Healthcare Poll

Why are 49% of Americans against the current healthcare bill?

  • 49% of Americans hate poor people.

    Votes: 4 7.0%

  • 49% hate taxes.

    Votes: 8 14.0%

  • FoxNews is getting better at mind control through television.

    Votes: 23 40.4%

  • 49% like the idea, but don't like the current version of the bill.

    Votes: 7 12.3%

  • Something abortion-related.

    Votes: 3 5.3%

  • 49% don't like the idea of the government forcing a citizen to purchase something.

    Votes: 9 15.8%

  • They got confused by the poller, but really are for the bill.

    Votes: 3 5.3%
  • Total voters
    57
Ignorant conservatives who follow everything Fox News says.
 
Because many Americans do not want the Federal Government to get any bigger than it already is. The more power we give to the government to influence the less control we have over our own lives. You might not know this, but in the United States of America we take our personal liberties VERY seriously (some more that others).

Most of us understand that our health care system needs a LOT of work... We just don't think the government should go into the health care business. Instead we suggest they reevaluate the system of regulations and rework them to be more streamlined, transparent, and cheaper for all parties involved. Some of us realize that just about every time a government tries to fulfill or the role of a private industry they result in failure. The only countries that seem to manage are relatively small countries with RIDICULOUS TAX RATES... and Americans F**King hate high taxes.

Remember, the reason the U.S succeeded from Britain was largely due to high taxes and a lack of representation. We don't take that S**T from anyone... especially our own government.
 
I don't understand this much but is this really opposed by working class or poor Republicans just because of some political dogma?

lord_raken said:
Because many Americans do not want the Federal Government to get any bigger than it already is. The more power we give to the government to influence the less control we have over our own lives
Click to expand...
Less power to the government, more power to the corporations. They are always very happy to fill the gaps.
lord_raken said:
The only countries that seem to manage are relatively small countries with RIDICULOUS TAX RATES... and Americans F**King hate high taxes.
Click to expand...
Small countries like Germany, UK or Canada?
 
lord_raken said:
Most of us understand that our health care system needs a LOT of work... We just don't think the government should go into the health care business. Instead we suggest they reevaluate the system of regulations and rework them to be more streamlined, transparent, and cheaper for all parties involved.
Click to expand...
It's been tried before, but some jerk-ass you might know as the healthcare lobby industry got in the way of things and stopped everything. Kind of like what's happened with healthcare "reform" recently.

lord_raken said:
Some of us realize that just about every time a government tries to fulfill or the role of a private industry they result in failure. The only countries that seem to manage are relatively small countries with RIDICULOUS TAX RATES... and Americans F**King hate high taxes.
Click to expand...
Actually, you have it backwards - every time the government retracts itself, whether by less involvement or fewer regulations, the industry itself quickly balloons and destabilises. Banks in Canada are doing pretty damn well compared to the rest of the world, and I can tell you for a fact it's not because the bank companies know what they're doing. It's because we have powerful (yet discerning!) regulation that prevents those companies from abusing their abilities and doing whatever they want.

Or conversely: With a government-backed attempt at entering an industry that's already privatised, failure is usually the result of the private corporations noting the threat of imminent government involvement in their profiteering, and doing everything in their power to strong-arm the government from effectively participating. Whether that's by taking advantage of obscure legal loopholes (put in place with the help of lobbyists) that put the government at a disadvantage, or applying legal pressure (anything from intellectual property claims to tying up the courts with frivolous lawsuits), the end result is the same. The government's attempt at entering failed, the private sector can safely claim that they're the only viable solution to doing whatever their industry does, and they can sit safely on their profits for years until the public gets very slightly disgruntled with their practices, and all this can happen again.

[edit] Or to put it another way, the more the government becomes involved in an industry, the more an industry's practices are made open to the public, and the harder it becomes for corporations to sustain themselves unfairly.
 
lord_raken said:
Because many Americans do not want the Federal Government to get any bigger than it already is. The more power we give to the government to influence the less control we have over our own lives. You might not know this, but in the United States of America we take our personal liberties VERY seriously (some more that others).

Most of us understand that our health care system needs a LOT of work... We just don't think the government should go into the health care business. Instead we suggest they reevaluate the system of regulations and rework them to be more streamlined, transparent, and cheaper for all parties involved. Some of us realize that just about every time a government tries to fulfill or the role of a private industry they result in failure. The only countries that seem to manage are relatively small countries with RIDICULOUS TAX RATES... and Americans F**King hate high taxes.

Remember, the reason the U.S succeeded from Britain was largely due to high taxes and a lack of representation. We don't take that S**T from anyone... especially our own government.
Click to expand...

This argument is bullshit.

The very people who oppose this measure instead like shit such as the Patriot act which is far worse in terms of civil liberties. Hell, healthcare doesn't even affect civil liberties whatsoever. The vast majority of people hate it because it was proposed by democrats, people are tired of childish political bickering (both sides), and the current mentality in this country is "if they win, we lose". Taxes are entirely irrelevant, because as it has already been stated taxes will not rise for anyone making less than ungodly amounts of money.

By the way, seceded*. Not to be a grammar nazi or anything, but something to keep in mind lest other people completely ignore your argument and call you an idiot. That being said, many of your arguments are either from misunderstandings (as the posters above me have pointed out) or from sheer ignorance (which the posters above me have also pointed out).

PS: Poll sucks.
 
Bitches be hating ****ing poor people. Look at the poor people breeding like animals comments... the no free school lunches for poor kids.

That's not the only cause, there is no only cause. But that's a big cause.

Anybody who struggles financially for any significant period of time, even if they are pulling down multiple jobs to feed their family will get a welfare queen label from them.

I've been on too many ****ing conservative forums and reading too much of their bullshit to have any other sort of impression in my mind that a lot of this is anything other than a truly appalling distaste of lower class individuals.

Just ask any one of the bible thumping ones what their views are on Jesus's words about poor people who struggle underfoot the rest of society, and they'll tell you that these poor people aren't what Jesus had in mind. That these are good for nothing poor people who are just too lazy.


I'm not making any sense, so I'm just going to mosey on out of this thread.
 
Kinslayer said:
Taxes are entirely irrelevant, because as it has already been stated taxes will not rise for anyone making less than ungodly amounts of money.
Click to expand...

That's BS. It's like saying "It's okay to steal from Wal-Mart because they already sell ungodly amounts of merchandise."
 
You ask me what go on in head of American? Seriousry?

I have no idea what goes on in the head of Americans, because they don't seem to understand the concept of a federal, central, unified government the way I do.

So people, please do explain why Americans think spending less on hospital bills is a bad idea.
 
Noodle said:
That's BS. It's like saying "It's okay to steal from Wal-Mart because they already sell ungodly amounts of merchandise."
Click to expand...

Honestly I think it would be okay to steal from Walmart based on their track record.
 
Some of you are under the baseless delusion that I don't F**King hate lobbyists. I do. I REALLY DO. I think lobbyists need to be severely regulated if not banned completely.

And I'm not suggesting we leave the companies unregulated. Read my post again and actually READ what I wrote.

By using reasonable and smart regulation the government can help insure that heal-care companies do not take unfair advantage of consumers without having to directly manage the industry (which would be a disaster).

It is all about balance. You balance the freedom of a company to make a honestly earned profit and the governmental regulation that keeps everyone honest and the playing field level. Tip to far to either side and you end up with a very bad situation.

P.S For those here for civil discussion I welcome you respectful criticism and counter points. I look forward to learning from you.

For those why just spout their Dogma without thinking in a vile spray of regurgitated sick. Kindly F**K off.
 
You do have a reputation around here, you should be prepared to modulate yourself according to it. Everything you just said however is rational, so I'll take it at face value.

I think I was on track to start a "let's see who overwhelms the other person with rhetoric first?" game, so I'll stop now and just ask a question of you. Do you think the government having direct involvement in the healthcare industry, as an insurance company, is a bad thing? Why or why not?
 
lord_raken said:
By using reasonable and smart regulation the government can help insure that heal-care companies do not take unfair advantage of consumers without having to directly manage the industry (which would be a disaster).

It is all about balance. You balance the freedom of a company to make a honestly earned profit and the governmental regulation that keeps everyone honest and the playing field level. Tip to far to either side and you end up with a very bad situation.
Click to expand...

That's what they're trying to do though. The problem is, since the health care and insurance industry have had pretty much free reign to do whatever they've wanted for the past... 35 years or so, it's resulted in some pretty abominable business practices that have allowed them gain absurd amounts of money while increasing their lobbying power.

A lot of the opposition and talking points for the opposition have come from health insurance market research departments that have directly fed this information to senators in congress that are opposing healthcare reform largely to insure these companies will then help finance their re-election campaigns.

I'm not making this up either. All this info comes from Wendell Potter, the former head of corporate communications of Cigna, one of the largest insurers in the U.S. Check it out here if you've got the time. It's a great interview.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/watch2.html

They've been so good at running this PR campaign against universal health care (which is flat-out the best thing government could ever be involved in as can be seen by the success of every UHC in every other western nation on the planet) that the public option is almost viewed as demonic by the same people who would benefit the most from it.

The shame of it all (as if this weren't bad enough) is that a lot of the junk in this healthcare bill, comes from lobbyist influence and compromise in the name of bipartisanship. If Republicans and Democrats were deadly serious about saving money on the healthcare reform bill, they'd create laws that allowed them to regulate the price of drugs so they're not 3-5 times the price of most other nations on the planet.
 
2009_07_HCOL_Health%20Reform_01.gif


I'm just willing to bet no matter what it is, in 10 years we'll be pushing Congress for something new and better. I'm not a big fan of large changes and I believe baby steps are a good way of treading new water when it comes down to trying something drastic
 
people don't like paying for other peoples shit,simple.
 
people bitch and moan about taxes when they don't realize that it's for our own benefit.
 
This isn't "paying for other people's shit", this is helping your entire country stay healthy and not be in debt. The fewer people there are who have been bankrupted by medical bills or have led themselves into poverty through insurance payments, the more people there are to stimulate the economy and be healthy enough to work full-time.

So you tell me what's more patriotic: helping the poor, or helping yourself?

[rhetorical question]
 
unozero said:
people don't like paying for other peoples shit,simple.
Click to expand...

What, like people paying for your house or lives to be saved by fire fighters, or police to keep your cities safe?

If you come out and say, "I'm the one who pays those taxes for my own services...", you're god damn right. But what you pay doesn't get the job done. It's a combined community effort that allows it all to be possible. You're paying in to make for a better society.
 
Think of it as an opt-in plan. You can opt in to your community and your country, or you can pack your bags and opt out of America.
 
Stigmata said:
You do have a reputation around here, you should be prepared to modulate yourself according to it. Everything you just said however is rational, so I'll take it at face value.

I think I was on track to start a "let's see who overwhelms the other person with rhetoric first?" game, so I'll stop now and just ask a question of you. Do you think the government having direct involvement in the healthcare industry, as an insurance company, is a bad thing? Why or why not?
Click to expand...

Thanks.

Yes. I do think the government becoming directly involved is a bad thing. The U.S Government was never intended to be a healthcare company, and its attempts in the past and present haven't done very well. Social Security is going bankrupt and Medicaid and Welfare are riddled with issues.

In theory, I'm not completely against the government providing some help the the very poorest people. Sadly, the reality is that the whole system has been poorly handled. It leaks money like a sieve, the Government has used social security funds like free piggy-banks they can smash, and there are a hose of inefficiencies.

In light of this reality I'm certain we shouldn't expand the U.S. government's direct involvement. Those systems need to be reevaluated and then either fixed or scrapped.

I think we can accomplish a much better medical system with regulations and minimal direct Government control.
 
Raziaar said:
What, like people paying for your house or lives to be saved by fire fighters, or police to keep your cities safe?

If you come out and say, "I'm the one who pays those taxes for my own services...", you're god damn right. But what you pay doesn't get the job done. It's a combined community effort that allows it all to be possible. You're paying in to make for a better society.
Click to expand...

Yes, but we all get equal coverage from the fire dept. (varying by region, of course). The problem with health-care's cost is that the cost would be stuck onto our current income tax system so that the people funding the operation are the last people who would need government intervention.

Funding it with a special sales tax or flat tax of sorts would make more sense and make the bill easier to swallow (and pass).
 
/buzzkillington

Yeah man! We dont want cheaper health care so we can all live longer!

/slow clap
 
^ I'm with you! Down with overpopulation!

Republicans and conservatives or whoever the **** doesn't support this, is a NAZI TERRORIST.
 
Stupid Poll Question.

How can we know why 49% of the population oppose the bill? Also, the options given are very limited and some of the answers are absurd. A better question would be 'Do you support the bill?'.

I will remember this poll in the future when I am wondering how Noodle can hold views that seem so silly to me.
 
I'm confused as to why people are so god damn scared of the government expanding in the slightest, but seem to be fine with letting profit-driven corporations squeeze their nuts in a vice. I would hope that Americans, what with their zealous love for LIBERTY and FREEDOM, wouldn't put up with any jackboot regardless of origin.

Guess what? Governments aren't gonna get any smaller in this day and age. Get used to it.
 
If anything, the difficulty that this bill has had in getting through is a sign that the government could never directly screw over the population (though they do plenty of it indirectly).
 
Congratulations, America.

You've turned into a socialist European state.
 
I guess I need to stop with all the smug "Haha I'm in Canada" jokes.

Eh?
 
I can't wait till tomorrow when I can taste those delicious republican tears.
 
I can see some legitimate arguments as to why people oppose it in its current form. Frankly though, the pros FAR outweigh the cons. Its like getting pissed that your friends made you a 6 foot long birthday cake, but accidentally misspelled "happy" when they wrote "Happy Birthday." Yeah, thats a defect, but you still have a low cost, perfectly edible and delicious 6ft cake, instead of having to pay $600 for a professionally made 2ft cake, which would have been your only other option. You still had to pay a bit, but now everyone can have a slice!

I blame FOX News for blowing everything out of proportion and spreading misinformation.
 
So this bill says that everyone has to have insurance? And one problem is people who can't afford even that?
 
Stigmata said:
It may not be free, but it's certainly cheaper than what you're buying :p
Click to expand...

Never said it wasn't. I just think it's funny when people believe anything the government gives is free. Unless, you know, they're on Welfare. Then yeah, it is free since they haven't done any honest work for it in the slightest.
 
Maestro said:
Never said it wasn't. I just think it's funny when people believe anything the government gives is free. Unless, you know, they're on Welfare. Then yeah, it is free since they haven't done any honest work for it in the slightest.
Click to expand...

Or are students. Or minors. Or severely handicapped.
 
Maestro said:
Never said it wasn't. I just think it's funny when people believe anything the government gives is free. Unless, you know, they're on Welfare. Then yeah, it is free since they haven't done any honest work for it in the slightest.
Click to expand...

The argument boiled down, **** the poor. Seeing you crippled will be delightful
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Community Interviews: Tony Newton, co-creator of Redemption
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
-smash-
Valve and The Road to GDC 2015
Replies
10
Views
44K
Engineer123
E
BabyHeadCrab
Gabe and VAC. PSA on Reddit.
Replies
2
Views
2K
MuToiD_MaN
MuToiD_MaN
CptStern
Congressman Todd akin" Abortionists perform abortions on women who are not even pregnant
Replies
6
Views
4K
ríomhaire
ríomhaire
Back
Top