When will people understand nothing is free?

Question

People are complaining that they can't afford health insurance in the US, and they want it made available for free. Let me ask this? Why don't those who are complaining cut out your internet, cable, cell phone, etc. and all the other things that are for pleasure and use that money to pay for insurance? Government run healthcare is not the answer folks.

Answer 1

You are 100% correct, Sir.
And Common Sense... yes, mild_irritant is serious.
He's also deranged and delusional. Don't mind him.
I doubt he's ever READ the Constitution... which explains why he thinks it's the purpose of the Government to provide such things.

Look... there are not as many people without Health Insurance as the media would have you think... at least... not LEGAL citizens. They count kids amongst the numbers which skews them because those kids would be covered if their parents would WORK instead of being on welfare and other government entitlement programs in the FIRST place.

You have the rights to:
LIFE
LIBERTY
PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS

Note that last one does not say happiness, it says its pursuit.
You don't have the right to free health care. Earn it. You don't have the right to never be offended. Deal with it. You have the right to try to live a happy life. If you achieve it? Great.
Next thing you know, they'll be saying you have the RIGHT to cable TV... cellphones... a car...

Listen, what is more basic than FOOD... but you don't have the RIGHT to food. You can't walk into a grocery store and take whatever you want. You have to earn the money and pay for it.
FREEDOM ITSELF isn't free. Millions of brave Americans have died to earn it for you and some are even dying today but you'll find that many don't understand that or respect that, either!
The Liberal mindset is as naive as it is misguided.


Oh, and one more thing for the uninformed like mild-irritant:

80% of homes BELOW the poverty level in America have 2 TV sets.
Don't sit there preaching about those who have no health care have no cable TV. Many people are just STUPID with their money and instead of spending on what they should, they spend on what they want... then expect others to bail them out. It's the old ant and grasshopper story.

Finally... there IS a need for reform in the health care system but it's the labs charging so much for tests and the pharmaceutical companies charging so much for drugs that kill the industry. This will NOT change if the government provides the healthcare... they will just charge the same amount to the government.
What you need is regulation of charges and a free market system that provides opportunity for competition to drive prices down. Make health insurance portable like car insurance.

Answer 2

"...to provide for the general welfare..." statement in the preamble to the constitution would have quite a different meaning to the founding fathers in 1787 than it does to a "modern liberal" in 2007. The primare function of government is to establish law, order, and security. If it were not for these needs government would have no need to exist. The founding fathers of the United States would today be considered Libertarians of one sort or another. So to use such an argument is not in your favor.

If health care was socialized in this country the best and the brightest of our citizens would no longer become doctors because there would be no money in it, health research would lag without investment. All of the great benifits we have today would be thrown away, not to mention the fact that our government could not afford such a system. It isn't as if Health Care is being denied to anyone, they can get it, it just may take them a bit longer to pay for it. Even so, I do believe that there is a way we can offer Health Insurance to everyone through the private system, or at least an attempt should be made.

Answer 3

Nobody has suggested that UNIVERSAL HEALTH INSURANCE will be 'free', and nobody has suggested that government employ doctors or own hospitals. That half of the equasion will remain the same as it is now. The argument FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH INSURANCE is that it will replace many of the costly and overlapping programs that now exist..such as medicaid and medicare. and to some degree the VA system. It will also insure almost everyone...something that private insurance, as costly as it is, cannot or will not do. Add to that some form of co-pay and deductible charges, which will also help to finance part of the cost. There will also be a huge reduction in duplicated overhead....which is why trans-national corporations buy each other out....fewer people to do more work using computers and modern managment techniques. Another advantage is that the workings of a national health insurance plan will mean that its workings will be public and transparent as there will be a large investment in code enforcment to prevent 'ripping off'...something that the almost totally unregulated health insurance companies do now. Last, non-profit means there's no profit overhead to add to the cost of service. All in all a better deal all around!

Answer 4

The spending could be cut if there were some type of voucher program that would pay the doctor, then take it out of the person's tax refund at the end of the year. A person could go to the doctor once a week and pay for it and the total would be less than family coverage insurance fees paid for by federal funding. Plus if the person does not go to the doctor at all during the year, all that money spent by the federel funds for their insurance was wasted.

Answer 5

A lot of things are free like the air you breath, but that is only because nobody has figured how to charge you for it yet. There are also a lot of things that we pay for with taxes, but are not charged when we use them, like police protection, most roads, public schools and libraries. Many countries include medical care in their tax supported services, and the US does for veterans, the old and the very poor. There are arguments to be made not to include the rest of the population, but money is not among them since it would cost most people less in extra taxes than they already pay for private insurance. The only people who would pay more are the currently uninsured and people who are already covered by government provided care.

Answer 6

Because the charges for Internet, cell phones, cable TV, and other luxuries don't add up to the $1200.00 per month required by many health insurance plans.

Even doctors are finding themselves in trouble for health care: while doctors often treat other doctors for free, the labs, hospitals and pharmacies do not. That's the only reason that most doctors bother with the American Medical Association--they offer a health-insurance plan, albeit an expensive one.

It's no better for lawyers now. The problem is that health care can do a great deal for us now, but it has become enormously expensive. The technology has outrun our traditional methods of paying for care, and we have to come up with different solutions.

The best response to a question like this is to ask the asker who supplies his medical insurance, and how sure is he that it will continue at its present rate, and how sure is he that it won't be arbitrarily cancelled next month or next year?

Answer 7

But you have ABSOLUTELY no problem sending half a trillion dollars over to Iraq, right? Why does your disgust for handouts only include your "fellow" Americans?

And of course, you have links proving your assertions about people in America wanting "Free" health insurance? My question to you would be, so poorer people can have insurance or they can have communications, they shouldn't want both? And when grandma has a prescription bottle in one hand and loaf of bread in the other, trying to decide which one she can afford this month, well, that's just tough too, isn't it?

Do you believe your cable TV bill (for example), is equitable? You probably have a couple premium movie channels, digital music stations, etc. and you're paying $100 a month (at LEAST) for that.

Even though you only can watch one channel per TV at a time, you are being charged all month for watching EVERY channel, including the foreign language ones, the stupid "Historic Golf" channels, the Infomercials which take over virtually EVERY channel from 2:00 AM to 6:00 each day, so you're actually only getting around 20 hours per day (averaged) of legitimate programming for your $100 a month. And you find this equitable? For a service which permeates the globe, for which they still charge infrastructure fees? For an industry which forced your Federal Government to require the complete cessation of "over-the-airwaves" (AKA "Free" TV) transmissions, FORCING anyone who wants to catch the local evening news to purchase a cable TV contract, one of the few legally sanctioned monopolies allowed to exist in America. One cable company is not allowed to compete in another cable company's "region", which is simply State Sponsored Monopolism, which kills competition quicker than a wide stance in a Minneapolis men's room kills careers.

As a second point, if you don't believe in free handouts, why do you allow these cable monopolies? What's more free than giving huge Telecommunications "Captive Consumers", who have no choice, if they want the service, they have to pay whatever price the monopoly dictates? Why is EVERY health insurance policy basically the same, no matter what company you get the quote from? Speaking of insurance companies, why do you insist on paying insurance companies for health insurance? They aren't doctors, they don't encourage cures or health, all they care about is PROFIT, they do nothing in the Healthcare equation between doctor and patient except skim off large amounts of revenue, while contributing nothing back.

In fact, since pimps add nothing to prostitution, but skim off the bulk of the profits, you could call insurance carriers the pimps of the Healthcare Industry. Why are you defending pimps? Because they're Republican? Does being Republican and wealthy make stealing people's money alright?

How did Rich people make all their money, if it wasn't from the exploited labor of the masses? If that isn't getting wealth "For Free", what is it?

Edit to Jacob: Oh yes, first the Dems were courting the "Illegal Immigrant" vote, now it's the "Comatose Folks in Rest Homes" vote. "Why do you think senior citizens consistently vote "Democrat"? Because they had their savings accounts wiped out when Fred Thompson relaxed regulations in the Savings and Loan industry, causing a $4 trillion dollar collapse, because the pensions they spent a lifetime paying into (much like your cherished "Health Insurance") has been embezzled, because the shady mortgage refinancing craze foreclosed on the home they spent 30 years paying off, are allpretty compelling reasons why they vote the way they do. But that's fine, you've shown your disdain for women, blacks, now seniors, assuming they can't think for themselves, simply because YOU lack the skill yourself.

The biggest difference between the Partys is, Democrats see people, Republicans see votes, things to be manipulated into voting the "right" way.

Edit to Common Sense (the most inappropriate handle in Yahoo Answers), I would suggest you read the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States. There is a line in there which SPECIFICALLY says "promote the general welfare"

"We, the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Trust, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America"

Didn't you ever watch Schoolhouse Rock? They TAUGHT this stuff on Saturday Mornings, between cartoons. What, now Republicans as kids didn't watch cartoons?
Beautiful words, arent they? Sure beat "Phony Soldiers" by a country mile.

Answer 8

People who have a chronic condition or major health event in their past need a bit more than cell phone and cable money to pay their insurance costs.
Your argument is fine for people in good health - but then, they don't need insurance... until they're not healthy.

Also, only cable is entertainment.
Internet is required for some jobs to connect in to work from home, by the way. And it's the land line phone that goes first in costs cutting, not the cell phone - again, job requirements.

Answer 9

Government run health care is the right answer.
Why should people have to pay for an essential basic need as health care is? In many parts of the world health care is free, including Cuba.
We shouldn't mix business with health; and a rich country like the US not having a national health care system is appaling.
Profit and more profit is the foundation of a capitalist society bound to swallow itself because of monstrous greed.
Shame on you, USA.

Answer 10

The group plan we have is nearly $1000 a month for family coverage. The employer pays for the cost of the employee. I can cut cable, cell phone, Internet service, all my utilities, and still not have enough. When will people understand that the cost of health care is out of control. It has more than doubled in the last 5-6 years.