Esteban responds to the Health Care Bill Debate
By HHR | October 21st, 2009 | Category: Featured, General | 30 commentsEsteban G. Camacho is a contributor to HipHopRepublican.com he was born in 1989 in Bayamon, Puerto Rico. There he lived in a lower class family with his single mother for 11 years before moving to the contiguous states. Esteban became involved with politics when he reached his senior year of high school. When he got to college, he immediately pursued further education in the fields of government and economics. A staunch conservative and an advocate of the free market economies of the world, Esteban spends his time researching political backgrounds, economic titles such as Wealth of Nations, and strengthening his conservative base. Esteban believes in personal responsibility, individual liberty, equal opportunity, and in the American dream. Among his favorite quotes is: “What would you attempt if you knew you could not fail?” Esteban resides in Las Cruces, New Mexico and is currently pursuing a degree in Political Science.
Esteban’s YouTube Video Page – http://www.youtube.com/user/ConservativeE
on 
on 
on 
STOP PROMOTING NONSENSE.
Page 16: http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/private-insurance-not-outlawed/
Page 59, 50, 170, 84, 145, 149, 317, 318, 430: http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/twenty-six-lies-about-hr-3200/
====
On the deficit and bailouts: Who started the bailouts? Who drove the surplus left by Clinton to over a trillion dollars in deficit?
====
On undocumented workers getting the public option: there is already a LAW that prohibits undocumented persons to get *ANY BENEFIT* from the government, except Emergency Health Care. There is *NO NEED* to establish that again.
====
On the article per se:
* Immigrants: Contrary to popular Right Wing belief, Non-Residents aren’t compromised of *illegal* immigrants only. Most Non-Resident immigrants are either a) students (have you seen into any graduate program lately?), b) tourists (who don’t pay income taxes, do pay sales and like-wise taxes, and don’t get much except for a couple of Polariods), and c) professional workers (who do pay all kind of taxes, and most apply for residency).
Even the notion of *illegal* immigrants not contributing back to the society is laughable at best. Some do pay income taxes (via an IRS rule [ http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/04/14/politics/main549153.shtml ]), while sales taxes are payed by anyone doing purchases, illegal or not.
Do you find acceptable these:
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200908130053
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6658496.html
http://www.denverpost.com/commented/ci_13530098?source=commented-news
These are all possible thanks to the *CURRENT* health care system you *VEHEMENTLY* defend.
The Myth of the Clinton Surplus
The government can have a surplus even if it has trillions in debt, but it cannot have a surplus if that debt increased every year. This article is about surplus/deficit, not the debt. However, it analyzes the debt to prove there wasn’t a surplus under Clinton.
http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16
[For anyone seeing this before the first two comments, they are awaiting moderation. So things might seem a little out of place.]
What I forgot to mention, Mr. Camacho, is that you spewed this nonsense way back in August (in fact, this is the column: [ http://hiphoprepublican.com/politics/2009/08/20/health-care-sorry-some-roads-lead-to-disaster/ ]), and all of your talking points were discredited *back then*! In fact, the “Private Insurance is Outlawed” lie was debunked a full week *before* you published your first column. The rest of your talking points were debunked a week and a day *after* you published your first column. Repeating a lie won’t make it a truth, no matter how much you wish for it.
Ok, HHR, let’s agree that Clinton didn’t left any surplus. Who drove the current deficit to over a trillion dollars?
Do you find acceptable thes: ??? Did you read the bill?? Did you even listen to Esteban? Or are you simply replying with links you had saved?
Malpractice: Savings Reconsidered
New evidence shows limiting malpractice liability could cut health care spending by 0.5 percent, CBO says.
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/malpractice-savings-reconsidered/
Was it not the Democrats who took control of Congress 6 years into Bush’s tenure with a budget deficit of about $170 billion. Both Parties and the American peoples love for credit amongst other things drove the current deficit to over a trillion dollars?
Sp SAR …Youre telling me you can not name a single real program passed by the Democrats that drove the deficit up..its all Bush???
Give me a break, HHR. The traffic jam was horrendous today.
I loved what President Obama had to say during the Campaign, but I recognized most of it as recycled socialist rhetoric used by Communist for over 100 years. When you hear that garbage for the first time as a teenager it all sounds so good but after decades of failed socialist ideology how can you embrace this craziness? WHERE ARE THE &*%(*%(% JOBS?
I don’t believe I’ve heard anyone say the current system must be kept lock stock and barrel? So why are you condemning all of it? I’ve asked you before why don’t we start with tort reform? WHY ARE THE LAWYERS PROTECTED? WHY ARE THE UNIONS PROTECTED? Would you agree the current system works for 80% of the population? A problem socialist like OBAMA have never been able to resolve is their inability to increase the poor’s standard of living instead they are brutally efficient at decrease the standard of living for everyone above the poverty level.
How does all this relate to the health care debate? When you try to socialize medicine you will only succeed in lowering the level of care for everyone not raising it. And if you don’t believe The Obama administration is socialist just ask the people around him they seem to be.
If something is not included in the bill then say it plain and simple, and live up to that obscure promise that all bills will be posted 72 hours before they are voted on. Sounded good when it came out of a Jr. Senators mouth with no record and no experience, what will he do in 2012?
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/twenty-six-lies-about-hr-3200/
is a gov’t run entity….wake up.
and BTW bailouts and deficts are a non partisian issue. no one is saying how great bush is.
how can you deny care to illegals if there is no way to check citizenship? oh , and why must those who disagree always resort to name calling?
an interesting link
http://www.cprights.org/2009/05/who-fact-checks-factcheckorg.php
here’s another
http://cei.org/gencon/030,05351.cfm
“FactCheck”.org is an affiliate of the Annenberg, Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which Ayers and Obama were on their board.
@HHR:
I can scream to the four winds that I read the HR3200 bill completely, or that I have read Gemmell’s Drenai series entirely. Both would be false (missing one book on the Drenai series). But I did read the bill’s pages mentioned, as well as researched some of them. You can read my initial impressions on Camacho’s original column, linked earlier, which haven’t changed much since then.
As far as listening to Camacho, I did. I actually had two tabs open, one on the video and one on the original column, searching each instance mentioned in the video. And you know, most of them matched. What’s more important, these matched Betsy McConaughey so-called “research”. In the academic world, copying another person’s research without referencing is called plagiarism.
It’s also dishonest for Camacho to say that working 75 hours a week, he took time to read the bill. It’s been almost two full months since the *original* column, and he didn’t *add* anything new. I know it’s hard to be an university student, and some weeks are more laborious than others, but stating that he took time to read the bill while *not adding* anything new during a two month period is more than a slip.
I rarely bookmark links, but I do remember small details that make it easier to find them, like knowing that I linked them in the original column answering these remarks.
It’s good that you mention tort reform. You care to explain what the CBO projections means? For every dollar invested, *half a penny* would be saved. If you pay $500 dollars for health insurance, a federal tort reform would mean you’d pay around $497.50. I know that saving pennies are important, but I can’t get a half decent fast food lunch with $2.50 where I live. In terms of cost effectiveness, it’s just not a mayor player.
Let’s get some recent History, shall we? War on Terror (Afghanistan) started in 2002. War on Irak, started on 2003. Department of Homeland Security, established on 2002. Two wars that are increasing the gov. deficit and the largest increase in gov. since 1947 were approved by a Republican Congress. Democrats won the Congress back on 2006. In 2007, W Bush proposed a similar and more loose stimulus bill than Obama’s, and it was approved with heavy resistance by the Republicans in the Senate (81 in favor to 16 against) and in the House (380 in favor to 34 against), unless the Republicans had more than 16 Senators and 34 Representatives during 2006-2008. Did the Republicans alone drove this deficit? No, but they certainly help a lot by starting two wars, making the biggest gov. increase in almost half a century and, proposing and approving an even looser stimulus bill!
BTW, I sometimes get impatient when people don’t respond to my questions, but consider giving people more than 5 minutes to answer. Not everyone can respond instantaneously.
@andrea:
There’s something called an “About Us” page. Consider using it from time to time to verify who are the organization/company in the website. For example, FactCheck.org’s About Us page is this: http://www.factcheck.org/about/ . The first 3 paragraphs states the following [let's hope pure HTML works this time]:
Quote:
End quote
Unless Chicago has a county named Pennsylvania, which houses their very own University of Pennsylvania, we’re talking about different organizations with similar names (“Chicago Annenberg Challenge” and “Annenberg Public Policy Center”). What you did is a smear by diluting the name. That’s if I tried to equate Michael Hughes to Michael Steele because they happen to share the first name. Neither they are the same person, nor are they related in any way, nor are they relevant in any way to the conversation.
@andrea, part II:
On verifying citizenship:
I don’t know if you are aware, but there are several ways to verify citizenship:
* Birth Certificate.
* Passport.
* United States Permanent Resident Card (also known as green card).
If you are worried about Emergency Room Care, which is the only gov. medical attention undocumented people may get, it’s against the law to ask for citizenship/residency documentation. There is a SCOTUS decision on it which was incorporated into law. And it was done for a good reason: it’s quite easy for anyone that looks and sounds like an “illegal alien” be negated emergency treatment.
Readers and listeners,
I appreciate your comments and your time, as it is obviously taken to watch videos and read my several writings.
First, I would like to point out that the reason that I did not “add” any other video footage after reading the next 500 was simply because it would have been a basic repetition to the two videos above. Also, any myths and rumors of plagiarism on my part are completely false. I do not take other’s work, my videos and writings are my own creation from my own research unless otherwise noted. Also, when I say that I work 75 hours a week and still read the bill, it is no lie. I do not lie to my readers or viewers. At the time I read the bill, I was employed by RadioShack Corp. and Applebee’s, working an average of 75 hours per week. Thats what I needed to make the bills during the period of April-Septermber of 2009. I discontinued the work because of my studies.
To the critics: my arguments have not been “debunked.” To the first, I can admit that George W. Bush caused an increase in deficit, due to many of his policies. However, the deficit reached by Bush was not over 1 trillion. Out of the top of my head, it was a bit less than 500 Billion, which is still a considerable amount, but only trying to report as accurate as possible. Also, while Clinton seemingly produced a surplus in the government, many economists and analysts argue that he did not. Even so, I take the side that favors Clinton, I believe (from my studies) that Clinton did indeed create one quarter of budget surplus. The original “bailout” was forged during the Bush administration in full support by the left-wing of Congress, not the right. Also, please remember that I am a conservative before I am a Republican, I do not like bailouts from Bush and despise them from Obama… that is hypocrisy.
Undocumented (illegal) workers and persons who live in the United States have always had access to emergency care, which I suppose is understandable. However, this is not the only case of “free” access they have been allowed to receive. We see policies coming out of the mouths of many politicians, Obama included, that would create a safer haven for undocumented workers. For example, the driver’s license to illegals talk. It would allow illegals to have “legal” access to our road system (which is paid for by tax dollars-gasoline tax included, which they can contribute to) and have a form of national identification for other uses. In the words of Obama: “they are not here to drive, they come here to work.” My point? Laws are there to prevent, the duties to enforce are different. If you read the bill that I spoke of in the video (3200) you can understand how many of the clauses are open to interpretation. The clause that I have interpreted to undocumented workers receiving medical aid is interpreted like it is read. On that note, I do not confuse “immigrant” with “undocumented person.” Period.
I might have been misunderstood when I spoke about page 16. On this page is a clause that CLEARLY makes switching plans after the first day of Y1 illegal. It is titled “limitations on new enrollment” that should explain it enough as it is written. So while it might not be completely illegal to have private care, it would be illegal to switch type of care after the date described on the bill.
Again, thank you for taking the time to comment, your use of the 1st amendment rights is always appreciated, no matter what your views are. And I also apologize for taking so long to respond. Inexcusable.
Thanks.
For the second note, I realize that this country needs some kind of health reform. What I disagree with is the primary use of government for that reform. While the media does an excellent job of covering the negative aspects of America, one should take the time to realize what DOES work about this system that we have in place today. I mention some of them at the end of the video.
The current administration and congress seem to be involving government more and more every time they speak or debate health care. This troubles me, as it seems that more government is always the answer. As many of you know, this does not comfort my senses.
I do not believe there is a perfect system out there for health care, and our is included in that imperfection. However, it is important to note that the only (YES ONLY) negative thing I see about our current system is the cost. The care is responsive, the innovation is great, the benefits are tremendous… but it’s simply too expensive. Getting government to run it will not fix that problem and it will create many, many new ones.
there is a report out that 151 members of congress (the sentate and house) receive medicare benefits. of these 151, 55 of them are republicans. and interestingly enough some of these republicians have been the biggest opponents of a public option, while they partake in public option health care. just for clarification, just because you are of age to receive medicare doesn’t been it’s mandatory that you sign up for it thus making it an option to do so. if government provided health care is the worst thing ever, then why don’t these people that are against it only take private healthcare? they are government employees, therefore they have great private benefits that are offered to them. do you see the hypocrisy? i wonder what members of congress also receive va benefits?
repubs against public option that receive medicare:
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ)
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ)
Sen. Orin Hatch (R-UT)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL)
Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK)
Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY)
Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC)
Rep. Peter King (R-NY).
@Shauna,
The reason those Republicans, and many Democrats have the public insurance (not to be confused with public care) is the money. Every government employee is allowed a certain insurance paid for by the people’s tax dollars. However, these employees use private facilities in order to get their needs met. Under the health reform going through congress, these private facilities would become public, and therefore less effective. The portion of healthcare that IS government run is still ineffective, even though the number of people using it is very small.
Comparing our system to the systems of countries who have instituted a public option is a must. Like I have stated before, the only problem our system has today is price… it is simply too expensive. In socialized countries, the problem does not only include cost (check out how much they pay in taxes to support the program), but also includes quality of care, quality of facilities, preventive care (basically impossible), innovation (also very lacking because this is usually a private sector dealing), and most importantly, responsiveness. You think you have long waits at the doctor now? People in Canada can sometimes be waiting over a year to get seen, by that time, Im sure the illness has spread to uncontrollable levels, or has gone away. Useless.
A website called “pajamastv” has a very good documentary about Canada’s health system. They interview several Canadian citizens and have video footage of what its like to receive “care” in Canada.
@ esteban…thanks for such a timely response
medicare/medicaid is public insurance for children and the elderly (particularly set aside for those in need). i don’t doubt the congeress persons on medicare don’t have private insurace as well provided through their jobs as federal employees. where i have issue is, if you have told the american public that government run health care is awful, why then do you get government run health care benefits (medicare) in addition to your federal health insurance. get it…they have both private and public insurance. why not just have just only private health insurance…i do. based on this argument, wouldn’t medicare be awful too? (how many millionaires do you know that have medicare?)
the problem with private healthcare isn’t just the cost it’s also the cost containment practices (medical boards, pre-existing condiditons, etc) and spending caps. it is inhumane when you are sick and at your most vulneralbe to have to be concerned if your insurance is going to drop you or stop paying for your treatment. insurance companies are getting away with murder literally and figuratively. many of the people that had to file bankruptsy due to medical costs had insurance.
those socialized countries that have higher taxes have health care paid for, college tutition paid for (and some countries even pay the students just for being students), paid maternity leave and vacation time for much longer periods than the us. those darn socialists. even the us has socialist tendencies like social security (key word social) and medicare/medicaid. i don’t hear people on these government programs being called socialists or calls to take away their socialism (it would save the us a lot of money). these socialized countries have longer life expectancies and lower fetal mortality rates compared to the us.
does the us have great health care…yes. does the us have great health insurance…no. although people have health insurance, the insurance companies will deny them access to great health care.
there is such a crazy conflict of interest when you make money by denying people medical coverage.
@Shauna
Yes, medicare and medicaid are publicly funded programs. What I think you are not really grasping is the concepts of how current SOCIAL government programs like those work. While you do have the public funding those programs, PRIVATE doctors administer the care. Like I mentioned last time, if this health care bill comes to pass, the majority of doctors will become public employees, not private. Because of this, we get a high rate of ineffective treatment simply because of the lag in the process and the sheer number of people that will demand quality service. Think of it as a small business compared to a large corporation. Usually (9/10 times), the small business item that is not mass produced due to the high number of demand will have higher quality than the items that are made by large corporations which are in turn highly concentrated in mass production in order to meet that demand. The health system will function the exact same way. Current medicaid/medicare is funded by the public, but it is treated by the private practice, so it is not quite on the “awful” scale.
I respectfully disagree that cost is not the only problem. The practices of the private insurance companies can be questionable, sure. However, they do this merely because of cost. It would be too expensive for them to cover every single human being in this country, and make a profit. I have no problem with companies making profits, as long as they perform. One of the things about capitalism, which is an economic system based on Classical Liberalism, is that it is based purely on self-interest and individual responsibility. This means that acts like what you mentioned will not be inhumane. The word inhumane is based on the Marxist theories of creative labor, and spurs socialism. I am not agreeing with insurers denying coverage to patients, but I am saying that they have reasons to do so. EVen so, there are always companies that are willing to accept many kinds of pre-existing conditions.
I understand why you must like the socialist countries. However, the American culture is based on hard work, individual responsibility, individual decisions, and self-interest. In the words of John Locke: “right to life, liberty, property..” all three which are endangered by socialized programs. Let me go through that list you mentioned briefly. Health care is paid for by the upper classes primarily, and it is of low responsiveness and quality; again, look at the mass production example I mentioned above. College Tuition is paid for only in public universities, and those do not have world recognition. The United States is the country sought most for higher education by foreigners and that is for good reason. Our public universities (which still function to provide a profit for themselves, out of self-interest), have very high standards in regard to education and research. In Europe, the known Universities will be private conservatories, for the most part. paid maternity leave occurs here in the US, depending on length of employment. Vacation time? Sure. I won’t argue with that, but I do not think vacation time is necessarily a positive thing. America has the hardest working force in the world, and look at our economic power… it’s awesome. OUr economic size is unrivaled, even from countries like China and japan. UNRIVALED. In fact, if you take the economies of the G-20 countries combined, then you surpass that of the US, but it takes THAT much effort in order to do so. This is an effect of a hard working force. The socialized countries have about the same life expectancy actually. This is not a matter of health care quality, but a matter of culture. Americans don’t really give in to many healthy habits do we? Lower fetal mortality rates are caused by aborted fetuses. Over 80% of children that are pre-diagnosed with down syndrome IN THE WOMB are aborted. This is counted in the fetal mortality.
You might disagree with all of the above, sure. However, it is a matter of ideology. I believe the US has it right. A system of self-interest individuals that pursue their own goals, are (some) responsible, have individual rights, protect liberty, and most importantly, protect private property. Our economic system works as follows:
“The butcher, brewer, and the baker provide goods to each other out of self interest. The UNPLANNED result of this division of labor is a better standard of living for all three.” -Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations (keep this in mind while we converse about private and socialized countries.)
You should read books by Adam Smith (wealth of nations), Karl Marx (communist manifesto), John Locke (Treatise of Government), Thomas Hobbes (leviathan) and other key theorists. You fall under the category of Marx. I am not calling you a marxist, but the things you mentioned in your writing can easily be found in Marx’s writing. It is the American Liberal mentality.
The US has the best health care in the world, and youre right… perhaps not the best health INSURANCE.
Hope to hear from you soon.
@andrea and SAR
Fact Check can be very reliable. I do find it awkward that it has only been mentioned to me as a source by left wing professors.
I do use fact check from time to time, they have good information. However, just like all other websites of the sort, they do interpret, which requires the use of OPINIONS.
@ esteban
it sounds like you feel that medicare/medicaid is acceptable but a public option is out of the question.
i don’t subscribe to ideologies. i subscribe to real life and right vs wrong. i have personally watched family and friends get denied treatment by their healthcare provider or don’t have healthcare due to unemployment. i would suggest you talk to people who have cancer about the issues that they have trying to get their cancer treated (there was a story last week where a man joined the army at 39 so that his wife could continue her cancer treatments). if you yourself (or someone close to you) becomes sick, you don’t want to your insurance company to say WE ARE DENYING YOUR TREATMENT (OR A DRUG) BECAUSE IT COSTS TOO MUCH AND WE HAVE TO MAKE A PROFIT.
i had no idea being humane was a marxist principle. i learned humanity from the teachings of the Jesus.
i personally have great insurance. i never pay-copays and i only pay very little for drugs (antibiotics and pain killers). but what happens when i get a more costly illness?
i get that you are against the public option and i’m skeptical about if it will be handled appropriately and if the us can afford it. but are you against any type of healthcare reform? personally i would like to see more ideas (beyond tort reform which isn’t a perfect solution) on how to make insurance companies serve its insurers better instead of just being a naysayer. i can’t think of any other forms of capitalism that hinges on life and death decisions (but feel free to correct me if i’m wrong).
i have 2 articles for you:
1. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/06/health_reform_for_beginners_th_1.html
2. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/21/AR2009082101778.html
just a few side notes:
-the 1993 family and leave act only requires that your job holds your position for 12 weeks UNPAID if you have a newborn or newly adopted child. all maternity leave in the us isn’t paid. it just depends on your employer.
-if medicare/medicaid payments to private doctors doesn’t make them public employees, then how does a public option make them public employees? to be a purely government run healthcare system, the government would have to build the hospital and hire the drs and nurses…we have that now…the va healthcare system. i don’t see any calls to get rid of this either. there is just too much contradiction about why universal healthcare is the worst thing possible when the us has “universal” healthcare for certain populations of the country (young, old, veterans). the us currently has government run insurance which coexists with private insurance.
and that is my spiel.
@Esteban:
Thank you for your response. The way you phrased it on the video gave me the impression that you were implying that you kept reading the bill since August. Thanks for clarifying.
On your research:
* Pages 16 (Private insurance Illegal) and 430 (Death Panels) by Betsy McCaughey: http://www.defendyourhealthcare.us/brokenpromisesnypost.html (34 days before your post)
* Mark Steyn on Undocumented Immigrants getting insurance: http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200908180031 (2 days before your first column)
* Someone else posting a list of HR3200 talking points: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=22775 (21 days before your first column for this list)
It just seems like too much coincidence for me.
All clauses are open to interpretation. Just read some of the SCOTUS landmark decision.
Immigration issues are themes for another day, and as such, I’ll keep them out. However, the current immigration system is more complicated than “Citizen” and “Illegal”. Just because someone isn’t a US citizen, it doesn’t mean their undocumented. There are several exceptions that allow a non-citizen to be legally in the US.
The biggest problem with the current health care system isn’t costs (it’s a symptom), but greed. Most HCI companies want the biggest winnings from their investments, and to get them, they need to insurance healthy people, while trying to keep people with illness out, either by explicitly denying cover, or by rising the premiums so high it’s unaffordable.
In part, what you say is truth: the US has some of the best HC professionals. And it’s not just celebrities that come here for health care; even common people come here. It’s worth noting, that most people that come here for health care, their country’s HCS pays for their treatment.
Can you enumerate the problems that would be caused by a Gov. run HCS?
Several pet peeves:
* Karl Marx was not a marxist. Hard to believe, but he disowned the movement that carries his name.
* First amendment only covers criticism against the government. Criticism in forums like this isn’t covered, which means that deleting (and blocking) it is perfectly legal. =)
* There’s a quote that reads: “Often statistics are used as a drunken man uses lampposts — for support rather than illumination.” It’s also how FactCheck.org and the CBO are used, praised if they agree with their talking points, condemned if they disagree.
@SAR
Pet Peeves:
Karl Marx was a Marxist. The reason it is named Marxism instead of Socialism is because of his own interpretations. Marxism is the following of his writings in the books “The Communist Manifesto,” and “Das Kapital.” The movement that followed in the name of Marxism was criticized by Marx because it included the idea of revolution, which he did not agree to.
First amendment covers all rights of speech, whether its against the government or against an individual. It would be un-american for me to delete a comment. Unless of course, it is in violation of the responsibilities that come with that right (foul language, personal attacks such as racism, sexist comments, etc.)
I can agree with the quote. (but emphasis on ‘sometimes’)
I really disagree with the greed part. The only problem is costs. I don’t mean for you to take this as personal offense, but usually, persons that believe in overwhelming amounts of greed generally have a universal attitude of what I call “the victim mentality.” They are always the victim, no matter what the scenario brings. This is usually very present in the liberal philosophies. If thought logically, why would management teams be greedy? All it does is hurt their business, and they know it. If you have read any of my writings on government regulation, you will understand why it SEEMS that the “elite class” is composed of greed. That is simply not the case.
No, I cannot enumerate them because the list would be far too long. I can, however, enumerate the problems in our current system: 1. Cost.
Now, about those links that you posted: are you implying that the information that I speak of is stolen? I can guarantee you it is not. I read the bill myself, and I took what I saw out of it from my own work. Im sure you could find HUNDREDS of people who finished the bill before I did repeat the exact same thing with different wording… or perhaps even the same. Because of the vast number of people in this country (over 300 million) the probability that I was the first to have this information is dismal, almost non-existent. In fact, i will write this sentence:
“I think the House of Representatives will gain seats in 2010″
And I can guarantee you, another few hundred people can be writing the same exact thing today, based on research. The fact that people id this before me, and got the same results means I did something right. Which is good.
@shauna
I should clarify: I do not support the systems of medicare and medicaid that this government has in place. However, I would support a different system, based on private interests, that would accomplish the same thing. Also, I am 100% in favor of health care reform. Again, I think it needs to be based on the private interest, not the collective interest or interest of the government. I believe it should be almost entirely comprised, run by, and sought over by private business, not government.
Humanity is a Marxist/Rousseauistic principle. I don’t usually point to religious beliefs or figures to prove any points. Although, I can certainly respect your source.
I certainly agree with you! There should be more ideas rolling around. However, the ONLY idea that this President is pushing is the option of public care. The conservatives in Congress have been to busy fighting back by finding errors and radical changes in the several bills, but instead, they should focus on giving us a real alternative. I do understand, however, that for political reasons they instead choose to fight the current bills. (it’s actually a bit better that way)
Listen, I am an economist first and a social person later. With the strength of the dolar declining, deficits up the rear end, more deficits on the way, tons and tons of FOREIGN debt, threats to change the oil currency from the dollar to something more “stable,” and other economically viable things… we cannot in any way afford a public option at this point. Im sorry, but the Democrat party and liberal ideologies have never had economics correct. Their belief system and policies have hurt this country’s economy in the past, and with these kinds of policies, it will occur again in the future. We need to support private business, not condemn it. We cannot afford this. We cannot afford President Obama. We need to find another way. I will look at your articles in the coming hours.
@Esteban,
On Marx: Depends on which definition of Marxism you use. If you use the Marxism-as-Marx-envisioned, then yes, he was a Marxist. If you use the Marxism-as-many-misunderstood, then no, he wasn’t. He went as far as state to one of the Marxists leaders in France that “if that is Marxism, then I am not a Marxist” ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx#Marx.27s_influence ).
On First Amendment: Legally speaking, no. However, it establishes a social “rule” that permits the open dissidence without the fear of being shut up. So, in a way, we are both right.
I’ll argue for greed. If we were talking purely about costs, it’s inflation + some increases due to R&D. However, it doesn’t explain why people who paid their dues for years, suddenly get cancer and their dues rise 3 times what they’ve been paying. Or why someone with higher BMI than “normal” is rejected. Greed does explains it: if you want to make maximum profit, you want people to use insurance as few as possible. And that’s possible by rejecting (one way or another) as many sick, or possibly sick, people as possible.
Maybe I misunderstood some of the statements (English is my second language, after all), so I apologize for what I said.