Clinton proposes universal health care - again.

I'm on the Redneck Health Care Plan. It consists of never getting sick, and never going to the hospital if you are sick. I'd love to believe the USA can join the rest of the world in making sure its citizens can go to the hospital, but I've never seen such a thing in my long life, so you'll just have to forgive me for being jaded.

I don't know why she bothers. She isn't going to win the election.

Why not? She's a bridge to the past...

Heh...yeah. That's what I'm afraid of.

article snip said:

Mrs. Clinton’s role as architect and champion of the plan to remake the nation’s health care system in 1993 and 1994 is still hotly debated.

In an essay posted Friday on the Web site of The American Prospect, Paul Starr, who was a senior adviser at the White House in 1993, said that Bill Clinton had “settled on the basic model for reform” before he took office. Mrs. Clinton’s role was “not to choose a policy, but to develop the one that the president had already adopted,” said Mr. Starr, a Princeton professor and co-founder of The American Prospect, a liberal journal.

Click to expand...

We'll end up with a meddling first husband, whom we didn't vote for as President this time.

Go Hillary!!

She's got her priorities straight: taking care of Americans, all of them. She's a courageous leader. Good for her.

No thanks, BoP. I don't need more government sticking their fingers in my business. It's the Patriot Act on a different level. No good will come from it, in the end.

Rllgthunder said:

No thanks, BoP. I don't need more government sticking their fingers in my business. It's the Patriot Act on a different level. No good will come from it, in the end.

Click to expand...

Well I hate the Patriot Act, and apparently, it's not going away any time soon. And just for once, I'd like to see my taxes go to something that actually benefits the majority of Americans instead of a few greedy CEO's.

Rllgthunder said:

No thanks, BoP. I don't need more government sticking their fingers in my business. It's the Patriot Act on a different level. No good will come from it, in the end.

Click to expand...

From the verbiage, it almost sounds like you just had to go through a prostate exam recently...

I agree. Getting the government involved will only make things worse...it sounds good and makes people feel better about themselves to think that everyone will have health care coverage, but the reality will be far different than the dream.

Bird of Prey said:

Well I hate the Patriot Act, and apparently, it's not going away any time soon. And just for once, I'd like to see my taxes go to something that actually benefits the majority of Americans instead of a few greedy CEO's.

Click to expand...

But your taxes will still go to the latter...because they'll just rob from the "universal health care fund" like they do with Social Security.

Bird of Prey said:

Well I hate the Patriot Act, and apparently, it's not going away any time soon. And just for once, I'd like to see my taxes go to something that actually benefits the majority of Americans instead of a few greedy CEO's.

Click to expand...

If the government has to get involved I'd prefer to see some sort of guidelines put in place, defining the intended market, rather than regulating it. Tax credits should be put into place for the insurance and medical providers to encourage the system to become more efficient and fair, not more expensive to the end user.

Except the banking and credit markets. Those need a vast overhaul of regulation to thwart greed. Really, I'm getting .25% on a savings account, my checking account fee went from $1 to $3 per month, and I'm getting 2.25% on my IRA. That's basic robbery on the banks part especially at the rates they charge for loans.

Rllgthunder said:

No thanks, BoP. I don't need more government sticking their fingers in my business. It's the Patriot Act on a different level. No good will come from it, in the end.

Click to expand...

Why do Americans have this attitude?

How can people in the USA be in favour of the US government getting involved in other people's countries, when they don't even trust it to run their own?

Mac

Mac H. said:

Why do Americans have this attitude?

How can people in the USA be in favour of the US government getting involved in other people's countries, when they don't even trust it to run their own?

Mac

Click to expand...

I don't understand it much, either and I'm an American. Sad, isn't it?

Personally, I think Clinton's plan isn't sound. It still makes private insurers the ones to provide the healthcare. Sorry, Mrs. Clinton, but healthcare is a RIGHT and should not be for profit, ever.

But seeing as she's been bought off by the healthcare industry and Big Pharma, I can't say I'm surprised.

I like Edwards' plan better; it forces private insurers to compete with Medicare/Medicaid and slowly but surely starves em off.

Mac H. said:

Why do Americans have this attitude?

How can people in the USA be in favour of the US government getting involved in other people's countries, when they don't even trust it to run their own?

Click to expand...

We trust it--more or less--to run our country, just not to run every aspect of our lives.

Why do non-Americans think liberty is so passe?

Whether or not she pushes this issue, whether or not it is sound, one thing is clear: It worked last time.

aruna said:

I still don't understand what not having health coverage has to do with liberty. I know, you've tried to explain it again and again but I still don't get it...

Click to expand...

I don't get it either, and I live in the same country with these people.

I mean, doesn't "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" include having decent healthcare and economic security?

aruna said:

I still don't understand what not having health coverage has to do with liberty. I know, you've tried to explain it again and again but I still don't get it...

Click to expand...

There's healthcare and there's health insurance--two different things.

As I've said, I think having free access to emergency/ambulatory care is fine. And I think having some free/less expensive healthcare for people with financial needs is fine, like Medicare and Medicaid (though both have many problems right now--and why no one in D.C. would like to address these problems is beyond me).

And I think certain government actions and inactions have allowed healthcare costs to spiral well above what they should be, so here's another great place for lawmakers to do their job.

But mandating health insurance is 1) silly, as insurance must be a choice if it is to be insurance and 2) an encroachment on liberty as it narrows the range of choices with regard to service and with regard to how one chooses to dispose of one's own property (money).

InfinityGoddess said:

I don't get it either, and I live in the same country with these people.

I mean, doesn't "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" include having decent healthcare and economic security?

Click to expand...

No, actually, it doesn't. Nowhere in that quote does it state, or even imply, that life would be easy, or free from disease, death, or accidental dismemberment. Liberty constrained is not liberty. And there is no guarantee that by pursuing happiness you will reach it.

InfinityGoddess said:

I mean, doesn't "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" include having decent healthcare and economic security?

Click to expand...

No.

Mac H. said:

Why do Americans have this attitude?

How can people in the USA be in favour of the US government getting involved in other people's countries, when they don't even trust it to run their own?

Mac

Click to expand...

LOL!! This post gets the wisest post of the month - maybe even the year - award!!

Duncan J Macdonald said:

No, actually, it doesn't. Nowhere in that quote does it state, or even imply, that life would be easy, or free from disease, death, or accidental dismemberment. Liberty constrained is not liberty. And there is no guarantee that by pursuing happiness you will reach it.

Click to expand...

I would like to think that the "life' part of the quote would mean that your needs in terms of proper care once you get sick or disabled are covered.

And with "liberty", you are free not to worry about going bankrupt when paying off the medical bills that incurred while you were undergoing cancer treatment.

And with "happiness", you're alive and well because you were able to catch the cancer early with preventative care.

What about food? Why shouldn't that be included, as well. And how about a place to live, some decent transportation, and chocolate?

InfinityGoddess said:

I would like to think that the "life' part of the quote would mean that your needs in terms of proper care once you get sick or disabled are covered.

And with "liberty", you are free not to worry about going bankrupt when paying off the medical bills that incurred while you were undergoing cancer treatment.

And with "happiness", you're alive and well because you were able to catch the cancer early with preventative care.

Click to expand...

I thought the 'life, liberty and pursuit of happiness' was basically: you have the right to exist, the freedom to choose how you exist as long as your choices don't greatly detriment the choices of others, and the ability to pursue happiness with no guarantee that you'd ever find it. That may not seem 'fair' but to badly misquote The Princess Bride, Life isn't fair...anyone that tells you differently is selling you something...

Take care all ('cause going to the hospital is too darn expensive - even with insurance!)

robeiae said:

What about food? Why shouldn't that be included, as well. And how about a place to live, some decent transportation, and chocolate?

Click to expand...

Mmmm....I could do with some chocolate.