kcdodd wrote:No, they are not. You have distorted what conservatives and liberals work toward. I am a gay american citizen, and you are clearly prejudiced against me as a minority. I have already stated that is a continuous position of conservatives, and you have supported it.
You see, the issue with many people in America is that homosexuals don't just want to be tolerated, they want to be affirmed. In other words, they want people to be AWARE and APPROVING of their sexual activities, when most people would rather not know about it. The idea that most people don't talk about what sort of sexual activities they engage in simply doesn't occur to these people. For example, suppose someone announced to the world that they prefer to be tied face down naked over a log with their head in a bucket of spiders, while someone spanks them with a dead cat?
Who wants to hear about this? People that like this sort of thing, (and believe you me, I don't doubt for a minute that
SOMEONE out there would like this sort of thing.
) don't make a point of letting others know they like that sort of thing. It is considered deviant, and alarming. It may surprise you to hear that I have researched Human Sexuality and the subset of Homosexuality quite a bit more than the average joe. I can discuss the subject in details that would make most people squirm. I've read the prominent current theories on the topic, and i've got my own insight to throw into the mix.
kcdodd wrote:
Not all liberals believe in a welfare state. I don't. But what I do believe in is a system which is fair.
I'm with you so far.
kcdodd wrote:
If someone does not work for a company who carries group medical coverage, they are at a disadvantage to everyone else who does.
You mean someone has something that someone else doesn't? And the government should fix this?
kcdodd wrote:
Different rules apply to them. It is not about a free ride. Its about being let on the bus. I have been denied individual medical coverage, and if it was not for my job i still would not be covered. My partner is still not covered, and of course can never be covered under my policy because of people like you.
This does not bother me at all, but it does illustrate one of the major problems with health care. It's the INSURANCE that is the problem. When people paid their own bills, they would simply refuse to pay for procedures that were too exorbitant and would shop around for the best deal they could get. Now that someone else is paying the bill, they just don't care if the Insurance company gets gouged.
How did we get here? Again, government interference. Back in the 1970s, the Tax rates were so high that people didn't WANT raises because it placed them in higher tax brackets, and people ended up with LESS money than without a raise. In an effort to provide incentives to people, many companies started giving employees health insurance because it was non taxable. It was a way of giving employees a raise (benefit) without forcing them backwards economically. It became common practice, and then it started pushing up the medical costs.
When doctors don't have to compete, they charge what they feel like. They usually feel like they want a lot, and who cares anyway? After all, It's not like their hurting anyone. Just some big Insurance fund. The Doctor Doesn't Care, the Patient doesn't care, so who cares? The Insurance company cares, so they start jacking up the rates to pay for other peoples lack of concern over the gouging.
To reiterate. Government Produces a punitive tax structure. Companies respond by providing nontaxable benefits. Dr.s (medical companies) take advantage of the unlimited pocketbook, and patients don't care because they aren't paying for the excessive costs. (till later when insurance companies jack up the rates.)
kcdodd wrote:
Coverage can also be removed, or price jacked, on people who have it when they develop illness. There also needs to be further regulation of primary care to prevent over-payments, over-treatments which are also contributing to health care costs in the Medicare and Medicaid programs we already have.
Not to mention "defensive medicine". The condition in which doctors run extra expensive and unnecessary tests to make sure that if something goes wrong, they have protected themselves from the lawyer sharks.
kcdodd wrote:
Guess what, there is more in the healthcare bill than just mandatory coverage, which is also a solution to health insurance costs on those who are not already covered.
It solves nothing. It makes things worse. It creates the illusion of a solution, but in practice results in rationing and poor service.
kcdodd wrote:
There are many programs being instituted in the bill to find and curb costs. This is not state run healthcare! It is state-regulated healthcare! There is a difference.
The people who wrote the bill doesn't even know what it says, nor how much it costs. See
here? Please don't insult my intelligence by claiming that any of this thrown together, bribe infested, darkness of night, skullduggery, pile of crap, written and passed by crooks and idiots will improve anything.
