[Synopsis]

Interesting questionnaire on the candidates. Although it's not comprehensive, it is interesting. See who you line up with the best.

VoteChooser.com

[peggydavis]

Candidate Most Similar to You

Hillary Clinton

Democrat

AGREED ON: 5 DISAGREED ON: 5

[Synopsis]

Originally Posted by peggydavis

Candidate Most Similar to You

Hillary Clinton

Democrat

AGREED ON: 5 DISAGREED ON: 5

UGH! I'm not talking to you any more Peggy!!!!

Ron Paul turned out to be my candidate, and then Romney.

The one area that I'm on the fence is regarding healthcare. I know it has to be fixed and needs to be more affordable. I think INSURANCE COMPANIES are the reason rates have skyrocketed. That, and the ambulance chasing lawyers that have filed so many lawsuits that are frivolous.

[peggydavis]

I'm still voting for Ron Paul no matter what I think!

I agree on the health care, between the insurance companies and the lawyers it is really messed up.

[Synopsis]

Ron Paul:
Agreed on 8
Disagreed on: 2

Mitt Romney:
Agreed on: 6
Disagreed on: 4

Mike Huckabee:
5/5

John McCain:
5/5

Barrack Obama:
4/6

Hillary Clinton:
3/7

No matter how much I disagree with Obama on the issues, I still find it hard to dislike the guy. We may disagree on a lot of things, but the guy at least states his opinion and doesn't seem to stick his finger in the wind to see how he should speak to a given audience (i.e. Billary Clinton). Billary and McCain; neither one of them can I stand. Besides, we don't need another Bush or another Clinton in the White House; 20 years of this stuff is enough.

[Synopsis]

The two points that I disagreed with Ron Paul on were 1) He wants to withdraw the troops immediately, where I think it should happen over 1 or 2 years. Also, on the environment, he believes to achieve energy independence we should allow land-owners to sue polluters. I don't see how allowing land owners to sue polluters would help us achieve energy independence.

[peggydavis]

No, it won't so I don't see why that was a question.

I think we should be able to sue the polluters, though.

[Synopsis]

I agree peggy.

[Goodpasture]

Originally Posted by Synopsis

I think INSURANCE COMPANIES are the reason rates have skyrocketed. That, and the ambulance chasing lawyers that have filed so many lawsuits that are frivolous.

There is no real evidence that lawyers have caused the increase of anything. It is obvious (at least to me) that insurance companies have put fear into the doctors, requiring them to carry inordinate amounts of liability insurance. The real, and sole, reason rates have skyrocketed, is the profit motivation of the corporate entities.

The concept that money should be made from people being ill is counter to every thing I was taught as a Christian. To EXCLUDE people from the health delivery system because they are sick, or have a condition that might cause them to need is as selfish and coldblooded as anything on earth. Health delivery has to be specifically FOR those that cannot afford it, who have long term conditions that require esoteric treatments. Those of us blessed with decent health must assist those facing overwhelming tragedy.

But in reality we should not blame the health insurance companies. They are doing what they are supposed to do. Maximize the ROI for their shareholders. Paying doctor and hospital bills eats away at profitability. Treating a child who has leukemia, a woman with breast cancer, a man with a bad heart, or a stroke victim will prevent the optimum profit. Consequently, medical care MUST be removed from the private sector and made public. Public health is too important to relegate it to the bottom line. It is like highways. The population as a whole pays for the roads. Although some roads are good and some are full of potholes, we all benefit when we can move goods and people around freely, and even when the roads are terrible, you can still get to where you are going. That is the way health delivery should be looked at. It is a benefit to all to have healthy citizens. Healthy citizens work better, they work smarter, they make more money, they pay more taxes, they buy more stuff. Sick people don't. We need a national effort to make everyone who can be healthy, be healthy. Profits should not determine who gets needed treatment.

[karibear]

IMO, the insurance companies and lawyers have a lot to do with the current state of health coverage. I know of one doctor who has a net income of around 1,000.00/monfh. He also pays about 1,000.00/week for malpractice insurance. And what good does government [i.e., medicaid] insurance do when doctors and clinics won't accept it, because it takes them up to a year to collect? On top of that, the above-mentioned doctor can't even get health insurance for himself, because HE has had previous health problems!

I also had a friend some years back who's daughter developed a malignant tumor on her carotid artery. Bad place for it! He was a teacher and had excellent health insurance, but by the end of the second year, the insurance benefits were nearly capped. He said the only thing that happened good that year was that contract negotiations resulted in a doubling of the cap, so he had a few more years to go. That was just one of his 3 kids, fortunately the other two didn't have anything calamitous happen to them. And wonder of all wonders, his daughter who'd been given a 15% chance of survival, did survive, and she's well now. But given her medical history, I very much doubt if she'll ever be able to get 'normal' health insurance from anywhere.