Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
Share
Consider the consequences of universal health care before voting
An economist from the UK was on TV talking about how England has suffered financially since they went with socialized health care. He said that Canada is the model we in the US always hold up, and how that system is not all it is cracked up to be. They still have insurance. Hillary says it will cost $200 million to convert. That is hilarious. We have three hundred million people here and the cost for that monstrosity would be $5 trillion a year. Most of you have no concept of how much that is. Our whole budget comes to $2.5 trillion.
Something you don't hear the candidates of either party talk about is our economy. After the last six years and the terrible expenses we have to do something to help our economy. Some saw the answer as letting 60 million Mexicans in as citizens to pay taxes and pay into SSA. But a further look showed they work at too low pay and 60 percent needed to use at least one welfare program. Millions of illegals flooded California and 80 of their hospitals closed because they could not absorb the cost of the indigents.
Someone has to pay for those programs. Who? It will be you: the American taxpayer. There would be massive tax hikes. With too many of our factories moved out of the country, our high tech being cloned and taken over by China, and the housing bubble bursting we have to look at the dynamics of our economy. We have a huge national debt of $53 trillion and a deficit of $1.5 trillion. Bush took money out of SSA for the war that should be going to the present retirees. And then the Democratic Congress dipped into it.
Can you imagine a little 80-year-old woman who is on SSI disability that gets a check of 630 a month living in the frozen north country of upper Minnesota where heat bills are soaring and fuel for the car is rising again? She can't afford the food she needs for her diabetic diet and she keeps all the lights turned down. There are millions of people on a fixed income and they pay high taxes on their houses and cars and the price of food has gone up. They often choose between medicine and food.
I am for some socialization balanced by a healthy capitalist system. I don't mind helping single moms get on their feet. But we can't support the whole world. We don't have candidates addressing our economy, the national debt, or the recent tricks of the Federal Reserve. I know you are caring people. I just ask that you consider the consequence of our going universal health care right now.
Our college students will be working soon at good jobs and will be able to afford insurance. A working person's check today has nearly 40 percent taken out in taxes. Isn't that enough? Do you want to pay for the drunks, the lazy druggies, and the illegals' health care through higher taxes? This is not a popularity contest. We shouldn't vote for someone because of their gender or race. Nor should we vote for someone because they showed a human moment with a tear. Use your heads.
Edith Dodds
Macomb, Ill.
Something you don't hear the candidates of either party talk about is our economy. After the last six years and the terrible expenses we have to do something to help our economy. Some saw the answer as letting 60 million Mexicans in as citizens to pay taxes and pay into SSA. But a further look showed they work at too low pay and 60 percent needed to use at least one welfare program. Millions of illegals flooded California and 80 of their hospitals closed because they could not absorb the cost of the indigents.
Someone has to pay for those programs. Who? It will be you: the American taxpayer. There would be massive tax hikes. With too many of our factories moved out of the country, our high tech being cloned and taken over by China, and the housing bubble bursting we have to look at the dynamics of our economy. We have a huge national debt of $53 trillion and a deficit of $1.5 trillion. Bush took money out of SSA for the war that should be going to the present retirees. And then the Democratic Congress dipped into it.
Can you imagine a little 80-year-old woman who is on SSI disability that gets a check of 630 a month living in the frozen north country of upper Minnesota where heat bills are soaring and fuel for the car is rising again? She can't afford the food she needs for her diabetic diet and she keeps all the lights turned down. There are millions of people on a fixed income and they pay high taxes on their houses and cars and the price of food has gone up. They often choose between medicine and food.
I am for some socialization balanced by a healthy capitalist system. I don't mind helping single moms get on their feet. But we can't support the whole world. We don't have candidates addressing our economy, the national debt, or the recent tricks of the Federal Reserve. I know you are caring people. I just ask that you consider the consequence of our going universal health care right now.
Our college students will be working soon at good jobs and will be able to afford insurance. A working person's check today has nearly 40 percent taken out in taxes. Isn't that enough? Do you want to pay for the drunks, the lazy druggies, and the illegals' health care through higher taxes? This is not a popularity contest. We shouldn't vote for someone because of their gender or race. Nor should we vote for someone because they showed a human moment with a tear. Use your heads.
Edith Dodds
Macomb, Ill.
Share this Article
 |
||
| Pollsters made a Dewey-Truman mistake |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of dailydem.com.
Georgia wrote on Mar 2, 2009 12:17 AM:
" Just a clarification my friend. Socialism is not the same as communism. Russia had communism, they never had socialism. Socialism means a free economy with some government oversight.Communism is full government control. Countries that have socialism are Germany, France, Holland and others; by the way they all seem to be doing much better than us right now.
Personally speaking, I am 35 years old and I have a ten year old daughter. I took her for an allergy test since she had some skin irritation, test was negative. After that I tried to purchase a better insurance and I was denied because I took my daughter for an allergy test. Their claim was that down the line my daughter might not be a very good investment. They didn't even look that the test came out negative. SO you know what, at that moment I wished I lived in Canada or France so if God forbid something happens I can at least take my kid to the doctor.Here we are viewed as investments and not as humans. The insurance representative told me "you see mom, you would never insure a burned home, so why shall we insure your daughter?" "
Personally speaking, I am 35 years old and I have a ten year old daughter. I took her for an allergy test since she had some skin irritation, test was negative. After that I tried to purchase a better insurance and I was denied because I took my daughter for an allergy test. Their claim was that down the line my daughter might not be a very good investment. They didn't even look that the test came out negative. SO you know what, at that moment I wished I lived in Canada or France so if God forbid something happens I can at least take my kid to the doctor.Here we are viewed as investments and not as humans. The insurance representative told me "you see mom, you would never insure a burned home, so why shall we insure your daughter?" "
June Streeter wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:30 PM: