Posted on 09/29/2015 6:16:01 AM PDT by ken5050
Well, you can't say we didn't tell you so, or at least try to warn you. But would you listen? NOOOOOOO!!! Much is being said here about Trump's tax proposals..and yes, there is a lot in there that makes sense. But he also said Sunday night that he wanted free, universal, single-payer government run healthcare...and....nary a peep from any of you Trump die-hards.
That you don’t understand what you’re buying into is a fantasy.
Are you saying that Trump is a blatant fraud, a mountebank, and impostor, a poseur, an ersatz conservative? I think you are. And you, sir, are right.
Eliminating it entirely? He hasn’t proposed that. He has, however, strongly opposed expanding Medicaid (which, again, would be a necessary part of Trump the Benevolent’s plan to “take care of everybody”):
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c11YPk20YjU
Is this a weird kind of illiteracy?
I cringe every time I see such clumsily arranged prose.
A psychological misfire maybe?
You're not right.
Cruz has offered his own alternative bill to replace Obamacare.
I believe he said he would contract with existing hospitals for the service. That tells me he knows the insurance companies and and middlemen are taking the lions share of the premiums. He also NEVER said he would outlaw private insurance. More competition is good to me. We also have choice here.
His plan is for single-payer national health care.
Maybe he should just go back to the cheap insults.
Until Jeb quits the race, I don’t care if Trump is caught doing strange things with farm animals behind the barn.
In the meantime, he will do - even if it is only to scare the Establishment.
You mean the Bill in the Senate. All that is is replace Obamacare with private insurance sold across state lines. I do not believe it addresses how to insure those who are uninsurable and are poor. They are the ones who go to ER’s and run bills up.
That is a small part of his plan and it is for the poor who were uninsured and/or on Medicaid before.
Devils in the detail. Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Singapore
If its something like this, I’m fine with it
I’m pretty sure Colonel Mustard is fully aware of this.
A key principle of Singapore’s national health scheme is that no medical service is provided free of charge, regardless of the level of subsidy, even within the public healthcare system. This mechanism is intended to reduce the over-utilisation of healthcare services, a phenomenon often seen in fully subsidised universal health insurance systems
Probably have just as many as you do. Rocks, that is.
Bookmark
You are a retard. And I mean that in only the best way. :-)
And on behalf of retards everywhere, I thank you kindly ma’am, for the compliment.....
Great! We’ll be in your neck of the woods in mid October, but farther north. Have missed seeing your spunky posts.
With Trump, you only have to go back as far as 2008 when he supported Barack Obama for president.
In a 1999 chat with Larry King, Trump said: "I'm very liberal when it comes to healthcare. I believe in universal healthcare. I believe in whatever it takes to make people well and better."
Does he think the same now?
In July, he told King: "You can't let the people in this country that are the poor people, the people without the money and resources go without healthcare. I just can't even imagine. You're sick and you can't even go to a doctor. I say one thing, can you not let 25 percent (sic) of the people of the country because they have no money go without something?"
Then Trump should use his fortune to open and run a charity or Christian hospital.
I guess I would be what Trump, born into wealth and display, classifies as "the poor people, the people without the money and resources."
There's a big difference between health insurance and health care. Charities are on hand to take care of the poor, and it is our job as Christians to do that. The government has OTHER duties. If Trump wants to run a charity, he should do it on his own dime -- I want to vote for someone who is willing to leave my decisions on health care up to me, my doctor, and my insurance company if I choose to employ one..
Ditto that. Why can't states adopt their own more localized solutions for linking doctors with patients who can't afford them? How is it a Federal responsibility?
Where is charitable support indicated in the Constitution? What does the Federal government have to do with any of it?
Medical care is a big business, a huge big industry. We managed to "get here" over the past 4,000 years, roughtly 3,965 of them without cradle-to-grave managed health care (i.e., medical advice and tests your insurance company insists you have). Very obviously, you will probably live if you simply continue to skip docs until you actually need one.
Yet people are bullied, dominated, by "health care" concerns and have to have jobs they hate and deplore in order to do what they are frightened into thinking they must do to survive -- spend a whole lot of dough to pay doctors to keep an eye on them cradle to grave, carefully monitoring them like a hothouse plant ...
Go see the doc when you need to. Buy insurance for catastrophic things, and go on about your life. If you only have to see a doc every few years, GREAT!!!!
The whole thing is just ... sad to see people frightened, scared, terrorized, by the constant barrage of medical and hospital commercials. No wonder people need so much "health care" -- the need is suggested to them on every commercial medium where they are consumers! Pills, insurance plans, hospitals, illnesses ...
*heaving a big sigh*
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.