Shared publicly  - 
By the Numbers: Community health centers have added about 3,000 nursing positions since 2009. Learn more at
Victor Blazhnov's profile photoJuan María Hernández Pérez's profile photoSahil Ahuja's profile photoKathy Lips's profile photo
We could have gotten help, but the rich shot it down. Maybe next time.
It's up too us to stay stay out of hospitals and doctors offices...because we can't afford them.
So you are saying it's our fault if we get sick, so are you healthy all the time, were you born in a hospital, do you take your children to get vaccinated. I rest my case.
So, Thomas, even if it were possible to keep ourselves from ever getting sick, which it isn't, as we've gone over, are you really satisfied with the fact that so many people can't afford it?
The rich care less, about the middle class as long as we keep them rich. A man once say "if you do not make it lease 120K a year you do not matter" It's on record. His name is G.W.Bush.
Hey I'm in the same boat..we are the cash payers..I can't afford the insurance..soo when one of my three kids gets sick it hurts..that's why my wife and I try to do what we can.
Just go on CNN, CBS, or any of the networks they all have it on record.
You are the only one that ask the number one question. Where to. Have to give you a plus on that one.
We pray for health and well being everyday..for our family. What else can you do..
In not the author, this comes from the news, check out united press for more info.
+Thomas Dilbeck you can vote against +Mitt Romney , all #republicans , and support universal health care reform and +Barack Obama . He tried to get everyone health care to not only make it cheaper, but so everyone could recive basic health care.
And really guys why would the rich care..we are not their responsibility, any more than you or I am each others responsibility..but if the rich weren't rich where would we be job wise..they produce the jobs.
I never said that we were the responsibility of the rich, I sad that the rich do not care about the poor, and if it was not for the poor they would be in the same boat.
I would say it's very cynical to say that we do not/should not have a responsibility to each other. I can not back this up, only from a personal view and experience, but I would think that anyone, poor or rich, would be in better health if they believed that someone out in the world actually gave a frak.
I agree Mr Stephens. The rich forget that the people below them make them wealthy. Now isn't that what sparked the first pilgrims to come to the Americas. They wanted freedom from kingship rule that subjected them and created a divide. That's what is happening in this country the rich make themselves richer and expect the ordinary man to surfer. Mitt Romney a man who made 20 million from bonuses after tons of lay offs and that's what we know of he closed his Swiss bank account just a couple months ago. Also he paid 1.5. Million in tax in Europe when he pays nothing here. You think this guy will care how a nurse makes the mortgage. Obama 2012.
Mr. Sinclair, and Mr. Githiomi, you both have a good point, but other then us it may not matter. but you are right. We need someone who cares.
The country cannot be run by some who has a vested interest in profit over people. Obama forward 2012.
Bill B
Don't get me wrong, I'm probably lower middle class and Healthcare is tearing me up financially. But I'm not about to fall into the class warfare trap/game.

Something has to change. I've not been convinced yet that handing Healthcare over to the same people who has ran medicare and Social Security into the ground is the greatest idea in the world.
I'm not a republican or democrat, I'm just a DAV looking for a better way of life for myself, and family. I just want someone the will look after our best interest.
I have never been in the system, but if it did happen I would like to know that there is something to fall back on.
That conversation could go round and round forever..but none of it will change..until we Americans quit looking for someone too take care of us..we have to get it in our head that there isn't any relief else where..we have to focus on our selves. We have to find was to hedge our bets, we have to find ways to uplift the ones around us. All of this is supposed to come from the white house...but it's been a very very long time..since it has
Mr Stephens I agree with that's all most people want. But for me its about the lesser of 2 evils. I would prefer a 3rd party to even clear the playing field and earn the peoples trust. But in order to do that the old guard needs to be eliminated from actively interfering in politics. Republicans will not allow that they represent corporations and the rich 1%. The p.a.c.t are as a result of Republican creation to further that goal to influence the voter through $. I pick the lesser of 2 evils. Obama forward 2012.
No the conversation is not going round and round, if you are listening to what is going on you will see what we the people are doing, relaying info to each other, and that what it's all about.
And if the conversation is going round and round, don't our founding father do the same, person to person, town to town too get the word out to the public. No more then what we are doing now.
So you don't feel that this round and round business could be the problem..bcus it never stops long enough too actually find a way to fix the problems..this is exactly what they are faced with every day..and at the end of each day nothing has been accomplished..which turns into months..then it's too late and nothing can be done but suck it up and start over..that's where we are headed..:)
No, because when all is said and done there is some hope the from the conversation some one will come up with answer it might not be the right one but it's a start.
Mr dilbeck now the conversation can evolve we need a political revolution in this country the birth of a new party that goes against both dem and rep and is for the people by the people. From the ground up.
Is that cause were getting fatter and need more attention? 
I LOVE all the comments on the PPACA that clearly show that the commentators haven't the first clue what the PPACA does. It really RUINS your credibility when you comment on things that you know nothing about.

+Bill Bartholomew "I've not been convinced yet that handing Healthcare over to the same people who has ran medicare and Social Security into the ground is the greatest idea in the world."

I see. So, the PPACA "handed health care" over to someone? Really? I must have misread it, because the PPACA I read doesn't do that, at all. You sound so authoritative, and certain, that you MUST know what you are talking about.
Bill B
Speaking of going round and round +Roderick Stephens you are only helping to divide people if you don't back up where you found your quote. You say you found it quoted, show us where. I suspect you can't. These sorts of accusations of things said only serve to divide us and now more than ever, we have the need and ability to be united. That is what I hope we all can do here in this day and age.
Give me some time when I heard the statement I was at the VA going through my chemotherapy, so I need to remember what day it was. So I can give you a date and time. Is that ok.
Bill B
+Drew Heyen I was referring to our wonderful /sarcasm/ Federal Government as a whole. I respectfully admit my ignorance that I have no idea what PPACA is. I was just innocently jumping into the comment thread because of my interest in what seemed to be an outlandish quote without citing a source. My apologies if I came across as knowing anything. I'll be the first to admit that I know little, but I'm striving to know more. Hopefully we all are.
Mr. Bartholomew, I thank you for the time and the +1, and I'll get you the info that you requested.
We have all heard the same thing from all of them...the reason the poor don't matter to the rich is because we don't pay enough taxes individually to hurt us..we usually get it back at the end of the year..when we do our taxes..when they do their taxes they actually get hit pretty hard...i would sooo be crying if i had to pay millions in taxes every year.

Yes this country needs to refocus on us..but I think we are forgetting something here..mainly because we feel the effects soo closely but this is a problem world wide. That's what America is forgetting...:(
You know as an individual you can't uplift others if you your not strong enough..America needs to become strong again before it can sustain others. But we are trying to wade thru the muck just like everyone else...:(
Source: Glenn Kessler, Washington Post, p. A10 , Oct 17, 2000
Bill B
Silly me, do you know that's the first time I think I've ever seen the Healthcare act referred to as the PPACA. I surely am a dumb average American. But, you know what +Drew Heyen I stand behind my statement, except you either misquoted or misunderstood me, so let me reiterate.
Something has to change. I've not been convinced yet that handing Healthcare over to the same Federal Government that has ran medicare and Social Security into the ground over these many years is the greatest idea in the world.
Mr githiomi..(please forgive me if I miss spelled that) yes we need the revolution but you know that leads too blood shed..and most won't support has to be a way none die for it.
Bill you might as well just kiss your social security good bye...
I like to say I sorry that I take the group in the wrong direction. But some time it happens. Mr. Drew Heyen i'm sorry for that.
Roderick...I would vote for you because your the one who started this are the hope that Americans need because your an American that cares..!!! Enough to ask the question and seek the answers...;)
Thanks but it's not just me it's all of us that matters
We all must speak our minds, because that is what freedom means, no matter who you are or where you come from, we have to speak out so our voices can be heard by all around us.
Yes we all matter and believe me I believe they (the white house) are trying too get us relief...but no matter how we want to perceive it...what America does effects the whole world now...;(
That's why I say we as individuals have to focus on our selves..become strong so we can sustain others..we have to realize that our ripple in the pond effects every one around us. We can't look to anyone but ourselves..we have to fix the problem with ourselves. Because truthfully they don't seem to be looking out for us
Yes I understand how you feel now and yes I do agree, but we as a whole have the power to make the change.
It has been nice discussion things that matter, but now I have to take my med's, and after that it's lights out, cancer med's are bee with an itch, and they put me out like a light. so once again it's been fun. Peace Out. And God bless you and yours
Bill B
Thanks +Roderick Stephens I gave the debate transcript a quick read through and word search. I didn't find anything close to your quotation yet, but don't give up on me. I tell you what is interesting for all of us is to go back and take a look at this transcript. It's a great example of how the wheels in D.C. have just been spinning around for years. I bet if we go even farther back, the similarities in arguments go on and on. Anyway here's a link to the transcript
I haven't given up I just take my cancer med's and they kind of put me on my butt, I still looking through my paper work for all the info for you.
Bill B
No prob +Roderick Stephens you gave me a couple of sources, it's my responsibility to sort through it now :)
Bill B
Peace out
+Bill Bartholomew Again, what leads you to believe that is what the PPACA Does? Even if we disregard the inherent weakness of your reasoning in declaring the US Government "inept" as a whole. In which case...leave. Seriously, just get out. Problem solved.

regardless of how you feel about our government or its personnel, you really should understand a Bill/Act if you are going to be against it. The PPACA is MOSTLY a Health Care insurance regulatory bill, which GREATLY hampers the various abuses that Health Care insurance companies have used, in the past to cheat the American people out of gigantic piles of money. It basically takes Health Care Insurance Companies, forces them to do the job they are intended to do, AND limits their profit per dollar. In return, since the Insurance companies are SO limited that they would literally go out of business, the mandate was put in place: A)To make certain fewer people are hit by all the bad things that happens when the sick aren't insured, and B)Keep the Insurance Companies in business and doing their jobs. The PPACA is a terrible solution, unless you limit your selection to solutions that Conservatives have ANY chance of accepting, in which case, it is BRILLIANTLY written.

Illustrating the Success of Health Care Reform
Bill B
Okay +Drew Heyen I'll be open minded and look at the information provided, but I have to tell you that yes, I have problems with Government broadening it's reach into our private lives or coercion of business owners through "mandates" (do this and we'll give you a break) or the more common translation of 'mandate' (do this that we ask or suffer otherwise).
Tonight, this very night, I just returned from the ER where I had taken my wife for an emergency. Her insurance isn't that great and we'll be paying for it for a long time, along with other medical bills we already owe. If you told me (and a lot of people believe this) that all I have to do is go along with the plan and I'll never have another medical bill again, I would at this point in time, with my limited knowledge, turn you down and preserve my liberties rather than hand them over to more layers of bureaucrats with even more frightening power over my life and my decisions, than the corporate ones I face now.
Once again, let me make it known that I say this before looking at the links you have presented me and hope you can understand my feelings towards this as I endeavor to verify the validity of what's been presented to me.
Bill B
BTW +Drew Heyen so I criticized my government's ability to run medicare and Social Security,(not declared the US Government "inept" as a whole)

and you propose I leave? I get out? Problem solved - your words -

whose problem is solved? Yours? So you don't have to type 'til you're blue in the face to get your point across one more thick headed morons skull?
Well I'm taking this conversation down a notch and letting you know you can kiss my bare arse before that will happen.
I love this F'ng Country, I love the people, our accomplishments, the many cultures that have either melded to create this Great Land or still stand on their own to add flavor, soul and intelligence. AMF +Drew Heyen AMF
I find your complete unwillingness to surrender liberties to our government, yet complete willingness to sacrifice them on the alter of "Capitalism"...ironic.

It's hard to explain how angry it makes me, that people who hate what this country is, wont leave it, and insist on destroying it, because they love it.
Bill B
Oh, that one's easy. Capitalism is voluntary and the market brings the best products for the best price. Survival of the capitalistic fit.

Any chance that's ever happened in an ever bloating Government that has never had to compete on an even playing field with private enterprise.
So, standing up for balanced budgets and responsible spending makes me hate it and want to destroy it. I propose that stands for just the opposite.
Every create a budget for yourself? Do have the luxury of our Government to ignore it and continue to spend our money that we don't have? (our money) 'Cause if I could do the as the Government is allowed, well, then I'd say our Government is pretty Damn awesome.
Lastly, you're not quite getting it. I'm not insisting on destroying it simply because I want to know more about another Government program. I don't hate what the country is, I hope for solutions to make it better. I don't even want to destroy the Government for the love of the Country.
If I'm too ignorant to understand how PPACA will save this Country according to you, then that is my worst offense you can hold me accountable for. If that justifies my expulsion, then that's your problem and should take it on yourself to remove me for your peace of mind. AMF
and the Conservative dogma comes spewing out.
Bill B
Really, adherence to a budget... Dogma? Deficits created by Republicans and Democrats alike... Dogma. Oh wait, I said the C word, that's it. You don't know me from Adam. If anything, I'm closer to a libertarian, socially liberal fiscally conservative. I'm tired of this facsimile of a conversation and truth be known I've probably been trolled all evening. I'm fairly confident that I haven't jumped to conclusions about who I've been trying to engage in an dialog with. Maybe if nothing else, between the two of us, we've shown others what's wrong with our civilities towards one another when when can't allow ourselves to find common ground. So, having said that, I. Will simply say as I did to my new friend +Roderick Stephens Peace Out.
Hi everyone ! what price Americans are willing to pay ... for free health care?
We don't want free health care..affordable would be nice..!!!
Community health centers are awful and provide inadequate care. They are not capable of handling people with complex health problems and often prescribe unnecessary medication. They are not run like a real doctor's office where if you leave a message to speak to the doctor, he/she will call you back right away. Instead they leave you hanging for a week, then you have to keep on calling them.

If you want to go there because you have a cold, that's fine. If you want to go there because you have a heart condition and need treatment, you would be better served at the ER. At least the doctors there have a clue.
I know now, the problem is the privatization of health and the doctors get mad about the health of americans public.1 of 6 Americans haven’t diseases protections, it was in 1993. Now the figure is how much? It's easy solution, the new organization as TELEMEDICINE health.
It depends on the center. I go to a community health center and I have better care than I did when I was working for a corporation and went to a regular family practice doctor and have better access to specialists.
Health Care is the new home for the "Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc", Fallacy. "Whatever problems exist, exist because of the things I don't like, and whatever good exists, exist because of things that I do like." Everyone wants their argument to be as simple as "Socialist Health Care doesn't work. I Know because I have this friend who had this really bad health care story in a Socialist health care nation." Why, for the love of God Why, do I have to explain what is wrong with that kind of thinking?
because social ideas have never in history worked.... NO WHERE
They are working in many places, right this very moment, including the US, which would be in SPECTACULAR economic shape, if all "Conservatives" had fallen over dead in 1950, and never been replaced. YOU can't find me one single example of "Socialism" failing by nature of it BEING "Socialism". Not one.

Thank you for a BEAUTIFUL example of the fallacious approach I spoke of in my previous post.
cuba ,ussr,venazula spain france greece all the people live in filth and scum while the government live like kings where is that happening at in the US? where has it ever worked name them dumbass
You just gave the exact answer I expected you to give. You rattled off a bunch of third world nations, stereotypically considered "Socialist", and considered the argument won. Of course you still haven't done what I said you wouldn't do. You have yet to show any kind of causality between socialism and failure. In fact, you still haven't addressed the socialism in the US. We have been a successfully "Socialist" nation for around a century.

You don't know what "Socialism" is, do you? You do not have the first clue.
Bill B
We have not been a socialist nation, Nimrod. We implemented social(ist) programs that has helped to financially cripple the Federal Government. These programs 'could' possibly be tolerated financially if your Liberals that you fap yourself over would allow a Balanced Budget Amendment like all the States have to operate on.
You don't. You don't have the first clue what "Socialism" is. Just to start with, using your statement that we "aren't a socialist nation" your claim that it doesn't work is COMPLETELY unfounded, as there has never BEEN a socialist nation. You really are stupid enough to debate something you can't even define.
Bill B
Well then, I would expect it's your responsibility to enlighten us, so that we can engage, instead of berating us. But you don't really want to help your fellow man understand do you? You just want to beat us down with, as far as l'm concerned, your psuedo-intellectualism.
Bill B
+Drew Heyen in my first reply to you I admitted my ignorance and yet you continue to engage me.
+Bill Bartholomew You've missed my point. Admitting your ignorance is great, but irrelevant if you have formulated a faith behind that ignorance. Being ignorant isn't a crime, but arguing from ignorance really should be. You aren't listening. You aren't learning. I would love to help my fellow man, but one of them, in particular, has shown no interest in BEING helped. It's one thing to walk cautiously into a pitch black room. I admire that kind of curiosity and bravery, but you've run full tilt, with no plan or intention of stopping. Like the entire right, you have formed an opinion on things you know nothing about, and you cling to that uneducated opinion tenaciously. Admitting your ignorance isn't nearly enough. Particularly if you have every intention of keeping that ignorance.
Bill B
I disagree, why would I admit my ignorance and continue to interact if I was not interested in don't know me, you don't know my values. I went from a staunch liberal when i was in my late teens to early 20's to full blown conservative a little later, and have come to a time in my life where I decide upon ideas intellectually (or as intellectually as I'm able to, especially with others help. I'm not right-wing, I'm not left-wing. Actually let me modify that, depending on the issue determines my stance. Most of the time I find myself Socially Liberal, Fiscally Conservative, more than likely when it comes down to it, a Libertarian (I think)

So, I don't know when I'm not listening and not learning. I suppose those are the times that my opinion differs from yours. so I could say to you that, you possibly are not listening, are being obtuse, toeing the Party line. Your hatred of Conservatives is the only theme that has a constant through out your comments.

I've learned a lot more from people with opposing opinions in much shorter threads. So, I am ready to end my participation in this one. I am obviously the wrong student for you or you are the wrong teacher for me. So take your preconceived notions and paranoid hysteria of anything outside of your beliefs and blast and demean someone else with them. DONE, I'm Done.
You asked for it.

Having looked through the definitions available on line, then resorting to discussions with a Doctor friend of mine (Doctor of Economics, as it happens) Allow me to share with you a brief explanation of the reality of "Socialism".

All exchanges of goods, services, and property fall into one of three categories, of which Socialism is one possibility. The other two are Capitalism and Communism. Capitalism is free exchange between individuals, no government involvement, what so ever. Socialism is government ownership, control, or funding of part or all of an exchange, and finally Communism is "communal ownership".

There have actually been very very few examples of true "Communism" in history, it is really more conceptual. Honestly, the best examples I can think of are the Open Source Software community and Public Domain works. No one really "owns" them, and they are shared by a community freely. You can, of course, see the problem with "Communism" on a national level. Capitalism is any exchange between one or more individuals for goods and/or services, with absolutely no outside involvement or control. This is also sometimes known as "Laissez-faire". Finally you have "Socialism", which is where all or part of an exchange is owned, controlled and/or funded by the government, on behalf of its people.

Every economic exchange in the history of man is made of one or more of these three systems. Also, in the history of man, no economic structure, on the national level, has ever been exclusively one of these. Every economy in the history of man has been what is known as a "Mixed Economy". Here in the US, almost every exchange or goods or services ever made, is in fact a mix of Capitalism and Socialism. Obviously some exchanges lean more heavily towards Capitalism, and Some lean more heavily towards Socialism.

A fine example of a Heavily Socialist exchange would be the US Military. Who "owns" the US Military? Who Funds the US Military? Who "Controls" the US Military? Obviously the answer to all three of those questions is "The US Government".

Most of the exchanges of goods and services in the US are Capitalist in nature, though there are very few that are not regulated in one manner or another by economic laws of exchange, mostly to protect our rights as consumers.

If you want to know to what degree a good or service happens to fall into one of these three categories, you need only ask these three questions:
1)Who owns the good or service being provided?
2)Who is funding the service or production of the good being provided?
3)Who controls the good or service being provided and the nature of the exchange of said good or service.

I hope that this has cleared up some of the confusion concerning the nature of "Socialism". One of the things which really muddies the socio/political discussion waters, is a failure to recognize the gigantic difference between a Governmental Form, and an Economic Form. Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism are the three Economic Forms, and are not relevant to Political discussions, other than the fact that the "Government" USUALLY effects the economy, in some way. For example, Somalia is pure Capitalist, mostly BECAUSE they have no functional government, to operate any social programs or economic regulations.
One of the things which I encounter all too often, when discussing economics and politics are things like the ""Socialism" has never worked" argument. The number of places statements like that break down, is mind boggling. Just to start with, if COMPLETELY ignores causality. I mean it IS a "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" Fallacy (After, therefor, because), but it is so much more than that. It completely disregards the number of factors which go into the success and or failure of an economy. Then there is the fact that "Socialism" has thrived all over the word. Average First world nations are more socialist than third world nations. All first world nations are pretty heavily socialist. The "Socialism" is bad, argument is oversimplified to the point of stupidity.

Then you get into the concept of HOW a given socialist program is executed. There is no question that socialism CAN BE DONE BADLY. (The irony is, there is no way to do Laissez-faire that works. Laissez-faire can only be done one way.)

Finally, there is the "I have a friend in a nation with socialist medicine, and he says it sucks". Fallacy of the Small Sample, but on such a magnificent scale. Fact is, I have a lives in a nation with free market health care, and tell you, first hand, it blows. All health care has problems, and those problems are almost NEVER related to how that health care is paid for. In Canada, for example, more of their health care problems are directly related to getting health care to everyone in rural areas. Other than those situations, and the obvious situation of "Bad Doctors", which happens anywhere you have.....doctors.... Canadian Health Care is fine, and SOOOOOO MUCH LESS EXPENSIVE. Same with Great Brittan.

This issue is more complicated than the people debating about it are giving it credit for, and it is a tragedy, because we have a chance to fix this mess, and that chance is getting thrown away for no better reason than ignorance.
Bill B
I said I was done but out of respect for you going in depth in explanation and not berating us, I will make this one last reply.
No wonder you get so tangled up with comments with incomplete facts. Your acknowledging the the fact that socialism could mean economic or Governmental. If I'm understanding correctly.
I'm sure that this is clear to Academia, but you rarely hear it broken down by politicians, any of the 'for profit' media or regular folks having conversations.
Socialist programs can be good but executed badly. I think that was my original point about Medicare and Social Security - Broken.

Fallacy of small sample - agreed, never a valid argument, simply an observation, an anecdote.

I did not realize some of Canada Healthcare issues where related to getting health care to rural areas, which is interesting to me because I see the logistics of providing health care to a nation our size with it's many rural areas to be a part of the problem with a one provider system.

In response to your last paragraph, I'll just say that I'm pretty much in agreement, but I'm perfectly fine with blaming both Parties for our ignorance, as they spew half-truths, spin facts to mean one thing when they mean something else. I am convinced that both sides are doing it to protect their own power and groups and corporations that they are empowered by.

Little off Subject, but that is the one area of OWS and the TEA party could actually come together on. That has been realized and noted by pundits on both sides.
Bill B
And so hopefully +Drew Heyen I haven't given you much to tear me a new arse hole with. I would much rather end our discussion under reasonable terms. Or maybe we could, as Jerry Seinfeld says "go out on a high note"

"Goodnight everyone, thank you, I'm out!" - George Costanza
The one point I need to correct you on, is that "Socialism" is specifically economic, NOT governmental, however Government and economy have to interact, in most cases, enough that they are often associated, or linked, however you can have a Fascist Socialism, A Democratic Socialism, A Socialist Monarchy. Doesn't matter. The only essential is that if there is a LACK of government, it WILL BE exclusively capitalist, because Capitalism (Laissez-faire) is economics without any intervention. No government, no intervention. That NEVER ends well.

As for blaming "both parties", liberals mostly know all the things I just presented. Only the right is pitching the "Capitalism good, Socialism bad" rhetoric. Obama is as Capitalist as the next person. What he isn't is "Laissez-faire-ist". He believes (as do most, if not all liberals) that most things are best served by well regulated Capitalism. The only governmental involvement is regulatory boundaries, preventing us from cheating each other, and treating each other unfairly. However, we believe that there are many things in which the foundation of "Capitalism" (supply and demand) is completely unbalanced, thus those things should be Socialized.

If that sounds complicated, it's because it is. All of this is complicated. Only Fox News and the Conservative Media are telling you that it is anything BUT complicated.
BTW, I can't tell you how many times, and in how many places, I have presented this data. It starts to wear on me, after a while. At least you are asking, and that is a start.
Add a comment...