If you support ObamaCare, what else do you support?

Because people only want the government to take over what the media tells them the government should take over.

 

Interesting question, the obamacare project (if you will) came about because the current system is simply not working (i think thats the consensus on all sides,) so carry that idea over to housing and the government would take control of all derilict housing (or buy it off existing owners.) They could then upgrade it to modern standards and rent it out at low cost to low income familys, giving them a secure and affordable housing on long term contracts. The new healthcare bill does not stop people from having private health and i'd see similar principle carried over to housing so i'm not suggesting taking peoples houses or anything just making use of unoccupied housing stock found in the majority of major cities.

When the original outlay by government had been repayed in rents (and yes that could take a LONG time) the houses could then be sold at knockdown prices to longstanding tennents allowing them to get on the property ladder (and netting a nice profit.)

With food production i dare say things are close enough to what you are suggesting given the subsidies given to farmers already, although you could do with some extra regulation to remove GM products from the market (especially in meat and dairy) and so improve it's quality and reduce negative health effects.

 

No disrespect intended, but do you actually realize how much our Government IS involved in the housing and food markets?
There are low income housing assistance programs in every state and more are needed, yet no one is stepping forward offering any sort of positive and viable solutions to housing EVERY needy American out there. It is a good start, and yes it does need more attention, but no one seems to be that interested in contributing their inspirational ideas and solutions. Instead of offering solutions, many are only content to offer dollar amounts they pull out of their asses.
Food and other neccessary goods manufacturers are subsidized by Government contributions and support as well. Without their intervention, no one would have food on the table.
It is funny how so many scream about not wanting 'big Government' and the price tag that goes along with it, yet those same people are demanding an easy and fast fix and they want it now. They do not want increased taxes and other forms of support to keep social and subsistence programs operating, yet are content to maintain the broken status quo.
This healthcare issue should have and could have been resolved already if a few ill informed representatives and their supporters would have taken a more proactive stance in aiding our Commander in Chief and his administration to come to a viable solution.
Silence = Death seems to be the underlying theme in the fight for Universal Health Care coverage....and it is exactly death that more than 45,000 people face for every year this problem is not resolved.
At what price does a human being become worth fighting for? What does the price tag attached to your big toe read?

 

The thought of housing, food, education and healthcare being a "right" is immoral and just plain wrong.

The idea that anyone in the world has a right to the labor of another person (be it a teacher, doctor, or laborer) is called slavery. The property (time and talents) of one person can never be legitimately claimed as the "right" of someone else.

 

You know there is another option besides Universal Health Care coverage, right? Some of us actually want to try a free market health care system.

Do you think a universal health care plan can survive on deficits? Look at France and Germany... they are all forced to spend 20% of their income on health coverage, yet still run deficits. The first problem I see here is a system that's fostering undue population growth.

How do you expect the US government (who already spends $1.1 trillion of our money annually subsidizing the health industry) to cover the whole tab in our economic situation?

 

I'm not trying to argue one way or another, but you need to realize there is a fundamental difference between the two suggesting that analogy isn't appropriate: you not having health care costs me and everyone else who has health care A LOT of money, whereas you not having housing or food does not cost me anywhere near as much, if any. Bottom line, when a large fraction of the nation isn't insured, we all suffer...when a large fraction of people are homeless, sure that sucks for them, but the impact on my wallet and my well-being is not as significant.

Just because someone (not necessarily myself) supports government take over of a particular project does not mean they support the take over of everything else. It's a rather naive connection to make...

 

And... how does you paying for their health care lead to costing less?

You want to add more beneficiaries while at the same time eliminating further the incentives for efficiency and innovation... competition.

 

I don't follow: within 5 years all Americans will need to be on a public option? I thought there was question of that even being included in the bill? Or do you mean it will require every citizen to have proof of health insurance within that time?

edit: Just a basic question on health insurance: are premiums going up because more people are getting sick/seeking treatment or because the real cost of hospital procedures are going up?

 

I don't think it is naive, I think it is actually a very good question to ask. It makes you question the principle behind the problem. Should the government be in control of any industry? What makes it right to be in X industry and not Y industry? These are the questions that really should be asked.

mwasa254 has it right. It is called slavery. You can not be entitled to the fruits of another man's labor, which is what government intervention in insurance, housing, and food would be.

It really boils down to people not being responsible for themselves and instead preaching about being responsible for everyone else. Shut the fuck up, mind your own God damned business, and take care of your life before you go around bitching at others.

 

I agree completely. Perhaps I misspoke when I said the question itself was naive, but rather that the comparison between health insurance and homes was a poor choice. Health insurance is unique to most other problems simply because the current system is set up such that those who pay health insurance cover the extra costs of those who don't pay anything or need more health care, which clearly is unfair and has a huge impact on this country. In other words, most of my health insurance money goes not to help myself, but rather to fix those who chose to be fat, unhealthy or not pay their share. While I'm not convinced the proposed government plan is the ideal way to go, people need to stop being so naive to think that the current system works well and doesn't require some sort of serious overhaul. People here are too gun-happy to criticize the proposed solution as if it is some communist takeover plot that they forget the fundamental issue, which is that the system needs to change in some way. Everyone in this country is going to receive health care one way or another (the law says that a hospital cannot turn someone away because of insurance or financial status), so how to do we make it the most fair for everyone? How do we get everyone to pay their share and not anything more or less? These are not easy questions to answer, but that's the goal.

As I explained earlier, if you pay for health insurance, your payment goes to cover not only yourself but also those who doesn't have health insurance because the law requires a hospital to treat every person that walks in their door regardless of financial or insurance status. If every tax payer is forced to contribute their portion of their health insurance costs (rather than having you and I paying for it all through our current insurance plans), then the cost per person (at least in theory) should be less. If 5 people pitch in to buy a car, it's a lot better deal than if one person buys it while the other four who paid nothing drive it around all the time. The point is that with the current system you are already paying for other people's health care costs.

 

That isn't my goal, but thanks for speaking for me.

 

Premiums increase for a number of reasons, off the top of my head, and very generally:

• Inflation.
• Pharmaceutical and medical device costs, and the FDA intervention (patent laws/antitrust/protectionism); regulatory costs.
• Administrative costs.
• Lack of competition (no interstate competition).
• People are overly dependent on insurance; insurance 'abuse'.
• Malpractice suits and legal restrictions.
• Government licensing and subsidies.

 

Sounds like a stupid law.

Maybe that's why all those border-state hospitals are going bankrupt?

 

Food production has already been taken over. Ever heard of the FDA, or Monsanto?

And sure, state-socialized healthcare is bad, but is it really any worse than what we've already had to deal with for decades? No

 

So if you get fired from your work tomorrow, lose your health insurance and have a heart attack next week, the hospital should leave you to die on their front step?

 

Don't tell me to shut the fuck up. Grow up and learn a little respect. Welcome to the politics forum, it's where people share opinions.

For the record, my life is in perfectly good order...more so than most. I just happen to care about the well being other people less fortunate than I. I apologize if you can't understand that concept.

In case you can't understand it, the use of "we" was rhetorical. No one was speaking for you. And secondly, what is your goal then? To continue paying insurance premiums that are designed compensate for everyone else's lack of health insurance? Because that's exactly what you're doing right now whether you want to accept it or not, yet you tell me to just take care of myself, such the fuck up and stop bitching. It is physically impossible to only take care of yourself in our current health care system...you are forced to take care of everyone else. You see your hypocrisy, right? I suggest there needs to be change to fix the fact you and I are paying too much for everyone else, yet I don't see you offering any further solutions other than to continue paying for your neighbor's health coverage.

 

My solution is to let everyone make their own decisions. My solution is to stop living for everyone else. My solution is to protect natural rights.

My solution would involve removing the government from the health industry completely. Why are they there? What purpose do they serve? What does their regulation, taxation, licensing, subsidizing, and ownership actually accomplish? Nothing good, that is for sure. Why would we want more government involved in something the government fucked up? That makes no sense at all.

The reason we pay for everyone else is because we have let laws get way too out of hand. Insurance wouldn't be so fucking expensive if health care wasn't so fucking expensive. Health care wouldn't be so fucking expensive if the government didn't limit the amount of nurses, doctors, and other medical personnel by requiring licenses. Health care wouldn't be so fucking expensive if the government didn't require ridiculous requirements for drugs. Health care wouldn't be so fucking expensive if the government didn't give benefits to monopolies in the industry. Health care wouldn't be so fucking expensive if the government wasn't a monopoly in and of itself.

No mo' government.

Also, the problem with the rhetorical "we" is that it isn't really rhetorical at all. Everything that this country does directly influences me without my consent or input. That is called immoral and I won't stand for it. I just wanted to make the point that you should not be speaking for others. It isn't like you hold a direct position of power, so it really isn't that important (at least I don't think you hold a direct position of power). I just don't like to be spoken for, I am perfectly capable of speaking for myself.

And what the fuck? Your compassion for others leads you to telling them how to live their lives? Your compassion includes letting the cluster fuck of a government we have ruin more lives? Who the fuck are you? What makes you so special that you know what everyone else wants and needs? Telling other people what to do with their lives does not embody compassion. It embodies ridicule, as if for some reason people are too fucking stupid to make decisions for themselves. Of course, not you. You know better. You know what people want and how to give it to them.

Man, what a way to care about the well being of other people less fortunate than you...

 

So in your perfect health care world, medical professionals don't need any certification or a medical education to practice medicine? In which case anyone can practice medicine who deems themselves worthy? And anyone can market a "drug" without quality control? I sure as shit wouldn't want a world like that...talk about fucked up, not to mention unbelievably dangerous.

Dude, you are way out in left field. Nice try putting words in my mouth to demonstrate your righteousness. Rather, in "my world", everyone has access to affordable health care, and that they are able to pay for the services they chose to receive. That's it. How exactly that means I'm dictating how they should live their lives is beyond me. Let me quote myself:

Notice the key words "THEIR SHARE". If their share is nothing (i.e. they refuse any form of health care, ever), then they pay nothing. If their share is high, then they should have a means by which to pay for it. Again, how this means I am some sort of malicious dictator deciding what's best for everyone is well beyond me.

I think you need to relax, it would make you less bitter.