PDA

View Full Version : What's your idea of Health Care Reform?


steelax04
03-22-2010, 04:02 PM
I've read quite a bit between all of the Health Care Reform threads. Lots of great dialogue, but it's pretty muddled as to what some think "Reform" should be...

Discuss :thumbsup:

I think we need a backyard football 'do-over' and build it from the ground up. Build it with a bipartisan 'consulting' group. Work toward a healthcare constitution, with a nice solid foundation to build on top of. Keep the majority of politicians out of it until they need to read it and vote on it. No sweetheart deals or any of that. Sadly, I feel the only way we could get real 'change' is to keep most of the politicans out of the process.

Of course, this is all just wishful thinking, as nothing is ever this simple in Washington.

steelerdude15
03-22-2010, 04:54 PM
I believe everyone should have the right to affordable health care, but you shouldn't be fined/ jailed if you don't buy it. I'm pretty torn between the bill, it has its ups and it has its downs. I will say this, I'm neither for or against this bill. I honestly don't believe that the federal government should have much control over health insurance. Maybe to make sure things are running smoothly or have the states do that. I believe that all liberals, conservatives, moderates (as myself), etc should work together to fix it. I believe though that the government should listen to the American people... "We the People of the United States."

tony hipchest
03-22-2010, 05:17 PM
but it's pretty muddled as to what some think "Reform" should be...
its definitely muddled, plus there are so many different aspects to it.

for instance i have employees who are medically covered through their husbands military service. working on a federal government contract, they also earn "health and welfare' which the union uses to purchase the entoire group a health plan, wheter they need it or not. then if they get injured on the job, workmans comp insurance pays for the medical coverage.

this sort of "tripple dipping" completely baffles me and seems like a complete waste, especially whent there is legal wrangling and passing the buck amongst the insurance providers over who should pay for a single illness or injury. believe it or not, it is not always cut and dry.

if all americans are to be insured, perhaps a way to pass cost savings onto the employer is to eliminate workmans cost insurance for medical costs. everyone will be covered the same whether they are injured on or off the clock.

of course its not that simple and you still need coverage from lost wages and potential earning potential, but social security sorta covers that anyways.

tony hipchest
03-23-2010, 07:29 PM
im a bit suprised some of the vehement critics and armchair policy makers havent chimed in. while most disagree with obamas plan (or any democrat's for that matter) most, to a tee, say they are in favor of health care reform of some sort. :noidea:

heres another thing that baffles me-

if i am wearing a ton of gold around my neck in a dark alley, mugged at gunpoint, and a cop saves my life and arrests the mugger, i am not sent a bill.

if i fall asleep with a cig and catch my house on fire, and a fireman puls me out of a burning house, i am not sent a bill.

yet if i have a heart attack and a doctor saves my life, i am sent a bill.

if i am in a car wreck and trapped inside a burning car a police cruiser, fire truck, and an ambulance are all sure to show up, yet only one will send me a bill.

whats up with that?

GoSlash27
03-23-2010, 08:02 PM
im a bit suprised some of the vehement critics and armchair policy makers havent chimed in. while most disagree with obamas plan (or any democrat's for that matter) most, to a tee, say they are in favor of health care reform of some sort. :noidea:

heres another thing that baffles me-

if i am wearing a ton of gold around my neck in a dark alley, mugged at gunpoint, and a cop saves my life and arrests the mugger, i am not sent a bill.

if i fall asleep with a cig and catch my house on fire, and a fireman puls me out of a burning house, i am not sent a bill.

yet if i have a heart attack and a doctor saves my life, i am sent a bill.

if i am in a car wreck and trapped inside a burning car a police cruiser, fire truck, and an ambulance are all sure to show up, yet only one will send me a bill.

whats up with that?

The other services you mentioned aren't free. You are billed for them through taxes every day. They took 2 out of every 3 dollars you earned, and you didn't even notice. "Not billed"?? HAHAH
Since these taxes are collected and allocated at the local level, the cost/ benefit tends to be kept in reasonable balance.
All that goes out the window when the Feds start throwing money at health care.

So on to my idea of health care reform:
Tort reform, allowing interstate competition for insurance, stop forcing the hospitals to treat deadbeats. That'd about fix it.

tony hipchest
03-23-2010, 08:25 PM
The other services you mentioned aren't free. You are billed for them through taxes every day. They took 2 out of every 3 dollars you earned, and you didn't even notice. "Not billed"?? HAHAH
.



i see you are enjoying that carrot at the end of the stick. :bunnydance:

:toofunny: (allow me to laugh along with you).

nobody has taken 66% of what i earned, plus there is a difference between paying a tax and being sent a bill.

learn it. :coffee:

Godfather
03-23-2010, 08:51 PM
I'll chime in.

If you look at my thread earlier (Send this to your R Senators) I put in a proposal that would make a big difference. Raise HSA contribution limits and remove the restrictions on using the funds to help third parties. That lets people keep their money instead of giving it to an insurer, and they can pay their own medial expenses. Catastrophic cases can be handled by having your social network (church, community, alumni association, union, etc.) chip in. Let this become the standard and medical providers no longer need an army of administrative employees to fight with insurers for reimbursement. Medical costs fall, allowing more general practitioners to exist. With lower costs and the shift to social networks and mutual aid societies, there's less of a burden on businesses and they can hire the displaced medical billers.

Fund emergency rooms with public dollars. It's an emergency service just like police and fire. On the federal level, the funding can come from a tax on wire transfers (which means we get a cut of the money illegal immigrants send to their families). States can pick up the rest however they choose; in the Southwest they might use a sales tax because that gets money back from both illegal immigrants and from Mexicans who enter the country legally to go shopping or dining. This cuts down unreimbursed ER care (although this is just a small fraction of overall costs--the biggest sources of waste are insurance-created overhead and defensive medicine).

HometownGal
03-23-2010, 10:21 PM
As I believe this topic to be quite worthy of various thoughts, positive discussion and kept separate from the existing Obaaaaama Health Care Plan thread, I'm going to leave this one stand as well.

Good topic, steelax, and I'll chime in with my thoughts when I have a few minutes to breathe.

GoSlash27
03-23-2010, 10:30 PM
nobody has taken 66% of what i earned, plus there is a difference between paying a tax and being sent a bill.
I beg to differ on both counts.
You pay Federal and Social Security. Actually twice, since your employer matches your contribution. You pay State. You pay local (6% sales) every time you buy anything other than food. You're subject to inflation, which is why you can't save money (that's a tax too).

They think you're a rube who won't notice how much money they're taking if they're slick about it, and so far you're proving them right. Don't feel bad; most people fall for it.

And as for "taxes not being the same as a bill", try not paying it some time. :chuckle:

steelax04
03-23-2010, 10:56 PM
im a bit suprised some of the vehement critics and armchair policy makers havent chimed in. while most disagree with obamas plan (or any democrat's for that matter) most, to a tee, say they are in favor of health care reform of some sort. :noidea:

heres another thing that baffles me-

if i am wearing a ton of gold around my neck in a dark alley, mugged at gunpoint, and a cop saves my life and arrests the mugger, i am not sent a bill.

if i fall asleep with a cig and catch my house on fire, and a fireman puls me out of a burning house, i am not sent a bill.

yet if i have a heart attack and a doctor saves my life, i am sent a bill.

if i am in a car wreck and trapped inside a burning car a police cruiser, fire truck, and an ambulance are all sure to show up, yet only one will send me a bill.

whats up with that?

Interesting way to look at it. I'd agree with you to a point. The other services you mentioned have sort of a 'ceiling' for charges, if you will. Medical bills could go on and on and on... However, maybe 'basic' type of care could be covered, and anything past that is where a supplemental insurance would kick in. Like with the fire fighter pulling you out of your burning house is the covered basic care, but to replace your belongings, you need the supplemental homeowner's insurance. Then the question becomes, who decides what basic care is?

tony hipchest
03-23-2010, 10:57 PM
I beg to differ on both counts.
You pay Federal and Social Security. Actually twice, since your employer matches your contribution. You pay State. You pay local (6% sales) every time you buy anything other than food. You're subject to inflation, which is why you can't save money (that's a tax too).

They think you're a rube who won't notice how much money they're taking if they're slick about it, and so far you're proving them right. Don't feel bad; most people fall for it.

:how do you know what i have saved?

you can beg to differ all you want. i know my scrilla, my chedda, my paper scratch (ie money) better than you do.

and again, i suggest you look up the difference between a tax an a bill.

And as for "taxes not being the same as a bill", try not paying it some time. :chuckle: i guess anyone can say that food is the same as water because both can fill your stomach. only an idiot would beleive they are the same, though.

steelax04
03-23-2010, 11:05 PM
Boo... you guys are killing my thread. Guess I better call the fire department since they won't send me a bill..... :chuckle:

steelerdude15
03-23-2010, 11:07 PM
Boo... you guys are killing my thread. Guess I better call the fire department since they won't send me a bill.....
I've got the hoses ready.

GoSlash27
03-23-2010, 11:09 PM
how do you know what i have saved?

you can beg to differ all you want. i know my scrilla, my chedda, my paper scratch (ie money) better than you do.

and again, i suggest you look up the difference between a tax an a bill.

i guess anyone can say that food is the same as water because both can fill your stomach. only an idiot would beleive they are the same, though.

Excessive noise-to-bandwidth. Let me know when you come up with a counter argument.

Save your "scrilla"; toilet paper is fixing to get a lot more expensive.
/ change you can believe in

tony hipchest
03-23-2010, 11:12 PM
Excessive noise-to-bandwidth. Let me know when you come up with a counter argument.

Save your "scrilla"; toilet paper is fixing to get a lot more expensive.
/ change you can believe in

dollar bills are toilet paper. dont tell me you havent been investing in bullion. :busted:

GoSlash27
03-23-2010, 11:23 PM
Tony,
dont tell me you havent been investing in bullion.
Of course I have. I saw this coming down the pike years ago. Silver is the way to go.

Question is, what are you gonna do when the whole system goes tits-up in 2014? No more Obamacare (hehe with no bill) no more Social Security, no more Medicare, no more welfare, no more nuthin'?
It'll all be gone because the government is on a collision course with insolvency. So sorry, but you can't get blood from a stone. We tried to tell you that there's no such thing as a free lunch, but ya had to go and learn it the hard way.
/ I'll be okay

tony hipchest
03-23-2010, 11:35 PM
Tony,

Of course I have. I saw this coming down the pike years ago. Silver is the way to go.

Question is, what are you gonna do when the whole system goes tits-up in 2014? No more Obamacare (hehe with no bill) no more Social Security, no more Medicare, no more welfare, no more nuthin'?
It'll all be gone because the government is on a collision course with insolvency. So sorry, but you can't get blood from a stone. We tried to tell you that there's no such thing as a free lunch, but ya had to go and learn it the hard way.
/ I'll be okay

:shout:- oh noez!!! "we" are all doomed and GoSlash27 will rule the world!

whatever will "we" do when we are at his mercy in 2014? :toofunny:

seriously dude... get over yourself.

MasterOfPuppets
03-24-2010, 03:11 AM
I've got the hoses ready.

Fluffer !!! :finger:

MACH1
03-24-2010, 12:04 PM
dollar bills are toilet paper. dont tell me you havent been investing in bullion. :busted:

Chicken of beef. :chuckle:

stlrtruck
03-24-2010, 03:23 PM
I'm not so sure that it's health care reform as much as they need health insurance reform and guidelines.

It seems that insurance corporations have a lot of legal mumbo jumbo that can confuse the everyday man and as soon as it benefits them, they cut the everyday man or increase his/her premiums.

GoSlash27
03-24-2010, 06:54 PM
:shout:- oh noez!!! "we" are all doomed and GoSlash27 will rule the world!

whatever will "we" do when we are at his mercy in 2014? :toofunny:

seriously dude... get over yourself.

Wake me up when you think of an actual argument. :coffee:

GBMelBlount
03-24-2010, 07:05 PM
I'm not so sure that it's health care reform as much as they need health insurance reform and guidelines.

It seems that insurance corporations have a lot of legal mumbo jumbo that can confuse the everyday man and as soon as it benefits them, they cut the everyday man or increase his/her premiums.

I certainly agree with the need for guidelines to protect individuals from companies dropping them only to avoid costly treatments or procedures that are necessary.

One thing I find interesting is how Obama showcased someone whose mother died because she did not have insurance to cover a necessary procedure (I believe).

So I wonder if these types of cases would be would ever be publicized if the government decided against a necessary procedure because it was too expensive or that the likelihood of success was too low and the person died in a similar manner....

This does happen in some countries with socialized medicine, doesn't it?

MACH1
03-24-2010, 08:06 PM
I certainly agree with the need for guidelines to protect individuals from companies dropping them only to avoid costly treatments or procedures that are necessary.

One thing I find interesting is how Obama showcased someone whose mother died because she did not have insurance to cover a necessary procedure (I believe).

So I wonder if these types of cases would be would ever be publicized if the government decided against a necessary procedure because it was too expensive or that the likelihood of success was too low and the person died in a similar manner....

This does happen in some countries with socialized medicine, doesn't it?

See the current medicare/medicaid drop or refusal rate. Its twice as high than any insurance company. Just wait till rationing starts.

http://www.cluelessemma.com/.a/6a00e54efc9d1088340120a57fb843970c-pi

GBMelBlount
03-24-2010, 08:17 PM
Mach1

See the current medicare/medicaid drop or refusal rate. Its twice as high than any insurance company. Just wait till rationing starts.

Wow. I had no idea.

I would imagine in the case of private insurers it is painted as greed and capitalism as Obama did in his example.

So in comes the government to fix things....

So now if the government denies someone I imagine the same treatment denial will be presented in a new way.......that by not treating them they are able to help others. You know, "taking one for the gipper" and doing a service for your country and fellow man by not complaining and just dying quietly.

Although they might be doing the exact same thing, it will likely be viewed differently by many because of how it's presented.

Godfather
03-24-2010, 09:09 PM
I certainly agree with the need for guidelines to protect individuals from companies dropping them only to avoid costly treatments or procedures that are necessary.

One thing I find interesting is how Obama showcased someone whose mother died because she did not have insurance to cover a necessary procedure (I believe).

So I wonder if these types of cases would be would ever be publicized if the government decided against a necessary procedure because it was too expensive or that the likelihood of success was too low and the person died in a similar manner....

This does happen in some countries with socialized medicine, doesn't it?

Yep. And it's even worse in Oregon. Their public health plan cuts off people who are too expensive and the "no more" letter offers to pay for assisted suicide. That is absolutely repugnant.

tony hipchest
03-24-2010, 09:23 PM
nothing wrong with a little assisted suicide. it should be free and government supported.

Wake me up when you think of an actual argument. :coffee:

you mean like this?-

toilet paper is fixing to get a lot more expensive.


:rofl:

i think i will let you enjoy your slumber in peace.... :yawn:

"ZZZzZZzzzZ zzzZ z zzz z z z"

NJarhead
03-24-2010, 09:26 PM
See the current medicare/medicaid drop or refusal rate. Its twice as high than any insurance company. Just wait till rationing starts.

http://www.cluelessemma.com/.a/6a00e54efc9d1088340120a57fb843970c-pi


:rofl:


.....


:crying01:

tony hipchest
03-24-2010, 09:37 PM
Medical marijuana users risk job loss

another idea would be to reform this, although the drug companies rue the day, as do all the prisons since they have been privitized (gotta keep the streets clean of criminals like these)-

http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/03/24/michigan.medical.marijuana.fired/index.html?hpt=C1

(CNN) -- When a rare form of cancer invaded Joseph Casias' nasal cavity and his brain, his doctor prescribed marijuana to help alleviate the daily pain.

Casias lives in Michigan, where medical marijuana is legal.

But his employer, Wal-Mart, the nation's largest retailer, fired him in November 2009 after he failed a drug test.

Casias, 29, says he never came to work high. He's got a medical marijuana card to prove he's allowed to smoke legally in the state.

"I was angry they did this to me because I always tried my best," said Casias, who was employed at Wal-Mart for five years. He earned an Associate of the Year award in 2008. "I want my job back. I thought I was part of the Wal-Mart family."

To date, 14 states have laws allowing the use of medical marijuana, which shield legal users from criminalization but don't protect them from them penalties enforced by their employers. As more people are being prescribed marijuana across the nation, they are wrestling with a caveat: They could be fired.

Without laws defending medical marijuana users from employers' drug policies, Casias and a growing number of medical marijuana users are being let go from their jobs, says Keith Stroup on the legal counsel team of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. He said his office, headquartered in Washington, receives about 300 e-mails and phone calls a year from medical marijuana users who have been fired or had job offers rescinded because of a failed drug test.

"Usually they talk about how they have lost their job," Stroup said. "And I tell them there's not a thing they can do about it."


this is brilliant! :applaudit:

take a 29 year old (probably dying of brain cancer) off the job market and paying taxes so we can put him in jail or support him on welfare for the rest of his life.

God bless george bush I, his war on drugs, and all his wackenhut friends.

NJarhead
03-24-2010, 09:48 PM
Medical marijuana users risk job loss

another idea would be to reform this, although the drug companies rue the day, as do all the prisons since they have been privitized (gotta keep the streets clean of criminals like these)-

http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/03/24/michigan.medical.marijuana.fired/index.html?hpt=C1



this is brilliant! :applaudit:

take a 29 year old (probably dying of brain cancer) off the job market and paying taxes so we can put him in jail or support him on welfare for the rest of his life.

God bless george bush I, his war on drugs, and all his wackenhut friends.

George Bush? Blame Wal-Mart; Mary Jane is legal where the dude worked.
If you want to blame a president, why not Clinton or Obama? Neither of them changed our BS legal stance on it either.

tony hipchest
03-24-2010, 10:04 PM
If you want to blame a president, why not Clinton or Obama? .

because neither sunk billions of dollars in a bogus "war on drugs" campaign that was really nothing more than a pork barrel project for texas (throw in cali and AZ).

NJarhead
03-24-2010, 10:27 PM
because neither sunk billions of dollars in a bogus "war on drugs" campaign that was really nothing more than a pork barrel project for texas (throw in cali and AZ).


Much of my time in the CG was during the Clinton Administration and I don't recall any difference in the war on drugs when we transitioned to the Bush administration. In fact, I believe we were upgrading to the HITRON airship before GWB was elected and that multi-million dollar projects' sole purpose was drug interdiction.


:noidea:

Anyway, I think your comment was off-base my friend. Wal-Mart owns the blame for this guy losing his job.

GoSlash27
03-24-2010, 10:35 PM
i think i will let you enjoy your slumber in peace....
Translation: I have nothing to contribute other than random ad-hominems. Well... thanks for playin'. :noidea:

GBMelBlount
03-24-2010, 10:37 PM
GBMelBlount

I certainly agree with the need for guidelines to protect individuals from companies dropping them only to avoid costly treatments or procedures that are necessary.

One thing I find interesting is how Obama showcased someone whose mother died because she did not have insurance to cover a necessary procedure (I believe).

So I wonder if these types of cases would be would ever be publicized if the government decided against a necessary procedure because it was too expensive or that the likelihood of success was too low and the person died in a similar manner....

This does happen in some countries with socialized medicine, doesn't it?

Godfather

Yep. And it's even worse in Oregon. Their public health plan cuts off people who are too expensive and the "no more" letter offers to pay for assisted suicide. That is absolutely repugnant.

Thanks for clarifying Godfather.

So when an individual dies that can't afford health insurance it is showcased by Obama as an evil of capitalism, but when the government does the exact same thing it is "OK".

Hmmmmm. So the only real "change" is that the government will be doing it so it is OK now?

Am I missing something?

NJarhead
03-24-2010, 10:42 PM
Thanks for clarifying Godfather.

So when an individual dies that can't afford health insurance it is showcased by Obama as an evil of capitalism, but when the government does the exact same thing it is "OK".

Hmmmmm. So the only real "change" is that the government will be doing so it is OK now?

Am I missing something?

Well, unless you didn't notice our switch to socialism, I'd say you're up to speed. :thumbsup:


:crying01:

GBMelBlount
03-24-2010, 10:51 PM
Well, unless you didn't notice our switch to socialism, I'd say you're up to speed. :thumbsup:


:crying01:

Thanks brother. :drink:

I am sure I am missing something though as I am a conservative.

As for the socialism comment, I think that is a bit harsh and undeserved. Obama is all for freedom and liberty imo.

So I would love to hear some other thoughts and perspectives, especially from anyone on the left who is involved in this thread and has made intelligent and relevant comments. :drink:

tony hipchest
03-24-2010, 11:36 PM
wal mart is definitely to blame for firing the dude. 100% bogus.

about as bogus as the likes of them and home depot keeping majority employees as non full time status to save millions in benefits and health care costs.

perhaps that needs reformed too.

Translation: I have nothing to contribute other than random ad-hominems. Well... thanks for playin'. :noidea:aww, c'mon... dont take your ball and go home.

i wanna hear more about this toilet paper shortage in '12. will it be like the oil embargo in the 70's?

will there be 'gas lines' at all public rest stops and port-a-johns across the US???

:toofunny:

will jeff reed be even more angry on his next visit to sheetz?

steelerdude15
03-25-2010, 12:46 AM
Fluffer !!!
Only for you cutie. :nana:

MACH1
03-25-2010, 12:48 AM
because neither sunk billions of dollars in a bogus "war on drugs" campaign that was really nothing more than a pork barrel project for texas (throw in cali and AZ).

How bout Trillions on a bogus deathcare plan. :noidea:

tony hipchest
03-25-2010, 02:24 AM
How bout Trillions on a bogus deathcare plan. :noidea::danceshout:

dont get me wrong...

i miss the good ol days when the govt provided for affordable and easy access to crack cocaine (plus it created millions of jobs).

:applaudit:

Preacher
03-25-2010, 03:30 AM
George Bush? Blame Wal-Mart; Mary Jane is legal where the dude worked.
If you want to blame a president, why not Clinton or Obama? Neither of them changed our BS legal stance on it either.

Actually, no it is not.

While the state has said it was legal, federal laws still say it is illegal. The courts have repeatedly ruled that federal laws trump state laws.

GBMelBlount
03-25-2010, 07:20 AM
this is brilliant! :applaudit:

take a 29 year old (probably dying of brain cancer) off the job market and paying taxes so we can put him in jail or support him on welfare for the rest of his life.

God bless george bush I, his war on drugs, and all his wackenhut friends.

How sad & tragic Tony. Thanks for posting. :drink:

I, like you, completely agree that it is a tragedy how the federal government is bullying states and individuals with laws violating their rights as in this example.

...and fortunately, now that Bush is gone and you and I both agreed that Obama is all about freedom and liberty, we won't have to worry about these things any more, right? :drink:

So, back to health care.

These 2 examples, one used by Obama showing a child whose parent died because they couldn't get a needed medical procedure due to lack of insurance, and your excellent Walmart example are both great cases for government healthcare, assuming that was your point.

Fortunately, the government has been kind and caring enough to not only step in and save us from the best health care system in the world but they have provided it to all 300,000,000 Americans, everyone except for themselves, of course.

Thank you friend, for without the intelligent and levelheaded reasoning of people like yourself we would never have been able to have the best health care system in the world saved from the clutches of free markets and made better and more fair by the government. :drink:

With the wonderful things government has done with everything else they are involved in, I can only imagine the future of heath care being brighter, wouldn't you agree?

Thanks again. :drink:

GoSlash27
03-25-2010, 07:30 AM
aww, c'mon... dont take your ball and go home.
Not much point in debating with someone who refuses to discuss the issues. :noidea:

i wanna hear more about this toilet paper shortage in '12.
You asked for it.

There'll be no toilet paper shortage and I never said there was. I said that it'll get a whole lot more expensive.
It's called "inflation".

As I said, the government's way in the red. Instead of balancing the books, they're creating even more programs they can't afford. Social Security is broke, and the government raided their trust fund and gutted a half a trillion from their budget right when the baby boomers are starting to retire.
Hospitals are already denying services to Medicare recipients because Medicare can't afford to pay the bill, and they ripped a half a trillion dollars out of *their* budget.
China isn't buying our debt anymore and Moody's is downgrading our credit rating in the next few years.

Obama's budget has us TRIPLING the debt over this decade. Thing is, you can't triple your debt when nobody's willing to lend you money. They can't tax the economy heavily enough to balance the books without crashing it. So just what can they do to support all this spending?
Either they cut the spending (which will end up looking like the situation Greece is in) or they'll fire up the presses and start printing money out of thin air.

When that happens, it will devalue all the money already in the economy. That's what inflation *is*.
In this case it'd be hyperinflation, devaluing the dollar to worthless.

It's not like it hasn't happened before.
http://www.bitsofnews.com/images/graphics/economy/weimar.jpg
Cash: Cheaper than firewood

If you have a rational counter-argument, I'm listening. :popcorn:

MACH1
03-25-2010, 10:21 AM
:danceshout:

dont get me wrong...

i miss the good ol days when the govt provided for affordable and easy access to crack cocaine (plus it created millions of jobs).

:applaudit:

I miss the good ol days when we had the freedom of choice. When the Constitution actually stood for something.

steelerdude15
03-25-2010, 04:15 PM
I miss the good ol days when the Pirates were actually good.

sixstringlass
03-25-2010, 05:22 PM
The health care reform debacle has been the basis for my thesis, which, by posting here, I am not working on. LOL.

Anyways, after extensive study, I can tell you this: both political sides are basically shills for the corporate bottom line. Insurance companies don't care about people; they want healthy people who will pay, pay, pay and never want anything back. The government (regardless of who controls things) just does what their "constituency" (those who give them the most money) want; case in point, this health care reform bill.

While I am all for reform (because, let's face it, the current system is BROKEN), mandating that we are required to buy a corporation's product is catering to that industry, regardless of how you slice it. A better way to handle the broken system of health care (government programs included) is to cut the fat from the system.

A good start would be the government subsidies we've been paying to the insurance companies out of tax payer dollars since the eighties so that insurance companies can run Medicare. When the American taxpayer is paying a corporation almost $900 per subscriber per year for services that, prior to privatization to the insurance companies, cost about $200 per person, something's wrong. When hospitals will charge an uninsured person $300 for an Ace Bandage that cost them less than fifty cents per, charge Medicare almost $90 for the same thing, and then negotiate with insurance companies for the costs (which end up being about $20), you start to see where the profit-based system of health care is essentially at the root of the problem.

And when it comes to the uninsured, exactly how are they costing anybody anything? These reports keep coming out about how the uninsured use the emergency room as a family practice (which, of course, costs more), but that also assumes that the uninsured never pays their bills. While I won't deny that there are those who do shirk their responsibilities when it comes to paying bills, I have a hard time believing that all the uninsured never pay up when the piper comes calling. It's actually a form of class warfare to assume that uninsured people are irresponsible, first, for not buying insurance (who can afford it?), and second, for never paying their bills. These sorts of attacks on a certain segment of society actually serve to further widen the divisions among Americans that are perpetrated on us every day through the media.

We are encouraged to "belong" to a particular group with a particular label and with a particular ideology, and this actually strengthens a notion that we are all alone out there (despite the belonging to a group - lots of studies have been done on this), and we're not. We're part of a community, but these divisions in supposed ideological thought are creating divisions and animosity and a sort of environment like a daytime talk show that used to be hosted by a former Cincinnati mayor. And the divisions between us also make us believe that the poor are out to take everything we have and helping others - even those we don't know and who don't live in our community - is somehow wrong; that these people deserve their lots in life because, hell, they ASKED for it by being lazy and poor, right? They're just out for handout, right? They just don't want to work and want to take from those who do work.

But those cases are rather the exception than the rule. Most people actually do want to work and make it on their own. But it's the worst of the worst, the talk show fodder, that make the media, that we hear about, and then generalizations are made.

The argument has been made repeatedly in the media and regurgitated back by the people that the only way to fix this situation is to privatize everything. Because, in a capitalistic society, privatizing, in theory, creates competition in the marketplace. But that only works when other laws that prevent monopolization are in place. Certain regulations are required. Case in point, the monopolization of the media industry. Before the relaxation of FCC laws, no one owner could have more than 7 TV stations, 7 radio stations, and 7 print outlets, and no two could occupy the same market. That rule, along with a "Fairness Doctrine" that provided for the airing of opposing opinions gave the people a broader viewpoint from which to make decisions. That rule was relaxed in 1984, and it allowed an owner to own 12 of each kind of media outlet. In 1996, the rule was relaxed again, allowing owners to have as many stations as they wanted in any market, so long as their content didn't reach more than 39.5% of viewers. Well, in the era of cable TV, where penetration in market is 85%, clearly, THAT can be thrown out the window. Now, with the FCC rules slackened,there are only 8 corporate voices in the mainstream marketplace. That means audiences are only given 8 viewpoints that don't really differ all that much. Most outlets simply tow the corporate line.

Which is what the government is doing right now. Capitulating to the moneyed interests in health care, and it makes me sick. They say they care about the people, but they don't. The corporations don't, their paid shills in the government and the media don't, and, increasingly, people don't care about other people, either.

Do I have any ideas about how to fix it? Not really. All I know is that everything looks pretty broken to me.

Leftoverhard
03-25-2010, 05:25 PM
I miss the good ol' days when the R's were the ones who (we thought) were tough.
So much for that - now it's all whining and lying and scraping the bottom of the barrel instead of actually debating anything.
That's what they call a reversal of fortune.

GoSlash27
03-25-2010, 06:09 PM
I miss the good ol days when the Pirates were actually good.

I'm GoSlash27 and I approve this message.:applaudit:

NJarhead
03-25-2010, 06:19 PM
I miss the good ol' days when the R's were the ones who (we thought) were tough.
So much for that - now it's all whining and lying and scraping the bottom of the barrel instead of actually debating anything.
That's what they call a reversal of fortune.


You:

http://organicgreenteabygrace.com/images/black_tea_pot2.jpg

GBMelBlount
03-25-2010, 08:15 PM
sixstringlass

The health care reform debacle has been the basis for my thesis, which, by posting here, I am not working on. LOL.

both political sides are basically shills for the corporate bottom line.
Insurance companies don't care about people
The government (regardless of who controls things) just does what their "constituency" (those who give them the most money) want; case in point, this health care reform bill.

The argument has been made repeatedly in the media and regurgitated back by the people that the only way to fix this situation is to privatize everything. Because, in a capitalistic society, privatizing, in theory, creates competition in the marketplace. But that only works when other laws that prevent monopolization are in place.



Sorry to condense this.

Thanks for posting. I think a lot of what you are saying makes sense, especially about monopolies.

Since you've been doing a lot of research on this I'd like to know your thoughts as to whether you feel the increased government involvement will improve the price, quality and overall accessibility of health care services.

Is the government in some senses not a monopoly as well?

sixstringlass
03-25-2010, 08:39 PM
Sorry to condense this but since you've been doing a lot of research on this I'd like to know your thoughts as to whether you feel the increased government involvement will improve the price, quality and overall accessibility to health care services.

Well, for some it will increase access. For anyone making over $30,000 annually, it will only drain away money and funnel it into insurance company's pockets. Make no mistake about this: the Democrats involvement in this started out as something worthwhile debating, but ended up being nothing more than a bailout for insurance companies that are already raking it in hand over fist.

Honestly, increased government involvement won't have a whole lot of influence, insofar as access goes. When people are forced to buy something they couldn't afford before all this happened, it isn't going to make them suddenly go to the doctor. No, it's going to take more money away from them that they could have used for something else and force them to spend it on something they either couldn't afford or didn't want in the first place. There will still be unaffordable deductibles and copays and I wouldn't think that prices for insurance are going to down, what with this being a gift to those companies, anyway. No, most of the uninsured who are forced to buy insurance will buy it to avoid their tax returns getting reduced by the fines, but between the exhorbitant cost of medical care in general and the high cost deductibles, premiums, and copays, don't expect everybody to bum rush the doctor.

As far as cost, don't expect medical care prices to come down, because the regulations removed from the medical industry suppliers (and the costs of additional tests doctors perform to avoid malpractice suits) made the health care industry about the bottom line (ought to rename it the wealth care industry). Look, health care is 1/6 of the U.S. economy. Short of these corporations growing a heart (metaphorically speaking) and caring about whether people can actually afford their services, prices will stay the same or go up.

In sum, the practice of socializing costs and losses and privatizing profits and gains has really messed things up. The taxpayers can't keep funding the excesses of big business, especially when they give virtually nothing back. The amount of money spent by the health care industry on lobbying and campaign contributions in 2009 alone could have insured the whole of the uninsured population for at least half a decade.

With the unemployment rates going up, more and more people are without health insurance every day and can't afford to keep it going when COBRA can cost as much or more than $800 per month... when these people are laid off, no less. I think that society needs to stop commodifying everything and assigning a price tag to things and start thinking of the human element in things. I'm not saying that nobody and nothing should profit from hard work or enterprise. I'm just saying that when society is funding it, we ought to get something in return.

tony hipchest
03-25-2010, 08:54 PM
Not much point in debating with someone who refuses to discuss the issues. :noidea:

:blah:

If you have a rational counter-argument, I'm listening. :popcorn:

:huh: seriously.....?

:toofunny: what you are talking about is SO 1990, and has absolutely nothing to do with my ideas of health care reform.

the only thing you have debated or argued is the price of toilet paper and my own personal bank account. (talk about making things personal).

you should be more concerned about the price of baby wet wipes with all the bullshit that spewed out of your hole. theres gonna be alot of clean up on aisle number two. :binky:

when you decide to grow up and cease the attempts to hijack this thread, feel free to offer a "rational counter-argument" to my ideas of health care reform that i have so repsectfully offered.in a mostly non partisan fashion.... (unfortunately i cannot overlook how the failed propoganda of the 'say no to drugs' and "war on drugs' campaign as crack was matadored into where it would do the most damage and how legitimate medical marijuana laws were set back atleast 30 years).

sixstringlass
03-25-2010, 08:59 PM
Is the government in some senses not a monopoly as well?

This really is a whole separate issue. It is a monopoly insofar as there really isn't anywhere for people to turn if the laws made by the government affect them adversely. In the case of health care reform that just passed into law, people's fears about control of medical decisions are really very minute in comparison to the fact that the law essentially burdens American taxpayers with subsidizing the insurance industry's bottom line. I suppose that we can turn the courts or hope that our state government will do something, but, in the end, nothing really gets done until and unless someone starts paying for it.

I think what's ticked me off more than anything about this health care reform package is that a lot of people are talking about increased government interference, death panels, governmental interference in decisions between a patient and a doctor, rationing, low quality care, and possible "socialism" that they're losing sight of the big picture, which is that taxpayers are being ask to fund corporate jets, billion dollar bonuses, and other bloat from corporations and getting the proverbial shaft in return. The health insurance industry spent more than $164 million in lobbying in 2009 and $30 million more in campaign contributions. How many people could have been insured with that money? Instead, we as American taxpayers will get to fund more lobbying once this atrocious bill takes effect.

To be honest, I am simply disgusted by both government and corporate behavior toward American citizens here recently.

GoSlash27
03-25-2010, 09:14 PM
seriously.....?
Yeah. Seriously. The government is broke. What's wrong? Don't you have anything to counter the assertion?
/ prove me wrong

tony hipchest
03-25-2010, 09:28 PM
Yeah. Seriously. The government is broke. What's wrong? Don't you have anything to counter the assertion?
/ prove me wrongi never said the government wasnt broke (everybody knows that, einstein), it has been for years.

like i said, youre barking up the wrong tree and have been doing it for days now.

keep in mind, this tree pisses on dogs, not vice vesra. :monkey:

do you have anything to counter my ideas on healthcare reform, or are you gonna continue this desperate attention seeking attempt at a thread hijack? :coffee:

NJarhead
03-25-2010, 09:37 PM
i never said the government wasnt broke (everybody knows that, einstein), it has been for years.

like i said, youre barking up the wrong tree and have been doing it for days now.

keep in mind, this tree pisses on dogs, not vice vesra. :monkey:

do you have anything to counter my ideas on healthcare reform, or are you gonna continue this desperate attention seeking attempt at a thread hijack? :coffee:


Excuse me; This:

Medical marijuana users risk job loss

another idea would be to reform this, although the drug companies rue the day, as do all the prisons since they have been privitized (gotta keep the streets clean of criminals like these)-

http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/03/24/michigan.medical.marijuana.fired/index.html?hpt=C1



this is brilliant! :applaudit:

take a 29 year old (probably dying of brain cancer) off the job market and paying taxes so we can put him in jail or support him on welfare for the rest of his life.

God bless george bush I, his war on drugs, and all his wackenhut friends.

Seems like a hijacking to me, no? Just so you can feed your endless Bush-Bashing hunger.

:coffee:

tony hipchest
03-25-2010, 09:42 PM
Excuse me; This:



Seems like a hijacking to me, no? Just so you can feed your endless Bush-Bashing hunger.

:coffee:so you dont think replacing some of the expensive narcotic painkilling drugs with a weed that grows for free is a positive step towards reform?

forget the "endless bush-bashing hunger" strawman argument and set down the texas sized glass of bush kool aid.

do you agree with the regan and bush policy of demonizing dope and putting its users in prison as they released violent criminals to make room was effective steps towards medical marijuana?

NJarhead
03-25-2010, 09:54 PM
so you dont think replacing some of the expensive narcotic painkilling drugs with a weed that grows for free is a positive step towards reform?

forget the "endless bush-bashing hunger" strawman argument and set down the texas sized glass of bush kool aid.

do you agree with the regan and bush policy of demonizing dope and putting its users in prison as they released violent criminals to make room was effective steps towards medical marijuana?

War on drugs = Apples

Health Care Reform = Oranges.

Any ties are vague at best. And before you accuse me of drinking kool-aid of any flavor you had better look in the mirror.

For the record, Reagan and Bush were raised in a country that had already "demonized" dope. They didn't create the atmosphere. And unless your golden calf out in the white house has changed something (because obviously Clinton didn't), dope is STILL illegal. Are drug free school zones a bad idea in your opinion? :noidea:

Anyway, I don't think either of them left anyone out to dry like Clinton did with Rwanda. Or turning tail like Clinton did in Somalia. I can at least commend Odumbass for not doing the same in Afghanistan.

GoSlash27
03-25-2010, 09:54 PM
do you have anything to counter my ideas on healthcare reform?
Ideas? Like 'it should just happen with no bills'? :toofunny:
You haven't managed to work around to the fact that you actually do get billed for government services. I've seen more logical "ideas" on Lambchop's sing-along, so pardon me if I'm a little under-whelmed.
:chuckle:

tony hipchest
03-25-2010, 10:07 PM
Ideas? Like 'it should just happen with no bills'? :toofunny:
You haven't managed to work around to the fact that you actually do get billed for government services. I've seen more logical "ideas" on Lambchop's sing-along, so pardon me if I'm a little under-whelmed.
:chuckle:so in other words you got nuthin?

there are simple fundamental differences between being taxed and paying bills.

since my taxes didnt raise while the govt was saving my life from the evil terrorists, are you saying we all should expect to see a bill?

when should i check my mailbox for said bill?

if all you can argue is semantics then youve already lost. :noidea:

GoSlash27
03-25-2010, 10:12 PM
so in other words you got nuthin?

there are simple fundamental differences between being taxed and paying bills.
No there's not. There's just ways of making the truly stupid/ self-deluded *think* they're not paying them.

since my taxes didnt raise while the govt was saving my life from the evil terrorists, are you saying we all should expect to see a bill?
You are already paying the bill. The fact that you didn't notice is exactly why the rest of us don't pay attention to your uninformed "ideas".

when should i check my mailbox for said bill?
Middle of next month. Right around April 15th.

GBMelBlount
03-25-2010, 10:12 PM
I think what's ticked me off more than anything about this health care reform package is that a lot of people are talking about increased government interference, death panels, governmental interference in decisions between a patient and a doctor, rationing, low quality care, and possible "socialism" that they're losing sight of the big picture, which is that taxpayers are being ask to fund corporate jets, billion dollar bonuses, and other bloat from corporations and getting the proverbial shaft in return. The health insurance industry spent more than $164 million in lobbying in 2009 and $30 million more in campaign contributions. How many people could have been insured with that money? Instead, we as American taxpayers will get to fund more lobbying once this atrocious bill takes effect.

To be honest, I am simply disgusted by both government and corporate behavior toward American citizens here recently.

So we agree that there is a big problem and that this may not be the best solution. Right?

Your concerns regarding monopolies and big corporations are certainly understandable.

For me, all other things being equal, more competition tends to generate the best products at the best price and promotes innovation.....and let's face it, even big bloated greedy corporations outperform government.

I do tend to fear a lot of the things you mentioned above as I see how the government can operate once they get their tentacles into something.

If I could see more of a track record of success for the government controlling the production or distribution of good and services, I guess I would be a bit more confident perhaps.

Admittedly, your mention of people overly concerned about the quality, price and rationing (long term) is indeed what my fears are.

I guess we'll see...:drink:

GoSlash27
03-25-2010, 10:20 PM
^ This is why I think Federal witholding should be abolished. Then every year we would all be presented with a tab for $20,000 and certain idiots would stop thinking they "don't get billed" and start thinking about fiscal responsibility, thus saving the rest of us from their asinine ideas on how to throw away more money.:wave:

GBMelBlount
03-25-2010, 10:24 PM
War on drugs = Apples

Health Care Reform = Oranges.



Have you not figured out that THE reason the focus is on apples is because this thread is about oranges?

NJarhead
03-25-2010, 10:26 PM
Have you not figured out that THE reason the focus is on apples is because this thread is about oranges?

Well, it depends on what THE definition of "the" is. :chuckle:

tony hipchest
03-25-2010, 10:30 PM
War on drugs = Apples

Health Care Reform = Oranges.

Any ties are vague at best.

painkillers derived from poppies (afghanistans major export) = apples

painkillers derived from cannabis (grows like weeds anywhere in america) = apples

the legalization of marijuana is very relavent to health care reform, even ignoring the additional revenues that can be collected from taxes, that could help offset the costs of other aspects of it.

"apples and oranges" or should i say "toilet paper and oranges" is some of the other flushable rubbish that has been presented as a legitimate "argument" in this thread.

and if i guage the OP's intent, it was more a gathering of insight and opinion as opposed to setting up a forum for debate.

i am deftly trying to address and respect that, but for some reasons my attempts are being de-railed.

GBMelBlount
03-25-2010, 10:34 PM
Well, it depends on what THE definition of "the" is. :chuckle:

The definition is definitely defined by the definer and THE definer defines the definition of the defined definer.

Just sayin.

tony hipchest
03-25-2010, 10:37 PM
Have you not figured out that THE reason the focus is on apples is because this thread is about oranges?like most others here, it seems it is more about sour grapes. :laughing:

NJarhead
03-25-2010, 10:40 PM
painkillers derived from poppies (afghanistans major export) = apples

painkillers derived from cannabis (grows like weeds anywhere in america) = apples



:doh:

C'mon Tony, quit while you're ahead. That's a major reach there. MJ is not part of the HC bill. Your boy hasn't done anything to legalize it, so it's a non-issue with absolutely no ties to the discussion. None.

and if i guage the OP's intent, it was more a gathering of insight and opinion as opposed to setting up a forum for debate.

i am deftly trying to address and respect that, but for some reasons my attempts are being de-railed.

Again, even if that were true and you truly believed the "war on drugs" post was relevant, was the shot at GWB addressing the issue? Respecting the issue? I'd say it was geared more towards derailing the issue.

GBMelBlount
03-25-2010, 10:40 PM
like most others here, it seems it is more about sour grapes. :laughing:

No sour grapes here friend!

You and Obama are both class acts! :thumbsup:

NJarhead
03-25-2010, 10:41 PM
The definition is definitely defined by the definer and THE definer defines the definition of the defined definer.

Just sayin.

werd.

GBMelBlount
03-25-2010, 10:44 PM
werd.

Sorry, I was just working on my legalese. :chuckle:

NJarhead
03-25-2010, 10:44 PM
like most others here, it seems it is more about sour grapes. :laughing:

Not sour grapes. And I'd still buy your dumbass a beer if ever we get to a game. :wink02:

Without getting into it, I am extremely pissed off about how this bill was passed. Extremely. But I'll wait and see if 12 states turns into 32 and "We the people (the REAL majority)" can kill the frickin thing.

:drink:

NJarhead
03-25-2010, 10:45 PM
Sorry, I was just working on my legalese. :chuckle:
Don't be sorry. I actually just got done reading a book entitled "Lawyers and other Reptiles" so I understood completely. :chuckle:

NJarhead
03-25-2010, 10:46 PM
No sour grapes here friend!

You and Obama are both class acts! :thumbsup:

How dare you group that asshole in with my friend Tony! :chuckle:

tony hipchest
03-25-2010, 11:10 PM
:doh:

C'mon Tony, quit while you're ahead. That's a major reach there. MJ is not part of the HC bill. Your boy hasn't done anything to legalize it, so it's a non-issue with absolutely no ties to the discussion. None.
.

through about 8 pages i am pretty much the ONLY one to even address the OP's original topic and question.

What's your idea of Health Care Reform?

infact this thread laid dormant for about 2 days until i baited the trap and got GoSlash to bite (as expected).

as far as my ideas of health care reform go, legalizing marijuana would be a great first step.

dont call it a pharmaceutical drug. dont decriminalize it. legalize it and tax it just like cigs and beer.

get the people off the expensive, addictive, liver killing narcotics, and let them smoke some dope for some relief.

if firing up a fattie give an aids or cancer patient the munchies and helps them eat, then by all means, let them burn one. being that many of the patients are terminal, it makes no sense to allow the drug and insurance companies to profit off of them.

being that the govt often supports those who are too ill to work, you would think going the cheapest route is acceptable.

what part about this do you bleeding heart ribs disagree with?

(i know mel has no answer, and goulash would rather talk about wiping his butt. you have pretty much said you agree, so the above question was pretty much rhetorical. i already know the answer).

mel and slash need to lay off the e-viagra. :jerkit: as much as they take for pleasure, they are driving up the health insurance costs for us all. :sofunny:

sixstringlass
03-25-2010, 11:27 PM
So we agree that there is a big problem and that this may not be the best solution. Right?

I guarantee you it is not the best solution.

Your concerns regarding monopolies and big corporations are certainly understandable.

To be honest, I really couldn't care less about monopolies... or, rather, I couldn't until the mega corps started taking taxpayer money. If they're too big to fail, they're too big to exist, IMO. No, companies, big business, corporations... they all could do whatever they wanted within the law as far as I am concerned, but when they start being able to buy legislation and then make it a moral issue in the media by feeding the talking heads, well, then, besides us funding enormous CEO bonuses through taxes, they're stoking fears on the airwaves.

For me, all other things being equal, more competition tends to generate the best products at the best price and promotes innovation.....and let's face it, even big bloated greedy corporations outperform government.

I'd disagree here. While corporations and the private sector are very able to be efficient and promote competition, more often than not, it is merely the appearance of these things. It's all an illusion. I recommend David Korten's book When Corporations Rule The World. Korten is a conservative Republican and worked with several Fortune 500 companies, so it's not like he's some left wing nut or something. His book really opened my eyes as to the atrocities committed every day in this country by corporations controlling the government. Another recommendation is the film The Corporation. Required viewing, IMO, for anyone concerned with the problems of this world.

Also, the Post Office was solvent before it became privatized in the late 1970s. After privatization, it's slowly gone downhill. Admittedly, technological advances in communication have contributed to that, but... still, it was more solvent under the Feds. Another example is (dare I say it?) Medicare, which, until the government started piecemealing the day-to-day operations and costs to the private insurers, the costs were much lower and efficiency was a lot higher. I can get you published studies to read, if you're interested. I was actually floored. I come from a very conservative background and also believed that government was more bloat than anything. Turns out, the private sector appears to be vultures, looking for any carrion in society they can grab, every once in a while picking on the body before it's dead. (Read up on corporate raiding sometime... wow....)

I do tend to fear a lot of the things you mentioned above as I see how the government can operate once they get their tentacles into something.

But why are you afraid of it? I mean, some ephemeral fear about governmental interference is like jumping at shadows. Especially when it's demonstrably proven that the government is merely the legislative arm of the corporatocracy?

IfI could see more of a track record of success for the government controlling the production or distribution of good and services, I guess I would be a bit more confident perhaps.

Much of that actually has to do with the government contracting those services out to private entities, sorry to say. Not to say the government is/was/would be any more efficient, but costs inevitably go up in the private sector, efficiency is reduced with administrative overhead and bonuses for corporate butt lickers, and layoffs are considered the first priority for cutting costs and "increasing efficiency" (those rotten greedy workers, anyway). Again, I can't recommend Korten's book highly enough. Do get it and read it.

Admittedly, your mention of people overly concerned about the quality, price and rationing (long term) is indeed what my fears are.

I guess we'll see...:drink:

I guess I still have to ask "why?" Because there is no model for this, only supposition. Under true universal health care - a single payer system, for instance - yes, there are models world wide on how it works and what happens in regards to rationing, et cetera. But this? No, there's nothing even close to this... mess... anywhere else in the industrialized world. So, by there being no model for a mandate to buy private health insurance as a country in the entire history of the world, there is no reason whatsoever to be fearful of rationing or quality or anything else. Nobody knows how it'll work out. People can guess and the talking heads on TV can scare people with their guesses (because they seem so much more reliable than other people, I guess), but, in the end, nobody will know until it starts to happen. What we should be afraid of is, if the insurance lobbyists can get pocket lining legislation passed by spending $160-some odd million dollars, how much other legislation could get passed and what does that mean for We the People?

MasterOfPuppets
03-25-2010, 11:35 PM
if firing up a fattie give an aids or cancer patient the munchies and helps them eat, then by all means, let them burn one. being that many of the patients are terminal, it makes no sense to allow the drug and insurance companies to profit off of them.


good god tony....then the stoned bastards will turn to the FRUCTOSE which is destroying this country...think man, thiiiiiink !!!:tap:

GoSlash27
03-26-2010, 06:56 AM
as far as my ideas of health care reform go, legalizing marijuana would be a great first step.
Look... I've got nothing against legalizing marijuana (I think it needs legalized just on GP), but that is far from a "great first step". It wouldn't make a dent in the cost of health care. The industry is faltering and it's *not* because Americans don't have access to cheap, affordable ditch weed.

The problem is that hospitals are struggling under the weight of deadbeat patients, malpractice insurance, and insufficient competition among insurance providers. They have no choice but to pass the cost on to the consumer.
Each of these factors is a direct result of government red tape; regulations that force the hospitals to act in a way that's counter to their own best interest.

So tort reform, interstate competition, and stop forcing hospitals to treat deadbeats. That lowers the costs dramatically and forces competition to ensure that the savings are passed on to the consumer.

GBMelBlount
03-26-2010, 12:45 PM
sixstringlass;790116]

But why are you afraid of it? I mean, some ephemeral fear about governmental interference is like jumping at shadows. Especially when it's demonstrably proven that the government is merely the legislative arm of the corporatocracy?


It's pretty simple sixstring. I have seen what has happened to things like social security and it scares me. It started with good and noble intentions but is unfortunately not faring so well now.


sixstring

I guess I still have to ask "why?" Because there is no model for this, only supposition. Under true universal health care - a single payer system, for instance - yes, there are models world wide on how it works and what happens in regards to rationing, et cetera. But this? No, there's nothing even close to this... mess... anywhere else in the industrialized world........

but, in the end, nobody will know until it starts to happen. What we should be afraid of is, if the insurance lobbyists can get pocket lining legislation passed by spending $160-some odd million dollars, how much other legislation could get passed and what does that mean for We the People?

"Why" am I concerned? whether it is government involvement or corporate lobbyists, I am afraid this legislation is not going to improve things. It's as simple as that.

Hammer67
03-26-2010, 01:20 PM
Most people are missing the point. The federal government should not be in the business of forcing you to buy ANYTHING. It is unconstitutional. No where does it say that the federal goverment should provide the citizens access to health care insurance. And, for good reason. If anything, this is something that should be in the jurisdiction of the states.

As for the OP suggestion, from a macro level, I feel that Health Care is not a right, but a privlidge for people that work. Take all the emotional, hand holding, liberal crap out of it. Insurance reform should and can be handled by the Fed. Government oversite, tort reform, nationwide competition, rate gouging...all of these things can be monitored federally and don't cost much to enact. Why not START there instead of enacting a trillion dollar institution that is unconstitutional??

All I can say is thank god they got rid of that goverment option.

Today's politicians spit on the Constitution and it bothers me.

sixstringlass
03-26-2010, 02:21 PM
It's pretty simple sixstring. I have seen what has happened to things like social security and it scares me. It started with good and noble intentions but is unfortunately not faring so well now.

"Why" am I concerned? whether it is government involvement or corporate lobbyists, I am afraid this legislation is not going to improve things. It's as simple as that.

What happened to social security? (Other than the fact that no administration outside of Carter's could keep their hands out of it?)

But that still doesn't answer the question of why. Okay, I get that you are afraid of those things, but, considering that there's no precedent for it anywhere in the world, how does anybody know that it would risk socialism, lower quality, decrease competition, and risk rationing? I'm not defending the law, I'm just wondering where these fears come from, because, as far as my research has shown, there is no precedent for this kind of overhaul, therefore, nothing to base these fears on. They're irrational. Sticking to facts, the biggest worry is how this will affect the working poor and middle class families who make more than $30,000 per year, but less than $40,000 per year. Not some mythic threat of socialism. Not scare tactics of supposed outcomes that cannot, in any way, shape, or form, be proven.

Again, not defending the law 'cause I think it sucks, but I think it sucks for the reasons I've outlined above, not because there's this rumor - begun in 1961 - that it leads to socialism, rationing, et cetera.

sixstringlass
03-26-2010, 02:27 PM
Most people are missing the point. The federal government should not be in the business of forcing you to buy ANYTHING. It is unconstitutional. No where does it say that the federal goverment should provide the citizens access to health care insurance. And, for good reason. If anything, this is something that should be in the jurisdiction of the states.

As for the OP suggestion, from a macro level, I feel that Health Care is not a right, but a privlidge for people that work. Take all the emotional, hand holding, liberal crap out of it. Insurance reform should and can be handled by the Fed. Government oversite, tort reform, nationwide competition, rate gouging...all of these things can be monitored federally and don't cost much to enact. Why not START there instead of enacting a trillion dollar institution that is unconstitutional??

All I can say is thank god they got rid of that goverment option.

Today's politicians spit on the Constitution and it bothers me.

I'll agree with you on the point that the Feds shouldn't be forcing us to buy anything. That's been my problem all along. But the reason that the Constitution doesn't mention health care is because, back when it was written, doctors took care of people because they loved medicine, science, and learning about how to make people better. It wasn't a cottage industry designed to make profit. people paid doctors in chickens and meals and clothing whenever they could. (At least in this country in the mid-to-late 1700s.) The some of this country's most famed documents - specifically the Declarartion of Independence - does say that all Americans have the right to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. When corporations and/or the government and/or any institution can take away people's access to health care through economic warfare, THAT'S unconstitutional.

And your comment that health care is only for those who work, I disagree. Child labor, then? Forcing the disabled to work? Forcing people to work until the day they die? How selfish that comment is. Which would you rather have: a society where everyone has equal rights and equal access or a system where, one day, you might not be in the preferred group? Selfish attitudes that suggest that there are people in this country who don't deserve access to health care spit on the constitutional right to life.

NJarhead
03-26-2010, 03:00 PM
Today's politicians spit on the Constitution and it bothers me.

That's it in a nut shell for me as well.

Hammer67
03-26-2010, 04:10 PM
I'll agree with you on the point that the Feds shouldn't be forcing us to buy anything. That's been my problem all along. But the reason that the Constitution doesn't mention health care is because, back when it was written, doctors took care of people because they loved medicine, science, and learning about how to make people better. It wasn't a cottage industry designed to make profit. people paid doctors in chickens and meals and clothing whenever they could. (At least in this country in the mid-to-late 1700s.) The some of this country's most famed documents - specifically the Declarartion of Independence - does say that all Americans have the right to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. When corporations and/or the government and/or any institution can take away people's access to health care through economic warfare, THAT'S unconstitutional.

And your comment that health care is only for those who work, I disagree. Child labor, then? Forcing the disabled to work? Forcing people to work until the day they die? How selfish that comment is. Which would you rather have: a society where everyone has equal rights and equal access or a system where, one day, you might not be in the preferred group? Selfish attitudes that suggest that there are people in this country who don't deserve access to health care spit on the constitutional right to life.

Just classic disagreement of the role of the federal government. No one is saying you can't pay for services in this country. If you want health care, shop around and get it.

It is naive to just call this view "selfish"...when in fact, the person who is on welfare can also be considered selfish if they complain about someone taking it away. Take, for instance, the obese woman at the grocery store using the welfare debit card to buy junk food. Why should I pay for her health insurance? Or, the crack addict who has six kids so they can get government assistance to feed her kids?

At the end of the day, if someone has an emergency, the hospital HAS to treat them, they can't turn people away. And, you said it plainly....the right to the PURSUIT of happiness. The constitution does NOT guarantee it.

Long story short...do I believe there needs to be some sort of federal guidlines or oversight?? Sure. Do I think we should be forced to pay for someone else's healthcare??? NOOOOOOOOO! Am I naive to not want to support people that may be lazy or have chosen NOT to pursue the happiness afforded to them in this country...I think not. I have a heart...but I also have a mind, and believe that supporting everyone without any realistic economic basis, is heading for disaster. Our country is ALREADY in debt beyond repair and the value of the dollar is shrinking...when will people wake from their comas?

Leftoverhard
03-26-2010, 05:34 PM
Take, for instance, the obese woman at the grocery store using the welfare debit card to buy junk food. Why should I pay for her health insurance? Or, the crack addict who has six kids so they can get government assistance to feed her kids?

I've heard you use this mythical "obese crack addict woman with 6 kids addicted to junk food" story so many times that at this point you should probably be paying her (and her 6 fat kids) royalties every time you mention her in one of your posts. Also of note is how you choose not to mention the old (lazy, I'm sure) homeless amputee.

Why do you get to pick and choose who is worthy or important and who isn't? In your America everyone seems to be held to the same standards - regardless of class, social upbringing, genetics, luck, or any of the other differences that make us individuals and not robots.

Say you got to dole out what Americans will pay taxes on. It's a blank slate. What will we we taxed for? Are you going to decide? Schools? Roads? Military? Nothing?

I'd like to hear you answer this - because with such strong opinions about denying certain people health care based on your opinion of their lifestyle, you must have some interesting ideas.

NJarhead
03-26-2010, 05:37 PM
I've heard you use this mythical "obese crack addict woman with 6 kids addicted to junk food" story so many times that at this point you should probably be paying her (and her 6 fat kids) royalties every time you mention her in one of your posts. Also of note is how you choose not to mention the old (lazy, I'm sure) homeless amputee.

Why do you get to pick and choose who is worthy or important and who isn't? In your America everyone seems to be held to the same standards - regardless of class, social upbringing, genetics, luck, or any of the other differences that make us individuals and not robots.

Say you got to dole out what Americans will pay taxes on. It's a blank slate. What will we we taxed for? Are you going to decide? Schools? Roads? Military? Nothing?

I'd like to hear you answer this - because with such strong opinions about denying certain people health care based on your opinion of their lifestyle, you must have some interesting ideas.

WHAT....A....COMPLETE.....CROCK.......OF.......SHI T! :banging:

You really ARE a socialist aren't you. :mad:

SteelCityMom
03-26-2010, 06:06 PM
I've heard you use this mythical "obese crack addict woman with 6 kids addicted to junk food" story so many times that at this point you should probably be paying her (and her 6 fat kids) royalties every time you mention her in one of your posts. Also of note is how you choose not to mention the old (lazy, I'm sure) homeless amputee.

Why do you get to pick and choose who is worthy or important and who isn't? In your America everyone seems to be held to the same standards - regardless of class, social upbringing, genetics, luck, or any of the other differences that make us individuals and not robots.

Say you got to dole out what Americans will pay taxes on. It's a blank slate. What will we we taxed for? Are you going to decide? Schools? Roads? Military? Nothing?

I'd like to hear you answer this - because with such strong opinions about denying certain people health care based on your opinion of their lifestyle, you must have some interesting ideas.


Trust me, as someone who at one point needed welfare, I can attest to the fact that the program is very much broken and abused. Unless you've had to sit in the welfare office you have no clue as to the type of people who tend to mooch off of it.

As much as it annoys me to hear the tired argument of "fat, lazy babymakers are suckling at the teet of welfare"...it's not an altogether false statement. If there weren't people abusing this system, there would be no complaining about it whatsoever.

Leftoverhard
03-26-2010, 08:39 PM
Trust me, as someone who at one point needed welfare, I can attest to the fact that the program is very much broken and abused. Unless you've had to sit in the welfare office you have no clue as to the type of people who tend to mooch off of it.

As much as it annoys me to hear the tired argument of "fat, lazy babymakers are suckling at the teet of welfare"...it's not an altogether false statement. If there weren't people abusing this system, there would be no complaining about it whatsoever.

:noidea: Where did I say that abuses don't occur or that the program doesn't need fixing? Actually I have spent some time in a welfare office - really fun place, like disneyland almost; raised by a single mom - and very proud of my mom for raising me and my brother by herself - with some help from food stamps and HUD housing. Without some form of government assistance, my mom would have had to put us in a homeless shelter at some point.
Now I'm an adult - I consider myself LUCKY to be able to fend for myself - I don't judge people who can't fend for themselves and I am HAPPY to pay taxes to help those who can't always help themselves. The small fraction of people who abuse the system? So what? There are always going to be people who abuse any system. I really don't think it's the biggest problem facing us at the moment.
I do take offense to that ridiculous argument - that's what I was pointing out when I was commenting on Hammer's post. Some people love to make social commentary on things they have no idea about, things they can't even comprehend. A few of them post on this very website.

WHAT....A....COMPLETE.....CROCK.......OF.......SHI T! :banging:

You really ARE a socialist aren't you. :mad:

Dude...use your words - and while you're at it - read some books.
PS - Glen Beck books don't count.

MACH1
03-26-2010, 08:51 PM
Dude...use your words - and while you're at it - read some books.
PS - Glen Beck books don't count.

Only obaama approved books!

The American Socialist Movement 1897-1912,The Socialist Party of America, Socialism in America, Socialism in Theory and Practice, Cloward-Piven Strategy, ect...

chacha
03-26-2010, 08:56 PM
:
Dude...use your words - and while you're at it - read some books.
PS - Glen Beck books don't count.

what about this literary gem?

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:NCAOy1pFAp1jMM:http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0120a6b51351970b-500wi

MACH1
03-26-2010, 09:01 PM
How about this one, you know the one where he explains why he's a commy.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/513Mq510EjL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01_.jpg

chacha
03-26-2010, 09:13 PM
getting ready to go out, but one more for you Mach!

http://207.199.174.56/img/XsYWUYbCJU_georges-favorite-book.jpg

SteelCityMom
03-26-2010, 09:23 PM
:noidea: Where did I say that abuses don't occur or that the program doesn't need fixing? Actually I have spent some time in a welfare office - really fun place, like disneyland almost; raised by a single mom - and very proud of my mom for raising me and my brother by herself - with some help from food stamps and HUD housing. Without some form of government assistance, my mom would have had to put us in a homeless shelter at some point.
Now I'm an adult - I consider myself LUCKY to be able to fend for myself - I don't judge people who can't fend for themselves and I am HAPPY to pay taxes to help those who can't always help themselves. The small fraction of people who abuse the system? So what? There are always going to be people who abuse any system. I really don't think it's the biggest problem facing us at the moment.
I do take offense to that ridiculous argument - that's what I was pointing out when I was commenting on Hammer's post. Some people love to make social commentary on things they have no idea about, things they can't even comprehend. A few of them post on this very website.

Believe me, I understand fully that there are people who aren't on welfare to abuse they system. I was one of them myself. I've known people who've made no attempt to get off of it though whatsoever. I applaud your mother for doing what it takes though...I know it's tough sometimes. That's why it makes me doubly angry when I see people leeching off of foodstamps and welfare. That was pretty much my whole point. My apologies if I took what you said the wrong way and vice versa.

I have to add though that one of my all time favorite experiences was when I attempted to get cash assistance. My daughter was 2 and I had become a single mom with no help from her sperm donor financially. Made my own car payments, paid my rent (I wish I could have been on HUD..the waiting list in my county was 2 1/2 years though), utilities (did get some help with electric), car insurance, yadda yadda yadda. Since I was working full time I wasn't getting a ton in foodstamps (I think like $250/month) and had trouble coming up with grocery money at the end of each month. I thought...maybe getting on some cash assistance would help. Because of the hours I worked I was offered $20/month...TWENTY DOLLARS. I was told if I had more kids I could get more. I remember leaving the office in tears. This is one of the reasons it makes me angry when I see someone on welfare buying needless junk with their foodstamps. There I was eating Ramen everyday and many other people are buying carts full of junk food and bakery cakes, and they could afford too...because they had more kids. I've always felt that foodstamps should be set up like WIC...where you can only buy certain items that you NEED. All that other junk is extra stuff and is just luxury imo.

Again...I really don't mean to sound condescending towards people who actually treat the welfare system with respect. But you have to know that seeing things like almost on a daily basis just boiled my blood (and still does).

MACH1
03-26-2010, 09:26 PM
http://dancingczars.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/obama-death-czar-480.jpg

Hammer67
03-26-2010, 09:41 PM
I've heard you use this mythical "obese crack addict woman with 6 kids addicted to junk food" story so many times that at this point you should probably be paying her (and her 6 fat kids) royalties every time you mention her in one of your posts. Also of note is how you choose not to mention the old (lazy, I'm sure) homeless amputee.

Why do you get to pick and choose who is worthy or important and who isn't? In your America everyone seems to be held to the same standards - regardless of class, social upbringing, genetics, luck, or any of the other differences that make us individuals and not robots.

Say you got to dole out what Americans will pay taxes on. It's a blank slate. What will we we taxed for? Are you going to decide? Schools? Roads? Military? Nothing?

I'd like to hear you answer this - because with such strong opinions about denying certain people health care based on your opinion of their lifestyle, you must have some interesting ideas.

With a smarmy post like that, I am not going to waste my time giving you a civics lesson.

And, that's funny, I mentioned the obese women buying junk food once before as it made a big impression on me....is that how you define "so many"? That fact that you overstated this eliminates your relevance to this discussion from my perspective. Thank you, please drive through.

Hammer67
03-26-2010, 09:51 PM
Believe me, I understand fully that there are people who aren't on welfare to abuse they system. I was one of them myself. I've known people who've made no attempt to get off of it though whatsoever. I applaud your mother for doing what it takes though...I know it's tough sometimes. That's why it makes me doubly angry when I see people leeching off of foodstamps and welfare. That was pretty much my whole point. My apologies if I took what you said the wrong way and vice versa.

I have to add though that one of my all time favorite experiences was when I attempted to get cash assistance. My daughter was 2 and I had become a single mom with no help from her sperm donor financially. Made my own car payments, paid my rent (I wish I could have been on HUD..the waiting list in my county was 2 1/2 years though), utilities (did get some help with electric), car insurance, yadda yadda yadda. Since I was working full time I wasn't getting a ton in foodstamps (I think like $250/month) and had trouble coming up with grocery money at the end of each month. I thought...maybe getting on some cash assistance would help. Because of the hours I worked I was offered $20/month...TWENTY DOLLARS. I was told if I had more kids I could get more. I remember leaving the office in tears. This is one of the reasons it makes me angry when I see someone on welfare buying needless junk with their foodstamps. There I was eating Ramen everyday and many other people are buying carts full of junk food and bakery cakes, and they could afford too...because they had more kids. I've always felt that foodstamps should be set up like WIC...where you can only buy certain items that you NEED. All that other junk is extra stuff and is just luxury imo.

Again...I really don't mean to sound condescending towards people who actually treat the welfare system with respect. But you have to know that seeing things like almost on a daily basis just boiled my blood (and still does).

I have all the sympathy in the world for your situation. You are exactly the kind of person who should get assistance, and I gladly support it. And, I would be PISSED if I were you and see what I see...especially here in Detroit. It's a joke here.

I was pissed, too, when I was making peanuts and living off mac n cheese while people with the "bridge" card were buying steak at the grocery store. But, I kept working, and eventually started making a few bucks. It's the people who abuse this system that need to be held accountable....otherwise, where is the motivation? Where is the pursuit of happiness if the government just hands it too you? I would rather have the freedom to choose where my money goes.

I am not for universal health insurance provided by the federal government. It's not their business. Should they regulate it? Sure. Should they be in the insurance business? Absolutely not.

Sorry, not a socialist and never will be one.

Hammer67
03-26-2010, 10:05 PM
I do take offense to that ridiculous argument - that's what I was pointing out when I was commenting on Hammer's post. Some people love to make social commentary on things they have no idea about, things they can't even comprehend.


How could you possibly know that? :wtf: :doh:

HometownGal
03-28-2010, 07:55 PM
what about this literary gem?

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:NCAOy1pFAp1jMM:http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0120a6b51351970b-500wi

Better yet - how 'bout this one?

http://www.theodoresworld.net/pics/0408/proudofcountryImage2.jpg


or this one . . .


http://firstfriday.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/06obama_lg.jpg

Leftoverhard
03-28-2010, 08:10 PM
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2009/10/27/Going%20Rouge.jpg

smokin3000gt
03-28-2010, 08:14 PM
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2009/10/27/Going%20Rouge.jpg

Good one. :applaudit:









:doh:

silver & black
03-28-2010, 09:03 PM
I've advocated Tort reform, and opening up competition between the insurance companies across the country. I think those two things alone would drop costs measurably.

GoSlash27
03-28-2010, 10:20 PM
S&B,
They surely would. Notice that the bill they passed never got around to addressing cost?

NJarhead
03-29-2010, 11:10 AM
Dude...use your words - and while you're at it - read some books.
PS - Glen Beck books don't count.

Oh, I'm a reader alright. Do you know what my genre is? World History with an emphasis on the last 250 years.

I also know what the definition of Socialism is, and it has no place in this country. So if that's what you want, then you'll need to move to Europe. There are too many of us who would rather die than to see pigs like you bring that shit here.

Now, FO.

MACH1
03-29-2010, 11:51 AM
There are too many of us who would rather die than to see pigs like you bring that shit here.

:thumbsup:

chacha
03-29-2010, 12:08 PM
Oh, I'm a reader alright. Do you know what my genre is? World History with an emphasis on the last 250 years.

I also know what the definition of Socialism is, and it has no place in this country. So if that's what you want, then you'll need to move to Europe. There are too many of us who would rather die than to see pigs like you bring that shit here.

Now, FO.

:popcorn:

lamberts-lost-tooth
03-29-2010, 12:34 PM
: Some people love to make social commentary on things they have no idea about, things they can't even comprehend. A few of them post on this very website.


...so says one of the absolute WORST debaters on THIS website.

You might want to stick to posting "funny" pictures. That seems to be your strength.
:doh:

Leftoverhard
03-29-2010, 01:06 PM
Oh, I'm a reader alright. Do you know what my genre is? World History with an emphasis on the last 250 years.

I also know what the definition of Socialism is, and it has no place in this country. So if that's what you want, then you'll need to move to Europe. There are too many of us who would rather die than to see pigs like you bring that shit here.

Now, FO.

Your response reminds me of this time I was running a pool table for hours at a work party. I was just having fun with some co-workers but I'm a really good pool player (and a little lucky) and no one was beating me. I went to grab a beer from the bar and one of the supervisors was sitting there - one of the only people at work I never got along with at all, so there was never even a remote chance he was joking. He said "Oh, you think you're good. I would kick your ass if I had some quarters." I handed him a dollar and told him the tables take bills. No response, just a snooty shrug and he walked away.

That's you. No response. Nothing at all. :noidea:

Leftoverhard
03-29-2010, 01:19 PM
:thumbsup:

LLT said ...so says one of the absolute WORST debaters on THIS website.

You might want to stick to posting "funny" pictures. That seems to be your strength.
:doh:


There - I fixed that for you LLT - you must have meant to respond to MACH1 - he's the picture guy. :wave:

lamberts-lost-tooth
03-29-2010, 01:29 PM
Your response reminds me of this time I was running a pool table for hours at a work party. I was just having fun with some co-workers but I'm a really good pool player (and a little lucky) and no one was beating me. I went to grab a beer from the bar and one of the supervisors was sitting there - one of the only people at work I never got along with at all, so there was never even a remote chance he was joking. He said "Oh, you think you're good. I would kick your ass if I had some quarters." I handed him a dollar and told him the tables take bills. No response, just a snooty shrug and he walked away.

That's you. No response. Nothing at all. :noidea:

The only thing wrong with that analogy is that I & others have attempted to debate you on several topics. You either lie (i.e. Pilots suicide note) or you bob and weave without true facts.

You are actually more like the pool hall's Cliff Clavin... spouting useless information, which is more often then not of suspect origin...and generaly bearing little relevance to the conversation at hand.

lamberts-lost-tooth
03-29-2010, 01:31 PM
LLT said ...so says one of the absolute WORST debaters on THIS website.

You might want to stick to posting "funny" pictures. That seems to be your strength.
:doh:


There - I fixed that for you LLT - you must have meant to respond to MACH1 - he's the picture guy. :wave:

Nope.

It stands as correct the first time. But thank you....Imitation is the highest form of flattery.

MACH1
03-29-2010, 03:37 PM
LLT said ...so says one of the absolute WORST debaters on THIS website.

You might want to stick to posting "funny" pictures. That seems to be your strength.
:doh:


There - I fixed that for you LLT - you must have meant to respond to MACH1 - he's the picture guy. :wave:

Who's debating. If you'd made it past the sixth grade you might of figured that out. :doh:

You might as well move along, there's no free stuff for you here.

NJarhead
03-29-2010, 06:52 PM
Your response reminds me of this time I was running a pool table for hours at a work party. I was just having fun with some co-workers but I'm a really good pool player (and a little lucky) and no one was beating me. I went to grab a beer from the bar and one of the supervisors was sitting there - one of the only people at work I never got along with at all, so there was never even a remote chance he was joking. He said "Oh, you think you're good. I would kick your ass if I had some quarters." I handed him a dollar and told him the tables take bills. No response, just a snooty shrug and he walked away.

That's you. No response. Nothing at all. :noidea:


And this is a response? :noidea:

I'm not walking away asshole. And when the time comes, it will be me who forces your ass on a plane the hell out of here.

chacha
03-29-2010, 07:04 PM
And this is a response? :noidea:

I'm not walking away asshole. And when the time comes, it will be me who forces your ass on a plane the hell out of here.

why does everyone get so uptight here? And not for nothing but if i replied like this I can only imagine what some folks here would say. :noidea:

Leftoverhard
03-29-2010, 07:04 PM
So, I angered you. Doesn't take much does it? I'm confident that I would say the exact same things to you in person as I do here in this forum. I'm also positive you would not.

Leftoverhard
03-29-2010, 07:19 PM
If you'd made it past the sixth grade you might of figured that out. :doh:


I can't help myself here - and I NEVER call people out on spelling or grammar...BUT

Before sinking so deeply down into the depths of name calling and insults (especially when referring to a person's grade level) - it is advisable to make sure that your grammar is up to snuff.

Hammer67
03-29-2010, 08:18 PM
Why do you guys even bother? It's a waste of time trying to talk to a kool-aid drinker on an internet forum. They usually have no point anyway...it's typical liberal banter (ie. no research, no concept of history, Constitution is only valid if it makes them feel good).

And, for the people posting Nazi pictures with Republicans, you may want to actually study history a bit...read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich". Nazi's were Socialists...hate to burst your bubble.

MACH1
03-29-2010, 08:30 PM
I can't help myself here - and I NEVER call people out on spelling or grammar...BUT

Before sinking so deeply down into the depths of name calling and insults (especially when referring to a person's grade level) - it is advisable to make sure that your grammar is up to snuff.

http://bloggis.se/alphanum3r1c/bilder/GrammarNaziCat.jpg

NJarhead
03-29-2010, 11:12 PM
So, I angered you. Doesn't take much does it? I'm confident that I would say the exact same things to you in person as I do here in this forum. I'm also positive you would not.

Let me just assure you that you would feel very uncomfortable saying that crap around me. And I'm not afraid to admit that I'd likely knock your ass out if you did start spewing that garbage in front of me.

You, yourself did not anger me. Socialists in my country, in general, makes my blood boil.

NJarhead
03-29-2010, 11:14 PM
why does everyone get so uptight here? And not for nothing but if i replied like this I can only imagine what some folks here would say. :noidea:


You're new here. Wait until you've been around a while You'll get to know who's who.

NJarhead
03-29-2010, 11:17 PM
Why do you guys even bother? It's a waste of time trying to talk to a kool-aid drinker on an internet forum. They usually have no point anyway...it's typical liberal banter (ie. no research, no concept of history, Constitution is only valid if it makes them feel good).

And, for the people posting Nazi pictures with Republicans, you may want to actually study history a bit...read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich". Nazi's were Socialists...hate to burst your bubble.


You're 100% correct. At the same time, I really would like to pulverize one of them with a Louis-Ville Slugger. :noidea:

tony hipchest
03-29-2010, 11:25 PM
why does everyone get so uptight here? :

just wait til "cap and scam... errr trade" passes :muhaha:

:rofl:

a ton of people here said obama would never get elected. then, the same ton said that the health bill was dead in the water, and didnt have a shot in hell in passing.

anger washes the egg away. :noidea:

:popcorn:

NJarhead
03-29-2010, 11:32 PM
just wait til "cap and scam... errr trade" passes :muhaha:

:rofl:

a ton of people here said obama would never get elected. then, the same ton said that the health bill was dead in the water, and didnt have a shot in hell in passing.

anger washes the egg away. :noidea:

:popcorn:

It "passed?" Really? Okay.

revefsreleets
03-30-2010, 03:03 PM
Pages and pages and pages of insults, half-assed "analysis", random idiocy, and nary an actual solution offered.

It's actually simple.

-Start at the provider level, and mandate a Mayo or Cleveland Clinic-type pay system where doctors work on salaries, NOT for billable services rendered.
-Examine these organizations best practices and either require that they be adopted or reward emulating them
-Un-pin healthcare from employers. That system is beyond repair
-Make buying health insurance just like buying car insurance (Give people MORE choices, not less), BUT...
-Drop the state barriers. Consumers can pick and choose from any insurance provider in any state, which will ramp up competition exponentially
-Provide vouchers for people who need and deserve subsidies (although I expect implementation of all the previous suggestions would drive rates down to the point of affordability for most people)
-Tort reform

Those are just a few common-sense ideas that would TRULY reform healthcare. All that Obama and congress have done now is dump millions more into a completely corrupt and broken system and only bad can come of it. This wasn't "reform" at all....

HometownGal
03-30-2010, 07:06 PM
a ton of people here said obama would never get elected. then, the same ton said that the health bill was dead in the water, and didnt have a shot in hell in passing.

anger washes the egg away. :noidea:

:popcorn:

I can state without a shadow of a doubt that most of those pickleheads who voted "yay!" to the HC Bill have rotator cuff tears from the arm twisting Madame Pit Bull, Little Caesar Reid and The Savior did.

A ton also said that Obaaaaaama is a one and doner and I am proudly one of 'em. :thumbsup: Want to make a friendly bet there hipcheese? :drink:

tony hipchest
03-30-2010, 07:29 PM
Pages and pages and pages of insults, half-assed "analysis", random idiocy, and nary an actual solution offered.

It's actually simple.

* [:cookie: cutter responses] *

Those are just a few common-sense ideas that would TRULY reform healthcare. ....

a day late and a dollar short.

you have just insulted all those who have already given the suggestions you just parroted.

bravo. :applaudit:

MACH1
03-30-2010, 08:59 PM
a day late and a dollar short.

you have just insulted all those who have already given the suggestions you just parroted.

bravo. :applaudit:

Well, it was nice while it lasted. :rolleyes:

revefsreleets
03-31-2010, 11:03 AM
a day late and a dollar short.

you have just insulted all those who have already given the suggestions you just parroted.

bravo. :applaudit:

I have not seen all these ideas in one place anywhere on this board. And, as usual, I saw NOTHING from you but second string political hackry, and getting your ass kicked when you try to post up against people who actually know what they are talking about.

Status quo garbage for you... Got anything else, bunker-map boy?

lamberts-lost-tooth
03-31-2010, 11:26 AM
Why do you guys even bother? It's a waste of time trying to talk to a kool-aid drinker on an internet forum. They usually have no point anyway...it's typical liberal banter (ie. no research, no concept of history, Constitution is only valid if it makes them feel good).

And, for the people posting Nazi pictures with Republicans, you may want to actually study history a bit...read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich". Nazi's were Socialists...hate to burst your bubble.

Exactly...pages upon pages of attempting to get the "three amigos" to debate maturely.

Instead...we through our own prompting...have to read factless, ill-informed, beat around the bush, pseudo-comical Red-Herrings.

revefsreleets
03-31-2010, 11:32 AM
By the way, I joined the braintrust private group...you guys may want to actually make your little anti-revs hate group invitation only next time.

It was interesting reading...it's apparently open to all if any of you would like to see Tony, ric, Mach, El-Gonzo, MOP and a couple others devote post after post after post ripping me up. Good stuff:rofl:

43Hitman
03-31-2010, 12:01 PM
By the way, I joined the braintrust private group...you guys may want to actually make your little anti-revs hate group invitation only next time.

It was interesting reading...it's apparently open to all if any of you would like to see Tony, ric, Mach, El-Gonzo, MOP and a couple others devote post after post after post ripping me up. Good stuff


First of all, what does this have to do with HCR? Secondly, all of the social groups are readable. There is nothing private about them. There is only a couple that I know of that are by invite only, but you can still read them. So please stop trying to start flame wars Revs, the act is getting really old and it does nothing but derail the threads. The rest of us would like to debate things without the Tony vs. Revs sideshow.

:drink:

revefsreleets
03-31-2010, 12:07 PM
First of all, what does this have to do with HCR? Secondly, all of the social groups are readable. There is nothing private about them. There is only a couple that I know of that are by invite only, but you can still read them. So please stop trying to start flame wars Revs, the act is getting really old and it does nothing but derail the threads. The rest of us would like to debate things without the Tony vs. Revs sideshow.

:drink:

Should I have started a new thread asking people to check out the little circle-jerk? Then I'd have been accused of attention w horism.

Anyway, 2/3rds of the posts in HCR threads already have nothing to do with healthcare...what's a couple more gonna hurt?

43Hitman
03-31-2010, 12:17 PM
Should I have started a new thread asking people to check out the little circle-jerk? Then I'd have been accused of attention w horism.

Anyway, 2/3rds of the posts in HCR threads already have nothing to do with healthcare...what's a couple more gonna hurt?


No, you should keep it to PM's. I know, a novel idea right? You can thank me later.

revefsreleets
03-31-2010, 12:55 PM
No, you should keep it to PM's. I know, a novel idea right? You can thank me later.

Yes...thank you for reminding me why I took a little self-imposed vacation from the rampant idiocy of this place. Nest time I want to post something calling the entire board's attention to it, I'll PM every single member.

You're quite the brainiac....

43Hitman
03-31-2010, 01:21 PM
So you admit that you want the whole board to watch you and Tony have a pissing match? Okay. At least your honest about it. I wonder if you can make a post without trying to generalize the whole board as idiots or retarded. Also, if this board is full of idiocy, then why bother posting here? You never seem happy unless you're insulting someone or exalting yourself. Why is that?

revefsreleets
03-31-2010, 01:30 PM
So you admit that you want the whole board to watch you and Tony have a pissing match? Okay. At least your honest about it. I wonder if you can make a post without trying to generalize the whole board as idiots or retarded. Also, if this board is full of idiocy, then why bother posting here? You never seem happy unless you're insulting someone or exalting yourself. Why is that?

No...I want the whole board to see the childish behavior of a few posters who have chapped asses and cry a lot.

It only takes a few pissed off fools to wreck an entire board...and that little collection is a very good place to start...no reason not to shed a little light on the think-tank play pen they've cooked up.

Tony has little to do with it...he's like the 5th dimmest bulb in the group, and it ain't all that bright of a bunch to begin with.

steelax04
03-31-2010, 01:53 PM
Alright, I'm hijacking my thread back...

Regardless of whether Revs was a "day late and dollar short" it was pointed out that he echoed the general ideas on what HCR should be:

-Start at the provider level, and mandate a Mayo or Cleveland Clinic-type pay system where doctors work on salaries, NOT for billable services rendered.
-Examine these organizations best practices and either require that they be adopted or reward emulating them
-Un-pin healthcare from employers. That system is beyond repair
-Make buying health insurance just like buying car insurance (Give people MORE choices, not less), BUT...
-Drop the state barriers. Consumers can pick and choose from any insurance provider in any state, which will ramp up competition exponentially
-Provide vouchers for people who need and deserve subsidies (although I expect implementation of all the previous suggestions would drive rates down to the point of affordability for most people)
-Tort reform

So a question I have from the list... would the fierce competition proposed by opening up the state barriers hurt the system and end up driving providers out of business? Kind of like "price wars" for healthcare? Or would it eventually hit a floor and not be able to drop any further?

steelax04
03-31-2010, 01:56 PM
Another question, on Tort Reform. How do you regulate the amount of damages so a provider doesn't have to practice 'defensive medicine' but also have enough teeth for a lawsuit if they really do screw up? That's a pretty fine line to balance on imho.

Hammer67
03-31-2010, 02:22 PM
Another question, on Tort Reform. How do you regulate the amount of damages so a provider doesn't have to practice 'defensive medicine' but also have enough teeth for a lawsuit if they really do screw up? That's a pretty fine line to balance on imho.

That's a great question, I guess one would ask how it is handled in other kinds of law suits? As we know, sometimes monetary awards for civil suits can be ridiculous depending on the judge presiding...

SteelersinCA
03-31-2010, 02:30 PM
Another question, on Tort Reform. How do you regulate the amount of damages so a provider doesn't have to practice 'defensive medicine' but also have enough teeth for a lawsuit if they really do screw up? That's a pretty fine line to balance on imho.

I don't think regulating the amount of damages is really the issue. How do you put a price on some of the medical malpractice or wrong that goes on? The real issue is filtering out the frivolous claims where people are trying to make a quick buck whenever anyone screws up. I would start with a prima facie showing of a MINIMUM amount of damages. The things that don't meet that minimum can be sent to a review board for binding arbitration. You shouldn't be able to get millions for a coffee burn. You also have to keep in mind the people awarding these damages are the juries. So, I don't think capping damages is the answer. If you lose life or limb you should get millions, if you get burned by coffee, considerably less.

It's a delicate balance but when you have a Constitution that provides so much for so many, it's difficult to limit it. Another thing that seems to be gaining ground is a loser pays doctrine. However, good luck collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars from a turnip.

stlrtruck
03-31-2010, 02:44 PM
I think that part of that tort reform has to go in line with what service is being provided. I mean if I'm getting my teeth cleaned and the dentist jabs a hole in my jaw - there should be some sort of settlement. Then again if I'm having shoulder surgery and the doctor explains that there is a possiblity that I won't have 100% range of motion then a year later when I don't have 100% range of motion I shouldn't be able to take him to court. Just like sports, some surgeries have an assumption of risk. The doctor needs to lay them out in front of the person requiring surgery, then if the person decides to go for the surgery they understand that things may or may not work out 100% in their favor.

As for the HCR, it's going to be a constant battle because not everyone is going to be happy with everything that goes through. Let's face it, there are individuals out there today that are milking the system dry. If you change that system so they have to become an active part of it, then they won't be happy.

ARKIESTEEL
03-31-2010, 02:50 PM
Being a simple guy from the hills of Arkansas I think of things in a simple way so here is my thoughts

1. No one over the age of 18 deserves anything
2. more help for the working poor.......note the working part
3. if you decide that working aint your thing then starving should be your thing (not for those that have had jobs and are trying to find work, but them that dont want to work and aint going to work.) and while you starve you dont deserve health care.
4. if you are one of the folks that think we all DESERVE health care then you pay for it. I am trying to better my life, my child's life and my wife's life and I dont give a rats ass about you and my money should go to things I use like roads and police.
5. The government has no business telling me how to cover my health cares, if I want health care it is my problem not theirs


yeah pretty simple, but then again so am I

steelpinstripe72
03-31-2010, 03:14 PM
1. No one over the age of 18 deserves anything

5. The government has no business telling me how to cover my health cares, if I want health care it is my problem not theirs


Covered 1 already in another thread, but 5? Abso-fracking-lutely. They want to make it illegal to not have health care? If one could afford it, don't you think they'd have it already?

MACH1
03-31-2010, 04:11 PM
No...I want the whole board to see the childish behavior of a few posters who have chapped asses and cry a lot.

It only takes a few pissed off fools to wreck an entire board...and that little collection is a very good place to start...no reason not to shed a little light on the think-tank play pen they've cooked up.

Tony has little to do with it...he's like the 5th dimmest bulb in the group, and it ain't all that bright of a bunch to begin with.

You really aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer are you. As I've told you before your a hypocrite.

Do as I say, not as I do, really has a lot of meaning to you doesn't it. :binky:

HometownGal
03-31-2010, 04:23 PM
KNOCK IT THE HELL OFF AND GROW UP for God's sake. If this thread is hijacked with this nonsense any further, I'm personally going to be handing out infracts and bans. Enough is enough already.

Take this shit to the Playpen and don't forget your :binky:'s.

tony hipchest
03-31-2010, 04:25 PM
By the way, I joined the braintrust private group...you guys may want to actually make your little anti-revs hate group invitation only next time.


cool deal! :thumbsup:

what took you so long?

since the obvious whooooshed over your head, it is a public group that anyone is encouraged to join. as the 1st page says "welcome one, welcome all". it was set up to be non-exclusive from day one. nothing to hide there. :hunch:

thanks for promoting it. :applaudit: feel free to post and offer some of your valuable football insight anytime.

as for this thread, do you have any original ideas for health care reform that havent already been posted or that arent mainstream talking points on republican forums?

HometownGal
03-31-2010, 04:30 PM
My trigger finger is getting VERY itchy.

This is the last warning - the next post in this thread off topic will result in a vacation.

silver & black
04-01-2010, 07:14 AM
Being a simple guy from the hills of Arkansas I think of things in a simple way so here is my thoughts

1. No one over the age of 18 deserves anything
2. more help for the working poor.......note the working part
3. if you decide that working aint your thing then starving should be your thing (not for those that have had jobs and are trying to find work, but them that dont want to work and aint going to work.) and while you starve you dont deserve health care.
4. if you are one of the folks that think we all DESERVE health care then you pay for it. I am trying to better my life, my child's life and my wife's life and I dont give a rats ass about you and my money should go to things I use like roads and police.
5. The government has no business telling me how to cover my health cares, if I want health care it is my problem not theirs


yeah pretty simple, but then again so am I

:applaudit:

Aussie_steeler
04-01-2010, 07:31 AM
I have just started my vacation HTG so I am game to step in here and have a go.

It is a shame that Obama postponed his recent visit to Australia to head back to lead the battle for health reform. If he had of stepped foot in our country he may have got a chance to look at a health care system that is meeting the needs of a large chunk of australians. ( not all but a large share)

Next time he is here he should have a look at our health system. It isnt anywhere near perfect but it has levels of support that ensure that medical care is available to all.

We have a Medicare system that is funded by all taxpayers (proportionate to the amount you earn). Doctors can bulk bill the medicare system or charge their own fees and their clients can seek reimbursement of their entitled share from the medicare pool.

At the lowest level, anyone on social welfare support recieves a health care card that provides access to health care. Individuals on disability pensions, veterans affairs and aged pensions receive also receive free medical support and heavily subsidised pharmaceuticals.

All medical support is readily available through the public health network. Above the public health network is the private health network that is financed by the private health schemes that people elect to become members of. Workers who earn above the tax threshold get tax concessions on their Medicare tax payments if they join private health schemes. The benefits of private health schemes are that you can have the doctor and hospital of your choice on an almost immediate timeline.

The public system has extended waits for elective surgery, but immediate access for life threatening illnesses.

Australians feel very unsafe when travelling as our health system is usually pretty reliable with a high standard of care. If you get sick overseas it is a very scary situation from both a medical and financial stand point as the safety network we have afforded here is no where near existent in other countries

I am not saying our system is perfect. It leaks billions of dollars a year. We have a serious doctor shortage in rural and remote areas due to financial constraints. Dental health is suffering a real shortage in skilled workers and as a result across all areas of health our government is having to access skilled practitioners from overseas. Waiting lists for specialists are getting longer - but the common trend is that our population is aging and growing whilst our of skilled doctors and specialists is not growing proportionately.

As a parent of a child with a disabiity who has many surgeries I cannot fault the service she has received across all our tiers of access ( * via disability pension health card * public hospital waiting list * private health elective surgery). As of Thursday she needs grommets to improve her hearing (it is slowly declining) and even though it is elective surgery we need only wait two weeks before she will be operated on.

I guess we really are the lucky country and we do take some things for granted.

I am not an expert but I thought I would show that some countries do have functional health care systems and good things are possible if all levels of bureacracy are on the same page.

By the way HTG - I am really looking forward to my two week vacation. I hope you get to enjoy your easter break
as much as I will.