• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.

Universal Healthcare...an idea whose time has come??

New posts
I thought you were addressing lobbyists. Limiting who can lobby the government would be unconstitutional. First Amendment and stuff.
 
What are the limits for lobbyist:idontno: :confused: Are there no rules at all against fraternizing? It seems wrong with a capital 'W' to for a Congress member to be able to fraternize in their job if the general population isn't always allowed. Like Haliburton for example. WTH was anyone allowed to personally profit on a war machine they (Congress, Cheney,etc.) were voting on :confused: :idontno: Uh oh, that's probably a huge can o' worms already opened on another thread. :idontno: Sorry.
Seems like a huge 'conflict of interest' ;-) That's what shouldn't be allowed, IMHO, that is.:cool:
 
The lobbying firms can limit who they employ, but dictating who can and who cannot address their government is a bad, bad thing.

As for Cheney and Halliburton, I do not remember the details, but there was extensive legal work completed to ensure that he could not ever recognize profit from any of his decisions, I?m sure someone can dig up the details. And I know Halliburton is a convenient boogieman, but there are not a lot of companies in the world that do what they do.
 
There should be strong guidelines with gov't like the rest of us, against 'conflict of interest' and fraternizing. Why is it constitutional for us but not for them to have limits. :confused: :idontno: Probably, again IMHO, the very same reason some large corporations don't have any competitors :shock: ;-)
Back to health care. This universal plan, in order to work the best, is something that would have to be turned right back into profit for the people and their health, instead of big companies.
 
Last edited:
Someone in the medical field please answer this question for me as simply as possible - apart from the fact that France and Canada obviously tax their citizens more than the US - why are they able to consistently provide excellent care to all - please no-one write in that the French can probably no longer sustain this - I realize this but also know that for decades, EVERYONE had access to excellent care and medicine and people were not forced to squander their life savings if they were faced with a serious or debillitating disease.

Why can the US not provide this?? Is it because this country has hundreds of millions people (may be a dumb question - I do not know???).

I am very curious to see Sicko - saw Michael Moore in an interview and he said that one of the main issues that bothered him was not so much the millions uninsured but rather the millions who regularly pay their premiums and then, in many cases when confronted with somethig serious may often find themselves having their claims denied.
 
Am in EXTREME pain right now - I have the most God awful ear ache in only one ear - has spread all the way down my neck and into my glands which are swollen (cannot even stand touching my neck).

It started yesterday morning (thankfully I was spared pain on plane) and got progressively worse - I went to see Pharamcist begging for anything I could get across the counter without prescription - all he could advise was for me to either go to ER or to take tylenol - I opted for the latter and it has done nothing but I also did not want to go to ER and then be charged God knows how much.

I have noon appointment with doctor here and am desperately trying to keep myself distracted. Have not had earache probably in 15 -20 years and had forgotten how much it hurts like hell!!!!!!!!
 
:clap: :D I am very curious to see sICko too, chickpea. All I can seem to figure out is there is a big money making monopoly going on in our country, between insurance and drug companies, not to mention oil companies.:idontno:
 
seacrestkristi said:
There should be strong guidelines with gov't like the rest of us, against 'conflict of interest' and fraternizing. Why is it constitutional for us but not for them to have limits. :confused: :idontno: Probably, again IMHO, the very same reason some large corporations don't have any competitors :shock: ;-)
Back to health care. This universal plan, in order to work the best, is something that would have to be turned right back into profit for the people and their health, instead of big companies.
Click to expand...

Well, our President has shown that he?ll sign unconstitutional legislation that limits free speech and the Court, although since shifted, has shown that they?ll let him get away with it (McCain-Feingold), so if you want to lobby your representatives to draft such a bill, provided you don?t have any conflicts of interest that would disallow you to do so from your own personal guidelines, go right ahead. As for large companies that don?t have many competitors, that?s probably because there is a large barrier to entry, which isn?t necessarily a bad thing.

For the healthcare, issue, a credit union style of insurance or health care might be an idea, but it would take some time to catch on. Regardless, Uncle Sam, MD, is a bad idea.

To the one that isn?t addressing me, I?m not sure on Canada, but I do know Canadians often come here for quality care. I believe France has a system in place that allows citizens to pay for health care that is not state sponsored. That is at least a step in the right direction, but the best way to do it, should the government get involved, which it should not, is compete on the playing field that everyone else is competing on and allowing those who do not want state health care to opt out and not be forced to pay taxes that would fund it. I do not believe France allows the opt out. Fortunately I believe this state health care stuff is a political loser, as it has been virtually every time they?ve tried it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter









Share this page




                               
Back
Top