forgottenliberty.com

Yes, what if the people in Washington’s parents or grandparents were forced into this kind of health care? Do they realize it is worse than the government run health care currently instituted? Will we only become enraged when it is our family members who die too early, because they were denied simple procedures due to, let’s face it, age?
That is ageism. That is discrimination. Isn’t this administration supposed to be sensitive to discrimination?

Discrimination is only a tool for this administration, and for the left as a whole. It is a means to an end, and that end is control.

Part of this has to do with “sustainable development.” One of the goals stated by adherents to this Marxist scheme is to lower the human population of the world to “sustainable” levels. “Knocking off granny,” or in lib-speak, “dying with dignity,” is one way to get there. The sad thing is, how long before it’s disabled people as well? After all, it’s not cost effective to treat the physically disabled, mentally ill, or mentally retarded. Most of them don’t work, and don’t contribute to society. Wouldn’t euthanizing them be more cost effective as well? It’s a slippery slope, and the left is all too ready to take a slide.

I agree Matt. It gives me chills to think about my mother who is on disability.

Have we learned nothing from history? It seems as though this is the beginning of Hitler ideology right here in America.
Unfortunately, I do not think Americans are quite getting it. As I spoke with a lawyer in my community yesterday, I realized by his lackadaisical response what mindset many Americans hold. He said, “Everything is going to be OK. We still have our freedom. This is America.”
Many are blind to the writing on the wall.

It seems like the American Idol crowd is running the country. Voting for anything of substance is too taxing on the brain. So now we’ve got the winner of the popularity contest in the White House. damn.Sure do miss Dubya.

Through a subsidized multi-pay system in which a risk equalization pool exists, competition amongst private insurerers ensues when situations such as prolonging “Gramps’s one more year of jello” arise.

How about relaying emotion through efficient thought……rather than telling everyone how much you love your momma, you’re not the only one.

Let the spelling trumps ensue…….now

So, do you think competition is a good thing or a bad thing?

Competition, is a great thing.

People are hesitant to accept the idea of government subsidies (in concern to Health Care) because it may extinguish competition, hence eliminating any idea competitive price differentiation, furthermore allowing us to be further knelt over and given the Stars & Stripes stamped suppository.

I don’t accept the idea of subsidies for anything. Any time the government subsidizes something it makes the subsidized company or industry lose touch with supply and demand and market values. It destroys market driven pricing because it makes less profitable items, or items where demand is low, profitable because the government is making it that way. Instead of a company being forced to modify or change it’s product or pricing it just relies on a check from the government. Then there is the question of whether government subsidies are even constitutional? Are there any examples of government subsidization where someone other than the company or industry getting subsidized profits from it?

Sorry if this seems generalized, but in most cases you’re right, government subsidies have no place. However were speaking of the general well-being(health) of the populous; which should not be regarded as some commodity, or a luxury.
Insurance companies will be forced to compete with one another in regards to what the governing body decides it will not cover; i.e routine prostate exams which are only in place because of countless malpractice suites.

So should we do the same thing for the food supply (above and beyond the subsidies farmers already get) since it is directly related to the general well-being of the populous? Surely, food should not be considered a luxury. How about the same with clothing and shelter. Everyone needs those things so should we subsidize them as well? I think there is much we can do to foster more competition in the field of health insurance while at the same time making health care more affordable. However, I don’t see how subsidizing health insurance companies would accomplish this. Nor do I see how the health care bill in Congress will lower costs and increase competition. Some of the new analysis has estimated that 80 million people would lose their insurance under the current bill.

The aforementioned are already offered, and subsidized.
However Brooks Brothers Suits, and crab legs are luxuries, and are options people have to weigh on a personal level in regards to it’s utility, respectively.
Why this concept (while extremely simplified in terms of analogy) cannot correlate in terms of Health Care is beyond me.
I don’t necessarily agree with this administrations plan, or potential plan at that. I’d personally like to see a plan sampled from the same as Germany, Ireland, Netherlands. And given the breadth of the U.S. in contrast to these European countries; have the governing of the REP (risk equalization pool) as localized as possible.

Not everyone has their food and basic living requirements subsidized by the government (the USSR tried that and it didn’t work so well). However, the aforementioned are subsidized on some level (which I don’t agree with) in the form of food stamps, welfare, and government housing for the poor. The poor also have almost completely subsidized health care in Medicaid. Subsidizing health care for everyone in this country, because it’s not “some commodity or luxury”, would be like giving everyone food stamps for their necessities, and a living allowance for adequate shelter and clothing. These are not “some commodity or luxury” so shouldn’t they fall under the same category as health care? If the government will be responsible for our health wouldn’t it also be in it’s best interest to make sure we are eating healthy and are properly sheltered? Why should health care be paid for but not proper food, clothing and shelter? Where is the money going to come from for these subsidies? Are you saying that since we already pay for some then we should pay for all?