Ron Paul says healthcare not a right

Quote from doreilly:

-- I'm from the Soviet Union and I assure you that of the two of us, I know WAY more about the socialism you spew

You may know more about communism, but from your reply you do not seem to know more about socialism since you do not seem to be able to differentiate the two.

The interesting thing is that your reply would indicate that you bear all the intolerance that is associated with communism, but at the same time you rail against it.

It seems your can release the Soviet from Communism, but you can not necessarily release the communist from the Soviet

The Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics was SOCIALIST. It held communism as an ideal, but abandoned implementation of Communism after the attempt to do so shortly after the 1917 revolution caused the complete and almost overnight collapse of the Russian economy. We were all supposedly BUILDING toward communism in Russia but we all lived in a socialist state. Marx taught that socialism is the stepping stone to Communism and, alas, my country never got past Socialism. Please DO try to at least learn some history before you feebly attempt to lecture me on the economic structure of my home country.

Yes, I'm deeply intolerant of anyone trying to rob people (including myself) of liberty. I'm just intolerant of institutional slavery to the state in the name of the common good. That's just super crazy of me.

BTW, what did your scrambled brain interpret as my intolerance of the intolerance in Socialism or Communism? If you knew anything at all about Communism, it is in theory the most tolerant thing on earth. Intolerance is not associated with Communism or Socialism but with dictatorial regimes.

The goal of Communism is DEMOCRACY. Mob rule democracy.

Why can't you lefties learn about the crap you're pushing before you open your mouths?
 
Quote from achilles28:

First, the Federal Government has no authority whatsoever to mandate any type of socialized health care program. The 10th Amendment cedes all power not expressly granted to the Federal Government, to the States, or People.

Any type of health care program must be initiated by the States. If a California or New York wants to mandate universal health care for their residents, let them. Either via a sales tax, state income tax, whatever . Its their business.

As far as the morality of a universal health care system.

Socialism is a wolf in sheeps clothing. Big Government power-freaks want to make everything a "Right", with the catch the State now has an equal RIGHT to tax you for it and take even more power to ensure the "safe and effective" metering of such services.

Government freebies are really just legislated power to STEAL from your neighbor and keep a Government Brownshirt hovering over his wallet to insure future pillaging.

Private healthcare would work a lot better with tort reform (liability caps), and insurance deregulation. This is just another powergrab by Government that will cramp the economy further, instill new, even more inept bureaucracies, and cut a fat pay-check to a top Washington lobbiest - Big Pharma.


Well said!

I would encourage every person to write their state reps and senators to not only affirm their state's rights but take action that either negates fed law or minimizes it to the point of being useless.

The battle lines are drawn at the state level. US Congress is totally out of control and cannot be stopped, especially after 20+ million illegal aliens are given citizenship at the stroke of a pen before the 2010 election.

The state in which you live is the last hope you have to protect your liberty and freedom before arming up, and you should already be doing that before Obama’s Civilian National Security Force is fully armed and functional.
 
Quote from trefoil:

I was born here, and I like it here. I'll be staying, thank you.
Obviously you don't like it here, because you seem to bitch about it, quite loudly.

You've got a point about little guys subsidizing big guys. But the answer isn't to nationalize everything which just screws the middle class and small business even harder.

The cost of nationalized healthcare is enormous: 1.5 Trillion over 10 years is a low-ball joke. Canada spends 10% of its GDP on healthcare, per year! Thats like ~25% of total tax revenue!!

The US equivalent would be 1.4 Trillion, every year, in additional expenditures.

Like running 1 Trillion deficits, each year? Try 2.4 Trillion with Obama?!?

How long will the dollar last then?

The Loving Liberal argument is make "the Rich" pay for it and to hell with consequence.

How about we think up a solution thats both fiscally sustainable and benefits the poor? Like cheaper, private healthcare? What's wrong with that?
 
Quote from mtwokay:

Well said!

I would encourage every person to write their state reps and senators to not only affirm their state's rights but take action that either negates fed law or minimizes it to the point of being useless.

The battle lines are drawn at the state level. US Congress is totally out of control and cannot be stopped, especially after 20+ million illegal aliens are given citizenship at the stroke of a pen before the 2010 election.

The state in which you live is the last hope you have to protect your liberty and freedom before arming up, and you should already be doing that before Obama’s Civilian National Security Force is fully armed and functional.

Spot on. It all comes down to States Rights, as the Federal Government has effectively declared war on the Constitution and anyone who opposes their absolute authority.

Americans need to realize they can have their cake and eat it too, at the State LEVEL.

If Connecticut or Seattle wants to pay for universal healthcare, thats FINE. They can do so legally, within the jurisdiction of that State, and every resident of Seattle can be issued a photo-id (proof of residence) that entitles them to such service, for a paultry 10%+ additional sales tax. Done and done.

The answer to Governance is STATE LEVEL. Not this one-size-fits-all, top-down Federal Dictatorship which wants the entire Country under its THUMB.

Thats not what the Founders had in mind or enshrined in the Constitution.

Local problems need to be solved LOCALLY.

California has gone BANKRUPT without any type of universal healthcare program.

The only difference between Cali and broader America is the printing press. That's where your "Free" programs will come from!!!!

What happens when the Dollar collapses? What of all this endless Federal charity, welfare and health-care programs then?!?

The Country will literally descend into Chaos when that happens. 1 Trillion deficit per year + 1.4 Trillion more for health + cut revenues from Cap and Trade = Death Spiral.


:mad: :mad:
 
achilles28: WTF? Free speech is all about complaining. What else would it be for?
Secondly, McCain actually had a good idea about this which Obama is thinking of using: take away, either partially or totally, the tax exemption that corporations enjoy on the money they use to pay for their employees' health care. Eliminating that would fund the transition, and you can bet your house it would lower costs, as your average spoiled corporate employee would very quickly find out just how much that benefit was worth.
Within a few years, our societal cost for healthcare would come down to Canadian levels. The economic benefit would be enormous.
 
Quote from trefoil:

A little reason in the midst of the usual libertarian nuttiness:

Saying it's not a right doesn't really mean anything.

Correct. It means absolutely nothing in the face of a government which constantly stomps on the constitution that limits its power. But, saying that healthcare (or any good) is a right is equally meaningless because saying it doesn't make it so.

Quote from trefoil:

Electricity isn't a right, but it is highly regulated, because in a modern society it's a necessity.

That sentence makes as much sense as any random collection of words. Electricity is not a necessity for survival and your arbitrary declaration that it is does not make it so.

Besides that, it is not regulated because it is deemed to be a necessity and regulation and socialized medicine have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

No wonder Thunderass loves your comment so much. You make less sense than he does.


Quote from trefoil:

EDitto for water and heat.

Also not provided by via single-payer system and completely irrelevant to the discussion.

Quote from trefoil:

Other things are treated by society as a public good: roads, police, and fire protection, all of which were, at one time, private enterprises.

Great. Let's take your logic to its final conclusion: if everything can be seen as a public good, why not start treating EVERYTHING as a public good and make the government provide EVERYTHING. We did that in Russia and it worked so well.


Quote from trefoil:

Arguing that it should be that way again will get you nowhere, because it simply isn't going to happen.

Where on this thread did you see anyone argue for a private police force? Mowing down straw men is sort of fruitless.


Quote from trefoil:

Healthcare in every other industrialized country is treated as a public good.

Yes. They pay huge sums for the shittiest health service on earth. I've sampled several European countries and you wouldn't be able to recognize what passes for healthcare in most European countries and Canada. ALL European countries are moving toward privatization but when you combine both public and private expenditures, they pay more and get less. Their healtchare costs are also skyrocketing and the health services are responding by cutting service. However, they are also not as fat as Americans and that Obesity problem is a huge driver for healthcare costs. So, we can expect to be worse off.


Quote from trefoil:


From a financial POV, it makes the most sense by a wide margin, because of the economies of scale involved in covering everyone, so cherry-picking healthy folk isn't a problem.

Any economies of scale and the elimination of adverse selection (which exists in ALL forms insurance including fire, life, etc. and they somehow manage to get on) would be vastly outweighed by the over-use problem, which tends to happen when there is no incremental cost to the user. The solution? Rationing. So, the promise of single payer - access - is the first thing to go under single payer.


Quote from trefoil:


The current USA system, such as it is, is socialism for the covered corporate/government employee, and a free market for small business workers and owners and self-employed people. The result, of course, is that small business folks and self-employed people massively subsidize corporate and government employees. The result of that is that most sane people with an economic choice decide to work for large corporations or the government.
This is the least optimal outcome. You want a system where people make a choice to start a business or be an employee based on their inclinations and abilities. What you have is a system where large numbers of the most intelligent and able wind up working for years for other people, and only strike out on their own when they know they won't endanger the lives, quite literally, of themselves or their family by exposing them to the dysfunctional "market" for healthcare the USA has, which is rife with cherry-picking.
The solution to this problem is to treat healthcare as a public good. A mixed socialist/free market "system" - really a mess - is the worst possible choice, but it's the choice the US has fallen into, by historical happenstance.
It's completely indefensible. It delivers the worst care at the highest price.

The hold conclusion and analysis is a hot mess. Health insurance didn't stop me from leaving the I-bank and starting my own company. I got insurance right away. Never stopped anyone I know from starting their own business.

The problem is that there IS no market for health care. States mandates raise the cost of insurance by limiting choice. This means that if in NY you want just catastrophic coverage, you can't get it. State by state regulation means that moving from one state to another constitutes a break in coverage and a circumstance to deny further insurance for that arbitrary reason. The system is so screwed up because it already operates VERY much like socialized medicine and every single one of these screwed up, cost raising, coverage denying measures is made possible by the very government that you want to entrust to provide you and your family with better healthcare. I can only laugh - but that's only because I can afford to buy my medical care privately and the majority of you guys screaming for socialized medicine can't.
 
Quote from achilles28:

Spot on. It all comes down to States Rights, as the Federal Government has effectively declared war on the Constitution and anyone who opposes their absolute authority.

Americans need to realize they can have their cake and eat it too, at the State LEVEL.

If Connecticut or Seattle wants to pay for universal healthcare, thats FINE. They can do so legally, within the jurisdiction of that State, and every resident of Seattle can be issued a photo-id (proof of residence) that entitles them to such service, for a paultry 10%+ additional sales tax. Done and done.

The answer to Governance is STATE LEVEL. Not this one-size-fits-all, top-down Federal Dictatorship which wants the entire Country under its THUMB.

Thats not what the Founders had in mind or enshrined in the Constitution.

Local problems need to be solved LOCALLY.

California has gone BANKRUPT without any type of universal healthcare program.

The only difference between Cali and broader America is the printing press. That's where your "Free" programs will come from!!!!

What happens when the Dollar collapses? What of all this endless Federal charity, welfare and health-care programs then?!?

The Country will literally descend into Chaos when that happens. 1 Trillion deficit per year + 1.4 Trillion more for health + cut revenues from Cap and Trade = Death Spiral.


:mad: :mad:

Bravo, sir. Well done.
 
Back
Top