Is anyone considering a public healthcare system funded by those who want it? Why not?

A healthcare system funded by those who want it would be something other than a government run program, thus not public.

Government uses tax dollars, taxes are compulsory.  If you want to set something up yourself, it's a private healthcare system funded by those who want it.  Like the numerous coops and mutuals the country already has.

If uncle would fuck off and leave us alone, it wouldn't take an act of God to get one started either.  The requirements are utterly ridiculous.

Making it so complicated that 'acts of God' are the only way to get anything done is the name of the political game.

Yep, make it even more complex than it already is and scratch the United ideals while you're at it. Competition is the trick of the loop; quality ratings multiplied by the amount of differently managed & provided solutions. No coherent norms, chaotic policies, variable assets, high & low ball figures of investment, evaluation of local needs, etc.

Sure, make it sooooo impossible to reach that instead of 10+ Insurance corporations you'll soon have 2000+ profit mongers smelling the opportunities... all of which, with offices in every major cities.

But that wouldn't stop there either, right? Cuz, 10,000+ more rural groups would want the same kind of services. All of which -- expenses. To all. At once.

Unity. As in, cross the state lines of Texas & Louisiana (example) and be in another country within countries. Go in Chicago, but not Detroit. Fly to Honolulu, but not Anchorage. Drive to Baltimore, but not DC.

Operation anarchy, millions roaming around trying to find one of the many hospitals privately owned, staffed, supplied by yet another newly created pharmaceutical pipeline. Moving, pack the furnitures, sell the house -- we're goin' in Florida since THEY have 2500+ clinics overthere instead of 25- in Utah. If we're lucky we may even find a new job that someone else will lose.

Yep, health care_S to the freemarket ways. So wisely hidden in efficiency illusions, that everyone's cash is wasted even more.

Watch your premiums skyrocket through the plans. Mutually available, cooperative enough to create organised hysteria.

Please remember to try thinking in english when writing in english.

Uncle set up the horribly inefficient profit mongers you keep bitching about.  I'm guessing you just don't know what mutuals and coops are, but since you weren't thinking in english I have no idea what half of that post is actually supposed to say and am too tired to try guessing.  Have fun with whatever that rant was.

Copout.

No offense, but it really is difficult to decipher your rants. I think he has a right to throw his hands up at that.

I would rather see public health care as the collectives resposibility to care for its own.

Those who say that if you dont have the money youre not trying hard enough well please tell that to the father of three with 2 jobs and a sick wife who has to use all his money to get the right medical treatment for his wife and get the money for necessities (like food). Or even worse the same man who just lost one of his jobs. I am quite sure there are some of these guys out there.

Of course you can say that he is stupid because he doesnt get a job that pays better..

Question: Is health care as outlined by the governement constitutional?

Definition of constitutional is the constitution grants the federal government the power to do it.

Please site ammendment or text with an explanation of how that makes it constitutional.   

So tough in fact that if were to insist i wasn't ranting (at all), even proper grammar or superbly constructed phrasing wouldn't even change the meaning detectable. After all, the english language is ONLY understandable by those educated enough to mock around anyone who isn't using similar rethorics or complex ramblings factually insulting whatever happens to be contradictory.

Pheeeewwww, anything above reads novel or forum discussion worthy?

Or something to demean - again?

A right of silence or a right to observe - quietly?

Any typos in this reply?

A proper adjective inserted somewhere, an intelligent opinion, a hyperbolic metaphor poetic enough to stir chaos in all of your mindsets?

Why should i explain myself all over twice & differently to nitpickers of improperly devised wordings?

Fine, you don't want a public option for health care managed by government (after all you don't live in a country where justice for all prevails over privately owned operations & surgical procedures to save lives) ... but, it's quite ooookay for some to depend on coops & mutual alternatives. See the obvious contradiction? Understood my point? There, better?

Wrong or right, i said what needed to be said. Like it or not. respect that. Or skip away from my perspective on such issues and be my guest... cuz if you read my replies more than once you may yet again comprehend the reasoning more than the manner in which i choose to express it.

I could translate the whole response straight to French. Want it? Or would it become another way for someone to yell around - he's ranting?

Really, gimme some slack. I don't use slang or vocabulary gained since childhood.

Salaries, what is the current cost of living anywhere in the states? Variable? Adaptative? Calculated by inflation? Tagged on items in commercial outlets? Unaffordable? Minimal costs?

Welcome to the assembly lines, next unemployed please.

Your economy is collapsing under the weight of greedy corporations who would pay anyone working as less as possible if that (alone) could protect investors & stockholders capital gains.

Now, who's stupid? The system or the individual?

Zyxpsilon, I understood what you were saying. How hard can it be? 

Only a fool would believe that they or anyone else is in complete control of their circumstances.

And only a fool would leave his circumstances to anything but his own ability.

Zyx, I don't speak french(at least I'm assuming it's french).  I don't read french.  I don't write french.  I sure as hell don't think in french

When you're thinking in french, I have to deconstruct your sentences and put them back together the way they're supposed to be in english.  It's the structure, not the words.  It's as hard to read as the typical automatic translation.

The only thing I can get out of that post is that you're under the impression health care doesn't exist most places without an all encompassing, simplified system.  Reality is that attempts to simplify complex systems don't work and are themselves the cause of such problems.

If you want insurance companies to be personally accountable to the people they cover, it's counter-productive to encourage business to buy the insurance.  If you want costs to go down, it's counter-productive to encourage those businesses to provide pre-paid medical instead of catastrophic coverage.  If you want people to be able to keep their insurance when they get sick, it's counter-productive to have insurance come through your place of employment.  If you want more doctors in low income areas, it's counter-productive to pay them less than the going rate through medicare.

These are all common sense government fuckups.  They're not even bright enough to realize the current mistakes after the fact, wanting them to take over more of it is suicidal.  Universal health care already exists in this country, it has for decades, we just don't have universal insurance.  If they had a brain between them in congress, they could take a massive chunk out of the costs any time they wanted to.  It's really simple, repeal the legislation they put through that redirected all of the uninsured poor people to the emergency rooms instead of the vastly cheaper, and often even profitable clinics that they used to be showing up at before congress shut them all down to save money.(GW, this last one in particular is one of those iron clad examples proving that politicians are generally idiots. )

Since you're calling my post a copout, perhaps you could actually argue something, maybe even post facts in your next one!  It would be a nice change of pace from the nonsensical nonsense posts you've been making.  If you're really feeling brave, maybe you could take five minutes of your time to educate yourself on the subject so you actually know what you're talking about when you trash the free market for the results of the government established entities and regulations we hamstrung it with in the 90's.  The free market has dick to do with health insurance, it's been dead in that sector for 20 years now.

So you believe that you can prevent someone else from drink driving and crashing into and injuring you?

We have a measure of control over our circumstances, but we DO NOT have absolute control. I'd like to see that statement of yours repeated to one of the starving kids in Africa, a German Jew during the 1930s or a black African under Aparthied.