Hillary Clinton has come up with a plan for universal health care?

Without knowing anything about it, Republicans are already blasting it and renewing their angry cries that she's a socialist. Do republicans, honestly, even care about this issue? Isn't it relevant that every other modern country in the world basically has universal health care?

to wmcritte: Everyone having insurance to get treated constitutes a "monopoly" to you? I hope you realize you sound like a raving lunatic.

On the illegal alien/ obese smokers thing: Problems for sure, but not insurmountable. How do the countries of Western Europe manage I wonder? I understand they have substantially lower military budgets, and that might be the problem, but Clinton is suggesting the cost of health care be largely borne by employers. Honestly, I think it's a worthy goal, but I don't necessarily disagree with those saying it might be unrealistic, even with tax credits for smaller businesses. The question in my mind isn't whether universal health care is desirable (it is) it's whether or not we can afford it, especially if we want to remain, by far, the number one military power (which I think we should). See, I'm not so liberal after all.

It's more part of partisan warfare than real politics.

Yes, we do. But I can guarantee you WITHOUT even hearing it, that lazy, low-life, welfare recipients will simply exploit the system and get rewarded for sitting on their arses.

No - they don't care about anyone but themselves and their $$.

And yes the other countries who have it is relevant - but not if you.... see the first part of my answer.

Yes, and yes. More empty words and volumes of experience in that arena. NO change noted.

the point is not that republicans are blasting it without knowing anything about it. it is socialism, plain and simple. what other way would you put it? "government control that steals peoples money in the form of taxes on the premise of helping irresponsible fat people get bypass surgeries"? well guess what buddy, thats socialism. and by the way, im not a republican, so dont go saying its only republicans who are against this.

I'm not for it but I'd rather see the money spent on Americans that war or foreign aid...BTW, it IS a good (smart) plan but being retired military I'm very unlikely to gain anything from it

Isn't it also relevant that every other modern country w universal health care is either teetering on bankruptcy or imposes ridiculous tax rates on it's working class to pay for it. I live in Massachusetts where they recently imposed such a program.(without a vote allowed, of course) You should see the politicos scrambling to pay for it. The #1 answer?: New Taxes. You want to hand over huge chunks of your pay to provide free health care for someone else while still being charged for your own, that's up to you. As for me, I'll watch out for me and mine without nanny state interference.

other modern countries arent bankrupt already. We have a massive debt to cash ratio. Its just another bill we cant pay.

I think i heard all of this 13 years ago.What happened?? Nothing

She posted the details on her website and it isn't very different than what any of the other Democrats have proposed so far. The law will be written so that everyone MUST become a insurance customer or purchase medicare and the cost is based on your income.

Not only does this give the profit-driven insurance companies millions of new, forced customers, its going to hand them at least $100 billion a year in subsidies. If Bush proposed it, you'd be calling it corporate welfare! Its actually not very different than the drug benefit Bush just pushed through, with a similar price tag too.

Anyone who voted for the war should basically be disqualified from holding public office.

She's not getting approval from insurance companies because they'd have to 'cut' rates and take on higher risk clients. I think congress'd have to out law lobbying before anything like mandatory health insurance will fly with the money people. Auto and insurance is a money maker when health insurance is not, so far as insuring people who tend to get ill, or in a position that promotes illness, say like pollution etc. and resultant outrageously expensive over calculated medical costs.Probably the most aggravating fact known to health care.Republicans will always argue with Hillary/the Clinton name, it wouldn't matter if she said "Read my lips, NO NEW TAXES!!" they'd say "Oh, we've heard that story before.... probably lying...

"War on Lobby!!"

That does have familiar ring to it.

Yo, David S, Hillary didn't vote FOR the war, Bush went in on his preferences for self grandiosity.

Hey where does this delusion about welfare people being responsible for our country going broke? As much money as we spend daily for inkpens and postage stamps ususally outstrips the actual expenses. I've got a sneaking suspicion that hype rules the decision making of most voters and the size and bling bling of most bill boards sans issue. The fact of it is, that most if not all complainers about welfare, are the VERY FIRST to slam the welfare office the instant they themselves face the spector of destitution from ill health and NO protection.

I've learned a new word today, and from an apparent Republican, "Bipartisan". Wow, I'm impressed...

Military? Where in heck did that come from? Now sick folks with no health insurance is going to unemploy the military? No wonder we cannot get any substancial concensus on it, other than a need for it, we're scared out of our wits. But then who want's pesky healthy people running around working, thinking up stuff and actually providing for.. why it's a cruel and unfair world with stuff like that going on. Bah, Humbug!!

I have been listening to Hillary talk about her plan for health care for 16 years.
I have heard and read her speeches on the subject.
It was one of the most spectacular defeats in legislative history 鈥?a 1,342-page disaster that became a symbol of arrogance and unwieldy bureaucracy, and contributed in large part to the Democrats' loss of the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years.

She says: "We set the groundwork in place, so that now, people are saying, 'boy, we wish we had done that back then,'"

With that in mind, I have no reason to blieve that what she is proposing now will be any different than what she provided before.

She says three things; No my words, her's.

Affordable: Unlike the current health system where insurance premiums send people into bankruptcy, the plan provides tax credits for working families to help them cover their costs. The tax credits will ensure that working families never have to pay more than a limited percentage of their income for health care.

Available: No discrimination. The insurance companies can't deny you coverage if you have a pre-existing condition.

Reliable: It's portable. If you change or lose your job, you keep your health care.

She says:
"Tax credits" as if to avoid having to say "Tax Supported"

I thnik what you meant to say is that we shouldn't Blast it until YOU know more about it.

BTW:
It is a Republican, Mitt Romney, that actually instituted a health care plan that is working so, to say that Republicans don't care about the issue puts you as far behind the curve as Hillary is.
Under the plan, all but the smallest companies will face financial penalties if they don't cover their workers. The bipartisan plan is already being talked about as a national model.

We know everything about it. You are the one that doesn't have a clue. Who cares if most countries have it? Most of them were monarchies and dictators when we fought for our freedom, should be have stayed a monarchy because everyone else did it? Idiot.

Let me put it simply. MONOPOLIES ARE BAD!!!!! Anybody with an IQ higher than their shoe size knows that. Monopolies with the power to throw you in jail (our government) are the worst kind. We must fight for our FREEDOM to choose between Humana, Blue Cross, United, Aetna, etc. What kind of retarded moron wants to surrender freedom and competition to a government monopoly? Who could possibly be that stupid?

What kind of insanity drives people to WANT slavery?

This coverage is NOT for everybody , it is for the 47 million she talks about , which the majority are illegals ...

She said " many Americans are willing to pay around one thousand dollars per year to insure these 47 million have insurance coverage " ....That is not all , not to meantion the tax hikes for the Govt's part , , plus the growing number of illegals ....You will pay for it even if you do not get it ,,...That is not right , and I will not pay for illegals , and crack heads insurance coverage , crack heads can straighten up , get a job , and get their own insurance , ..Illegals can either get legal and do the same , or go the h*ll home , they are not my problem ...

"Senator Clinton's latest health scheme includes more government mandates, expensive federal subsidies and more big bureaucracy 鈥?in short, prescription for an increase in wait times, a decrease in patient care and tax hikes to pay for it all

What more do we need to know about it? If it's another government run program, staffed by bureaucrats who are not answerable to the voters, what more does one who opposes increased government involvement in our daily lives need to know in order to oppose such an initiative? If it's yet another way for the government to take even more of what we earn to give to those who do not, how much do we need know about it? Whether you can see it or not, it's just another way of trading in your freedom for security.