Chuck Norris, Sarah Palin Now Health Care Experts - Where's Joe the Plumber?
Posted on August 11th, 2009 by Jason Rosenbaum in Profits Before People
 |
The latest entry into the health care debate, on the heels of the unhinged Sarah "death panel" Palin, is Chuck Norris, with a piece on the right-wing Townhall.com about the "dirty little secrets" in the health care bill.
I could debunk Norris's claims, as they're remarkable similar to the insurance industry-funded right-wing viral email so full of lies it warranted a multi-page debunking from us last week, but really, it's not worth it. A better question to ask is what does Chuck Norris know about health care? Or about reading legislation? Or about reading, in general?
More to the point, we're seeing the same cast of characters from the right as we saw during the McCain campaign: Crazy, violent protesters, Sarah Palin, Chuck Norris. It begs the question - where does Joe the Plumber stand on health care?
And even more to the point, why would anyone care?
I'm all for answering questions about the health care bill. But these right-wing smear artists use fear and shouting to drown out debate. They should be ridiculed or ignored.
Here's "Joe the Plumber"! I am a stay at home Mother who works weekends in order to stay home with my two children and PAY MY OWN HEALTH INSURANCE. My husband and I pay for our entire family out of pocket. Neither of us are covered by our jobs. Never once did we expect anyone else - not our parents, not the hospital, not the government to pay for the birth of my second son. I took an extra job and we paid for it ourselves. Meanwhile, a mother was admitted HIV positive having her EIGHTH child on MEDICAID. We need to TEACH people to fish.
Rather than a government plan like our failing Medicare/ Medicaid, how about giving tax credits to people to pay for their own insurance of choice? How about getting rid of the corruption in private insurance, Medicare, Medicaid that drive up prices? How about letting Americans have a more direct link to paying for healthcare rather than being separated by insurance? Then, people would shop around, take care of what they have (wheelchairs, walkers, splints, medicines), and providers would have to be more competetive with their prices.
President Obama's administration says that private insurance already rations healthcare then fails to mention that Medicare does the same. Medicare decides how long they will pay for rehab, which medicines they will pay for, and which diagnoses are reimbursed and for how much.
We need insurance, we need reform, but the government running healthcare is a mistake and once they are in, they don't move out. Watch what happens with GM….we'll see.
That's the plan here. To allow you to choose the insurance you want.
If the government moves in, private insurance will not be able to compete, then there will be no choice. Medicare is the perfect example. It was designed to help elderly in need. Now, everyone 65 years or older have Medicare. No choice. Some have supplement plans, but for the most part, no choice. Medicare is full of red tape and paperwork. Then, came medicaid, now they want to add those who choose not to be insured, next will be the whole population. Is that what you want - the government to take over the whole system?
You're wrong about Medicare. It was designed to work how it does work, to be the only choice for those above 65.
What we're talking about here is different. It is designed to offer you a choice, only a choice, of what you want. If you don't want government health care, you don't need to have it. But for those of us who want that choice, why can't we have it?
1. Why do I have to pay for your healthcare? Canadians pay 60% in taxes.
2. There will be no choice- eventually.
Again, private insurers cannot compete against a government-run plan that makes its own rules and prints its own money. If government gets its foot in, it will spread to everyone.
Canadians pay 60% in taxes? Really?
This is from the Canada Revenue Agency website (www.cra.gc.ca) … and the taxes are not cumulative. In other words, you do not add 15% plus 22% plus 26% etc. Each rate applies to a segment of your income.
* 15% on the first $40,726 of taxable income, +
* 22% on the next $40,726 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $40,726 and $81,452), +
* 26% on the next $44,812 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $81,452 and $126,264), +
* 29% of taxable income over $126,264.
Wikipedia also has an interesting tax comparison chart under "taxation in Canada."
I wonder how the U.S. would fare if we added current health insurance premiums and out-of-pocket costs to our "taxation" statistics.
If you want health care pay for it yourself, like everyone else does.
When you give someone something for free you take away part their human dignity, their ability to help themselves, why would you want that? Cut out the non essentials and start paying your own health bills.
And there is only a choice to have your own healthcare if you already have it before the bills goes into affect in 2013, that doesn't sound a like a choice to me.
I am very happy that you are wealthy enough to be able to afford your own insurance. There are a great many others that cannot. I understand their are those who will abuse any system. That is unfortunate and we need reform to curb abuse.
I agree we do need healthcare reform and with as little government involvement as possible. However, I have Optimum Choice and they DO tell me what kind of treatment I can have and cannot have. They DO tell me how long I can receive treatment. They do tell me what medications I can have under my plan and which ones I cannot have under my plan.
I fail to understand how any insurance coverage would be able to allow the insured to have unrestricted coverage.
So I fail to see your point. Please enlighten me.
I am far from wealthy. As a matter of fact, that is part of the reason I am upset. I work hard to pay for my own health insurance and simply cannot afford to pay for yours. My family rarely eats out, we do not go to the movies, we drive paid for clunkers. It depends on where your priorities are. Medicare is government -run. They decide what treatment you can and cannot have. They do tell how long you can receive treatment. They do tell which medications you can have. So, I do not think another government option will be any better. Let's fix what we have. I believe healthcare breaks down into three parts: Insurers(private & governmental), Providers, and Patients and all need to be reined in:
1. Why Do insurance companies say they will pay once you meet your dedcutible and then nothing applies toward the dedeuctible?
2. Why do hospitals charge $20 for one tylenol?
3. Why do Americans complain and say they will not pay their medical bill and then buy a 4 wheeler?
It is a large, complicated problem and as President Obama said in his town hall, "I never said change would be easy." I simply believe it comes down to if you want the (1)GOVERNMENT to fix it or the (2)PEOPLE and whether you believe the government can afford to keep doing bail outs. I personally believe we as a Nation cannot afford this and that we as a Nation are better off with less government.
I am Canadian and just graduate with a PhD at a US college. I have experience both health care systems (Canadian vs American) and all I got to say is Americans are getting screwed over by insurance companies. I developed an autoimmune condition and the insurance companies were awful about covering anything. I am now trying to stay in the US but I have a pre-existing condition and I can't get insurance anywhere (believe me I have tried). I am trying to find a job and can't afford my medication (I would just go back to Canada but can't bec. I am on OPT).
Americans really deserve and need a better system !!!
Didn't we defeat these rowdy mobs back in November? Guess we'll have to keep doing it again and again. Yes, we can! Turn your social media icon purple for healthcare reform. And spread the word. "I am turning purple for Healthcare Reform!" #iamturningpurple
Government get out of our business. There has to be a better way, but not with government involved. And George Soros, you go home, stay out of our business. And take Obama with you.
Back to the question: Why do I have to pay for your health care whatever the tax rate? Either way, it will go up.
Because if you have an accident and go to the emergency room, they must treat you, and then I and the rest in your community get stuck with the bill. That's not fair, is it?
Lets make one thing clear I HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE. My husband and I work VERY hard to buy our OWN HEALTH INSURANCE. I TOOK AN EXTRA job from the time I was 3 months pregnant until I was 8 months pregnant to pay any expenses related to the birth of my son. BELIEVE me, I am all about PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY - that's why I am against this.
Thanks for debating with me… Looks like we are going to have to agree to disagree. It comes down to if you would rather fix the private insurance(less government) or get sigle payor (more government). If you believe in entitlements (there was a time in America when people were ashamed to ask for handouts.) or you don't. I personally would rather continue to take my chances with the private sector. One last thing - if our contry goes bankrupt, we won't have teachers, we won't have police, we wont have ERs.
I'm not asking for a handout. I'm willing to pay a reasonable price for health insurance. But I'm 55, and I have had the sniffles more than once. So the health insurance companies will not cover me. Good for you, for being personally responsible and supporting the ridiculous profits of the health insurance companies. Why not allow me the same privilege?
First, 55 is young:) All I am saying is let's fix what we have now. I don't see how a public option will be any better. President Obama himself said that it will cost 1 TRILLION dollars. Someone will have to pay for your public option. I don't want my infant and my toddler to have to pay for this plus interest. What are we going to do when China calls us on our loans?
Sigh.
The public option actually saves money off the price of health reform. What costs the most is tax breaks to people so they can afford insurance, either public or private, whatever they choose. Plus, it's all paid for.
Sigh
One Trillion Dollars saves money?
Without the public option, it would be more. The public option saves money.
I see the kool aid drinkers don't believe Chuck Norris. Well, look it up. Also, the Obama snitch line is a felony. Look that up too. They made this kind of thing a felony after Tricky Dick. He kept track of people like all presidents do, but the left really hated him so they passed the law. Can we spell impeachment? Government, stay out of the private sector. Stay out of my personal life. Go back to teaching these public school chumps what this nation is really about and no apologies are needed.
The HuffPost story regarding Chuck Norris's paranoia debunks it all. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/11/chuck-norris-says-governm_n_256585.html
Here's a blast from the past that best explains what the GOP, and their sheepish followers, will want you to believe.
"You work three jobs? … Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic that you're doing that." —President George W. Bush, to a divorced mother of three, Omaha, Nebraska, Feb. 4, 2005
Fantastic? When other countries make it a law to have a whole month vacation or create 36 hours work weeks, W had the audacity to call a divorced mother of three working three jobs patriotic?
Chuck Norris, Sarah Palin, and Joe the Non-Plumber are wholly owned subsidiary's of the Insurance Industrial Complex. And as much as I enjoyed watching Chuck kick butt as a child, I did happen to grow up, go to college, get a degree and learned to critically distinguish fact from fiction.
FACT: The most recent administration guilty of intruding into peoples homes has been Bush Jr, who rushed the Patriot Act through Congress which few or nobody read and shamelessly and warrantlessly wire tapped American citizens such as journalists.
FICTION: Chuck Norris is legally qualified to interpret HR 3200.
Mr. Straight to Video Norris mentioned a "revolt" in the beginning of his tirade.
Well, Chuck, what did you think November 4th was?