Universal Health Care

[Falla39]

Universal Health Care



A short but poignant independent film on government sponsored healthcare systems. Everyone who plans to vote for our new President in 2008 NEEDS to see this.

Regardless of the person for whom they would vote. Please forward this to everyone you can think of as soon as you can.


http://www.freemarketcure.com/brainsurgery.php

Someone sent this in an e-mail this morning. Has anyone seen it?
Any comments?

Falla39

[Digging4Truth]

I am not a fan of governmentally controlled health care. One need only spend some time at the VA to see how that would work out.

But... having said that... People have made equally compelling videos of how well the system works and how quickly they got in and out and their service was free.

All one need do is find someone who has had an experience that tells the story one wants to tell and VOILA... instant compelling documentary.

I could make an equally compelling film for or against our American system of health care.

Like I said... not a governmental health care fan by any stretch of the imagination... but this film should be taken for what it is. It is a film whose makers set out to make things look one way and they found the people who had the set of experiences needed to make their point.

So... Universal Health Care... Bad idea.

This film... propaganda to suit one sides views & opinions. I strive to be man enough to see that even when it props up my particular viewpoint.

[Ron]

Falla,

More scare stories by the people who control the money in the US.
I have lived with our system of health care for all my life and it hasn't failed me.

Ever wonder if it is so bad, why do the majority of Canadians want to retain it?

We have had 3 American Preachers who live & Pastor up here so they have access to the same services as we Canadians.
Thier surgeries were top notch, improved thier lives, & they thank God they didn't have it in the US.

[Falla39]

I just thought I would toss this out for pro and con comments!

That's the way we learn, isn't it!

Falla39

[Digging4Truth]

I just thought I would toss this out for pro and con comments!

That's the way we learn, isn't it!

Falla39

Indeed it is brother.

Thanks for sharing it.

[scotty]

Falla,

More scare stories by the people who control the money in the US.
I have lived with our system of health care for all my life and it hasn't failed me.

Ever wonder if it is so bad, why do the majority of Canadians want to retain it?

We have had 3 American Preachers who live & Pastor up here so they have access to the same services as we Canadians.
Thier surgeries were top notch, improved thier lives, & they thank God they didn't have it in the US.

I am pretty sure it is everything You say it, the thing is , that is Canada. Your government is not near as corrupt as ours. I know that might be sad to say but unfortunatly it is the truth. Our government can not handle being in control of that much money. they can't control the tax base they have now.

Do ya'll have government run schools? What about a Social Security system? Do ya'll have government run transportation and road departments? We do. Does all that stuff do about as good as your health care program? Ours don't, matter of fact all three of those departments are inept and in debt and in shambles.

See my point. US run health care, by experience, would be no different.

[Praxeas]

Universal Health Care



A short but poignant independent film on government sponsored healthcare systems. Everyone who plans to vote for our new President in 2008 NEEDS to see this.

Regardless of the person for whom they would vote. Please forward this to everyone you can think of as soon as you can.


http://www.freemarketcure.com/brainsurgery.php

Someone sent this in an e-mail this morning. Has anyone seen it?
Any comments?

Falla39
How do you all feel about forcing drivers to have car insurance or they don't drive? On that note...how about forcing people to have health insurance or they don't have a right to live? Stupid I know but hospitals are paying for the uninsured and they are passing the costs on to those with insurance.

[Praxeas]

I am not a fan of governmentally controlled health care. One need only spend some time at the VA to see how that would work out.

But... having said that... People have made equally compelling videos of how well the system works and how quickly they got in and out and their service was free.

All one need do is find someone who has had an experience that tells the story one wants to tell and VOILA... instant compelling documentary.

I could make an equally compelling film for or against our American system of health care.

Like I said... not a governmental health care fan by any stretch of the imagination... but this film should be taken for what it is. It is a film whose makers set out to make things look one way and they found the people who had the set of experiences needed to make their point.

So... Universal Health Care... Bad idea.

This film... propaganda to suit one sides views & opinions. I strive to be man enough to see that even when it props up my particular viewpoint.
but at least they have the VA....they might have nothing instead. It needs to be better that is for sure, but how is it going to improve on it's own?

[ReformedDave]

How do you all feel about forcing drivers to have car insurance or they don't drive? On that note...how about forcing people to have health insurance or they don't have a right to live? Stupid I know but hospitals are paying for the uninsured and they are passing the costs on to those with insurance.

It is my understanding that there are governmental caps placed on hospital charges. We can bill what we want to but that doesn't mean we'll get paid.

[Digging4Truth]

but at least they have the VA....they might have nothing instead. It needs to be better that is for sure, but how is it going to improve on it's own?

Yep... you are absolutely right.

There is a definite need for a fix. I'm not sure what the right answer is either and, as you have said, thankfully they at least have the VA.

I think that a lot of the problem is... well first it is because of the greed of the large corporations which decide whether we get a treatment or not... and then beyond that our connection with the price of a treatment has been completely done away with.

I could continue but I don't feel that I should since I know so many more problems than I do answers. I don't feel that one should gripe too much unless then have answer and I am definitely short in that area.

But... I do agree with your post.

[Sam]

A government controlled and operated health care system would have:
the cost effectiveness of the Pentagon,
the efficiency of the Post Office,
the skill level of a Union Shop,
and the customer relationship warmness of the IRS.

[Mrs. LPW]

I am pretty sure it is everything You say it, the thing is , that is Canada. Your government is not near as corrupt as ours. I know that might be sad to say but unfortunatly it is the truth. Our government can not handle being in control of that much money. they can't control the tax base they have now.

Do ya'll have government run schools? What about a Social Security system? Do ya'll have government run transportation and road departments? We do. Does all that stuff do about as good as your health care program? Ours don't, matter of fact all three of those departments are inept and in debt and in shambles.

See my point. US run health care, by experience, would be no different.

A government controlled and operated health care system would have:
the cost effectiveness of the Pentagon,
the efficiency of the Post Office,
the skill level of a Union Shop,
and the customer relationship warmness of the IRS.

That's too bad. We do have government run things.. all down the line. And we could never say our government is perfect. Our last government did some shady things with money and it was a huge part of their not getting re-elected. So we can't toot our horns too loudly but I am so thankful the the Lord we have the system in place that we do.
Especially health care!

[Apprehended]

This nation had better quadripple the amount of medical students if they expect to stay up with government mandated health care.

We are educating doctors from around the world who go back to Canada and other places including third world nations but we do not have nearly enough trained physicians to take on the load that mandated health care would be sure to come.

[scotty]

That's too bad. We do have government run things.. all down the line. And we could never say our government is perfect. Our last government did some shady things with money and it was a huge part of their not getting re-elected. So we can't toot our horns too loudly but I am so thankful the the Lord we have the system in place that we do.
Especially health care!

Believe me when I say , you have no idea just how thankful you should be. Live on our systems for about a year and you would go back to Canada and devote a daily prayer meeting just to being thankful.

[scotty]

This nation had better quadripple the amount of medical students if they expect to stay up with government mandated health care.

We are educating doctors from around the world who go back to Canada and other places including third world nations but we do not have nearly enough trained physicians to take on the load that mandated health care would be sure to come.

That is how they want to do it Brother. Offer free education in health care to others thus they can send us to the students alot cheaper than a veteran doctor. They will just keep rotating students from other countries. Free healthcare. Little overhead.

[Praxeas]

It is my understanding that there are governmental caps placed on hospital charges. We can bill what we want to but that doesn't mean we'll get paid.

But still our premiums go higher....at least in my case my perscription drug coverage goes lower. I am paying more out of pocket for meds and Im not even working...

Hospitals are taking in people without health insurance and not getting paid by them. In LA alone many many hospitals have closed and ERs due to funding.

[Praxeas]

A government controlled and operated health care system would have:
the cost effectiveness of the Pentagon,
the efficiency of the Post Office,
the skill level of a Union Shop,
and the customer relationship warmness of the IRS.
Isn't there a difference between health care coverage (insurance) and Government run HMOs?

[ReformedDave]

Isn't there a difference between health care coverage (insurance) and Government run HMOs?

Not much. I agree that $millions$ are given away to to those that cannot afford it. I work in the biggest NICU in San Diego and we have MANY people from south of the border that come here to have their babies (who can blame them) and have no intention of ever paying.

BTW, my wife and I have had great health care with absolutely no problems from my Ins. plan, and that includes 'elective' surgery.

[Pragmatist]

I think that a lot of the problem is... well first it is because of the greed of the large corporations which decide whether we get a treatment or not... and then beyond that our connection with the price of a treatment has been completely done away with.



I just wanted to address the "greed of the large corporations" theory.

They do not decide whether you get treatment or not, they decide whether or not the contract that two parties agreed to covers the cost of the treatment.

And the insurance company that I worked for consistently lost money year after year on health insurance until finally they left the health insurance market altogether.

I do agree that part of the problem is that the majority of consumers have no idea of the true cost of medical coverage. People whine about their $25 copayment for a $400 office visit.

[ForeverBlessed]

Universal Health Care



A short but poignant independent film on government sponsored healthcare systems. Everyone who plans to vote for our new President in 2008 NEEDS to see this.

Regardless of the person for whom they would vote. Please forward this to everyone you can think of as soon as you can.


http://www.freemarketcure.com/brainsurgery.php

Someone sent this in an e-mail this morning. Has anyone seen it?
Any comments?

Falla39

I am not a fan of government healthcare.... but we really need to do something in this nation... healthcare is through the roof!!!

It is nothing for me to write off in excess of 50 thousand a month to patients who qualify for some type of assistance...or bad debt. (we have 31 physicians on staff) We go by federal guidelines and try to do our part in helping the uninsured... but bottom line, this is really being funded by major hospitals...

People don't realize that doctors don't have the control of patients medical care as they used to... they work for networks... and those networks are owned by hospitals.... those hospitals bail us out financially every month.

Just when I think we are going under from all the charity and bad debt write offs, I get a report showing me how much medical expenses that our local hospital writes off each year.... blow me away. Millions...

It is sad, but in America, we have people who won't work...and they unfortunately get the free healthcare of Medicaid... but we will always have those people until they are made accountable.

Then we have the working class who can't afford healthcare and the companies don't provide it... Indiana now has a program that helps these people called HIP... it is a part of Medicaid, but is managed and guidelines are stricter... they will pay copays and such.

That is the people I don't mind helping through taxes... and I don't mind paying for medical care for children... we shouldn't be a country that can't provide medical for kids because it is so expensive... One well child visit and immunizations, can set a parent back 1K... that is crazy. I for one am grateful we do have Medicaid programs for kids.

There are many things that factor into the high cost of high health care...and the drug companies are a big part of it... imo

[ForeverBlessed]

I just wanted to address the "greed of the large corporations" theory.

They do not decide whether you get treatment or not, they decide whether or not the contract that two parties agreed to covers the cost of the treatment.

And the insurance company that I worked for consistently lost money year after year on health insurance until finally they left the health insurance market altogether.

I do agree that part of the problem is that the majority of consumers have no idea of the true cost of medical coverage. People whine about their $25 copayment for a $400 office visit.

oh, and do they whine.... I hate collecting copays. Drives me absolutely crazy when a Lilly employee from around here, lets their petty $5 copays rack up and I am sending letters... I want to yank them through the phone and :girlytantrum

I work for a medical network and I have a $1,700 deductible.. so, if it wasn't for my health savings account... I would just go sick instead of being seen.

[ForeverBlessed]

How do you all feel about forcing drivers to have car insurance or they don't drive? On that note...how about forcing people to have health insurance or they don't have a right to live? Stupid I know but hospitals are paying for the uninsured and they are passing the costs on to those with insurance.

You are correct, they have to off set those write offs somewhere...

One of our best payers is "Medicare" Nine of the physicians that I collect for specialize in geriatrics and it is the easiest office to collect after..

Medicare pays fairly well, and most of those on Medicare today are from the generation that pays their bills timely... not a lot of bad debt generated there.

[ForeverBlessed]

It is my understanding that there are governmental caps placed on hospital charges. We can bill what we want to but that doesn't mean we'll get paid.

You are right, there are pretty much caps with every insurance company... We are under contract and even though we bill a much higher amount, we get about 70...maybe 80% of what we charge. Of course there is a lot of contract negotiating going on ... everyone has to give a little.

Medicaid pays the least... and requires so many restrictions... we have to adjust off anything they do not pay,(and they don't pay much) and we can't refuse care even if they had a large collections balance prior to having Medicaid. At least the doctors have the right put cap on the number of patients on their Medicaid panel.... and some even refuse to have a Medicaid panel.

[Ron]

Below is a few comments about what our health care in Canada is all about.
It still requires health care premiums which right now is $108 a month all inclusive for my family.
The Provincial & Ferderal Governments sit down & work out a contract with the Doctors & Private Labs, Imaging Labs, & some private hospitals.
They agree to Fees for services rendered.
One thing that also is different in Canada is costs.
A Hostpital may charge $600 a day for a patient to stay, whereas in Canada that may be $300 a day.
A surgery to remove an appendix may be $10,000 in the us vs $5,000 in Canada.
The hospitals are modern, some are being expanding, but Canada is facing something the US has to face as well.
There is a worldwide shortage of Doctors & Nurses that isn't going to be fixed soon.

Does Canada have a national health insurance plan?

Canada does not have a single national health care plan, but rather a national health insurance program, which is achieved through a series of thirteen interlocking provincial and territorial health insurance plans, all of which share certain common features and basic standards of coverage, with slight differences. Under the Canada Health Act, our national health care program is designed to ensure that all residents of Canada have reasonable access to medically necessary hospital and physician services on a prepaid basis, and on uniform terms and conditions.
Who is eligible for health care in Canada?

Our national health insurance program is designed to ensure that all residents of Canada have access to medically necessary hospital and physician care on a prepaid basis. Residence in a province or territory is the basic requirement for insured health care coverage. The Canada Health Act defines a resident of a province or territory as:

"a person lawfully entitled to be or to remain in Canada who makes his home and is ordinarily present in the province, but does not include a tourist, a transient or a visitor to the province."

Each province and territory is responsible for determining its own minimum residence requirements with regard to an individual's eligibility for benefits under its health insurance plan. The Canada Health Act gives no guidance on such minimum residence requirements beyond an initial three-month waiting period to establish eligibility for and entitlement to insured health services. Provinces may require minimum residence annually in the province, and evidence of intention of returning to the province for that minimum residence period each year.

The federal government is responsible for:

* setting and administering national principles or standards for the health care system through the Canada Health Act;
* assisting in the financing of provincial health care services through fiscal transfers;
* delivering direct health services to specific groups including veterans, native Canadians living on reserves, military personnel, inmates of federal penitentiaries and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police; and
* fulfilling other health-related functions such as health protection, disease prevention and health promotion.

The provincial and territorial governments are responsible for:

* managing and delivering health care services;
* planning, financing, and evaluating the provision of hospital care;
* physician and allied health care services; and
* managing some aspects of prescription care and public health.

What health care services are insured by the provinces and territories?

Under the Canada Health Act, provincial and territorial health insurance plans are required to provide coverage to their residents for all medically necessary hospital and physician services on a prepaid basis.
What other health care services do provinces and territories provide?

Provinces and territories may also offer "additional benefits" under their respective health insurance plans, at their discretion, and on their own terms and conditions. While these services vary from province to province, some examples include prescription drug benefits, dental care, optometric services, chiropractic services, hearing aids, transportation services and home care programs.
What health care services are not covered by provinces and territories?

Services not covered are generally those considered not to be medically necessary. Some examples include: cosmetic surgery, health examinations for employment purposes and tattoo removal. However, there can be exceptions; for example, the removal of concentration camp tattoos or reconstructive cosmetic surgery following a trauma.




Discovering he had colon cancer came as a shock to John Kioussis, but after 10 days in the hospital, attended by a battery of medical specialists, technicians, nurses and other staff, his bill came to less than $85 in American dollars -- and that was only for his phone and cable TV.

Under Canada's government-funded health insurance system, Kioussis' care, from the first visit to a family doctor, through visits to two specialists of his choice and his hospital stay, was free, paid for by Ontario's publicly funded universal health coverage.

"When you're sick like that and off work, the last thing you want to worry about is how to pay the bill," said Kioussis, 55. "I had excellent care and one of the top specialists in the country, the same doctor who would treat the prime minister."

That's the side of Canadian health care familiar to many Americans -- a system that provides free cradle-to-grave treatment to all, regardless of income or employment status.

The fact is, though, that Canada's system is riddled with problems, many stemming from inadequate funding. As a result, delays of several months are common before seeing a specialist or getting nonemergency surgery.

For his part, Kioussis said the month he waited between seeing his family doctor and his surgery did not seem unreasonable. He admitted, though, that because of a personal connection between his brother and the surgeon, the doctor operated on him just before he left for vacation.

Although delays and other problems have caused support to dip slightly, Canadians still overwhelmingly back their universal health program. They think of their health care system as a mark of their national identity, something that separates them from Americans.

Meanwhile, a recent ABC News poll showed that while Americans value the quality of U.S. health care, 62 percent think the nation should shift to a universal health insurance program like Canada's.

As a result of the sharply differing approaches Canada and the United States have taken toward financing health care, their medical systems have developed in contrasting ways.

The United States has more hospital beds per person than Canada because most American hospitals are private, while almost all Canadian hospitals are publicly funded. As a result, American hospitals compete for patients, while Canadian hospitals "don't fund excess capacity," said Sharon Sholzberg-Gray, chief executive of the Canadian Healthcare Association.

By many measures, Canadians are healthier than Americans, with a longer lifespan and lower infant mortality, even though they spend much less on medical care. Canadians devote about 10 percent of their gross domestic product, the total of a nation's goods and services, to provide full health coverage for all citizens. American health costs account for about 14 percent of GDP, yet 45 million Americans have no health insurance and many more have limited coverage.

One of the main culprits pushing up the cost of care in the United States is the expense of administering a plethora of complicated health plans. It has been estimated that any large health insurer in a midsize U.S. state spends more on administration than is spent on health administration in all Canada.

Dr. Catherine Kurosu is a gynecologist at two San Diego hospitals. A Canadian, she said the biggest differences between the two systems are that poorer Americans won't seek medical care until their problems have become serious. In addition, she said, American insurers often play games to avoid paying bills.

In San Diego, a lot of pregnant women -- especially illegal immigrants -- show up with problems that could have been avoided with prenatal care, she said. The idea that they can't get this kind of care "still seems foreign to me," she said.

"My patients are always interested in finding out about the health care system when they find out I'm Canadian," she continued.

When it comes to billing, the Canadian system is a simple matter of sending an invoice to the Ministry of Health, which pays on a fee-for-service basis, she explained. In the United States, there are so many insurance companies, each with its own rules covering not only the patient but also the doctor -- as Kurosu learned when she had to wait months for an insurance company to approve her.

U.S. health insurers nickel and dime doctors by always sending bills back and questioning everything, she said. "It's like a game to see how long they can forestall payment."

Eleven years ago, Colleen Burns started a medical imaging business in Buffalo, N.Y., right across the border from Ontario. She expected 20 percent of her business would come from Canadians willing to pay $300 to $600 in U.S. for quicker access to high-tech diagnostics. Instead, the proportion is only about 8 to 10 percent, she said.

Canadians need to feel a sense of urgency and have the money before coming to the United States, "because they can get an MRI for free in Canada," she said.


Canada's system "Perfect?" No.
But it isn't the big bogeyman everyone thinks it is.

[scotty]

US editing


Below is a few comments about what our health care in Canada is all about.
It still requires health care premiums which right now is $108 a month all inclusive for my family.
The Provincial & Ferderal Governments sit down & work out a contract with the Doctors & Private Labs, Imaging Labs, & some private hospitals.
This would take longer than my life span
They agree to Fees for services rendered.
One thing that also is different in Canada is costs.
A Hostpital may charge $600 a day for a patient to stay, whereas in Canada that may be $300 a day.
A surgery to remove an appendix may be $10,000 in the us vs $5,000 in Canada.
The hospitals are modern, some are being expanding, but Canada is facing something the US has to face as well.
There is a worldwide shortage of Doctors & Nurses that isn't going to be fixed soon.
We import students from other countries and give them free medical college in return for practicing their skills on us.

Does Canada have a national health insurance plan?

Canada does not have a single national health care plan, but rather a national health insurance program, which is achieved through a series of thirteen interlocking provincial and territorial health insurance plans, all of which share certain common features and basic standards of coverage, with slight differences. Under the Canada Health Act, our national health care program is designed to ensure that all residents of Canada have reasonable access to medically necessary hospital and physician services on a prepaid basis, and on uniform terms and conditions.
Who is eligible for health care in Canada?

Our national health insurance program is designed to ensure that all residents of Canada have access to medically necessary hospital and physician care on a prepaid basis. Residence in a province or territory is the basic requirement for insured health care coverage. The Canada Health Act defines a resident of a province or territory as:

It would take our congress another lifetime to pass this and when we did there would be so many earmarks it would be bankrupt right out the door.

"a person lawfully entitled to be or to remain in Canada who makes his home and is ordinarily present in the province, but does not include a tourist, a transient or a visitor to the province."

This means our illegal aliens can't be covered ....that will never work.

Each province and territory is responsible for determining its own minimum residence requirements with regard to an individual's eligibility for benefits under its health insurance plan. The Canada Health Act gives no guidance on such minimum residence requirements beyond an initial three-month waiting period to establish eligibility for and entitlement to insured health services. Provinces may require minimum residence annually in the province, and evidence of intention of returning to the province for that minimum residence period each year.

The federal government is responsible for:

* setting and administering national principles or standards for the health care system through the Canada Health Act;
Principles? We have sex scandels and embezzelment in government. No principals here.
* assisting in the financing of provincial health care services through fiscal transfers;
This requires fiscal responsibility. yeah right
* delivering direct health services to specific groups including veterans, native Canadians living on reserves, military personnel, inmates of federal penitentiaries and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police; and
* fulfilling other health-related functions such as health protection, disease prevention and health promotion.

The provincial and territorial governments are responsible for:

* managing and delivering health care services;
* planning, financing, and evaluating the provision of hospital care;
* physician and allied health care services; and
* managing some aspects of prescription care and public health.
Like we manage, plan, finance, evaluate and deliver SS, Medicare, Medicade, VA Benifits, welfare, IRS, education, (inhale) .....you get the picture.

What health care services are insured by the provinces and territories?

Under the Canada Health Act, provincial and territorial health insurance plans are required to provide coverage to their residents for all medically necessary hospital and physician services on a prepaid basis.
What other health care services do provinces and territories provide?

Provinces and territories may also offer "additional benefits" under their respective health insurance plans, at their discretion, and on their own terms and conditions. While these services vary from province to province, some examples include prescription drug benefits, dental care, optometric services, chiropractic services, hearing aids, transportation services and home care programs.
What health care services are not covered by provinces and territories?

Services not covered are generally those considered not to be medically necessary. Some examples include: cosmetic surgery, health examinations for employment purposes and tattoo removal. However, there can be exceptions; for example, the removal of concentration camp tattoos or reconstructive cosmetic surgery following a trauma.



Absolutly love it, I say we all move to Canada...

:doggyrun:airplane:boat:driving:cc1:coolcar:helico pter


any way we can get there :happydance

[pelathais]

Falla,

More scare stories by the people who control the money in the US.
I have lived with our system of health care for all my life and it hasn't failed me.

Ever wonder if it is so bad, why do the majority of Canadians want to retain it?

We have had 3 American Preachers who live & Pastor up here so they have access to the same services as we Canadians.
Thier surgeries were top notch, improved thier lives, & they thank God they didn't have it in the US.
Why is the head of the Canadian Medical Association is opening "private practice" clinics around Canada.

Why did that Canadian lawmaker come to the United States for her cancer surgery?

And who "controls the money in the US?" I control the money in my wallet. That's a pretty fair system. Why would I support a system the enables government minions to control what's mine?

[pelathais]

US editing





Absolutly love it, I say we all move to Canada...

:doggyrun:airplane:boat:driving:cc1:coolcar:helico pter


any way we can get there :happydance

It is a beautiful place, but socialism failed. Why don't people remember that socialism has failed?

[scotty]

It is a beautiful place, but socialism failed. Why don't people remember that socialism has failed?

sssshhhhhh :shhh

Thought maybe the ones who wanted it would get excited and move....

I ain't goin no where..
:happydance

[Ron]

Why is the head of the Canadian Medical Association is opening "private practice" clinics around Canada.

Why? There is money to be made, and there is a shortage of supply. There is a worldwide shortage of Doctors & nurses even in the USA.

Why did that Canadian lawmaker come to the United States for her cancer surgery?

If she can pay for it, why not? She can also go to Britain, China, or wherever, it is a free country.

And who "controls the money in the US?" I control the money in my wallet.
What you don't control is the Doctors & corporate hospitals that where making money is a priority-not patient health care.

That's a pretty fair system.

Why would I support a system the enables government minions to control what's mine?

Why should you support Taxes for Roads, Schools, Police, & even Welfare!


Now Dat's the name of that tune!:thumbsup

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by pelathais http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?p=388210#post388210)
Why is the head of the Canadian Medical Association is opening "private practice" clinics around Canada.

Why? There is money to be made, and there is a shortage of supply. There is a worldwide shortage of Doctors & nurses even in the USA.

But he's the head of the gov't system. Why create an inefficient redundancy if the gov't plan is so good? He's doing it because the Canadian social medical plan won't last. You can't import enough Muslims to support you in retirement as it is. And besides, when your population of Canucks is old and infirm and on the dole, why do you think those Muslim immigrants are even going to care about you at all? You should be building a sustainable society, not dying off like Old Europe.

Are Canadians covered by any insurance in the private clinics or is it completely out-of-pocket? Why are the people going to private clinics paying twice just to recieve medical care once?

Why did that Canadian lawmaker come to the United States for her cancer surgery?

If she can pay for it, why not? She can also go to Britain, China, or wherever, it is a free country.

But she was already paying for her own health insurance in Canada. She came to the U.S. to recieve surgery that her Canadian government plan had said would be delayed. The social medical plan has caused longer waiting lists for medical care.

And who "controls the money in the US?" I control the money in my wallet.
What you don't control is the Doctors & corporate hospitals that where making money is a priority-not patient health care.

Yes, I do control that. And this might be a concept so basic that it escapes most people in socialist societies. When I choose to spend my health care dollars at a clinic or hospital that puts "me" first, then both myself and the hospital's funds (heretofore "my money") are at the top of the list.

Besides, most hospitals in the U.S. are non-profit corporations. Very few operate on a for-profit basis. The health care workers, however, work according to their own self interests and are compensated at a rate higher than people in every other industry. So most of the money that you fear is in the hands of "corporations" is really in the hands of people like you and me.

...And the trial lawyers. http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Frivolous medical lawsuits are a bane to our system. Presidential candidate John Edwards amassed a private fortune of over $200 million dollars by suing the makers of breast implants. For several years silicone breast implants were unavailable. Then they were found to be harmless and are back. Edwards, however gets to keep his $200+ million!

That's where we get ripped off.

Now, just for a moment, imagine how you would feel if the gov't gave you all the money you needed to take care of your health expenses. That they just gave you that money and doctors and hospitals competed for the privilege of treating your cankers, or whatever. You could choose where and when you wanted a procedure done. You could choose the doctor. You would have power over your own life and death decisions!

Ah... now we see why they wanted to take that away from you. And why did you let them, again? Were you afraid? Did they make you feel that you weren't "smart" enough? Did they tell you that you weren't "good" enough or that your community wasn't "fair" enough?

That's a pretty fair system. (Me keeping the money in my wallet, ed.)

Why would I support a system the enables government minions to control what's mine?

Why should you support Taxes for Roads, Schools, Police, & even Welfare!

"Why should I pay to support taxes?" Think about that for a bit and you may understand why we threw your tea into the harbor. The best roads in my area are paid for by me and a private corporation. The best schools in America are private schools.

Welfare is what we do to help each other out during hard times - and it's a lot cheaper for me and a some neighbors to take care of each other than it is to send more money than necessary to Washington and then see my neighbors still in need. It makes better sense to do things yourself than to hire John Edwards and Co. to bilk everyone.

Now Dat's the name of that tune!:thumbsup

Sing that tune in Arabic for me, please. You don't? Well, you'd better learn. :thumbsup

[trickledown]

thanks for some sense pel,

getting tired of Canadians and socialist here telling me whats wrong with my health system. Pres. Bush couldn't do anything with SS reform. Hopefully the hope for nationalized healthcare will sink even faster.

[Praxeas]

Hopefully the hope for nationalized healthcare will sink even faster.
what an ironic thing to say....

[trickledown]

sorry for the wording .... take from it what you will .... my hope for ss reform is much more dear to my heart, did you see the pew population forecast for 2050? we won't survive at the current rate. even with twice the rate of immigration it won't work without huge tax hikes

[Praxeas]

sorry for the wording .... take from it what you will .... my hope for ss reform is much more dear to my heart, did you see the pew population forecast for 2050? we won't survive at the current rate. even with twice the rate of immigration it won't work without huge tax hikes
At this point I can hear REM singing "It's the end of the world as we know it"

[Maple Leaf]

Originally Posted by pelathais http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?p=388210#post388210)
Why is the head of the Canadian Medical Association is opening "private practice" clinics around Canada.

Why? There is money to be made, and there is a shortage of supply. There is a worldwide shortage of Doctors & nurses even in the USA.

But he's the head of the gov't system.



This single statement is representative of the whole post: "He's the head of the gov't system."


The head of the Canadian Medical Association is a woman, Dr. Louise Cloutier.

The head of the CMA is not the head of the gov't system.

The Minister of Health is the head of the gov't system.

The suggestion that the CMA is opposed to publicly funded healthcare is a misrepresentation. Here is a quote from the CMA web site: "Overall, the CMA’s goal is to ensure the survival and robust health of Canada's medicare system — easily the country's most valued social program — in the face of numerous challenges."

[ChristopherHall]

I go to Canada every year. I've seen the system with my own eyes and it's actually quite good. I was impressed. I have a good friend there who has explained that as with any system there are "horror stories". A good example is that my father-in-law was allowed to sit and die from internal bleeding nearly two weeks after a heart surgery in Kettering Hispital in Kettering Ohio. We can't use either instances, my father-in -law's story or this man's story to classify an entire health care system.

But the facts are in, overall Canada's system is far superior to America's.

Besides, the actual plan that is getting traction among Democrats is more like that found in France (number one in the world) than that found in Canada.

[MrsMcD]

The government can't handle what they are in charge of now. I don't want them in charge of my health care. I have heard many doctors say that if the government takes over health care, they are finding a new occupation. What kind of health care is that going to give us? We need a solution but the government isn't the solution. imo

[scotty]

I go to Canada every year. I've seen the system with my own eyes and it's actually quite good. I was impressed. I have a good friend there who has explained that as with any system there are "horror stories". A good example is that my father-in-law was allowed to sit and die from internal bleeding nearly two weeks after a heart surgery in Kettering Hispital in Kettering Ohio. We can't use either instances, my father-in -law's story or this man's story to classify an entire health care system.

But the facts are in, overall Canada's system is far superior to America's.

Besides, the actual plan that is getting traction among Democrats is more like that found in France (number one in the world) than that found in Canada.


And Frances tax rate is???????

[Ron]

If ignorance is bliss, than judging from some responses on this thread some people must be in Seventh Heaven!

I could care less about peoples opinions & ideas about something, but to outright classify Canada's Heath System as what you think it is without even seeing it is being 'ignorant!"

What you have right now is broken right now. Have I been in it-no.
Have you all complained about it-yes.
Is it a campaign issue-yes.

I ain't telling you to copy us, but why not objectively ask what is working in other countries?
I had another p[oster who asked me (not falla) if I would start a thread about Health care in Canada & I said that they should.
They told me it should be someone that is familiar with our system.

I said but, "They won't listen!"

I was right about more than one thing!:hypercoffee

[ReformedDave]

If we call something a 'right' someone must give it to them. By the government forcing me to give violates the 8th commandment.

[ChristopherHall]

And Frances tax rate is???????

Good point. The tax rate is higher...BUT...they don't have the outrageous premiums and deductibles we do. For example a popular business plan right now is a high deductible HRA, like where my wife works. Meaning that for a family you pay something like the first $3,000 of your medical expenses out of pocket, because you have to save it in the HAR account to use it and count it toward your deductible. You also pay an outrageous monthly premium of about $300 (often on the low end). So you pay full price for doctor's visits, shots, services, and prescriptions, up to $3,000 dollars AND THEN the insurance kicks in and pays only 80% of costs after that. So if you have expensive prescriptions or health problems you'll pay a MINIMUM of $6,600 in a given year and then 20% of every additional cost. So basically if you had health issueshealth you'd have to pay well over $6,000 a year. In a Universal System all of that goes away. You might pay an extra $120 in taxes and a government negotiated monthly premium of $80. You have no out of pocket co-pays or deductibles. So under the universal system in a single year you would pay only $2,400 a year TOTAL. You saved $4,200 of your own money a year! Places like Canada may have negociated a higher premium of around $100 a month. In the Canadian system you'd only save around $3,000 a year.

So yes, in a universal system you pay more in taxes with a negotiated premium....but your duductibles and co-pays are GONE. You save money. On top of that...the vast majority pay something into the system where as in our American system you have 50 million uninsured going to the ER and paying nothing, jacking your health insurance premiums higher and higher every year. Frankly...in the American system you're paying for more freeloaders than in the universal systems, that's why it's more expensive.

Also Canadian and French business journals have businesses that love universal health insurance. Even businesses pay less money after the combination of taxes and negotiated premiums. The advocate against a system like ours because it would cut their competitiveness! LOL

It's an all around good thing. It's only fear and predudice that prevents us from doing what every other Western natino has done with health care.

Oh...and their over all costs as a nation in health care is lower than the US (who spends nearly 16% more on health care than any other nation, yet our population is far less heathly and see their doctor less). That's also an interesting study.

God bless.

[ChristopherHall]

If we call something a 'right' someone must give it to them. By the government forcing me to give violates the 8th commandment.

Does a dying man have the right to medication that might save his life? Yes or no?

What about a insurance corporation "forcing" you to pay a higher premium to pay for someone without health insurance that can't or won't pay their bill? Please factor in that they add services fees and overhead costs to that to insure a profit.

The public system would have very few who do not pay into the system, thereby lowering costs and premiums instantly. Then prices are negotiated between the government and the industry to lower them more. You come out on top instead of paying for the 50 million freeloaders like you do now.

[scotty]

Does a dying man have the right to medication that might save his life?

Maybe you should ask God that question.

[ChristopherHall]

I'm asking YOU guys....we'll let God listen to your answers. ;)

At least have the guts to say it bro. Your position testifies to the fact that you don't believe a dying man has a "right" to medication or health care that might save his life. That's philosophically intrinsic to your argument. lol You might agree he should be treated, as long as he's rich enough to pay for it. His right to live in the view you espouse is measured in cold hard cash.

[Falla39]

If ignorance is bliss, than judging from some responses on this thread some people must be in Seventh Heaven!

I could care less about peoples opinions & ideas about something, but to outright classify Canada's Heath System as what you think it is without even seeing it is being 'ignorant!"

What you have right now is broken right now. Have I been in it-no.
Have you all complained about it-yes.
Is it a campaign issue-yes.

I ain't telling you to copy us, but why not objectively ask what is working in other countries?
I had another poster who asked me (not falla) if I would start a thread about Health care in Canada & I said that they should.
They told me it should be someone that is familiar with our system.I said but, "They won't listen!"

I was right about more than one thing!:hypercoffee

Bro. Ron,

I must admit that I only posted the video a friend e-mailed me

to get an idea of the pros and cons, (about Universal Health Care),

because I didn't have a clue. It's been interesting to

read the different opinions and comments, pro and con. I didn't even

think about American vs Canadian concerning this subject. LOL!

Thank our Great Lord God that He has been the ultimate in Health

Care these many years. There has not been one time when we called

that He wasn't a very present Help in time of need! To God be the

Glory for He is Great and Greatly to be Praised!! If anything this thread

has convinced me that I just want to trust HIM more.

Blessings,

Falla39

[ReformedDave]

I'm asking YOU guys....we'll let God listen to your answers. ;)

At least have the guts to say it bro. Your position testifies to the fact that you don't believe a dying man has a "right" to medication or health care that might save his life. That's philosophically intrinsic to your argument. lol You might agree he should be treated, as long as he's rich enough to pay for it. His right to live in the view you espouse is measured in cold hard cash.

A right means I OWE it to him. It may be the Christian thing to do of my own will but for the government to steal from me to give some of it to him is wrong.

[ReformedDave]

Does a dying man have the right to medication that might save his life? Yes or no?

What about a insurance corporation "forcing" you to pay a higher premium to pay for someone without health insurance that can't or won't pay their bill? Please factor in that they add services fees and overhead costs to that to insure a profit.

The public system would have very few who do not pay into the system, thereby lowering costs and premiums instantly. Then prices are negotiated between the government and the industry to lower them more. You come out on top instead of paying for the 50 million freeloaders like you do now.

It's amazing folks. He sets up straw men and smoke screens. He'd flunk logic 101. He has a tough time answering questions though......

[ReformedDave]

Good point. The tax rate is higher...BUT...they don't have the outrageous premiums and deductibles we do. For example a popular business plan right now is a high deductible HRA, like where my wife works. Meaning that for a family you pay something like the first $3,000 of your medical expenses out of pocket, because you have to save it in the HAR account to use it and count it toward your deductible. You also pay an outrageous monthly premium of about $300 (often on the low end). So you pay full price for doctor's visits, shots, services, and prescriptions, up to $3,000 dollars AND THEN the insurance kicks in and pays only 80% of costs after that. So if you have expensive prescriptions or health problems you'll pay a MINIMUM of $6,600 in a given year and then 20% of every additional cost. So basically if you had health issueshealth you'd have to pay well over $6,000 a year. In a Universal System all of that goes away. You might pay an extra $120 in taxes and a government negotiated monthly premium of $80. You have no out of pocket co-pays or deductibles. So under the universal system in a single year you would pay only $2,400 a year TOTAL. You saved $4,200 of your own money a year! Places like Canada may have negociated a higher premium of around $100 a month. In the Canadian system you'd only save around $3,000 a year.

So yes, in a universal system you pay more in taxes with a negotiated premium....but your duductibles and co-pays are GONE. You save money. On top of that...the vast majority pay something into the system where as in our American system you have 50 million uninsured going to the ER and paying nothing, jacking your health insurance premiums higher and higher every year. Frankly...in the American system you're paying for more freeloaders than in the universal systems, that's why it's more expensive.

Also Canadian and French business journals have businesses that love universal health insurance. Even businesses pay less money after the combination of taxes and negotiated premiums. The advocate against a system like ours because it would cut their competitiveness! LOL

It's an all around good thing. It's only fear and predudice that prevents us from doing what every other Western natino has done with health care.

Oh...and their over all costs as a nation in health care is lower than the US (who spends nearly 16% more on health care than any other nation, yet our population is far less heathly and see their doctor less). That's also an interesting study.

God bless.

France with all it's civil unrest, unemployment, high taxes.....yeah I want to live there. Robespierre lives!

[Ferd]

Ahh yes, the old WWJD argument.


LOL! the funny thing to me is the dems ask us to be like Jesus and give our money to the government so the unfortunate can have.... and have.... and have....

while at the same time, telling us "sorry, no Jesus in public because the constitution built a wall"

quit mixing metaphors

[ReformedDave]

Ahh yes, the old WWJD argument.


LOL! the funny thing to me is the dems ask us to be like Jesus and give our money to the government so the unfortunate can have.... and have.... and have....

while at the same time, telling us "sorry, no Jesus in public because the constitution built a wall"

quit mixing metaphors

Exactly!

[Praxeas]

I go to Canada every year. I've seen the system with my own eyes and it's actually quite good. I was impressed. I have a good friend there who has explained that as with any system there are "horror stories". A good example is that my father-in-law was allowed to sit and die from internal bleeding nearly two weeks after a heart surgery in Kettering Hispital in Kettering Ohio. We can't use either instances, my father-in -law's story or this man's story to classify an entire health care system.

But the facts are in, overall Canada's system is far superior to America's.

Besides, the actual plan that is getting traction among Democrats is more like that found in France (number one in the world) than that found in Canada.
We have horror stories NOW without Universal Health Care

[pelathais]

I go to Canada every year. I've seen the system with my own eyes and it's actually quite good. I was impressed. I have a good friend there who has explained that as with any system there are "horror stories". A good example is that my father-in-law was allowed to sit and die from internal bleeding nearly two weeks after a heart surgery in Kettering Hispital in Kettering Ohio. We can't use either instances, my father-in -law's story or this man's story to classify an entire health care system.

But the facts are in, overall Canada's system is far superior to America's.

Besides, the actual plan that is getting traction among Democrats is more like that found in France (number one in the world) than that found in Canada.
I'm saddened to hear about your father-in-law. No matter what the payment system was, it sounds like this was an unfortunate misdiagnosis or some other kind of triage oversight.

I'm sure that the people at Kettering Hospital would not ever allow a patient to knowingly bleed to death - even if there was no payment to be recieved at all. Had they known the situation, I'm sure that they would have tried to respond immediately.

One fourth of all Canadian visits to an emergency room result in at least a four hour wait to be treated. 57% wait more than four weeks to see a specialist. *Commonwealth Fund, Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: An International update on the comparative performance of American health care, Karen Davis et al., May 15, 2007

I visited my physician at a time that was convenient for me recently. Among my complaints was a large lump on my shoulder. "Nothing to worry about, he assured me." But I didn't like that lump on my shoulder. It was NOT life threatening, just a "fatty deposit." But I didn't like the way it looked. It made me a bit lopsided when I closely inspected myself in the mirror. He referred me to a surgeon due to the size and placement of the lump. The surgeon scheduled a surgery at his hospital to remove the tumour. I didn't like the hospital's reputation and asked that the surgery be rescheduled at a hospital of my choosing, the surgeon agreed. I went in and the tumour was easily removed, displayed for my benefit in a sealed jar and sent to the lab for a biopsy. The biopsy report was telephoned to me and it was benign. All of this took 4 days. This was all covered by my health insurance except for the $20 co-pay to the physician and a $20 co-pay to the surgeon.

The "horror stories" and related scenarios are indeed frightening. However, I don't think there's a hospital in the Western World that would turn out a patient whose life or limb could be saved simply because of a lack of verifiable insurance or payee.

In fact, and I hope to not ever have to test the hypothesis, I think any hospital anywhere in the world would do all they could, whether they would be paid or not. People in health care are just like that. Now the debate is about the most efficient method of payment. And no, the "facts" are not "in." The Canadian system is relatively new, not even the Canadians have a lot of history with this system. You have to give it generations to even be fair. But still, a four hour wait in an emergency room????

Does the Canadian system promote research and even the expansion of medical research? The U.S. system can't build new research facilities fast enough to house the dreams of the world's brightest medical researchers. Are the world's finest physicians and health care professionals lined up around the globe to try and get into Canada to study and practice medicine? Or is Canada their second choice after they've lost their place to another promising student for a coveted spot in the U.S.?

I think your dislike for America is showing through.

[pelathais]

Good point. The tax rate is higher...BUT...they don't have the outrageous premiums and deductibles we do. For example a popular business plan right now is a high deductible HRA, like where my wife works. Meaning that for a family you pay something like the first $3,000 of your medical expenses out of pocket, because you have to save it in the HAR account to use it and count it toward your deductible. You also pay an outrageous monthly premium of about $300 (often on the low end). So you pay full price for doctor's visits, shots, services, and prescriptions, up to $3,000 dollars AND THEN the insurance kicks in and pays only 80% of costs after that. So if you have expensive prescriptions or health problems you'll pay a MINIMUM of $6,600 in a given year and then 20% of every additional cost. So basically if you had health issueshealth you'd have to pay well over $6,000 a year. In a Universal System all of that goes away. You might pay an extra $120 in taxes and a government negotiated monthly premium of $80. You have no out of pocket co-pays or deductibles. So under the universal system in a single year you would pay only $2,400 a year TOTAL. You saved $4,200 of your own money a year! Places like Canada may have negociated a higher premium of around $100 a month. In the Canadian system you'd only save around $3,000 a year.

So yes, in a universal system you pay more in taxes with a negotiated premium....but your duductibles and co-pays are GONE. You save money. On top of that...the vast majority pay something into the system where as in our American system you have 50 million uninsured going to the ER and paying nothing, jacking your health insurance premiums higher and higher every year. Frankly...in the American system you're paying for more freeloaders than in the universal systems, that's why it's more expensive.

Also Canadian and French business journals have businesses that love universal health insurance. Even businesses pay less money after the combination of taxes and negotiated premiums. The advocate against a system like ours because it would cut their competitiveness! LOL

It's an all around good thing. It's only fear and predudice that prevents us from doing what every other Western natino has done with health care.

Oh...and their over all costs as a nation in health care is lower than the US (who spends nearly 16% more on health care than any other nation, yet our population is far less heathly and see their doctor less). That's also an interesting study.

God bless.
Chris, just follow the French financial gurus and their money. They have been fleeing France for decades. One of London's most important financial sectors are the ex-pat French banks and brokerages. Even the French don't like France. Sarkozy may give them hope, but we'll have to see. BTW, have you seen the maps (http://i.ville.gouv.fr/divbib/doc/chercherZUS.htm) of the "no-go areas" in Paris? These are areas that the French police themselves do not patrol for fear of violence. Click on the word "carte" on the 2nd column from the right. "Carte" is French for map. Print these out when you go to Paris- if you find yourself in one of these neighborhoods you're pretty much on your own.

Of course ChristopherHall could just wave his man Obama's flag (http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc275/pelathais/cheobama_jpg.jpg) and he'd be welcomed as a hero. You go Chris! Wave that flag!

[pelathais]

This single statement is representative of the whole post: "He's the head of the gov't system."


The head of the Canadian Medical Association is a woman, Dr. Louise Cloutier.

The head of the CMA is not the head of the gov't system.

The Minister of Health is the head of the gov't system.

The suggestion that the CMA is opposed to publicly funded healthcare is a misrepresentation. Here is a quote from the CMA web site: "Overall, the CMA’s goal is to ensure the survival and robust health of Canada's medicare system — easily the country's most valued social program — in the face of numerous challenges."
I confess that I did read that in Macleans. Watta I know about Canada?

[OP_Carl]

I'm asking YOU guys....we'll let God listen to your answers. ;)

At least have the guts to say it bro. Your position testifies to the fact that you don't believe a dying man has a "right" to medication or health care that might save his life. That's philosophically intrinsic to your argument. lol You might agree he should be treated, as long as he's rich enough to pay for it. His right to live in the view you espouse is measured in cold hard cash.

Dear Brother Chris,

You are putting the cart before the horse, and you are erroneously using civil rights, individual rights, and religious obligation interchangeably.

The theories of natural law, on which our constitution was founded, explain that to expect humans to act against their own best interests will eventually bring chaos. The Soviet, Cuban, Korean, Vietnamese, and Chinese experiments in socialist dictatorship prove this point with the estimated 100 million "differing opinions" crying from their graves for justice.

The American Declaration of independence incorporates the elements of natural law, calling them "inalienable rights," specifically the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The last one is supposed to be synonymous with property rights.

Logic, reason, and our English heritage brought us to to this new system which gave every last man, great and small, an equal chance to make his way in the new nation. What the constitution guarantees is equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

What you are asking for in your anecdote above is equality of outcome.

American thought on the topic has become hopelessly warped by our acclimatization to the federal income tax, the New Deal social programs, and the civil rights voting act of 1964, constitutional abominations all three.

Long before your ailing anecdote arrives at the hospital's doorstep gasping his last few breaths, several fundamental constitutional concepts have been hopelessly smothered. Taxes on income are NOT constitutional. They are scarcely tolerable in time of war, which is when they were "temporarily" enacted. This gives the government a new stake in the property rights of the citizenry. It is supposedly a voluntary tax, but apparently nobody told the IRS.

Now we are subjects, who must pay up or suffer punishment by the government. This is not freedom, nor is it within the ideals of limited government, kept in check, that the founding fathers had in mind. We rationalize that it's not so bad since the money is spent on items of national interest.

Except now it has somehow become the national interest to subsidize bad decision making, and the money forcibly collected from one individual is arbitrarily given to another individual. The social gospel folks are ready to sing the hallelujah chorus, but the plight of the person whose property rights were violated in order to bankroll the party is ignored. However, the perceptive individual notices that this practice is not only NOT in his OWN best interest, but it hinders the socioeconomic progress of the individuals that receive the cash. But now it is his patriotic duty to ignore his "inalienable rights."

What for?

For the advancement of civil rights. The term sounds good but in practice it vaunts the "rights" of collective groups over the rights of the individual. This is entirely antithetical to natural law and the constitution. The result, intended or not, will be to obliterate the individual. This brings us one step closer to mob rule and chaos. With the advent of group rights come a plethora of new groups demanding new "rights," including the right to affordable health care. Except that isn't really a natural right, now is it? It is much more akin to a demand from a collective bargaining entity. The politicians have jumped on the bandwagon, and play the class envy and racial tension cards at every opportunity.

And this is where Christopher Hall steps on the scene. Your heart is in the right place. You see that these various groups are suffering, and have unmet needs. You know that the precedent is already there to turn on the tap to have the cash start flowing from the federal treasury. But you fail to recognize the that the treasury is mostly funded in violation of the natural rights of your fellow individual citizens. You have succumbed to the corollaries of class envy and the romance of Robin Hood. Jesus didn't instruct his followers to care for the poor, widows, and fatherless via institutional programs and bureaucratic systems. His commands were to individuals.

People that want to restore property rights in America aren't for pain and suffering; they are people that recognize that collective societies have failed in every instance in history. They are people who recognize that the most virtuous way to meet the needs of the poor is through individual and voluntary efforts.

[ChristopherHall]

We have horror stories NOW without Universal Health Care

That's the point. Every system has it's few horror stories. Bu these guys lie all the time about the Canadian system. I've been to Canada. Our family shares a cottage in Ontario. So we're no strangers to Canada or the Canadian system. There are also numerous Canadian Apostolics ON THIS FORUM who can testify that the things they say about the Canadian system is nothing but myths and lies that play on people's fears.

[ReformedDave]

That's the point. Every system has it's few horror stories. Bu these guys lie all the time about the Canadian system. I've been to Canada. Our family shares a cottage in Ontario. So we're no strangers to Canada or the Canadian system. There are also numerous Canadian Apostolics ON THIS FORUM who can testify that the things they say about the Canadian system is nothing but myths and lies that play on people's fears.

My cousin having to wait months(3) to have breast cancer surgery is no lie.

[ChristopherHall]

I'm saddened to hear about your father-in-law. No matter what the payment system was, it sounds like this was an unfortunate misdiagnosis or some other kind of triage oversight.

I'm sure that the people at Kettering Hospital would not ever allow a patient to knowingly bleed to death - even if there was no payment to be recieved at all. Had they known the situation, I'm sure that they would have tried to respond immediately.

One fourth of all Canadian visits to an emergency room result in at least a four hour wait to be treated. 57% wait more than four weeks to see a specialist. *Commonwealth Fund, Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: An International update on the comparative performance of American health care, Karen Davis et al., May 15, 2007

It's a bogus report. Our family shares a cottage on Charleston Lake in Outlet Ontario. We go up there every year and spend at least a week. We have good friends there and David and Terry, my uncle and aunt-in-law do quite a bit of business in Canada, not to mention works relating to their denominational church. I've personally been to Windsor, Toronto, Gananoque, Outlet, Kingston, and Ottowa. And seen facilities in Windsor, Toronto, Gananoque, Kingston. With my own eyes. With the many friends I have in Canada I've talked to them at length about this and they laugh hysterically at how Americas are so jealous they feel they have to lie to tear down the superior Canadian system. It's all lies and propaganda...I've seen it personally. I was there. Many Canadians here on this forum can testify that everything you just posted isn't typical of the Canadian system.

I visited my physician at a time that was convenient for me recently. Among my complaints was a large lump on my shoulder. "Nothing to worry about, he assured me." But I didn't like that lump on my shoulder. It was NOT life threatening, just a "fatty deposit." But I didn't like the way it looked. It made me a bit lopsided when I closely inspected myself in the mirror. He referred me to a surgeon due to the size and placement of the lump. The surgeon scheduled a surgery at his hospital to remove the tumour. I didn't like the hospital's reputation and asked that the surgery be rescheduled at a hospital of my choosing, the surgeon agreed. I went in and the tumour was easily removed, displayed for my benefit in a sealed jar and sent to the lab for a biopsy. The biopsy report was telephoned to me and it was benign. All of this took 4 days. This was all covered by my health insurance except for the $20 co-pay to the physician and a $20 co-pay to the surgeon.

That doesn't change the fact that your data about Canada is full of untruths, half truths, and misrepresentations. For example I know only one person who had a wait in Canada. He was suffering from joint pain in his hip. He had some x-rays taken and was looked at by his doctor and told that he had to see a specialist and have an MRI. There was a six week wait to see the specialist and have his MRI. But he was given time off work, compensation, and decent pain killers while waiting. Oh...but wait...it gets better. I told him it took me only a week to get an MRI in the United States and he laughed and explained to me that he could have gone to another specialist and been seen within days. But he had seen this specialist and he was really good, so he wanted to see him again. The doctor was rather popular I guess and had a wait. It wasn't government that made my friend wait, it was supply and demand bro. It was a good doctor. He also explained to me that sometimes there can be funding problem in various regions and that can cause a backup, but they typically resolve that quickly. Most Canadians haven't had any major issue with it. The other instance in which one might have to wait that he mentioned was in regards to distant location in certain provinces. He explained that sometimes there can be a shortage of beds at a regional clinic if there is a lot of people sick with flu.

I'm talking from personal experience here, not something I merely read.

The "horror stories" and related scenarios are indeed frightening. However, I don't think there's a hospital in the Western World that would turn out a patient whose life or limb could be saved simply because of a lack of verifiable insurance or payee.

Actually you're incorrect. There have been senate hearings where families have testified against insurance companies for denying coverage that would have other wise saved their loved one's life. For example the story about the young boy who died from a dental infection that spread to the brain. He was denied coverage and treatment because his family didn't have health insurance. His mother worked hard for the family and just couldn't afford health insurance. Because she worked she made too much to qualify for any government assistance program. There was also the issue with a man who had cancer. He raised enough money through charitable sources to get part way through treatment and ran out of funds. He couldn't attain coverage and died within months. There is also the story of the young lady who was in desperate need of a liver transplant. One became available to her, her insurance company denied her coverage. Her family sued the company and litigation began. Eventually the insurance company overturned it's denial of coverage. But the liver that was available at the time was given to someone else. She died while awaiting a new liver. There are nearly 18,000 deaths like these every year in the United States of America due to our broken, inefficient, and expensive health care system.

In fact, and I hope to not ever have to test the hypothesis, I think any hospital anywhere in the world would do all they could, whether they would be paid or not. People in health care are just like that. Now the debate is about the most efficient method of payment. And no, the "facts" are not "in." The Canadian system is relatively new, not even the Canadians have a lot of history with this system. You have to give it generations to even be fair. But still, a four hour wait in an emergency room????

Ummm....the Canadian health care system began in Saskatchewan in 1946. In 1946, Tommy Douglas' (a Baptist Minister and Politician) Co-operative Commonwealth Federation government in Saskatchewan passed the Saskatchewan Hospitalization Act. This guaranteed free hospital care for most of the population. In 1957 Canada passed the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act to fund 50% of the cost of such programs for any provincial government that adopted them. In 1961 every province in Canada adopted the system. The Medical Care Act was passed in 1966 that extended the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act cost-sharing to allow each province to establish a universal health care plan. This also set up the Medicare system they use. In 1984, the Canada Health Act was passed. It prohibited user fees and extra billing by doctors.

I don't know where you get the idea that the Canadian system is new and that Canadians don't even have a lot of history with the system. All of that took place well before I was born! LOL Oh, it may be of note that Canadians voted the most loved Canadian to be none other than....Tommy Douglas, the originator of their health care system.

TO BE CONTINUED....

[ChristopherHall]

Does the Canadian system promote research and even the expansion of medical research? The U.S. system can't build new research facilities fast enough to house the dreams of the world's brightest medical researchers. Are the world's finest physicians and health care professionals lined up around the globe to try and get into Canada to study and practice medicine? Or is Canada their second choice after they've lost their place to another promising student for a coveted spot in the U.S.?

Yes. There is quite a bit of research being done in Canada. A lot of what we're doing has already been done in Canada. You'll notice that American researchers always talk about improving specific treatments and claim cutting edge advances in various fields. What many don't know is that many of the things our researchers are trying to improve or advance with were things already launched in countries like Canada. Here's a short list of Canadian medical innovations.

1877 Introduction of sterilized cotton wool swabs in test tubes, which reduces contamination. (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1907 First bronchoscopy performed. (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1908 Installation of the first milk pasteurization plant in Canada, 30 years before it becomes mandatory. This all but eliminates diseases transmitted by unpasteurized milk like tuberculosis, salmonella, and e.coli. Pasteurization dramatically decreases infant mortality in Canada. (The Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

1912 First surgical treatment of tuberculosis. (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1922 First clinical use of insulin for diabetes in human patients. (University Health Network — Toronto, Ontario)

1930 Development of a new infant cereal that later becomes famous internationally as “pablum.” This fortified cereal (the first of its kind) significantly reduces death from malnutrition. (The Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

1933 First excision of the entire lung performed (pneumonectomy). (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1939 Invention of the corneal splitting knife (still standard in surgery to reduce pressure in glaucoma). (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1948 Development of the first artificial kidney machine. (Lawson Health Research Institute — London, Ontario)

1948 First 25 million electron-volt beta-tron to be established in any university or hospital — calibration takes nine months. The electron-volt beta-tron is used for cancer research and to improve treatment accuracy. (Saskatoon Health Region — Saskatoon, Saskatchewan)

1950 Introduction of lumpectomy for treatment of breast cancer. Lumpectomy is a surgical procedure designed to remove a discrete lump (usually a tumour, benign or otherwise) from an affected woman or man’s breast. (University Health Network — Toronto, Ontario)

1950 Use of total body cooling as a method of making heart surgery safer. (University Health Network — Toronto, Ontario)

1950 First neuro-surgical treatment of epilepsy performed. (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1951 First use worldwide of calibrated cobalt-60 for cancer radiotherapy treatment. (Saskatoon Health Region — Saskatoon, Saskatchewan)

1951 First “cobalt bomb” in the world used to deliver radiation therapy to cancer patients. (Lawson Health Research Institute — London, Ontario)

1952 First use of a device that determines whether or not a patient’s thyroid is cancerous through the use of radioactive iodine. (Saskatoon Health Region — Saskatoon, Saskatchewan)

1956 Major breakthrough in virology by discovering that positive strand Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) could be infectious. (Capital Health/University of Alberta — Edmonton, Alberta)

1957 Invention of the artificial cell for application in medicine and biotechnology. It was thought that artificial cells could one day be used as a partial substitute for human cells and organs. (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1958 World first surgical treatment on cerebral aneurysms. (Lawson Health Research Institute — London, Ontario)

1960 Implementation of genetic screening programs for hereditary metabolic diseases in newborns. (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1960 First implanted mammary artery into the heart wall in order to restore functionality of the heart. (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1961 Discovery of blood-forming stem cells enabling bone marrow transplants. (University Health Network — Toronto, Ontario)

1963 The first widely successful surgery to correct the birth defect known as “Blue Babies” is performed. Before this procedure, this condition used to kill 9 out of 10 patients in their first year. (The Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

1965 First artificial knee joint in the world created. (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1969 Discovery of a carcino-embryonic antigen, a tumour marker for cancer. (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1970 Discovery that hereditary metabolic diseases could be treated with vitamins. (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1971 Developed the world’s first paediatric electric prosthetic arm. (Bloorview Kids Rehab – Toronto, Ontario)

1975 Development of software used worldwide for 20 years to control radiation therapy. (University Health Network—Toronto, Ontario)

1976 Identification of P-glycoprotein as a major cause of cancer drug resistance. (University Health Network — Toronto, Ontario)

1978 Developed the internationally-recognized AeroChamber, a medical device used to administer aerosolized medication for patients with asthma. This device continues to be used in practice around the world. (St. Joseph’s Healthcare – Hamilton, Ontario)

1979 Invention of a radically different ventilator (now used worldwide) that gently “shakes” oxygen into the lungs of children with severe lung disease, sparing many of them painful lung bypass procedures. (The Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

1979 Development of “Continuous Passive Motion” (CPM), a revolutionary treatment for injured or diseased joints. Before this treatment, patients with damaged cartilage had to be totally immobilized. CPM is such an improvement that it is now being used in 17,500 hospitals in more than 77 countries worldwide. (The Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

1980 Initial studies using real time ultrasounds and detailing biological factors affecting human fetal behavioral activity and breathing movements. (Lawson Health Research Institute — London, Ontario)

1981 World-first heart operation to correct a life-threatening heart condition known as right ventricular dysphasia. (Lawson Health Research Institute — London, Ontario)

1983 Successful single lung transplant. Lung transplants extend life expectancy and enhance the quality of life for end-stage pulmonary patients. (University Health Network — Toronto, Ontario)

1983 The Department of Nuclear Medicine becomes first to use a special imaging agent to diagnose Parkinson’s disease. Called [18] F6-fluorodopa PET, the chemical was produced by Hamilton Health Sciences and is now used worldwide. (Hamilton Health Sciences/McMaster University – Hamilton, Ontario)

1984 Discovery and cloning of the T-Cell receptor genes, significant in the field of immunology. (University Health Network — Toronto, Ontario)

1986 Discovery of the SH2 domain, which controls the ability of proteins to interact with other SH2 containing proteins and thereby direct the function of enzymes involved in transmitting cellular signals. This finding has revolutionized our understanding of how proteins form, signaling pathways inside cells. It is already informing research to control these pathways in diseased cells — the basis for novel therapies. (Mount Sinai Hospital — Toronto, Ontario)

1986 Developed first predictive testing for late onset genetic diseases (Huntington Disease). (Provincial Health Services Authority – Vancouver, British Columbia)

1987 First aortic valve replacement in the world using the Toronto Heart Valve, which is now used worldwide. (University Health Network — Toronto, Ontario)

1987 World’s first pacemaker cardioverter defibrillator is implanted. (Lawson Health Research Institute — London, Ontario)

1988 Researchers solve the structure of rennin, a key enzyme in the kidney that plays a role in the development of high blood pressure. (Capital Health/University of Alberta — Edmonton, Alberta)

1988 World’s first successful liver/small bowel transplant is performed. (Lawson Health Research Institute — London, Ontario)

1989 Researchers develop sputum induction techniques and sputum cell analysis. Research on nasal mucosa suggested ways in which the cellular response to antigen challenge might be studied in bronchial mucosa and sputum. (Firestone Institute for Respiratory at St. Joseph’s Healthcare – Hamilton, Ontario)

TO BE CONTINUED....

[ChristopherHall]

1989 Development of the first oral treatment for hepatitis B, resulting in the drug Lamivudine. (Capital Health/University of Alberta — Edmonton, Alberta)

1989 Discovery of the gene which, when defective, causes cystic fibrosis, the most fatal genetic disease of Canadian children today. (The Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

1990 First measure of neurotransmitter concentration in schizophrenics by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS). MRS allows scientists and doctors to measure chemicals within the body and brain without removing tissue or blood samples and without using dangerous radioactive “tracers.” It is therefore safe and can be used repeatedly on the patient without any ill effects. (Lawson Health Research Institute — London, Ontario)

1991 Publication of the first paper demonstrating that treatment of obstructive sleep apnea by nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in patients with congestive heart failure improves cardiac function and symptoms of heart failure. This discovery has major implications because it suggests that obstructive sleep apnea contributes to the development and progression of congestive heart failure. (Toronto Rehabilitation Institute — Toronto, Ontario)

1992 Discovery of the first gene responsible for Fanconi anemia. Fanconi anemia (FA) is a rare genetic disease that affects children and adults from all ethnic backgrounds. FA is characterized by short stature, skeletal anomalies, increased incidence of solid tumors and leukemias, bone marrow failure (aplastic anemia), and cellular sensitivity to DNA-damaging agents such as mitomycin C. (Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

1993 Researchers demonstrate that mouse embryonic stem cells are capable of supporting the entire embryonic development and in fact creating completely cell cultured derived mice. (Mount Sinai Hospital — Toronto, Ontario)

1993 Discovery of a novel gene associated with Lou-Gehrig’s disease. (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1994 World’s first three-dimensional (3-D) ultrasound-guided cryosurgery. (Lawson Health Research Institute – London, Ontario)

1994 Solved the 30-year old puzzle of why so many people suffer an allergic reaction when they receive a blood transfusion. (Hamilton Health Sciences/McMaster University – Hamilton, Ontario)

1995 First physical map of the human genome created. (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1995 Discovery of the gene associated with localized muscular dystrophy. (McGill University Health Centre Research Institute — Montreal, Quebec)

1996 Identification of a human blood cell that regenerates the entire blood system. This discovery enabled the development of new treatments for blood diseases such as leukemia, thalassemia and sickle cell anemia. (Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

1996 Identification of a gene that causes colon cancer. Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths among Canadians. (Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

1998 Developed the first trophoblast stem cells – the precursors of cells that form the placenta. Since the placenta is critical for a successful pregnancy, this discovery will have a major impact on research to understand and ultimately prevent pregnancy complications resulting from a failure in normal placental function. (Mount Sinai Hospital — Toronto, Ontario)

1998 Discovery of the first gene that causes Lafora disease, one of the most severe forms of teenageonset epilepsy. (Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

1999 First islet transplant under the Edmonton protocol for Type I diabetes. Islet transplantation had been performed under other protocols; however, the Edmonton protocol produced unprecedented levels of success in the field of islet transplantation. (Capital Health/University of Alberta — Edmonton, Alberta)

1999 World’s first closed chest robotic-assisted beating heart coronary artery bypass graft conducted. (Lawson Health Research Institute — London, Ontario)

1999 Identification of ABCA-1 gene – key regulator of HDL concentrations in humans. (Provincial Health Services Authority/BC Children’s Hospital – Vancouver, British Columbia)

2000 Discovery of the mechanism of formation of amyloid, the basis of Alzheimer’s and other diseases, and the subsequent development of drugs to treat this. (Kingston General Hospital — Kingston, Ontario)

2001 Discovery of a clinical rule that may reduce use of unnecessary x-rays for low-risk neck injuries and could aid in reducing use of imaging tests in alert and stable patients. (Ottawa Health Research Institute — Ottawa, Ontario)

2001 Development of the first animal model for Hepatitis C in mice, using transplanted human cells, providing a convenient way to test new treatments for Hepatitis C. (Capital Health/University of Alberta — Edmonton, Alberta)

2001 Tissue factor is a cell surface membrane protein involved in the initiation of blood clotting. Overexpression or increased activation of tissue factor can increase the risk of cardiovascular disease. The research group demonstrated that overexpression of GRP78 (a protein), can block the coagulant activity of tissue factor in human cells. These studies are important because they have identified a relevant cellular factor that can mediate tissue factor activity. (Hamilton Health Sciences Centre — Hamilton, Ontario)

2001 Identified the emerging role that albuminuria as an important risk factor for both kidney and heart disease. (Hamilton Health Sciences/McMaster University – Hamilton, Ontario)

2002 Introduction of revolutionary medication doses for depression and schizophrenia through positron emission tomography (PET) technology. (Centre for Addiction and Mental Health — Toronto, Ontario)

2002 Creation of a simple system to generate T-cells in a Petri dish. T-cells are a vital component of the immune system that orchestrate, regulate and coordinate the overall immune response. This discovery provided a method to create model systems to study the genetics and molecular biology of T-cell development and points to future clinical therapies for people whose immune systems have been destroyed, for example, by HIV or toxic cancer therapies. (Sunnybrook & Women’s Research Institute — Toronto, Ontario)

2002 Discovery that a type of self-destructing “suicide cell” activity, previously believed to only be detrimental, is in fact necessary for the proper formation of muscle tissue. (Ottawa Health Research Institute — Ottawa, Ontario)

2002 Pioneered the use of Botulinum Toxin A to reduce upper limb spasticity in children with cerebral palsy. (Bloorview Kids Rehab – Toronto, Ontario)

2003 Discovery of a molecular marker to diagnose hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the most common type of liver cancer. HCC is usually asymptomatic at early stages, and has great propensity for invasion, making it difficult to treat. A test was developed for the early diagnosis of HCC, which could also be useful for the screening of individuals that are at high risk for developing this disease, such as people chronically infected with Hepatitis B and C. (Sunnybrook & Women’s Research Institute — Toronto, Ontario)

2003 Researchers discover a way to make the immune system specifically recognize infectious prions, proteins that cause brain-wasting diseases like mad cow disease and Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease, its human equivalent. This discovery paves the way for the development of diagnostic tools, immunotherapy and a vaccine. (Sunnybrook & Women’s Research Institute — Toronto, Ontario)

2003 Major international clinical trial provides first alternative treatment to taxol for preventing breast cancer recurrence in survivors five years post diagnosis. (University Health Network — Toronto, Ontario)

2003 Compilation of the complete DNA sequence of chromosome 7. Researchers decode nearly all of the genes on this medically important portion of the human genome. Chromosome 7 contains 1,455 genes, some of which, when altered, cause diseases such as cystic fibrosis, leukemia and autism. (Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

2003 Study makes it easier to identify patients with deep vein thrombosis (DVT), providing faster diagnosis and significant savings to the health care system. (Ottawa Health Research Institute — Ottawa, Ontario)

TO BE CONTINUED...

[ChristopherHall]

2003 Performed the world’s first deep brain stimulation for depression, causing depression that was previously treatment-resistant to go into remission. (University Health Network — Toronto, Ontario)

2003 Identification of a cancer stem cell responsible for brain tumors. This discovery may change how this deadly condition is studied and treated in the future. (Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

2003 Linkage of maternal folic acid intake to a decrease in neuroblastoma, a deadly childhood cancer. (Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

2003 Performed the world’s first hospital-to-hospital telerobotic assisted surgery on a patient more than 400 kilometres away. During the procedure, they completed a Nissen Fundoplication on a 66-year old patient located at North Bay General Hospital from St. Joseph’s telerobotics suite in Hamilton, Ontario. (St. Joseph’s Healthcare – Hamilton, Ontario).

2003 Developed a genetically modified vaccine that can completely prevent the recurrence of metastatic breast cancer through genetically altered cells that only destroy cancer cells. (Hamilton Health Sciences/McMaster University – Hamilton, Ontario)

2003 Developed first draft DNA sequence for coronavirus implicated as cause of SARS (Provincial Health Services Authority/BC Cancer Agency, Genome Sciences Centre – Vancouver, British Columbia)

2003 Found that the vast majority of heart attacks can be predicted by nine easily measurable factors that are the same in virtually every region and ethnic group worldwide. (Hamilton Health Sciences/McMaster University – Hamilton, Ontario)

2004 Performed the world’s first simulated underwater surgery during the NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operation (NEEMO 7). During the 10-day NEEMO 7 Mission, they successfully telementored the NEEMO7 crew through various surgical simulations from their base in the underwater Aquarius habitat located 19 metres below the surface off the coast of Key largo, Florida. (St. Joseph’s Healthcare – Hamilton, Ontario)

2004 Development of StemBase, a database of gene expression data from DNA micro array experiments on samples from human and mouse stem cells and their derivatives. This growing resource is used to find genes whose activity is related to stem cells. (Ottawa Health Research Institute — Ottawa, Ontario)

2004 Discovery of the apelin receptor and design of an analogue that can interfere with and block the actions of apelin, in order to decipher its role in the brain. (Centre for Addiction and Mental Health — Toronto, Ontario)

2004 Discovery of over 70 novel human receptor genes; many of which, together with their chemical activators, mediate unique functions in the brain and are being targeted for drug design. (Centre for Addiction and Mental Health — Toronto, Ontario)

2004 In the first large, multi-centre clinical trial of its kind, researchers provided evidence to suggest that artery grafts from the forearm should be used in place of vein grafts from the leg in heart bypass surgery because radial arteries have significantly higher graft patency over one year. Graft patency, a measure of whether the bypass remains open enough to permit efficient blood flow, is critical to success after surgery. (Sunnybrook & Women’s Research Institute — Toronto, Ontario)

2004 A research team finds magnetic resonance imaging detects more breast cancer tumors, earlier, compared with mammography, ultrasound or clinical examination in women with the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. This finding offers hope to genetically at-risk women, and gives them an alternative to removing both breasts. (Sunnybrook & Women’s Research Institute — Toronto, Ontario)

2004 World’s first use of beads of palladium, a low-dose radioactive material, to treat women with breast cancer on an outpatient basis. This therapy holds the promise of eliminating anguishing side effects and considerably enhancing the women’s quality of life. (Sunnybrook & Women’s Research Institute — Toronto, Ontario)

2004 Demonstration of an association between pediatric multiple sclerosis (MS) and the Epstein-Barr virus, indicating that exposure to the virus at a certain time in childhood may be an important environmental trigger for the development of MS. (Hospital for Sick Children — Toronto, Ontario)

2004 Developed a virtual instrument that allows children with physical disabilities to make music (both therapeutic and recreational applications of the software – which is licensed in 7 countries around the world). (Bloorview Kids Rehab – Toronto, Ontario)

2005 Developed the world’s first upper respiratory viral panel test that can accurately identify all respiratory viruses including various flu strains including H5N1 and the SARS Coronavirus. (St. Joseph’s Healthcare – Hamilton, Ontario)

2005 In the first trial of its kind in the world, researchers begin treating prostate cancer using a 3-D image-guided radiation therapy device that was developed in Canada. This non-surgical technique allows oncologists to visualize the exact position of the target and deliver precise external beam radiation therapy. (Sunnybrook & Women’s Research Institute — Toronto, Ontario)

2005 Key discovery in Type-1 Diabetes proves the repair process is present within the pancreas during disease development. Understanding the repair process could be the key to successful treatment. (Ottawa Health Research Institute — Ottawa, Ontario)

2005 Study determines that a specific enzyme, known as pro-protein convertase 4 (PC4) may be responsible for fetal growth restriction, the second leading cause of infant mortality in the developed world. Knowledge may lead to screening for the defective enzyme early in the pregnancy and provide the ability to monitor the pregnancy more closely. (Ottawa Health Research Institute — Ottawa, Ontario)

2005 Scientists show that early surgical removal of the spleen combined with antiangiogenic therapy, which arrests the growth of tumour-feeding blood vessels, may stop the progression of leukemia. (Sunnybrook & Women’s Research Institute — Toronto, Ontario)

2005 Using neuropsychological testing, researchers accurately predict which study participants will develop Alzheimer’s disease within five and 10 years. Previous studies were able to predict Alzheimer’s only for shorter periods of time; other studies showed predictions for 10 and even 15 years, but these did not indicate the predictive accuracy of the tests. (Sunnybrook & Women’s Research Institute — Toronto, Ontario)

2005 Identified novel mutations in the gene that causes Rett Syndrome. The discovery is now licenced as a test for the disorder and is available to the public. (Centre for Addiction and Mental Health — Toronto, Ontario)

2005 Initiation of first human clinical gene therapy trials for lipoprotein lipase deficiency. (Provincial Health Services Authority/BC Children’s Hospital – Vancouver, British Columbia)

2006 Discovery of the precise molecular chain of events that initiates the wide-scale immune destruction of “super bug” infections such as flesh-eating disease, toxic shock syndrome and severe food poisoning. (Robarts Research Institute — London, Ontario)

2006 Implantation of an antibody-coated stent into the first human patient. The invention of the antibody-coated stent reduces restenosis and prevents blood clots from occurring. (St. Michael’s Hospital — Toronto, Ontario)

2006 World’s first clinical trial to combine gene and cell therapy to treat a cardiovascular disorder. The PHACeT (Pulmonary Hypertension: Assessment of Cell Therapy) trial will assess the use of adult stem-like cells called endothelial progenitor cells (EPC) for the treatment of pulmonary hypertension. (St. Michael’s Hospital — Toronto, Ontario)

2006 First demonstration that children with cystic fibrosis have choline deficiency. Provision of choline improves redox balance and methyl transfer capacity in humans. (Provincial Health Services Authority/BC Children’s Hospital – Vancouver, British Columbia)

2006 First demonstration that dietary omega-3 fatty acid deficiency impairs neurogenesis in vivo (Provincial Health Services Authority/BC Children’s Hospital – Vancouver, British Columbia)

2006 First curative therapy for Huntington Disease in a mouse model (Provincial Health Services Authority/BC Children’s Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia)

As for doctors going to Canada. The Wallstreet Journal featured a College Journal article stating that there's a growing trend of professionals seek employment in Canada, one of the largest demographics are...doctors. Many doctors want to practice medicine not spend 3 or more hours a day doing paperwork and haggling with insurance companies. So many doctors are getting fed up with our system the American Medical Association has now begun lobbying Washington for universal health insurance. It should also be of note that Ontario’s College of Physicians and Surgeons is streamlining it's medical licensing program to adapt to the growing number of physicians coming to Canada from other countries including the US.

I think your dislike for America is showing through.

I don't dislike my country. I just believe she can be made better.

Here's a question....

Have you ever been to Canada? Yes or No?

[ChristopherHall]

My cousin having to wait months(3) to have breast cancer surgery is no lie.

What were the surrounding circumstances? In nearly every case like this I like to know the details. I assume you live in Canada?

[OP_Carl]

BUMP for CHRISTOPHER HALL

Dear Brother Chris,

You are putting the cart before the horse, and you are erroneously using civil rights, individual rights, and religious obligation interchangeably.

The theories of natural law, on which our constitution was founded, explain that to expect humans to act against their own best interests will eventually bring chaos. The Soviet, Cuban, Korean, Vietnamese, and Chinese experiments in socialist dictatorship prove this point with the estimated 100 million "differing opinions" crying from their graves for justice.

The American Declaration of independence incorporates the elements of natural law, calling them "inalienable rights," specifically the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The last one is supposed to be synonymous with property rights.

Logic, reason, and our English heritage brought us to to this new system which gave every last man, great and small, an equal chance to make his way in the new nation. What the constitution guarantees is equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

What you are asking for in your anecdote above is equality of outcome.

American thought on the topic has become hopelessly warped by our acclimatization to the federal income tax, the New Deal social programs, and the civil rights voting act of 1964, constitutional abominations all three.

Long before your ailing anecdote arrives at the hospital's doorstep gasping his last few breaths, several fundamental constitutional concepts have been hopelessly smothered. Taxes on income are NOT constitutional. They are scarcely tolerable in time of war, which is when they were "temporarily" enacted. This gives the government a new stake in the property rights of the citizenry. It is supposedly a voluntary tax, but apparently nobody told the IRS.

Now we are subjects, who must pay up or suffer punishment by the government. This is not freedom, nor is it within the ideals of limited government, kept in check, that the founding fathers had in mind. We rationalize that it's not so bad since the money is spent on items of national interest.

Except now it has somehow become the national interest to subsidize bad decision making, and the money forcibly collected from one individual is arbitrarily given to another individual. The social gospel folks are ready to sing the hallelujah chorus, but the plight of the person whose property rights were violated in order to bankroll the party is ignored. However, the perceptive individual notices that this practice is not only NOT in his OWN best interest, but it hinders the socioeconomic progress of the individuals that receive the cash. But now it is his patriotic duty to ignore his "inalienable rights."

What for?

For the advancement of civil rights. The term sounds good but in practice it vaunts the "rights" of collective groups over the rights of the individual. This is entirely antithetical to natural law and the constitution. The result, intended or not, will be to obliterate the individual. This brings us one step closer to mob rule and chaos. With the advent of group rights come a plethora of new groups demanding new "rights," including the right to affordable health care. Except that isn't really a natural right, now is it? It is much more akin to a demand from a collective bargaining entity. The politicians have jumped on the bandwagon, and play the class envy and racial tension cards at every opportunity.

And this is where Christopher Hall steps on the scene. Your heart is in the right place. You see that these various groups are suffering, and have unmet needs. You know that the precedent is already there to turn on the tap to have the cash start flowing from the federal treasury. But you fail to recognize the that the treasury is mostly funded in violation of the natural rights of your fellow individual citizens. You have succumbed to the corollaries of class envy and the romance of Robin Hood. Jesus didn't instruct his followers to care for the poor, widows, and fatherless via institutional programs and bureaucratic systems. His commands were to individuals.

People that want to restore property rights in America aren't for pain and suffering; they are people that recognize that collective societies have failed in every instance in history. They are people who recognize that the most virtuous way to meet the needs of the poor is through individual and voluntary efforts.

[ChristopherHall]

So in short Carl, you don't believe the a dying man or woman has a "right" to medication or life saving health care procedures that might save his life unless he has the money to pay for them.

[ChristopherHall]

You whine about property rights but you support allowing insurance corporations to take far more money from Americans than what the government would take. Nearly 25,000 Americans declare bankruptcy every year due to medical bills. But you don't see that as an assault on property rights. You don't think an elderly lady has the right to both her heard medication and food. You believe it's a just system that makes her choose between the two. For you it all boils down to cold hard cash.

[ChristopherHall]

Carl, I'm still interested in your sister's story if you don't mind sharing.

[ReformedDave]

What were the surrounding circumstances? In nearly every case like this I like to know the details. I assume you live in Canada?

Short memory. I told you I live in San Diego. My cousin lives in London Ontario. According to her the surgery schedule was too backed up......

[ReformedDave]

You whine about property rights but you support allowing insurance corporations to take far more money from Americans than what the government would take. Nearly 25,000 Americans declare bankruptcy every year due to medical bills. But you don't see that as an assault on property rights. You don't think an elderly lady has the right to both her heard medication and food. You believe it's a just system that makes her choose between the two. For you it all boils down to cold hard cash.

CH, I think what most small government types like me object to is not that someone may or may not get the medication they need, I object that the government has the right to steal from me to give to them. There are more ways to give and show grace than to break the 8th commandment to do it. Obviously the vast majority thinks of the government as the messiah and has allowed the government to overstep it's God given bounds. We have fed the beast.

[OP_Carl]

So in short Carl, you don't believe the a dying man or woman has a "right" to medication or life saving health care procedures that might save his life unless he has the money to pay for them.

This "right" does not fit any of the definitions of natural rights, individual rights guaranteed in the U.S. constitution, or in old english common law.

It is a "right" only in the sense that the supersession of group interests over individual interests is called "civil rights." Our culture has been immersed in the entitlement and group identity mentalities for so long that this twisting of language and meaning has warped our ability to even understand the basic terms.

It's kind of like the way we call death insurance "life insurance." The common name used for marketing does not properly describe the item in question.

Please don't mistakenly assume from all this that I'm a beady-eyed, cold-hearted, money-grubbin hypocritical judgmental Pharisee. My eyes aren't beady! :toofunny Loss of life and health are no laughing matter. The issues I am raising are issues of definitions, terminology, and basic world view.

I'm attempting to catch you at your point of origin and show you how the very fundamentals of what you propose go against natural law and our constitution. A system that forces the citizenry to work against their own best interests is destined to fail. The people can only be fooled for so long.

What I am arguing is that taking a bad situation, to wit, the health care crisis, and applying a worse solution that expands an unsustainable system, is wrong on many levels.

It is unquestionably our Christian duty to help others in need. But when you say that other people are ENTITLED to my assistance, the method of conveying the assistance causes the administering body to behave towards ME in an un-Christian fashion.

A sense of entitlement breeds dependency, which breeds a whole dictionary of societal ills. The bible also admonishes the sluggard and plainly describes his fate as destructive. The bible instructs us to prepare for the future with sabbath days, sabbath years, the year of jubilee, and "consider the ant."

I don't want people to die unnecessarily. But I believe that a system that is fundamentally based on a coercive and un-constitutional denial of true rights, that panders to collective "rights" groups and class envy, with broad openings for corruption at every level, will make the situation worse.

Democracy requires an informed citizenry. Our citizenry is being intentionally denied basic education on essentials, and kept preoccupied with sensational drivel. We've just about got propagandized mob rule, which will lead us to chaos and worse.

[OP_Carl]

You whine about property rights but you support allowing insurance corporations to take far more money from Americans than what the government would take.
I'd bet dimes to doughnuts that you haven't considered that the insurance companies pay a 40% corporate income tax rate into our blighted treasury, and that the proposed federal bureau of health care administration will soak up an inconceivable amount of overhead to pay for brick-and-mortar buildings, unionized government employees and their many, many fringe benefits, and the inability to fire workers for gross incompetence. It's difficult to count all the costs ahead of time, but this particular cost estimate is made easy by the history of the many comparable bloated federal programs.

Nearly 25,000 Americans declare bankruptcy every year due to medical bills. But you don't see that as an assault on property rights. I confess I do not make the connection between bankruptcy and assailed property rights.

You don't think an elderly lady has the right to both her heard medication and food. That is correct. IT IS NOT A RIGHT. You have been deceived into believing that the demands of civil rights groups are rights. They aren't. It is, however, a societal blight that people are so unconcerned about their neighbors that they wouldn't help out.

You believe it's a just system that makes her choose between the two. You're looking at it all wrong. She's had clean drinking water, access to the largest public road system in the world, a clean, peaceful, and well-policed society in which to live to an age in excess of most of her peers in other nations. She's been blessed, and yet because of our obliviousness to our own condition, we regard her somehow as a victim. The fact that she has a choice is something that isn't taken for granted in some countries.

For you it all boils down to cold hard cash.
That's a pretty cheap shot for somebody who attempts to claim the moral high ground.

[ReformedDave]

Great posts OP!!!!!! He confuses 'grace' with 'justice'.

[Ron]

Great posts OP!!!!!! He confuses 'grace' with 'justice'.

Dave, you confuse Truth with Fiction!
You don't live in Canada, you don't know how the system works.

If you equate stealing with helping a fellow human being get health care, than you can not support someone who doesn't have enough to eat.
Your taxes do that, it also helps to protect the just A& the unjust through the same system.

That's right-rains on the just & unjust, blessings befall the just & the unjust.


I am just thankful to God that the majority of Americans are waking up!

[ReformedDave]

Dave, you confuse Truth with Fiction!
You don't live in Canada, you don't know how the system works.

If you equate stealing with helping a fellow human being get health care, than you can not support someone who doesn't have enough to eat.
Your taxes do that, it also helps to protect the just A& the unjust through the same system.

That's right-rains on the just & unjust, blessings befall the just & the unjust.


I am just thankful to God that the majority of Americans are waking up!

My statement is not specifically about Canada. It's mainly about the USA. Nobody has a 'right' to demand that I take money from my family's income to give to someone else. I have no say in the matter. That is stealing. Whether it is from a gun or government it is the same.

I am all for benevolent giving and my church and I do what we can. But to take it from me under force is sin.

[Ron]

My statement is not specifically about Canada. It's mainly about the USA. Nobody has a 'right' to demand that I take money from my family's income to give to someone else. I have no say in the matter. That is stealing. Whether it is from a gun or government it is the same.

I am all for benevolent giving and my church and I do what we can. But to take it from me under force is sin.


Maybe you need to revisit the scripture about "cheerful giving" God likes someone like that.

Even before I became a Christian that it was the right thing to do to have someone have access to basic medical care.

[ReformedDave]

Maybe you need to revisit the scripture about "cheerful giving" God likes someone like that.

Even before I became a Christian that it was the right thing to do to have someone have access to basic medical care.

You have a hard time with reading what I just wrote. Mighty cold up there eh?

I said that I'm all for benevolent giving. Just recently our church paid for a member's operation. I believe in it!

When one uses the term 'right' it means someone HAS to provide that right. I do not see in scripture where government has the authority to steal from me to give to you.....

"Cheerful giving"? You bet. Not forced but gracefully.

[OP_Carl]

You have a hard time with reading what I just wrote. Mighty cold up there eh?

I said that I'm all for benevolent giving. Just recently our church paid for a member's operation. I believe in it!

When one uses the term 'right' it means someone HAS to provide that right. I do not see in scripture where government has the authority to steal from me to give to you.....

"Cheerful giving"? You bet. Not forced but gracefully.

Socialism has a mighty powerful siren's song for a sales pitch. The really fun part is when less than 50% of the population fund the system, and more than 50% are on the dole. That is known as "the tipping point," and the only recovery is via revolution or collapse. Even pure democracy has its perils. That's why America was founded to be a constitutional republic - NOT a democracy. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for supper. Liberty is an armed sheep contesting the vote. :toofunny

The founding fathers knew that pure democracy was inherently unstable, and that is why the original system only allowed landowners to vote. The price of participation was demonstration that you had a stake in the success of the system, and that you had at least a modicum of life skill competence.

[Ron]

You have a hard time with reading what I just wrote. Mighty cold up there eh?

I said that I'm all for benevolent giving. Just recently our church paid for a member's operation. I believe in it!

When one uses the term 'right' it means someone HAS to provide that right. I do not see in scripture where government has the authority to steal from me to give to you.....

"Cheerful giving"? You bet. Not forced but gracefully.

And Bro you ain't hearing me!
I am against Taxation-period.

That being said, if they are going to tax us, why not put it to good use.
We pay for police protection, fire protection, education, defense, etc;

Making sure that everyone has food, clothing, shelter, & medical care & an affordable price.

If you have issue with Health, you should have issue with the rest of your Taxes!

I am saying we should make sure that there is no lack for food, housing, or medical care, at least in North America.
Do you have a problem with that?

[Ron]

Socialism has a mighty powerful siren's song for a sales pitch. The really fun part is when less than 50% of the population fund the system, and more than 50% are on the dole. That is known as "the tipping point," and the only recovery is via revolution or collapse. Even pure democracy has its perils. That's why America was founded to be a constitutional republic - NOT a democracy. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for supper. Liberty is an armed sheep contesting the vote. :toofunny

The founding fathers knew that pure democracy was inherently unstable, and that is why the original system only allowed landowners to vote. The price of participation was demonstration that you had a stake in the success of the system, and that you had at least a modicum of life skill competence.

The US stopped being a Republic.
It is now an empire-an empire teetering on collaspe!

[OP_Carl]

And Bro you ain't hearing me!
I am against Taxation-period.

That being said, if they are going to tax us, why not put it to good use.
We pay for police protection, fire protection, education, defense, etc; The issue is that we have been tricked into believing that subsidizing the individual needs of some groups of people is an analogous category of public spending as defense and fire protection. It isn't. Social programs are not in the interest of the general public, but in the interest of special interest groups. It is actually a disservice to the groups that it enslaves in a virtually inescapable cycle of dependency.

The bureaucracies that administer the programs quickly become cancerous, making conscious effort to continually expand their budgets, regardless of the true measure of need in their area.

[Ron]

The issue is that we have been tricked into believing that subsidizing the individual needs of some groups of people is an analogous category of public spending as defense and fire protection. It isn't. Social programs are not in the interest of the general public, but in the interest of special interest groups. It is actually a disservice to the groups that it enslaves in a virtually inescapable cycle of dependency.

The bureaucracies that administer the programs quickly become cancerous, making conscious effort to continually expand their budgets, regardless of the true measure of need in their area.

It is a terrible thing when people need health care!
Cancer, Heart Disease, not my problem!

It is clear to see who would walk to the other side of the road when the man taken among thieves was in need of a good Samaritan!

[ReformedDave]

And Bro you ain't hearing me!
I am against Taxation-period.

That being said, if they are going to tax us, why not put it to good use.
We pay for police protection, fire protection, education, defense, etc;

Making sure that everyone has food, clothing, shelter, & medical care & an affordable price.

If you have issue with Health, you should have issue with the rest of your Taxes!

I am saying we should make sure that there is no lack for food, housing, or medical care, at least in North America.
Do you have a problem with that?


I have a huge problem with the rest of my taxes. The only Biblical reason I see for taxation at all(and I'm open for correction on this) is for defense, justice, and the prevention of fraud.
That would REALLY cut our federal government way down.

[OP_Carl]

It is a terrible thing when people need health care!
Cancer, Heart Disease, not my problem!

It is clear to see who would walk to the other side of the road when the man taken among thieves was in need of a good Samaritan!

May I summarize your argument?
"You're a doody-head!

It really isn't that hard of a principle to understand. A government that disregards the interests of the individual over the interests of the group when it comes to the collection of funds is ALSO going to disregard the interests of the individual over the interests of the group when it comes to the PAYOUT OF BENEFITS. It's a systemic disregard and sense of superiority, not a localized incident.

[OP_Carl]

I have a huge problem with the rest of my taxes. The only Biblical reason I see for taxation at all(and I'm open for correction on this) is for defense, justice, and the prevention of fraud.
That would REALLY cut our federal government way down.

The original mission of the federal government was to defend the coasts and provide a common currency. No standing army was allowed.

Interstate commerce clause, you've come a long way, baby!

[trickledown]

Dave, you confuse Truth with Fiction!
You don't live in Canada, you don't know how the system works.

If you equate stealing with helping a fellow human being get health care, than you can not support someone who doesn't have enough to eat.
Your taxes do that, it also helps to protect the just A& the unjust through the same system.

That's right-rains on the just & unjust, blessings befall the just & the unjust.


I am just thankful to God that the majority of Americans are waking up!

I WOULD DEBATE THAT THE MAJORITY IS NOT IN FAVOR OF A SYSTEM LIKE YOURS OR FRANCES. AND NOW YOU HAVE ADDED WETHER OR NOT WE BELIEVE THAT ALL PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO EAT. SCRIPTURE MAY BE SILENT ABOUT UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE BUT IT DOES SPEAK TO FOOD.
2 Thessalonians 3:10 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain

10For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

THIS IS A WAKE UP TO EVERYONE READING THIS POST. THE SAME PEOPLE THAT THINK ALL SHOULD HAVE HEALTHCARE REGARDLESS OF ANY OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES WILL ALSO SOON ASK YOU TO FEED ALL REGARDLESS OF ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. THEIR IDEAS DO NOT FLY IN THE LIGHT OF SCRIPTURE. THE IDEAS THAT WERE PERPETUATED BY MARXIST ARE NOT CONGRUENT WITH THE IDEAS OF CHRIST.

[ChristopherHall]

CH, I think what most small government types like me object to is not that someone may or may not get the medication they need,

Dave, that doesn't make much sense. Because right now in America there are tens of thousands of elderly people barely able to buy food because they cannot afford the prescription drugs they need. Every year an estimated 18,000 Americans die because they are not granted coverage or cannot afford insurance that will help them get the care or treatments they need to survive. Bro, numbers of cases have been brought up before the Senate and have engaged the insurance companies in lawsuits because their loved one died. There are another 25,000 Americans who declare bankruptcy every year due to the inability to pay their medical bills.

Funny...none of this seems to bother you one bit. I'll tell you what it's really about...it's about the almighty dollar.

I object that the government has the right to steal from me to give to them.

The Law of God commanded land owners to leave the corners and edges of their fields for the destitute. It was a civil law of Moses. If this is theft, Jesus is a sinner...because Jesus and the disciples freely gleaned corn, with unwashed hands, in a field belonging to another. If Jesus is a sinner, your faith is in vain.

Also let's read what Paul said in Romans 13,

" 1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. 7Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor." - Romans 13:1-7 (NIV)

In this passage we have a number of truths. First, Government, like the family, is an ordained institution of God. And, Governments are established and set up by God. If one rebels against the rule of law they are in rebellion against the governing institution appointed by God bringing judgment upon themselves. One need no fear of rulers if they obey the laws. The governing authorities will commend those who do what's right and obey the laws. Governing authorities are servants called to do good for the people. But law breakers have reason to fear because governing authorities have the authority to use force, the sword, to punish them. Governments serve God by punishing law breakers. Therefore it is necessary to obey the government, not only because you may be punished but because in doing so you will have a clear conscience. HEY, this is why you are to pay taxes. Because the governing authorities are the servants of God and give their lives to public service. You are to give what you owe. If you owe taxes, pay taxes. If revenue, pay revenue. If respect, then respect. If honor, then honor.

Those who serve in the public service of government are servants, ministers, of God. There called to do the people good and punish law breakers. Paying taxes to assist them with doing the people good and punishing law breakers is commanded in Scripture.

If a governing official sees tens of thousands of elderly folk struggling to survive because of medical costs, if they see 18,000 dying a year because they need coverage for life saving treatments, and if a governing official sees 25,000 people loosing everything they ever worked for due to an illness, they are called to "do you good". They have the God given burden of resolving the issue and minimizing the damage done.

The Republicans wanted to slash necessary funds for SCHIP which insures many children who need medical care. The Republicans slash and hack Medicare, which serves the elderly. Here is a dire warning for those who commit acts of abuse and injustice or even tolerates such things toward children...

"10Beware that you do not despise or feel scornful toward or think little of one of these little ones, for I tell you that in heaven their angels always are in the presence of and look upon the face of My Father Who is in heaven." - Matthew 18:10 (AMP)

And when it comes to helping the elderly,

"Honour thy father and thy mother:" - Exodus 20:12 (KJV)

Part of your harvest belongs to those in need,

Leviticus 23:22
And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make clean riddance of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither shalt thou gather any gleaning of thy harvest: thou shalt leave them unto the poor, and to the stranger: I am the LORD your God.

Charity is wonderful. It fulfills an immediate need. However, government often has to intervene to insure social justice toward those needy classes. Rather it be government or charity God's word commands,

Deuteronomy 15:7
If there be among you a poor man of one of thy brethren within any of thy gates in thy land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not harden thine heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother:

But some argue, "BUT IT IS NOT THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT!" Oh, will you war against the Word of God oh mighty man? For behold the calling of a godly magistrate:

Psalm 72:1-20
1Give the king thy judgments, O God, and thy righteousness unto the king's son.
2He shall judge thy people with righteousness, and thy poor with judgment.
3The mountains shall bring peace to the people, and the little hills, by righteousness.
4He shall judge the poor of the people, he shall save the children of the needy, and shall break in pieces the oppressor.
5They shall fear thee as long as the sun and moon endure, throughout all generations.
6He shall come down like rain upon the mown grass: as showers that water the earth.
7In his days shall the righteous flourish; and abundance of peace so long as the moon endureth.
8He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth.
9They that dwell in the wilderness shall bow before him; and his enemies shall lick the dust.
10The kings of Tarshish and of the isles shall bring presents: the kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts.
11Yea, all kings shall fall down before him: all nations shall serve him.
12For he shall deliver the needy when he crieth; the poor also, and him that hath no helper.
13He shall spare the poor and needy, and shall save the souls of the needy.
14He shall redeem their soul from deceit and violence: and precious shall their blood be in his sight.
15And he shall live, and to him shall be given of the gold of Sheba: prayer also shall be made for him continually; and daily shall he be praised.
16There shall be an handful of corn in the earth upon the top of the mountains; the fruit thereof shall shake like Lebanon: and they of the city shall flourish like grass of the earth.
17His name shall endure for ever: his name shall be continued as long as the sun: and men shall be blessed in him: all nations shall call him blessed.
18Blessed be the LORD God, the God of Israel, who only doeth wondrous things.
19And blessed be his glorious name for ever: and let the whole earth be filled with his glory; Amen, and Amen.
20The prayers of David the son of Jesse are ended."

It is the magistrate's role to look after these needy classes. This is why leaders who seek to relieve the poor and needy among men are often the most revered down through history. It's a promise of God, Psalm 72:17. And the magistrate should always keep in mind God's intention regarding social justice toward the poor,

Deuteronomy 15:4 (AMP)
However, there will be no poor among you, since the LORD will surely bless you in the land which the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance to possess,

Deuteronomy 15:11
For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.

There are more ways to give and show grace than to break the 8th commandment to do it. Obviously the vast majority thinks of the government as the messiah and has allowed the government to overstep it's God given bounds. We have fed the beast.

Isaiah 32:7 (Amplified Bible)
The instruments and methods of the fraudulent and greedy [for gain] are evil; he devises wicked devices to ruin the poor and the lowly with lying words, even when the plea of the needy is just and right.

The Word of the Lord.

[ChristopherHall]

I have a huge problem with the rest of my taxes. The only Biblical reason I see for taxation at all(and I'm open for correction on this) is for defense, justice, and the prevention of fraud.
That would REALLY cut our federal government way down.

A biblical definition of justice is in order,


Holman Bible Dictionary

JUSTICE
http://www.studylight.org/dic/hbd/view.cgi?number=T3548

The order God seeks to reestablish in His creation where all people receive the benefits of life with Him. As love is for the New Testament, so justice is the central ethical idea of the Old Testament. The frequency of justice is sometimes missed by the reader due to a failure to realize that the wide range of the Hebrew word mishpat, particularly in passages that deal with the material and social necessities of life.

Nature of justice Justice has two major aspects. First, it is the standard by which penalties are assigned for breaking the obligations of the society. Second, justice is the standard by which the advantages of social life are handed out, including material goods, rights of participation, opportunities, and liberties. It is the standard for both punishment and benefits and thus can be spoken of as a plumb line. “I shall use justice as a plumb-line, and righteousness as a plummet” (Isaiah 28:17, REB).

Often people think of justice in the Bible only in the first sense as God's wrath on evil. This aspect of justice indeed is present, such as the judgment mentioned in John 3:19. Often more vivid words like “wrath” are used to describe punitive justice (Romans 1:18).

Justice in the Bible very frequently also deals with benefits. Cultures differ widely in determining the basis by which the benefits are to be justly distributed. For some it is by birth and nobility. For others the basis is might or ability or merit. Or it might simply be whatever is the law or whatever has been established by contracts. The Bible takes another possibility. Benefits are distributed according to need. Justice then is very close to love and grace. God “executes justice for the orphan and the widow, and… loves the strangers, providing them food and clothing” (Deuteronomy 10:18, NRSV; compare Hosea 10:12; Isaiah 30:18).

Various needy groups are the recipients of justice. These groups include widows, orphans, resident aliens (also called “sojourners” or “strangers”), wage earners, the poor, and prisoners, slaves, and the sick (Job 29:12-17; Psalms 146:7-9; Malachi 3:5). Each of these groups has specific needs which keep its members from being able to participate in aspects of the life of their community. Even life itself might be threatened. Justice involves meeting those needs. The forces which deprive people of what is basic for community life are condemned as oppression (Micah 2:2; Ecclesiastes 4:1). To oppress is to use power for one's own advantage in depriving others of their basic rights in the community (see Mark 12:40). To do justice is to correct that abuse and to meet those needs (Isaiah 1:17). Injustice is depriving others of their basic needs or failing to correct matters when those rights are not met (Jeremiah 5:28; Job 29:12-17). Injustice is either a sin of commission or of omission.

The content of justice, the benefits which are to be distributed as basic rights in the community, can be identified by observing what is at stake in the passages in which “justice,” “righteousness,” and “judgment” occur. The needs which are met include land (Ezekiel 45:6-9; compare Micah 2:2; Micah 4:4) and the means to produce from the land, such as draft animals and millstones (Deuteronomy 22:1-4; Deuteronomy 24:6). These productive concerns are basic to securing other essential needs and thus avoiding dependency; thus the millstone is called the “life” of the person (Deuteronomy 24:6). Other needs are those essential for mere physical existence and well being: food (Deuteronomy 10:18; Psalms 146:7), clothing (Deuteronomy 24:13), and shelter (Psalms 68:6; Job 8:6). Job 22:5-9,Job 22:23; Job 24:1-12 decries the injustice of depriving people of each one of these needs, which are material and economic. The equal protection of each person in civil and judicial procedures is represented in the demand for due process (Deuteronomy 16:18-20). Freedom from bondage is comparable to not being “in hunger and thirst, in nakedness and lack of everything” (Deuteronomy 28:48 NRSV).

Justice presupposes God's intention for people to be in community. When people had become poor and weak with respect to the rest of the community, they were to be strengthened so that they could continue to be effective members of the community—living with them and beside them (Leviticus 25:35-36). Thus biblical justice restores people to community. By justice those who lacked the power and resources to participate in significant aspects of the community were to be strengthened so that they could. This concern in Leviticus 25:1 is illustrated by the provision of the year of Jubilee, in which at the end of the fifty year period land is restored to those who had lost it through sale or foreclosure of debts (Leviticus 25:28). Thus they regained economic power and were brought back into the economic community. Similarly, interest on loans was prohibited (Leviticus 25:36) as a process which pulled people down, endangering their position in the community.

These legal provisions express a further characteristic of justice. Justice delivers; it does not merely relieve the immediate needs of those in dire straits (Psalms 76:9; Isaiah 45:8; Isaiah 58:11; Isaiah 62:1-2). Helping the needy means setting them back on their feet, giving a home, leading to prosperity, restoration, ending the oppression (Psalms 68:5-10; Psalms 10:15-16; compare 107; Psalms 113:7-9). Such thorough justice can be socially disruptive. In the Jubilee year as some receive back lands, others lose recently-acquired additional land. The advantage to some is a disadvantage to others. In some cases the two aspects of justice come together. In the act of restoration, those who were victims of justice receive benefits while their exploiters are punished (1 Samuel 2:7-10; compare Luke 1:51-53; Luke 6:20-26).

The source of justice As the sovereign Creator of the universe, God is just (Psalms 99:1-4; Genesis 18:25; Deuteronomy 32:4; Jeremiah 9:24), particularly as the defender of all the oppressed of the earth (Psalms 76:9; Psalms 103:6; Jeremiah 49:11). Justice thus is universal (Psalms 9:7-9) and applies to each covenant or dispensation. Jesus affirmed for His day the centrality of the Old Testament demand for justice (Matthew 23:23). Justice is the work of the New Testament people of God (James 1:27).

God's justice is not a distant external standard. It is the source of all human justice (Proverbs 29:26; 2 Chronicles 19:6,2 Chronicles 19:9). Justice is grace received and grace shared (2 Corinthians 9:8-10).

The most prominent human agent of justice is the ruler. The king receives God's justice and is a channel for it (Psalms 72:1; compare Romans 13:1-2,Romans 13:4). There is not a distinction between a personal, voluntary justice and a legal, public justice. The same caring for the needy groups of the society is demanded of the ruler (Psalms 72:4; Ezekiel 34:4; Jeremiah 22:15-16). Such justice was also required of pagan rulers (Daniel 4:27; Proverbs 31:8-9).

Justice is also a central demand on all people who bear the name of God. Its claim is so basic that without it other central demands and provisions of God are not acceptable to God. Justice is required to be present with the sacrificial system (Amos 5:21-24; Micah 6:6-8; Isaiah 1:11-17; Matthew 5:23-24), fasting (Isaiah 58:1-10), tithing (Matthew 23:23), obedience to the other commandments (Matthew 19:16-21), or the presence of the Temple of God (Jeremiah 7:1-7).

Justice in salvation Apart from describing God's condemnation of sin, Paul used the language and meaning of justice to speak of personal salvation. “The righteousness of God” represents God in grace bringing into the community of God through faith in Christ those who had been outside of the people of God (particularly in Romans but compare also Ephesians 2:12-13). See Law; Government; Poverty; Righteousness; Welfare.

Stephen Charles Mott

Dave, it's obvious you and many others have a limited understanding of biblical justice. That's understandable though, because most political conservatives ignore this teaching of the Bible. As a matter of fact they would love to cut it out of the Bible. But God won't let them and is calling a new generation of Christian to confront this Social Darwinism of the Conservative Movement. The churlish teachings of the modern conservative are doomed to fall to the power of God's Holy Word. We stand as a new generation of reformers...standing in opposition to the Right Wing's greed, extortion, and religious pomp and power.

[trickledown]

I WOULD DEBATE THAT THE MAJORITY IS NOT IN FAVOR OF A SYSTEM LIKE YOURS OR FRANCES. AND NOW YOU HAVE ADDED WETHER OR NOT WE BELIEVE THAT ALL PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO EAT. SCRIPTURE MAY BE SILENT ABOUT UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE BUT IT DOES SPEAK TO FOOD.
2 Thessalonians 3:10 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain

10For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

THIS IS A WAKE UP TO EVERYONE READING THIS THREAD. THE SAME PEOPLE THAT THINK ALL SHOULD HAVE HEALTHCARE REGARDLESS OF ANY OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES WILL ALSO SOON ASK YOU TO FEED ALL REGARDLESS OF ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. THEIR IDEAS DO NOT FLY IN THE LIGHT OF SCRIPTURE. THE IDEAS THAT WERE PERPETUATED BY MARXIST ARE NOT CONGRUENT WITH THE IDEAS OF CHRIST.

see: ABOVE 2 POST

[ChristopherHall]

One cannot be both Christian and a Social Darwinist Trickeldown.

[trickledown]

In light of some members interpretation of scripture, I really fear for the apostles who defied their governments and for the many believers who in rebellion to governmental authority secretly meet around this globe. In particular there is a missionary friend and role model who has so blatantly defied scriptural submission to government that I fear he must be given over to a reprobate mind.

Today I have learned that certain pentecostal government "servants" are actually God's version of "Minister Robinhoods" and I stand in awe that there is certainly more to the mental deprevity of some "christian socialist" than I could ever expect.

People always seem to put a high minded and righteous spin on their visions.

May there still be a vision for smaller less intrusive government.
The "change" and "hope" that I fear are coming this fall may do untold damage to this great nation that I love. I would die for this country to save it from those who would attack it. If needful, we must fight just as surely against those who have a distorted mindset that would destroy her from within.

We must not willingly sacrifice any Liberty that we now enjoy for a little security.
Or as Ben Franklin said we "deserve neither."

For us as US citizens, we have enjoyed the highest level of sustained healthcare advancement in the modern world. We must not let those who feel they have been ill-served use any means, wether misrepresentation of scripture, federal judiciary, erroneous statistics, or any other form of "bleeding heart liberalism" to persuade us to abandon the free market that our country gave us for a federal (anti)solution.

Detractors of our current model choose not to offer plausible solutions, but instead they advocate for more government involvement.
They use blatantly biased (dis)information from agenda driven organizations to sell the people of this great nation on more terrible government intervention.

Please know that the road to the great society was paved with promises that our generation cannot pay. If we decide to take it farther, this nation will be choked to death. You and I along with it. In less than 35 years there will be one person depending on government help and support from medicare and social security for every two people that are working.

WE don't need more government intervention in our lives.

[trickledown]

This is about as convolluted as the rest of your ideas and does not apply to mine.


Social Darwinism

Social Darwinism is a theory that competition between all individuals, groups, nations or ideas drives social evolution in human societies. The term is an extension of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, where competition between individual organisms drives biological evolutionary change (speciation) through the survival of the fittest.

The term was popularized in 1944 by the American historian Richard Hofstadter, and has generally been used by critics rather than advocates of what the term is supposed to represent.[1]

While the term has been applied to the claim that Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection can be used to understand the social endurance of a nation or country, social Darwinism commonly refers to ideas that predate Darwin's publication of On the Origin of Species. Others whose ideas are given the label include the 18th century clergyman Thomas Malthus, and Darwin's cousin Francis Galton who founded eugenics towards the end of the 19th century.

Some claim that it supports racism on the lines set out by Arthur de Gobineau before Darwin published his theories, which directly contradict Darwin's own work. This classification of social Darwinism constitutes part of the reaction against the Nazi regime and the Holocaust.

[OP_Carl]

Dave, that doesn't make much sense. Because right now in America there are tens of thousands of elderly people barely able to buy food because they cannot afford the prescription drugs they need. Every year an estimated 18,000 Americans die because they are not granted coverage or cannot afford insurance that will help them get the care or treatments they need to survive. Bro, numbers of cases have been brought up before the Senate and have engaged the insurance companies in lawsuits because their loved one died. There are another 25,000 Americans who declare bankruptcy every year due to the inability to pay their medical bills.

Funny...none of this seems to bother you one bit. I'll tell you what it's really about...it's about the almighty dollar.

This confirms that you are neither reading nor comprehending. You are merely regurgitating the same stuff over and over again. Including your "laugh line."
The Law of God commanded land owners to leave the corners and edges of their fields for the destitute. It was a civil law of Moses. If this is theft, Jesus is a sinner...because Jesus and the disciples freely gleaned corn, with unwashed hands, in a field belonging to another. If Jesus is a sinner, your faith is in vain. Utter nonsense This is totally unrelated.

Also let's read what Paul said in Romans 13,

" 1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. 7Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor." - Romans 13:1-7 (NIV)

In this passage we have a number of truths. First, Government, like the family, is an ordained institution of God. And, Governments are established and set up by God. If one rebels against the rule of law they are in rebellion against the governing institution appointed by God bringing judgment upon themselves. This is farcical. Nobody is suggesting civil nor violent disobedience. We have a new paradigm, unimaginable in bible times, where the individual is sovereign and participates in the making of the rules. In America, if we believe that a law is in error, we are FREE to work to revoke it. See prohibition. See slavery.

Nobody contending against your destructive socialist views currently defies the government via non-payment of taxes because they are against supporting social security, welfare, the war on drugs, or government schools.

You are, in essence, telling us to shut up and obey the law BEFORE NATIONAL HEALTH CARE IS THE LAW. This is either disingenuous or discombobulated.

This kind of thinking is dangerous to freedom of expression, action, and even freedom of thought. I showed you how you have put the cart before the horse, and are extolling the virtues of YET ANOTHER system that causes mankind to work against his own best interests. Even without religious connotations this is untenable in the long term. It has been proven untenable. And yet folks still promote more of it.

Thank God we are free to debate these things both before and after they are implemented. We've poured billions into the machine of government schools, and our students perform more poorly than ever. We've poured billions into the war on drugs, yet our nation's drug problems persist. We've received the warnings about the coming insolvency of social security for 20 years. There is plenty of evidence that federal social programs are ineffective at best and often make the problem worse, all the while wasting BILLIONS of dollars ($1,000,000,000.00) Yet some folks point to them anyhow as the reason to start yet another one?


One need no fear of rulers if they obey the laws.
The combination of state, local, and federal statutes are so convoluted NOW, largely due to muddled collectivist thinking, that it is impossible to obey all the laws. Societal order is kept via selective enforcement - yet another broad avenue for corruption.

The governing authorities will commend those who do what's right and obey the laws. Governing authorities are servants called to do good for the people. But law breakers have reason to fear because governing authorities have the authority to use force, the sword, to punish them. Governments serve God by punishing law breakers. Therefore it is necessary to obey the government, not only because you may be punished but because in doing so you will have a clear conscience. HEY, this is why you are to pay taxes. Because the governing authorities are the servants of God and give their lives to public service. You are to give what you owe. If you owe taxes, pay taxes. If revenue, pay revenue. If respect, then respect. If honor, then honor. Do you believe that this paragraph should persuade ANYBODY, law-abiding or not, to become excited about and supportive of yet another tax?
Do you believe government creates wealth?
Where does the government get all this money for these programs? Do they just print it?
What increases the federal budget?
What increases the GDP?
What makes the economy grow?
Is income earned or distributed?
When the majority of a man's efforts to increase himself are confiscated by government, what incentive does he have to produce by his efforts more wealth for the taking?

[ChristopherHall]

Trickledown,

A grandmother is unable to pay for both her food and her much needed medication. She can afford the food without causing her economic ruin but not the medication. Does she have the right to medication that could save her life? You're the civil magistrate she appeals to in fear filled tears. What do you tell her?

A young mother of three is in need of a liver transplant. A liver that appears to be a match has been found and is ready for her. Her insurance company denies her coverage based on the fact that research is relatively new in treating her disease. So when applying for coverage for the transplant her insurance company denies coverage for the procedure on the grounds that it is "experimental". (Remember, insurance companies have an entire staff trained on how to find ways NOT to cover treatments people need to save the company money.) The doctors are all confident this may save her life. She dies while wrangling this out in court. The family appeals to you as a civil magistrate to implement a national insurance that will not deny coverage to protect profit. Her daughter is dead. She weeps asking you to save another mother this pain. What do you do? What do you tell her?

[ReformedDave]

CH, you are the king of cut and paste. You don't answer direct questions and you have no hermanutical basis that has been proven to not be inconsistent, arbitrary, and unbiblical. You have no framework or set of presuppositions that hold up your philosophy. What you do have is a lot of bluster, the propensity not to listen, the extreme use of strawmen, and the ability not to answer questions. It makes it very difficult to converse with you in a meaningful way...if that is what you want.

[ChristopherHall]

Dave, what did you think about the article definition of "biblical justice"?

[augustianian]

Universal Healthcare..........Hmmmmmmmm........the government using taxpayers money to supply healthcare for all.

Socialism-a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

Now...all we need are anecdotal stories to make the public more pliable to accept such a theory...WOW ! ! Is that not the modus operandi of those who call for universal healthcare??

(Of course the next move will be the strident remarks such as......"What?? [feigning incredulity] you don't care about people?????????")

Puhlease,
a

[ReformedDave]

Dave, what did you think about the article definition of "biblical justice"?

In general I have no problem with the majority of what he wrote. I will say he sounds a bit dispensational,(I could be wrong), but you cannot take what he writes and apply the Scripture as you please without a context and rules of hermeneutics. Some of what he quoted was and/or will be fulfilled by Christ, some applies today. We must do careful exegesis and application.

BTW, you keep using the term "social darwinism'. As one who hates what Herbert Spencer stood for(at least his Darwinian suppositions) I don't see the connection. And please, as I have stated before, I'm neither a member of either major party.

[ChristopherHall]

This confirms that you are neither reading nor comprehending. You are merely regurgitating the same stuff over and over again. Including your "laugh line."

It’s the truth. You don’t care if someone dies merely because they cannot afford health care. You don’t care that the elderly are choosing between food and medication. You don’t care if 18,000 Americans die every year because they cannot afford the health care they need. In your mind it’s just another weak, sick, person dying off. As long as it doesn’t cost you anything you’ll feel sad…but hey…ultimately you don’t care. At least that’s the attitude you’re displaying. Me and others are advocating a way to do SOMETHING to help so many that are hurting so badly. You’re only presenting why your stand against anyone doing SOMETHING. You’re not presenting REALISTIC alternatives with which we can relieve the elderly and insure that all Americans are covered with AFFORDABLE health insurance. Don’t just tell me what you’re against….tell me what you’re for. So far, all I have to go on is that you’re against anyone doing anything that might cost you more in taxes….even if the system would allow YOU to bring home more of your own money due to the elimination of fees, deductibles, and co-pays! LOL Right now it sounds like you just don’t care. I’ll tell you what I’ve told people in staff meetings. Don’t give me an argument against the ideas of people willing to do SOMETHING. Give me viable and realistic alternatives.

If you don’t mind me asking you, how much is your health insurance premium that you pay every month?

Utter nonsense This is totally unrelated.

It’s a principle. It shows how national laws supporting those in need are found even in the Bible. How would you feel if you were a land owner and the Law of Moses required you to surrender the dropped harvest, corners, and edges of your crop to the need? Would you argue against it, calling it a Leftwing Levitical Agenda?

[b]This is farcical. Nobody is suggesting civil nor violent disobedience. We have a new paradigm, unimaginable in bible times, where the individual is sovereign and participates in the making of the rules. In America, if we believe that a law is in error, we are FREE to work to revoke it. See prohibition. See slavery.

Nobody contending against your destructive socialist views currently defies the government via non-payment of taxes because they are against supporting social security, welfare, the war on drugs, or government schools.

My point was that taxation isn’t theft. If it were we wouldn’t be commanded to pay taxes.


You are, in essence, telling us to shut up and obey the law BEFORE NATIONAL HEALTH CARE IS THE LAW. This is either disingenuous or discombobulated.

This kind of thinking is dangerous to freedom of expression, action, and even freedom of thought. I showed you how you have put the cart before the horse, and are extolling the virtues of YET ANOTHER system that causes mankind to work against his own best interests. Even without religious connotations this is untenable in the long term. It has been proven untenable. And yet folks still promote more of it.

No. My point was that should the people decide that this is best for our entire society and vote for a leader implementing a universal health insurance system covering all and benefiting all…including you (you’re premiums will drop further than the taxes you’d pay, you’d save money) it’s not theft. It’s on par with social justice.

You say it’s been “proven” untenable. Yet every Western nation has taken this route and every Western nation has no intention of using a system like that found in the United States. It’s working in Canada (Canadian Brothers here have expressed this well, are they liars?). It’s also working in France, Britain, Norway, Israel, Switzerland, Italy, and the list could go on and on and on and on. Is it expensive? Yes. But when compared to the rising premiums we’re facing, it’s actually less expensive. American spends over 16% more in the system we currently have….and less people are covered and the American population sees the doctor far less and has far more overall health problems.

TO BE CONTINUED....

[ChristopherHall]

Thank God we are free to debate these things both before and after they are implemented. We've poured billions into the machine of government schools, and our students perform more poorly than ever. We've poured billions into the war on drugs, yet our nation's drug problems persist. We've received the warnings about the coming insolvency of social security for 20 years. There is plenty of evidence that federal social programs are ineffective at best and often make the problem worse, all the while wasting BILLIONS of dollars ($1,000,000,000.00) Yet some folks point to them anyhow as the reason to start yet another one?[/b]

Ah, but again…what’s the alternative? No government schools? In Dayton Ohio the government schools did terribly. But the chartered private schools fared worse! LOL So you’re advocating what? Again all I can see in what you said is that you’re against having government schools for those who cannot afford to go to private schools. And most of the private schools would begin to experience a world of hurt if we began shipping all these students into them. You’d dissolve the public schools system causing tens of thousands of kids to not even have a chance? I see millions of kids all over the country wondering the streets without an education. That’s what I see in my mind’s eye as I read your words above. What’s the alternative? Why did so many of our founders believe in a public education?

Here’s the real problem with the schools….parents. Parents aren’t parenting. Too many kids are growing up in homes where both parent’s work just to make ends meet or have health insurance. These “latch-key kids” grow up without parental supervision. They don’t study, they’re not disciplined, they get into all kinds of trouble. Also you have millions of kids growing up in broken homes. Factor in all the drug and alcohol abuse and you have a recipe for disaster. Teachers aren’t parents. Teachers can only provide information. The problem with public schools…are parents failing to parent.

You mention how much money we’re spending on the drug war yet the problem persists. Here’s a wonderful example of what I’m trying to say with abortion. You can make something illegal and place fines and penalties on perpetrators…but it isn’t going to really change things. But the factor of addiction falls into the subject of the drug war. Again I’m going to ask you, what’s the alternative? End the war on drugs and allow the addiction to spread across the country until we’re a nation of riots, violence, and burnouts? Give me alternatives. (On a side note. If you want to see where the war on drugs will take us study Prohibition.)


The combination of state, local, and federal statutes are so convoluted NOW, largely due to muddled collectivist thinking, that it is impossible to obey all the laws. Societal order is kept via selective enforcement - yet another broad avenue for corruption.

That’s a matter of opinion. I work for a government office and often I have to navigate the “convoluted” statutes you’re talking about. I don’t believe you can lump all statutes together. You have to look at them individually.

[b] Do you believe that this paragraph should persuade ANYBODY, law-abiding or not, to become excited about and supportive of yet another tax?

If most Americans understood that the tax you speak of would allow the government to bring down their monthly premiums, eliminate their high deductibles, and their co-pays, thereby actually saving them more of their hard earned money, yes, I think most Americans would be supportive. Interestingly, the more Americans learn about universal health insurance…the more there are coming to support it. Education is a wonderful thing.

Do you believe government creates wealth?

No. Government ensures justice. And justice is a very broad concept speaking to more than just punishment of crime but also social benefits, as outlined in the Holman Dictionary’s definition of Justice.

Where does the government get all this money for these programs? Do they just print it?

No. We have programs in place that would be combined into the universal health insurance system. For example Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, OPM (and sub programs), Veterans Health Care System, etc. would all be combined into a universal insurance program. Initially this is estimated to provide over 60% of the costs necessary for the universal health insurance system. This minimizes the increase in taxation greatly. The overall coverage would allow doctors to be paid (whereas right now they take a loss passed down to you in costs and premiums). When the doctors are actually paid, the loss will not be passed to you, thereby reducing health care costs for both doctors and patients and lowering your premiums. In addition the government will negotiate prescription drug costs with drug companies reducing your costs even more. As stated above this would eliminate our high deductibles and copays. The increase in taxes would be less than what you’re now paying in rising premiums, deductibles, and copays. You’d make money by accepting the tax increase and eliminating rising premiums, deductibles, and copays. Yes…by accepting the tax increase…you bring home more of your own money. And guess what….this money would go back into the economy and boost the economy over all. Businesses would also no longer face being gouged by rising premiums. As with Canadian and French businesses, it frees them to do more business and less healthcare cost management and provision. It would remove the redundant clerical nightmare of the corporate bureaucracy with a single national electronic records system. This accounts for over 30% of present health care costs. Thus boosting the coverage power of the system itself. You’d come out keeping more of your money, business would be liberated and pay less in taxes than rising premiums, and the economy would see a boost because individuals would have more spending power.

What increases the federal budget?

I wouldn’t call what we have now a “budget”. LOL

I hope that helps you understand my position better and answers your questions. Again, don’t just argue against the SOMETHING we are considering doing. Offer REALISTIC and VIABLE alternatives and explain how they would work.

God bless.

[ChristopherHall]

One last thing, consider how this would effect the church and ministers. First, if people are saving on their insurance costs monthly. That liberates more of their income and produces the option to give even more to further the work of God, should they desire to do so. Ministers might benefit the most. Think of how many ministers with families would move into full time ministry if they were covered by a universal health insurance plan.

[ReformedDave]

One last thing, consider how this would effect the church and ministers. First, if people are saving on their insurance costs monthly. That liberates more of their income and produces the option to give even more to further the work of God, should they desire to do so

Wouldn't there be a higher tax revenue to offset the expense? Didn't I hear someone say that Obama wants to through 1 trillion dollars at the issue?

[StMark]

I'm okay with universal healthcare as long as it's a CHOICE.

I think that Americans should have a choice as to whether they want it or not.


Did you all know that the extreme rich pay very little taxes in America? they send their money to off shore banking and such. maybe there would be more revenue if this group paid their taxes ???

[Ron]

I'm okay with universal healthcare as long as it's a CHOICE.

I think that Americans should have a choice as to whether they want it or not.


Did you all know that the extreme rich pay very little taxes in America? they send their money to off shore banking and such. maybe there would be more revenue if this group paid their taxes ???

Comrade, that is not proper making the rich pay thier fair share!
Me thinks you are finding the truth!

[StMark]

Comrade, that is not proper making the rich pay thier fair share!
Me thinks you are finding the truth!



and they call ME the pot stirrer?????

[Ron]

Wouldn't there be a higher tax revenue to offset the expense? Didn't I hear someone say that Obama wants to through 1 trillion dollars at the issue?

The US has 1.4 Trillion Dollars to throw at a war it ain't winning.

[Ron]

and they call ME the pot stirrer?????


Hey I am pot stirrer for no other reason but that I am Canadian!:happydance

[ReformedDave]

Did you all know that the extreme rich pay very little taxes in America? they send their money to off shore banking and such. maybe there would be more revenue if this group paid their taxes ???

Mark, you are saying that ALL extremely rich do this??????? I know some that are very honest.....and extremely rich. BTW, do you know that many of middle America don't file tax returns????? Until we repeal this unethical system we will always have this trouble.

If there has to be taxes I think it should be no more than 10% and it should be across the board, rich and poor.

[Ron]

Mark, you are saying that ALL extremely rich do this??????? I know some that are very honest.....and extremely rich. BTW, do you know that many of middle America don't file tax returns????? Until we repeal this unethical system we will always have this trouble.

If there has to be taxes I think it should be no more than 10% and it should be across the board, rich and poor.

And no money being sent overseas! Sounds like a notion floating around up here.

[ReformedDave]

The US has 1.4 Trillion Dollars to throw at a war it ain't winning.

I was against the war from the beginning. I think that to change hands, or pockets, from which the money comes from doesn't help anything.

[ReformedDave]

Mark, you are saying that ALL extremely rich do this??????? I know some that are very honest.....and extremely rich. BTW, do you know that many of middle America don't file tax returns????? Until we repeal this unethical system we will always have this trouble.

If there has to be taxes I think it should be no more than 10% and it should be across the board, rich and poor.

And no money being sent overseas! Sounds like a notion floating around up here.

Right. No money floating over seas.

[StMark]

The US has 1.4 Trillion Dollars to throw at a war it ain't winning.


It's not winning??? actually the war in Iraq has begun to turn in our favor Ron. If America failed then why is Iraq beginning to spring back to life?

[ReformedDave]

It's not winning??? actually the war in Iraq has begun to turn in our favor Ron. If America failed then why is Iraq beginning to spring back to life?

I think it was an unjust war from the beginning. But pragmatically, I don't think that even by 'winning' the war people will change when we pull out. I know many hope for a 'democracy' similar to Saudi Arabia.....but I can't see that happening.

[StMark]

Mark, you are saying that ALL extremely rich do this??????? I know some that are very honest.....and extremely rich. BTW, do you know that many of middle America don't file tax returns????? Until we repeal this unethical system we will always have this trouble.

If there has to be taxes I think it should be no more than 10% and it should be across the board, rich and poor.


I don't know the percentage, but i know that a great many don't.
They know the loopholes better then the middle class and have the means to find ways to avoid the system. Very few in middle america get away with not paying taxes.

Dave,I don't like the tax system either. I think we are taxed to death.

what do you think of a flat tax ?

[ReformedDave]

I don't know the percentage, but i know that a great many don't.
They know the loopholes better then the middle class and have the means to find ways to avoid the system. Very few in middle america get away with not paying taxes.

Dave,I don't like the tax system either. I think we are taxed to death.

what do you think of a flat tax ?

IF we must have a tax the flat tax is the most equitable way to go.

[StMark]

I think it was an unjust war from the beginning. But pragmatically, I don't think that even by 'winning' the war people will change when we pull out. I know many hope for a 'democracy' similar to Saudi Arabia.....but I can't see that happening.

How do you think we are we going to win the war against terrorism?
should we have just let it all go and did nothing ?
should we just protect our own borders? seems a little too late for that i think

We may just have to keep some military presence in there for many years.
the slovic nations have been fighting for 1000 years and nothing else works but to have permanant military presence.

Doesn't it beat having terrorist camps growing everywhere ?

[scotty]

The US has 1.4 Trillion Dollars to throw at a war it ain't winning.



Love you Bro. Ron , really do. But with all due respect, if you haven't been there then you have no right to go there. There are places here the government needs to be helping our own, I will admit that. But if you stand for UHC...you would truley love what we are doing over there.

[ReformedDave]

How do you think we are we going to win the war against terrorism?
should we have just let it all go and did nothing ?
should we just protect our own borders? seems a little too late for that i think

We may just have to keep some military presence in there for many years.
the slovic nations have been fighting for 1000 years and nothing else works but to have permanant military presence.

Doesn't it beat having terrorist camps growing everywhere ?

I guess that's where I'm different than most. I say we do start by securing our borders. I believe it can be done. I think we should handle issues at home first. This is a simplistic answer but that is my starting point. I'm not real concerned with fighting the 'war' on drugs in other countries. Take care of the problem here and we won't have to worry about the other places.

[StMark]

I guess that's where I'm different than most. I say we do start by securing our borders. I believe it can be done. I think we should handle issues at home first. This is a simplistic answer but that is my starting point. I'm not real concerned with fighting the 'war' on drugs in other countries. Take care of the problem here and we won't have to worry about the other places.


FERD, you may have another undercover Democrat on your hands :happydance

[augustianian]

Reformed Dave,

Everytime I see one of your posts I think it's Greg Bahnsen resurrected from the dead.

Talk about wishful thinking.

a

[Ferd]

Love you Bro. Ron , really do. But with all due respect, if you haven't been there then you have no right to go there. There are places here the government needs to be helping our own, I will admit that. But if you stand for UHC...you would truley love what we are doing over there.

This is a great point. One of the main reasons, European countries and Canada have the $$$$ to spend on socialist health care scemes is because they dont have to spen $$$$ on Military. We do it for them.


Maybe they should start paying us, then we could afford it too.

[scotty]

This is a great point. One of the main reasons, European countries and Canada have the $$$$ to spend on socialist health care scemes is because they dont have to spen $$$$ on Military. We do it for them.


Maybe they should start paying us, then we could afford it too.

Another good point Bro. Ferd.

Wonder how much of the defecit we could pay off if we stopped giving financial aid to France, England, Africa, Canada, Mexico, Korea, etc.etc.etc.

[ChristopherHall]

Wouldn't there be a higher tax revenue to offset the expense? Didn't I hear someone say that Obama wants to through 1 trillion dollars at the issue?

Indeed, Obama did say that. But again things are more complicated than they look. Yes, a universal system would require at least 1 trillion dollars start. But remember, as we speak there are different Federal Programs providing some form of assistance with health care to various people groups. For example you have Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, funding blocks for state programs, etc. The first step is to bring all of those programs and their funds under one umbrella program. So in a real sense a good portion of the 1 trillion dollars needed for the program is already in the budget, it’s just broke up over a myriad of different programs right now. They will do this because with a universal health insurance system there’s no need for SCHIP, Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans health care programs, etc. There would be a single all encompassing program. Estimates are that when all of these Federal monies are brought under the universal health insurance program umbrella a good portion (some estimates show as much as 50% to 60%) of the 1 trillion dollar budget would be in place. The remainder would be funded primarily by repealing the Bush tax cuts on only the top 2% of those who received them and according to Obama, “don’t need them, and didn’t ask for them.” I personally believe that there will also be a nominal tax increase, but it may not directly touch the middle class.

[embonpoint]

Indeed, Obama did say that. But again things are more complicated than they look. Yes, a universal system would require at least 1 trillion dollars start. But remember, as we speak there are different Federal Programs providing some form of assistance with health care to various people groups. For example you have Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, funding blocks for state programs, etc. The first step is to bring all of those programs and their funds under one umbrella program. So in a real sense a good portion of the 1 trillion dollars needed for the program is already in the budget, it’s just broke up over a myriad of different programs right now. They will do this because with a universal health insurance system there’s no need for SCHIP, Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans health care programs, etc. There would be a single all encompassing program. Estimates are that when all of these Federal monies are brought under the universal health insurance program umbrella a good portion (some estimates show as much as 50% to 60%) of the 1 trillion dollar budget would be in place. The remainder would be funded primarily by repealing the Bush tax cuts on only the top 2% of those who received them and according to Obama, “don’t need them, and didn’t ask for them.” I personally believe that there will also be a nominal tax increase, but it may not directly touch the middle class.

Could you send me your credit card numbers,billing address, expiration dates and pin numbers, I have some dental work I need done and I would like to put it on your card. :D

[scotty]

I think it was an unjust war from the beginning. But pragmatically, I don't think that even by 'winning' the war people will change when we pull out. I know many hope for a 'democracy' similar to Saudi Arabia.....but I can't see that happening.


I'm on your side on this topic at hand but again like I told Bro. Ron, the Iraqi war has many views, but the only right one is from within the country.

WMD's ? Nope. Nukes? Nope. Terrorist? Nope. So why did we go? Ohhh yeah! Biological weapons Sadam was using on his own people. Mass graves of hundreds of thousands of men, women and children. A dictator that picked women off the street to play with in his rape-room. Thousands of dollars given to Palastinian terror groups to blow up civilians in Israel. Come on people, did we do it right? No. Should we be doing it? Yes. Bush offered twice the troops when we first went in and the commanders on the ground said "we don't need that many" They should have took the offer. We did not have enough troops to secure what we were occupying. And yes we are now the police until the Iraqi government can provide it's own. Front Page says 5 died today. Yet I have to "literally" dig through Yahoo,MSN, to find the story about the orphanage we raided were we found hundreds of children bound, naked and sexually abused by insurgents. Or the stories of the schools and hospitals "we" are building. (We is emphasized due to me being a member of the US Navy Seabees Construction Battalion)Troops playing with children or feeding the poor. Look, Bush is not the best we have had. But he is the best there was to choose from. He did not come into office knowing 9/11 was going to happen or knowing some rogue dictator was going to build nukes to "wipe a country off the face of the map". He came into office to lower taxes and build the economy which he did, and quite well I might add,. It offends me for you people to sit over here and say " its all for nothing". This website could not hold the stories of thankful Iraqi's I could talk about. I will gladly pick up my weapon again and go share a candy bar with an Iraqi child or knock some more doors down, kill 2 or 3 armed thugs and pull the woman from the back room, bleeding from between the legs, and carry her to a waiting ambulance. If that were your sister you might see things differently. If it were your mother going to the grocery store one day just to be taken off the street by the president of this country and raped for days at a time then maybe you would be the one praying everynight for someone, anyone, to come take the nightmare away. But instead you wake up every morning wondering what flavor latte you will have, while they wake every morning wondering which family member they will bury today. For the most part this war has no effect on your lives whatsoever.

The economy is good, the market is strong and the illegal immigrants are still a pain in the butt, but I get up to a sunrise, wake and have breakfast with my daughter before taking her to school and kiss my wife good morning. WHY? Because I killed some people over there that don't want me to have this. One day I will go back again and I might take a bullet this time, but I do so knowing it's because I want my family and all of you to go on enjoying the above. You want to open a forum about the war?, open it to troops and the citizens of Iraq, those who are effected by it. As for the rest of you, open a forum to gripe about the price of a latte, I've given you the right and freedom to that.

Lets not make this a thread on the war, most of you are not qualified to post.

[embonpoint]

The US has 1.4 Trillion Dollars to throw at a war it ain't winning.

1.4 trillion total over entire war as opposed to 1 trillion per year and growing.

You would have to define "winning".

I think it is winning.

[embonpoint]

Ah, but again…what’s the alternative? No government schools? In Dayton Ohio the government schools did terribly. But the chartered private schools fared worse! LOL So you’re advocating what? Again all I can see in what you said is that you’re against having government schools for those who cannot afford to go to private schools. And most of the private schools would begin to experience a world of hurt if we began shipping all these students into them. You’d dissolve the public schools system causing tens of thousands of kids to not even have a chance? I see millions of kids all over the country wondering the streets without an education. That’s what I see in my mind’s eye as I read your words above. What’s the alternative? Why did so many of our founders believe in a public education?

Which of our founders believed in a government provided public education?

[ReformedDave]

Which of our founders believed in a government provided public education?

Many times it was provided by the local pastor. The great Jonathan Edwards' father was a school teacher/pastor.

[embonpoint]

:footinmouth
No. We have programs in place that would be combined into the universal health insurance system. For example Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, OPM (and sub programs), Veterans Health Care System, etc. would all be combined into a universal insurance program. Initially this is estimated to provide over 60% of the costs necessary for the universal health insurance system. This minimizes the increase in taxation greatly. The overall coverage would allow doctors to be paid (whereas right now they take a loss passed down to you in costs and premiums). When the doctors are actually paid, the loss will not be passed to you, thereby reducing health care costs for both doctors and patients and lowering your premiums. In addition the government will negotiate prescription drug costs with drug companies reducing your costs even more. As stated above this would eliminate our high deductibles and copays. The increase in taxes would be less than what you’re now paying in rising premiums, deductibles, and copays. You’d make money by accepting the tax increase and eliminating rising premiums, deductibles, and copays. Yes…by accepting the tax increase…you bring home more of your own money. And guess what….this money would go back into the economy and boost the economy over all. Businesses would also no longer face being gouged by rising premiums. As with Canadian and French businesses, it frees them to do more business and less healthcare cost management and provision. It would remove the redundant clerical nightmare of the corporate bureaucracy with a single national electronic records system. This accounts for over 30% of present health care costs. Thus boosting the coverage power of the system itself. You’d come out keeping more of your money, business would be liberated and pay less in taxes than rising premiums, and the economy would see a boost because individuals would have more spending power.



I wouldn’t call what we have now a “budget”. LOL

I hope that helps you understand my position better and answers your questions. Again, don’t just argue against the SOMETHING we are considering doing. Offer REALISTIC and VIABLE alternatives and explain how they would work.

God bless.

You argue for government efficiency and management in one breath and then mock it in the next.

Which is it???

You advocate an additional 1/2 trillion dollars per year (your figures) be put in to the hands of those who can't budget what they have now?
:footinmouth :killinme

[embonpoint]

Many times it was provided by the local pastor. The great Jonathan Edwards' father was a school teacher/pastor.

Exaxtly, they obviously believed in education and were intelligent and articulate, however, I do not recall their advocating state run education.

[ReformedDave]

Exaxtly, they obviously believed in education and were intelligent and articulate, however, I do not recall their advocating state run education.

In many ways they were our superiors.

[Ron]

Love you Bro. Ron , really do. But with all due respect, if you haven't been there then you have no right to go there. There are places here the government needs to be helping our own, I will admit that. But if you stand for UHC...you would truley love what we are doing over there.

I'm on your side on this topic at hand but again like I told Bro. Ron, the Iraqi war has many views, but the only right one is from within the country.
]Lets not make this a thread on the war, most of you are not qualified to post.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/I][/B]

Not qualified to post?

What qualifies oneself?

When they agree 100% with you?

I got no qualms with the military. My family has a long history on both sides of being involved both in the Air Force & Army.
Canada has troops in Afghanistan, almost every other day there is news of soldiers either being hurt or being killed.

In fact there is a debate in Parliament right mow about us willing to stay longer if other Nato countries getting involved-militarily.

What qualifications does one need?

You guys in the US getting rid of your Colonial Status from Great Britain-good on you.

How does the rest of the world view you going into the Middle East?
As just another oppressor-period.

You guys may feel you are the World's cop, but that doesn't make it so.

[Ron]

This is a great point. One of the main reasons, European countries and Canada have the $$$$ to spend on socialist health care scemes is because they dont have to spen $$$$ on Military. We do it for them.


Maybe they should start paying us, then we could afford it too.

Ferd, we could spend more, but how much more?
What you guys spend on Defense is more than the Whole Canadian Federal Budget.

[Ron]

1.4 trillion total over entire war as opposed to 1 trillion per year and growing.

You would have to define "winning".

I think it is winning.


You need to think again.

[scotty]

Not qualified to post?

What qualifies oneself?

When they agree 100% with you?

I got no qualms with the military. My family has a long history on both sides of being involved both in the Air Force & Army.
Canada has troops in Afghanistan, almost every other day there is news of soldiers either being hurt or being killed.

In fact there is a debate in Parliament right mow about us willing to stay longer if other Nato countries getting involved-militarily.

What qualifications does one need?

You guys in the US getting rid of your Colonial Status from Great Britain-good on you.

How does the rest of the world view you going into the Middle East?
As just another oppressor-period.

You guys may feel you are the World's cop, but that doesn't make it so.

That is because the rest of the world doesn't have a clue. The rest of the world hides behind us. The rest of the world screams because we are in Iraqi, then crys out the same pie hole because we are not doing anything about Darfur. We didn't put ourselves here , the world did. Research your history Brother. It's the world that always looks to us for protection, its other countries that call on us when oppressed, it's here the people of the world come running to when they want out of their own country, the world call on us in WWI and WWII, Veitnam called us when the communist attacked. Other countries call us when they are hit with disasters. The world calls us when they can't do it on their own, then as our men and women die answering that call the same world bashes us for doing it. If your country has never asked for help nor recieved help from us then you may have reason to argue, otherwise I just assume the world say "thank you" and keep their hypocritical, ignorant and otherwise worthless comments to itself.

[scotty]

You need to think again.

No thinking neccesary, facts have proved it , the surge is working.

[Ron]

No thinking neccesary, facts have proved it , the surge is working.


I respectfully disagree!

[scotty]

I respectfully disagree!

LOL, I could disagree that the world was round, lol

doesn't change the facts.

[Ron]

LOL, I could disagree that the world was round, lol

doesn't change the facts.

Nor does Patriotic Propaganda either!

[scotty]

Nor does Patriotic Propaganda either!

Are you kidding me, so all the statitics coming out of Iraqi is propaganda?!?! Even when the news agencies that are against the war report the same?!?!? I am still in touch with friends there.
Sorry Brother, your just highly opinionated, but you have no facts.

[OP_Carl]

Trickledown made some excellent points that Christopher Hall ignored:

I WOULD DEBATE THAT THE MAJORITY IS NOT IN FAVOR OF A SYSTEM LIKE YOURS OR FRANCES. AND NOW YOU HAVE ADDED WETHER OR NOT WE BELIEVE THAT ALL PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO EAT. SCRIPTURE MAY BE SILENT ABOUT UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE BUT IT DOES SPEAK TO FOOD.
2 Thessalonians 3:10 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain

10For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

THIS IS A WAKE UP TO EVERYONE READING THIS POST. THE SAME PEOPLE THAT THINK ALL SHOULD HAVE HEALTHCARE REGARDLESS OF ANY OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES WILL ALSO SOON ASK YOU TO FEED ALL REGARDLESS OF ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. THEIR IDEAS DO NOT FLY IN THE LIGHT OF SCRIPTURE. THE IDEAS THAT WERE PERPETUATED BY MARXIST ARE NOT CONGRUENT WITH THE IDEAS OF CHRIST.

I know that you have asked me to propose a workable solution instead of popping off from the sidelines with a long list of reasons why somebody else's proposal WON'T work. And that is exactly how I operate in the business world. However, I am not running for office, so my proposal is still in its draft phase. Maybe I'll get something together later.

You've also asked me for some more personal anecdotes and such. However, I am arguing from a set of principles, not appealing to sentiment.

A government that disregards the interests of the individual over the interests of the group when it comes to the collection of funds is ALSO going to disregard the interests of the individual over the interests of the group when it comes to the PAYOUT OF BENEFITS.

I can't emphasize this enough. The people that you're going to climb into bed with, politically speaking, in supporting national health care are going to turn around and cut your "Christian" throat just as soon as you've outlived your usefulness to their plans. Most people promoting national health care are doing so out of a true collectivist mindset or class envy. You "social gospel" people are a rarity. The business of group rights cuts both ways, and will eventually work against anybody who is not a committed secularist.

The communist manifesto has a term and a plan for people who can be convinced to cooperate with various steps of the master plan without being aware of the full implications or even the existence of the master plan itself. If you aren't familiar with it, suffice it to say that it is neither complimentary nor a term of endearment.

At the root, the socialist plan is to change the way Americans view themselves in terms of their rights, responsibilities, and most of all, their capabilities. The new paradigm will create an elite ruling class that treats the little people as children. It will include practices that will be counter to all kinds of Christian principles, but it will be too late for you to voice your opposition or affect change. The worst thing about it, from a Christian perspective, is that people will be harder to win to Christ when they've been raised from childhood to not take accountability for their own actions.

[embonpoint]

You guys may feel you are the World's cop, but that doesn't make it so.

Nor does believing the guy behind you with the red and blue lights and the gun and cuffs is not a cop mean he's not. Probably wouldn't be a good defense in court and certainly isn't going to keep you out of the hoosegow when you do finally pull over. :D

[embonpoint]

You need to think again.

OK I'm thinking.

But I don't think you want to know what I'm thinking. :happydance

[trickledown]

CH, you are the king of cut and paste. You don't answer direct questions and you have no hermanutical basis that has been proven to not be inconsistent, arbitrary, and unbiblical. You have no framework or set of presuppositions that hold up your philosophy. What you do have is a lot of bluster, the propensity not to listen, the extreme use of strawmen, and the ability not to answer questions. It makes it very difficult to converse with you in a meaningful way...if that is what you want.

Agreed. Chris seeks to highjack threads for his proliberal propoganda and seeks to avoid anything that might pen him down. He is very hard to converse with in that he chooses which questions he has answers for and ignores the rest while blasting you with his rhetoric.

Don't forget that he is a government worker who has had a personal experience with healthcare coverage that was lacking. He also sees the Canadian system as one that would have saved him personally from such a problem. He is a great advocate for big government which he feels would benefit him personally. If he was in private enterprise or had a higher economic status, he would probably be just as vocal about his self-interest in battling against higher taxes. He has been demeaning of private small businesses in several post all the while defending government growth. He is after all a government worker, a "minister" to the people.

It is like single mothers who do not produce, that feel they should get more from welfare. If it cost them nothing, why wouldn't the unscrupulous support more government growth?
People in this country are determined to bring the living standards for the lower class higher. The same lower class that is determined to produce less and less. Food nor healthcare nor a home is a God-given or constitutionally given right. Freedom of religion however is. If those that support themselves in the free market economy do not advocate for our freedoms, then those who take their living from the self supporters will choke our nation to a early death.

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship."

Library of Congress' Respectfully Quoted writes, "Attributed to ALEXANDER FRASER TYTLER, LORD WOODHOUSELEE. Unverified."

[OP_Carl]

How does the rest of the world view you going into the Middle East?
As just another oppressor-period.

You guys may feel you are the World's cop, but that doesn't make it so.
Ron,
I recognize that if the average American were to be made to fully understand the ways in which our foreign policy is ACTUALLY put in to practice, they would be appalled. Our foreign policy does not represent our national heartbeat, and the deception of the people is a shame.

However, I would suggest that you think, truly stop and reflect, on what the world would be like if we did not intervene with the lawyers, guns, and money. Usually folks will grimace and begrudgingly admit that our efforts produce a stabilizing influence on the socioeconomic life of the world. Few reflect on what the opposite of stability truly means.

Unintended consequences isn't just an abstract concept. Some unintended consequences - like what happened in Cambodia after the U.S. fled Vietnam - are very real for some people.

[OP_Carl]

Agreed. Chris seeks to highjack threads for his proliberal propoganda and seeks to avoid anything that might pen him down. . . . . He is after all a government worker, a "minister" to the people. While your assessment and your implication might both be accurate, it is considered much better form to argue the ideas and not address personal aspects in a negative fashion. I realize you are just trying to point out on what side his bread's been buttered, but I would still urge caution.

If those that support themselves in the free market economy do not advocate for our freedoms, then those who take their living from the self supporters will choke our nation to a early death.

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship."

Library of Congress' Respectfully Quoted writes, "Attributed to ALEXANDER FRASER TYTLER, LORD WOODHOUSELEE. Unverified." Perhaps not so surprisingly, I agree with these points.

[StMark]

This is a great point. One of the main reasons, European countries and Canada have the $$$$ to spend on socialist health care scemes is because they dont have to spen $$$$ on Military. We do it for them.


Maybe they should start paying us, then we could afford it too.



Ferd,

I had never thought of this before- Great point.
So,If we didn't spend so much on our military on other countries you'd be okay with UHC??
What do you think of Dave's point? He thinks we should just worry about our borders and let the chips fall where they may.
we'd certainly have more money for other things wouldn't we?

Here is One of the reasons I feel the medical system needs overhauling.
My Sister in law has worked all of her life as a pharmicist. she paid all her taxes, and now she is in the hospital close to death but because her medical insurance has ran out, they want to send her to a convalecent home ALL THE WHILE the illegal immgrants and welfare recipients have unlimited resources and can stay in the hospital as long as the need to!!
as it stands it doesn't pay to do things the right way !

[pelathais]

It's a bogus report. Our family shares a cottage on Charleston Lake in Outlet Ontario. We go up there every year and spend at least a week. We have good friends there and David and Terry, my uncle and aunt-in-law do quite a bit of business in Canada, not to mention works relating to their denominational church. I've personally been to Windsor, Toronto, Gananoque, Outlet, Kingston, and Ottowa. And seen facilities in Windsor, Toronto, Gananoque, Kingston. With my own eyes. With the many friends I have in Canada I've talked to them at length about this and they laugh hysterically at how Americas are so jealous they feel they have to lie to tear down the superior Canadian system. It's all lies and propaganda...I've seen it personally. I was there. Many Canadians here on this forum can testify that everything you just posted isn't typical of the Canadian system.

No, it's not a "bogus" report. And no, socialized medical plans do not increase efficiencies. It seems from your incredibly verbose responses that follow that someone's really hit a nerve here with your Obamamania.

Chris, flooding this forum with Leftist propaganda will probably be a waste of time for you - just an observation. I'm glad that you found something that makes you happy and I hope Obama can deliver the goods for you. However, the average wait for treatment in Canadian emergency rooms is 4 hours. That's documented. It doesn't mean that Canadians are bad people or that their doctors "don't care." It's just a fact of government services. I have a friend who is a doctor in Canada. Her stories give me the willies.

You may wish to pretend that the evils of America justify your new love affair, but don't worry- I'll still be your friend when the libs have let you down. And let you down they will; been there, done that and I've already thrown out the t-shirt.

[pelathais]

This is a great point. One of the main reasons, European countries and Canada have the $$$$ to spend on socialist health care scemes is because they dont have to spen $$$$ on Military. We do it for them.


Maybe they should start paying us, then we could afford it too.
The wealth of Europe is kind of complex. The U.K. was brankrupt in the 1970's until two things happened: North Sea Oil and Margaret Thatcher.

The Queen of Norway administers a "mutual fund" with cash assets in excess of 1.5 trillion dollars. That's "cash," not the Crown Jewels. The money belongs to the people of Norway and is invested around the world - much of it in the U.S. economy. When the U.S. economy slows, the pensioners of Norway (that is, the entire native population of Norway) shudder. This fund has been built up through selling North Sea oil to the Germans and Swedes.

Canada is one of the leading suppliers of oil to the United States and has the second largest reserve of oil in the world. Also, Canadian manufacturing has literally exploded after the U.S. auto unions drove the industry out of Detroit.

You can imagine how shaky these financial houses appear to be. Huge governement social programs have been built upon financial assets that are tied to the health of the US economy. If we ever hit the skids, their assets would diminish rapidly.

Tired of breeding with each other, Canadians and Europeans have begun to import human beings in massive numbers, just to keep population levels nearly even. In the U.K. there has been substantial growth in population- all of it fed by immigration.

The Canadians and Europeans are dying out. They will soon be gone. Their "cash" assets will be the familar green US dollar. That dollar will be worth exactly what Americans say it's worth. Meanwhile, the Canadians and Europeans will have hordes of angry Muslims who really won't understand why they should have to pay for the aged white people loitering about.

Not having children really isn't much of a "plan" for the future. http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

[ChristopherHall]

No thinking neccesary, facts have proved it , the surge is working.


You're missing it. Of course the surge is working. It's a surge of armed soldiers. The surge has decreased the number of attacks...but the stability of the Iraqi government is virtually nil. What the surge's success shows in light of the unstable Iraqi democratic government is that it's a house of cards ready to fall should we step away. Bro...that's not "mission accomplished". If after the surge we saw a decrease in violence and the Iraqi government became strong with a unified Shiite, Sunni, and Kurd coalition with a strong government infrastructure and a capable military to fight off terrorists, I'd agree with you. Iraq is about to fall apart politically, and if it does we'll not only have insurgents to deal with...but warring factions fragmenting the country.

[ChristopherHall]

Are you kidding me, so all the statitics coming out of Iraqi is propaganda?!?! Even when the news agencies that are against the war report the same?!?!? I am still in touch with friends there.
Sorry Brother, your just highly opinionated, but you have no facts.

Bro...who do you know there?

[ChristopherHall]

Trickledown made some excellent points that Christopher Hall ignored:



I know that you have asked me to propose a workable solution instead of popping off from the sidelines with a long list of reasons why somebody else's proposal WON'T work. And that is exactly how I operate in the business world. However, I am not running for office, so my proposal is still in its draft phase. Maybe I'll get something together later.

You've also asked me for some more personal anecdotes and such. However, I am arguing from a set of principles, not appealing to sentiment.



I can't emphasize this enough. The people that you're going to climb into bed with, politically speaking, in supporting national health care are going to turn around and cut your "Christian" throat just as soon as you've outlived your usefulness to their plans. Most people promoting national health care are doing so out of a true collectivist mindset or class envy. You "social gospel" people are a rarity. The business of group rights cuts both ways, and will eventually work against anybody who is not a committed secularist.

The communist manifesto has a term and a plan for people who can be convinced to cooperate with various steps of the master plan without being aware of the full implications or even the existence of the master plan itself. If you aren't familiar with it, suffice it to say that it is neither complimentary nor a term of endearment.

At the root, the socialist plan is to change the way Americans view themselves in terms of their rights, responsibilities, and most of all, their capabilities. The new paradigm will create an elite ruling class that treats the little people as children. It will include practices that will be counter to all kinds of Christian principles, but it will be too late for you to voice your opposition or affect change. The worst thing about it, from a Christian perspective, is that people will be harder to win to Christ when they've been raised from childhood to not take accountability for their own actions.

Fear and paranoia. We have millions of individuals who, like the elderly, can't afford both food and the medication they need. We also have thousands dying from treatable diseases every year because they don't have insurance or their insurance denies them coverage. And you offer me a "philosophical" reason why it's all just fine with you. Get some heart.

[ChristopherHall]

Ever wonder what the future of America's private health care system holds? Behold, the private health care industry is creating a monster they call, MedFICO. Here's an interesting article:

How healthy is your medical credit score?
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/121207dnbushealthcredit.299ccc0.html
System being designed to help hospitals figure out whether you'll pay them

03:32 PM CST on Wednesday, December 12, 2007

By JASON ROBERSON / The Dallas Morning News
jroberson@dallasnews.com

Mortgage lenders aren't the only ones showing more interest in your credit score these days – the health industry is creating its own score to judge your ability to pay.
Also Online

Tell us: Is medical credit scoring a good idea?

The new medFICO score, being designed with the help of credit industry giant Fair Isaac Corp., could debut as early as this summer in some hospitals.

Healthcare Analytics, a Waltham, Mass., health technology firm, is developing the score. It is backed by funding from Fair Isaac, of Minneapolis; Dallas-based Tenet Healthcare Corp.; and venture capital firm North Bridge Venture Partners, also based in Waltham. Each kicked in $10 million for the project.

The score is already raising questions from consumer advocacy groups that fear it will be checked before patients are treated. People with low medical credit scores could receive lower-quality care than those with a healthy medFICO, they argue.
Illustration
MARK MATCHO/Special Contributor

"How much assurance do I have that they're not going to look at this medFICO first, before they decide whether to treat or not?" asked Linda Foley, founder of the Identity Theft Resource Center in San Diego.

Post-discharge checking

That will not happen, says Stephen Farber, chairman and chief executive of Healthcare Analytics. Hospitals will check the score, which will be based on the patient's medical bill payment history, only after the patient is discharged, he said.

"We only come into play once the patient has been treated and discharged, and the bill already exists," said Mr. Farber, who has visited hospital executives nationwide over the last six months to sell the concept. "We just help figure out what sort of relief a hospital should grant the patient."

Hospitals and other caregivers already can tap into regular credit scores – even without the patient's permission – but those are not necessarily a good indication of whether a patient will pay a medical bill, Mr. Farber says. Such credit scores are based on voluntary purchases, such as a car. Health care debt is largely involuntary.

Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, hospitals and doctors are allowed to report health care debts to credit reporting agencies, but they cannot indicate what they were for.

"They have to do it in a way that there will be no way a person looking at the information would be able to guess what they were treated for," said Frank Dorman, spokesman for the U.S. Fair Trade Commission.

By custom, hospitals generally do not report delinquent accounts, but they do turn them over to collection agencies, said Norm Magnuson, vice president of public affairs for the Consumer Data Industry Association, a Washington D.C. trade group for companies that provide credit reports.

In such cases, only the medical provider's name and the amount owed would be listed. But even that cannot be included if the name gives away too much information, as in the Betty Ford Clinic, widely known as an alcohol and drug rehabilitation facility.

The proposed medFICO score would be legal as long as it only includes billing data. And unlike a standard report, which only lists late medical bills, the medFICO score would reflect a history of on-time payments.

To develop its scoring system, Healthcare Analytics is collecting patient billing data from hospital systems with a combined $100 billion in annual net revenue.

Tenet executives say the scoring system could help them decide whether a given patient can pay his or her bill or if they should just write it off as uncollectible, or a "bad debt" in industry lingo.

Without a way to gauge the likelihood that patients will pay their bills, hospitals cannot comfortably invest in new projects or accurately balance expenses against revenue.

Adding up debts

Tenet, the nation's third largest hospital system, with 63 hospitals and medical centers, had $433 million in bad debt through this year's third quarter. Seventy-five percent of that bad debt was from uninsured patients and 25 percent from those with deductibles they couldn't, or wouldn't, pay, according to Steve Mooney, Tenet's senior vice president of patient financial services.

To figure out how to collect from patients, Tenet now divides them into categories based on whether they are married or single, whether they came through the emergency room or had a scheduled procedure, and whether their regular credit score is high or low.

"But the problem with the credit score is that not everybody has one," Mr. Mooney said. "We have about 40 percent of our self-pay patients who we do not get a credit score on."

Meanwhile, consumer advocates argue that given the problems arising from the current Fair Isaac credit score – such as identity theft and inaccurate scoring data – it should not become the basis for a medical version.

In an analysis of more than 500,000 individuals' credit scores, the Consumer Federation of America says it found that 29 percent were 50 points lower than they should have been.

"What if there's a mis-scoring – whether it's due to some clerical error, or due to an identity theft issue, where you have two William S. Joneses, who have similar numbers?" asked Ms. Foley. "This is the same problem we've seen in the credit industry."

Ms. Foley said a recent personal experience heightened her sensitivity to the possible dangers.

The day before she was interviewed, she said she spent more than six hours in an emergency room with her husband, who was believed to be suffering a heart attack.

"We have an HMO, but what if we didn't have health coverage?" Ms. Foley asked. "If he had a low score, would he have gotten the same type of care that he got last night?"

Mr. Mooney, of Tenet Healthcare, says the hospital business has changed over the past 30 years to take on characteristics of the retail industry. With patients expected to pay a larger share and do more comparison shopping, they soon will be able to purchase health care much like an automobile, he said.

Pamela Dixon, executive director of the World Privacy Forum, a consumer advocacy group, isn't impressed. "I don't like it; I don't like it at all. These are people's lives we're talking about. This isn't some car."



How do you feel about the private industry choosing to establish a health credit score with which to score patients and their ability to pay or not to pay for essential medical services?

"I'm sorry Mr. Richards, coverage for your cancer treatment has been declined based on your current MedFICO score. If you have any questions please consult your insurance provider."

Here's what some speculate the score will do to the private health care industry in the United States:

1. First, if physicians have access to the scoring system, the score may affect the willingness of doctors to accept someone as a patient. Does that mean the patient won’t get care? Probably not. As George Bush said last summer, “you can always go to the emergency room.” (sixteenth paragraph). But if doctors are unwilling to accept someone as a patient for routine medical problems, preventative care goes out the window and the patient is forced to wait until an “emergency” develops to get treated for the problem. Once the “emergency” is averted, the patient waits for another emergency.
2. If the score will be accessible to employers who provide health insurance, it could be used as a tool to cherry pick healthy employees in order to keep insurance costs down. If you have chronic diseases and utilize medical services excessively, who says you can’t be fired for some other reason as a pretense. If the company can access your MedFICO score before they hire you, who says the company has to hire you at all?
3. I’m not sure why hospitals would want the score. I don’t know if it would be used to put pressure on someone who hasn’t paid their bill (”You’ll ruin your MedFICO score if you don’t pay”) or if it would be used to market their services to patients who are likely to be profitable. Good MedFICO score (with lots of medical visits) + good credit score = big bucks for hospital.

http://whitecoatrants.wordpress.com/2008/01/19/a-medical-credit-score/

It's not about your health... it's all about their profits. This is where the private health care industry is considering on going here in the United States. This would be far far far worse than a universal health insurance system in the US. Ethically speaking, the Social Darwinists of the private industry are slowly creating a purely utilitarian society in which the value of your life and health is measured in $$$.

[ChristopherHall]

Another interesting article on the subject:

THE DOCTOR WILL SEE YOUR CREDIT NOW
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2008/01/the-doctor-wi-1.htm
Posted: Friday, January 18 at 04:32 am CT by Bob Sullivan

The folks who invented the credit score for lenders are hard at work developing a similar tool for hospitals and other health care providers.

The project, dubbed “MedFICO” in some early press reports, will aid hospitals in assessing a patient’s ability to pay their medical bills. But privacy advocates are worried that the notorious errors that have caused frequent criticism of the credit system will also cause trouble with any attempt to create a health-related risk score. They also fear that a low score might impact the quality of the health care that patients receive.....


For the entire article please click the link provided above.

[ChristopherHall]

I'm as serious as a heart attack. We better come together on this and support universal health insurance or our children will live in a world where the very value of their life and health will be measured in cold hard $$$$. Study and educate yourselves, it's our only hope from seeing this happen. Then choose to be an outspoken activist for universal health insurance in America. This cannot be allowed to happen.

http://www.pnhp.org/
http://americanhealthcarereform.org/
http://cthealth.server101.com/the_case_for_universal_health_care_in_the_united_s tates.htm
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/healthcareplan/summary.aspx

[StMark]

Chris, you seem just a little obsessed with all of this

[ChristopherHall]

Chris, you seem just a little obsessed with all of this

lol

I do feel passionately about it. I think it would be one of the single greatest and most positive changes for American society in our entire history.

What are your thoughts on the medFICO scores?

[ChristopherHall]

I'm going to be out of town tomorrow. I'll catch up with you guys maybe tomorrow night if I get back in town early enough.

Love and appreciate you all. God bless.

[StMark]

lol

I do feel passionately about it. I think it would be one of the single greatest and most positive changes for American society in our entire history.

What are your thoughts on the medFICO scores?

medFICO scores?? not sure what you are talking about here.
If it was posted in one of those story book post,
trust me i didn't see it :happydance TMI !!!!

[StMark]

I'm going to be out of town tomorrow. I'll catch up with you guys maybe tomorrow night if I get back in town early enough.

Love and appreciate you all. God bless.


Where are you going ?

[scotty]

Obama rally :stirpot


they are gonna bus in old folks and paying them a carton of cigarettes to testify about not being able to afford food because of the price of cancer treatments.

[ChristopherHall]

Where are you going ?

I found some down time. I'm going to visit family in Van Wert Ohio.

[helen_febus]

Universal Health Care



A short but poignant independent film on government sponsored healthcare systems. Everyone who plans to vote for our new President in 2008 NEEDS to see this.

Regardless of the person for whom they would vote. Please forward this to everyone you can think of as soon as you can.


http://www.freemarketcure.com/brainsurgery.php

Someone sent this in an e-mail this morning. Has anyone seen it?
Any comments?

Falla39
______________________________

I don't think I would like such a system.

[ReformedDave]

The USA has done so well with Medicare, Medicaid, Medigap, and Social Security that I sure do think they can handle a national health system............They can't even balance their checkbook. That's what happens when you feed the beast. It gets bigger.

[StMark]

I'm patiently waiting for Brother Ron to come back and chime in with his thoughts :happydance

[Ron]

I'm patiently waiting for Brother Ron to come back and chime in with his thoughts :happydance

Is this bait???:toofunny


Actually a dialog is when two parties are talking and listening.
Some just aren't listening & have been fed "propaganda" from the big drug, pharmaceutical & people who stand to make money on the status quo!

No one posting on here who has had "first hand" knowledge of our system has ever "dissed" what we have going--cuz they know the truth!:happydance

[ReformedDave]

Is this bait???:toofunny


Actually a dialog is when two parties are talking and listening.
Some just aren't listening & have been fed "propaganda" from the big drug, pharmaceutical & people who stand to make money on the status quo!

No one posting on here who has had "first hand" knowledge of our system has ever "dissed" what we have going--cuz they know the truth!:happydance

There are flaws in both systems.

[OP_Carl]

There are flaws in both systems.

You can't say THAT

Everybody knows socialists have the best of intentions! :toofunny

Brother Ron I'm glad things are going well for you. The Canadians and Brits I have spoken with, as well as the tales relayed to me by truck driver friends who meet Canadian truckers, all have mentioned the waiting periods and the unpleasantness of some of the other constraints.

[Ron]

You can't say THAT

Everybody knows socialists have the best of intentions! :toofunny

Brother Ron I'm glad things are going well for you. The Canadians and Brits I have spoken with, as well as the tales relayed to me by truck driver friends who meet Canadian truckers, all have mentioned the waiting periods and the unpleasantness of some of the other constraints.

An ER is not a place to take a sniffle!

I repeat, if there is a need, I go to my own Doctor or walk in clinic.
No wait.

When I broke my ankle at work in Sept & an Ambulance came is was deemed not "life threatening" so they did not speed or use the lights even though I begged.

The Paramedics did get an IV set up, the Surgeon saw me right away & I had the surgery with 30 hours only being bumped when A person started hemorrhaging.

I couldn't get surgery right away because I drank some water while waiting for the Ambulance as I felt nauseous.

Everyone has a scare story.

I have seen in the news about Hospitals dumping patients in the streets in the US!

[OP_Carl]

Everyone has a scare story.

I have seen in the news about Hospitals dumping patients in the streets in the US!

That's not a scare story. That's invigoration therapy!

:toofunny

:killinme

:blink

:hmmm

:tissue

[ChristopherHall]

medFICO scores?? not sure what you are talking about here.
If it was posted in one of those story book post,
trust me i didn't see it :happydance TMI !!!!

It was a long post. Basically a medFICO score is a medical credit score that the industry is assigning everyone to help hospitals determine your likelihood of being able to pay your medical bill. Right now they're promising it will not be used at admission, only upon discharge to keep track of your medical debt and ability to pay or not pay. Consumer advocates are arguing that once in place there's nothing to prevent hospitals, doctors, or other provider.s from checking your score upon admission and triaging you according to your ability to pay. Those with a good score may be seen first while those with a low score may be forced to wait longer for care or even transfered to a different facility for those with lower scores.

They also point out that there is nothing to prevent employers from looking up this score as part of a hiring process to try and determine if you'd be too expensive of an employee to insure.

It's like a credit score being pulled before you buy a car or a house. Accept they pull this score and keep track of it as you seek medical services.

That's the future of private health care in America. I'm making this clear right here and now. I'm for Universal Health Insurance.

[ChristopherHall]

Is this bait???:toofunny


Actually a dialog is when two parties are talking and listening.
Some just aren't listening & have been fed "propaganda" from the big drug, pharmaceutical & people who stand to make money on the status quo!

No one posting on here who has had "first hand" knowledge of our system has ever "dissed" what we have going--cuz they know the truth!:happydance

Amen. All they have is hear say, email rumors, and propaganda.

[ChristopherHall]

There are flaws in both systems.

Agreed. But Canada's is far better than ours.

[ChristopherHall]

You can't say THAT

Everybody knows socialists have the best of intentions! :toofunny

Brother Ron I'm glad things are going well for you. The Canadians and Brits I have spoken with, as well as the tales relayed to me by truck driver friends who meet Canadian truckers, all have mentioned the waiting periods and the unpleasantness of some of the other constraints.

Riiiigggghhhht. I go to Canada every year bro. I've got friends up there I can call right now and talk to them about this, again, and confirm, once more, that they've never had a wait, can go to any doctor they like, and pay far less for their coverage than we do. I know a couple attending our church right now who lived in Europe before moving here and said our system can be summed up in one word, "insanity".

Here in our system 18,000 die every year because they are denied coverage or cannot afford treatments that could have saved their lives. I'm sure that they would have taken one of those mythical waits you're talking about over death.

Also in America you can't go to any hospital you like or any doctor you desire. They have to be "in network" for most of our private plans.

Hmmmm......they are working on a medFICO to determine how profitable it will be to treat you, 18,000 people die every year because of insufficient coverage or the lack of coverage, 25,000 people declare bankruptcy every year because of medical bills, you can't go to a hospital or doctor who is "out of network", elderly people having to choose between food and the prescription drugs they need.

Bros...all those mythical horror stories and propaganda you're telling us about Canada...they sound more like the realities we are facing in the United States health care system.

[Ron]

Agreed. But Canada's is far better than ours.


Is our system perfect? No!

The principle is!

Who knows, if the Americans tackle Universal Health Care, it may be the model for the world.

[ChristopherHall]

Is our system perfect? No!

The principle is!

Who knows, if the Americans tackle Universal Health Care, it may be the model for the world.

Far too many people here in America are afraid to dream. They don't realize Americans have a tendency to revolutionize and lead when we finally get involved. I've been saying for months that when America finally does it, it will be the best system in the world. We have the benefit of looking at all the systems in place now and avoiding the pitfalls they experienced. Ron, I too think that our contribution to Universal Health Care will help some nations work out the bugs in their own systems.

But too many people aren't visionaries. They can't rise above their fears. But I've chosen to have hope. I've chosen to dream big for our country. I believe we can do it...I believe we WILL do it...and it will be a system that indeed may prove to be the best on the planet, a model, as you said. But we're going to have to overcome our fears and dream big and have hope again! The politics of the 1900's is dying. It's 2008...the future is now.

[ChristopherHall]

Ron, where you at Bro? We spend at least a week in Outlet Ontario during the Summers. We stay in a little cottage belonging to my uncle-in-law on Charleston Lake. Are you near that area?

[pelathais]

It was a long post. Basically a medFICO score is a medical credit score that the industry is assigning everyone to help hospitals determine your likelihood of being able to pay your medical bill. Right now they're promising it will not be used at admission, only upon discharge to keep track of your medical debt and ability to pay or not pay.

Which is it then? This sounds a lot like the evil SWIFT financial transactions and other "mark of the beast" horror stories. It's almost as bad as Ron's "I heard news stories of hospitals dumping people on the street in the US ..."

Yeah, right.


Consumer advocates are arguing that once in place there's nothing to prevent hospitals, doctors, or other provider.s from checking your score upon admission and triaging you according to your ability to pay. Those with a good score may be seen first while those with a low score may be forced to wait longer for care or even transfered to a different facility for those with lower scores.

They also point out that there is nothing to prevent employers from looking up this score as part of a hiring process to try and determine if you'd be too expensive of an employee to insure.

It's like a credit score being pulled before you buy a car or a house. Accept they pull this score and keep track of it as you seek medical services.

That's the future of private health care in America. I'm making this clear right here and now. I'm for Universal Health Insurance.
Chris, if the money that I have paid into Social Security had instead been invested in private mutual funds, I would be looking at retiring with millions of dollars. Instead, what I'm looking at is a huge black hole where I won't even get my money back. That's the government's "Universal Retirement Plan." It's bankrupt.

And now you want to give them the reins of our health care as well? Open your Bible, human government is the problem. Socialism is a disease that has failed wherever its been tried. Europe is dying because of it. Human beings are designed to be free. We die when we're locked in cages.

"Universal Health Insurance" is an oxymoron. The "Insurance" will be universal but the "Health" will be reserved for the fat cats. Guys like you and me will become prey to the Benny Hinns of the world because we have no hope of actually seeing a doctor.

[pelathais]

Far too many people here in America are afraid to dream. They don't realize Americans have a tendency to revolutionize and lead when we finally get involved. I've been saying for months that when America finally does it, it will be the best system in the world. We have the benefit of looking at all the systems in place now and avoiding the pitfalls they experienced. Ron, I too think that our contribution to Universal Health Care will help some nations work out the bugs in their own systems.

But too many people aren't visionaries. They can't rise above their fears. But I've chosen to have hope. I've chosen to dream big for our country. I believe we can do it...I believe we WILL do it...and it will be a system that indeed may prove to be the best on the planet, a model, as you said. But we're going to have to overcome our fears and dream big and have hope again! The politics of the 1900's is dying. It's 2008...the future is now.
My grandparents had a dream about retirement. Because of the failings of the private financial institutions during the Great Depression they placed their hope in a the new government run retirement system called Social Security.

Sure, "social security" was responsible for the deaths of 20 million in the Soviet Union, but hey! We're Americans! We can get the bugs out of the system and our "social security" will be the model that the rest of the world looks to as a shining beacon of hope.

Today, Social Security is a mess. It's neither "social" nor "security." It's just a way for the government to eat up 13% and more of my hard earned wages. And thats on top of all the other taxes I pay.

You happy guys and your "Big Government is the Answer" are going to be responsible for untold human misery and suffering if your "dreams" are ever realized. What component of FDR's "New Deal" ever worked? Nothing. And now you want to expand the program? Sad.

[ReformedDave]

Is our system perfect? No!

The principle is!

Who knows, if the Americans tackle Universal Health Care, it may be the model for the world.

What exactly is that principle?

[ReformedDave]

My grandparents had a dream about retirement. Because of the failings of the private financial institutions during the Great Depression they placed their hope in a the new government run retirement system called Social Security.

Sure, "social security" was responsible for the deaths of 20 million in the Soviet Union, but hey! We're Americans! We can get the bugs out of the system and our "social security" will be the model that the rest of the world looks to as a shining beacon of hope.

Today, Social Security is a mess. It's neither "social" nor "security." It's just a way for the government to eat up 13% and more of my hard earned wages. And thats on top of all the other taxes I pay.

You happy guys and your "Big Government is the Answer" are going to be responsible for untold human misery and suffering if your "dreams" are ever realized. What component of FDR's "New Deal" ever worked? Nothing. And now you want to expand the program? Sad.

Like I said before, America did so well managing Medicare, Medicaid, etc we sure want them to manage even more......Feed the beast.

[Ferd]

My grandparents had a dream about retirement. Because of the failings of the private financial institutions during the Great Depression they placed their hope in a the new government run retirement system called Social Security.

Sure, "social security" was responsible for the deaths of 20 million in the Soviet Union, but hey! We're Americans! We can get the bugs out of the system and our "social security" will be the model that the rest of the world looks to as a shining beacon of hope.

Today, Social Security is a mess. It's neither "social" nor "security." It's just a way for the government to eat up 13% and more of my hard earned wages. And thats on top of all the other taxes I pay.

You happy guys and your "Big Government is the Answer" are going to be responsible for untold human misery and suffering if your "dreams" are ever realized. What component of FDR's "New Deal" ever worked? Nothing. And now you want to expand the program? Sad.

So true, the only thing Social Security secures, is poverty for those who depend on it!

and what do democrats say? changing the system is BAD!. that is what democrats say.

[Ferd]

Like I said before, America did so well managing Medicare, Medicaid, etc we sure want them to manage even more......Feed the beast.

Lets add the VA, Social Security, welfare, to Medicare and Medicade.


The U. S. Governemnt is good at killing people and breaking things. that is why the military is the only part of the government that works!

As an American, I want the Governemnt to spend its time focusing on people like Al Queda...NOT my healthcare system..... I dont want to die.

[ChristopherHall]

Which is it then? This sounds a lot like the evil SWIFT financial transactions and other "mark of the beast" horror stories. It's almost as bad as Ron's "I heard news stories of hospitals dumping people on the street in the US ..."

Yeah, right.


Chris, if the money that I have paid into Social Security had instead been invested in private mutual funds, I would be looking at retiring with millions of dollars. Instead, what I'm looking at is a huge black hole where I won't even get my money back. That's the government's "Universal Retirement Plan." It's bankrupt.

And now you want to give them the reins of our health care as well? Open your Bible, human government is the problem. Socialism is a disease that has failed wherever its been tried. Europe is dying because of it. Human beings are designed to be free. We die when we're locked in cages.

"Universal Health Insurance" is an oxymoron. The "Insurance" will be universal but the "Health" will be reserved for the fat cats. Guys like you and me will become prey to the Benny Hinns of the world because we have no hope of actually seeing a doctor.

Bro, nations with universal health care are healthier than Americans. I've been to countries with universal health care. Have you?

Oh, and I provided links for you to look up medFICO. If you do some research a lot of the medical industry isn't too pleased with it either. And Ron is right, there have been instances of the poor and indigents being dropped off by cabs paid by hospital staff on the street outside clinics in poor neighborhoods. It's not all over the place, but it has happened and still does in some areas.

[Ron]

Ron, where you at Bro? We spend at least a week in Outlet Ontario during the Summers. We stay in a little cottage belonging to my uncle-in-law on Charleston Lake. Are you near that area?


I live in Vancouver, B.C. about as far west as you can get without going to an island!

[ChristopherHall]

My grandparents had a dream about retirement. Because of the failings of the private financial institutions during the Great Depression they placed their hope in a the new government run retirement system called Social Security.

Sure, "social security" was responsible for the deaths of 20 million in the Soviet Union, but hey! We're Americans! We can get the bugs out of the system and our "social security" will be the model that the rest of the world looks to as a shining beacon of hope.

Today, Social Security is a mess. It's neither "social" nor "security." It's just a way for the government to eat up 13% and more of my hard earned wages. And thats on top of all the other taxes I pay.

You happy guys and your "Big Government is the Answer" are going to be responsible for untold human misery and suffering if your "dreams" are ever realized. What component of FDR's "New Deal" ever worked? Nothing. And now you want to expand the program? Sad.

Social Security and a Universal Health Insurance system really function quite differently. The current system in Social Security COULD work if we focused on it and made some much needed changes (changes we most likely would agree upon). But the Republicans have been in control of the show for eight years, and they've done NOTHING to fix the system. Nothing. Now the Democrats, should they set the agenda and we get a Democratic President will have an opportunity to look at the system. If it cannot be fixed, privatizing and investing it properly might work. Here's a policy paper on fixing Social Security:

DLC | Blueprint Magazine | March 15, 2005
Fixing Social Security
By Will Marshall
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=125&subid=165&contentid=253231

[ChristopherHall]

Like I said before, America did so well managing Medicare, Medicaid, etc we sure want them to manage even more......Feed the beast.

Medicare and Medicaid have actually been managed quite well...unless you count what the Republicans have done to it.

[Ferd]

Medicare and Medicaid have actually been managed quite well...unless you count what the Republicans have done to it.

Wow Chris! this is unbeleavable! it only took you 19 words and 4. to come up with 2 wild eyed insane comments!

usually it takes you 15 paragraphs.

im impressed.

[ChristopherHall]

So true, the only thing Social Security secures, is poverty for those who depend on it!

and what do democrats say? changing the system is BAD!. that is what democrats say.

That only shows that you have no idea what the Democratic plan is.

Read the link I provided above and you'll see how the Democratic Leadership Council is considering an approach that will protect those coming into needing Social Security and also change how Social Security works by turning the working class into long-term investers, building capital, and savings.

The Democratic and Republican plans for reform are similar.

[ChristopherHall]

Wow Chris! this is unbeleavable! it only took you 19 words and 4. to come up with 2 wild eyed insane comments!

usually it takes you 15 paragraphs.

im impressed.

Nice personal insult. Our Medicare and Medicaid systems aren't perfect, but they are doing rather well...as long as the Republicans can refrain from cutting them again to fund pork passed for their corporate buddies.

[ChristopherHall]

I live in Vancouver, B.C. about as far west as you can get without going to an island!

Bummer. I was hoping that the next time my family was in Canada we could hook up.

[pelathais]

Social Security and a Universal Health Insurance system really function quite differently. The current system in Social Security COULD work if we focused on it and made some much needed changes (changes we most likely would agree upon). But the Republicans have been in control of the show for eight years, and they've done NOTHING to fix the system. Nothing. Now the Democrats, should they set the agenda and we get a Democratic President will have an opportunity to look at the system. If it cannot be fixed, privatizing and investing it properly might work. Here's a policy paper on fixing Social Security:

DLC | Blueprint Magazine | March 15, 2005
Fixing Social Security
By Will Marshall
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=125&subid=165&contentid=253231
Social Security has been in existence for over 70 years. During that time "Republicans have been in control of the show" just briefly from 1994 to 2006.

Remember, all bills involving funds must originate in the House (Article 1, Section 7). And, the only thing the Republicans could do when they were in control of the House was to protect the Social Security fund from the time honored depredations of the Dems by creating the so-called "lock box."

The trust fund millionaires who run the Democratic Party aren't concerned with their retirement funding. Also, members of Government Unions are exempt from the system - that's YOU from what I've read.

Why should I trust YOU to fix something that's been allowed to rob me of 13% of my hard earned wages for the length of my entire life when YOU are the principal beneficiary of this robbery?

[Ron]

Bummer. I was hoping that the next time my family was in Canada we could hook up.

That would be nice.

[scotty]

Social Security and a Universal Health Insurance system really function quite differently. The current system in Social Security COULD work if we focused on it and made some much needed changes (changes we most likely would agree upon). But the Republicans have been in control of the show for eight years, and they've done NOTHING to fix the system. Nothing. Now the Democrats, should they set the agenda and we get a Democratic President will have an opportunity to look at the system. If it cannot be fixed, privatizing and investing it properly might work. Here's a policy paper on fixing Social Security:

DLC | Blueprint Magazine | March 15, 2005
Fixing Social Security
By Will Marshall
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=125&subid=165&contentid=253231

CH you are such a hack.... The Dems have had control for the last 2 yrs and have not brought up one bill of change for SS what so ever. The Republicans pushed for SS reform in the 90's and the Dems/Clinton siad we were fear mongoring and that nothing was wrong with it. Both parties have failed SS. Bush has the best idea but they sure are not going for that because that would remove our money from the government bank rolls. Talk about wanting to help someone, Our SS would be 3 times what the benefits are now, how come Dems are not helping us there, the elderly could pay for their own healthcare...what another novel idea !!...nope that would mean the government would have no control and the Dems can't have that cause we are just too stupid to take care of ourselves, How does it feel CH to be labeled by those you support as being to ignorant to take care of yourself?

[pelathais]

Bro, nations with universal health care are healthier than Americans. I've been to countries with universal health care. Have you?

Oh, and I provided links for you to look up medFICO. If you do some research a lot of the medical industry isn't too pleased with it either. And Ron is right, there have been instances of the poor and indigents being dropped off by cabs paid by hospital staff on the street outside clinics in poor neighborhoods. It's not all over the place, but it has happened and still does in some areas.
Define "healthy." Russia has had universal health care since the day they shot the Czar in 1917, and they're a mess. China and India both have universal goverment paid health care systems and health care is non existent in many regions.

I notice that the countries that you would probably prefer to cite don't report on the "health" of their huge immigrant populations - just the rich white folk. Considering that most of those programs were built up by either colonial imperialism or through the judicious use of eugenics throughout the 20th century I'm surprised that you want us to follow their lead.

[pelathais]

Medicare and Medicaid have actually been managed quite well...unless you count what the Republicans have done to it.
Ha! C'mon Chris. The Republicans didn't even touch Social Security, Medicaid nor Medicare during their brief interregnum- except to try and set up a system to prevent the Dems from raiding these funds for their pork projects- this was Newt's famous "lockbox."

The Dems have controlled the nation's purse since FDR. The Dems invented the Federal deficit to try and pay for all of the New Deal social programs. We went completely bust with LBJ's infamous "War on Poverty" that created so much institutional poverty that we're still mired in it.

It's the Dems, bro. Blow the dust off your Constitution and read Article One, Section Seven. Who's been stealing our money? Who is the only Constitutionally empowered body to steal our money- and who has been running that show for the last 100 years, except during the brief "take over" by that 'philandering' Newt Gingrich?

And when were the books even briefly balanaced as well? Back in the 1990's when the GOP briefly held the purse. The US is really a Christian nation in this regard- we give our purse to a thief to hold - the Democratic Party.

[ChristopherHall]

Define "healthy." Russia has had universal health care since the day they shot the Czar in 1917, and they're a mess. China and India both have universal goverment paid health care systems and health care is non existent in many regions.

I notice that the countries that you would probably prefer to cite don't report on the "health" of their huge immigrant populations - just the rich white folk. Considering that most of those programs were built up by either colonial imperialism or through the judicious use of eugenics throughout the 20th century I'm surprised that you want us to follow their lead.

You're cherry picking. There are nations with very successful systems. Lying is still a sin if I remember correctly.

[ChristopherHall]

CH you are such a hack.... The Dems have had control for the last 2 yrs and have not brought up one bill of change for SS what so ever. The Republicans pushed for SS reform in the 90's and the Dems/Clinton siad we were fear mongoring and that nothing was wrong with it. Both parties have failed SS. Bush has the best idea but they sure are not going for that because that would remove our money from the government bank rolls. Talk about wanting to help someone, Our SS would be 3 times what the benefits are now, how come Dems are not helping us there, the elderly could pay for their own healthcare...what another novel idea !!...nope that would mean the government would have no control and the Dems can't have that cause we are just too stupid to take care of ourselves, How does it feel CH to be labeled by those you support as being to ignorant to take care of yourself?

Bro, you'd vote Republican if they planned on selling your family on ebay. lol

[scotty]

Bro, you'd vote Republican if they planned on selling your family on ebay. lol

Uuuuu ok :blink :blink :blink

You have a brain lapse there chris, that sounds like a response from my 12 yr old.

[Ferd]

You're cherry picking. There are nations with very successful systems. Lying is still a sin if I remember correctly.

yea, like Peru.

THEY PRIVITIZED THEIR SYSTEM

[ChristopherHall]

yea, like Peru.

THEY PRIVITIZED THEIR SYSTEM

Wow. Let's be like Peru dude. :thumbsup

[ChristopherHall]

Uuuuu ok :blink :blink :blink

You have a brain lapse there chris, that sounds like a response from my 12 yr old.

It was a joke, because you're so sold out on those guys and they've really done nothing for you.

[scotty]

It was a joke, because you're so sold out on those guys and they've really done nothing for you.

BUMP

However, you could lower taxes for those companies then the money they save they will reinvest into their company and expand it which means more jobs thus more tax revenue for the government without raising taxes!!! And it created jobs!!!! What a novel idea!!! Oh yeah, we done that....thats why my company experience an average yearly growth of 32% for the past 6 years, which in turn has trickled down to me in the form of 3 promotions totaling an 80+% increase in wages in just the past 3 years. A meeting back at the beginning of the year focused on the fact that a Democrat will probably take office next year, as such we are self limiting our growth this year to just 8 - 10% because we know that we are about to sink into a huge tax loss.

You can quote all the statistics you want but it don't jive with real life facts.

[ChristopherHall]

Scotty, most of the money the companies saved has been eaten up by the increased cost of living, a weakened dollar, and the rest they invested in overseas markets. We didn't see the big boom in jobs they promised.

Did your wages increase 80%? It's a manipulated statistic.

[Ferd]

Wow. Let's be like Peru dude. :thumbsup

as it relates to social security? you bet. Pruvians retire with a higher standard of living than they had during their working years because their system is privatized.


would to God we had done this in the 1960's When the beloved Ronald Wilson Reagan said we should!

[scotty]

Scotty, most of the money the companies saved has been eaten up by the increased cost of living, a weakened dollar, and the rest they invested in overseas markets. We didn't see the big boom in jobs they promised.

Did your wages increase 80%? It's a manipulated statistic.

yoo hooo..thats not a statitic , that is my personal paycheck...yes sir 80% increase in 3 yrs....and I watched the same thing happen around me. you work in government, out here in the real world we had job growth and we did great.

[Ferd]

yoo hooo..thats not a statitic , that is my personal paycheck...yes sir 80% increase in 3 yrs....and I watched the same thing happen around me. you work in government, out here in the real world we had job growth and we did great.


well, I cant say 80% over 3 years but it sure has been pretty nice!

my pay has increased quite a bit over the last 3 years. I would say in the neighborhood of 22%? that aint bad.

[pelathais]

You're cherry picking. There are nations with very successful systems. Lying is still a sin if I remember correctly.
No lies here, bro. You're cherry picking and... uhm prevaricating. Instead of name calling, why don't you just graciously concede the point and admit that "universal health care," when it has been implemented in large countries (with populations in excess of 250 million people) has always been a failure.

And that the whole Keyensian scheme of social welfare has been a failure in Europe. It's easy to do. I will freely admit the same point- and do so without the childish name calling.

[scotty]

well, I cant say 80% over 3 years but it sure has been pretty nice!

my pay has increased quite a bit over the last 3 years. I would say in the neighborhood of 22%? that aint bad.

Sorry, must be a Texas thing...lol jk

we have grown by leaps and bounds, opened up two more facilities in the past 5 years. Been hiring left and right, got new insurance plans. etc.

[ChristopherHall]

as it relates to social security? you bet. Pruvians retire with a higher standard of living than they had during their working years because their system is privatized.


would to God we had done this in the 1960's When the beloved Ronald Wilson Reagan said we should!

Well, be careful. Scotty might tell you to move to Peru because you're unworthy to call yourself an American.

Hey, if Peru has figured Social Security out, I'd have no issues with looking into how they did it. But universal health insurance is a different animal. I don't think America's will be exactly like any other nation's on earth. But I think it will be one of the best, if not the best.

[ChristopherHall]

yoo hooo..thats not a statitic , that is my personal paycheck...yes sir 80% increase in 3 yrs....and I watched the same thing happen around me. you work in government, out here in the real world we had job growth and we did great.


Maybe I'm in the wrong field. What do you do for a living?

[Rico]

Bro, nations with universal health care are healthier than Americans.

I'd say that has more to do with diet than the healthcare system.

[ChristopherHall]

No lies here, bro. You're cherry picking and... uhm prevaricating. Instead of name calling, why don't you just graciously concede the point and admit that "universal health care," when it has been implemented in large countries (with populations in excess of 250 million people) has always been a failure.

And that the whole Keyensian scheme of social welfare has been a failure in Europe. It's easy to do. I will freely admit the same point- and do so without the childish name calling.

I think we could pull it off. We're Americans. Well, since Scotty stripped me of my right to call myself an American I guess I should say, you're Americans.

[ChristopherHall]

I'd say that has more to do with diet than the healthcare system.

Well, I'm not convinced that's entirely the case. When you see the doctor more frequently than your American counter part, you're far more educated about your health and more likely to eat properly. People don't just wake up thinking, "I think I'll eat better than the American's today." No, in nations with universal coverage they see their doctor far more regularly than Americans do causing them to be more health conscious.

[scotty]

I think we could pull it off. We're Americans. Well, since Scotty stripped me of my right to call myself an American I guess I should say, you're Americans.

Yes we are , and we americans can do it ourselves, we don't need governments help. That is what America was founded on. Freedom from government to live as we will.

[ChristopherHall]

Yes we are , and we americans can do it ourselves, we don't need governments help. That is what America was founded on. Freedom from government to live as we will.ue][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]


That's easy to say. I hope you never find yourself in the place millions of hardworking Americans are finding themselves in.

[Ferd]

Yes we are , and we americans can do it ourselves, we don't need governments help. That is what America was founded on. Freedom from government to live as we will.


that is what it used to be about.

it seems to me that now being an American is about finding someone else to be responsible for you.

[Rico]

Well, I'm not convinced that's entirely the case. When you see the doctor more frequently than your American counter part, you're far more educated about your health and more likely to eat properly. People don't just wake up thinking, "I think I'll eat better than the American's today." No, in nations with universal coverage they see their doctor far more regularly than Americans do causing them to be more health conscious.

Brother, the food in this country is very much overprocessed and loaded with chemicals. The food in other countries is much "closer to the ground it came from" than what we eat. In this country fast food is king. I would very much like for you to post some examples of countries where people see their doctors more frequently than we do and where they have better access to the latest technology and medical advances.

[Ferd]

That's easy to say. I hope you never find yourself in the place millions of hardworking Americans are finding themselves in.

find themselves in or made decisions that led them to where they are?

Like me a few years ago when I couldnt afford health coverage because I didnt finish college and had to work my way thru a tuff spot and took jobs that didnt have coverage because the long term prospects were better than taking jobs that would have had coverage but would not have had the same horizon?


found themselves in? really? that is what you are going to stick with?

Dude, we arent rich kids that were born with silver spoons in our mouths. we are hard working Middle class Americans who have worked for everything we have ever gotten and resent your team trying to take it away from us.

[Pragmatist]

Well, I'm not convinced that's entirely the case. When you see the doctor more frequently than your American counter part, you're far more educated about your health and more likely to eat properly. People don't just wake up thinking, "I think I'll eat better than the American's today." No, in nations with universal coverage they see their doctor far more regularly than Americans do causing them to be more health conscious.

You think people seeing the doctor more frequently is going to cause them to eat better???

I think the majority of Americans are well aware of the fact that they don't eat well, and that is a CHOICE they make. It has nothing to do with how often they do or do not see a doctor.

And for a personal anecdote, my husband and I rarely go to the doctor. We eat a healthy diet, exercise, have NO chronic conditions and very rarely even get a cold. We don't need a doctor to tell us how to eat or to make us conscious of our health.

[ChristopherHall]

that is what it used to be about.

it seems to me that now being an American is about finding someone else to be responsible for you.

But that's not what universal health insurance is about. I'll explain it again Ferd. Your premiums are rising higher and higher primarily because more and more people are uninsured and not able to pay their medical bills. Health care providers hand this loss down by raising the cost of care. Your insurance company has to cover that, so they raise your premiums. Ferd...the reason your premiums are so high is because your paying for those who can't pay their bills.

A Universal System is about everyone contributing something to the cost of their health care. Everyone would be paying something into the system and since providers would be being paid, they'd have no loss to hand down. Since there would be no loss to hand down, private insurers would be able to lower your premiums.

Do you like paying for millions of uninsured people with higher premiums or do you think all Americans should pay something into the system that provides them health care?

[pelathais]

That's easy to say. I hope you never find yourself in the place millions of hardworking Americans are finding themselves in.
You are a very fortunate American. Very few of us come from families that can afford a Canadian Lake House. If I could just get that 13% of my earnings returned to me that FDR took away, maybe I would have some savings. Oh, and I've noticed that you don't have any idea what I'm talking about when I mention that 13% of my income that's missing each week.

You see, Government employees have excempted themselves from the rapacious scouring of their Democratic Congress people. The rest of us pay that much in Social Security withholdings. You however, get to satiate yourself at the public funded trough. I can only dream of that kind of luxury.

Instead, after working hard my entire life I'll be eating Kibbles 'n Bits because Union protected Government commissars stole from me and are now sipping Moulson's with their Lefty comrades at their Canadian dachas.

[ChristopherHall]

Brother, the food in this country is very much overprocessed and loaded with chemicals. The food in other countries is much "closer to the ground it came from" than what we eat. In this country fast food is king. I would very much like for you to post some examples of countries where people see their doctors more frequently than we do and where they have better access to the latest technology and medical advances.

Food really isn't all that different in other countries. But yes, fast food is king here. Why do you think that is? I think it's the rat race of American society.

One thing a sister of ours said when she returned from Canada (her company is re-locating to Ottawa) was how she was so impressed with how they don't live this hurried rat race like culture. I just laughed and said, "It's something isn't it."

Do you think that our hurried culture contributes somewhat to this?

[Pragmatist]

But that's not what universal health insurance is about. I'll explain it again Ferd. Your premiums are rising higher and higher primarily because more and more people are uninsured and not able to pay their medical bills. Health care providers hand this loss down by raising the cost of care. Your insurance company has to cover that, so they raise your premiums. Ferd...the reason your premiums are so high is because your paying for those who can't pay their bills.

A Universal System is about everyone contributing something to the cost of their health care. Everyone would be paying something into the system and since providers would be being paid, they'd have no loss to hand down. Since there would be no loss to hand down, private insurers would be able to lower your premiums.

Do you like paying for millions of uninsured people with higher premiums or do you think all Americans should pay something into the system that provides them health care?

Given the choice between paying higher premiums and having the government in charge, I choose the higher premiums. :)

[Ferd]

But that's not what universal health insurance is about. I'll explain it again Ferd. Your premiums are rising higher and higher primarily because more and more people are uninsured and not able to pay their medical bills. Health care providers hand this loss down by raising the cost of care. Your insurance company has to cover that, so they raise your premiums. Ferd...the reason your premiums are so high is because your paying for those who can't pay their bills.

A Universal System is about everyone contributing something to the cost of their health care. Everyone would be paying something into the system and since providers would be being paid, they'd have no loss to hand down. Since there would be no loss to hand down, private insurers would be able to lower your premiums.

Do you like paying for millions of uninsured people with higher premiums or do you think all Americans should pay something into the system that provides them health care?
I dont care how many times you want to explain what universal healthcare is about. Im not reading.

I am opposed to any system that makes me pay for someone else.
I am opposed to any system that leads to a single payer system
I am opposed to the government telling me what to do.

I am opposed to all of the proposed solutions to getting everyone in America covered by health insurance that have been put forth by democrats. you cannot explain communism in a way that I will appreciate. period.

[scotty]

But that's not what universal health insurance is about. I'll explain it again Ferd. Your premiums are rising higher and higher primarily because more and more people are uninsured and not able to pay their medical bills. Health care providers hand this loss down by raising the cost of care. Your insurance company has to cover that, so they raise your premiums. Ferd...the reason your premiums are so high is because your paying for those who can't pay their bills.

A Universal System is about everyone contributing something to the cost of their health care. Everyone would be paying something into the system and since providers would be being paid, they'd have no loss to hand down. Since there would be no loss to hand down, private insurers would be able to lower your premiums.

Do you like paying for millions of uninsured people with higher premiums or do you think all Americans should pay something into the system that provides them health care?

NO NO NO.....We don't want it, you can explain it till your blue in the face and we will keep explaining our point. It is feeding a beast that is already too big and out of control, it is stealing from me to give to those who want to live off of me. And last but not least in order to get it I have to vote in a candidate who will not stop with UHI but will continue to increase government spending and raise my taxes. NO NO NO

[ChristopherHall]

Given the choice between paying higher premiums and having the government in charge, I choose the higher premiums. :)

Hey, a lot of Americans can't afford it. It's not right to make them choose between living with a roof over their heads or having health insurance. Eventually the premiums would rise until even more cannot afford insurance, and then they'd rise more...until even you're unable to afford insurance.

I assume you don't have kids. I have to have health insurance for my son and my wife. It's my duty as a father to see to it that they can see the doctor when they need to.

[Ferd]

NO NO NO.....We don't want it, you can explain it till your blue in the face and we will keep explaining our point. It is feeding a beast that is already too big and out of control, it is stealing from me to give to those who want to live off of me. And last but not least in order to get it I have to vote in a candidate who will not stop with UHI but will continue to increase government spending and raise my taxes. NO NO NO

sucker! your read it! LOL!

[pelathais]

Brother, the food in this country is very much overprocessed and loaded with chemicals. The food in other countries is much "closer to the ground it came from" than what we eat. In this country fast food is king. I would very much like for you to post some examples of countries where people see their doctors more frequently than we do and where they have better access to the latest technology and medical advances.
After my recent health care crisis I'm inclined to agree with you. The over abundance of the protein gluten which becomes highly concentrated in processed wheat flour was literally poisoning me.

I see the effects of this poison on many other people in public bathrooms. It's something that is really nasty to notice, but once you've been there and diagnosed you can recognize other sufferers.

[ChristopherHall]

I dont care how many times you want to explain what universal healthcare is about. Im not reading.

I am opposed to any system that makes me pay for someone else.

But you're already paying for someone else. That's why your premiums are so high.

I am opposed to any system that leads to a single payer system

In other words your against single individuals paying something into the system to support their own health care.

I am opposed to the government telling me what to do.

Like how you're told you can't see a doctor or go to a hospital because it's "out of network"?

I am opposed to all of the proposed solutions to getting everyone in America covered by health insurance that have been put forth by democrats. you cannot explain communism in a way that I will appreciate. period.

You're just confused bro. This isn't Communism.

[ChristopherHall]

NO NO NO.....We don't want it, you can explain it till your blue in the face and we will keep explaining our point. It is feeding a beast that is already too big and out of control, it is stealing from me to give to those who want to live off of me. And last but not least in order to get it I have to vote in a candidate who will not stop with UHI but will continue to increase government spending and raise my taxes. NO NO NO

Your premiums are already so high primarily because you're paying for increasing numbers of uninsured people not paying their bills. Bro...if you really want people shouldering more of their own weight...single payer is the way to go.

[pelathais]

I dont care how many times you want to explain what universal healthcare is about. Im not reading.

I am opposed to any system that makes me pay for someone else.
I am opposed to any system that leads to a single payer system
I am opposed to the government telling me what to do.

I am opposed to all of the proposed solutions to getting everyone in America covered by health insurance that have been put forth by democrats. you cannot explain communism in a way that I will appreciate. period.
I would be proud to stand in a fight beside a Texan who spoke like that.

[scotty]

sucker! your read it! LOL!


Leave me alone.....LOL:tvhappy:toofunny

[scotty]

I would be proud to stand in a fight beside a Texan who spoke like that.


Don't swell his head any bigger than it already is....

[pelathais]

Don't swell his head any bigger than it already is....
But that's first nice thing I've said about a Texan in I can't remember how long! http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[scotty]

But that's first nice thing I've said about a Texan in I can't remember how long! http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/images/icons/icon10.gif


ssssshhhhhhh....

great now he is really special....of all the Texans to change you it had to be him?!?!?!? :stirpot

[ChristopherHall]

Why do you guys enjoy for paying for 50 million free loaders who aren't paying anything into the system?

At least in Canada everyone pays something toward their health care coverage.

[ChristopherHall]

I'm tired of paying for the uninsured. It's time we all pay into the system for our health care. Every last one of us.

[scotty]

I'm tired of paying for the uninsured. It's time we all pay into the system for our health care. Every last one of us.

Nope....don't want it

don't like it , move.

You want a system that way then why not move to one of all the countries that have it instead of trying to force the one country that don't want it.

[pelathais]

Why do you guys enjoy for paying for 50 million free loaders who aren't paying anything into the system?

At least in Canada everyone pays something toward their health care coverage.
I'm already paying your "fair share" of the Social Security burden to provide for your aged family members- while you pay NOTHING! And the "free loaders" are our neighbors and brothers. If misfortune befalls them during a period of time when they're between insurance providers Americans are the kind of people who step up and make up the difference. That's how the private sector works.

We don't have Union thugs to enforce "fairness" for us. Instead, we take our lumps and try to soften the blow that others might feel. It's called compassion - and it can never be legislated. Either you care, or you don't. We do.

We paid for those conjoined twins (http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-06-16-twins_x.htm) to be expensively seperated when the social welfare system of oil rich Mexico refused to care for them. We feed starving millions around the world even though that means higher food prices here at home for Americans. The list is really endless.

[AmazingGrace]

Nope....don't want it

don't like it , move.

You want a system that way then why not move to one of all the countries that have it instead of trying to force the one country that don't want it.

And we can all sing... the world would be a better place... LOL

[scotty]

I'm already paying your "fair share" of the Social Security burden to provide for your aged family members- while you pay NOTHING! And the "free loaders" are our neighbors and brothers. If misfortune befalls them during a period of time when they're between insurance providers Americans are the kind of people who step up and make up the difference. That's how the private sector works.

We don't have Union thugs to enforce "fairness" for us. Instead, we take our lumps and try to soften the blow that others might feel. It's called compassion - and it can never be legislated. Either you care, or you don't. We do.

Your alright,,,

I don't care what Ferd says about you...:stirpot

[Nina]

I would be proud to stand in a fight beside a Texan who spoke like that.



Brother,

Ron Paul is from Texas and feels the same as Ferd here.

Nina

[pelathais]

I'm tired of paying for the uninsured. It's time we all pay into the system for our health care. Every last one of us.
Then start by paying your "fair share" of the Social Security taxes. I'll take you a lot more seriously when you do that. I'm paying for YOUR free loading ways, Commissar. http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[pelathais]

Brother,

Ron Paul is from Texas and feels the same as Ferd here.

Nina
Nina, you know that I love you as if you were my own blood kin sister!

But Ron Paul...? LOL!

Sorry... I was making an exception for my Brother Ferd- not opening the flood gates for every looney from the Lone Star State; from Ross Perot to Ron Paul to what next? For AFF's IAINTMOVING? :toofunny

[Ferd]

Your premiums are already so high primarily because you're paying for increasing numbers of uninsured people not paying their bills. Bro...if you really want people shouldering more of their own weight...single payer is the way to go.

LOL! you keep arguing that single payer isnt what is being proposed but you say that single payer is the way to go.


now both may be true, but single payer means government mandated price controls and NO COMPITITION

that is the number one recipe for disaster!

and single payer in England has led to such things as turning sheets over instead of washing them to cut costs and other nice debates like not treating fat people for fat related issues because they got themselves fat.

YOU are the one who is confused...and is looking for a hand out.

[Ferd]

Nina, you know that I love you as if you were my own blood kin sister!

But Ron Paul...? LOL!

Sorry... I was making an exception for my Brother Ferd- not opening the flood gates for every looney from the Lone Star State; from Ross Perot to Ron Paul to what next? For AFF's IAINTMOVING? :toofunny

thank you. I was getting worried that I had just gone insane.

whew! Ron Paul is a first class nut.

[Nina]

Nina, you know that I love you as if you were my own blood kin sister!

But Ron Paul...? LOL!

Sorry... I was making an exception for my Brother Ferd- not opening the flood gates for every looney from the Lone Star State; from Ross Perot to Ron Paul to what next? For AFF's IAINTMOVING? :toofunny


Well Brother,

I mean this in a good way, You sound a lot like Ron Paul, fiscally speaking.

:happydance Nina

[Rico]

But that's not what universal health insurance is about. I'll explain it again Ferd. Your premiums are rising higher and higher primarily because more and more people are uninsured and not able to pay their medical bills. Health care providers hand this loss down by raising the cost of care. Your insurance company has to cover that, so they raise your premiums. Ferd...the reason your premiums are so high is because your paying for those who can't pay their bills.

A Universal System is about everyone contributing something to the cost of their health care. Everyone would be paying something into the system and since providers would be being paid, they'd have no loss to hand down. Since there would be no loss to hand down, private insurers would be able to lower your premiums.

Do you like paying for millions of uninsured people with higher premiums or do you think all Americans should pay something into the system that provides them health care?

This all sounds good, but it's off the mark. The reason premiums are as high as they are is because the healthcare system in this country is profit driven. It's all about making money. Insurance companies are in business to make money, period. Granted, the uninsured are part of the problem, but they're not the sole reason why premiums are as high as they are. Greed is the reason.

[pelathais]

This all sounds good, but it's off the mark. The reason premiums are as high as they are is because the healthcare system in this country is profit driven. It's all about making money. Insurance companies are in business to make money, period. Granted, the uninsured are part of the problem, but they're not the sole reason why premiums are as high as they are. Greed is the reason.
Most of the hospitals in the US, the place where most of the expensive healthcare is given are not-for-profit. The insurance plans are a mixed bag. My wife is a senior manager in the nation's largest not-for-profit hospital accounts payable system. Yet our health insurance provider there is the largest private for-profit entity, Blue Cross/Blue Shield. Looking at their numbers I see them greedily raking about 5% into their net income. Sheesh, you wonder how they stay in business.

The largest HMO in the country is Kaiser (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaiser_Permanente) Permanente and they have $34.4 billion in operating revenue with about $1.4 billion of net income. Assuming that they pay their "fair share" of the taxes, the share holders must receive something under 3% on total revenue. Those are slim margins. Not much room for greed here.

For comparison purposes, my employer - a privately held IT services provider operates on a profit margin of between 25 - 30 percent. And no one has called them "greedy." Hey, they took me in from off the streets, they must have some heart. http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

But those are big numbers overall in the healthcare field. And what's more, the entire U.S. healthcare industry equates to something like 20% of the entire US economy. One fifth! That's huge. If a single political party could get their hands on one fifth of the largest economy in the world, then they would become the most powerful political force in the world.

Ah... now we see where the greed really lies. The free market (more or less; often less) US health care system is open and entrepeneurs can offer services like medical billing and record keeping services. A lot of the "work from home" radio comercials direct people into these programs.

Also, a doctor can hang his or her shingle up anywhere they want. If they prefer a rural setting and don't mind a bit less income, then that's where they go. If they're a hard charging alpha type and want big bucks and the cutting edge then they can go to any city they want. That's freedom.

[pelathais]

But that's not what universal health insurance is about. I'll explain it again Ferd. Your premiums are rising higher and higher primarily because more and more people are uninsured and not able to pay their medical bills. Health care providers hand this loss down by raising the cost of care. Your insurance company has to cover that, so they raise your premiums. Ferd...the reason your premiums are so high is because your paying for those who can't pay their bills.

A Universal System is about everyone contributing something to the cost of their health care. Everyone would be paying something into the system and since providers would be being paid, they'd have no loss to hand down. Since there would be no loss to hand down, private insurers would be able to lower your premiums.

Do you like paying for millions of uninsured people with higher premiums or do you think all Americans should pay something into the system that provides them health care?
Ferd's premiums have been rising dramatically since the 1980's for a variety of reasons. One of the biggest factors was the operating expense of the new imaging devices and other new technical gadgetry. The same things that save our lives also eat a hole in our wallets. A lot of that increase has been mitigated by the predictable leveling off of costs that you see in all the other electronics type industries. But there was a huge hiccup that put a lot of providers out of business.

This also led to consolidation and other instabilities in the industry. It was a bumpy time. Also, we were faced with expensive new diseases like AIDS and obesity. Added to that, we found ways of keeping cancer patients alive longer - that's a very expensive proposition; but not one that I hope to have to debate to justify the expense.

We have an aging population- that's going to be increasingly expensive. And we have illegal immigrants who are treated for free and disproportionately take away from our common pool of resources. But I've noticed that your DNC rhetoric carefully avoids that issue.

The most galling medical expense that I'm paying for right now is Democratic Presidential candidate John Edward's $20 million mansion. He made over $200 million dollars telling juries that silicone breast implants were unsafe. That was all a scam and bogus "science." Silicone is now right back on the market again and being implanted. But Edwards and the Dems get to keep the $200 million.

And now, in addition to telling us how to live, we see him operating a Hedge Fund that funnels billions of dollars off shore into a variety of tax havens just like the Kennedys have used to years to protect their moonshine money from the prohibition era "revenuers."

The Dems have been scamming and robbing us for generations. They founded the gangland underworld in the Northeast and then founded Las Vegas to move it out west. They invented American politival corruption with Boss Tweed and Tammeny Hall and stole 22 electoral votes in the fraudulant elections in King County, Washington and Milwaukee, WI, in 2004.

"Universal Coverage" will not address any of these problems. It will only serve to fund more of them.

[Pragmatist]

Hey, a lot of Americans can't afford it. It's not right to make them choose between living with a roof over their heads or having health insurance. Eventually the premiums would rise until even more cannot afford insurance, and then they'd rise more...until even you're unable to afford insurance.

I assume you don't have kids. I have to have health insurance for my son and my wife. It's my duty as a father to see to it that they can see the doctor when they need to.

We do have a sweet baby girl and we have individual insurance. We have a high deductible plan and pay most expenses out of pocket so we are very aware of how much health care costs. We need a more market driven health care system, rather than a government operated one.