English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Why would Bush or any republican stand by and let a 5 year old little guy die of an illness that they could be treated for cause they dont have enough insurance? Why would Bush or any republican want to stand by and watch a 68 year old grandmother wither away cause she does not have enough on her fixed income to pay for all her medicines? Why do they hate little children and kindly grandmothers?

2007-08-23 18:31:30 · 27 answers · asked by ron j 1 in Politics & Government Politics

27 answers

Cuts into corporate profits!!!!!

The guy under me is full of B.S.

1st of all Hillary worked on National Health care and the Republican controlled congress shot it down


2nd cheaper more efficient , more rewarding...........tell that to the 45 MILLION that's right 45 MILLION AMERICANS that do NOT have any health care!!!!!!!!

45 million out of 300 million!!!!!!

go spin on that!!!!

2007-08-23 18:35:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 8 6

Healthcare not fixed in America jobs gonna be outsourced quicker, and break the line employement and insurance or else the people will suffer more. Medicare is unafforable without cost contianments, but at the same time its immoral to deny childern healthcare. Free market universal healthcare is the way to go consplustory coverage, and if people dont buy insurance repo TVs, cars, luxury goods because its not the taxpayers job to pay for healthcare on people making 100k a year, but at the same help the poor with subidies pay for healthcare at 250% of the poverty line, and get employer out of covering people with healthcare coverage. No healthinsurnace, no tax refund. Use some things the french use for healthcare, but make it American style system, but with cost contianments, and spreading of risk among all healthcare payers

2007-08-24 02:09:26 · answer #2 · answered by ram456456 5 · 4 0

You don't know what your talking about! I had a sister that got diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, and she had no insurance. When she was diagnosed in the hospital, she told them she had no insurance. The specialist looked at her and said, "you need surgery right away and we don't let people die because they have no insurance." She had surgery 2 days later and was in the hospital 2 months. Had an astronomical bill when she was released. The doctor has never billed her and that was 2 yrs.ago. The hospital is accepting payments.
So tell your BS to someone else. Why do you think so many hospitals are going broke in the southern states? Because they are being over run with people with no insurance, but they don't turn them away.

2007-08-24 02:14:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Waaaahhhh! You're making me cry big ol' crocodile tears. The USA is primarily a free-enterprise, capitalist nation and it has worked so well that we pretty much run and support the entire world. We have the best medicine, the best surgeons, and we school/train the rest of the best throughout the world as well as develop the technology and equipment both to enable the best to do what they do and to increase and create new abilities. This is primarily because we are a Christian nation and God blesses those who seek to help others, but secondly because our economic system causes fierce competition among researchers and developers so they can bring in the money to continue their work. Socializing the whole thing would be like throwing a bucket of ice water on them. It is a nice thought to say "the Government" should pay for all medicine everywhere" but the reality is that "the Government's" money comes out of OUR pockets. We are free people, and the government is here for us. We are not here to be slaves to the government. And the tax rate that would have to be imposed to collect that kind of money would effectively reduce us all to slavery. But since you're so full of love and compassion, the next time you hear of someone on hard times - go ahead, give them your house, money, and clothes and do without for their sake. What are you going to do for the next guy? What are you going to do for your family?

2007-08-24 01:58:35 · answer #4 · answered by rumplesnitz 5 · 2 4

McPoop. Clinton did address it but was unsuccessful. That is not the same as not addressing it now is it?
If it is ALWAYS better and cheaper in the hands of the private sector then why does the US, with the most privatised health industry in the developed world have both the most expensive health care and the least effective in the developed world?
SophieB - if noone is standing by while 5 year olds die then why does a child have twice the likelihood of dying before the age of 5 in the US as it does in the rest of the developed world combined? (8 deaths per 1000 live births compared to 4)
Maxxx - noone is confusing anything other than you. No dem candidate has called for the nationalization of the US health industry. And since you have been told this before one can only assume that you continue to state this nonsense out of deceit rather than ignorance.
And by the way it is 15.4% of the economy - twice what it is in most countries - yet not as effective - THAT is the problem.
Cinamon - if you have a stat to provide please provide a link to support it. Since we have the lowest life expectancy and lowest healthy life expectancy and highest child mortality in the developed world I personally believe your stat is both unlikely and inconsequential.
Riteon - your argument against ensuring everyone has health insurance is that hospitals are going broke due to not everyone having health insurance. And you say others are speaking BS?
I do find it interesting how opposed to a healthy more productive workforce so many cons are.

2007-08-24 01:41:12 · answer #5 · answered by Sageandscholar 7 · 2 6

You are confusing the opposition to socializing 25% of the economy to create a system that does not work and will cost more.

Is your 68 year old grandmother aware that she can get prescription drug coverage through Medicare (a program started by the Bush administration)

I would like to know where the 5 year old was allowed to die because of a lack of health insurance. Federal and state law prohibits the denial of critical care based on ablity to pay. Please let me know where this occurred so that the authorities can be contacted and felony charges filed.

OR are you just a partisan hack who has created a phony sob story is order to try to gin up sympathy from the gullible and uninformed.

2007-08-24 01:42:21 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 6 4

They don't "hate" them--they woud just rather not know them or know about them! and, God forbid, that you would take another cent of their precious money to help someone! Don't you know that the rich people NEED every penny they have? My Lord, they give so much in taxes to feed this hideous war and the deaths of our young people, and thousands of Iraqi men, women and children, that they can't spare any for something worthwhile! Those few cents are what keep them rich, you know?

2007-08-24 03:01:30 · answer #7 · answered by Joey's Back 6 · 2 1

by the way if you are a poor homeless person with no job or bill gates and you are dying ANY hospital is required to treat you without consideration to what health insurance you have if you even have any. If that isn't universal health care i don't know what is. Also, if you know a kindly old grandmother or little children that don't have health care why aren't you paying for it??? or do you hate them as well?

2007-08-24 01:42:09 · answer #8 · answered by ironranger166 1 · 6 4

Geeze. I can't wait until we have a socialist health-care system that will benefit us as well as our socialist educational system and socialist retirement system and our pot-hole ridden transit system have done.

The founding fathers could have saved us a lot of trouble just stating that "Government is the Sole Source of Everything, because you human individuals are too stupid to work it out on your own!"

(The problem with health care is a lack of free-enterprise capitalism, which requires competition and accountability. These have been compromised by unions, legal parasites, government favoritism and regulation. Fortunately, a socialized system will be free, because nobody ever thinks to see what was taken out of their paycheck before they were paid. So whoo-pee! Even more unaccountability --- but you won't notice. And a 9-month wait for hernia repair will only do you good...
)

2007-08-24 01:49:06 · answer #9 · answered by Boomer Wisdom 7 · 7 3

Why is the parents of the 5 year old paying for their childs medical care? Why is that the responsibility of the government????? a 68 year old grandmother would be on medicare, and be able to get medicine.. why do liberals always want a handout instead of earning what they get??

2007-08-24 01:51:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4 5

no one is standing by and letting any 5-year old little guy or any child, in fact, die of an illness...there are other ways to get assistance already in place. And an old grandmother at age 68 (is that old?) could be using medicaid, and there are new government programs out there for assisting with medicines. So you see, no one at all is hated. (so I think you heard wrong). Even asshat is mistaken, in that the Clintons did want socialized medicine...but counties still had health programs in place then as they do now. But asshat is right about the private sector doing it better.

2007-08-24 01:37:05 · answer #11 · answered by sophieb 7 · 5 7

fedest.com, questions and answers