Local vid makes Obamacare finals, outrages Hannity
"I deserve health care."SCREEN CAPTURE
One local filmmaker (along with a pack of kids at Riverview Park) might play a key role in the health care debate if a new video keeps advancing in the Obama Health Care Reform Video Challenge. Already, the 30-second spot from Charlottesville has been chosen from over 1,000 submissions to become one of just 20 finalists.
Eric Hurt–- who once shot a television show about Spudnuts–- wrote, directed, and shot “I Deserve Health Care” with producer Erica Arvold. Voting for the Challenge is now open, and individuals are encouraged to watch the top videos, vote for their favorites, and help select the winning ad that will air on national television.
The whole enterprise, but particularly Hurt's video and a graffiti video, drew the outrage of FoxNews commentator Sean Hannity, who interviewed a conservative commentator who blasted Hurt for "grooming the next generation of entitlement-seekers."
–last updated 6:49am Friday
Spelling of Spudnuts corrected 9:20am Friday
54 comments
The reality is that the USA spends more money on medical care and receives less value per dollar than many other countries in the world. One would think that our elected representative could behave like adults and confront the problem. Unfortunately they seem to enjoy being hos for any interest group that will help finance their next campaign. The sad thing is we keep electing them - we have the representation we deserve.
#
Russ October 30th, 2009 | 6:25 am
I deserve health care too”Š”Š but not at your expense! I work for it because it is one of the things that is higher on my priority list.
----------------------------------------------------------
That's a little white lie Russ unless you pay for everything out of your pocket. If you have health insurance you are letting someone else pay for your care. You are using socialism. Socialism run for profit, but socialism never the less.
My pastor said that Jesus said that poor people deserve to be poor because they're stupid, selfish and lazy.
Are you all saying Jesus could be wrong? Cause if you are you'll burn in hell for all eternity. That's why I'm against healthcare!!
I don't want my hard earned dollars to support some lazy family that can't afford a room at the inn! Make 'em sleep in the manger!
Also, Obama is a word that used to mean anti-christ! Look it up, people! It's on the internet!!!
I am in favor of gov't sponsored health care IF it reduces this country's health care expenditures without drastically reducing the quality of care, but this video is a turn-off to me. The word "deserve" makes me cringe. Aunt Bea sums it up well. Healthcare is a privilege, not a right. I think it is economically beneficial for the nation to ensure that everyone has access to some basic healthcare, but it is totally unrealistic to think that top care can be provided to everyone without bankrupting the country. Why isn't anyone talking about the inevitable two tiered system? Those who can afford top quality care can pay for it, providing profit incentives for the healthcare industry to keep improving. Those who can't afford it, get a basic plan which prevents them from becoming an even greater tax burden on the rest of us.
Come on Drawn-in... be a sport your really know deep down inside we all deserve it. Hoolarius changed my mind. Go ahead and read that message again. We don't want to catch what Billy has, in fact we can all begin to ease off a little and be a little more like Billy's mom. I've been wanting that big screen TV for a while and a trip to Disney world, this may be my chance. Besides, like that incredibly intelligent girl said at one of those radical rightwing teaparties said this summer, I don't want to have to work in this cubical farm to make money for the things I need including health care insurance if I can be out being creative on my own. (by the way, we (with govt help) may be able to get all that unhealthy food off the store shelves that we all know is causing healthcare costs to go up, govt scienitists will be proving that to be a fact....and it will help solve the man made global warming (I mean climate change) problem.
Hoolarious,
If you think I'm going to stand by and watch people using my tax money who are making bad choices like eating fast greasy food which clogs their arteries, your kidding. I'll be on the front lines of the Marxists to control bad habits. You've convinced me.... health care for everyone followed by more controls to keep them healthy.... including every student to carry a condom in their pocket to they don't transmit a something nasty during recess. The only cure for bad government is more government.
If they simply mandated that there be a basic policy that all insruance companise had to offer, listing what was covered and what was not and then let the companies offer them based soley on price and service you would see a dramatic reduction in premiums. The government could then use some tax credits to help the poor and children.
Personally I Would rather see a public subsidy of health care premiums for poor kids then the stupid mismanged free lunch program. Anybody poor enough for free lunch gets food stamps. /why should we pay the labor for someone to make their lunch when they have parents who can spead penaut butter at home and throw it in a baggie?
We coddle the poor too much . It is supposed to hurt to be poor so that you will be motivated to work yourself out as so many have had.
Also, we are 37th in health care by scued numbers. We get penalized because we try and save people that other countries let die. There is no better quality of care available anywhere else in the world. People don't fly to zimbabwe for brain surgery.
russ, you're argument seems to be based on hypothetical conjecture.
re :"health care for everyone followed by more controls to keep them healthy”Š. including every student to carry a condom in their pocket to they don’t transmit a something nasty during recess"
If someone has to make the leap to saying that the government will be promoting sex with minors in order to make a point about health insurance reform then I'd say that they aren't able to make a good point based on the facts. Not only that, I'd say that such hyperbole masks the knowledge that their argument is losing.
But perhaps frustration is the motivation. It appears that after all the huffing and puffing, the house is still standing. Health care reform WILL pass and the public option is very viable, politically.
This is why the Democrats were elected and why they'll rule in Washington for years to come!
Hoolarious, we currently have a multi-tiered system. I think what rankles many about "universal healthcare" is the notion that those who don't pull their weight might receive the same care as those who do. This is not an entirely unwarranted fear given how politicians tend to promise all things to all people. I think the administration would help its cause if it characterized a gov't program as one that would provide just enough healthcare to maximally reduce national healthcare expenditures.
"even if it makes long-term fiscal sense for the rest of the country?"
Surely you jest. If an independent nonprofit organization ran the program I would agree with you.
It is very sad to see the change in the country since the 60's.
Instead of the able bodied working for their meal we now have able bodied persons looking for handouts at every turn. This is not the "me generation" it is the "give me" generation.
#
Mequa Shore October 30th, 2009 | 3:05 pm
That’s not socialism, Caesonia.
----------------------------------------------------------
It most certainly is. From an economics operational point of view,all socialism is, is a group of people paying into a single pot to pay for things that they, as individuals, cannot afford, should they need them. It's no different that a community paying for a police force, or for a fire department. My house has never burned down, but I pay taxes yearly for a fire department, because I might one day need to put out a fire and can't afford my own fire truck and crew.
Health insurance is operated on a large group paying money into a pot to pay for things as a group, thigns which they as individuals cannot afford. Some of us get sick, some of us don't. We pay premiums yearly based on that we might need to buy an MRI.
That IS socialism and ALL it boils down to. But hey, if you think that we should really continue with for profit socialism, I think its time you all started pushing to privatize the fire departments, and the police departments, and you can all go out and buy your policies from the mega corproations.
After all, fire departments and police forces are a privilege, not a right. Non of you have the right to security, or protection of any sort.
I'M SICK OF ALL THESE SOCIALIZED SCHOOLS, SOCIALIZED POLICE DEPARTMENTS, SOCIALIZED ROADS AND OUR SOCIALIZED MILITARY DESTROYING THE FABRIC OF OUR ONCE BELOVED COUNTRY! JESUS IS WEEPING, PEOPLE!! ALL WE CAN AFFORD TO DO IS DROP BOMBS ON BROWN PEOPLE! THEY DESERVE IT! IF YOU SUPPORT ANY OTHER POLICY YOU ARE A SOCIALIST, FASCIST OR COMMUNIST!! REMEMBER THE MAINE!!!
re:"able to achieve some or all stated goals without spending more than we do currently"
Define the terms "stated goals" and "more than we do currently".
Are you talking government spending or spending by society as a whole?
Wow, I must have missed something when I viewed the Hurt video of kids saying that they deserve health care. I thought it was a message to parents who might not realize the risks involved in not having ways to insure health care for their children, as well as to politicians who are trying to diagnose the ailments in our present system and are discussing possible treatments that would improve the system. Did the children say that the government had to supply this health care free of charge? Did the children even say that the government had to supply this healthcare?
Yes, children do deserve care, all kinds of care because they are children and are not yet able to know how to best fend for themselves.
I have not been a blogger before and had hoped to learn something from this blog but instead I found most of it quite distasteful. I did feel a bit hopeful after reading the questions posed by Drawn-In. I thank you Drawn-In.
In general I much prefer the dialogue in Diane’s radio talk show on NPR. I recommend it highly. The speakers have diverse viewpoints and much knowledge on the topics being discussed. I’ll stick to that in the future but since I did spend time reading all this, I feel compelled to let you in on another viewpoint.
I only hope that readers will curb their emotions and open their minds so they can understand where I am coming from and I hope they think about these ideas for a while before making assumptions or integrating some of what I say into their messages.
Same ââ?¬Ë?ol Story, I agree that most of the arguments made in this blog lack logic. The emotion is so strong it blasts through the computer screen. Aha! Maybe blogs are primarily venting mechanisms instead of logical dialogue? Now that is an invalid assumption! This is only the second blog I have read and this makes 50% of the 2 I experienced so my venting mechanisms comment is unjustified. Before using inductive logic or what most call making assumptions, we must collect information from many many cases, cases that are similar and cases that are dissimilar.
Assumptions are rampant in this blog. I was amused by, ââ?¬Å?By attempting to change the subject you are”Š” I wonder if the author of this statement is making assumptions about me right now. Ah, but if you only knew me”Š
Use of name calling to make a point seems so so juvenile, such as ââ?¬Å?Lazy parasitical welfare queens”Š” and nonworking mooching freeloading welfare queens. What a waste of stupidity.
Use of tongue-in -cheek tactics (I think that is what they are?) seldom clarify facts or help people understand the complexity of the issue, for example, ââ?¬Å?My idea is the only morally correct answer to the problem”Š” With all the blabbering present, I don’t really know which statements are tongue-in-cheek and which are not. Maybe blogs are just for entertainment? This is not an assumption. I am just asking a question.
Do some of you actually believe that everyone who is poor is a slacker? How na¯ve this would be! I feel sure you don’t think this. Maybe this blog is just a puzzle? One needs to dissect it to figure out which statements are true beliefs and which are not? Just a question again.
I must admit that this is only the second time I have read a blog. And it may well be the last because to me, it seems like too much of a waste of time. Time is a valuable resource. How do you ââ?¬Å?workers” find the time for this? But the last few comments may be moving the discussion in a positive direction. Hmmm. The glass is half-full for me. Maybe the blog will be more helpful to me in the future. I hope so.
My expectations were so wrong. I expected that people who blogged on critical and serious issues such as health care would be educated on the subject, would use logic in their arguments, and would avoid sensationalism to negate the very points they were trying to get across. I expected that the people who blogged on serious issues like this one would have some knowledge of the diversity of our national population, and especially of groups of people who are unlike themselves, the OTHERS who they mention in disparaging ways. I sense that most of the authors have little true understanding of those richer or poorer than they. Blogs seem as unreal as the reality shows that are so popular! I don’t have time for either. I think that the escapism that they offer is detrimental to our health. I believe I’ll read more of what is coming out of congressional reports instead. Thanks but no thanks bloggers. Adios.
But wait. One should not offer criticism without a possible positive direction. I do have a suggestion. Let’s educate our populace. Let’s promote logical reasoning, responsibility, rational communication, and respect for one another. Let us join together to debate, to design, and to facilitate the measures needed to sustain a healthy environment for all.
Tyranny of the majority
Let's talk some more about entitlements and personal responsibility. Anybody feel that they "deserve" safe highway bridges? that you're "entitled" to expect the federal and/or state government to inspect the bridges you drive on to make sure they're not about to collapse into the river below?
not me. I'm all about personal responsibility. if I care that much about highway bridge safety, then I'm willing to work just a little bit harder to pay for that bridge inspection myself. it's simply "one of the things that is higher on my priority list" and I sure as hell don't think that some slacker who doesn't work as hard as hard-working me should get the government to inspect the highway bridges for him ON MY TAXPAYER DIME.
Some slackers feel like they "deserve" to be able to feel confident that the meat they buy at the grocery store is safe and has come from a meatpacker that passes federal inspections. Not me--I'm all about personal responsibility. I think that if you love your family enough to want to ensure that the meat you buy is safe, then you'll just work a bit harder and pay for private inspections of the meatpackers that supply your grocery store. I simply put this "higher on my priority list." If you're not willing to work a little bit harder like hardworking me, then I guess you just don't love your family as much as I do.
And then there are those unpatriotic parasitical welfare queens who expect -- seem to feel they are entitled! -- the federal government to provide them with accurate and timely warnings about looming catastrophic weather events, like hurricanes! They actually expect a government-funded entity like NOAA to work all day long tracking developing storms and warning us if a hurricane is coming -- on the hardworking taxpayer's dime! Well, I'm a self-reliant hardworking American and I don't ask anything from anyone. I pay for my own version of NOAA to keep track of developing hurricanes -- it costs more, but I just work a little bit harder. Because it matters to me. If you don't want to work harder, you shouldn't get any warnings about impending hurricanes. Only if you can pay for it yourself.
This entitlement mentality makes me sick. People thinking that uninsured children somehow "deserve" health care so that they can get regular check-ups and vaccinations that will help prevent minor illnesses from turning into major catastrophic diseases...that's crazy talk. That's like expecting the government to spend money taking steps to ensure that the water we drink and bathe in is clean and safe. As if it's the government's job to subsidize some basic health and safety standards so that Americans can go about their business without worrying about dying suddenly from things like bridge collapses, hurricanes, tainted meat, and poisoned water! Unheard of, and unAmerican!
There is absolutely no sarcasm or innuendo in this question. Do those of you who support healthcare reform believe that our current (and future) government will be able to achieve some or all stated goals without spending more than we do currently? If so, where do you think the savings required to pay for universal coverage will be found? If not, how much more would you be willing to pay in taxes (percentage increase) to reach those goals?
O come on Same ol',
How can you say I'm paranoid. do you roll your own cigaretts? Look at the sin tax we now pay. I'm down to 2 packs a day now. The govt is trying to price me out of smoking. You have your head in the sand.
Now explain that to me!
Hollarious: What I think is especially funny is all these whiners crying about free loaders think that because they have health insurance they are paying their way when they clog of up THEIR arteries.
They aren't of course. All the other insurance policy holders do. It socialism for profit, that's all. Inefficient socialism to boot.
Which is why I am more than tired of the complaining. I got great care from the NHS for many years, and I know its improved since then.
russ- don't forget that in a democracy the majority rules. If we want Healthcare for all we will have it. And everyone will pay to the extent and ability that the tax system allows. Its a right that all of us have. If some people need to pay more because they have a higher income, so be it. Its the fair thing to do for the good of everyone.
YES, Nobama, you GET it! why should we let Those People have ANYTHING? even if it makes long-term fiscal sense for the rest of the country? wait, what did I just say...fiscal long-term something...hell, I don't even what that means, that must be some liberal thing...anyway, the point is THEY DESERVE NOTHING. no bridge inspections. no safe meat. no clean water. what this country needs is a total overhaul so that no nonhardworkers can benefit from anything they didn't pay personally for. i don't care how much money we have to spend to ensure that no nonhardworkers get to enjoy anything they didn't pay for. it's worth it if i can keep looking down on them.
you know, we might just have to destroy this country to save it -- from the nonhardworkers.
"I deserve health care". Next the Dems will run ads this saying "I deserve a car", "I deserve a house", "I deserve a fat bank account". Sad thing is they attract votes from those not willing to work who want to rely on the Dems stealing from those who do and handing it over to them (AFTER the Dems take their fair share). Very sad.
That's not socialism, Caesonia.
'10 yr olds that comprehend the cause due to the fact that their parents talk 'frankly'?'
I certainly hope you are trolling.
Man, do I hate it when anybody uses/abuses children in videos, pictures, or at protests to advance THEIR partisan politics of any side, any issue, any debate. Instantly turns me off to whatever cause - which these kids can not even comprehend nevermind understand - they are being used for.
There are some really bad parents in Charlottesville - I already know this as a Little League coach - and this guy is a really creepy clown for making this vid.
More promotion of hatred and division from The Democratic Party.It works, look at the level of hatred today compared to thirty years ago--and the Democrats are seen as heroes. Repellant, repulsive, Machiavellian.
You think the doctors don't "doctor" the bills now???? Are you insane? They get paid per service, i.e. they more things they do, the more they get paid. If we switched health care to a salaried system such as they have in the UK, the incentive would not be there to "doctor" the bills. Single payer is the way to go. If you mistakenly think the U.S. has the best medical care in the world, listen up, we DO NOT. We are 37th in the world. Pathetic. And yet we pay the most for what little we get. Study up, people, study up. Don't simply repeat the propaganda you've been spoon fed.
Why would we get substandard care if the govt ran health care? Do we have substandard police and fire depts? The govt. runs those. I don't think people in countries that have govt-run medical programs, such as Canada, Britain, and France complain about getting substandard care. Ever wonder why drugs are cheaper in Canada???? Educate yourselves.
For what it's worth, I think the ad is effective.
but hoolarious, right now the costs are hidden from Russ. He FEELS better not knowing that he's subsidizing the poor. It's psych 101. Once he knows that he's subsidizing others, even if it's for less than he was paying before, he'll FEEL worse. Therefore he doesn't want it.
Someone else posted that poor people are supposed to suffer. These people are making emotional arguments in support of a failed system that causes them financial harm.
It is no wonder that rational argument is ineffective in this "debate".
My God, what a nasty jealous, angry and IGNORANT group of people you healthcare reform nay-sayers are?
Aunt Be, How do YOU know what sort choices the parents have made and whether they were poor or not? I'll tell you what. You DON'T.
Tell me, what about all the descent employees laid off from the financials companies, who had NOTHING to do with the crappy management decisions. They now have no health insurance. Is it their fault CEO's driven by avarice destroyed the bank? What about all the closed down retailers?
How about the off-shored jobs to save a penny on making a pair of socks?How about all those people? Are they to blame too for their lack of health insurance?
You people sit here and complain about how you think you subsidize everyone else, without realizing how you too, are subsidized. For example, self-employed single people like me pay for you and your family.
The final thought is, no one has any more 'right' to make millions every year off of the suffering of sick human beings than someone has a 'right' to healthcare.
Hoolarious is right - you are all so busy thinking ME MINE I ME ME ME you forget that viruses and bacteria do NOT CARE if you currently have health insurance. The Swine Flu makes no distinction, and a sick and injured workforce is a non-productive one. To expect everyone in this country to pay twice as much as anywhere else in the world so you can have your petty little ME MINE attitude is insanity. I would rather treat the slackers for 50% of what I have to pay now, and know that God forbid, I get a terminal illness with no one to help me, I can at least die with some dignity and basic care.
You disgust me. All of you. You deserve to get the swine flu and be in hospital for WEEKS, and lose your OWN HOMES, the lot of you. Then we'll see how much you point fingers. We'll hear how you cry about being a victim.
Much of my family has emigrated back overseas because of these just...greed and selfishness. I am debating it too.
Here is a phrase:
There but for the Grace of God go I.
Russ, can you just answer this question: in the current system, when one of Those People who clogs his/her arteries with greasy food has a major coronary attack and ends up in the hospital for many days and runs up a huge bill that he/she cannot pay b/c he/she has no insurance, WHO PAYS FOR IT? I'm talking about the current system -- who is footing the bill for the heart attacks for the currently uninsured?
Fairies?
You are, Russ, through your tax dollars and your insurance premiums. Those costs are coming out of your pocket. In the current system. And apparently that's how you want to keep it: keep a system in which people who make bad dietary choices and do not have insurance can have a massive coronary for which you and other taxpayers pay for. That is what you are doing RIGHT NOW.
Sputnuts? Never heard of it, though sounds a bit like that shop just off the Belmont Street bridge.
The repubs do it too..
http://factsaboutbarackobama.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/image001.jpg
But it's mostly in the partisan blogs. The fact that this exploitative video is actually in the running to be what the administration puts on national TV is disgusting. I'm not surprised that any of our local media promotes it. Obama is their new god after all. But for the white house to be promoting this - is pretty disgusting. i guess they got caught up in their own "progressive" rhetoric.
What these kids deserve is to be told the truth. They need to be told that the reason they don't have health care is because their parents chose to buy a house instead of renting one and using the other money for health care. They need to be told that if they get a broken leg that it gets fixed and the parents are asked to only pay what they can afford. (except that their ability to "afford" does not mean they get to drive new cars have cable and cell phones and then cry poormouth)
They need to be told that the reason they don't have health care is because their parent may have chosen to spend the money on other things or don't love them enough to work a little overtime to pay for it. Health care for a single child is only about 50 bucks a month. The tax exemption for a kid is 3000 a year...
They need to be told that health care is a personal responsibility and that selfishness is too rampant in america.
They need to be told that their grandmother never had health insurance until she turned 65, but she knows what castor oil is for and how to use baking soda to cure heartburn.
They need to be told that if we get government run healthcare the government will not be able to stop dishonest people from stealing all the money and they will get substandard care.
They need to be told that nothing in life is free and that if you want something you work hard and pay for it.
They need to be told that all politicians are worse than business CEOs because at least the business CEOs don't lie about wanting your money.
They need to be told that they are being exploited and their parents should be ashamed of themselves.
They need to be told that over half of all diseases could be avoided if they laid off all that crap they are given because their parents are too lazy to have them eat right.
The funny thing is, I actually know the kids in this commercial (unlike the haters posting above), and they do comprehend the cause -- they're around 10 years old, not 2, after all. Perhaps LMS doesn't know any intelligent 10 year olds who have parents who talk frankly to them about current events and political issues.
And I'm hard-pressed to see the "hatred and division" inherent in an ad that points out the number of uninsured children in the U.S. and the fact that for some families paying for catastrophic illness and injury results in financial meltdown. Yeah, that sure is a hateful and divisive message, Mr. Insurance Company CEO.
Why has no one done a comprehensive study as to who is actually uninsured and why? I would imagine from my own experience that that 45 million number would be reduced significanlty if people made the right choices for priorities. Maybe if we only rescused those who cannot swim we might be able to absorb it better as taxpayers.
I personally know at least a dozen people with newer cars, cel phones, ipods etc who say thate cannot afford health insurance, yet a high deductible policy (5000 dollars) which would protect against these "catosthrophic" illnesses is only about 65 dollars a month.
Check out carefirst. (dotcom)
We are going to get overun with fraud when they give everyone a medical card. You will see doctors givong away incentives to get customers so they can "doctor" the bills.
Russ, you're paying for "their" healthcare NOW, anyway, because if "they" don't have health insurance, it's not like they go away and get sick quietly or nurse their broken legs in privacy. They have to go to the emergency room and the state has to end up paying for it and that means YOU end up paying for it, through taxes and increased insurance premiums. What I don't get about the "Hey, Ho, Status Quo is the Way to Go" group is that more and better health care for everyone would be GOOD for everyone, economically as well as in terms of public health. Who cares whether Billy's mom has no insurance because Billy's mom made some bad choices? Isn't it more important that Billy have all his vaccinations or get his strep throated treated promptly so that YOUR kids don't get whatever Billy has? Isn't it more important that Billy get preventative care so that he doesn't develop a major money-sucking disease later on that taxpayers are going to end up paying for indirectly?
Honestly, it just seems sometimes like these haters live for moments when they can shake their finger at some other group of people -- naughty, naughty poor people who make Bad Choices! And you're willing to bite of your own nose to spite your face -- I don't care what it does to my own insurance premiums or taxes, let's not reform this system to widen access to good preventative care for those naughty, naughty poor people! I'll just pretend it's NOT already costing me way more than it needs to, because I enjoy shaking my finger at poorer people SO much!
Hoolarious,
20 years from now my point of view will be extreemly conservative...... Govt will be directing much more of what you do. Its for the common good. I'm just getting a jump start. ....look where we are now.... and at history.
re:"It is supposed to hurt to be poor "
Oh. So it comes down to a moral question? How are things "supposed" to be?
This guy on the hook's message board says that poor people are "supposed" to suffer.
I have to say that I don't know where you get this information as this is the ONLY place I've ever read that there is a group of humans that are "supposed" to suffer.
I fundamentally disagree with you. There is no group of people are supposed to suffer. Maybe it's just a matter of disagreement but the difference is that you are wrong and I am right. The other difference is that people that agree with me are in power in Washington DC.
Why don't all these liberal congressmen and senators and president, propose and pass a constitutional change that legitimizes the taking of liberites. This Healthcare doctrine mandates that everyone pay or be penalized. Another serious violation of the Constitution and a hair raisng slap in the face for all those who read, understand and believe the words of the Declaration of Independence. Without a change in the Constitution that takes us un an undisputable path towards Marxism, we are setting ourselves up for a revolution in this country that makes throwing some Tea in Boston harbor look like a tea party.
Drawn-in, you do NOT have to answer that question asked by "vague question" -- it's a liberal trap! don't fall for it. just tell him or more likely HER that whether it costs more or not is IRRELEVANT. if we provide universal health care, then those uninsured kids are NEVER going to get off their butts and do their patriotic duty of making their lazymoochingnonhardworking parents get a J.O.B. there's no INCENTIVE to make their parents get jobs if they're not suffering from untreated strep throat. i know it sounds harsh, but we have to let those uninsured children get miserably sick. after all, it "is supposed to hurt to be poor so that you will be motivated to work yourself out as so many have had [sic]." especially seven year olds...if it hurts to have untreated diabetes, then that seven year old is REALLY going to be motivated to work herself out of poverty. and her mother doesn't love her, by the way.
i'm sorry i'm using so many all-caps words. it's just that people who don't work as hard as i perceive myself to work make me SO MAD. and sad.
OK, vague question, let's say the goal is to extend basic insurance coverage to everyone under any conditions. Is it possible to accomplish this without a) increased government healthcare spending or b) increased societal healthcare spending. If so, how? If not, are you amenable to a tax raise and, if so, of how much?
Hoolarious, your extended vitriol isn't going to win anyone over to the reform side.
Ummm, Archie, people fly to India all the time now for surgeries. And people go to Canada for cheap prescription drugs (subsidized by the Canadian taxpayer, so we're friggin' freeloading on their public health care system). We do NOT have the best health care in the world.
I cannot stand people who think the poor deserve to be poor because of some kind of lack of motivation. And I wish all the Bible thumpers out there would actually read the gospels to discover how Jesus felt about the poor and the outcast. (same ol' story, by the way, your first post made me smile--loved it).
When people don't have health care, we all suffer both in terms of health and money in the bank.
A good public health care program would benefit EVERYONE.
And, by the way, yes, I think everyone, EVERYONE deserves healthcare. It is a right, not a privilege.
Same ol',
I drew you off topic, but the fact is the govt (govt schools) have distributed condoms. There is no leap to make as you refered to. It is already happened/happening. Look at the news stories over the years. It's a good start though. That will help to reduce unwanted pregnancies which in itself will help reduce the taxpayers cost for healthcare. Its the other risky behaviors we need to work on too. Currently Insurace companies have their hands ties to do anything except for adjusting the premiums of those who smoke, motorcyle ride, sky dive, have high blood pressure......or just drop you. They don't have the police powers that the govt has. Now, when we get the govt healthcare, they will be able to little by little put the screws to the offending players....maybe use the taxing powers to make those fries less attractive, extra taxes on motorcycles. Hey we were able to add an excise tax on the manufactures of toy arrows when the TARP bill passed! Thank God, that will help to price those dangerous toys out of the reach of many parents. See... the govt can solve a lot of problems like that for us. Behavior control ... through taxation.
I just wish they could have done something about the govt mandated saftey shield that fell off the lawn mower, got caught underneath in the blade and flew out and hit me in the shin. I'll need to write my representavive about that.
Oh, so glad they are mandating Compact florescent bulbs too. (I'm looking forward to spending the money to replace the dimmers in my house which won't work, I'll be stimmulating the economy). Oh, and except for the CFL that caught on fire and burned the outside door fixture on my house. Electronics in the base failed. I'm sure that the govt will insist the Chinese fix that probem.
I deserve health care too...... but not at your expense! I work for it because it is one of the things that is higher on my priority list.
ohmy, TOTALLY agreed, it is sad. sad sad sad. not sad in the sense of "I'm actually crying tears," like you might if you saw a sick child whose nonhardworking parents didn't love him enough to work extra hard to get health insurance so they could take him to see a doctor at the first sign of an illness and whose untreated strep throat turned into a systemic infection that required hospitalization at enormous expense to the hardworkingtaxpayingrealAmericans. not sad like that.
sad more like "I look down on you" sad. yes, i totally agree, it is sad (and tiring!) to have to look down on SO MANY people who are not hardworkingtaxpayingrealAmericans like you and me. who are instead moochingloafinghandoutlovers who expect ME to pay for their bridge inspections. god it makes me angry. and sad.
I just re-read my last post, and I had a GREAT idea. I think Russ and Aunt Bea and Jeff S. are going to LOVE it.
I'm thinking about all those lazy parasitical welfare queens who drive over our federally inspected highway bridges EVERY DAY -- bridges that were inspected using OUR hardworkingtaxpayer dollars -- even though they aren't nearly as hardworking as we are. And how WRONG it is that they get to enjoy the safety of those bridges, a safety paid for by hardworkingtaxpayerdollars. And I thought "what if we set up a system whereby at every bridge, there was a place where you stop and you have to show some kind of papers that prove that you are actually a hardworkingtaxpayer who is entitled to drive over that bridge. And if you can't show those papers, then HA HA ON YOU, you don't get to drive over the bridge. Because you don't deserve it. Because of that hardworkingtaxpayer thing I said above. You can just stay on your side of the bridge.
I think my idea is the only morally correct answer to this problem. But don't bother telling me that it would be hugely expensive to set up this system (what with having to have papers to prove your hardworkingtaxpayer status, a whole bunch of people to keep track of the papers, all the stations on both sides of all the bridges, people to run the stations, etc.). Don't bother telling me that it would be a lot cheaper to just let anyone drive over these bridges, or that the commute would run a lot more smoothly if we just let anyone drive over the bridges. Because IT'S NOT ABOUT saving taxpayer money in the long run. It's not about fiscal responsibility. It's not even about having a rational system that gets people over the bridge in the most hassle-free way. Those are things that it is SO not about. What it's all about is ensuring that nonhardworking mooching freeloading welfare queens don't get to use anything they didn't personally pay for. That's what matters most. And it's also about the exquisite pleasure I will feel when I show my hardworkingtaxpayer papers to the man at the booth and then I get to drive over that bridge, right in the faces of those moochers who are getting turned back. SEE YA, suckers! Guess you don't work as hard as I do! or love your family as much as I do!
So I think this is a great solution because it's all about confirming my sense of moral superiority (because I'm so hardworking and all), even if confirming my sense of moral superiority is ridiculously expensive and fiscally insane in the long run.
russ, re: "when we get the govt healthcare, they will be able to little by little put the screws to the offending players"
This is pure speculation based on nothing more than your paranoia.
The rest of your post is a rambling diatribe, completely off the topic of health insurance reform, so what's the point of responding?
By attempting to change the subject, you are conceding that you are bringing nothing to the debate. Which is appropriate, since congress is going to pass reform despite your paranoid objection.
Thanks Hoolarious. You have just gave me the incentive to cut back and drop into the lower income group to reduce my taxes. I' ve already let one of my rental properties remain vacant this year to reduce my taxes. So figure on a 5K decrease on my paid taxes this year. sign me up for the govt health care. let the rich people pay. WE DESERVE IT. ITS OUR RIGHT. The next thing we need to do is close down McDonalds and other makers of unhealthy foods. The last thing I want to see is see some fat person going to the hospital knowing that they are using my tax dollars to get healthcare for their overwieght condition that the government could have stopped. People in small cars, and motorcycles are next. They are a huge risk of getting hurt in an accident getting their health care on my tax money. I'm starting to get it. If we let the government control these things then we will all be better off. The government must keep us from making bad choices.
Drawn-in, are you honestly suggesting that we don't already have a two-tiered system?
Russ, were you able to understand any of the points I made? You. Are. Already. Paying. For. Other. People's. Health. Care. And you're paying way more than you would need to pay (via taxes & insurance premiums) than you would if we had a system of universal health care that addressed everyone's needs (not just the needs of the wealthy) before those needs turn catastrophic. You seem hell-bent on wanting to pay way more than you need to. Maybe you've got gobs of money; I don't.
Who's talking about shutting down McDonald's or letting gub'mint "keep us from making bad choices"? I'm saying more or less the opposite -- don't worry so much about the bad choices people make, and instead put the system in place that keeps the inevitable bad choices people will make from becoming catastrophically expensive for the entire nation.
Russ, you seem kind of...hysterical.
and we will all be diagnosed with "ObamaScare" in two months- something that will bankrupt all of America......................
Hoo and the rest of folks with any common sense. I would suggest you save your breath on arguing with the no health care crowd (it just sounds evil "No health Care For You!"). They can only see one move ahead and have been so indoctrinated by the right wing prop they're simply mouthpieces at this point. Just remember that they are a very small, but very vocal MINORITY, thank god.
ohmy,
You wrote: This is not the ââ?¬Å?me generation” it is the ââ?¬Å?give me” generation.
Wrong..... this is now the "I'm gonna take it anyway generation".
No that you are all done debating...go to the help wanted ads and find a job. Help yourself get our country out of this mess!!