Welcome to the APBWeb.

View Poll Results: Are you in favor of Universal Health Care?

Voters
32. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    1 3.13%
  • No

    29 90.63%
  • Yes but under a different proposed legislation

    2 6.25%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 56
  1. #21
    MacLean's Avatar
    MacLean is offline O/R Gun mod
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    09-05-07
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    11,772
    Rep Power
    4546391
    Quote Originally Posted by thanantos View Post
    We are the only industrialized nation that allows that to happen.
    Actually, it happens in Canada, England, and elsewhere socialized medicine is practiced.

    It happens because health care is rationed in those places.

    No thanks.
    I'm your huckleberry...

    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentus telum est!

    You can be the weapon, and the gun in your hand is a tool - or the gun is a weapon and you are the tool.


    I was looking for a saint who was a devil of a lover,
    but every girl I found was either one way or the other...



  2. #22
    Xiphos's Avatar
    Xiphos is offline I Void Warranties
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    03-09-08
    Location
    Thermopylae
    Posts
    8,337
    Rep Power
    7688651
    The federal government can't run any program without bungling it with inefficiency and incompetency. Even the state governments have the same problem on an even smaller scale. Sit in DMV lately? Why does anyone think that the government in charge of health means that the quality of the system, or anyone's health will get better?

    No country that has a government run health care system does it well. Socialized medicine is a complete disaster in Canada and Great Britain, whose citizens travel to the US for care and medicine. They've got years of practice in those countries, yet they are circling the drain. How are we going to do it better? We're not.

    I'm against government run health care for the simple reason, the federal government in incompetent at everything else and health care is too important.

    The government is making itself the provider of a health care as a right. The problem with this is that the government is going to provide it off the backs of other people. The right of an individual to health care via government, means they have a right to the money in my pocket, and the pockets of an ever shrinking group of tax payers. Someone else gets to exert power over a portion of my life by government coercion in my pay check. The government is increasing that coercion in people's pay checks in growing leaps and bounds the last several decades (I'm not exonerating Republicans here either.) The less of this coercion the better, and health care is going to be a giant increase.

    I can already say that my current employer provided insurance is horrifically expensive and has me on the brink of financial solvency. My family's health costs are nearly a 1/3 of my take home pay. The increases that are conservatively estimated if the government implements these plans will send us into financial ruin. I don't know how I'll pay for it.

    And what is all this for? Universal health care? There isn't a person in this country that can't go to a hospital and get care. A friend who recently had a heart attack, and no health insurance, was given a pat on the back and told his entire bill would be comped by the hospital. No bill at all. Nobody is turned away from health care today, we don't need the government getting involved and screwing things up.

    Nothing good will ever come from the government running health care. Ever.
    Pleasing nobody, one person at a time.

    That which does not kill me, better start fucking running.

    If I lived every day like it was my last, the body count would be staggering.

    I intend to go in harm's way. -John Paul Jones

    Hunt the wolf, and bring light to the dark places that others fear to go. LT COL Dave Grossman

  3. #23
    121Traffic's Avatar
    121Traffic is offline Just Us
    Verified LEO
    Site Moderator
    Join Date
    01-09-06
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    4,547
    Rep Power
    6332979
    I don't actually know enough about this subject to argue intelligently about it. I did, however, work an H1N1 clinic the other day (special duty to provide security), and I got to see a little bit of the government doling out care (it was run by a tri-county health board). Holy shit, talk about inefficiency and mass confusion.
    "If anything worthwhile comes of this tragedy, it should be the realization by every citizen that often the only thing that stands between them and losing everything they hold dear... is the man wearing a badge." -- Ronald Reagan, in the wake of the deaths of 4 CHP troopers in the Newhall Incident, 1970

    The opinions given in my posts DO NOT reflect the opinions, views, policies, and/or procedures of my employing agency. They are my personal opinions only, thereby releasing my agency of any liability, or involvement in anything posted under the username "121Traffic" on O/R.

  4. #24
    thanantos's Avatar
    thanantos is offline Officer First Class
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    10-13-09
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    174
    Rep Power
    136635
    Lewisipo: The 10th amendment has been all shot to hell by the FCC, NTSB, CIA, FBI, blah, blah, blah. That is an old argument that just doesn't work anymore. The feds pay for all sorts of things the founders never intended.

    Really the core of my constitutional argument here is that you cannot take half a sentence of one law out of context and apply it. You certainly cannot take half a sentence of one law and apply it completely out of context to a completely different situation. Especially that law. It is very specific in it's scope. It applies a specific right to a person being criminally prosecuted, nothing more or less.

    #1. You know the people affected by this is you and me. The douchebag crack dealers we deal with already have free healthcare in Medicare because on paper they have 0 assets and income.

    The person we want to protect is the cop who effs up his knee in a foot chase 10 years into a great career and finds out 3 months after being discharged from duty his wife has cancer (sorry for the emotional argument). Yeah the ER will give her "life saving" treatment meaning they will attempt to resuscitate her when she finally goes into cardiac arrest from the cancer, but she has no way to pay for what would be truly lifesaving surgery or chemo.

    #2. The government would not be providing healthcare only payment for healthcare. Big difference meaning no government run hospitals (thank god).

    I should have mentioned that a public insurance has a sort of built-in legal protection for doctors and hospitals. What happens now is some a-hole goes to the ER for a migraine and finds out 3 months later that he has prostate cancer and sues the hospital for not finding it sooner. So to prevent this type of craziness doctors run all sorts of unnecessary tests on that 1 in a million shot that it might be this or that.

    What a public insurance would provide is a panel of doctors (possibly the AMA, but who knows?) that would set a recommended course of care for each symptom or disease and how much the public insurance would pay for each procedure. If you choose to have an additional procedure done outside of what they will pay for feel free, but you pay for it. If your doctor thinks he needs to go outside the course of treatment for your specific condition he can, but has to explain why. Important to note is that insurance companies already do this, but tried being firmer about it and got whacked in the media (remember HMO's?). Once this is in place the other insurance companies will follow suit and costs come down.

    This will inherently reduce litigation costs because when the previous a-hole sues him he can defend himself by saying he followed the recommended course of treatment for a migraine.

    #3. I know the drug companies argument is that this will reduce innovation, but I'm not buying it. Maybe to a very small extent, but this is still a capitalist country and people still like to make money. People will innovate regardless, and there will still be billions in that industry to pay for it.

    #4. I also see the argument for rationed care, but our system would be different than other country's. Ours is the government just being one insurance company in a sea of them. No government run hospitals, no government doctors. Just a single insurance company that you don't have to belong to if you don't want to.
    The truth is you're the weak, and I am the tyranny of evil men.
    But I'm tryin' Ringo.
    I'm tryin'...real hard...to be the shepherd.

    DSAM-MI.org

  5. #25
    thanantos's Avatar
    thanantos is offline Officer First Class
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    10-13-09
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    174
    Rep Power
    136635
    Quote Originally Posted by Xiphos View Post
    I can already say that my current employer provided insurance is horrifically expensive and has me on the brink of financial solvency. My family's health costs are nearly a 1/3 of my take home pay. The increases that are conservatively estimated if the government implements these plans will send us into financial ruin. I don't know how I'll pay for it.
    Sorry to hear that Xiphos. I wish your family all the best, and thank god for your friend.

    My only argument here would be (and maybe this won't apply to you), but how would you or I pay for your families healthcare needs do if we somehow lost our jobs?

    We have a guy at my department that is losing his job because he has cancer. Because of his disease he can no longer perform his duties. That means he losses his health insurance unless he can fork out $1500 a month with no job to pay for the cobra plan. Without his insurance he no longer can get the chemo/surgery/rehab/medications he needs and will die. Will he die anyway? Maybe, maybe not.
    The truth is you're the weak, and I am the tyranny of evil men.
    But I'm tryin' Ringo.
    I'm tryin'...real hard...to be the shepherd.

    DSAM-MI.org

  6. #26
    213th's Avatar
    213th is online now Solipsist
    Supporting Member Lvl 3
    Join Date
    12-19-05
    Location
    64.3 N 149.1 W
    Posts
    3,635
    Rep Power
    1673748
    Quote Originally Posted by pgg View Post
    How about the gov't actually allowing competition? Here in CA there are only a few insurance companies. The gov't does NOT allow any others to open or compete.

    Along with that, how much of our premiums have been raised to offset the cost of illegal immigrants? They are not paying their bills, and they use the ER as a doctor's office. Around here maybe 1 out of every 10 people in the ER have insurance. Most of the others are illegals. So that one person gets stuck paying for everyone else, otherwise the hospital goes out of business. If the hospitals were allowed to turn away these people (or better yet these people weren't even in the country) then our premiums would be alot less.
    Of course! That is definetly acceptable "reform" to me. Those kinds of things would ultimately lower cost over all.
    He who has the money, signs the cheques.
    He who signs the cheques, makes the rules.
    He who makes the rules, has the power.
    He who has the power, has the money.

  7. #27
    Five-0's Avatar
    Five-0 is offline Super Moderator
    Premium Lifetime Member
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    05-15-06
    Posts
    10,982
    Rep Power
    8357005
    Quote Originally Posted by thanantos View Post
    Lewisipo: The 10th amendment has been all shot to hell by the FCC, NTSB, CIA, FBI, blah, blah, blah. That is an old argument that just doesn't work anymore. The feds pay for all sorts of things the founders never intended.
    That doesn't make it right. The federal government uses federal funding to do this. Since the States no longer have representation in Congress this was easily done. This is why the 17th Amendment harmful to the Union. The founding fathers wanted about 95% of government to fall to the states and local government outside of a time of war. I think we can all agree the federal government is too big and screws things up. So I fail to see why abdicating power to the fed is a good thing outside of the powers that are enumerated to it.



    Quote Originally Posted by thanantos View Post
    Really the core of my constitutional argument here is that you cannot take half a sentence of one law out of context and apply it. You certainly cannot take half a sentence of one law and apply it completely out of context to a completely different situation. Especially that law. It is very specific in it's scope. It applies a specific right to a person being criminally prosecuted, nothing more or less.
    How is it being applied out of context?


    Quote Originally Posted by thanantos View Post
    #1. You know the people affected by this is you and me. The douchebag crack dealers we deal with already have free healthcare in Medicare because on paper they have 0 assets and income.
    So by taking more from those that pay taxes this going to make it better?




    Quote Originally Posted by thanantos View Post
    The person we want to protect is the cop who effs up his knee in a foot chase 10 years into a great career and finds out 3 months after being discharged from duty his wife has cancer (sorry for the emotional argument). Yeah the ER will give her "life saving" treatment meaning they will attempt to resuscitate her when she finally goes into cardiac arrest from the cancer, but she has no way to pay for what would be truly lifesaving surgery or chemo.
    This is a job for charity on the part of the public, and sound financial planning on the part of the individual/family. Lack of responsibility on the part of an individual does not constitute a valid reason for the government to take from me and my family and give to someone else. Especially since I am making the financial sacrifices to prepare for such situations.




    Quote Originally Posted by thanantos View Post
    #2. The government would not be providing healthcare only payment for healthcare. Big difference meaning no government run hospitals (thank god).
    See the V.A. system. With the government cutting costs, forcing hospitals to provide for abortion, paying a portion of actual costs private hospitals will go away. Yes, the Catholic hospital my wife works at will close its doors before being required to perform abortions by the imperial federal govenment.





    Quote Originally Posted by thanantos View Post
    I should have mentioned that a public insurance has a sort of built-in legal protection for doctors and hospitals. What happens now is some a-hole goes to the ER for a migraine and finds out 3 months later that he has prostate cancer and sues the hospital for not finding it sooner. So to prevent this type of craziness doctors run all sorts of unnecessary tests on that 1 in a million shot that it might be this or that.

    Yes, another reason for tort reform.




    Quote Originally Posted by thanantos View Post
    What a public insurance would provide is a panel of doctors (possibly the AMA, but who knows?) that would set a recommended course of care for each symptom or disease and how much the public insurance would pay for each procedure. If you choose to have an additional procedure done outside of what they will pay for feel free, but you pay for it. If your doctor thinks he needs to go outside the course of treatment for your specific condition he can, but has to explain why. Important to note is that insurance companies already do this, but tried being firmer about it and got whacked in the media (remember HMO's?). Once this is in place the other insurance companies will follow suit and costs come down.

    This will inherently reduce litigation costs because when the previous a-hole sues him he can defend himself by saying he followed the recommended course of treatment for a migraine.
    Costs will go up due to both parties playing politics. This article says it better than I can:
    Bending the Health-Care Cost Curve—Upward by Paul Howard, City Journal 18 November 2009

    HMOs were brought to us by the one and only Ted Kennedy. Funny how the Dems are using his name as a rally cry for this. I seem to remember a panal saying that women shouldn't get mammagrams until age 50 this week. When the bad press from doctors reached a head they retreated. This was a cost cutting measure that would have led to increased cases of breast cancer. The #1 cancer killer in women. I would hate for one of those women to be the wife of a ten year cop that was medically retired do to effing up his knee during a foot pursuit.

    Lawmaker says health bill won't limit mammograms - washingtonpost.com
    Lord knows this was reversed when word of it got out. By the way, not a single doctor on the panal that made the decision in the first place.




    Quote Originally Posted by thanantos View Post
    #3. I know the drug companies argument is that this will reduce innovation, but I'm not buying it. Maybe to a very small extent, but this is still a capitalist country and people still like to make money. People will innovate regardless, and there will still be billions in that industry to pay for it.

    This is not a capitalist program. Business will be told how much they can charge in order to control costs. Treatment will be cut to control costs/



    Quote Originally Posted by thanantos View Post
    #4. I also see the argument for rationed care, but our system would be different than other country's. Ours is the government just being one insurance company in a sea of them. No government run hospitals, no government doctors. Just a single insurance company that you don't have to belong to if you don't want to.
    A single run health insurance company that will not have to make a profit. It will destroy private insurance companies that have to make a profit to exist. That profit margin is roughly 2% by the way.

    Below are opinions by a Libertarian talk show host. Not a Dem or Republican.

    DON'T BELIEVE THIS NONSENSE ABOUT HEALTH INSURANCE COMPETITION - Nealz Nuze on boortz.com

    DON'T BELIEVE THIS NONSENSE ABOUT HEALTH INSURANCE COMPETITION

    By Neal Boortz @ August 5, 2009 8:20 AM Permalink | Comments (36) | TrackBacks (0)

    The Democrats and looters want you to believe that they're just going to set up a "public option," a government health care plan that will "compete" with the private insurance plans and keep them honest.
    OK .. let's build a little scenario here. You're in business for yourself. You own a restaurant. You find out the government is going to open a restaurant right next door to you. The government says that they're not trying to run you out of business .. they just want to give you a little competition so that you will improve your product. You find out, though, that while your restaurant will have to operate at a profit to survive, the government restaurant can operate at a loss ... for ever. If the government restaurant needs money all it has to do is go out into the community and seize it. If you tried to do that you would be arrested and charged with robbery. You also learn that the government restaurant is going to be able to set all the rules about how you operate: How you cook and serve your food, what kind of menu you will have, the hours you will be open ... everything. Those same rules will not necessarily apply to the government restaurant.
    Yeah .. that's some fair competition, isn't it? Can you tell me how you are possibly going to stay in business? The answer is, you won't. Sooner or later you close your doors, and if your customers want to eat ... they head to the government restaurant.
    That's the story of the "public option" health insurance Obama and the looters want. The goal is to run private insurance out of business. That way, by default, the government becomes the single payer. Absolute government control, the dream of every Democrat politician.

    Oh yeah, health insurance profit margins:
    FACT CHECK: Health insurer profits not so fat - Yahoo! News

    Meanwhile, fishing in Russia:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkzV5AIK8iM
    "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." -- Frederic Bastiat

    "Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never really care for anything else thereafter." Ernest Hemingway

    The opinions given in my signatures & threads DO NOT reflect the opinions, views, policies, and/or procedures of my employing agency. They are my personal opinions only, thereby releasing my agency of any liability, or involvement in anything posted under the username "Five-0" on Officerresource.com

  8. #28
    Pinki's Avatar
    Pinki is offline Sergeant
    Supporting Member Lvl 2
    Join Date
    12-22-06
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,729
    Rep Power
    462830
    The recent "Governmental Task Force" recommendation that Mammograms are not needed for women 40-50 is a prime example of what Universal/Governmental healthcare means, it means NO care or Poor care. Exactly what kind of quality ever comes from lack of incentive? It means poor quality healthcare workers and dirty hospitals.
    Arm the sheep!

  9. #29
    thanantos's Avatar
    thanantos is offline Officer First Class
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    10-13-09
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    174
    Rep Power
    136635
    Thanks for the arguments so far guys.

    Can't say anyone's changed my mind yet, but you guys make some comvincing arguments and it is good to hear them.
    The truth is you're the weak, and I am the tyranny of evil men.
    But I'm tryin' Ringo.
    I'm tryin'...real hard...to be the shepherd.

    DSAM-MI.org

  10. #30
    Five-0's Avatar
    Five-0 is offline Super Moderator
    Premium Lifetime Member
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    05-15-06
    Posts
    10,982
    Rep Power
    8357005
    Back at you. Good banter here. As you have Libertarian leanings might I suggest this site daily for NeelzNuze. Libertarian Talk show host that I think you would enjoy.

    http://boortz.com/

    Click the link, "More in Nealz Nuze" in the center of the page. Good stuff.

    Meanwhile, fishing in Russia:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkzV5AIK8iM
    "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." -- Frederic Bastiat

    "Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never really care for anything else thereafter." Ernest Hemingway

    The opinions given in my signatures & threads DO NOT reflect the opinions, views, policies, and/or procedures of my employing agency. They are my personal opinions only, thereby releasing my agency of any liability, or involvement in anything posted under the username "Five-0" on Officerresource.com

  11. #31
    thanantos's Avatar
    thanantos is offline Officer First Class
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    10-13-09
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    174
    Rep Power
    136635
    Agreed. I will check that out and in return here is a recent episode of "This American Life" where they attempt to explain why healthcare costs are so high:
    This American Life

  12. #32
    Cidp24's Avatar
    Cidp24 is offline Tempus Fugit
    Premium Lifetime Member
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    07-17-06
    Location
    Crossroads of the Sunny South
    Posts
    8,129
    Rep Power
    3999624
    I am much more in favor of tort reform as a tool to reduce heathcare costs. Medicine is NOT an exact science in all cases and mistakes happen. I think suits should be limited to gross negligence before they even make it to trial. Maybe by use of some impartial board or something.
    *************************
    "It wouldn't take much for me to up and run...
    to another life somewhere in the sun."
    *************************
    "There's something inherently wrong with having to put on a bullet-proof vest and a gun to go to work."-(An old friend)


    Any statements or opinions given in my postings or profile do not reflect the opinions, views, policies, and/or procedures of my employer or anyone else other than me. They are my personal opinions or statements only, thereby releasing my employer , any other entity, or any other person of any liability or involvement in anything posted under the username "Cidp24" on O/R.

  13. #33
    thanantos's Avatar
    thanantos is offline Officer First Class
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    10-13-09
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    174
    Rep Power
    136635
    Quote Originally Posted by Five-0 View Post
    How is it being applied out of context?
    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
    I think we may just have to agree to disagree on this point because I really don't get your argument that his can be applied to anything other than a criminal prosecution. That very well may be my lack of understanding rather than your interpretation.

    However, In my estimation it is similar to taking a sentence out of a speeding statute and trying to apply it to an improper turn case. Each law must be read, interpreted and applied in it's entirety and within it's own context. We can't pick and choose which pieces we want to pull out of them and which we disregard.
    The truth is you're the weak, and I am the tyranny of evil men.
    But I'm tryin' Ringo.
    I'm tryin'...real hard...to be the shepherd.

    DSAM-MI.org

  14. #34
    Xiphos's Avatar
    Xiphos is offline I Void Warranties
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    03-09-08
    Location
    Thermopylae
    Posts
    8,337
    Rep Power
    7688651
    Quote Originally Posted by thanantos View Post
    We have a guy at my department that is losing his job because he has cancer. Because of his disease he can no longer perform his duties. That means he losses his health insurance unless he can fork out $1500 a month with no job to pay for the cobra plan. Without his insurance he no longer can get the chemo/surgery/rehab/medications he needs and will die. Will he die anyway? Maybe, maybe not.
    If he lost his job and insurance he'd probably get comped on all the expenses associated with his health care. That's what's driving up costs for those who carry health insurance, which is why the system needs fixing. But in reality he'd get treatment and no one would expect him to pay if he didn't have insurance.
    Pleasing nobody, one person at a time.

    That which does not kill me, better start fucking running.

    If I lived every day like it was my last, the body count would be staggering.

    I intend to go in harm's way. -John Paul Jones

    Hunt the wolf, and bring light to the dark places that others fear to go. LT COL Dave Grossman

  15. #35
    Notorious's Avatar
    Notorious is offline Covering your 6 since 1994
    Verified LEO
    Site Moderator
    Join Date
    11-18-09
    Location
    Lib Central
    Posts
    2,559
    Rep Power
    2700393
    Let insurance companies sell their products across state lines and get rid of false parameters and barriers put in place by the government. Let the free market decide what healthcare should be.

    Expand the current Plan 125 so that more than $2,400 per annum can be deducted pre-tax for healthcare. If we are allowed to have a Plan 529 type of investment then you can let people choose their own expenditures without the involvement of government.

    Of course, that obviates the need for bigger government which will never happen since the first role of a government is to self-perpetuate and expand. When was the last time any government chose to shrink itself and get rid of departments or programs?
    Nothing clever here except my zombie defense gun... now where is that darn flashlight...


  16. #36
    lewisipso's Avatar
    lewisipso is offline Injustice/Indifference/In God we trust
    Supporting Member Lvl 3
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    02-02-07
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    14,661
    Rep Power
    6822867
    May I publiclly thank each contrbuting member participating in this thread. Politics, religion and the like are hard subjects to argue, debate and generally speak of. To see two sides of a very public and sometimes emotional subject exchange ideas without the usual emotional party bashing is refreshing indeed. When such subjects are freely spoken about with informational views, opinions and facts the outcome can only be positive.
    While educated individual discuss and debat such issues rationally there is the oportunity for the uneducated peron, such as myself to learn. I don't have a lot of time on my hands with work, work, work and sometimes a homelife. Therefore I am able to kill two birds with one stone sort of. I can surf the site that I love so much and learn from knowing people who are not afraid to express their opinions, arguments and facts in a diplomatic setting. Normally in such a setting it gets a little hot in the kitchen and someone gets their feelings hurt and the discussion stops. No one benefits from that.
    Thank you again and hopefully this and other discussions will continue in such fashion. I look forward to it.
    Do not war for peace. If you must war, war for justice. For without justice there is no peace. -me

    We are who we choose to be.

    R.I.P. Arielle. 08/20/2010-09/16/2012


  17. #37
    Notorious's Avatar
    Notorious is offline Covering your 6 since 1994
    Verified LEO
    Site Moderator
    Join Date
    11-18-09
    Location
    Lib Central
    Posts
    2,559
    Rep Power
    2700393
    Here's the concept... instead of social security, medicare, medicaid, SDI, and all the other compulsory junk that doesn't work... just let the people put the same money, pre-tax into a special medical use account like the Plan 125 or 529 investment and if you withdraw it for medical/retirement purposes, there's no penalty. Cut the government out... too simple, no?
    Nothing clever here except my zombie defense gun... now where is that darn flashlight...


  18. #38
    mack's Avatar
    mack is offline Officer Resource Offical Auctioneer
    Premium Lifetime Member
    Join Date
    05-25-07
    Location
    SE Indiana, I love this weather!
    Posts
    3,386
    Rep Power
    555142
    Thanks all for an interesting debate.

    My dad, I miss him every day.

    Originally Posted by Wolven
    Life is too short to wear unsexy underwear.


    I am a female!!!!! LMAO

    Be who you are and say what you feel.....
    Because those that matter...don't mind...
    And those that mind...don't matter

  19. #39
    Five-0's Avatar
    Five-0 is offline Super Moderator
    Premium Lifetime Member
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    05-15-06
    Posts
    10,982
    Rep Power
    8357005
    Quote Originally Posted by Notorious View Post
    Here's the concept... instead of social security, medicare, medicaid, SDI, and all the other compulsory junk that doesn't work... just let the people put the same money, pre-tax into a special medical use account like the Plan 125 or 529 investment and if you withdraw it for medical/retirement purposes, there's no penalty. Cut the government out... too simple, no?

    Sounds like one of those Nextel commercials. If cops ran the world. Someone post the youtube link to the one where a bunch of construction workers handle a divorce. Damn work MDT.

    Meanwhile, fishing in Russia:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkzV5AIK8iM
    "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." -- Frederic Bastiat

    "Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never really care for anything else thereafter." Ernest Hemingway

    The opinions given in my signatures & threads DO NOT reflect the opinions, views, policies, and/or procedures of my employing agency. They are my personal opinions only, thereby releasing my agency of any liability, or involvement in anything posted under the username "Five-0" on Officerresource.com

  20. #40
    dadyswat's Avatar
    dadyswat is offline Officer First Class
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    02-16-06
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    984
    Rep Power
    449904
    Quote Originally Posted by Five-0 View Post
    Currently there is no way that Congress can legislate Universal Healthcare. In my opinion, the only way to do this is to pass a Constitutional Ammendment making it a guaranteed right. Right now, the 10th Amendment stands in the way. The current plan is a power play and has nothing to do with decreasing costs or covering every person living in the U.S. (Yes, notice I didn't say every citizen.)
    I don't think Congress cares one bit about the Constitution and they'll just use their old excuse the Commerce Clause.

 

 
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •