Obama assails McCain over health care proposal

Sunday 05th October, 05:50 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Latest 15 of 63 Total Comments Show All

Betzee at 12:58 AM JST - 6th October

The US does have universal free health care... it is called emergency room.

WilliB,

Just because they have to treat patients in life threatening emergencies regardless of ability to pay doesn't mean it's free. You'll get a bill for their services and they will file the paperwork to be repaid from future income. Bankruptcies are often the result of inability to pay for services rendered under these circumstances. For those who wait owing to lack of insurance, they are a lot more costly to treat than had their health problems been addressed at an earlier stage. Diabetes, for example, can be managed on an out patient basis while diabetic comas require intensive care.

Many people encounter problems with the employer-paid system when they want to change jobs and learn pre-existing conditions won't be covered. If you've got a few things wrong with you, well the cost of private insurance is likely to be prohibitive. A downturn in the economy makes health insurance a more pressing issue since loss of job means loss of health care for most people.

I myself faced the prospect of paying for medical services out of pocket when I was hospitalized at the end of my schooling for four days. The insurance company wanted to wiggle out of it on the grounds I'd already graduated. It took a lot of wrangling to get them to reverse their initial refusal. The stress over the prospect of getting stuck with the bill impeded my recovery, forcing me to seek further medical services.
Betzee at 01:14 AM JST - 6th October

I'm not sure where you get your figures, but illegal aliens are not Americans. So when 47,000,000 Americans are uninsured, there is no subtraction for illegal aliens.

In my county (central coast California) we ceased to provide services for the undocumented (few of whom have employer-paid insurance and the agriculture industry is seasonal anyway). But it didn't save any money since those in need of medical treatment simply waited until it was a life threatening situation and hospitals were forced to admit them. The public got stuck with a far bigger bill this way.

It's common to see hospitals in California which offer no emergency or obstetrical services in order to vet patients' insurance before treating them. Many trauma centers have been closed to stem financial losses as well. That affects everyone; if you're in a car accident the nearest hospital which can provide treatment may be 50 miles away regardless of your insurance.
taniwha at 10:31 AM JST - 6th October

Obama is making promises he has absolutely no way of fulfilling.

Reality break.

The handover of hundreds of billions of dollars in public funds to Wall Street will preclude the use of those funds to aid working Americans. Should Obama win the presidency (and I don't think so) the legislation that Obama has himself helped to pass will in large measure set the agenda for his administration. It will be one of harsh austerity, budget cuts and attacks on essential social services.

Facts speak for themselves. There is no way Obama can slap together an improved health system when the full burden of this financial meltdown (i.e. the failure of the capitalist financial system) has just been shifted onto the backs of American workers - while providing the wealthiest people in the country with a windfall.
taniwha at 10:37 AM JST - 6th October

If Barack intended to boost social services (including health care) he would not have supported the plundering of the government coffers to serve up relief for the wealthy few.

Barack's deeds so far counter his words.
Everton2 at 10:50 AM JST - 6th October

The share arrogance of pursuing an health care policy that leaves out millions is just unbelievable. Moreover, to suggest that these uninsured are merely illegal immigrants whom by and large deserve to have no access is simply false. The assessment of those who are deemed uninsured does not take into account the undocumented, as they exist to a large extent in a close parallel society that would not easily present itself for examination.

The uninsured the statistics speak off comes from main street America. Those working two jobs and struggling to feed their kids, those who are terrified of getting sick because of the potential for bankruptcy due the manifold cost it may incur.

The Australian health care system is fair and moral. The Government takes the view that good health care is a fundamental human right. Good health and access to health care should be an integral part of a country's strategic infrastructure building effort. I wont even go into the decline in the standard of individul health in America in comparison to other developed democracy
SezWho2 at 12:09 PM JST - 6th October

taniwha,

I don't think Barack's deeds counter his words so much as they reflect changing political realities. Barack is one Senator. He can accomplish no deeds without the support of others.

He could, of course, take a high-minded and principled stand and refuse to budge from it. In that case, it is likely that he not be around to help anyone perform any legislative or executive deeds.
Sarge at 12:16 PM JST - 6th October

I can't understand how anyone can think that Barack Obama and Joe Biden are more capable than John McCain and Sarah Palin of leading the U.S.
SezWho2 at 12:31 PM JST - 6th October

Sarge,

I think it's because, McCain, for all his good points, is a maverick--and an old maverick at that. He has not exercised good judgment in selecting Palin, another maverick as self-described, as a running mate. Mavericks can lead some of the people some of the time, but by definition they cannot lead all of the people over the long haul.

Add to that the virtual lack of substance in McCain's campaign to date. He has not been presenting a program that truly differentiates himself from the incumbent--with whom America is mightily distressed. He has been presenting an almost exclusively negative campaign. And with Palin's most recent disgraceful slanders he has apparently decided that negativity and attempting to schmooze the American people is the way to win.
taniwha at 01:00 PM JST - 6th October

SezWho2

I don't think Barack's deeds counter his words so much as they reflect changing political realities.

I accept that in part. Because it is clear that Barack Obama is following the trend of American pragmatist politics. Part of the growing problem for his publicity campaign though is that the political pragmatism of his words (e.g. more troops to Afghanistan, accusing Russia of beginning the conflict with Georgia, urging Congress to pass the bailout of Wall Street and so on) conflict with his posture as the idealist visionary who will bring beneficial change to America.

The pragmatic content of his speech is aimed at the right wing military industrial corporate audience, particularly his Wall Street campaign funders. He aims to show he can 'out McCain' John McCain in fulfilling their imperialist aims abroad, and the necessary slashing of expenditure on the domestic front. His John Fitzgerald Kennedy styled image is there to ring in the old Democrat audience yearning for a return to the days of the American Dream, or at least a clear break from the current nightmare.
Sarge at 02:44 PM JST - 6th October

Sez - He has not exercised good judgment in selecting Palin"

On the contrary, this is a brilliant pick. Shortly after he selected Palin, he was ahead of Obama in the polls after being behind since the get-go. He's behind now again because of this ridiculous financial fiasco being unfairly blamed on Republicans.
borscht at 07:36 PM JST - 6th October

Ridiculous financial fiasco being unfairly blamed on Republicans.

Innersting. Are you better off now than you were 8 years ago? I'm sure the bankers are (WaMu Pres. gets 7.something million)

Oh, and by the way, waaaaay back there I suggested the Japanese health care system not because of its perfections or imperfections but because the doctors get to be rich while the patient doesn't have to sell his or her house to pay for an appendectomy.
SezWho2 at 08:16 AM JST - 7th October

taniwha,

Except for the occasional stridency of your lexis, I agree entirely with what you said in response to my observation. However, while you have correctly identified a problematic area, you have offered no practical solution for Obama.
SezWho2 at 08:27 AM JST - 7th October

Sarge,

We could obviously go back and forth on this for some time.

McCain's selection of Palin was brilliant--but as a distraction to Obama's nomination, as a bid to seize the feminine vote, as a bone to placate conservatives in his own party and as a tonic for his own lack of youth and vigor.

As a selection of a person who could be a competent leader of our country, however, it showed very poor judgment. A vice-president must be qualified to step up to the duties of president. Sarah Palin is not. No one who cannot hold their own with the press is qualified to be vice-president.

I don't think McCain is necessarily behind because the financial problem is being blamed upon Republicans. I think he is behind because the public has seen that Palin cannot speak knowledgeably except in very controlled circumstances and because McCain showed himself to be out of touch with regard to the state of the economy.
taniwha at 09:13 AM JST - 7th October

SezWho2

Except for the occasional stridency of your lexis...

Hey, stridency is a personal style choice, designed solely for the purpose of posting on this particular site.

However, while you have correctly identified a problematic area, you have offered no practical solution for Obama.

Since Obama's campaign has presented him as the bringer of "change", and considering the kind of change desired by much of the traditional support base of the Democrats includes an end to America's wars, an end to the greedy parasitism of Wall Street, and more funding of social services, and a health system that actually works - yes, I have a solution for Obama.

He should align himself with the SEP, because they are the only political party that could possibly bring that kind of change to the American people. However, given the character of Obama, and of the interests he represents, will it happen? Not in your wildest dreams.

The essential issue here actually is not Obama. It is the contradiction between the interests both candidates serve and democratic system itself. Doesn't the preamble to the Constitution goes something "We the people..."? That line doesn't appear to include "and we the wealthy" or anything like "we the corporations". Think about it, really.

If Obama does make it into the presidency (and I am fairly certain McCain will be the one to get that job) then you will see him slash and burn what's left of the American dream.
SezWho2 at 09:57 PM JST - 8th October

taniwha,

Prediction noted.

However, I would say this. At this point I don't think it's a question of any president destroying the American dream. I think it's a question of whether or not any president can revive it.

And, yes, stridency is a personal choice. If you're interested in winning people to your point of view, however, I don't think it's the best one.