Impeding changes to our Health Care system

[Clodfobble]

Right. What's being discussed won't affect that one way or the other, for good or bad. It also won't affect road maintenance funding, or the failing education system--just because something's a problem doesn't mean it has to be addressed at this time with this bill or else the bill must be worthless. One thing at a time.

[TheMercenary]

No, it does not effect the root problems in our system today. It places an bunch of bandaids over the issues. It pats everyone on the head with feel good programs fueled by political agendas. And it spend 1 trillion dollars on a system which will not fix the issues, that your great great grand children will be paying for. Good luck with that.

[Clodfobble]

Now, these are the facts. Nobody disputes them. We know we must reform this system. The question is how. Now, there are those on the left who believe that the only way to fix the system is through a single-payer system like Canada's, where we would -- where we would severely restrict the private insurance market and have the government provide coverage for everybody.

On the right, there are those who argue that we should end employer-based systems and leave individuals to buy health insurance on their own.

I have said -- I have to say that there are arguments to be made for both these approaches. But either one would represent a radical shift that would disrupt the health care most people currently have. Since health care represents one-sixth of our economy, I believe it makes more sense to build on what works and fix what doesn't, rather than try to build an entirely new system from scratch.

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you didn't watch the speech. (Not saying you have to agree with what he said... but I'm still quite sure you didn't watch it or read a transcript.)

Please tell me what the "root problems" are, and how we should "fix the issues." I am genuinely curious, since I can't recall you ever getting specific about it.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Illegal aliens should not be paid for by public funds. Period. Legal aliens who follow the process and do the right thing are welcome. All others are scumbag law breakers and should be kicked out on their ass.

There are no illegal aliens in America. The federal government has absolutely no Constitutional authority whatsoever to create or enforce immigration laws unless someone amends the Constitution to give them such an enumerated power. All immigrants regardless of how they got here, or whether or not they came here with or without papers or whether they checked in with the government when they got here are here LEGALLY.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by jinx

What will happen then, when an uninsured illegal immigrant shows up in the ER, under any proposed plan?

Republicans and scumbags who use terms like "illegal alien" to describe undocumented immigrants who are here legally would prefer that they die in the street. How humanitarian of them.

[lookout123]

which court rulings support your view on the immigration issue radar? how many cases have been filed?

illegal illegal illegal illegal illegal illegal. like it or not the law says there are legal requirement for entrance into the US. therefore anyone in the US not following those requirements is by definition and illegal immigrant. you may argue the validity of the law but you cannot argue the law isn't in place so until you are able to get a ruling in your favor you had better accept these people are here illegally.

[Radar]

The courts are below the Constitution, including the Supreme Court. The U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits the federal government from taking part in, legislating, regulating, or controlling anything that isn't specifically enumerated in the U.S. Constitution or from having "implied powers" and guess what?

Immigration is not mentioned so what I'm saying is a stone, cold, indisputable, undeniable, irrefutable fact.

As the Supreme Court said in Marbury vs. Madison, all laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void. There is no need for judicial review. They are unconstitutional in their face and automatically null and void. The U.S. Supreme Court are not the sole arbiters of the Constitution. All citizens not only have the right to determine whether or not laws are Constitutional, but the duty to do so.

The federal government has no more legitimate authority to make a law pertaining to immigration or an organization of thugs to enforce them than I have the authority to make a law stating that you will shave your head bald and wear a pink speedo for the rest of your life. You would ignore any laws I made like that. You don't ignore the government because they have more guns than me. Their guns don't lend them any legitimacy, nor does the title "government".

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Radar

Republicans and scumbags who use terms like "illegal alien" to describe undocumented immigrants who are here legally would prefer that they die in the street. How humanitarian of them.

But in fact we don't do that. We treat every single one just like they were your mother, father, brother, sister, husband, or wife. And someone else pays for it.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by jinx

What will happen then, when an uninsured illegal immigrant shows up in the ER, under any proposed plan?

The same thing that happens now. As Obama said, the reform doesn't include them.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

The same thing that happens now.

We will continue to have the hospitals and insurance companies make up the difference in our bills and premiums? Someone pays for them.

[Happy Monkey]

Of course. What's the alternative? Require papers from anyone who seems foreign in an ER?

[TheMercenary]

The problem still exists.

[jinx]

But if I show up in an ER they'll want to see proof that Ive paid for insurance, right?

[Shawnee123]

The problem still exists.

So rather than make things better for the deserving citizens it's better to not change anything because the illegals will still get care? What do you propose to change that part (assuming as you said that the problem is that part won't change in the current proprosal; it's not addressed) that would make the proposal to your liking? I don't get the logic. Don't change it because the millions it will benefit won't negate the small percentage who get around the system?

[TheMercenary]

I don't have the solution. Really. But they are costing taxpayers millions if not billions of dollars every year. Maybe we should send the bill to their home country governments or withhold $ from aid programs in direct proportion to the costs of the healthcare. I do know that they need to come up with a plan and they need to address the issue.