No one has a right to healthcare

Stelakh said:
Really? That's your take?

A friend of mine, who lives in upstate New York, couldn't afford insurance. He and his wife both work two jobs. They have no children.

Before the Affordable Care Act, they had two options: A roof over their head, electricity and food in the fridge, or healthcare (because their employers didn't offer it).

What do you say about people like that, who actually are working long hours in two jobs to make ends meet, but couldn't afford the outrageous costs of healthcare?

Are you really THAT isolated and blind that you're not aware there are people in that kind of situation?
Click to expand...

Following the logic, do they have a similar right to auto and home insurance?

My problem with the Obamacare approach is that it ignores the real problem: it's an access problem because it's a cost problem. People that don't have healthcare don't have it because they can't afford it. Rather than making someone else pay for it ['somebody' being all of those young Obama voters, ironically] they should have focused on costs instead.

Insurance companies should be forced to compete against one another like Geico and Allstate do. Your friends should be able to get on their computer and price-shop for health insurance like they do auto insurance.

The only government safety net should be for catastrophic instances. Set an arbitrary cap at 45%-50% of a families net worth before they step in. There are other ideas and approaches.

But we got saddled with this monstrosity instead.
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
Following the logic, do they have a similar right to auto and home insurance?

My problem with the Obamacare approach is that it ignores the real problem: it's an access problem because it's a cost problem. People that don't have healthcare don't have it because they can't afford it. Rather than making someone else pay for it ['somebody' being all of those young Obama voters, ironically] they should have focused on costs instead.

Insurance companies should be forced to compete against one another like Geico and Allstate do. Your friends should be able to get on their computer and price-shop for health insurance like they do auto insurance.

The only government safety net should be for catastrophic instances. Set an arbitrary cap at 45%-50% of a families net worth before they step in. There are other ideas and approaches.

But we got saddled with this monstrosity instead.
Click to expand...

And what is covered must be addressed as well.

Continuing with the auto insurance analogy, how much would car insurance be if all matters pertaining to care and maintenance was claimed under insurance . . . every oil change, air filter, tire replacement, turn signal bulb was passed onto an insurance company? How much would a turn signal bulb or tire cost in and of itself?

Consumers need to do their due diligence on health care; regular Dr visits, lab work, an x-ray here or there needs to be taken out of the normal coverage scheme and put into the consumer's responsibility to pay for.
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
Following the logic, do they have a similar right to auto and home insurance?

My problem with the Obamacare approach is that it ignores the real problem: it's an access problem because it's a cost problem. People that don't have healthcare don't have it because they can't afford it. Rather than making someone else pay for it ['somebody' being all of those young Obama voters, ironically] they should have focused on costs instead.

Insurance companies should be forced to compete against one another like Geico and Allstate do. Your friends should be able to get on their computer and price-shop for health insurance like they do auto insurance.

The only government safety net should be for catastrophic instances. Set an arbitrary cap at 45%-50% of a families net worth before they step in. There are other ideas and approaches.

But we got saddled with this monstrosity instead.
Click to expand...

People like Stelakh believe anything anyone wants is something they have a right to. When they can't afford it and it has been deemed one by the left, they push to force others to pay for it. It's their M/O.
 
Abatis said:
And what is covered must be addressed as well.

Continuing with the auto insurance analogy, how much would car insurance be if all matters pertaining to care and maintenance was claimed under insurance . . . every oil change, air filter, tire replacement, turn signal bulb was passed onto an insurance company? How much would a turn signal bulb or tire cost in and of itself?

Consumers need to do their due diligence on health care; regular Dr visits, lab work, an x-ray here or there needs to be taken out of the normal coverage scheme and put into the consumer's responsibility to pay for.
Click to expand...



In my State, the only auto insurance that's required is liability. That being the case, there is a distinct difference between the purpose of auto insurance and health insurance. I have yet to find a Liberal that can tell me.
 
Anyone who believes he/she/it has a RIGHT to healthcare essentially believes in slavery.
That means you have a RIGHT to the free services of a physician, someone who has spent over $100K for medical training and spends a little less than that a year in malpractice insurance premiums. That means you believe a doctor OWES you free services and the hospital OWES you a room and all the labs.

Now WHERE in the name of FUCK would you liberals ever get such a numbskull idea like that?

supernatural-angry-spng-crowley-mark-sheppard-insults-moron-morons.gif
 

Attachments

  • morons.jpg
    morons.jpg
    22.6 KB · Views: 0
evince said:
there is a car crash

the station wagon containing a small family rolls over three times ejecting a small child and as it comes to rest it bursts into flames.


people try to put out the flames but cant.


the car burns completely up


the small child is left bleeding in the street because she has no paper work to prove she has insuranace.



she dies in massive pain


that is the world you evil con seek
Click to expand...

either some one pays for her care or she dies
 
reason10 said:
Anyone who believes he/she/it has a RIGHT to healthcare essentially believes in slavery.
That means you have a RIGHT to the free services of a physician, someone who has spent over $100K for medical training and spends a little less than that a year in malpractice insurance premiums. That means you believe a doctor OWES you free services and the hospital OWES you a room and all the labs.

Now WHERE in the name of FUCK would you liberals ever get such a numbskull idea like that?

View attachment 2805
Click to expand...

They get that false idea by declaring anything they want as a right. That's when the if I can't afford it someone has to give it to me mentality kicks in.
 
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
 
evince said:
so you think the founders didnt believe that?
Click to expand...

I'm saying you can't provide me anything in the Constitution you say makes that claim.

Are you saying the founding fathers supported that even if it meant someone else has their violated in the process?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top