There is NOTHING wrong with what Hillary said about

[cali]

garnishing the wages of people who can afford healthcare who refuse to purchase it. It may not help her in the race for the nomination but there's not one thing wrong with her plan to dock the wages of those who can afford to pay for coverage.

I don't support Clinton, but this is most certainly NOT the reason I don't support her. In fact, I admire her for being direct about this.

[ruggerson]

1. She didn't use the word garnish

other than that, your post is right on target.

[cali]

4. I don't care what word she used

there's nothing wrong with what she said. And I find it somewhat amusing that you'd chide me on a thread dedicated to defending your candidate.

[ruggerson]

7. I'm not chiding you

I'm supporting what you said. I just don't want to feed the perpetual misleaders.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. I Have A Question

Let me lay a factual foundation...

Insurance companies are required to insure me regardless of pre-existing conditions...

Why shouldn't I wait to get sick and then get insurance instead of spending $7,000.00 a year on health insurance?

And if I keep paying $7,000.00 a year for something I can get free shouldn't I have sucker tattooed on my forehead?

[NC_Nurse]

2. I am glad you posted this.

So true. I have joined you in supporting Obama, but certainly not because of this issue.
Thank you for coming out and saying it. I'm glad I'm not alone.

[Guaranteed]

3. Oh yes there is. You don't take people's money against their will

to give it to PRIVATE COMPANIES who are already running SHITTY operations as far as service just because they're supporting your Presidential campaign. Especially when you could take a lesser amount of money and put it into a single-payer system and EASILY cover everyone.

Mandates and private health insurance do NOT mix.

[BootinUp]

16. Why dont you get your fucking facts straight

Youre just a damn spammer from where I sit.

[Guaranteed]

18. Well sir, PLEASE correct me if Sen. Clinton is establishing a health insurance

plan for these needy people administered and paid entirely for by the federal government- even through wage garnishment.

Because I would LOVE to see that. Love it.

[HughMoran]

5. Sometimes I wonder if we should change the name to "Republican Underground"

The rabid objection to pay for anything with taxes (or their equivalent) is somewhat disturbing to me.

[JFKgirl]

6. what if i lose my job?

what if my debt is already too high? YOU CANT JUST BASE IT ON INCOME.

WE ARE SUPPOSED TO SEPARATE OUR JOBS AND THE INSURANCE COMPANY. SHE IS TANGLING US FURTHER INTO SHIT AWAY FROM SINGLE PAYER. MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO GET SINGLE PAYER LATER.

Fuck mandates. UNFUCKINGCONSTITUTIONAL.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

13. Exactly, and welcome to DU.

Including the insurance companies is a virtual guarantee that we'll never get single payer.

:hi:

[Sarah Ibarruri]

8. Hmm... okay, so Hillary has a bad plan?? Does Obama have a good plan??

I've been an Edwards supporter but thus far, I see that there's a lot of Republican plants throwing darts at both Democratic candidates and all to get the Dems all riled up and hopeless.

[cali]

15. huh? I'm defending what Clinton in my OP

wtf are you talking about?

[Sarah Ibarruri]

20. Sorry. Thought you were using.....

:sarcasm:

[Vinca]

17. Both Obama and Clinton have plans that suck. So did Edwards.

Kucinich had the only decent plan that didn't continue to pump money to big insurance. (P.S. I really am a Democrat.)

[Sarah Ibarruri]

22. I know, but you know what? No plan like that is going to happen overnight......

... WE are going to have to get out there and WORK hard to make it happen. And thank you for telling me you really are a Democrat. :toast: Love to hear that.

[sandnsea]

9. lol, only if you're not the one

being garnished and ending up homeless because her idea of "affordability" isn't anywhere near reality.

Kind of like those $1,000 college scholarships that were supposed to allow everybody to go to two years of community college.

No thank you. The Clintons have already proven they don't get it.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

10. How do you determine who can afford the coverage?

And why not garnish people's wages for a real single payer system instead of more profits for 3rd party insurance companies?

We don't pay private police and fire insurance. We don't pay private insurance companies to provide public education. Why should we do it for another basic need of a functioning society, healthcare?

[sniffa]

11. Well, in that case, how do you define who can afford it

I make a pretty decent wage, yet I'm still paycheck to paycheck because the cost of living here is out of control. Then again, that's a factor in my wage. My company offers good coverage, and for that I'm grateful, but many other companies do not offer decent coverage even with my state's mandates.

[The_Casual_Observer]

14. Obamas is better & easier. They just don't get shit & fuck 'em.

They choose not to pay anything & they are forgotten.

[Auntie Bush]

23. No, John Q. Public ( you and me) will have to pay.

[The_Casual_Observer]

24. According to the Obamanuts, nobody has to pay. Those who choose

to opt out are cast into Obamaland, that magic place where faith takes over.

[msongs]

19. nice to hear you say this. hope your "friends" don't turn on you & call YOU gestapo nt

[JohnnyLib2]

21. Checks and balances will come into play, of course.

IMO, now is the time for the (new) president to take the lead, forcefully. We should see that with either Clinton or Obama. I'd give her points for gutsiness on this one, particularly in terms of her history....