Then the opposite principle applies, one might just as easily have “perfectly valid reasons” for approving.
Not quite. We know what we have with the status quo. If laws are to be passed without anyone knowing what’s in them, all sorts of bad or ridiculous things can be the result.
But you know that.
18,000 people dying every year due to lack of insurance!
I agree. Every American should sit down and read the text of “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009”, or at least a comprehensive synopsis. And failing that, at least look at this flow chart. I would be a LOT happier if more people would read the damned bill, and not just relying on Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck as their sole source of information on this matter.
Surprisingly enough, I couldn’t find the “Death Panel” provision that Sarah Palin was talking about.
50,000 people a year die in automobile accidents. Why not have government take over the nation’s transportation?
You mean like putting up traffic lights, building highways, and paying traffic cops? Radical notion.
ETA but missed the edit window:
People die. In every country, in every society, in every form of government.
I would prefer to take my chances with freedom and fate, as opposed to inevitably underfunded government fiat and lengthy waits.
Anybody know how many people die per capita in Canada because they’re either on a waiting list too long or their illness progresses to the fatal stage because they were on the waiting list too long?
If your belief is that no one will die prematurely because of the existence of government health care, I’ve got this great bridge you might be interested in
Did you ever have to see a specialist in America? First you go see a MD who gives you permission. Then you have to get an appointment. That will generally be months in the future. A lot of people go downhill before they finally get to see one. Some die. Here not elsewhere. Here.
We have the 37th rated health care in the world. Are you happy with that? It is rated behind all the other 1st world countries. You are defending a broken system.
I have friends in Canada. I live near Detroit and Windsor is across the river. Not one of them would trade us. One Canadian friend had a heart transplant. That is a big operation that your insurance company would deny you.
They can quit a job for a better opportunity and not sweat a lapse in coverage. They give very little thought to medical care. They know they have it. They are not familiar with “pre -existing condition”. They don’t live in fear that their company will deny them and they will have a long horrible battle to get covered. Even though the insurance company took premiums for a long time before suddenly discovering you are not covered. What a stupid system
That can’t be right. 18,000 is a blip of the national radar that’s essentially not worth worrying about. The idea that out of 50+ million people not having insurance (plus the millions who suddenly find that their insurance company found some technicality on which to stiff them once they get a nasty medical condition), only 18,000 die of preventable treatable conditions is laughable.
No, I don’t know. Why don’t you provide some cites?
What you’re engaging in is the Perfect Solution Fallacy. Just because a proposed solution is not 100% perfect, is not a reason to reject it. All I’m claiming is that universal healthcare will prevent enough deaths to be worthwhile, not that there will never ever be one single case of somebody slipping through the cracks and dying anyway.
Most illegal aliens do pay taxes- and aren’t eligible for nearly all the federal welfare programs. Cite. Their earnings are reported under a fake (or assumed) SSN, and Federal income tax, Social Security (OASDI) and Medicare taxes are deducted normally.
However, they can’t receive a tax refund (for obvious reasons) and do not earn Social Security credits.
Do you have a cite for “millions”? The number I heard on a radio show (either TAL or TTBOOK) was something like 37,000 over a several-year period. I’m on the blackberry so I can’t google up a cite right now.
No, conjecture on my part, I admit, so I’ll retract it.
I wasn’t necesarily just referring to cancelled contracts - but treatments denied not based on evaluation by medical personel for merit but based on cost savings and the terms of page 782 paragraph 2A of the contract.
OK. It’s easy to get caught up in the UHC rhetoric, so I understand.
Other bumbers I heard on the Tavish Smiley show this weekend–people who get sick have much better outcomes in the US than in the UK. The one I remember best was a 19 percent fatality rate for prostate cancer in the US versus something like 46 percent in the UK. You never hear these numbers, only the ones where the US does worse (which are caused by factors beyond the health care system, such as obesity).
I’ve heard the prostate cancer number in several places now - I have to wonder if that’s some sort of outlier that makes the situation look worse than it is, for it to be brought up as an example several times.
I’ve seen that number at least four times in these threads- and it may not be accurate anyway.
Hmmm, any credit to this idea:
Certain moneyed interests know in advance that they’ve bought enough senators to prevent anything they really don’t like from passing. For cover and for politics, they drum up a bunch of nonsense-babbling teabaggers and fucknuts to protest everything. Obama meanwhile is having his sober, reasoned dialogue on the issue, until said moneyed interests pull the leashes on their senators. Whoops! Obama can’t get the thing passed.
So on TV to Joe Six Pack it looks like Obama is saying, ‘I guess you whackjobs have a case (and I’m sooo scared of your guns), so how about I gut my own proposal in compromise?’, making him appear to be an idiot. Sort of an application of Liberal’s fallacy for a media audience?
Do you believe it’s a legitimate function of government to attack a country that is no threat to us?
Oh, by the way, you may be interested in Section 246 of H.R 3200:
Happy now?
Of course, that must be it, it’s all a right-wing conspiracy. I mean it couldn’t possibly be down to an inexperienced President and total disarray among the Democrats, could it?
This is redundant.