Do opponents of Public Health Care also oppose Public Education?

remember, these are the same people that want vouchers to have the government pay to send their kids to private schools.

the same people who are so anti-government, except when it comes to giving them money.

they don't want government run health care, but keep your hands off their medicare.

they don't want public schools, but want the government to pay for private schools through vouchers.

they don't want the FBI and their jack-booted government thugs hassling anyone about buying a machine gun, but want the FBI locking up anyone with a turban.

they don't want to pay any taxes, but want roads and airports provided for them.

now they complain that we're closing gitmo and transferring the prisoners to a supermax prison in michigan...claiming we're letting terrorists loose in america...when we already house CONVICTED terrorists in a supermax in colorado.

welcome to the USA, where hypocrisy is king.

oh, and don't let the black president speak to your kids - he might brainwash them.

B. Johnson -

Your ignorance and ability to stereotype a variety of people is what enables you to understand the situation.

I don't have health insurance, and I don't want nor take vouchers. I don't have kids, and if I did, would not want anyone to pay for their private education. I'm not anti-government - despite whether it's a Dem or a Rep leading. I pay taxes - and don't mind doing so (my only wish would be choosing where your tax money go - an idea I understand is too utopian...).

To stick with the topic: It IS contradictory to be soo willing to accept public education, though soo against public health care. Our tax payer money is paying for kids who can't afford to go to public school - the same way taxpayer money would pay for people who can't afford PRIVATE health care.

Gee, lets lower the level of health care to the level of Gov't skools. Sounds really, really bright.

Public education doesn't threaten private schools. If there is a public option, companies will choose to go with the PO because of the price, which in their minds (as well as mine) would most likely get rid of any competition in private coverage.

Public education is well below par for the most part. That's why many wealthy families opt to pay for it. But health coverage is a lot more unaffordable for most families. That's why govt should REFORM HC, not run it.

Do you want health care to resemble

http://richgibson.com/DPScrisis.htm

?

Yes publick skool made me dumb it is all my teachers fallt!!!

You do know the state of inferior public school has always been neglect of the government, which was furthered tremendously by the bush administration’s no child left behind act, which ironically leaves a shit load of kids behind?

If the Detroit Public Schools are a shining example of what Government can do for the citizens then God save us when we get Public Health Care.

Because the all knowing and powerful God is a myth....it's up to the citizens to stop the public health care nonsense.

All those Medicare recipients are rightly upset.....they faithfully paid all their working lives into the system and now Obama proposes to divert monies from Medicare to help pay the bill for the health care of the indigent and illegals.

Say... you saved up for a nice retirement nest egg ..... and now Government comes and says 'we need some of your retirement savings to help the guy down the street who does not have any money saved up'. Same difference.

mundus vult deci wrote:

Are there any opponents of a public health care system that also oppose public education?

I was discussing health care reform last night with a very conservative guy. I found it peculiar that he sent all his children to public schools. Moreover, this guy saw no contradiction in his actions.

I pay for my own health care and my children attend private school. However, I see no issue with public systems to educate people and treat their illnesses.

Can someone make sense of this guy? How can you vehemently oppose public health care but utilize public schools?

I oppose both public healthcare and public education. However, it is not a contradiction for someone who opposes public healthcare to send his children to public schools, and more than it would be for him to access the universal healthcare system if it were established. That is recompensation, not hypocricy.

There is NO plan to divert any medicare money. It should be noted the the republicans opposed social security, entering WWII, medicare and the military tricare insurance. They are against our people unless you are a millionaire. Creepy people those repugent leaders.

do you really mean this wrote:

Do you want health care to resemble

http://richgibson.com/DPScrisis.htm

?

I'm not sure how the problem started in Detroit, but a pattern I've seen in Oregon is that Republicans are constantly trying to cut taxes, and then to balance the budget they cut funding for public schools. Despite that, it is possible to get a pretty good education in a public school there. Most of the kids who fail, fail because they don't care about school. You see the pattern yet? When public schools fail, it's because the public doesn't care enough about education. It's impossible to provide a good education to every child when voters and politicians keep cutting revenue and many children simply don't want to learn.

Detroit has no tax base. It's hardly an example to use. I happened to be lucky enough to grow up in a well-off part of the country that was in the vicinity of several esteemed private schools. The public schools in my town were superior to those private schools.

I also went to an Ivy League school and found that with the exception of the very top tier (Exeter, St. Paul's, etc), the dumbest kids by far were the private school kids.

If vigilant attentive parents want decent public schools, they'll have them.

socalrunnerxc wrote:

Public education doesn't threaten private schools. If there is a public option, companies will choose to go with the PO because of the price, which in their minds (as well as mine) would most likely get rid of any competition in private coverage.

Public education is well below par for the most part. That's why many wealthy families opt to pay for it. But health coverage is a lot more unaffordable for most families. That's why govt should REFORM HC, not run it.

As to your first point, I do not understand why it is your employer's responsibility to pay for you to be healthy? If it is a basic right of citizenship--which I think it is--then health care should be provided by your government not your employer.

As to your second point, my family would not utilize public health care (and I wouldn't consider us "wealthy"). I do not trust the government to keep me healthy anymore than I trust them to educate my children. I would like continue to do what I do now: pay out of pocket for my very minimal daily health needs and carry true insurance in the event of an emergency.

However, I still see the value in public services to secure the basic rights of the citizenry. I also think that "good" public health care in my area would benefit me just at the property value of my home is better because we are zoned to one of the best public schools in America.

Well are you for the public option, or no? You claim that you think everyone should have health care if they are a citizen. While I might not agree 100%, I can understand that, and many Americans probably share that view, but you can have that without the public option.

socalrunnerxc wrote:

Well are you for the public option, or no? You claim that you think everyone should have health care if they are a citizen. While I might not agree 100%, I can understand that, and many Americans probably share that view, but you can have that without the public option.

Everyone (even non-citizens) have health care access even if they do not have insurance.

Public Schools = kids

Public Health Care = Adults, Seniors, Kids, and everyone in between. Thats alot of money.

"I pay for my own health care and my children attend private school. However, I see no issue with public systems to educate people and treat their illnesses."

No issues yet you still choose the private route? Of course you have issues and think public systems are less quality or else you wouldn't choose the private route.

What is wrong with taking advantage of something you are paying for?

If the government is going to make me pay for public education, I'm going to uses it. But I don't have to like it. Nor do I need to fool myself into thinking public education is the most efficient and effective way to educate.

Same thing with health care. Do you really think the government is going to administer health care efficiently and effectively? Health care will end up costing more. Not that we will ever know how much, we will know that our taxes will go way up.

And based on all the entitlement programs in place, no republican can ever reduce them like Reagan and Bush did. Look at all the foreign country that have socialist health care, taxes are ridiculously high.

High taxes prevent class movement. The have keep and the have nots don't ever get. That's the battle. Do you want an opportunity to save money and get ahead or be forced to live paycheck to paycheck because government taxes reduce disposable income to all most nothing?