What is Digg?209 Comments
- kemp34, on 04/30/2008, -8/+32This ponzi scheme is 100% unsustainable. It was created to make people dependent on the state.
- sportsbooks, on 04/30/2008, -18/+33Yeah more than 50 million US citizens don't have medical insurance. They want to bring peace in the world while their people are dying on the streets.
- jcastillo81, on 04/30/2008, -1/+15Wait... a government program is spending more than it has and not working the way it was intended?
- JSatt, on 04/30/2008, -3/+16These are the same people you want in control of everyone's health care? This is less than 15% of our country, and they can't handle it. The last thing we need is them in control of everyone's health care.
- inactive, on 04/30/2008, -2/+15You can cover a family of 4 for 50 bucks a month? Sign me up!
Meanwhile, Medicare "Advantage", the medicare that is run by private health care business on OUR tax dollars, is charging 14% more than regular medi-care. Then, we get reports like this saying medicare is doing so horribly. Amazingly, we are paying private businesses to run medicare into the ground, then using it as a reason private businesses should handle health care. - inactive, on 04/30/2008, -2/+13Yet for some reason free health care will work?
- inactive, on 04/30/2008, -3/+14bush = most unpopular president ever = 2 terms
congress = lowest approval rating ever = taking over healthcare?
Yea - I can totally see that! - inactive, on 04/30/2008, -3/+13We already have socialised medicine, but the rhetoric is so loud from private companies, no one sees it.
A poor person can't afford a regular doctors visit, because no coverage, or too high a deductible, and they can't pay. So they wait until they are very ill, then go to the emergency room, where they can't be denied service (a la "socialized health care"). Now, instead of the problem being treated for acouple hundred bucks at the beginning, it is a multi-thousand dollar bill, and the person can't pay. Who pays? American citizens.
But we are too ***** dumb to ignore the hype from the big health care companies, and would rather use lables to make decisions about the poor and elderly of our country. - inactive, on 04/30/2008, -8/+17What's that, government in supposedly private medicine causing big problems? Hmm, I thought it was private? Wait, it isn't, it's a government subsidy, and has been for 35 years. The system we have now is not part of the free market, don't be fooled. Any more government entanglement will only ***** it up more.
- cmorriss, on 04/30/2008, -1/+10You do know that Ron Paul wants to abolish medicare, right? Not replace it with some magical new entity, get rid of it.
- mokki, on 04/30/2008, -2/+10The process continues... weakening existing institutions, health care, social welfare, education and culture systems.
- oldhick, on 04/30/2008, -5/+12What? How do you relate healthcare to police and fire and roads? And no, I don't support Federal police or Federal fire.
- Meekus, on 04/30/2008, -3/+10Gee I dont know how this could possibly happen... It's not like we have to borrow from China every day in order to support our interventionist foreign policy or anything... And who gets to pay off that debt? Why the American people of course! Politicians charge all this money on our national credit card, and we the people must foot the bill.
Hmmm - how about controlling our spending both domestically and abroad? - stonebear, on 04/30/2008, -0/+7[citation needed]
- SillyRabbits, on 04/30/2008, -3/+10If you actually paid attention you would know that he tried VERY hard to begin instituting reforms, but was blocked by congress every time.
- TheUngod, on 04/30/2008, -4/+10Since when has watching a Michael Moore movie helped solve a national crisis?
- mriegger, on 04/30/2008, -1/+6Just watch Frontline's Sick Around the World
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaround ...
They look at six nation's healthcare systems and objectively list both the pros and cons of each with no political BS - SpaceMonkeyZero, on 04/30/2008, -2/+7Dying in the streets? Please provide links to news stories of 50 million Americans dying in the streets due to lack of medical care. You're full of *****.
- JulioChavez, on 04/30/2008, -1/+6Who put them in office? It sounds like if you could have voted, you would have helped them. You sound just like them. Your type of ignorance has hurt the US badly over the past 7-8 years, even if you weren't directly involved in the voting process. It is this government's *responsibility* to care for people that cannot care for themselves. I see your enlightened response a few comments down "No it's not". Yes. It is. Maybe it's not in your queer, little fantasy world. In America, it is. The government shouldn't provide for those who choose not to care for themselves, only those that can not. Oh yeah, and I didn't "keep" the neocons in office. There's little I can do about it, except voice my dissent. That's how we do it in the free world, while we wait for elections. If elections are canceled, then we can discuss other forms of dissent. It hasn't come to that yet.
- AustinMandi, on 04/30/2008, -3/+8There is a slight flaw in your argument also. You assume that the government must intervene to look out for society when for the majority of our country's history we did take care of each other without federal help. Take for example Dr. Ron Paul. In his practice, he did not accept medicare or medicaid but instead used a sliding scale to adjust payment for his patients. And some did receive free care. The problem is we see roadblocks on a global scale instead of trying to start fixing things in our own communities first. The govt. is far too inept in every aspect to entrust them with my health as well.
- chethanp, on 04/30/2008, -1/+6medicare looks in trouble
- ICSU, on 04/30/2008, -2/+7The fact that American free market medicare is worse than European "socialist" medicare tells me that American medicare is not a free market after all.
- ryansriches, on 04/30/2008, -1/+6this has been a huge issue for quite sometime now. It makes it very difficult to have insurance, especially as a business owner.
- SillyRabbits, on 04/30/2008, -5/+10Please, the only people dying in the streets are those that decide to. Emergency rooms don't turn people away. In fact, in Atlanta one of the main hospitals is now bankrupt because of abuse by people without insurance. Some people don't want to pay $1.75 for a subway ticket so they call 911 complaining of chest pains because they know they will get a free ride downtown to the hospital in an ambulance. I kid you not.
- bacon_skoda, on 04/30/2008, -1/+5"Who pays? American citizens."
1. that poor person also pays if he earns an income and files taxes.
2. no. not only american citizens. you mean people that pay taxes. - sjl127, on 04/30/2008, -4/+8You wrote, "it is the government's proper role to intervene when he cannot."
No it's not. - whisperedlie, on 04/30/2008, -1/+5a day of reading digg is enough to make you contemplate suicide.
- sjl127, on 04/30/2008, -15/+19You put these people in office, and you kept them in office. So shut up about that argument. Besides, it's the individuals responsibility to provide for ones self - not the government. And don't tell me they don't make enough. There's too much opportunity here for that to be an excuse.
- inactive, on 04/30/2008, -0/+4I partially disagree. It was made with the best of intentions, not some sinister plot--but that doesn't mean it's smart.
- lsfloyd, on 04/30/2008, -5/+9There is no easy way out of this mess. I hope nobody was really counting on the Bush admin anyway.
- br0ck, on 04/30/2008, -2/+6There are plenty of people 'dying in the streets' due to illnesses that an emergency room won't treat. 50% of all bankruptcies and the majority of homes loss are due to medical bills and most of those people were insured: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6895896/ After you've gone bankrupt due to pancreatic cancer and then lost your home, where are you supposed to go?
Also, unpaid emergency room bills are handled by the most aggressive collections agencies, and non-payment will result in reclamations and completely trash a person's credit score, so it's not like people can just using the emergency room for all of their medical needs over the course of an illness and still manage to maintain a reasonably decent quality of life. - PabloMac, on 04/30/2008, -0/+4Do you really think Socialistic health care puts doctors in control? The control would transfer to the government, and we all know where that most often leads.
- holzp, on 04/30/2008, -0/+4I saw this in 'Duh' magazine like two years ago.
- skellener, on 04/30/2008, -4/+8Stop paying for the war.
- Adamande, on 04/30/2008, -0/+4If you mean Iraq, the "peace to the world" explanation was the third one used for going in, after WMD's and ties to Al Qaida were debunked as outright lies, so I'd remain a little skeptical when Bush tries to portray himself as the savior of the planet. Especially considering the utter contempt he seems to have for his own people.
- inactive, on 04/30/2008, -15/+19That movie is a bunch of lies, inuendo, half-truths, and utter bullcrap.
- inactive, on 04/30/2008, -2/+5Do you presently have health care coverage? If so, you are already paying for others health care costs. You are just so enamored with ***** fantasy philosophy and buzzwords, you haven't a clue...
- vault, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3The problem isn't that we have medicare, the problem is that medical costs are sky high. Other countries don't have the same problems with trial lawyers and malpractice suits pushing up premiums, they cap drug prices, they don't need to spend 1/4 of all health care expenses on administration, etc.
When we start feeling the effects of the baby boomers retiring, something is going to have to give. The whole system desperately needs to be replaced. - lindstorm, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3This "trend" is global. Several countries, that have maintained their own healthcare service/infrastructure (gov't maintained hospitals etc.) will rely even more on private sector healthcare, thus making it a better business for already existing companies, and lure in new companies who are into business for the money, not to heal people...
- Delphium226, on 04/30/2008, -1/+4Yeah, it's the governments job to take our taxes and bomb foreigners, not pay for healthcare for Americans!!
/s - inactive, on 04/30/2008, -1/+4it was one of the only things he ever did that i thought was a good idea. they should have privatized social security and medicare. i think medicare is supposed to go bankrupt around 2017, so we're running out of time.
- rpfinley, on 04/30/2008, -1/+4How about some competition and conformity across state lines, its a horrible idea to let companies pay for it and have it not be portable.
- kemp34, on 04/30/2008, -4/+7They may be able to survive (doubtful), but the fact of the matter is they are anti-economic ponzi schemes that rob from the future to supplement the present. This is the antithesis of savings and investment, which are the root of social and economic development.
- TherealObadiah, on 04/30/2008, -2/+5Yet another failure of the Democrat's plan, born out of the great society of Lyndon Johnson, to provide government give-aways in exchange for votes. Is it any wonder why it's a complete failure. And now, Democrats have created an expectation among society that unless a politician promises to raid the treasury on your group's behalf, you are labeled as uncaring and of lacking compassion. But really, how hard is it to give away other people's money. Liberals...always on the wrong side of history.
- mattmedwards, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3There is something messed up about our system when a demented 90 year old gets triple bypass surgery and spends remaining 5 years of her life in intensive, round the clock nursing care with little quality of life. The total cost of these procedures is somewhere north of half a million dollars, all billed to medicare and medicaid. Repeat this story hundreds of thousands of times, and you are looking straight at the "silver tsunami," a tidal wave of entitlements that the baby boomers will expect to cash in on in the coming decades. The ratio of retirees to taxpayers will decrease, and at the same time medical costs are increasing due primarily to higher tech medicine.
What Michael Moore does not tell you in Sicko is that countries with socialized medicine implement aggressive cost-cutting measures. Do you think that in the UK a diabetic will get free dialysis for life? No freakin way. Yet that is what we have here... a bottomless pit of medical entitlements for a select demographic and zip for the rest of us (the ones paying in).
For a very succinct and balanced assessment of this situation, I highly recommend watching this video straight from the Government Accounting Office: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjZBOCAgR64 - ZenMojo, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3In other news, Congress voted to shovel another 200 billion dollars into Iraq. Yay!
- Kibitz, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3For those of you who keep crying incredulity: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/27348.php There has been study after study done (this is just one of them) showing that privatized systems are horribly inefficient. That's why socialized systems were adopted by the rest of the industrialized world in the first place. Just a fun little tidbit to illustrate the problem: the state of Massachusetts spends more on healthcare than the entire nation of Canada because the administrative costs of a private system are so embarrassingly ridiculous.
- oldhick, on 04/30/2008, -4/+7Dying in the streets... LOL, that was good!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 209 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is