the insurance business and a top of the line hospitalization policy paid $18 dollars a day for the room and covered all non elective procedures. That policy paid more than most hospitals were charging, so it covered virtually 100% for a stay in the hospital and any necessary surgery. That policy cost a family about $10 per month.

Then came Medicare and the explosion of health care costs. Uncle Sam was paying for many and prices were raised dramatically....for everyone.

IP: Logged

LittleLadyLeo
unregistered
posted September 18, 2004 09:24 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
It all comes down to supply and demand. As Americans become less healthy they need more medical services. As the "supply" of medical services has decreased while the "demand" has risen basic economic principles have been put into play and prices have been raised.

What I can't wait to see is what is going to happen when the American public decides that they are going to forgo expensive radical medical treatment and accept what fate has handed them. (DNR's to the extreme.) When people stop using medical services, when the demand decreases, at first the prices will explode to make up for the lack of business, but they will eventually drop again.

Just a thought.


LLL

IP: Logged

Irish Eyes
unregistered
posted September 18, 2004 10:24 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I agree with the "stupid tax"!

As most of you know I work in an inner-city Middle School Cafeteria. In the school that I work at over 50% of the over 900 students receive a free lunch everyday. For the most part, these children do not receive vegetables on there tray. They eat pasta, pizza, cheeseburgers, or chicken patties in a bun with a side of fried potatoes of some kind, everyday of the week. These same children who cannot afford the $2.00 lunch fee (not all of them I mind you, just a large percent)will perchase $1-$3 of junk food. Chips, soda, snack cakes, and even ice cream bars.

I know that it sounds simple to say that all of this should be taken out of the schools. The truth is that the schools get money from the companies (such as Coke and Pepsi) to have their products in the schools. This money is used to fund sport programs or after school programs.

I degress, what I wanted to say is that the health care situation in this country is BAD and we are teaching our children to be "junk food junkies" in our schools. There are kids in the 7th grade where I work that weigh over 230lbs and have type 2 diabetes.

And it is I, the lunchlady that serves heart diesese, diabetes, and obeseity everyday on a tray. I also pay the taxes that pay for the medical care for these children that I helped put there. It is a vicious cycle that
I believe needs to be addressed before we lose a generation.

(that's my two cents worth)

-Irish

IP: Logged

quiksilver
unregistered
posted September 18, 2004 11:27 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
LS- Don't be p***ed. I was not hostile towards you. I was frustrated because I just do not think it is productive to be one-sided about things just for the sake of a debate and when I feel that this is going on, I find it pointless to continue. I did not single you out, though it may feel like that to you. You were really the main person I was talking to, so who else would I be addressing, you know? We were having a discussion, just the two of us, and I told you what I thought about that definition of the right, whether it comes from an encyclopedia or not. I have also had a few words with people on this forum who lean very far to the right, so it is not fair to assume I am strictly one-sided. I am much more in the center than you might think. I try to see things from both angles always.

IP: Logged


This topic is 3 pages long:   1  2  3 

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright © 2011

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a