Shillery: Garnish Wages for Universal Health care?

Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

Pages:
1
2
3

Shillery: Garnish Wages for Universal Health care?; Fascist.
Topic Started: Feb 4 2008, 04:58 PM (755 Views)
Roxdog	Feb 4 2008, 04:58 PM Post #1
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08	Quote: Clinton May Garnish Wages to Achieve Universal Health Care By Susan Jones CNSNews.com Senior Editor February 04, 2008 (CNSNews.com) - Will Sen. Hillary Clinton garnish the wages of people who can afford health insurance but refuse to buy into her universal health care plan? Maybe. The Democratic presidential hopeful tried to duck the question Sunday, when ABC's George Stephanopoulos asked her about wage-garnishing three times. But she didn't rule it out. Clinton on Sunday described universal health care as "a core Democratic value and a moral principle, and I'm absolutely going to do everything I can to achieve that." The campaign of Sen. Barack Obama is warning voters that Clinton's plan forces everyone to buy insurance, even if they can't afford it. "And if they cannot afford it, then the question is what are you going to do about it? Are you going to fine them? Are you going to garnish their wages?" Obama asked Clinton at one of their debates. Clinton, pressed on the issue Sunday during her appearance on ABC's "This Week," said people will be able to afford her plan because she would limit premiums to a "low percent of your income." According to Clinton, "about 20 percent of the people who don't have health insurance in America today could well afford it," despite its "exorbitant" cost. "So what we've got to do is have shared responsibility. Everybody has to pay something, but, obviously, on a sliding scale." Stephanopoulos tried again: "And I still haven't heard, if people can afford it and they don't buy the insurance, will their wages be garnished under your plan? Will they have to pay fines?" Clinton told Stephanopoulos "there are a number of ways" of getting people to enroll in her universal health care plan. "I think you can automatically enroll people, and you will then say you've got to be part of this." She added that Congress is sure to "have some ideas" about it as well. "But if you don't start with universal health care, if you don't say everybody's going to be in the system, we'll never get there," Clinton said. Pressed a third time on the wage-garnishing question, Clinton said, "we will have an enforcement mechanism -- whether it's that (wage garnishing) or it's some other mechanism through the tax system or automatic enrollments." Clinton said the "key point" is to implement universal health care. She said the mechanism by which it is achieved -- "going after people's wages, automatic enrollment...whatever the mechanism is, is not as important as...the fundamental commitment to universal health care..." Clinton insisted that she will not force people to buy health insurance they can't afford: "There will be mechanisms to enable everyone to afford it. We have costed this out, and we will be able to achieve it," she insisted. Iran and Syria In her appearance on "This Week," Clinton also clarified whether she would meet with the leaders of Iran and Syria if she's elected president. "I've been a longtime advocate of having diplomatic processes with Iran and Syria," Clinton said. She called it "imperative" for the United States to have direct contact with Iran and Syria. "But it would be at low-level diplomatic efforts, between our ambassadors and between our diplomats, because I don't think a president should put the prestige of the United States on the line to meet with these people unless you have some idea of what is going to happen." http://www.cnsnews.com/news/viewstory.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200802/NAT20080204b.html
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08


fortuneteller	Feb 4 2008, 10:36 PM Post #2
Posts: 173 Group: BANNED! Member #152 Joined: 01/20/08	that's just more republican fear-mongering. at least the money used to implement that plan is going to the health and well-being of the american people, and not the warhawks Edited by fortuneteller, Feb 4 2008, 10:38 PM.
Posts: 173 Group: BANNED! Member #152 Joined: 01/20/08


Roxdog	Feb 5 2008, 10:56 AM Post #3
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08	fortuneteller Feb 4 2008, 10:36 PM that's just more republican fear-mongering. at least the money used to implement that plan is going to the health and well-being of the american people, and not the warhawks BWahhaha...WTF are you talking about? She said it herself, genius. Hillary is a war hawk. She voted for the war. She funds it. She panders to the military establishment. She admittedly pushed her dope dealing hubby to bomb Serbia. She is complete scum. Like you.
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08


Roxdog	Feb 5 2008, 02:26 PM Post #4
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08	"Everybody has to pay something...I think you can automatically enroll people, and you will then say you've got to be part of this."- Shillery "I voted for war in Iraq & the patriot act" Klinton. Edited by Roxdog, Feb 5 2008, 02:27 PM.
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08


look-up	Feb 5 2008, 02:28 PM Post #5
Posts: 1,642 Group: Admins Member #63 Joined: 01/15/08	mandatory healthcare is something I think most people would not be expected, but apparently it would happen if she is elected. alive and still shilling... how can you still support her? I know, she's a woman. Well, do you KNOW that for a fact? hehe
Posts: 1,642 Group: Admins Member #63 Joined: 01/15/08


kennyboy	Feb 7 2008, 12:58 PM Post #6
Posts: 11 Group: Members Member #194 Joined: 01/23/08	we in Canada have universal health care but it's a paid for by a tax to employers. prior to the employer tax, it used to a personal tax.... however, those who were unemployed would still get looked after. I don't think anyone in the US could or would be against a system that ensures exempliary health care for EVERYONE, but it just comes down to how it's paid for and how it's implemented. I hope to hell you guys have the sense not to vote her in as the next POTUS, but universal health care is a good idea, no question about it.
Posts: 11 Group: Members Member #194 Joined: 01/23/08


Roxdog	Feb 7 2008, 01:05 PM Post #7
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08	Quote: we in Canada have universal health care but it's a paid for by a tax to employers. prior to the employer tax, it used to a personal tax.... however, those who were unemployed would still get looked after. I don't think anyone in the US could or would be against a system that ensures exempliary health care for EVERYONE, but it just comes down to how it's paid for and how it's implemented. I hope to hell you guys have the sense not to vote her in as the next POTUS, but universal health care is a good idea, no question about it. Universal health care is not a good idea. There are many, many questions about it and saying that there isn't only shows you haven't looked into it ot thought about very thoroughly...
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08


kennyboy	Feb 7 2008, 01:18 PM Post #8
Posts: 11 Group: Members Member #194 Joined: 01/23/08	with UHC, rich or poor get the same level of service... how can that be bad (or even remotely fascist)? yes, we have some problems right now in Canada with our health care system as successive government have gutted the system in order to pay for the tax cuts they've promised to get elected. However, if I had a car accident on my way home tonight, I wouldn't have to worry about the bill from the hospital. Or I wouldn't have to take a loan to pay for the bills when my wife gave birth to our children. Private health care means those with money or insurance get looked after first by better doctors with the hospitals and doctors making obscene amounts of money. Health care is a service, not a business, and should be available to everyone without discretion.
Posts: 11 Group: Members Member #194 Joined: 01/23/08


Roxdog	Feb 7 2008, 01:30 PM Post #9
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08	Quote: with UHC, rich or poor get the same level of service... how can that be bad (or even remotely fascist)? Um, because it involves the redistribution of private proprty (also known as theft). It is the very defintion of facism. Quote: yes, we have some problems right now in Canada with our health care system as successive government have gutted the system in order to pay for the tax cuts they've promised to get elected. However, if I had a car accident on my way home tonight, I wouldn't have to worry about the bill from the hospital. I don't have to worry either. Most Americans don't have to worry about it. Quote: Or I wouldn't have to take a loan to pay for the bills when my wife gave birth to our children. I've never met a person in my life who had to get a loan for something woman have been doing since time began. Quote: Private health care means those with money or insurance get looked after first by better doctors with the hospitals and doctors making obscene amounts of money. No it doesn't. Simply saying something is fact doesn't make it so. Quote: Health care is a service, not a business, and should be available to everyone without discretion. Um, all services are a business. No one works for free. You have no right to tell everyone what should or shouldn't be available to them if they want nothing to do with it.
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08


Roxdog	Feb 7 2008, 01:32 PM Post #10
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08	Also...please address the topic of the actual thread. So you condone govt theft, yes?
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08


Like_a_Simile	Feb 7 2008, 03:45 PM Post #11
Posts: 22 Group: BANNED! Member #286 Joined: 02/07/08	kennyboy Feb 7 2008, 01:18 PM with UHC, rich or poor get the same level of service... how can that be bad (or even remotely fascist)? yes, we have some problems right now in Canada with our health care system as successive government have gutted the system in order to pay for the tax cuts they've promised to get elected. However, if I had a car accident on my way home tonight, I wouldn't have to worry about the bill from the hospital. Or I wouldn't have to take a loan to pay for the bills when my wife gave birth to our children. Private health care means those with money or insurance get looked after first by better doctors with the hospitals and doctors making obscene amounts of money. Health care is a service, not a business, and should be available to everyone without discretion. Just curious, but how is the health 'service' in Canada? How long is the wait for an operation or sugery?
Posts: 22 Group: BANNED! Member #286 Joined: 02/07/08


fortuneteller	Feb 7 2008, 07:57 PM Post #12
Posts: 173 Group: BANNED! Member #152 Joined: 01/20/08	the money will come out of revenue from former bush tax cuts and the money normally spent spilling blood in iraq
Posts: 173 Group: BANNED! Member #152 Joined: 01/20/08


blarney fife	Feb 7 2008, 08:24 PM Post #13
Posts: 202 Group: Members Member #15 Joined: 01/14/08	I don't think that theft (redistribution of wealth) is necessarily the exclusive province of fascism. What govenment in the history of ever hasn't confiscated the wealth of it's people in one form or another? The case for universal health care/social medicine is without doubt a complex issue. The answer is obviously not the 'for (extreme) profit' system we have now, where an estimated 40 to 50 million people are virtually excluded from care. Though the hospitals (at least in my city) are required to provide at least a percentage of indigent care, the result is still essentially socialized medicine...higher costs for the insured through higher premiums or co-pays and higher thresholds of uncovered expenses. The wide variety of insurance providers is apparently not the answer either as they are private corporations with the sole motive of profit for them and their shareholders. They are exclusionary to pre-existing conditions, what they consider experimental treatment, many organ transplants, higher out of pocket expense, and higher lifetime maximum benefits, to name a few. It's blatantly obvious that government bureacracy can't administer anything effectively. So what to do? I have known many people who have had to take second mortgages on their homes to pay for their medical care, some resulting in bankruptcy. And, I've known several people who have had to declare bankruptcy right off the bat as they would never be able to pay the hundreds of thousands of dollars they owe. The result is once again a hidden form of socialized medicine, as the majority of the people are once again forced to make up the shortfall through higher taxes, higher credit costs, higher consumer prices, higher insurance premiums, inflation, etc., etc., etc. I would prefer to pay a fair share up front to keep the system from imploding before more drastic measures are taken to keep it afloat. Call me a socialist, call me a commie...but don't call an ever expanding percentage of the population expendable because they are unable to receive the health care everyone in this life will someday need. Edited by blarney fife, Feb 7 2008, 08:33 PM.
Posts: 202 Group: Members Member #15 Joined: 01/14/08


fortuneteller	Feb 7 2008, 08:58 PM Post #14
Posts: 173 Group: BANNED! Member #152 Joined: 01/20/08	it is time to joing the rest of the modern world and socialize medicine, we have been screwed enough over the cost of medical care
Posts: 173 Group: BANNED! Member #152 Joined: 01/20/08


kennyboy	Feb 7 2008, 10:30 PM Post #15
Posts: 11 Group: Members Member #194 Joined: 01/23/08	let me re-phrase, healthcare is a necessary sevice, therefore in my opinion should be accessible to everyone regardless of income bracket. a friend of mine in the USA was hit with a bill for over $5000 for a simple birth yet the emergency c-section my wife needed cost us nothing because we already paid for it through taxes. Rox, not everyone can afford insurance like yourself, or can afford hospital bill when they're most vulnerable. Also, take minute to re-read the definition of fascism... it has to do with nationalism, dictator style of government, suppression of opposition, militaristic supremacy, etc.... hardly words I would associate with socialized healthcare. and no, I don't agree with government theft (the taking of something and not giving it back)... but I do agree with everyone pitching in for a neccesary service that we all use.... hardly fascist nor theft
Posts: 11 Group: Members Member #194 Joined: 01/23/08


fortuneteller	Feb 7 2008, 11:13 PM Post #16
Posts: 173 Group: BANNED! Member #152 Joined: 01/20/08	you can't explain anything to rox, he expresses pundit views to stimulate dialogue and then uses your gut reaction as a basis for his next radio show. no real conversation going on there, just be glad the republicans are dying so the rest of us citizens can have our day in the sun.
Posts: 173 Group: BANNED! Member #152 Joined: 01/20/08


Like_a_Simile	Feb 7 2008, 11:44 PM Post #17
Posts: 22 Group: BANNED! Member #286 Joined: 02/07/08	kennyboy Feb 7 2008, 10:30 PM let me re-phrase, healthcare is a necessary sevice, therefore in my opinion should be accessible to everyone regardless of income bracket. a friend of mine in the USA was hit with a bill for over $5000 for a simple birth yet the emergency c-section my wife needed cost us nothing because we already paid for it through taxes. Rox, not everyone can afford insurance like yourself, or can afford hospital bill when they're most vulnerable. Also, take minute to re-read the definition of fascism... it has to do with nationalism, dictator style of government, suppression of opposition, militaristic supremacy, etc.... hardly words I would associate with socialized healthcare. and no, I don't agree with government theft (the taking of something and not giving it back)... but I do agree with everyone pitching in for a neccesary service that we all use.... hardly fascist nor theft Why did your USA friend have to pay $5000 for a simple birth? Did he have insurance? Why or why not? Also, I asked earlier in this thread, and I am honestly curious, how is the quality of health service in Canada? How long is the wait for a procedure or surgery?
Posts: 22 Group: BANNED! Member #286 Joined: 02/07/08


fortuneteller	Feb 8 2008, 01:28 AM Post #18
Posts: 173 Group: BANNED! Member #152 Joined: 01/20/08	why don't you call canada and find out? lets face it, the medical community will love change, I have asked several providers about this proposal, and they are looking foreward to the day when they do not have to order a proceedure and wonder if they are ever going to get paid.
Posts: 173 Group: BANNED! Member #152 Joined: 01/20/08


Like_a_Simile	Feb 8 2008, 09:37 AM Post #19
Posts: 22 Group: BANNED! Member #286 Joined: 02/07/08	fortuneteller Feb 8 2008, 01:28 AM why don't you call canada and find out? lets face it, the medical community will love change, I have asked several providers about this proposal, and they are looking foreward to the day when they do not have to order a proceedure and wonder if they are ever going to get paid. Why would I "call Canada"? I am not the one promoting socialized medicine. If there is a good arguement for it, I'm willing to hear it. My concerns are those that I have heard expressed, again and again, from folks with socialized medicine; long waits and mediocre service. Having a Canadian on the board, I have asked for his opinion. So several providers you talked to are looking forward to socialized medicine? I trust that you don't assume that it's a good idea simply because physicians think so. I tend to look at how it effects the general population, not the doctors. It's a fact that when people have to pay for something they make sure they get there moneys worth. People who would normally not visit the doctor for a sore throat or cold will now book a visit at the first sign of sniffles. Where does this leave the industry? Where are the extra doctors needed to handle the 40 million new regular patients they have? Despite an earlier argument to the contrary, the medical industry IS a business. Business breeds competition, and competition breeds invention, discovery, and technology. Government intervention is NOT the answer. If you want to see how government run opertations work here in the US take a look at the Department of Motor Vehicles, or look at the USPS prior to competition such as UPS and FEDEX were allowed. Overnight mail did not even exist by the USPS until competitors created the service, forcing the USPS to compete. I am extremely surprised to find folks promotong socialism and big government on a forum where the general theme seems to be a fear of "Big Brother".
Posts: 22 Group: BANNED! Member #286 Joined: 02/07/08


kennyboy	Feb 8 2008, 10:23 AM Post #20
Posts: 11 Group: Members Member #194 Joined: 01/23/08	Like_a_Simile, my freind in the US had no insurance coverage, for reasons I can't fully explain... I'm assuming because he's the sole income earner in the family with a mediocre salary. As for the quality of our healthcare, without having anything to personally compare it to, I would say it is excellent. As mentioned, funding had suffered for a while as a 2 term provincial government gutted education and healthcare to pay for a 15% income tax cut that they promised to get themselves elected. During that time, emergency room wait times were long. Some areas were also suffering from family doctor shortages as many graduates were moving to the US as the pay was better (even though a decent family doctor could expect to make $200,000+ here). Waits for MRIs and very specialized testing was also longer than it should've been. Having said all that, my family doctor is usually available within 24hours, with walk-in clinics always available. Required surguries take place promptly with elective surguries taking a bit longer (a month or so). It's not perfect, but it's better than a pay-per-visit system, in my opinion. And Alive-and-still-Fortune-Telling, this is in no way an endorsement for your war-mongering NWO criminal canididate couple that you seem to adore so much.... I don't understand how you can pursue the truth (why else would you spend so much time on this forum) yet the Clintons seem to be immune to any scrutiny whatsoever. Edited by kennyboy, Feb 8 2008, 10:24 AM.
Posts: 11 Group: Members Member #194 Joined: 01/23/08


Like_a_Simile	Feb 8 2008, 11:00 AM Post #21
Posts: 22 Group: BANNED! Member #286 Joined: 02/07/08	kennyboy Feb 8 2008, 10:23 AM Like_a_Simile, my freind in the US had no insurance coverage, for reasons I can't fully explain... I'm assuming because he's the sole income earner in the family with a mediocre salary. As for the quality of our healthcare, without having anything to personally compare it to, I would say it is excellent. As mentioned, funding had suffered for a while as a 2 term provincial government gutted education and healthcare to pay for a 15% income tax cut that they promised to get themselves elected. During that time, emergency room wait times were long. Some areas were also suffering from family doctor shortages as many graduates were moving to the US as the pay was better (even though a decent family doctor could expect to make $200,000+ here). Waits for MRIs and very specialized testing was also longer than it should've been. Having said all that, my family doctor is usually available within 24hours, with walk-in clinics always available. Required surguries take place promptly with elective surguries taking a bit longer (a month or so). It's not perfect, but it's better than a pay-per-visit system, in my opinion. And Alive-and-still-Fortune-Telling, this is in no way an endorsement for your war-mongering NWO criminal canididate couple that you seem to adore so much.... I don't understand how you can pursue the truth (why else would you spend so much time on this forum) yet the Clintons seem to be immune to any scrutiny whatsoever. First of all, thanks for all of the information. Maybe fortuneteller can see why I'd rather ask a citizen than "call Canada" as he suggested. I have no basis for comparison, so I won't say that one system is better than the other. What I don't like is government intervention where it is not needed. Competition is good for us, socialism stifles progress. Regarding your $5,000 friend, I hate to sound heartless, but if my wife was pregnant, I'd make sure that we had insurance and if I didn't have insurance, I'd make sure I wasn't having children. Its called personal responsibility, although I admit that more and more people (especially in the US) would rather play the blame game. So now your friend, who couldn't afford insurance, brought a child into the world? Not only will the child be uninsured, but the cost to raise a child costs a lot more than the medical insurance he couldn't afford to begin with. If this was a planned pregnancy, then your friend is selfish; if he can't afford insurance, who does he expect to pay for his child and the babies insurance. If this is was an unplanned pregnancy, explain why you he shouldn't be responisble, and instead you and I should pay $5,000.
Posts: 22 Group: BANNED! Member #286 Joined: 02/07/08


Roxdog	Feb 8 2008, 11:38 AM Post #22
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08	kennyboy Feb 7 2008, 10:30 PM Rox, not everyone can afford insurance like yourself, or can afford hospital bill when they're most vulnerable. Also, take minute to re-read the definition of fascism... it has to do with nationalism, dictator style of government, suppression of opposition, militaristic supremacy, etc.... hardly words I would associate with socialized healthcare. Most can afford it. A vast majority can. VAST. And if the government actually cared about people's health, they would be investigating the COST of healthcare and why its so unreasonably expensive (aka, why we're being ripped off) . I've seen Sicko. Moore is great at highlighting problems but his solutions are almost as horrible as the problems themselves. Um, I don't need to reread what I already know. I believe it is you that should open the dictionary... Quote: A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition... The word "fascism" existed before Adolf. Not all of it goosesteps in military regalia... Edited by Roxdog, Feb 8 2008, 11:40 AM.
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08


Lin Kuei	Feb 8 2008, 01:19 PM Post #23
Posts: 1,307 Group: Admins Member #5 Joined: 12/22/07	my 2 cents Edited by Lin Kuei, Feb 17 2008, 05:16 AM.
Posts: 1,307 Group: Admins Member #5 Joined: 12/22/07


Roxdog	Feb 8 2008, 03:29 PM Post #24
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08	Your two cents is priceless.... Edited by Roxdog, Feb 8 2008, 03:30 PM.
Posts: 597 Group: Members Member #80 Joined: 01/16/08


fortuneteller	Feb 8 2008, 04:23 PM Post #25
Posts: 173 Group: BANNED! Member #152 Joined: 01/20/08	by the quality of distortion, I can almost guess lin is a guy. they always have issues regarding control by females. this is consistent with republican organizations which fight against gains by the democratic party. all you conservative guys out there are "squirmin' like a toad" over the prospect of having a FEMALE commander in chief. lol what you need is a QUEEN to look up to ... Edited by fortuneteller, Feb 8 2008, 04:27 PM.
Posts: 173 Group: BANNED! Member #152 Joined: 01/20/08


1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Election 2008 · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
3