Atlasian National Healthcare Bill (Law'd)

[Alexander Hamilton]

http://cthealth.server101.com/the_case_for_universal_health_care_in_the_united_states.htm

The Case For Single Payer, Universal Health Care For The United States

Myth One: The United States has the best health care system in the world.

Fact One: The United States ranks 23rd in infant mortality, down from 12th in 1960 and 21st in 1990.

Fact Two: The United States ranks 20th in life expectancy for women down from 1st in 1945 and 13th in 1960.

Fact Three: The United States ranks 21st in life expectancy for men down from 1st in 1945 and 17th in 1960.

Fact Four: The United States ranks between 50th and 100th in immunizations depending on the immunization. Overall US is 67th, right behind Botswana.

Fact Five: Outcome studies on a variety of diseases, such as coronary artery disease, and renal failure show the United States to rank below Canada and a wide variety of industrialized nations.

Conclusion: The United States ranks poorly relative to other industrialized nations in health care despite having the best trained health care providers and the best medical infrastructure of any industrialized nation.

Conclusion: Single payer, universal health care is not socialized medicine and would be preferred by the majority of the citizens of this country.

I take issue with all of these. None of those "facts" prove anything about our healthcare. Our health, yes, but that is more rooted in American culture and individual choices than access to quality healthcare.

Also, there is no way to say a single payer system isn't "socialized." Government control over an industry=socialized.

And I don't see any proof that it is preferred by a majority. In fact, I see the opposite.

[MaxQue]

The problem is than healthcare should not be an ''industry''. Human lifes are not products than should be affected by the market.

[Purple State]

The problem is than healthcare should not be an ''industry''. Human lifes are not products than should be affected by the market.

They are in every other aspect. Road repairs are based on cost of repair per probable life saved as a result. It is about time we actually had the conversation about how much life is worth, rather than pussy-footing around it as though it's not something we need to actually consider.

[Alexander Hamilton]

I am not in favor of taxpayer money going to people who constantly consume fast food, are alcoholics, smoke tobacco or chew tobacco, use drugs, drunk drive, or anything similar.

[MasterJedi]

Is it possible for some brave soul to post the text of the legislation, after all amendments? Pretty please?

I two would like to see the current text.

MJ has some issue with his internet if I'm not mistaken, so this may take a day for him to get to.

Correct, still no internet at my place. Damn landlord needs to act about it. -_-  Anyways I'll post the bill as it stands now on my lunchbreak.

[MasterJedi]

Unless I missed something this is the current bill:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The problem is than healthcare should not be an ''industry''. Human lifes are not products than should be affected by the market.

They are in every other aspect. Road repairs are based on cost of repair per probable life saved as a result. It is about time we actually had the conversation about how much life is worth, rather than pussy-footing around it as though it's not something we need to actually consider.

I tend to agree people's lives are indeed within the scope of Business to provide for. Businesses exist to provide the goods and services we need or want. Whenever a business does not provide the product people want or at to high a price people reserve the right to not purchase it from them. In a perfect Free Market other businesses who offer the same product then in theory would work to satiate those demands as long as they are reasonable. The more reasonable the demands, the more people boycotting and going over to competitors, the less customers the "bad" company will have and thus in the desire to make a profit they will also move to satisify those demands as well to save there customer base. There are problems within this system and thats why regulations and consumer protections exist. However the diverging point between Liberalism and Socialism is when people desire to work outside of this system in a certain sector, why Liberals or rather true liberals would in theory prefer to make the current system work better. It is then socialism to seek to completely take over Health care as some Senators have suggested needs to be cause they don't beleive it should be a "Business in the first place".

Businesses are by there very nature flexible. When that isn't is at severe risk. Businesses desire to make a profit by satiating the demands of a certain block of consumers. Businesses are however not inherently bad or good. A business can and should be run both honestly and efficiently. Businesses can however neglect one or two of those things in favor of the other. Some companies prefer efficiency(Profit) over Honestly(Good will). Companies that have done so are the Insurance companies, and the oil companies as well. For those that take a negative view of Free Market business activity and beleive that it inherently acts like the Insurance companies have and should therefore have certain sectors like the Health Care industry be owned and operated by the Gov't.

Gov't has the power to manipulate Business conditions to achieve a desired goal, and this has proven highly successfull in the past, without a full and complete takeover of the said business. That same power has proven highly effective in also working to achieve balance within Businesses to make sure they don't focus completely on profit as there primarily goal is to serve needs and wants of people while making a profit, not just making a profit in short-term.

No one argues that human beings are products, a business that does treat people like that is not operating correctly and the Gov't can intervene with Responsible but not overburdensome regulations to correct those "errors" in the market. The overal goal being to establish and achieve a truly free market.

Don't be confused though. This bill currently falls well within the confines of reform and as such it is not socialist, unlike the bill that was orginally introduced. I do think the market manipulation is a little overdone by the provisions here, but it doesn't fundamentally conflict with my personal views in regards to the gov't role in the economy like it did before. It does however still grate on me in terms of how much that should be. I guess I could say I am really undecided how to vote on this bill. When I first approached this debate, my primarly goal was to make the Private market work as much as possible and only having the Gov't intervene to the extent necessary to make that happen and solve a few problems such as the fate of the Uninsured. Coming in third was not extending the Gov't beyond what I though necessary to achieve this goal.

[Purple State]

I am not in favor of taxpayer money going to people who constantly consume fast food, are alcoholics, smoke tobacco or chew tobacco, use drugs, drunk drive, or anything similar.

That reasoning is pretty flawed. Either way your money is going to these people, whether you are paying premiums to a private company or the government, whether they are insured or uninsured. This bill is making sure that they are paying too and that costs are shared more broadly, making it less expensive for everyone.

[MasterJedi]

So are there going to be any more amendments introduced? If not I'll open up the final vote.

[Purple State]

So are there going to be any more amendments introduced? If not I'll open up the final vote.

Well, seeing as the GM is AWOL at the moment, we might as well bring this to a vote. I am becoming very frustrated with the inactivity of GMs.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Wow, interesting to see where "Mr. Conservative" will vote on this

[afleitch]

Wow, interesting to see where "Mr. Conservative" will vote on this

I'm sure Mrs Thatcher would approve

[DownWithTheLeft]

Wow, interesting to see where "Mr. Conservative" will vote on this

I'm sure Mrs Thatcher would approve

I'm sure Mr. Reagan, Mr. Paul, Mr. Gingrich, and Mr and Mrs. anyone who is actually an American/Atlasian conservative would not

[Marokai Backbeat]

Wow, interesting to see where "Mr. Conservative" will vote on this

I'm sure Mrs Thatcher would approve

I'm sure Mr. Reagan, Mr. Paul, Mr. Gingrich, and Mr and Mrs. anyone who is actually an American/Atlasian conservative would not

I'm sure if you have some serious evidence and mature reasons for opposing it, we'll give you the time of day.

[Bacon King]

Wow, interesting to see where "Mr. Conservative" will vote on this

I'm sure Mrs Thatcher would approve

I'm sure Mr. Reagan, Mr. Paul, Mr. Gingrich, and Mr and Mrs. anyone who is actually an American/Atlasian conservative would not

Realize that conservatism in this country meant a very different thing before Reagan came along.

Though like Marokai said this is all irrelevant of course.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I oppose the bill because it is overextending the government's power and creating a dangerous situation as well as robbing tax dollars away from the American public.  My point here was only to alert others in my party that a faux conservative keeps trying to win us over

[afleitch]

I oppose the bill because it is overextending the government's power and creating a dangerous situation as well as robbing tax dollars away from the American public.  My point here was only to alert others in my party that a faux conservative keeps trying to win us over

Then take it off this thread.

[Lief 🗽]

I oppose the bill because it is overextending the government's power

So? Better that the insurance industry's power be overextended?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

huh? Universal health care is dangerous? Seems the opposite to me...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Robbing? Well, if you don't want to fulfill your patriotic duty and pay taxes for the betterment of your country and fellow citizens, you're free to move to Somalia. You don't need to pay any taxes there! And besides, for the vast majority of Atlasians, this bill will be a net positive in their household budgets. Why is it better that they "robbed" (and by a considerably larger amount) by insurance companies?

[DownWithTheLeft]

Paying taxes is patriotic?  That is the kind of talk that scares the crap out of a reasonably thinking person

[Purple State]

Paying taxes is patriotic?  That is the kind of talk that scares the crap out of a reasonably thinking person

Supporting your government is and government can't survive without revenue from taxes. Unreasonable taxes are terrible, but I don't think any of the taxes raised here are unreasonable, especially for the service being provided.

[Fritz]

Can we bring this to a vote please?

[Purple State]

Can we bring this to a vote please?

You can call for a cloture vote to speed it up so we don't have to wait 24 hours.

[Fritz]

Can we bring this to a vote please?

You can call for a cloture vote to speed it up so we don't have to wait 24 hours.

All righty then, I call for a cloture vote.

[Purple State]

Can we bring this to a vote please?

You can call for a cloture vote to speed it up so we don't have to wait 24 hours.

All righty then, I call for a cloture vote.

Now let's hope MJ's internet is doing better. We will get this passed before the end of session, that I promise.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Paying taxes is patriotic?  That is the kind of talk that scares the crap out of a reasonably thinking person

Supporting your government is and government can't survive without revenue from taxes. Unreasonable taxes are terrible, but I don't think any of the taxes raised here are unreasonable, especially for the service being provided.

     Being patriotic or not is a choice, ignoring the fact that patriotism is an overused platitude. Unless you are saying that paying taxes should be a choice, please don't try to link the two together, thank you.