Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: M. Dodge Thomas
Mine was an overlong post. My apologies. In a nutshell, you can offer to pay for "Woman A", who is not insured, treatments yourself. You can do the digging to find those groups (private, corporate, government) who will assist her financially, yourself.

It's what I've done. Why should you do no less, but somehow declare "it's everyone's" responsibility. It's not. And by your sentiment that Conservatives would win big if they focused on using prime-time coverage to announce to the world that if you are uninsured "call this number" is selling point, you are truly mistaken. People will just find another reason to have never "heard the message", and blame Bush anyway and because "he doesn't care about the uninsured".

The President gave the US, each and every citizen CHOICE with every tax cut passed and each person paying taxes got more of their OWN money back into their pockets.

And he doesn't care about the uninsured, eh?

264 posted on 12/20/2006 8:10:31 AM PST by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies ]


To: Alia
"The President gave the US, each and every citizen CHOICE with every tax cut passed and each person paying taxes got more of their OWN money back into their pockets.

And he doesn't care about the uninsured, eh?

Well, if "care about" = "actually do something about", IMO voter skepticism is justified.

A tax cut is of little assistance to someone whose problem is that they are faced with a choice between bankrucpy because they being billed $3000 week for radiation treatments when they are unemployed and thus uninsured, and forgoing the treatment and hoping that surgery alone was successful.

Now, I can see a wide range of public polices to deal with their problem.

a) At one end of the "personal responsibility / public responsibility" scale is "Life is unfair. Thanks for playing".

b) Next over is something like a program of low-interst Federal Loans to such individuals, to be deducted from current income and/or from their estate, if any.

c) Next over is a national insurance scheme providing insurance against catastrophic acute health care costs for the unemployed, funded by mandatory tax contributions.

c) Next over...and so on.

And IMO, if someone's position is a) and a) only...well, the politcal system is eventually going to tell you "Life is unfair. Thanks for voting."

268 posted on 12/20/2006 9:21:01 AM PST by M. Dodge Thomas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson