Congressmen Ron Paul & Anthony Weiner On Massachusetts Election Results

http://MOXNews.com/
January 20, 2010 CNN

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Congressman
• Ron
• Paul
• Anthony
• Weiner
• Massachusetts
• Election
• Results
• senate
• senator
• scott
• brown

[surfer53]

Ron Paul might be the only sane, consistent politician left. This guy predicted all of this, and we still treat him like an old coot. We listened to people like Bush and Obama, and now we're broke. I think that should be the administration's slogan: We're all broke but we're right! This is like morality on LSD. It doesn't work and everyone's jobless, but it's the right thing to do. Progressives believe health care should be free for all, and that's all that matters.

[link48010]

I think Paul and Weiner are two of the best congressmen that we have, even though they both think opposite on many things. They are both strong in what they believe, but are not stupid and spread lies. They both are willing to compromise to get legislation that gives us, quoting Lewis Black, "SOME FUCKING DIRECTION!"

[Maserati7200]

@link48010 I agree. Weiner was my congressman (I live in the NY 9th congressional district). 

[nikolayzou]

No you can say it, Governments are very bad when they interfere with the free market. If you care for poor people and want to give them best health care, you must support a system that is financially viable, and Government health care is not. Listen to Ron Paul, he knows what he is talking about, he is a doctor of medicine and he has also studied sound economics.

[guidobambino]

@TheInsanetoker420 contact lenses, lasik eye surgery, and cosmetic surgery -- all areas where the government isn't involved, and costs are low while quality improves dramatically. id rather have the mechanism driving lasik eye surgery (i.e. the free market) operating on health care than the mechanism driving emergency rooms (government run)

[guidobambino]

@TheInsanetoker420 well..i cant argue with your choice. all i can say is ive had a great experience with medical care in this country, absent 1) emergency rooms, which are horrendous here in NY bcz the government makes sure anyone can go for free, and so TONS of people come for nonsense issues and 2) the cost of medical services, since medicare and medicaid provide incentive for patients to abuse services that they don't need/would be charged more for. thats why you look at things like

[TheInsanetoker420]

@guidobambino BTW dont use John Stossel to present an unbiased argument. lol.

[TheInsanetoker420]

@guidobambino well id have to say yes i would submit to some form of reasonable public option. You got to watch the whole thing man he talks about the negatives too. The wait times on surguery and how many systems are under funded.

[guidobambino]

@TheInsanetoker420 i started watching it..it seems so slanted though. i love how the narrator says "no medical bills...sounds good to me!" this is why public broadcasting is a sham. but thats a different conversation. stossel did a number of series' on medical care, here's one of them that shows the real state of medical care in around the world watch?v=sXJgkvF19QA

also, you have to answer my question -- would u still sign up for gov run health care if ppl were given the choice to opt out?

[TheInsanetoker420]

@guidobambino Check out the documentarty frontline sick around the world. Its a myth that our healthcare is of any better quality than those around the world infact its quite the opposite. The insurers have people who look for reasons to not accept your claim for the smallest reason. No one in the richest country in the world should have to choose between living and bankruptcy.

[guidobambino]

@TheInsanetoker420 (cont2) this question -- suppose the federal government just decided to let people choose not to pay taxes towards medicare, yet receive none of the benefits (i.e. "opt out"). now, suppose they say that sick people wont get turned away and won't be charged higher rates than others. would you still want to choose them as your insurer? in that system, the only way to stay profitable is to compensate the artificially lower rates on the sick with artificially higher rates on you

[guidobambino]

@TheInsanetoker420 (cont) considering the horrendous barriers to entry for doctors and small technology companies set up by the federal government.

my question to you is -- what do you mean "cover sick people?" do you mean that if i get sick an insurance company HAS to accept me? that defeats the whole purpose of insurance. the purpose of insurance is to spread natural risk among a large number of individuals. im an actuary, so i can go on all day about fair insurance pricing, but let me pose