Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Patricio Da Silva, Sep 23, 2021.
As I understand it, the ACA put a stop to all that.
What you should do there is start a new OP and toss it up for debate, rather than sidestep the point at hand.
So, you support R v W, then?
Not sure why you had to ask, answer should be obvious. Yes, I support RvW.
Yeah, but here's the thing: We don't believe that's actually true.
A couple of hospitals may even be blatantly lying.
The evidence is already coming in from foreign countries which contradicts that narrative.
I think the stat is something like most of the deaths are unvaxxed, and most ( don't know the actual stat ) of ICU beds are unvaxxed.
By "we" in "we don't believe" you mean you and your bunch of anti-vaxxers? Sure, you don't. You believe in conspiracy theories and junk science, not in facts.
No, the evidence coming in from foreign countries is what you lied about and I debunked.
No, this is your ongoing misunderstanding of the fundamentals.
When the majority of your population is vaccinated, then obviously infections will reflect that. The key is that the majority of severe illness and deaths are still in that smaller percentage of the unvaccinated. When entire populations are vaccinated, then all the deaths will be in vaccinated people who have significant co-morbidities (cancer patients, the morbidly obese, the very old, etc). IOW, people who are going to die from any small insult to their health - COVID or otherwise. It doesn't take much to kill such people, and while vaccinations might increase their chances somewhat, ultimately they cannot be saved.
The ACA for all practical purposes is little more than a figment of your imagination.
No it's one of the worst applications of capitalism (which has its uses for most sectors). Profit in most industries encourages better products. In health insurance, incentives are misaligned. In insurance, profit is made by cherrypicking healthier policyholders and finding ways to deny/limit coverage wherever legally feasible. Profit has negative, rather than positive side effects in this particular industry.
Federal governments as healthcare payers in the rest of the world are more efficient because of lower overhead (less complicated than hundreds of private companies), more purchasing leverage, and no need for profit. But then it comes down to the government allocating enough for healthcare and I'm sure Republicans here would f it up in favor of buying more missiles or jets.
Well said. Profit doesn't belong in Education or Healthcare.
Universal healthcare would never take care of me. In fact, it doesn't take care of most. The insurance companies are actually my only advocate. The government would not advocate for me.
Of course I understand what you are saying. But I disagree with it.
I don't believe the actual statistics really reflect what you are saying, so much.
And by that I mean the international statistics; I remain skeptical about the statistics in the US.
Healthcare should be EARNED. Only lazy socialist bums that want a free ride in life and are too lazy to earn their own way would ever call healthcare a right. Like everything else, there are exceptions. Folks who are mentally or physically challenged, obviously should be helped. But any able bodied person just looking for a free ride should have the freedom to die slowly and in pain if they do not want to work.
Care to be specific?
No one has paid attention to the side effects of the Covid vaccination. Anecdotes (and they're anecdotes 'cause no one has studied adverse side effects) of serious side effects from Covid vaccinations have been reported but not studied for some reason...I guess the US enjoys the huge number of lawsuits they'll have to defend from bad reactions (and vaccination mandates) to Covid vaccinations.
I thought I'd give this same reply to you as I did to another in another thread:
I call BS. Support your claim.
More BS, support requested.
More BS. Left-Wing Authoritarian is NOT "Liberal" in any reasonable sense of the term.
We The People are always included in decisions, it's the Authoritarian twits and then nitwits that that attempt to exercise the illegitimate authority to exclude those outside of their political tribe from participation in our Constitutional Liberal Democracy.
And liars. Watch out for the liars.
UK Health Authority Slammed By Watchdog For Misleading Claim That Unvaxx'd Have "32 Times" Risk Of COVID Death
"The truth is that statistics are being spun like this all the time by Government and others during the pandemic to bolster the preferred narrative."
You're missing something important. Read on.
Yes, 'lazy socialist bums' want a free ride and consider healthcare a right ... but once it's supplied, those lazy bums can no longer claim the cost of healthcare as the reason for their poverty. When you live in a nation where many of these 'rights' are met, and yet people are still failing to be responsible for themselves, it's much easier to identify genuine poverty and act accordingly. It lets you know where to put your mental energy, and any resources you might feel inclined to commit.
It's a self-policing system, to offer the materials of survival instead of cash. Those who don't use those materials to improve their lot, make themselves very apparent. The more materials we provide, the less that anyone can get away with crying poor. When you cover everything (housing, healthcare, education, food rations), any failure to utilise those will be very plainly a choice. Therefore any claim of need can rightly be ignored.
The problem with our current system is that we don't provide enough of these things, and so have no way of clarifying who is genuine and who is abusing the system. We're thus forced to believe every claim of need.
True. But by the time that's done, the entire nation will be bankrupt and we'll ALL be living in tents on the sidewalk.
It would actually do the opposite. Keeping in mind that probably less than 10% of 'lazy bums' are genuine, you'd see a mass exodus initially. But over time, some will come to understand that it's a huge privilege to be 'kept' thusly, and will accept the parameters. BUT, and here's the key number - many will realise that they're far too attached to their freedom of choice, and so will choose self-reliance and thus self-determination. Either way, welfare expenditure will be dramatically reduced.
Incidentally, all of these problems go back to whoever first made the disasterous decision to replace traditional welfare with cash money. In all of human history (and still, outside the First World), welfare was the family/village. It was never money .. it was always a roof, a bed, and a warm meal. If you are claiming a specific need (housing/healthcare/food, whatever), then that specific need should be met. To do anything else is the equivalent of giving cash to the panhandler who says he needs to buy a train ticket to visit his dying mother. Not only is it un-loving to give him cash (because his desire to do himself wrong will be enabled and supported), but it spirals the cost of keeping him alive. He uses his 'food' money for drugs, and thus needs more money for food. Yeah, so money is the root of the evil when it comes to welfare. A truly terribly idea, and one which WILL bankrupt us eventually, for the same reason the panhandler's costs keep increasing.
Yes it would. There is no limit to how much essential care you can receive.
You make some good points. But I still say we'd be bankrupt by the time the benefits you list accrued.
There are thousands of posts like this, going back decades, I don't have time to post them all:
Why should I also be responsible for paying for yours
Providing free healthcare for everyone simply means that the employees/workers will not only have to pay for their own health care with their labor, but will also have to pay for others too.
The biggest and simplist reason is because I don't want to pay for other peoples healthcare.
Socialist healthcare only works until you run out of other people's money.
During the current delta-driven Covid-19 wave, Americans are being transported hundreds of miles from their homes because no nearby hospital has room for them. Some of them have even died waiting for medical attention.
I am 100% for the rule of law, as opposed to the rule of me. That cannot be said for Trump and his fans, who incite violence, attack the nation's capitol, subvert democracy at every turn.
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Interim Staff Report FINAL.pdf
Your rant-esque statement seems to miss the point of the question. The question didn't ask for the unvaccinated to be consulted in priority decisions, it asked about hospitals rationing care and excluding the unvaxxed in their priority decisions under the guiding policy known as "Crisis standard of care", which, bizarrely, triggered some kind of 'we the people' rant? WTF?
As for your source, 'ZeroHedge' is not reliable, according to mediabiasfactcheck.com: To wit:
Rates 'low' on the factual reportage scale ( second to the bottom of the scale ) and....
Overall, we rate ZeroHedge an extreme right-biased conspiracy website based on the promotion of false/misleading/debunked information that routinely denigrates the left.
So, it seems, given your willingness to rely on a site like ZeroHedge for your information, why do you care about 'liars' ?
Separate names with a comma.