when even [http://www.amconmag.com/2007/2007_10_22/cover.html a magazine called "the american conservative" counsels] the republican presidential candidates that they can't live on hillary-hate alone, something is happening.
as nurses fighting for guaranteed healthcare, the california nurses association/national nurses organizing committee tracks this trend in terms of health policy. [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rose-ann-demoro/memo-to-the-gop-stopping_b_69472.html i will let our executive director rose ann demoro sum it up: attacking hillary clinton is not a health plan.] you can click through to the full article, but here's a taste:
apparently taking their leadership from karl rove who warned that the republican candidates must focus on healthcare because the issue is "on the mind of a lot of swing voters," the republican candidates for president have now latched on to healthcare.
but in the true spirit of their mentor rove, it appears they think our biggest healthcare crisis is the potential election of hillary clinton.
hearing their fulminations about "socialized medicine" and "hillary care" almost makes you wonder what they've been drinking.
in a new report, george lakoff's rockridge institute aptly describes the approach of clinton and the other top tier democrats as the "neoliberal mode of thought" in its dubious reliance on regulation and technocratic changes to an industry that needs to be dismantled, not tweaked.
but at least clinton and company are talking about comprehensive reform. the republican candidates' healthcare policies recall the words attributed, probably erroneously, to marie antoinette whose infamous solution to mass shortages of bread was "let them eat cake."
...cross-posted at the [http://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/blog national nurses organizing committee/california nurses association's] breakroom blog, as we organize to make 2007 the year of guaranteed healthcare on the single-payer model.
CR for an educated person I think you are deliberately ignoring the definition of insurance. Insurance is the pooling of money by individuals to protect against risk of loss beyond the capacity of any person or family to bear on their own and/or to reduce the risk of hardship. Each of us is paying for the health care of ourselves and others. A tax based single payer system would result in lower net cost for each of us and result in wall to wall coverage for all people living in the US.
Wow, your family would allow you to die homeless and on the streets?Interesting...
I'm looking at my most recent pay stub. Federal income withholding was $591.71.
This does not include Medicare or social security insurance which totaled $334.92. I am glad to pay for these insurance programs. I may die and never collect Social Security or use Medicare health insurance. If that happens other Americans will benefit from my participation.
Then again I may live to 100. Hopefully then I won't have to die homeless on the street because SS and Medicare will allow for basic needs.
So why not let working people buy into Medicare?
It is much more efficient already than private insurance.
Specializes in Med./Surg., Diabetes, Med. ICU, home hea.
Yosemite RN:
How can a battered woman, who now lives in a safe place with her children, working, saving for a place of their own, I.E. struggling for self improvement,
be categorized as breeding corruption, complacancy and mediocracy in this country?
A: Obviously, someone in THAT position, cannot. On the other hand, what happened to her WAS NOT MY FAULT. Again, what happened to her WAS NOT MY FAULT. I should have the right to contribute as much of my income to her plight as I can or care to. Also, do I not have the right to NOT contribute if I so desire? What about MY rights?
I can only guess what comes next... somehow, it will be my fault and/or my opinion MUST be attacked. Of course, liberals/socialists/communists cannot STAND to allow anyone else to have an opinion other than theirs.
A: Obviously, someone in THAT position, cannot. On the other hand, what happened to her WAS NOT MY FAULT. Again, what happened to her WAS NOT MY FAULT. I should have the right to contribute as much of my income to her plight as I can or care to. Also, do I not have the right to NOT contribute if I so desire? What about MY rights?
I can only guess what comes next... somehow, it will be my fault and/or my opinion MUST be attacked. Of course, liberals/socialists/communists cannot STAND to allow anyone else to have an opinion other than theirs.
Opinions and generalizations are two separate issues. That is why I used this example of TRUE life experiences. No one is blaming you for her folly, yet she was being generalized as a detriment. This is my point.
A: Obviously, someone in THAT position, cannot. On the other hand, what happened to her WAS NOT MY FAULT. Again, what happened to her WAS NOT MY FAULT. I should have the right to contribute as much of my income to her plight as I can or care to. Also, do I not have the right to NOT contribute if I so desire? What about MY rights?
I can only guess what comes next... somehow, it will be my fault and/or my opinion MUST be attacked. Of course, liberals/socialists/communists cannot STAND to allow anyone else to have an opinion other than theirs.
Of course it is not your fault someone was abused.
It is not the fault of the victim either. Especially not the children.
I am forced to contribute to what I believe is morally wrong. I we don't pay taxes we are imprisioned and taxpayers then pay for our healthcare.
WHY are we paying millions of our healthcare money to corporations that don't provide any healthcare at all?
I know. It's called life, and guess what... It ain't fair. Next I suppose someone is going to suggest people who don't have house insurance and their house burns down should get a new house.
I'm glad you have a supportive family CRNA2007, but not everyone is so fortunate.
Your current social security and medicare is being spent on todays retirees. When you retire it will be on the backs of our precious children that can't afford their own health care let alone yours. How could you be so heartless as to force poor children to fund your retirement and health care? Sound familiar??????
I'm looking at my most recent pay stub. Federal income withholding was $591.71.
This does not include Medicare or social security insurance which totaled $334.92. I am glad to pay for these insurance programs. I may die and never collect Social Security or use Medicare health insurance. If that happens other Americans will benefit from my participation.
Then again I may live to 100. Hopefully then I won't have to die homeless on the street because SS and Medicare will allow for basic needs.
So why not let working people buy into Medicare?
It is much more efficient already than private insurance.
Your current social security and medicare is being spent on todays retirees. When you retire it will be on the backs of our precious children that can't afford their own health care let alone yours. How could you be so heartless as to force poor children to fund your retirement and health care? Sound familiar??????
:madface:
HM2VikingRN, RN
4,700 Posts
CR for an educated person I think you are deliberately ignoring the definition of insurance. Insurance is the pooling of money by individuals to protect against risk of loss beyond the capacity of any person or family to bear on their own and/or to reduce the risk of hardship. Each of us is paying for the health care of ourselves and others. A tax based single payer system would result in lower net cost for each of us and result in wall to wall coverage for all people living in the US.