Who wants government run healthcare?

 
 


 
 


 
        
King Obama Approval Index  1/29/09  +28    11/23/2009  -13  (Down 41)
Strongly Approve 1/29/09  44%   11/23/2009 28%    (Down 16%)
Strongly Disapprove  1/29/09 16%  11/23/2009 41%  (Up 25%)
Total Approve  1/29/09  65%    11/23/2009  46%   (Down 19%)
Total Disapprove   1/29/09  30%  11/23/2009  53%  (Up 23%)
 
BYE BYE OBAMA  
Obama suffers from Bush Derangement Syndrome 

 
 
 







    
 
        
  
         
 

profile is now open for contact ty

What gives the government the right to control health care?

The Tenth Amendment states " the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution are reserved to the States respectively or to the people." Nowhere in the Constitution does it give the Federal Government any power or control over education, health, welfare, labor, dams, and public power projects, agriculture, unemployment or housing. According to the Constitution , the regulation of all these areas is to remain within the jurisdiction of the States or the people.

Here's the kicker. When Federal funds are used to support these the Federal government uses control over these areas. This is why the liberals, socialist, and communists want the Federal government to subsidize these area of government. Look up U.S. Supreme Court case Wickard vs. Filburn, 1942. Obama is passing Socialism. Remember Government subsidizes the Government regulates. So every new Federal laws passed by Congress which invades the rights of the individual States, it strengthens the control the government exercises over citizens.

Things may stay the same after all.

10:48 A.M. E.S.T. Though what about the Government. Are we not actually the Government. Do we not enforce the Laws. In the the last postings here it has been described as a governed situation.

No one wants to be run by the Government. Although we all have the suggestions to some-how co-insist. 

What about the tooling at first, is it the appropriate tooling to be used. {A tooling is something that is used for all and through and in time through all}- a concept that is perhaps a calculational theory, when it is in all a purpose of actual usage. In a calculational effort it would be wise to calculate a full capacity. This perhaps is used by a Full pledged Government. And in sort is assembled by the people for the people, perhaps a unique law.

Now have we a complete union in these United States of America. No we do not. First, allow me to remind you of the Tooling.

First there is you = a tooling

Then there is the usage = a tooling

Then there is the explanation of the usage = an understanding = a tooling

A tooling is something we use

Again we are as = the tooling

Money is evaluated as a = a tooling

Evaluated, is something that will need to be assessed to a figurational attempt. The attempt was a situation assembled during the figuration of calculation towards the equalness of a Governmental assessment. Assessment is perhaps something that may happen.

Does everybody have the money for the appropriate tooling matter and or cause.

Does everybody need the money for the apropriate tooling matter and or cause.

Does there need to be an evaluational effort for this accommodation. Could that evaluation be the theory one may have towards the idea of another. Take me for instance. I would suggest that everyone would need to supply themselves with the format to obtain heath insurance.

What is Insurance. Insurance is the availability to a calculational effort towards a completion of some sort of strategy. Perhaps the strategy is the evaluational task of some sort seeking the maintenance of another sort.  Though by any legal and or Standard the maintenance of any sort may not be forfilled or in a forfillment.

Example Money. Money is the issue. Have'nt got it yet and I am not talking about the money. Evaluation, Task, Venture, Accumilation, Environment, Government, then there's Law or a Law.

Question is whom did it first. Need more information, ask me what I'm talking about just once again. And there will be no problem answering it. Though allow me give you this tooling first.

Money is an Invention.

Land was an Invention and still is. Example when there was'nt any Money there was surley the Land.

Distribution is the key factor. Perhaps a DeLancey Factory then again one for all and all for one. Though what does that mean. Should go all for one and one for all.

Well I'll tell you if one has an idea then all sould be encouraged to enjoy it, especially if the idea is an idea for all. So there you have it One isea for all and all for one.

Here is the Task, form an evaluational venture when I was seeking my environment in which was surrounded by a Governmental Law. In all records it ended up as my own.

A One Percent Sales Tax on The Dollar, also a half a cent from within the Dollar.... Distribution of Income to Everyone of the Age of Twentyone.............................. A State Tax Witheld From A Paycheck.............................................................. Disabled Persons Get More.............................................................................. Retired Persons Get More................................................................................

11:28 A.M. 11-29-2009

Nobody but Liberals ignorant of the miserable failures of Health Care in every country that's tried it. That's who want it.

Another question should be: "Who are these uninsured that they keep changing the figures who need it?" Last total was, I think, 46 million, but previously it was 36 million and before that 25. I wish they'd pick a number and just go with it.

When you think about it, everyone legal can get health care somewhere..and affordable health care at that. I myself went through the process do get Medicare and Medicaid(Yes, I'm disabled so I have a lot of free time) and if done correctly, it works. SO who can't get healthcare by some option?

1- People who refuse to pay for it. There are varied types of this. Some are "Invincible", meaning the young who won't buy it due to their health making them think they'll never need it.  Some are just people looking for a handout, sad to say.

2- Partners of the Evening. Except in Nevada, where prostituion is legal, I doubt that any hooker/ gigolo has a health plan.

3- Criminals. Let's say you're a mob boss or the boss of a small gang. You don't provide health care to your soldiers due to that meaning you're trying to legitimize the crimes you commit.

4- Illegal Immigrants. Over 12 million of the 46 million come from this category. Despite the majority of them being law abiding citizens, they are illegal due to breaking the law. Giving them free health care is rewarding criminal behavior.

5- Mentally disabled without a family. Let's face it, you're hardly in a position to know how to secure your own healthcare unless you're just manic depressive or likely ailed(There are a lot of mental illnesses that are not disabling, you know?). For those that can't, their family is expected to secure health insurance or money. But once these few that haven't a family are put in an institution, a social worker there(applaud these people, they don't get enough praise) will secure your health care by applying for Medicaid/Medicare.

6- People in other countries who are dying due to their country adopting socialized medicine. America tries to be the nursemaid and policemen of the world, where we only obtain scorn in return. Think our government won't send our tax money to other countries? Think again. They devoted a hefty chunk of their stimulus bill to other countries.

All this and not to mention that America already shoulders the world's health burden. Drugs made in America cost less to people in Brazil than America. That $100 perscription med you had to buy? They probably paid $5 in Brazil. No, I'm not picking on Brazil(I actually admire how fast this SA country is developing), just using it as an example. All countries are given this discount. The money they lose for charging less in other countries is tacked onto America's medicine.

That's my list of who doesn't have health care. However, if one of these are injured and rushed to the hospital, they'll be treated depending on the immediacy of their ailment. For Benefitting these 46 million, most of whom are criminals and illegal aliens, the other 300 million of us have to pay it, and will have to drop our own health care plans to pay for the 46 million.

Conservatives can rejoice -- Rush Limbaugh recently left Queen's Medical Center in Honolulu hospital with a clean bill of health.
Despite complaints of sharp chest pains , Limbaugh told reporters that after he went through an angiogram, doctors "found absolutely nothing wrong. It was a blessing. No arterial disease, no coronary disease whatsoever."
Moments later, Limbaugh turned his praise of the hospital's service into his latest proof that the current American health care system is working perfectly.
"Based on what happened to me here, I don't think there is one thing wrong with the American health care system. It is working just fine, just dandy, and I got nothing special," Limbaugh continued.
What Limbaugh didn't realize, SEIU's blog points out , is that the Hawaiian health care system is one of America's most progressive. So progressive, in fact, that Hawaii has been exempted from some of the terms of the Senate health care bill because the current system's requirements go above and beyond the ones federal legislation would mandate.
Furthermore, Limbaugh's saviors at the Queen's Medical Center are represented by the Hawaii Nurse's Associations, which, according to SEIU, offers benefits and protections similar to those of a labor union. The anti-reform talk show host is working to deny more people the same type of "confidence-inspiring" medical attention that made him "thankful to be an American."

WASHINGTON — The U.S. spent an average of $7,681 per person on health care in 2008, for an eye-popping total of $2.3 trillion – even though spending actually slowed dramatically that year because of the recession, a new federal study says.

Health spending didn't slow down as much as the nation's overall economic output, the study said, in keeping with a decades-old trend that has now pushed health care costs to account for over 16 percent of the nation's economy.

The figures underscore the challenges confronting President Barack Obama and lawmakers seeking to overhaul the system. Obama has repeatedly cited spiraling health costs as one of the main reasons Congress needs to pass his health plan, and administration officials said the findings highlighted the need for quick action.

"This report contains some welcome news and yet another warning sign," said Jonathan Blum, a top official at the government's Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. "Health care spending as a percentage of GDP (gross domestic product) is rising at an unsustainable rate. It is clear that we need health insurance reform now."

However, health care experts question whether there are significant cost-containment measures in the bills passed by House and Senate Democrats before Christmas – and Republicans insist there aren't. The new report could provide fodder for both sides as lawmakers work to reconcile the House and Senate legislation into a final bill in coming weeks.

"I agree we need reform, but both the House and Senate Democrat bills make the problem worse by increasing the cost of health care," said Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan, top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee. "They spend $1 trillion we don't have and bend the curve the wrong way."

Republicans cited earlier analyses by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid that found the sweeping overhaul legislation that seeks to extend coverage to more than 30 million uninsured Americans over the next decade would lead to increased health care costs. Democrats counter that the bills begin to slow cost increases over time.

The new analysis by economists at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid appeared Tuesday in the journal Health Affairs. It found that total national health spending grew 4.4 percent in 2008, the slowest rate of increase since CMS began tracking health spending in 1960. By contrast, the growth rate in 2007 was 6 percent. The study seeks to measure all public and private health expenditures.