Sage, this is unbelievable. America is a degenerate plutocracy, where the workers are being bleed dry and kicked into the gutter. Its not about handouts or taxation--its about receiving the benefit of your labor. How can 1% of the American population own more than the bottom 95% and the bottom 50% just1% if workers are not being abused and exploited? These debates serve to legitmize the rule of despots over our lives
On Aug 13, 2:54 am, Sage2 <[email protected]> wrote: > Lone Wolf, > > When you say Healthcare should be a right for > all Americans or RESIDENTS I take it you are saying that we as tax > payers need to pay for the healthcare of 15,000,000 " illegal alien > immigrants " who are not " legal " residents. These are the real > parasites along with sponge monkey groups like SEIU, ACORN, LaRaza, > > ************************************************************************************************************************************** > > On Aug 12, 12:35 pm, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Thats right, lets pay taxes, while we work for bugger-all and expect > > nothing in return--while the gamblers that made trillions losing > > trillions are guaranteed $23 trillion dollars in public funds to pay > > off their debts. Some off that $23 trillion should be spent on those > > that contributed the money--it could certainly go to health care, > > social services, education etc. All I am saying if we pay the money, > > can we please have the services--no more--no less > > > The first thing that has to be done is to restore democracy--America > > is a plutocracy/financial dictatorship. > > > It's not even a matter of socialism or capitalism. If the majority of > > people don't want socialized medicine (though the polls show > > otherwise) and prefer to use their taxes for other things, that's > > fine--at the moment the public has no say in what happens in any are > > at all affecting their lives--the don't know where their money is > > going --there is no transparency--and corruption is out of control-- > > big business own everything--they are screwing us and suppressing all > > opposition and debate. > > > On Aug 13, 12:13 am, plainolamerican <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > What is behind the opposition to the Obama healthcare plan? > > > --- > > > those of us who should not be forced to pay for the healthcare of > > > others > > > > your healthcare is your responsibility > > > it is NOT an entitlement that WE should have to pay for > > > > On Aug 12, 3:29 am, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > What is behind the opposition to the Obama healthcare plan? > > > > 12 August 2009 > > > > > President Obama’s proposed restructuring of the US healthcare system > > > > has come under ferocious attack over the past week. Right-wing > > > > activists, in many cases organized by groups affiliated with the > > > > Republican Party or financed by sections of the healthcare industry, > > > > turned out at town hall meetings to shout down Democratic congressmen > > > > or Obama aides. There have been death threats and some actual > > > > violence. > > > > > The right-wing attack combines hysterical distortion of the provisions > > > > of the Obama plan (frequently, and falsely, branded as “socialized > > > > medicine”) with an appeal to the concerns of wide layers of the > > > > American population who sense, quite correctly, that the healthcare > > > > restructuring being promoted in Washington will come at their expense > > > > and will benefit only the big corporate interests. > > > > > Chief among the distortions has been the claim, fostered most notably > > > > by former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, that the > > > > Obama plan promotes euthanasia and that millions of elderly people > > > > will be hauled before a federal “death panel” to decide whether paying > > > > for their healthcare was warranted based on their “level of > > > > productivity in society.” > > > > > The actual provision, Section 1323 of one version of legislation that > > > > has passed one committee in the House of Representatives, merely > > > > states that Medicare will now reimburse doctors who hold end-of-life > > > > counseling sessions for beneficiaries who want to know their options > > > > on hospice care, living wills, and similar services. > > > > > Palin, who resigned as governor of Alaska July 26 in order to pursue a > > > > national career as spokeswoman for the fascistic wing of the > > > > Republican Party, is appealing to the same Christian fundamentalist > > > > elements who mobilized around the case of Terri Schiavo in 2005. > > > > > The popular disaffection with the Obama healthcare plan goes much > > > > further, however, than the fanatical right-to-life constituency. The > > > > Obama administration has based its program for healthcare > > > > restructuring entirely on the argument that healthcare costs are > > > > bankrupting the US economy and that controlling and reducing these > > > > costs is essential. > > > > > The logical conclusion of this policy—even if officially denied by the > > > > White House—is that somebody’s healthcare is too expensive and must be > > > > cut back or eliminated. Millions of people fear that that somebody is > > > > likely to be them and their families. One opinion poll published last > > > > week showed that 53 percent believed they would be worse off or no > > > > better than before under the Obama plan. > > > > > Obama and the congressional Democrats have sought to use the frenzied > > > > outpourings of his right-wing critics to discredit all opposition to > > > > the measures that the administration is pursuing to cut social benefit > > > > programs like Medicare and impose even greater burdens on American > > > > working people. > > > > > The crudest effort along these lines came in a column published in > > > > USAToday Monday by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority > > > > Leader Steny Hoyer, which branded the opposition to Obama’s healthcare > > > > plan “un-American attacks.” They criticized the right-wing disruptions > > > > as an effort to suppress discussion, then pledged that the healthcare > > > > “reform” would mean higher-quality care, an end to insurance company > > > > abuses and “stability and peace of mind for the middle class.” > > > > > In his radio speech Saturday and at a carefully controlled town hall > > > > meeting in New Hampshire Tuesday, Obama sought to soothe popular > > > > concerns over the implication of the healthcare cost-cutting and put a > > > > “progressive” gloss on what is a fundamentally reactionary and pro- > > > > corporate policy. > > > > > The president told his New Hampshire audience that charges that his > > > > program will cut Medicare benefits for the elderly were false. “It’s a > > > > myth that we’re going to be cutting your Medicare benefits,” he said. > > > > “We’re not.” He claimed that the only cut in Medicare would be $177 > > > > billion in subsidies to insurance companies that operate private > > > > Medicare Advantage plans. But all the plans moving through the House > > > > and Senate—with full backing by the White House—call for substantial > > > > reductions in Medicare reimbursement to hospitals and doctors, which > > > > will inevitably be translated into cutbacks in care for the elderly > > > > and disabled. > > > > > One of the first questions taken by Obama—no doubt prearranged by > > > > White House political operatives—was from a woman denied coverage by > > > > her insurance company because of a pre-existing condition. Expressing > > > > sympathy for her plight, Obama sought to use the exchange to present > > > > his program as a benefit for those whose healthcare benefits have been > > > > cut back or eliminated by profit-driven insurers. > > > > > The real relationship of Obama and the Democrats to the insurance > > > > industry was far more accurately described by BusinessWeek magazine in > > > > its current cover story on healthcare “reform,” headlined, “The Health > > > > Insurers Have Already Won.” The magazine details how > > > > UnitedHealthGroup, the largest US health insurer, has used its > > > > influence in Washington, particularly with conservative congressional > > > > Democrats in the “Blue Dog” caucus and Obama advisers like former > > > > senator Tom Daschle, to effectively dictate the parameters of the > > > > healthcare legislation moving through Congress. > > > > > “The industry has already accomplished its main goal of at least > > > > curbing, and maybe blocking altogether, any new publicly administered > > > > insurance program that could grab market share from the corporations > > > > that dominate the business,” BusinessWeek wrote approvingly. > > > > UnitedHealthCare, Aetna and Wellpoint have “also achieved a secondary > > > > aim of constraining the new benefits that will become available to > > > > tens of millions of people who are currently uninsured. That will make > > > > the new customers more lucrative to the industry.” > > > > > In other words, the corporate profiteers have a tight grip over the > > > > healthcare legislation. Their political servants in both the > > > > Republican and Democratic parties can be relied on to guarantee their > > > > financial interests are served by any healthcare restructuring, or to > > > > torpedo the bill outright if that proves necessary. > > > > > Over the past several weeks, there has been detailed press coverage of > > > > the enormous sums that the drug companies, the insurance companies, > > > > the for-profit hospital chains and other corporate interests have > > > > poured into “lobbying” and “campaign contributions”—the two Washington > > > > euphemisms for outright bribery. (See “US health care lobby pumps > > > > millions into Obama’s cost-cutting drive” and “The drug lobby demands, > > > > and gets, Obama pledge to protect health care profits”) > > > > > According to press reports Tuesday, the drug industry lobby PhRMA will > > > > launch a $150 million advertising blitz in support of Obama’s > > > > healthcare reform drive, after the White House reaffirmed its promise > > > > that it will limit the industry’s “contribution” to the cost of > > > > healthcare restructuring to the $80 billion agreed on in closed-door > > > > talks between Obama aides and PhRMA chief Billy Tauzin (a founding > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
