Ron Paul and the risks of being uninsured hit close to home!

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by The Other Side, Sep 14, 2011.

  1. The Other Side

    The Other Side Well-Known Troll Troll

    In Monday nights Tea Party debacle, the candidates were asked about health care, and most said the same thing, "WE WANT TO TAKE YOUR HEALTH CARE", and they used clever slogans like "personal responsibility" and Romney even went as far as saying that the patients should get a portion of the entire bill so they could contribute to the health care issue and lower costs.

    But lower costs for who? Surely not the patient, and clearly for the insurance provider, but the Tea Party crowd clapped as if this was a great idea for americans!!

    The ire of the day came down to Ron Paul and his positions on health care. He claimed that if a person "chose" not to buy health care, that was a "risk" and the federal or state goverments should not pay for medical costs if that person got sick and needed care. He said that a person who does this was taking a risk and they needed care and couldnt afford it, and ultimately they died, it was all a part of the "RISK".

    He said that this was a free country, and if people want to "RISK" their lives by not having insurance, then that was a choice.

    The problem is closer to home than people knew about with Ron Paul, as his former Campaign Manager Mr. Kent Snyder died of complications of pnemonia and he WAS UNINSURED. The Paul campaign did not provide insurance to its employees and Mr Snyder fell ill and racked up over 400 thousand dollars in debt in medical costs before he died. He could not afford the proper treatment and it cost him his life.

    Afterwards, donations were sought from Paul supporters to try and pay the massive debt that Snyder left the hospital where he was treated.

    Is this Ron Pauls idea of health care? How many americans should be put in Mr Snyders shoes?

    Would the Tea Party crowd clap loudly if this story was presented to them in the debate? A few persons in the Tea Party audience on monday shouted "YEAH" when the question was asked of paul if the patient should be allowed to die if he didnt have coverage.

    How dumb can a society be that accepts this idea for healthcare?

    The next decate will surely bring up Mr Snyders death and lack of healthcare. I cant wait.

  2. klein

    klein Für Meno :)

    TOS, you know I agree with you. Esspecially now wit 46 Million US citizens living in poverty.
    How many sick children will need to die, before the US looks worth then any African Nation ?
  3. UnsurePost

    UnsurePost making the unreadable unreadabler

    I don't care for Ron Pauls stance on HC, however he makes some good points.

    And why didn't his campaign manager have insurance? There must have been some level of insurance he could have afforded?

    The idea is, to me anyway, we find ways to make HC more affordable for everyone. There is plenty of money floating around with the outrageous salaries of (for ex) big pharm and of course it's not the rich that are losing skin in the game, it's the average American. Why it costs $80,000 for a simple surgery is beyond me.
  4. The Other Side

    The Other Side Well-Known Troll Troll

    Well, look at the guy yesterday who was riding a motorcycle and crashed into a car, the car and bike caught flames and the motorcycle rider was under the car. The motorcycle rider is now in the hospital with critical injuries and I BET he doesnt have insurance. He looked about mid twenties and thats the problem with the republican argument.

    They want to focus on 20 to 30 year olds who dont get sick and chose NOT to buy insurance or simply cant afford insurance and then say americans dont want insurance. Then, when one of these people gets hurt or sick, who pays for it then?

    If it was Ron Pauls way, they guy should be refused service and left to die. If its the other candidates way, the guy should be billed for it 100% then given directions to bankruptcy court to discharge the bill.

    Its the american way, according to the republicans.

    Health care costs continue to skyrocket due to personal bankruptcies for medically related bills and yet, the republicans would rather see this as the norm, then provide them with health care in the first place.

    If your between 20 and 30 yrs old, you do need insurance. Sure , you may feel fine today, but you have no idea what tomorrow brings, like this motorcycle rider. I am sure health care wasnt on his mind in the morning as he left his home for the day.
  5. klein

    klein Für Meno :)

    Yup, Tos, and then the other tax payers financial obligations begin.
    Since he won't be eligable for any after care treatment , (just gets a quick fixer upper), and then becomes disabled and unable to work.
    Tax payers can now pay for his disabilty for the rest of his life time !

    That sure saves money , NOT !
  6. av8torntn

    av8torntn Well-Known Member

    Actually you should not be allowed to make that decision for me. If you want health insurance go buy it. Nobody made you queen of America. You should not have the right to force someone to buy a product they do not want.
  7. klein

    klein Für Meno :)

    Well, then start with abolishing SS payments. Those are forced upon you, too !
    If people don't want to save for retirement, they can live on government assistance, (welfare), in their retirement years, too !

    Unemployment insurance is another one, that is forced upon every worker.
    That is unconstitutional, too, I suppose ?
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2011
  8. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    Truth be known, that happened in Logan Utah, in a college town, hell, he's probably still on mom & dad/s medical your example stinks!
  9. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    You guys are building a case on speculation. The guy is 21....I found that out. Quit making up fairy tales . He has 2 broken legs and a broken pelvis. Those are facts. Use facts, not fantasy to make your point. Klein, wipe your face, there's something brown on it!!
  10. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    You need to know the difference between State & Federal!!!!!!!!!!!!
  11. klein

    klein Für Meno :)

    my second cousin in Florida is only 18, almost died of an overdoses. His parents didn't have healthcare insurance, and still don't.
    Besides, he wasn't going to school anymore, either.

    He owns over 3 Million in medical expenses. Good luck paying that ever back !
  12. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    That was his risk by not being insured.
  13. klein

    klein Für Meno :)

    So what is the difference ? State law like Mass. has is constitutional (forced medicare), and federal law isn't ?
    So, why are UPSer's and other company workers not giving the oppourtunity to collect the extra cash, instead of being forced to get health insurance thru the companies they work for ?

    I bet if they (the employees), had a choice, atleast 50% of them would choose the extra money instead.
  14. klein

    klein Für Meno :)

    But who cares ? He sure ain't paying for it, anyways ! :)
  15. trplnkl

    trplnkl 555

    Your cousin made two bad choices and almost died. Tell me why his next door neighbors should be forced to pay his doctor bills? I know that part of the higher cost of medical treatment is because of people like your cousin. When the hospitals and doctors get stiffed on their bills, they simply raise the prices for those personally responsible enough to have insurance and pay their own bills. Your cousin could be the poster boy for Ron Paul's stance on HC.
    People who have enough personal responsibility to work, pay their bills and provide their families with insurance are the ones picking up the tab for freeloaders like your cousin regardless if he has national health care coverage or not.
  16. klein

    klein Für Meno :)

    Yup, trinkle, I say the same thing, let all US citizens die that have no coverage. Simple as that.
    Because as others say, you can't force them to buy health insurance.

    1 in 4 americans I believe have no health insurance, that should take the population back to the 200 Million plus range.
    Just think, unemployment would not be a factor then ! :)
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2011
  17. The Other Side

    The Other Side Well-Known Troll Troll

    Really AV8? Do you have car insurance because you want to? No matter how high it is, the state FORCES you to buy car insurance and youre cool with that. Whats the difference?

    Millions of americans are FORCED to buy car insurance to protect people and property and yet, when it comes to a living person, you disagree with FORCING them to protect themselves and leaving the burden on society to pay.

    That makes a ton of sense AV8.

  18. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    Yes, STATE....but Obamacare is i told your 'grasshopper', he needs to know the difference between state & Federal!!!
  19. klein

    klein Für Meno :)

    Yup, that has to be thrown out, too, if buying mandatory health insurance is considered unconstitutional !
    It will be a fun day all around the USA if that does happen :)

    And Moreluck, what is unemployment insurance there ? State or Federal mandatory law ? Or both ?
  20. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    Get it, car ins is state and Obamacare is Federal. Even if you throw Romneycare into it....that was only for 8% of people in a small state. Obamacare is for 100% of the people in the entire U.S all 57 states.

    Unemployment is a federal program and each state manages it's own.(me thinks)