The best way to make sure health care isn't harmed is to make
sure that Hillary is defeated in 2008. Socialized medicine has
never worked (ask the countries who have it). Hillary tried to
take over health care in 1993 and failed miserably. Our country
simply can't afford to provide health care to everyone. What happened to personal responsibility? Hillary wants EVERYONE
in this country to look to government for the solution to all of
their problems. Absolute power corrupts absolutely!
2007-01-25 05:43:16 · 14 answers · asked by Mike S 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
"Socialised medicine has never worked (ask the countries who have it)"
er.... we're THE country that has it, the country that started it. You ask Brits about the Health Service. They will moan about it for hours and hours on end. Then ask them if they want to get rid of it. You'd be pushed to find one in 20 or 30 that actually want to get rid of it and go back to what we had before.
The NHS, for all its faults, is one of the best things about Britain. And as Britain is ***ing brilliant anyway that's saying a lot!!
2007-01-25 08:40:42 · answer #1 · answered by anthonypaullloyd 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hillary Clinton is not a socialist. It's exasperating to keep seeing this nonsense, but we're going to see a lot of it over the next two years. She didn't try to "take over" health care, what's with the flame phrasing? She introduced a health care plan that didn't get passed. Now there are not only Democrats, but many Republicans interested in its points and they want to work together to fine tune it. You may as well call the Social Security program a socialist endeavor. The government has a duty to see to the continued health of its citizens, that's part of why we elect them! Hillary doesn't want government to be the catch-all for ALL of people's problems, there's that flame phrasing again. She is concerned about health care and she should be. So are the majority of those in both Houses, even the President is giving it at least lip service, which I found sort of amusing. Yes, absolute power corrupts absolutely and that is exactly why Bush lost his Republican majority House and Senate.
2007-01-25 14:53:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hahahahahah
Hilary Clinton a socialist come on man. For gods sake if anything she was a corprate puppet from the beggining. Oh and free health care well the thing is you are scared of it because it intially means that you get taxed more which is exactly what they want you to think. Be smarter and ask "why tax the working class so much why not tax those billionares that virtualy pay nothing in taxes" oh but you'r right they realy need that next million I mean how are they ever going to get that golden polished floor but hey wats few people dying because they dont have the money for meds, I mean that floor is way more important.
2007-01-28 10:06:26 · answer #3 · answered by Andre 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because there is a healthcare crisis and no one has really done anything to fix it. First off, she won't socialize healthcare. Secondly, the "free market" system is what we've had for the past 200 years and its obviously not working for a large portion of the population. Finally, we spend well over half of the entire discretionary budget on the military. Anyone who says we can't afford things just has to take a look at where all the money is actually going.
Free health care for all would cost a fraction of what our military spending is.
2007-01-25 14:12:41 · answer #4 · answered by quickblur 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Look at Sweden and Switzerland that they vote for years the socialists and you'll see that they earn more money, they have a better health care system and they are more respected as countries than USA right now. Try socialism for once and you'll see it wasn't so bad after all:) At least these guys don't have 40 million homeless like you do!
2007-01-25 14:38:14 · answer #5 · answered by Yliessian 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Socialized medicine is not the answer but we sure need some changes. Hospitals and doctors are running rampant in all these life and death decisions that are made based on the 'good' of the hospital and how much it may end up costing them. Doctor's are hard and cold and call their decision to starve somebody to death humane. Well if it was them it would not be so humane.
2007-01-25 13:51:32 · answer #6 · answered by Lou 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Hillary would be a far better choice than any of the Republicans who are running. I would feel completely at ease voting for her.
2007-01-25 14:14:55 · answer #7 · answered by some_guy_times_50 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes! This is exactly the point.
People tend to (conveniently) forget that government money is taxpayers' money; it's NOT free.
If people want cheaper health care, then get a better job, and buy insurance!
2007-01-25 13:55:52 · answer #8 · answered by silvercomet 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Hilary is sounding better all the time. It does work in other countries. The poor get the care they need unlike the U.S. You must be one of the rich that doesn't want to part with the tax dollar.
2007-01-25 13:54:00 · answer #9 · answered by robert m 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
There is no good reason to put another closet communist in the White House. Didn't willy the traitor do enough damage? We sure don't need a power mad termagant dictator like her in any position of power, especially that much power!
And you're right about the sick communist 'ho. Who needs her to tell us how to live our lives?
2007-01-25 13:59:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋