Conservatives were for it before they were against it!

we wanted and still want universal care.

It will happen no matter how much money the wealthy spend to stop it
 
... and liberals were against it before they were for it.

So, what's your point?
I don't see any evidence that liberals were against it, they were simply supporting a different plan at the time, I don't think anyone said it was a bad idea.

My point is that Obama care, especially the mandate, has become almost pure evil for the Republicans, even though a few years ago they were out promoting it.
 
the party is now run by the nutters they had to court to win elections even WHILE they cheated their asses off
 
As an alternative to universal care? Yes.

As a segue *to* a single payer system? No.

Not much complicated than that.
 
why?


why do you not want us to do the one thing that has been proven to work?

I've had my quota of you for the day, but you grabbed me with this.

I just gotta ask, if just for the sake of enjoying a gut laugh.... Where has this "been proven to work"?
 
Those aren't single-payer countries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-payer_health_care

Single-payer health care is a system in which the government, rather than private insurers, pays for all health care costs.[1] Single-payer systems may contract for healthcare services from private organizations (as is the case in Canada) or may own and employ healthcare resources and personnel (as is the case in the United Kingdom). The term "single-payer" thus only describes the funding mechanism—referring to health care financed by a single public body from a single fund—and does not specify the type of delivery, or for whom doctors work. Although the fund holder is usually the state, some forms of single-payer use a mixed public-private system.

Single-payer health insurance collects all medical fees, then pays for all services, through a "single" government (or government-related) source.[2] In wealthy nations, this kind of publicly managed insurance is typically extended to all citizens and legal residents. Examples include the United Kingdom's National Health Service, Australia's Medicare, Canada's Medicare, and Taiwan's National Health Insurance.
 
Where is Cuba in this list?

You really want to cling to your crap argument to the last breath?

It's right there in that definition...

Single-payer health care is a system in which the government, rather than private insurers, pays for all health care costs.

But if you're going to hold your breath until you see the actual words:

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/726680_2

Canada, Cuba, and North Korea are the only countries that have a true single-payer system. In these countries, an individual cannot buy health care services privately if that same service is covered and paid for by the government. Most single-payer systems find it necessary to incorporate a "buyout" provision. Great Britain, which started off as a single-payer system, found it could not serve everybody so the government allowed an outlet for people to buy private insurance or private care. This is a "buyout." But that is not a true single-payer system as considered by advocates.

Now, do you have any more "Yeah, buts...."?
 
You really want to cling to your crap argument to the last breath?

It's right there in that definition...



But if you're going to hold your breath until you see the actual words:

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/726680_2



Now, do you have any more "Yeah, buts...."?

Yes, on one hand you have a post that says the U.K. is a single payer system, but your next link says that Canada, Cuba and North Korea are the only single payer systems. Which is it?
 
Yes, on one hand you have a post that says the U.K. is a single payer system, but your next link says that Canada, Cuba and North Korea are the only single payer systems. Which is it?

Yeah, I guess you are going to cling to it to the bitter end.

Just read the defintions. It's a subtle difference, like between a true democracy and a representative republic.

If it's still too much for your mind to unravel, I haven't enough interest to walk you through it.

If you didn't ban people from your threads maybe there'd be someone here more willing than I to help.
 
The really unique thing about the UK and Cuban health systems is that their medical care is run by the government. So, like, holding them up as examples of single payer is kinda stupid since the defining feature is not who pays for medical care but who delivers it.
 
Yeah, I guess you are going to cling to it to the bitter end.

Just read the defintions. It's a subtle difference, like between a true democracy and a representative republic.

If it's still too much for your mind to unravel, I haven't enough interest to walk you through it.

If you didn't ban people from your threads maybe there'd be someone here more willing than I to help.

I only ban idiots who never offer anything beneficial to threads. They don't even engage in debate, the simply make racist comments and snipe.
 
Back
Top