Dr.Who
Well-Known Member
I really hate to jump onto conspiracy theories or accusations of what is behind ones motives. But it gets to the point that I just cannot think of any other reasonable explanation behind why this admin want the health care they are proposing. They have listed all sorts of reason and then the plan they propose solves none of those. If they are not proposing changes for the reasons they propose then what are the reasons?
Here is an article that describes some of the real reasons:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...rnment_health_care_in_stealth_mode_97826.html
Here are some quotes:
So is socialism the goal?
Here is an article that describes some of the real reasons:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...rnment_health_care_in_stealth_mode_97826.html
Here are some quotes:
"One video is worth a thousand words (or, as in this column, about 730). The video in question, put together by a group called Verum Serum, shows public statements by three advocates of single-payer (government monopoly) health insurance explaining that a health care bill with a "government option" would move America toward a single-payer government health care system. You may not have heard of the first two, Rep. Jan Schakowsky and professor Jacob Hacker. But you have heard of the third, President Barack Obama."
"A public option will put the private insurance industry out of business and lead to single-payer." The audience cheers. "My single-payer friends," she goes on, "he was right." Later she adds, "This is not a principled fight. This is a fight about strategy for getting there, and I believe we will."
Hacker, Yale's Stanley B. Resor Professor of Political Science, sounds friendly and cheerful in appearances recorded in January 2007 and July 2008. With a government option plan, he says in 2007, "You can at least make the claim that there's a competitive system between the public and the private sector," but he predicts that the government option "would eliminate the small group insurance. [] Speaking of the government option in 2008, he says, "Someone told me this was a Trojan horse for single-payer. Well, it's not a Trojan horse, right? It's just right there. I'm telling you. We're going to get there, over time, slowly, but we'll move away from reliance on employer-based health insurance as we should, but we'll do it in a way that we're not going to frighten people into thinking they're going to lose their private insurance. We're going to give them a choice of public and private insurance when they're in the pool, and we're going to let them keep their private employer-based insurance if their employer continues to provide it."
Of course, there's no guarantee employers will.
The video shows him [Obama] saying in October 2003, when he was running for the U.S. Senate, "I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer health care program." He adds, "We may not get there immediately," [] "But I don't think we're going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately." That seems to imply that his goal remains the same as it was in 2003. "There's going to be potentially some transition process -- I can envision a decade out, or 15 years out, or 20 years out, where we've got a much more portable system."
So is socialism the goal?