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

That's the new mandate she'll propose in her quest for the Presidency.
Whether you can afford it or not....YOU WILL PAY!

Rules in most states require all drivers to purchase auto insurance...
Clinton's plan would require EVERYONE to purchase HEALTH Insurance.

Is this a viable idea or the rantings of a fool?

THE STORY:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/17/health.care/index.html

2007-09-17 04:35:26 · 22 answers · asked by GeneL 7 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

22 answers

Land of the free huh??? She is a stark raving lunatic in my opinion.

2007-09-17 04:40:58 · answer #1 · answered by J S 3 · 6 7

Hey, here's my pathetic story:
I'm just an average person who lives a normal upstanding life. I've been financially comfortable, I've been dirt poor and in the gutter with nobody to turn to, not even my health care system! Why because I didn't have any health insurance.
Here are the facts people. If you are content with being down and accept any and every handout, then there is PLENTY!!
However, if you are down just for a short period and all you want is healthcare, no "welfare ride" so to speak, then you'll get nothing! I think that system of " pay $100 and you get your teeth worked on for 1 visit" is B.S.! I have serious dental issues, but they just get worse because I have a hard time thinking that for my 100 bucks I'll get the right attention..."oh' take what you can get " right? Would you?! Hell no, so why should anyone else.
Okay, so here is my opinion. We as a nation will pay far more for constant attention to people who are continually finding crap wrong with them, they whine the loudest, they are the ones who get represented, and ultimately they are the ones who get all of the benefits. So what about all of us who can't afford insurance, not because we're poor, but because we only make $15-$20 grand a year and are self employed, or sadly...not? We are too busy to spend any extra time on 'a voice' , but don't we deserve the same immediate care in the emergency room as the welfare moms dropping by with their babies and cackling girlfriends at 9pm, meanwhile everyone else has to wait...and they are supposedly ill. I waited for 3 hours one night for my son to get stitches. They said it would be an hour, but like clockwork every 15 minutes a welfare mom would come in with her baby for a 'checkover' and they would bump my kid up another hour. The worst was when a severely injured soccer player came in and he was in severe pain. They just propt him up in a wheelchair and helped the poor mommies with babies one right after the next.
Oh' I know I'm probably biased against the welfare system, because to me the wealthiest people bleed their funding strait to the bottom. Damnit there are a few of us who just need immediate help for a month or so and that's it. There are some of us who don't have time to deal with much of anything...like right now I've got to go clean carpet for a living...and I love it I just don't have insurance in case of an emergency. I'd be glad to pay $50-$75 a month for some sort of government plan, God knows most benefitting welfare recipients with healthcards don't pay a dime! Even the ones who can also work on the side and make up to so much...somehow I 'just don't qualify Mr. J...."

2007-09-17 05:12:22 · answer #2 · answered by paulj0557-vacuum cleaner expert 3 · 1 0

Do you realize our current health care plan consists of our president telling us to go to the ER? Where it costs ten times the cost of and office visit? Didn't he know that, shouldn't he have known that? Not to mention that the waits are already long, and waiting for emergency health care is pointless unless you are actually an emergency. While a baby with an cold needs a doctor, its not an emergency, but he would send him there anyway. Now the big point....we pay for that now. Did you think the hospital was going to absorb those costs? We pay now, we pay with our taxes, we pay with our health, we pay with our time.
If the doctors are behind this premise you know they are scared with whats going on now.
There are subsidies for the poor, so affording it isn't a sticking point, in fact so many can't afford health care now that its shameful. It costs at least twelve thousand dollars a year for private insurance and you still pay a copay, and you still might be refused coverage. Her plan addresses that.
Just calling it socialized medicine isn't enough anymore, please, offer an alternative. One that would eliminate the forty-seven million without coverage, in the only industrialized country that has no universal coverage.

2007-09-17 05:07:29 · answer #3 · answered by justa 7 · 1 0

I tend to be rather cynical about these things. I believe for Hillary Clinton it is a PR move. Some "voters" will read about it and say, "She really cares about us," and so they tend to think that's another reason to support her run for President. In reality, a solution will only be found when President, Representatives and Senators start putting people and this country ahead of their desires to do whatever it takes to get elected. No one person, whether President or congressman will solve the health care crisis.

2016-05-17 05:09:25 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

Here is the thing.... there is no free lunch or free rides. The money for a Universal Health Care Plan will have to come from somewhere.

Can we say higher Taxes boys and girls?

Many of the people who do not have health care coverage Choose not to have and can very well afford it. They just don't want to shell out the money because they'd rather spend it on other things.
Now before you get your drawers in a twist. Yes there are Many who can not afford health care premiums. But let's divide that group of uninsured into two groups. Those who truly can not afford insurance premium and those who can. The picture would change.

2007-09-17 04:49:27 · answer #5 · answered by ♥♥The Queen Has Spoken♥♥ 7 · 1 3

And just like Auto insurance there would be an untold number that won't get it, and then the insurance industry will cry because uninsured sick people are driving up costs so you will have an addendum to your health care for uninsured sick people. Insurance companies are becoming rampant and need to be curtailed It's a federal crime to commit insurance fraud but perfectly legal for them to deny coverage or procedures for anyone for any reason. The first step is to take them off the publicly traded stocks, when they are trying to please their customers and their stockholders at the same time...the stockholders win every time.

2007-09-17 04:46:55 · answer #6 · answered by kerfitz 6 · 2 1

I think it's a great idea!! I would rather pay for mandatory health insurance than mandatory auto insurance.

Do you realize how much of your tax dollars goes to people who have no health insurance? Who do you think foots the bill when a non-insured person goes to the emergency room? If there was mandatory health insurance (that was subsidized in some way by the gov for people who can't afford it) then people would be able to get cheaper, preventative care instead of the very expensive emergency care when their medical problem gets out of control.

BTW: Luckily I have health insurance provided my husbands employer...but some people can't afford it...

2007-09-17 04:41:02 · answer #7 · answered by ~*Bella*~ 5 · 4 2

No she won't. She'll say that now because she's pandering to the middle, but she won't do it. This is a basic Clinton MO. Say something when you're campaigning and then, once elected, 'discover' that it's not feasible and start pushing your own agenda.

She has no intention of making anyone but the top 50% or so of Americans pay for the health care of all Americans. Why would she? This is her constituency. As long as she gives them stuff and makes those who didn't vote for her pay for it, yahoo! She's got a winning formula. Votes can be bought. She knows this.

And mark my words, 'unversal health care' is the first step in the government's getting their hands into our behavior, eating habits, and our bodies. Once they get their hands on our health care they're going to feel justified in telling us how to live...and mandating it. "How you live is costing the nation millions. You must change for your good and the good of the nation."

2007-09-17 04:48:37 · answer #8 · answered by The emperor has no clothes 7 · 1 3

Although Hillary is on the bottom of my list, this proposal
does warrant some serious consideration. There's lots
of folks in the US that can't get sick without major hurts
to their life style. This country is rich enough that none
of it's citizens should have that over their head.

2007-09-17 04:45:35 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

The problem is that everyone is still paying, and those that cannot afford it (and just why not?) get a free ride. Just like today.

Sounds good until put into practice.

2007-09-17 04:43:31 · answer #10 · answered by cbmttek 5 · 3 1

I think it is a good idea. Why should working people be required to provide money for welfare for people that don't want to get their lazy butts up to go to work?? If they have to pay for their own insurance (i.e., no medical card), they might be inclined to actually get a job!!

2007-09-17 04:41:00 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

fedest.com, questions and answers