Prepare for a rough landing...

[Andy]

We may need universal health care after Obama get's finished with us.

 

[poptart]

Universal health care would help this economy.It was the health care that was killing the auto makers. It would help all those millions employed by small business to get health coverage. That would be a major win.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

We may need universal health care after Obama get's finished with us.

Yeah....we did so-much-better giving a credit-card to a frat-boy.

 

[Depeche Toad]

Universal health care would help this economy.It was the health care that was killing the auto makers. It would help all those millions employed by small business to get health coverage. That would be a major win.

It was health care for people no longer making cars that, among other things, killed the auto makers.

What people want is someone else to pay for their health care.

 

[HankHill]

Come on libs, it's time to man-up and get your own health care. Stop relying on Mommy-Gubment to feed you your cheese and buy you your band-aids.

This new Obama culture of gimme-gimme is so pathetic, it makes America weak as a whole.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Come on libs, it's time to man-up and get your own health care. Stop relying on Mommy-Gubment to feed you your cheese and buy you your band-aids.

This new Obama culture of gimme-gimme is so pathetic, it makes America weak as a whole.

Lemme guess.....people, who can't afford health-care, have an obligation to die, right?

​

 

[Depeche Toad]

Lemme guess.....people, who can't afford health-care, have an obligation to die, right?

​

No, you got that backwards.

People who are going to be given free healthcare will have an obligation to die.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_mccaughey&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

 

[HankHill]

Lemme guess.....people, who can't afford health-care, have an obligation to die, right?

​

Where in the constitution does it say you have a right to health-care?

Too much of this liberal hand holding, is starting and going to make this country SOFT

 

[Andy]

Universal health care would help this economy.It was the health care that was killing the auto makers. It would help all those millions employed by small business to get health coverage. That would be a major win.

On a short sighted view, you are right. Here's the problem...

In every single case where universal health care has been implemented, it has failed. Further, in every country that has modern health care, the taxes to pay for that health care has been nearly 50% of income.

So yes, doing so will take the burden off of business... but it will place that burden right back on the tax payers. Are you ready to pay 50% of your yearly income, in order for your company to do better?

Some quick numbers:
United Kingdom has a tax rate of 40% on anyone earning more than $50,000. 20% for anyone earning less.
The National insurance contribution is 23.8%
So a person earning only $30,000 a year, would pay roughly $13,140, 43.8% of their income.
This doesn't include an 18% Capital gains tax that hits individuals in the UK, where it rarely does here. (another $5,400 for someone making $30K)

Then the English government also has a sales tax of 17.5%. A 08 Pontiac G5, at $15,675 would cost $18,418, with Federal sales tax alone, not including local and state sales taxes.
This doesn't include a special gasoline tax that makes fuel cost $5.78, when it's $1.85 here. (An extra $78 per fill up, just in taxes)

So tell me, are you ready to pay an extra $16,000 a year to get your "free" health care?

What about France?

The national sales tax is 19.6%. The same car above, would cost $18,747. Once again, a extra tax on fuel.
Those making over $25,000 would pay 30% tax. Those making more than more than $66K would pay 40%.
The social security tax is 35% of your income.

All that, doesn't include screw special taxes France has, like a tax on TV ownership. Just owning a TV, whether you watch 50 hours a week, or 3 hours, you have to pay a yearly tax on owning one. Last year the tax was $144.
A special tax on living quarters. As in you pay a yearly tax fee whether you live in a rented apartment, or own a shack in the hills.
Of course a national property tax, on any land or home you own. That doesn't include local property taxes, like we pay for funding schools.

So tell me, are you ready to spend nearly half of your entire yearly income for health care? A person earning $25,000 a year would pay $12,500 in taxes, not including all the weird taxes, and the sales taxes.

So, do you think doubling, or tripling our tax rate, like France or Brittan, make cause an economic decline? Like maybe dropping us to their level?

See, it's real easy to suggest that nationalizing health care can remove the burden from specific industries like the Auto industry. But you fail to realize that if we adopt their policies, we'll also have to adopt their taxation system to pay for it.

Stuff costs money. There's no free lunch. Why is it that everyone agrees with that, but fails to apply that to policies they support?

 

[Andy]

Yeah....we did so-much-better giving a credit-card to a frat-boy.

Yeah, and your Obama is going to spend nearly a 3rd of our entire national budget, in extra spending, in one single year.

All the over spending of the last 8 years, added together (not including the bailout that Obama also supported) doesn't equal what Obama has done in one month of office.

If you want to talk about overspending, Obama takes the cake 5 times over.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

No, you got that backwards.

People who are going to be given free healthcare will have an obligation to die.

Ah, yes.....more o' that "compassionate-conservatism".

​

 

[Andy]

Ah, yes.....more o' that "compassionate-conservatism".

​

No, that's just the way it is. If you require health care, and the public is paying for it, then the best you can do for the public is die.

That's not conservatism, that's how publicly funded health care works. Why do you think in other countries, where they have publicly funded health care, they have a strong support for euthanasia?

In fact one country, I can't remember which, had forced euthanasia. Since the government didn't have unlimited funds (none do), and since the people would not accept unlimited taxation (none do), then there was a limited amount of health care. There was a limited number of hospitals, and a limited number of beds in hospitals.

Logically, over crowding was a massive problem. The government came up with a solution. Euthanasia. If the hospital was maxed out, and you had one person with a treatable illness, and another with a incurable illness... the incurable one was killed, and the treatable one got the bed.

Look, you can whine about it being a conservative thing... We're just pointing out how your system actually works.

That's just the way it is. In Canada where government funded health care, limits the number of neo-natal care available, women with children born too early, have to either zoom down to the US (and pay) or simply let their child die. One lady was told by three Canadian doctors... your child is going to die. She finely went to the states, and the baby was saved.

This is how it works Shaman. You want government in control of health care, get ready for government quality.

 

[Depeche Toad]

Ah, yes.....more o' that "compassionate-conservatism".

​

Use the whole quote.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aLzfDxfbwhzs

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

 

[Dr.Who]

Universal health care would help this economy.It was the health care that was killing the auto makers. It would help all those millions employed by small business to get health coverage. That would be a major win.

If you think it is expensive now just wait until it is free.

So just how would paying even more for even less health care help the economy?

 

[Dr.Who]

Yeah....we did so-much-better giving a credit-card to a frat-boy.

At least the Frat boy had his own name on his credit card. P. Obama likes to use other people's credit cards.