Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleLETTER TO THE EDITOR:
Obamacare will cause our national debt to skyrocket
Saturday, Nov. 27, 2010 | 2:02 a.m.
Regarding John Esperian’s Nov. 19 letter to the editor, headlined “Boehner is so wrong about health care”:
Esperian cites an example from Arizona in which a patient was denied a heart transplant because of the state of Arizona’s enormous debt. Well, Republican House leader John Boehner has it exactly right.
The implementation of Obamacare will cause the United States to face the highest debt load in the history of the country. The myth that adding millions of people to Medicare and saving money has been debunked.
Obamacare will be the most costly entitlement program in history and cause the national debt to soar. Private insurance companies will be driven out of business and the citizens of this country will face the Arizona situation day after day. Donald Berwick, the new “czar” of Medicare, is on record saying that care will have to be rationed as fiscal assessments are made concerning individual patients.
This massive expansion of government control over health care will cause exactly the situation Esperian describes to become the rule as opposed to the exception. We as Americans cannot afford to put the government in charge of these “life and death” decisions — literally!
Discussion: 36 comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
- Photos: Olivia Culpo, 20, of Rhode Island is crowned 2012 Miss USA at Planet Hollywood
- US Navy hopes stealth ship answers a rising China
- Learning about Electric Daisy Carnival fans will help Las Vegas court them
- On the horizon: A quick look at projects poised to shape downtown
- Clark PG Kentrell Washington heading to Hofstra basketball
Everything Under the Sun
Blogs
The Kats Report
Joe Pesci remembers his own honeymoon in Vegas -- meeting the Rat Pack
Las Vegas Philharmonic says search for new music director to begin 'immediately' (1 Comment)
With Shenandoah project stalled, Wayne Newton hits back legally (7 Comments)
Where does a Playmate play when she turns 21? Vegas! (3 Comments)
Ice Ice Billy
The road to six-toed cats and Mayor Bubba
The Kats Report
David Itkin tells L.V. Philharmonic officials he's on his way out (14 Comments)
Diamond Dave sells it well as Van Halen pours out the power at MGM Grand (2 Comments)
- Locally owned and independent since 1950; Winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, best news website in the nation & DuPont Award for broadcast journalism
lady gaga at his best, twisting the facts to suit his agenda which is to eliminate social security and medicare. joe, where were you when bush was pouring billions down the drain in iraq or on wall street? its time you took that 'mission accomplished' banner down and re-enter the world of reality.
Joe - Don't let any facts get in the way of your opinions. Here are a few facts to consider.
Every industrialized country in the world except the United States has universal health care. The majority of them have a "single payer" system.
The United States spends about 17% of its Gross Domestic Product on healthcare. No on else spends more than 10.5% and they outlive Americans by 2-3 years.
"Don't Care" is not a viable alternative to what you call Obamacare.
If you worry about healthcare being rationed, I would suggest that excluding one-sixth of our citizens from healthcare is not the answer. The answer is more healthcare assets.
If you think paying $1.00 in insurance premiums to get 70 cents worth of health care benefits is a good deal, recheck your math
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
March 2010
"The CBO estimates the legislation will reduce the deficit by $143 billion over the ten years from 2010 through 2019. In the following decade, 2020 through 2029, it estimates that the legislation will reduce the deficit by an estimated one-half of 1 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), or about $1.3 trillion. CBO also anticipates that health reform "would probably continue to reduce budget deficits relative to those under current law in subsequent decades, assuming that all of its provisions continue to be fully implemented."
Again facts mean nothing to those on the right. It seems the CBO is only correct when the Republicans are in control, all other times the bipartisan CBO is incorrect.
I see PISCES41 has done his homework, too bad a few of you others don't and use Fox as your news source, well done PISCES41.
I am of the strong belief that Republican/Tea Party types have simply lost their collective minds.
When money becomes the first priority and replaces doing what is right for the health, safety and welfare of people, we will lose all ability to become a nation anymore.
There are approximately 98 people who require specialized care in Arizona. And it has been yanked away from them. Because of money concerns.
The outcome of this decision has been written because of this action.
Those 98 people will die.
These, my friends, are the death panels that Sara Palin and Chuck Grassley were talking about.
I am so tired of a select few people with nutball thinking processes pushing an agenda constantly. And coming up with lame excuses why they are right because of their fanatical religious and political zealousness.
Painting national health care reform as some insiduous plot and labeling it as "Obamacare," as if it to imply by using that Tea Party labelled rhetorical word that this is a diabolical plan created by that evil African American President to destroy America and our very existence, is incredibly stupid. I am very sure that President Obama and his administration, when they enacted legislation that guarantees every single American possesses the inalienable right (not privilege, right) to have affordable, comprehensive and readily available health care, did not sign this into law because he wanted his name on it. He has shown he only wants the American people to be the beneficiaries and proud owners of it, fixing a broken system and intending for all of us to never, ever be victimized again.
Right wingnuts don't run this country. They may think they do, but they don't. The American people run it.
The Republican/Tea Party's trend of prioritizing money being more important than America's greatest commodity (people) is incredibly ridiculous. And dangerous. And the epitome of hypocrisy too. Republican/Tea Party types all scream to save money, but the only legislation they are good at performing is to start wars and make tax cuts for the upper 2 percent filthy rich...BOTH AT THE SAME TIME! There is no art to that kind of diplomacy. ANYONE could do that. Take the money away here so that it can be foolishly spent elsewhere. Utter madness.
Not only on a national level, but on a State level now. Republican/Tea Party incompetence continues.
One thing for sure is that I really, really feel sorry for the common taxpayers in Arizona. Because idiots have taken control of the State Government there. And they are, either directly or indirectly, going to cause deaths to occur. It is now a given fact that in Arizona, the government has flip flopped in the way how it is supposed to be working. The people serve the politicians. Not the other way around.
Awesome post ColinFromLasVegas, thank you very much.
Let's see...who should I believe, a delusional teatard like Schillmoeller, or the non-partisan CBO who says that it will actually save money?
But hey, give the Con a bone...at least he didn't link to a Cato study or a Rasmussen poll this time.
The Bush Wars = two trillion dollars, the prescription drug Bill, that was a hand out to drug companies by the Bush regime will cost a trillion as well.
If Europe and much of Asian can provide medical care for all (and places like Chile) so can we.
Canada has 8% unemployment and Australia has 5%, and they both have national medical care.
The author has absorbed the drug-addled propaganda of the liberloonytoonians and dittoheads.
People like Sherman Fredrick over at the other paper gets a make work "consultant job" so he can retain his medical care despite his major "pre-existing conditions." How many part time employees do you know get full medical coverage? The elite carve out exceptions for their fellow travelers.
gogo; you ought to write a letter to the editor... wait... YOU DID!
Joe - Thanks for quoting the Wall Street Journal. They are certainly champions of health care for all! What the WSJ really reflects is an attitude in this country that healthcare is a business and that it has nothing to do with healing, nothing to do with the welfare of citizens, nothing to do with alleviating human misery or advancing the human condition. Since the American Medical Association backed helthcare reform, maybe they are a better judge than Wall Street stock peddlers.
gogo - "First, we hear the ususal mantra about the "wars" which has absolutely NOTHING to do with the cost of health care."
It just goes to show how out of touch with reality you are.
Where do these veterans get treated? Not all of them access the VA, and many of them can't afford health insurance right now. If they show up in emergency rooms their treatment is passed off to tax payers, not insurance companies.
Which brings me to another point. Why are we subsidizing insurance and pharma companies when they are turning record profits?
WSJ, owned by Ruppert Murdoch, that says it all. Remember, these were the people who said auto workers were making $70 an hour or $145,600 a year.
If that is your arguement, why is it the CBO is only correct when the Republicans use them as a source of information?
"THe VA is NOT included in the "Obamacare" law - making your point, Vernos, even less consequential!"
Did you bother reading what I posted? I don't know about your comprehension skills, you comment on what is not written.
Joe, an insurance requirement doesn't put insurance companies out of business. Countries like Switzerland have had mandatory health insurance requirement for decades. Swiss insurance companies have some of the strongest balance sheets in the world. Programs like Medicare and Medicaid are already paying for the bulk of all the major medical procedures taking place in the United States. This includes heart-lung operations and transplants, joint replacements, stroke care, as well as many other ailments.
The new law is designed to address the issues of the tens of millions of Americans that are sick and can't get insurance, almost universally once illness hits Americans exhaust all of their financial resources, and up impoverished and in bankruptcy court or on welfare. As of 2007 medical default rates were running at about 8%. This translates to over $600 million a day. In addition medical related bankruptcies over the last decade have run in the countless millions.
You know what's going to happen to all of this debt that is being created around the world? At some point the finance ministers are going to push a button and make most of it disappear. Interest rates and currencies will adjust. There will be adjustments to trade policy that will be the end of it. The same way millions of Americans are adjusting to skyhigh mortgages that they can't pay.
My parents and grandparents lived through major upheavals in Germany prior to and after World War II in which this was done. The German people adjusted, the world adjusted and that was the end of it. Germany, because of its strong manufacturing base is still has one of the strongest economies in the world even though there have been numerous major currency and debt upheavals in the country.
The premise that countries around the world will be able to pay back the massive amount of debt that is being created to provide for the aging populations of the world is ridiculous at it's face. Our kids and grandkids are going to pay back trillions of dollars in debts? Mine can't even pay for gas.
Republicancare has trounced the economy and run up the debt. Talk is cheap, Republicans always talk debt when they are out of power but once in power they spend like crazy, don't tax the rich, and borrow from the Chinese.
By the way, Since when did it become so "American" to be a greedy pig?
If you make less thank 250K and vote Republican you are just Karl Roves pawn...
We all know a puppet is minipulated by strings, and a muppet is controlled by a person's hand.
I have a new word, "Fuppet", a person minipulated by Fox News.
The opinions posted herein reflect not only a difference of opinion regarding WHAT the alleged "RIGHTS" are for providing Health Care to the masses, but also a difference of opinion (misreading) of what the U.S. Constitution says our "RIGHTS" are. For one, we do NOT have a RIGHT to health care.
So why has this issue of Health Care become so contentious? There could be other ways to help indigent people - such as "street corner clinics." With positive thinking, we may be able to agree on some form of ensuring health care is available to those who cannot otherwise afford it. But the U.S. Constitution says we should "...PROMOTE (not PROVIDE for) the General Welfare..." of the nation. And we should be able to do this without bankrupting our economy, or destroying our current health care system.
From reading the postings herein, most of the impassioned rhetoric herein seems to say the government (taxpayers) should PAY for the health care of indigent people." That "one size fits all." Obama believes some people will not want to purchase Health Care Insurance - so, he will FORCE them to do so. This is the ONLY WAY he can work. But this is not economically feasible. Just "do the math." We cannot SPEND more than REVENUE (taxes) received!
WE NEVER DISCUSS the Obama/democratic IDEOLOGY behind such Health Care distributions - which is to "share the wealth of the nation." Like it or not, "egalitarianism" is NOT our form of government. Congress is supposed to write laws according to the will of the majority of the people; not just a segment. THAT is where "ObamaCare" has failed. Further, President Obama repeatedly said that health care reform would not "cost any citizen one dime," and "if you like your current health care plan, you can keep it." Well, he has not kept his word.
Now what happens to the people who believed what he said, to the mandates of the U.S. Constitution, to the exploding deficit of our economy? Americans are "Endowed by our Creator" to be able to go get what we want or need. But if we fail to do so, it is not incumbent on THE REST OF THE NATION to pay for the failure of others to act in their own best interests. America offers freedom and opportunity - NOT gifts tantamount to a welfare State.
This does not mean we should not have "health care, welfare, or "uemployment programs." It simply means that we must not FORCE anyone to do anything just to serve another segment of the population. Because it IS "the right" of Americans to pursue their own form of happiness, and keep the lifestlyes they have created for themselves. To disallow this freedom, would move this Country on a path toward a Totalitarian Socialist form of government - which would destroy this Country, and/or promote revolution. (Look at Argentina's history.)
Joe, people get turned away from emergency rooms by the thousands. The only time an emergency room is required by law to provide treatment is in the instance of acute life-threatening injury or illness. Example would be injuries from a car wreck or gunshot wound as long as the injuries are life-threatening.
Cancer, kidney disease except where you are within hours of death, heart disease, autoimmune disorders, diabetes, are all defined as chronic disorders and will not be treated in an emergency room unless you pay at the time of treatment. People with the described disorders either have to have some form of insurance or have to pay out of their own pocket for treatment. Go into your local emergency room tell them you have AIDS and ask for treatment. You will get nothing unless you are hours away from death.
The Swiss model has nothing to do with population. It could be handled by American insurance companies very easily. There is no limits to the number of insurance contracts that can be written. The numbers of contracts written by insurance companies all over the world are to numerous to mention.
There are three basic ways medical bills are paid for around the world. The government model, the insurance model, and people paying medical bills out of their own pockets which is how they do it in Singapore. The government model is the most popular, insurance is second and out of pocket payments are last in the industrialized world. Every model has its strengths and weaknesses, but that's just the way it is. There is no perfect way to deliver healthcare to billions of sick people around the world. If there were it would have been utilized many years ago.
In Germany they have been struggling with how to best provide healthcare to their citizens since the 1870s.
I almost hope we hit another deep recession. After the banks hose us all again; they'll get another huge non-refundable bail out by the American tax payer. It would be well worth watching the nut jobs choke on their words.
We've been through this cycle many times, and each time it was the wealthiest of Americans putting the screws to the working class, or attempting to control the government, in a few cases, both.
It's a shame people don't read history books or retain information they gather in their own life times. How easily most forgot what happened just 20 to 30 years ago. We've repeated our warring ways, let the banks hose the economy, created more enemies and still have Neo Cons and wing nuts refusing to sign a treaty with Russia.
Healthcare has nothing to due with indigent people or the constitution. It's a $200 billion a month headache for everyone. Million dollar hospital bills are becoming more and more common. It is not at all uncommon for neonatal expenses to run through a $2,000,000.00 lifetime cap in a few weeks. People with very high incomes are going bust.
Half the country is sick with mental or physical illness at any given time. We pay over 40 billion a month for drugs.
The indigent are a small part of the over all pie.
"So why has this issue of Health Care become so contentious?"
It became that way due to misinformation. The core of health care isn't so much about giving others free insurance, or hand outs as most believe. It's about the cost. Health insurance takes a large chunk out of our GDP as noted by PISCES41 in his previous post. Just a few years ago you could insure the average family for $6k a year. It's hit $12k now, and at the rate of profits made by these companies, soon to be $24k. During the process companies were receiving subsidies from the gov't. although they turned record setting profits.
Medicaid is for the indigent. As of 2006 we spent about $38 billion out of $2 trillion in gross expentitures.
Those that can't afford health care simply don't deserve its services -- insurance is nothing but an unethical numbers game of scamming poor stupid people -- taxation is theft -- governments forcing people to finance scams is criminal -- there are ethical alternatives -- all that lives, dies -- time is precious, cherish each moment without burdening others with issues you can't resolve upon your own while being brave enough to accept your ultimate fate with the dignity of knowing all pain and suffering is forever relinquished.
: {
The private sector steel mills and airlines that promised their retirees pensions and medical care, they got nothing in many cases. Everyone is getting their Social Security, that is solvent in the present form to 2035.
Wars? They cost money. The dittoheads can buy wars with their tax money, the rest of us will take medical care.
How come Bush, Cheney and McCain go to government hospitals?
@ zippert1 - You may be correct in your quoting of ""a $200 billion a month headache..., but my prior post about the indigent and the U.S. Constitution is accurate, and applicable.
The reason the Constitution is applicable, is because the House of Representatives of the U.S. Congess MUST ABIDE BY the Constitution and the laws of the United States; and by ethics, good moral behavior, legal precedent, ensuring compliance with existing law, and "act in good faith" in REPRESENTING the will of the people - WHO ELECTED THEM TO OFFICE.
The U.S. House of Representatives - a legislative body created by the U.S. Constitution - acted in a deceitful manner. The country watched their actions on television - the arm twisting, making offers for collusion, disgegarding Congressional Rules of Order, etc. - just to get the "Senate version" passed (because the Senate would NOT pass the House version).
Yes, as Nancy Polesi said: "we [did] have to pass it so we can see what is in it." And don't bother to argue with me on this point. She said it on TV! But what would YOU SAY if your husband or wife said: "lets buy a car so we can see how much it costs?" WHAT!
DID PELOSI AND THE REST OF THE DEMOCRATS THINK THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WAS STUPID ENOUGH TO BELIEVE SUCH A COMMENT?
And I don't care whether anyone is Republican or Democrat - this was a stupid comment by the "Speaker of the House" (a prestigious office), and demonstrated acts of subversive politics used in passing this Obama Health Care legislation. Even Sen. Bart Stupak violated his Catholic religion by signing onto a bill that includes acts of abortion - because it subjects Catholics to excommunication - as MANDATED by CANNON LAW. If you are not Catholic you may not care about this. But 68 million Catholic Americans do - as do others who disapprove of abortion.
So these are some reasons why the U.S. Constitution is important in this argument. Just read the Constitution and what it says about HOW legislation should be enacted, and you will see what I said is true. Then read the Congressinal Rules that the Congress is supposed to abide by - THEY WROTE THEM. (Think: Law and Ethics committees).
By example, this is how our children learn how to behave.
As for "indigents" - THAT GROUP IS THE VERY REASON why Obama started to force Health Care on the nation in the first place. Because 30 million people out of 300 million (15 million are illegal aliens) - do NOT have health care.
Read thousands of news accounts, and Google the subject for proof. If you tell me you don't agree with me - so be it. But get it right. I do not write lies, or distortions of truth.
Inaction cost, $9trillion over the next decade, can not be compared to the balance between estimate and outcome in a worst case of scenario, and this balance could be adjusted each year. ((Some of CBO analysis : While the costs of the financial bailouts and economic stimulus bills are staggering, they are only a fraction of the coming costs from Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Over the next decade, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that each year Medicaid will expand by 7 percent, Medicare by 6 percent, and Social Security by 5 percent. These programs face a 75-year shortfall of $43 trillion--60 times greater than the gross cost of the $700 billion TARP financial bailout)). Time does not fix endless greed and energy depletion.
Over the duration of healthcare debate, using the preliminary cost analysis of CBO, the reps opposed the public option stubbornly, but after the release of final score, they have been defiant on the referee.
Inaction cost in relation to health care reform totals $9trillion over the next decade.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that reform will reduce the federal deficit by $143 billion over the next 10 years and as much as $1 trillion during the following decade
CORRECTION:
In my 2nd post: By The-Socratic-Inkwell, Nov. 27, 2010 - 1:21 p.m., I mentioned "Sen. Bart Stupak." He was NOT a Senator; he was a Congressman.
In addition, Cong. Stupak and his small group of allies, was responsible for casting the enacting final votes that enabled passage of the Health Care legislation. But this vote was only ENSURED AFTER President Obama told Cong. Stupak that he would sign an EXECUTIVE ORDER to assuage Cong. Stupak's concern over the abortion issues contained in the legislation. The promise of an executive order was Bart Stupak's "30 pieces of silver."
By the way, when a president signs a legislative Bill into law - it beomes THE LAW. President Obama (an alleged former Constitutional lawyer) should know that he cannot abrogate the legal language or intent of Congressional legislation that has been signed into law - just by signing an Executive Order.
Congress writes the law. Presidents CANNOT re-write what Congress has written, but can veto such legislation.
post note:
Congressman Stupak decided NOT TO RUN on November 2 for re-election. I wonder why?
The Socratic Inkwell and Harley get it.
And the liberals have yet to justify the moral argument that a person is entitled to have everything provided for them by others who are better off simply because they can breathe. Further, a person is entitled to continue to breathe as long as possible at the expense of others no matter what the cost may be or how little time may be achieved.
It is one thing to say that the government should promote the health of its citizenry, it is quite another to say it must pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to prolong a person's life by 6 months or less. That is what insurance and charities are for.
Silly Season is supposed to end on Election Day. Apparently not so much any more.
@ ColinFromLasVegas - I was going to Log Out but I took time to read your 6:45 a.m. post, again. Regarding your closing comment:
QUOTE:
"One thing for sure is that I really, really feel sorry for the common taxpayers in Arizona. Because idiots have taken control of the State Government there. And they are, either directly or indirectly, going to cause deaths to occur. It is now a given fact that in Arizona, the government has flip flopped in the way how it is supposed to be working. The people serve the politicians. Not the other way around."
UNQUOTE
I guess you forgot the part where THE PEOPLE of Arizona are the ones who put those "idiots" in office. So, I guess that makes the PEOPLE OF ARIZONA "idiots" also. But the election of officials, actions of governments, is supposed to be "...of the people, by the people, and for the people..."
I understand that we elect bad apples from time-to-time. But this Country IS NOT a dictatorship. And "the people" seem to oust failed politicians eventually. I understand that will probably not help the 98 people you talk about now, but it is how our government works.
So, whether you agree with Arizona policies on health care or not, the State, or federal, Government DOES BELONG TO THE PEOPLE. Whatever is happening in Arizona now is the result of the Nov 2 election - where I believe that all but two democrats were voted out of office.
Since those unseated "democrats" have been in office for at least two years - are they the "idiots" you refer to? After all, the new guys have NOT taken office yet.
Economic and public needs oversight by the Arizona State legislature and the Governor of Arizona many not produce results that are as desirable as one might wish them to be. But given the economic stress of the times, the billions in budget shortfalls (all across the country), and the need to reduce budgets - I see ARIZONA (and many other States) trying hard to solve their budget shortfalls - so they CAN RESTORE services that they may have had to cut.
I too have compassion and sympathy for those 98 souls you mentioned - but I also recognize that there are millions just like them - all across the country - and there are limits as to what governments can do. Their money comes from the people's pockets. And if governments dont have the money - how will medical or other services be paid for.
I would like to believe that charties, federal assistance programs, churches, foundations, et al, will pick up the slack - as best they can. But sometimes, it is left up to families and neighbors to do what they can.
In the end, I believe that SO MUCH MORE could be done to help others if there were less government intervention in our lives. And then, divine intervention could also be an option that one could look to for help.
The Liberals don't have to justify any moral arguments. Every person in this country that lives a normal life expectancy will participate willingly in numerous government programs. That's what people want, that's what they get. People all over the world including the United States can't stand paying medical bills and people want supplemental income as they age so they don't have to work until they drop dead.
Everyone participates. If they say they don't they are lying.
@The-Socratic-Inkwell, welcome aboard. It's good to see another, I may not agree with, present a well based arguement in opposition, joining the ranks of boftx and Patrick Gibbons.
hsr - "Inaction cost in relation to health care reform totals $9trillion over the next decade.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that reform will reduce the federal deficit by $143 billion over the next 10 years and as much as $1 trillion during the following decade"
The basis of the arguement for health care reform. The subject has been side tracked with comment about "deaths panels", welfare, freebies and assorted bull crap. The right has misdirected the arguement and has nothing to replace the bill with, if repealed, other than one proposed last summer that was a complete give away to corporations.
$880 billion in govt. backed school loans outstanding.
Half of all mortgages govt backed
nearly 100 million folks on medicare and medicaid
IRA,401Ks and other similar savings and investment vehicles have been around since the 70s. How many have been able to retire on what they have in their IRA....none.
Every generation of kids think they will be rich and only a few make it. Even actors, lottery winners and star athletes who make millions end up bust and on SS and medicare.
How many kids could afford $50K a year for a good school without the govt...none.. unless rich parents.
The private sector has been around for a couple hundred years. How many of our citizens are truly self sufficient....A couple million out of 310 million.
Liberal programs...hardly...check welfare participation in many RED southern states.
http://factcheck.org/2010/10/whoppers-of...
The first thing that needs to happen is to repeal
the health care from every greedy, low life,
republican snake in the grass, who is against
health care reform.
These greedy scum-bags need to live without
health insurance to understand the plite of
their fellow Americans who can't obtain it.
REPUBLICAN GREED IS A SICKNESS.
Here is the future:
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/265/565/C...
Thanks for comments, The-Socratic-Inkwell. Enjoyed them.
In my last comment, I would have to agree with the fact that perhaps it a bit too much in-your-face. And I surely don't mean to throw a vague generality out there that disparages the Arizona voter. Everyone does have a voice. And those voices must and will be heard. Especially in the voting booths.
I guess what I was trying to say (and perhaps was not to good at outlining) is that I really, really do want to see the democratic process work. Not only in Arizona, but everywhere.
And when that does happen, I just hope that the little people don't get stepped on inadvertently.
But anyways, I did enjoy your comments. They made me think.
I do have one observation though about one of your comments though. I really do hope that the Government that has been elected into power in Arizona did not make a decision to yank money away from those 98 people and their health care coverage in hopes that other assistance, assistance other than Arizona State Government, would get involved. If THAT was factored into their decision, then I say this: SHAME ON THEM AND THEIR HEARTLESSNESS!
Of the no future generation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOshw4kIG...
So how does this Obama care work? My health insurance which I pay for personally and is an individual policy is dropping me, actually everyone in they insure privately, in 6 months. It is likely I can not get insurance to cover some minor existing conditions though I was told one will be offered from other companies but I am sure the cost will be unfordable. How do I get the Obamacare?
@Petef... not sure how you go about getting Obamacare but if you just quit your job and become a bum you'll be able to get on the welfare roll and then you can afford to get as sick as you want because the Government (ie: taxpayers) will be picking up the tab. There's certainly something wrong when the only ones who can afford to get sick are the Uber Rich or the bums .... the middle class hard-worker certainly can't afford to get sick... it's always the middle class who suffers and pays the price for both the rich AND the poor.
@ ColinFromLasVegas Nov. 28, 2010 7:08 a.m -- Thank you for your reply. I would make one final point regarding the function of our "Republic" form of government. Our Constitution says that THE PEOPLE are RESPONSIBLE for electing officials to run the government them.
But if "THE PEOPLE" are NOT familiar with the issues at hand - or are not active participants in the political processes - "the people" cannot possibly make a reasonable assessment of the qualifications of candidates who want to get elected - or KNOW what the candidates will do.
Such voids in understanding among "the people" occur all too often. Thus, people have a problem in being able to make an INFORMED decision as to WHO to vote for, or WHAT ISSUES to support. It seems that most "voter disapproval" (complaints AFTER elections) - seems to come from people WHO were not aware of the special-interests, or hidden agenda's, of a candidate they voted for. The "complainers" include those who just voted the "party line," and others who did not even bother to vote.
So the RESULT is mostly (as in "Health Care") DISTAIN, ANGER, and MISTRUST for public officials, and the legislation they come to pass. But a majority of THE PEOPLE voted them into office. So why didn't the - now, "dissident" - voters work harder to elect a candidate they believed in? Was it a lack of interest? It is UP TO "THE PEOPLE" to vote for candidates WHO WILL Do what they say they will do - and hopefully, act on the issues according to what the voters want them to do.
But if PEOPLE are APATHETIC - do not take TIME to learn about the issues, and a candidate's promises- NOTHING WILL CHANGE. "Politics as usual" will rule of the day, and once elected, officials will be free to do as they choose. Thus VISIBLE honesty and character are also important in a candidate.
I guess personal issues and family life do not enable many people to participate in such activities on a regular basis - or they get tired of politics. But the TEA PARTY has been successful in getting the needed passion and interest on issues, from citizens across the country. "Independent" voters have also become a larger "power base" in they way their "swing vote" occurs - as witnessed in this last mid-term election.
Bottom-line: For the betterment of the governing of America, ALL CITIZENS must participate in the election process and MAKE THEIR OPINONS KNOWN. This includes causing candidates to RESPOND to questions with DEFINITIVE answers concerning their beliefs and positions on issues. I believe such efforts by "THE PEOPLE" will go a long way toward ensuring comprehensive legislation is written - state or federal - that will "get the job done," and we can all agree with.
Just as a follow-up...
The Arizona death panels of Governor Brewer are now in place and entrenched as their warped policy.
Of the 98 people in dire need of assistance that have been rejected, 95 are left.
One of them, Mr. Price, successfully completed chemotherapy and was in need of a bone marrow transplant. That assistance was rejected by the Government of Arizona and Mr. Price was denied. Mr. Price has sadly enough died.
Governor Brewer has stated that all Federal money has been re-routed...elsewhere. And that it was an option they had to do.
In Arizona, people are not a priority. Other things are.
My original argument is true. People serve at the whim of politicians in Arizona. Not the other way around.
This is indeed dark times when we sacrifice people for money.