At a cost of nearly $110-120 billion a year, are you for or against Hillary's plan? They have not taken into account the millions of illegals in our country either....just curious on what people think, and where exactly she thinks this extra money is going to come from.
2007-09-18 07:52:52 · 26 answers · asked by Mrs. Morals 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Actually, the cost of her healthcare plan is grossly understated. You are correct to figure in untold added billions for illegals. I still believe it is a flawed proposal with too many loopholes for possible "pork-projects". The quality of care will suffer as well. Also, due to the sudden influx of patients the industry will need to hurry medical personnel through the training process to serve the public numbers efficiently. I fear that Ms. Clinton plans on creating a larger welfare state with no incentives for those who stand on their own merit.
2007-09-18 08:09:03 · answer #1 · answered by ugandanprince 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
They'll never mention where the funding will come from. She basically wants health care to be mandatory, and for the rich to buy it for the poor (That's my analysis, and if anyone doesn't like it, I don't care. I'm not representing it as absolute fact.) If that's not socialism, I don't know what is. The funny thing is, with all the time and money they spend trying to get it through the government, they could have set up an NPO by now (Clinton herself has had at least fifteen years to do this) and made a huge dent in this issue. They might have even solved it by now.
As expected, some people mentioned taking the war funding and putting it toward socialism. I'm wondering that the war funding actually includes. I'm willing to bet all the figures include military pay, food, and housing. None of these three expenses are a result of any kind of operation. The military doesn't go away just because congress doesn't want us to do our job anymore.
2007-09-18 15:02:47 · answer #2 · answered by DOOM 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
In the beginning and forever, I am against it completely. Most people don't understand that the money comes from somewhere. The Govenment does not own anything; Big Business does not own anything. Only individuals own anything. Divide the total amount by the total population and the answer is what you would owe.
For my part, I do not have that kind of money.
IAW CBS TV news, the 3 leading causes of death in this country are (1) doctors' errors, errors by nurses, pharmacists, etc., (2) neglect/carelessness by the medical "profession"; and (3) affects of drugs, supposed legal ones, as prescribed by the medical "professions".
Taking these FACTS into consideration, any health care plan is doomed; only the rich and famous will be provided with satifactory health care.
It is like the guy who went into the local VA for a colonoscopy and died. The doctors told his wife that the man "wasn't supposed to die".
No kidding!
2007-09-18 15:21:13 · answer #3 · answered by Nothingusefullearnedinschool 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We need to explore ways to make insurance available to all, but Hillary's plan isn't the answer. She wants an individual mandate requiring all people to be insured, sounds good on the surface, but as usual with the socialized medicine crowd she doesn't offer a way to pay for it other than by taxing those of us who are already acting responsibly in this area.
The term individual mandate is a misnomer. Many people who do not have insurance lack the means because of the expense. Just saying you have to have it is not going to change this fact. In order to insure those people it will have to be subsided. What this means is more taxes for all of us. In my case and many like me what it means is that we will be paying for our own employer driven plans. Then we will also have to pay higher taxes to ensure others.
Lastly do not buy this tax break garbage. How can you provide a tax break to people who pay no, or very little taxes to begin with? The answer is that you can't. So all that leaves is an entitlement program. This would end up being the largest entitlement ever created in the United States and it would have disastrous consequences. If you do not believe this fact just take some time to research the Massachusetts health care plan and what it is costing because this is very similar to what Hillary is proposing.
In closing my answer is. It's a bad idea.
2007-09-18 15:14:22 · answer #4 · answered by Bryan 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Poor people already have free health care and so do Illegals.
It is called medicad and old people have health care it is called medicare. It is the war on the middle class who doesn't have health care. I know of someone who had to quit her job because she needed an operation. When she went on unemployment she got a medical card and the best of care. The mexicans go to the hospital when ever they need to see a doctor for a cold and have free medical and medican. It is not the poor people who do not have free health care I don't know where people get that.
Haven't you ever heard of medicad? All the mexicans have free medical now.
Those with insurance has medical and old people have medical it is the working poor who cannot afford health Insurance. War on the middle class.
2007-09-18 15:03:10 · answer #5 · answered by Vanessa 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Hillary's Healthcare System is back?! Cool! A Bangles reunion can't be far behind!
2007-09-18 15:15:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
She will raise taxes under the inaccurate assumption that raising taxes will increase revenues to the government...she will only "tax the wealthy" though--those people working their butts off with two incomes trying to make a go of it. In the end it is doomed to failure, we cannot tax our way to prosperity however much the Democrats want to believe it.
2007-09-18 15:01:00 · answer #7 · answered by makrothumeo2 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
That's an additional $110-120 on top of the 400billion we already spend. Don't let her fool you. We already have people recieving healthcare at no charge to them but it costs us taxpayers 400 billion annually already.
2007-09-18 14:59:43 · answer #8 · answered by mbush40 6 · 7⤊ 1⤋
The illegals and the poor already have free or reduced cost health care. I don't care about them. I care about our hardworking citizens who aren't able to afford healthcare.
I don't particularly care for her plan but who has a better plan?Our politicans should be discussing and debating actively. We need to as well.
2007-09-18 15:00:11 · answer #9 · answered by Unsub29 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I am against mostly because people scream at the cost of current health care with out wanting to discuss how government intervention into the market has caused it to be so high.
Its not the role of the government to provide people with any type of welfare that duty is in the hands of the individual person.
2007-09-18 14:59:08 · answer #10 · answered by John C 6 · 6⤊ 3⤋