That's what this whole discussion is about. You can talk the finer points all you wish- but they either support your "health care priorities" idea or they do not. The idea being discussed here is clear.
Speaking of clear, the difference between your view and mine can be summed up this way, and here is the question it all boils down too-

If 100% of those with no health insurance were those described in post #1- rim and flat screen buying discretionary income blowing type (lets call them group "A"), would you encourage the gov to give them money for health care(insurance)?

Those that say "health care is a right" would say yes.

If 100% of those with no health insurance were those loosely described by BC- working and trying, not buying frills, and just not able to get over the hump (lets call them group "B")- would you encourage the gov to give them money for health care(insurance)?

Some will say yes, some no. Mostly yes I would think.

Of course the two groups are mixed and therefore it'll be a ratio.

The greater the percentage of group "B", the greater percent of most citizens will say "yes- help them". The greater percentage of group "A", the greater chance most folks will say- screw the freeloaders. That's my guess.

At what percentage are you as a person comfortable with? If it was under 15% of freeloaders I'd be okay with that I think- there is no way the gov can control a program any tighter than that.

We as a nation must come up with the balls to tell the freeloaders "If you want to blow your money, go ahead. We are not giving you more of it to blow, and are not giving you money for health insurance because you cannot be trusted to spend money wisely. When you stop buying frills and junk, and start spending it on the needs of your family instead, we will start helping you."

If the mix percentage was 50/50 would you fund the program? 60/40 either way? 70/30 either way?

Give us YOUR percentage and tell us why you support it. (this is for everyone- not just tankdriver)

I have an idea few on the left will answer that question, because it hits to the heart of the matter and I proposed it, instead of someone on the left proposing it.

I disagree. Health care is a right means that everyone has a right to access it. I don't think it matters if one spends frivolously or not in a public option if the public option takes taxes out of paychecks or something like that. However frivolous spenders are earning money to spend frivolously, I think health money should come off the top before they get the money.
I do not think we as a country should use health as a weapon in social engineering or to watch people die for making poor decisions. Much like I would try and stop an idiot from crossing a busy highway.

I can't say I have a number. I don't have enough data to be comfortable with a number. I will say this: I have worked with many people who cannot afford health care, or are crippled by it. I am acquainted with more in the same boat but have not worked with them. Not one spent frivolously. It has been my experience that most people aren't on the fringes, they're in the middle. It seems self evident, but I have anecdotal experience with it as well. ~Poor wasters of money is not a large segment of the population, same as excessively rich wasters of money.

The advantage takers will be there. And those people exist at all income levels, BTW (in general, not specifically in health care). At a high enough income level, it becomes a virtue. I admit I tend to forgive the have not ones than the haves, but it happens at all levels. Because it is often tax related, the poor advantage takers receive a lot of outrage. The rich advantage takers are often taking advantage in subtler ways, indirectly, or advantage of situations more than specifically tax money. They get away with it because people see it differently.
I think we can come up with a health plan with a public option that mitigates the advantage taking possibilities.
I was watching Howard Dean talking about his HC book on CSPAN last night, and I think he has some pretty amazing insights and opinions on health care. It had originally aired aug. 3rd, but the part I caught was pretty eye opening and very educational. If you're not dismissive of him because he's Howard Dean and it's possible to find, I highly recommend it. You can tell his opinions have been formed by his being a doctor, not by his political goals.

__________________
1984 300TD

I do not think we as a country should use health as a weapon in social engineering or to watch people die for making poor decisions. Much like I would try and stop an idiot from crossing a busy highway.

Isn't that exactly what HR3200 is all about? social engineering? I'm sorry but the whole thing about people dying because of poor decisions is B.S. You cannot, by law , turn away anyone from a hospital for lack of ability to pay. If I am wrong please provide proof. As a Firefighter I send patients off in ambulances and very expensive helicopters on a regular basis. Not once has the question of ability to pay influenced the level of care. I have to be completely honest-sometimes I feel like I am interfering with natural selection, but I took an oath and I stick to it. We never ask for your insurance card before administering life saving procedures. The myth about people dying in the streets because the can't (or choose not to) afford health insurance is a crock of propaganda.

You can't be turned away, that is, until you are stabilized. You may require more treatment to live more than a year, but that won't come until it's critical and you're in the ER again.

And before that, the bills come. If you work, you get garnisheed and come home with 1/3 of your gross, if you're lucky. If you had any assets, you do not have them any more.

If you live on 50K for a family of four, insurance may well be unaffordable after paying for your mortgage and food. Especially if you can't get insurance through work and have to play the individual market.

I've had individual insurance. The terms are quite a bit worse than group insurance, but that's what I could get so I bought it. I didn't use it for fear of "acquiring" a preexisting condition, but I paid because it would cover a catastrophe. Just one, mind you.

That is what the right is looking for so write it up and post it pronto, then and send it to Obama so we can move on to the next issue. If you cannot come up with it then we will not have any reform. I refuse to willingly give my and my kids money for social engineering by giving money to those that choose frills over health care.
Social engineering to me is taking my money and giving to to someone else because they did not make the proper decisions to make enough money for the things they wish for.

No, the right is not looking for a public option at all. Social engineering is when you use social programs to incentivize people to do what you want. If you told people not to buy certain things or you won't get health care, you're engineering.
I don't know what percentage of uninsured you think is moneywasters (the poor ones that is), but I'm confident that you are overestimating.

__________________
1984 300TD

Do you really think it will be any more optional than SS? I think it will be along the lines of "volunteer" when you are in the military, IOW, you are forced into the "option". So no, I don't think they are considering making it an option in the true sense of the word.

Social engineering is an attempt by the govt to "fix" a sociological issue in society. It can be anything from WIC to SS to healthcare.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

Of course it will be an option. Howard Dean mentioned in his talk that even if you design it to lead people into the public option, it will still have to be just an option. As he said, people will not accept an immediate wholesale change in health care like that. And he's absolutely right. People won't. And also as he said, it isn't necessary for everyone to be in the public option for it to work. He used several examples of other systems like Germany's and Holland's, and his own plan implemented as Governor which have means of preventing the downsides of co-existence of public&private (for example, what happened in Maine. There are simple rules that can be put in place to prevent that).

Social engineering does not require government.

__________________
1984 300TD

So like a drug dealer, they start with a couple of freebies and slowly work you up? Sounds like what govt can and will do and has done.

Yes there are simple rules that can prevent bad things from happening. However, whether they will be implemented or circumvented is another thing. Govt has taken funds allocated for one thing and used it for another. Take the Tobacco Windfall money for instance.

It does if you want it done faster.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

Not freebies, but it's possible to design it to incentivize people to get off private insurance. Whether it will be designed that way or not is up in the air. One way he pointed out is with the tax on private health benefits. I personally doubt that would make it through, and it's not a big ticket item for the bill now.
But it doesn't have to be designed that way either. It's entirely possible for public and private to co-exist.

Cart before the horse. Before you accuse them of breaking the rule, let the rule at least exist first.

__________________
1984 300TD

How is that not manipulation or social engineering?

Probably will be designed that way to try lower their costs.

Why should my benefits be taxed just to give some people insurance?

Yes it is but it is possible that the public insurance will be another SS that needs a fixing in the future that will cost us big bucks.

That is what a job reference is for. To see how you performed in the past as an indicator of your future performance. I don't think their past has been anything to speak highly of when it comes to all their hijinks that they have used to cook the books, balance the budget, etc, etc.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

I am a Canadian and read the American members posts on this subject usually with interest. After several years I have almost decided about the only cure for individuals there is to get at least semi rich.

Other than a company supplied good healthcare plan of a type with a nominal copay is about all there really is. Otherwise the system seems to be punishing in general with no real signifigant changes in sight of any real consequence..

As time moves along it gets more and more costly. Even the universal run healthcare schemes in all the other developed countries have already or are going to have problems with this.

If the economy does not totally break and I expect it will not in the shorter term. Americans may be faced with a doubling of their premium costs maybe in the next five to ten years. The cost to Canadians. Even though as individuals we do not actually see it too much. Certainly will be increasing as well.

Healthcare seems to be becoming more about money than anything else. Yet for the average American individual. It is just a small but concerning component of their lives. One that is taking a larger and larger chunk financially out of them. It is also far too much of a threat to their individual financial security.

Neither life nor health can be guaranteed no matter how much money or prayer is lifted to the hospital or to God.

Death is the only certainty in life.

Our (western) culture is so averse to suffering and death that we delude ourselves into believing there is an alternative. There is not.

To all of us: You will die and it will not be pretty, you will wish you had more time, and regret not having done a better job of your life. There is no lifetime rehearsal. This is it.

No gov program, no insurance, no gift to your temple, mosque, church or NPR will give you the slightest reprieve.

Doom. That is all.