I just don't get why the merkins are so against public health.
We may not have a perfect health system but I know that no matter what illness or injury I have, I can go somewhere that I will be treated without question regardless of my income.
( girlinthehole, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 10:46, 3 replies, latest was 16 years ago)

It's a funny one
I have met at least one perfectly intelligent American who was opposed to it; for the sake of avoiding a heated debate I didn't ask her to explain herself. But then I have also met several other perfectly intelligent Americans who, like us, can't understand why so many of their nation are so bitterly opposed to the idea.

At least it's through - as Enzyme points out, it will probably be a fairly second-rate compromise, but then I suppose the NHS took a long time coming and even then was only after fifty-odd years of piecemeal social reforms.
(LongJohnBaldry, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 10:49, Reply)

It's not even comparable to the NHS though
it's a centrist bill regarding private companies and insurance, the state isn't actually providing any health care, the intention was to force insurance companies to compete more and not just cherry pick the healthy people, but I don't know if this bill will actually work in that way.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:10, Reply)

It's really not centrist at all.
"The Centre" in America is comparable to the right here. By US standards, Cameron is a socialist, since he supports the NHS.

The difference between right and left in the whole US political spectrum maps roughly onto the difference between John Redwood or Daniel Hannan and Ken Clarke within the Tory party. It's really no difference at all.

(Indeed, there's a joke along the lines that the US has two political parties: one is like the Conservatives, and the other is like the Conservatives. Except that the joke is out of date, because both are to the right of mainstream Toryism.)
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:17, Reply)

This!

(MichaelS wasn't picked again, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:35, Reply)

They're against governments having any power over them.
They only cave to essential government interference.
The argument was not about if it was good, but if it was essential. Then the spin came in to whip up the idiots by saying that it would mean you'd die if you supported it.
(PsychoChomp, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 10:50, Reply)

So they'll let the government decide when to go to war and kill their husbands and sons.
But not let them decide when a change in healthcare is in their best interest or not.
( girlinthehole, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:04, Reply)

Exactly
What I see happening is that the right wing politicians are owned lock stock and barrel by big money and will do anything to keep sucking at the tits of their owners. They are extremely good at propaganda and use the media (that so many americans blindly follow) to scream lies about creeping socialism and government forcing people who are older to be killed etc.

Interestingly, when a lot of the people who have been drinking the right wing Kool-Aid are asked about specific portions of the health bill, they are all for them.

If you are not aware of it, once you’re past 65 in the us, you are enrolled into Medicare, which is basically a government run health care program. It was really funny to literally see people screaming that the health bill was going to put government in charge of their Medicare. They didn't even know how the system already works. TV is one great opiate.
(MichaelS wasn't picked again, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:13, Reply)

I didn't know about Medicare for the aged.
I figure there must be something for the poor re healthcare but it can't be very easy to get.
( girlinthehole, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:19, Reply)

There is Medicade which "covers"
the poor but really only covers emergency care and not much of that.
(MichaelS wasn't picked again, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:23, Reply)

"They're against governments having any power over them" or at least many people
think that after drinking the right wing Kool Aid and don't realize how much power the gov already has over them.
(MichaelS wasn't picked again, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:50, Reply)

they are against it because it is all liberal and communist and stuff
DAMN REDS!
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:11, Reply)

It's worrying how many of them actually seem to believe that...

(LongJohnBaldry, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:27, Reply)

People really do believe it. It is really bizzare.

(MichaelS wasn't picked again, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:39, Reply)

the bile which goes with the word liberal amuses me

( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:42, Reply)

See what good propaganda can do!
I think that some of the far right secretly grabbed a lot of Hitler's propagandists after WWII and learned from them. (Joke, sort of)

(No I'm not a conspiracy theorist and I don't think that the Illuminati or masons rule the world, just the US).
(MichaelS wasn't picked again, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:51, Reply)

I wonder if it confuses people
when the directions on a jar of something say to "spread liberally on toast" for example.
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:55, Reply)

Can one spread conservatively?
Well, apart from in the style of Nicholas Soames or Ken Clarke?
(LongJohnBaldry, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:57, Reply)

spreading jam is probably conservative

( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 12:02, Reply)

Don't forget that at one time not too long ago
the cafeterias in the US Congress changed the terms "French fries" and "French toast" to "freedom fries" and "freedom toast".

This was in response to those damn French thinking they had the right to govern themselves and not send troops to Iraq. How dare they not do what George Bush told them they must do?

Of course French Fries (or chips to you Brits) are really Belgian and French toast was named after the cook who "invented" it whose last name was French.

(Obama has changed the names back to their original names)
(MichaelS wasn't picked again, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 12:33, Reply)

You see, I've never been to the States
partly because I fear that if I went to the wrong part I'd have to bite my tongue so often I'd end up chewing it off. Which are the safest states to visit if you're an atheist scientist who normally votes Lib Dem?
(LongJohnBaldry, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:57, Reply)

Hawaii

( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 11:58, Reply)

I'm fine, thank you
When did you turn Geordie?
(LongJohnBaldry, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 12:00, Reply)

hahaha

( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 12:01, Reply)

Vermont but our far left wing socialist state gov
is more like your Center. We do have the only Senator who at one time was openly Socialist (Berny Sanders). He now has dropped the Socualist label and calls humself a Progressive.
(MichaelS wasn't picked again, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 12:36, Reply)