Hillary gets your money first
It was like pulling teeth for George Stephanapolous, but he finally got Hillary to admit her mandated healthcare plan will have enforcement provisions including “automatic enrollment” and wage garnishments.
Some on this site support mandated healthcare including John. Do you folks support enforcement tactics like those proposed by Hillary? If not, how will you enforce your mandated healthcare plans?
Bart
It was Romney’s idea and you voted for him!
No John, you base your support on mandates…do you agree with Hillary’s enforcement methods?
If not, then how will you force citizens to comply with your idea of healthcare mandates?
In the Romeny plan they garnish when they can and bill the rest. I have no problem with billing people for healthcare.
The free method you support we cannot afford!
FYI BART
Mass. Gov. Romney’s health care plan says everyone pays
OK John…you support mandates over and over on this site…there is no spinning out of this.
Now do you support Hillary’s method of auto-enroll and wage garnishments to force citizens into government healthcare?
If not, then how would John Konop’s plan succeed in forcing people to buy healthcare?
This is not about Romney John…It is about Hillary.
Romney leaves it up to states to decide on healthcare as he did in Massachusetts.
Hillary wants to nationalize the system.
Answer the question John.
Bart
I did answer the question.
So you are for the Hillary/Romney plan as long as the government gives out incentives for the State to use the Romney/Hillary plan? You realize that is the basic difference?
Mitt Romney wrote in the WSJ about his Massachusetts healthcare plan based on reform in private insurance providers:
“Will it work? I’m optimistic, but time will tell. A great deal will depend on the people who implement the program. Legislative adjustments will surely be needed along the way. One great thing about federalism is that states can innovate, demonstrate and incorporate ideas from one another. Other states will learn from our experience and improve on what we’ve done. That’s the way we’ll make health care work for everyone.”
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008213
You have not come close to answering…they are simple yes, no questions John:
Do you support Hillary-like auto-enrollment and wage garnishments in government healthcare?
If not, then what?
Bart
He also said in the debate we would give out incentives for a State to use the Romney/Hillary plan!
What did he you think incentives are?
No John, I do not support government mandates. On this, I disagree with Mitt, but I also choose not to live in Massachusetts, thus it does not affect me.
Is healthcare a right as Hillary stated Sunday?
Is healthcare in the Constitution to be forced upon every citizen?
How would John Konop enforce the mandates he supports in healthcare? wage garnishments? auto-enrollment? fines? jail?
Bart
What part of this do you not understand?
FROM USATODAY….Romney’s plan says everyone should: The state would work harder to enroll all residents eligible for Medicaid; employers, most of whom already offer insurance, would be encouraged to continue doing so voluntarily; and individuals who don’t have insurance would have to sign on to one of two new insurance pools, one of which would be subsidized for lower-income residents.
Failing to sign up could lead to a loss of a personal tax exemption or garnishment of wages…..
Bart
You did vote for Romney?
So do you agree with #13?
I said yes in post 3. The free method you support does not work!
Bart
Why did you vote for Romney if this issue is such a big problem for you?
John,
No you didn’t…you danced around as usual. Do you support garnishing wages? auto-enroll? fines?
Why did I vote for Romney?
1. economy
2. business experience
3. war on terror
4. John McCain
and —>
“Other states will learn from our experience and improve on what we’ve done. That’s the way we’ll make health care work for everyone.”
Bart
Do you support FREE HEATH CARE?
CLINTON WON’T COMMIT TO RENEW CONSTITUTION…
http://tinyurl.com/32b9tb
bb: A vote for Romney or Clinton (or Obama) brings us one step closer to universal health care.
So, on behalf of the left, thanks for your support!
LOL
You are a hero now!
What the lovely phrase “universal health care” boils down to is politicians and bureaucrats forcing people to get their medical treatment and pharmaceutical drugs the way the politicians and bureaucrats decide.
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3652
John,
You and Hillary point out the problem with government healthcare…somebody has to pay for it. That is why you will not answer the question, nor will she.
It’s easy to get support for “free” healthcare provided by Big Nanny like you and Hillary seek. Harry and Louise see “FREE” and don’t think about the intricate details such as auto-enroll and wage garnishments.
Now once again John, I ask you the question that Hillary finally came close to answering Sunday;
Do you support wage garnishments and/or auto enrollment as part of your idea of mandated healthcare?
If not, how will you enforce the government mandate?
You know Bill, that’s just not right. Nothing Obama or Clinton are proposing puts bureaucrats in charge of healthcare delivery. Nothing.
They are not proposing “government run” anything.
If anything their plans drive costs down by forcing everyone to pay in, weakening insurance companies’ ability to skim off the profit cream, and improving the industry’s free market nature by allowing for greater competition (especially in drugs)—all of which probably ultimately strengthens doctors and patients.
No one is proposing the conversion of privately held hospitals to government run. No one.
John Konop is indicative of the problem with Big Nanny populists. These government programs cost money…somebody has to pay for it.
Regarding healthcare, there is enough liberal rhetoric on this site…time for some conservative rebuttal:
- Healthcare is not a right, never has been.
- It is not my responsibility to pay for your healthcare AND mine.
- If an American chooses to not get healthcare, then that American should get on the pay-as-you-go plan or suffer the consequences…over-population will be addressed naturally without government interference.
- It should not be necessary to MANDATE a RIGHT…name another that is MANDATED!
If government would just get out of healthcare, then it would be affordable…F’N DUH!
Bart
Why did you vote for Romney it was his idea?
Lefthook
The big picture is big pharma and big government dictating what treatments are acceptable as well as what drugs. And codex is always ratcheting foreward.
You can’t force coverage for “acceptable” treatments without “feeding the beast” which outlaws other treatments.
The solution to the freeloaders who show up at the hospital is to garnishee their wages for the costs. It is not right to force people to sign up for healthcare Why is that such a hard concept to understand?
On top of hating all forms of socialism I don’t trust any damn politician who takes a “wet noodle approach” to illegal aliens. And damn sure don’t want to pay any more for the US invasion. Hellspawn of the new world order!!!
I hate educating people but what the hell.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_alimentarius
http://www.nocodexgenocide.com/nocodexgenocide.html
As I posted in another thread, the Romney plan in Mass. is an abject failure with costs expected to triple over the next five years and the taxpayers unable to pay for it. Romney made a HUGE mistake with this plan by any accounting method. If you doubt this, I recommend you do a bit of research as I have.
Oregon recently voted down SCHIP and California DEMOCRATS voted down “Universal Healthcare” because they can’t possibly afford to pay for it. IT DOESN’T WORK!
As for the mechanism to pay for this ridiculous – not to mention unconstitutional idea – the day the Federal government can garnish wages of honest, hard-working Americans is the day we see the end of the free republic our founders envisioned.
Hillary and the other socialists who support this crap are fools on the highest magnitude and have no regard for the free enterprise system that made this Country great.
Sgt Mac
Are you against mandatory car insurance? Are you against mandatory child support?
PERSONAL responsibility is a big issue to me!
That’s right John. PERSONAL responsibility. NOT nanny-state responsibility. The government doesn’t garnish wages to pay for car insurance. Furthermore, if the powers that be did a better job of forcing people to pay chhild support, the rest of us wouldn’t have to foot the bill for all the kids out there born out of wedlock. Does SCHIP or Peach Care sound familiar John? Where’s the PERSONAL responsibility there?
Go be responsible John and BUY a health insurance policy for you and your family instead of sponging off the rest of us.
Like you said John, be responsible, PERSONALLY responsible.
Did you even READ what I posted on the thread entitled “Is this the future of healthcare?” I recommend you do so. You are a socialist through and through and your support of isolationists, socialism, and unconstitutional crap like this proves that point beyond any doubt.
Joe Oliva – re #30 above;
BRAVO! I couldn’t agree more!
Awaiting moderation again…..perhaps cesorship is alive and well at Control Congress…..
John,
Why won’t you answer the question about enforcement of healthcare mandates? You are no different than Hillary when it comes to defending Big Nanny solutions.
Why did you vote for Ron Paul who does not support healthcare mandates as you do?
Ron Paul’s healthcare solution:
It is time to take back our health care. This is why I support:
Making all medical expenses tax deductible.
Eliminating federal regulations that discourage small businesses from providing coverage.
Giving doctors the freedom to collectively negotiate with insurance companies and drive down the cost of medical care.
Making every American eligible for a Health Savings Account (HSA), and removing the requirement that individuals must obtain a high-deductible insurance policy before opening an HSA.
Reform licensure requirements so that pharmacists and nurses can perform some basic functions to increase access to care and lower costs.
By removing federal regulations, encouraging competition, and presenting real choices, we can make our health care system the envy of the world once again.
Bart –
He can’t answer that. It goes against the “nanny-state” mentality he adheres to.
You have to understand Konopian logic. Let me explain;
“My name is John Konop and I believe in the U.S. Constitution for everyone except people like me who want the government (read: other taxpayers) to pay for MY healthcare (and maybe a few other things). I particularly like the idea of further taxing those evil rich people who’ve worked hard to realize the American dream. The government needs to re-distribute their fairly earned wealth in order to share their dream with me and other socialists who are jealous of their success.”
Understand now Bart?
Of course….awaiting moderation yet again……
quote:
Lines For Swedish Care Grow Longer
Click here to find out more!
INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY
Posted 2/4/2008
Reform: Government medicine in Canada and Britain is often taken to task in these columns because those nations’ systems are held up as models for the U.S. Are we ignoring universal care’s success elsewhere?
Related Topics: Health Care
“Why not talk about other ’socialized’ systems around the world like Germany, France, Netherlands, Japan, Norway and Sweden?” asks one reader. OK, let’s talk about Sweden.
If universal coverage can work anywhere, it should be Sweden, a small, homogenous nation where poverty is virtually unknown. Yet problems there have begun to undermine a health care system that dates back to the 1930s, when Social Democrats began to assemble a welfare state.
snip===============
Any migration toward private care has brought complaints from the left. Lars Ohly, leader of the Swedish Left Party, told Bloomberg that it “makes a mockery of the most fundamental values of the Swedish system. Care should be given based on needs, not wallets.”
Ohly thinks he’s made a strong point, but in reality he underscores two of socialist medicine’s deepest flaws:
Investor’s Business Daily
We are going to have a national health care plan soon. If you don’t want the same thing to happen here that is happening all over the socialized world, then what do you do to avoid it?
Taxpayers are not going to want to fund the program once they get into it and costs go up due to inflation. They are going to be seeing their own paychecks lose buying power and aren’t going to want to pay more to the government to cover the costs of health care. At that point, government will have no choice but to cut corners. How do you avoid that?
Jan Paul – good piece. It echoes everything I’ve been posting for months.
Every socialized system in the world suffers from the same malady – overuse due to the perception that it’s “free.” As this piece and those I’ve posted in the past clearly demonstrate, it’s anything but.
Sgt Mac
I posted that article on the Ron Paul Tree of Liberty Forum too,
You may want to check on it to see if any comments are made there or you may want to comment on it, too.
There are also many articles on how both parties are damaging America on that forum.
http://www.phpbbplanet.com/libertytree/viewtopic.php?p=10200
The forum index is
http://www.phpbbplanet.com/libertytree/
All the candidates are covered and there are categories on almost everything economic and political.
Absolutely Mac…John cannot answer just as Hillary tried so hard not to on Sunday with George. But she at least finally admitted the obvious; enforcement measures will be tough on those who CHOOSE not to participate in socialized medicine.