I have never heard someone get on TV and

Automatic Washer - The world's coolest Washing Machines, Dryers and Dishwashers

Help Support :

alr

Thank you for responding. I don't get your point though. A child like that overhere would get treated and there is no lifetime cap here. Daddy and mummy wouldn't end up in the poor house. Overhere there is no health insurance by the government, all private companies. People with minimum incomes can get some compensation through the tax office. Still our health care system is affordable. So it is possible to have health insurance for everybody through private insurance companies and keep the costs down for the people as well.
 
It is true though......

The members of congress and I presume WH personnel incl mr obama and family have conveniently exempted themselves from having to buy what they are forcing on the rest of the country. They won't be fined (potentially jailed) for not taking the government insurance like we will. Stands to reason if they won't take what they're forcing upon us it must not be nearly so good as they say it is. I think they should be subject to the same things they make us subject (slave?) to!

I have good insurance via employer but, I don't get it for free - we have premium taken from every pay check.... we pay in part for what we get - single or family. The insurance is not always what I would like it to be and doesn't cover all I would like at times but I do still get to choose my doctor(s) amongst other things - the GP that I have now is not one I ever want to give up for the government. Been with him a good 20 years now - he's a good friend and I have no intention changing!
 
Louis.......

That is precisly what many want here - private health care insurance which many have. Problem is, as has been stated above, that our government is hell bent on taking over health care - literally.... they will the insurnace company and will provide the coverage, mandate who, what, when, where, why etc and one thing that is not tolerated very long here is this kind of government intrusion into people's private lives. Our constitution does not provide for (allow) this kind of interference in people's lives. Our constitution purposly limits federal goverment to minimal influence in the lives of the populace, provides for the common defense (military/national security) and past that they are not supposed to be doing anything more for the most part.
The rest of the governing of the people is to be taken care of by the "many states" followed by the more local county, parrish or municipal goverments.

It's supposed to go like this - Local, State, Federal insted we have it exactly backwards these days - Federal, State, Local and that's what's got folks in such an uproar here - the feds are treading where they do not belong doing things that were never ment to be constitutionally speaking. I think I can safely say that after what's happened the last few days here that our founders are spinning in their graves.... this was not what they had in mind and these folks know it but don't give a rats rear about that or what the majority have to say about it!!!!!!!!
 
There is regulation overhere too. A health insurance is mandatory and every year it is defined what the basic insurance covers. Extra insurances for dental care or care not in the basic insurance (like more than basic fysical therapy) is possible. There are a lot of insurance companies participating in this market. Altough the insurance rates are low compared to the USA a lot of companies seem interested in earning money here.

BTW, perhaps this whole health insurance thing is not in the spirit of the Founding Fathers, but they are not among us anymore so who knows. Legislation develops, politics too fortunately! I'm glad that we're not going back to the political standards of several centuries ago, life wouldn't look pretty.
Besides that this is not the first issue that the federal government has settled and that you think they shouldn't have done. The list is long I think. To protest now against that principle is rather opportustic, that should have done a long time ago.
The majority has voted for Obama and he convinced a majority in the parliament so they voted in majority for this legislation. The USA are not a referendum country like Switzerland where every issue can be discussed and decided on a mountain. The voters have given a mandate to the president and to the Parliament. In that sense the majority has spoken in favor of a health insurance for everybody.
Not acknowledging this decision is a matter of disrespect for the democracy. To be honest I think the Founding Fathers would spin in their graves much faster about that.

For you personal I hope the "soup is not eaten as hot as it is served". It has taken quite an effort to get to this legislation and compromises have been made for that. I'm sure changes will be made in the future after evaluation of the system. All for the best and health of all Americans.

I wish you well,

Louis
 
... this was not what they had in mind and these folks know it but don't give a rats rear about that or what the majority have to say about it!!!!!!!!

But the majority changes every day! Latest polls indicate more people are in favor of the bill now that it passed than are against it. That's why we have representative government, not that it works all the time.

Let me ask this - if you feel everyone should not be required to carry health insurance, how do you feel about uninsured drivers? Is it wrong to require everyone who drives to have insurance? How about when you get hit by one of them?

Sure, it's great to keep government out of your life, but there are aspects of our lives where govt. is needed and wanted. If big business had it's way each power company would have it's own voltage and frequency, locking you into their appliances, making in very hard to switch. Want and example - look at cell phone companies. Each has it's own phones and are pretty much incompatible with each other. Sure, if you really try you can get SOME phones reprogrammed to work on other carriers, but it's not easy and it's not cheap. From my standpoint it's a stupid system.

People harp on the abuses of the poor, and how the poor will scam the system. But there are in many cases more egregious abuses by the rich and corporate America, they are just better at covering their tracks and asses.
 
Louis.......

Sometimes you have to agree to disagree...... at any rate this was designed as a representative republic rather than a democracy. In this design democracy is the degeneration or disintegration of a republic or in this case the republic.

No one would want to live as they did 230 years ago however, I think that the core ideas should still be adhered to and that basically does not happen any more. Even though we're 230 years this side of the founding and many things have changed - some for the good, some for the bad - the core ideas, if adhered to, should still, for the most part, work and work
well. That is not what is happening - it takes 2/3 of the states to convene and Constitutional Convention to change it.... not going to happen anytime soon so what we have we need to abide by.

Yes, majority ruled in November 2008 and I do think that most of those did want some kind of reform however, I'm not so sure that this is what a good number of them had in mind - they definately did not count the cost at the time.

As to the disrespect issue - works both ways and has happened both ways. I have much respect for the office of the President and other bodies of goverment but, many times, it's another thing to respect the people occuping those offices or positions of power. People have to earn the respect - they don't just get it because a little over 50% (or more sometimes) of the populace are pursuaded to put them there. I'd be much more respectful of mr obama and congress if they just used some common sense in their approach to things sometimes - not that you want to govern that way all the time but it might temper things abit. Our government set up just does not allow for this kind of power grab by the feds - the power, for the most part, resides where the people are.... the states and the local communities, counties/parishes, towns, cities where people live, worship, work, play etc. Anytime the federal pushes this aside then there are definately problems.
 
Hey guys......

I'm calling a halt on my discussion, debating etc. It's been enjoyable and we're not all going to agree on all the things related to this health care issue or others that will surely come up over time. I think we can all agree that some reform has been needed - is needed but how all that happens is where we all go in different directions all over the place but, that's what makes all this so unique. I don't think we've been overly ugly about things (well maybe the Pelosi/witch thing was - lol!) overall and I'm glad for that.

Thanks for all the spirited and passionate discussion over the last few days - enjoyable regardless of the perspective. I'm back on the road this coming weekend to pick up the 2nd machine in my collection - the 70s Westy frontloader that is on my profile photo. It will take its place next to the pristine Kenmore 600 - sooooo.... back to the main reason for the site! Enjoyed it guys - til the next one!!!!
 
Louis

" I don't get your point though. A child like that overhere would get treated and there is no lifetime cap here. Daddy and mummy wouldn't end up in the poor house. Overhere there is no health insurance by the government, all private companies. People with minimum incomes can get some compensation through the tax office. Still our health care system is affordable. So it is possible to have health insurance for everybody through private insurance companies and keep the costs down for the people as well."

Even though your insurance in the Netherlands is private, there is government regulation (as you mentioned above) which tells the companies what they can and cannot do and how much they can charge. That needs to be done here in the U.S.A. Some of our utilities are like that, as are some other forms of insurance.

In your first post above, you said "Overhere in the Netherlands we only have private insurance companies for healthcare and our costs are not out of control and besides that overhere everybody has an affordable insurance. If it can be done overhere why shouldn't it be possible in the USA?"

It is possible to do that here. But, the insurance companies and corporate America have powerful lobbyists who try to influence the politicians and the politicians always try to get concessions for themselves and their districts. For these (and many other) reasons, it is very rare indeed for Congress to pass a simple, intelligent, straight forward bill.

Another thing that needs to be done is reign in frivolous medical lawsuits. These lawsuits raise the costs of malpractice insurance, equipment, drugs, etc, which raises the overall costs of health care. So far, I haven't seen where this health care reform has addressed that particular problem; maybe because many, if not most, politicians are lawyers and they want to protect their own.
 
Obviously no one knows what the founders of our nation would have thought of health care reform, but it's worth recalling that the governmental system they created was without precendent at the time. One reason some early Americans proposed making George Washington king was that they had no concept of a country without some sort of hereditary royalty. Thankfully Washington refused to entertain this idea, cooler heads prevailed and we didn't become a monarchy. The whole point is that our Founding Fathers were really ballsy guys and not at all afraid to think out of the box. I hardly think they'd be afraid to consider some nationwide oversight of a dysfunctional health system.

Allowing each state to control their own healthcare has become a big problem in many respects. How do you enact reform when there are fifty sets of rules? And what about people who have a pre-existing condition but need to move from one state to another? More than likely that can't be done as they'd never be able to afford insurance in the new state.

And finally, what about precedent? We've had Medicare for decades. Medicare is a far greater example of socialized health care than the reform bill just passed, and was in fact expanded by the Bush administration. I am perplexed as to why this is ignored by the "Obama is a socialist" crowd.

The big problem with our current state regulated, insurance company driven system is that it just doesn't work well. It's hugely expensive and the care it provides ranges from fabulous down to non-existant, depending on the circumstances and location of the individual person. There are some things that should be gambled over, but healthcare isn't one of them.

Here's a link to an interesting article from the Council on Foreign Relations on how our current system and its high costs reduce the competiveness of American business. Remember that these costs were a big part of GM's bankruptcy, and if GM couldn't make the current system work well, consistently, and affordably after years and years of dealing with it, then who can?

Loading…

www.cfr.org
 
Before I go on this discussion....

David, like your post.... I actually have some agreement with a good part of that.... Thanks! Done now!
 
David

I agree with you, two major issues that should be addressed. But as you described it is not easy to do so. Too much money involved that have nothing to do with healthcare itself. It's all about people's own interests, not what the country needs anymore. People easily forget. One of the things that have been forgotten are the famous words of President John F. Kennedy:"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country".
 
"Ask not..."

Yes indeed.

The dirty little secret nobody wants to mention is that the medical industry has been de-facto nationalized for quite some time, as the federal government pays >50% of all healthcare dollars, and medicare reimbursement by diagnosis is what pretty much every private insurer follows for reimbursement as well.

Ultimately what it really comes down to is this: Given the healthcare bill's provisions for a national database of health information and a push for electronic medical records, anyone who believes this data is private is deluding themselves. Do you folks, who are always saying 'the republicans want to kill us!' want the government, whose administrations come and go, to have this information?

See attached link wrt privacy of medical records.
Hunter

Loading…

online.wsj.com
 
Do you folks, who are always saying 'the republicans want to kill us!' want the government, whose administrations come and go, to have this information?

As one of those people given the basic choice between death and sharing my records I'd share in a heartbeat. I want and expect safeguards to be in place, but it has always been relatively easy to find out about a person's medical problems if you really wanted to.
 
YAY FOR THE HEALTH CARE BILL

I haven't been this happy since november 2008. The majority of Americans have finally had thier say on health care in the USA. Americans approve of this bills provisions by more that 70% the president was elected by a clear majority of the voters. The majority of Americans love thier congressman and thier senators, this will likely help increase progressive candidates in the fall. I know everyone has a right to thier political opinion butt when your opinions are so out of step with the majority of Americans and the rest of the world it really makes me wonder if I or many other club members will take your opinions on anything seriously.
 
Not much more to add from me other than I think that the majority of Americans are for and have been for it all along and it is the media has been promoting the furor vehemently and you know why that is... Bad news and controversy gets viewers and viewers bring in program sponsers aka money.

But soon as some really big celeb or a blonde haired blue eyed little white girl gets murdered or abducted (colored kids need not apply for this part) the health care bill will be "yesterdays news"
 
Foraloysius, you are welcome, and thanks 58Limited for clarifying my post. The kid in my example and his family would have very different outcomes in the Netherlands vs. USA. I am done with this post, i am going dancing in the streets with gansky :-)
 

Similar threads

panthera
The best comment on the election I have ever read
Replies
1
Views
2
hydralique
H
E
Eating in America and around the world
Replies
10
Views
11
frigilux
frigilux

Latest posts

Back
Top