Comments on: Givens: Insurance is an employee benefit

By: The Professor

The Professor — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 14:59:11 +0000

Ed H said:
Are you trying to argue that nobody but employed workers ever gets sick?

My response:
I said nothing like that. I was clarifying what I believe Mr. Givens was saying.

By: allen bunch

allen bunch — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 01:25:33 +0000

What are you talking about Professor? Listen carefully.

Mr. Walker said that knowing his medical bills would be paid gave him the good judgement to get medical attention instead of taking an aspirin and going to bed. (That is so far back that I do not remember the precise situation. This is close enough for what we are talking about.) Givens was so desperate to refute Mr. Walker that he retorted, no, you are wrong. Your good judgement and the doctors and hospitals saved your life. DUH... That is pretty much what Mr. Walker just got through saying.

Now, this is the point where you really need to pay attention.

Givens says that the doctors saved his life as they would have had he had no health insurance.

"As they would have had he had no health insurance." Walker just got through telling us that with no health insurance, he probably would not have gone to the doctor. Doctors can not save your life if you are not there. Givens has not demonstrated enough credible ESP to convince me that he knows more about what Walker will do than Walker does.

By: Sandi Saunders

Sandi Saunders — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 20:13:11 +0000

I felt his point was that if government employees could be covered (and apparently covered very well) mayhap the government could provide coverage to those without any coverage just as well, and if indeed that was his gist, I am in full agreement. "There are, however, NO reasons that we cannot do this." Amen 4!

By: Ed H

Ed H — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 19:46:51 +0000

The Professor,

Are you trying to argue that nobody but employed workers ever gets sick?

By: The Professor

The Professor — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:46:45 +0000

Allen,
I think Mr. Givens is saying Mr. Walker's description of his coverage as "socialized insurance" is a misnomer. Mr. Walker got his benefits from his employer, which happened to be the U.S. government. Givens is saying that's no reason to assume the government should provide health care for the majority, which does not work for the government.

By: Sandi Saunders

Sandi Saunders — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 14:30:32 +0000

Mr. Walker, THANK YOU for your eloquent commentary and generous belief in the America of her ideals as well. God's blessings to you!

By: Christopher Walter

Christopher Walter — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 14:14:32 +0000

Ms. Saunders - thank you for your comments re: my commentary. You are absolutely correct - we are the government. I am sometimes reminded of the words of Pogo, that great swamp philosopher: "We have met the enemy and they are us." However, as more and more people think, speak and act as you do, the more we will be truly the government and the less we will be the enemy. Thanks again.

Mr. Bunch -- thank you for your comments, also. Your thought that my insurance allowed me to make the best, and a lifesaving, decision is completely true and is the point of my commentary. It's good to read someone who gets it!

To all -- there are a millions excuses why we cannot have universal, affordable health care in this, the greatest and richest nation in the history of mankind. There are, however, NO reasons that we cannot do this. It is also great to see that my commentary has provoked this needed discussion. Best wishes to all.

By: allen bunch

allen bunch — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 02:17:43 +0000

Mr. Givens, did you read what Mr. Walter wrote? You say that his good insurance did not save his life. You say that his good judgement did. You say this right after reading that he thinks his good judgement was brought on by his good insurance. What am I missing here? Has my memory gone down the tube again? Maybe you are a psychic designer. Just maybe, you know more about where his good judgement comes from than he does.

By: Sandi Saunders

Sandi Saunders — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 20:43:10 +0000

Mr. Givens' (seemingly) innocuous commentary leaves me wondering what exactly he thinks that the millions of unemployed people are supposed to do? I have received his "root little pig or die" message loud and clear but for retirees who thought they too made a good bargain right up until they lost those precious "employee benefits" after becoming no longer employed, methinks that is not a sufficient answer at all.

The problem with the medical insurance industry and the employers in this country is that when the two can work it out, it is indeed an employee benefit and for some a quite wonderful and generous one. When an employer cannot afford such largess or an employee cannot afford to participate, there must be an alternative. To continue on the expensive and for many, catastrophic course we are on is madness.

I do not think of the government being an entity that is removed from us, I consider the government to be US. When we fight a war, build a road or bridge, send a rocket to the moon or relief to a famine, that is US working as a society not some separate "government". In the same vein, a health insurance program for the uninsured and/or unemployed will be US helping US. If we cannot help each other through a government program I do not know what better thing we could do. Hard as it may be for those WITH to understand, those WITHOUT are hurting and living on rationed and non-existent care now (most through no fault of their own), so even an imperfect program would be an improvement. Don't we owe it to US to help US?