randycmaynard
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
- Messages
- 655
Prefer Tea........
Leave the lumps out..... too many of those already!
Leave the lumps out..... too many of those already!
I have never heard someone get on TV and
- Thread starter randycmaynard
- Start date
Wa-wa-wa-wa-Waterloo!
WE GOT HEALTH CARE BAAAABYYYYYYYY!!!!!!
We should be rejoicing, singing and dancing in the streets Democrats, Liberals and Progressives - we did it! This is a massive victory for our country, our congress, and our president. This sends a huge message to the entire world that despite the deep divisions in our society, we can pull our collective heads out of our asses, recognize a problem and begin to solve it! This bill isn't perfect, it doesn't solve every problem but it's a beginning. I've been doing the Charlie Brown Happy-Dance for two days - we did it!
A quick link to give some balance to the feeble right-wing propaganda machine - from a Republican no less!
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value=""></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
http://www.frumforum.com/waterloo
WE GOT HEALTH CARE BAAAABYYYYYYYY!!!!!!
We should be rejoicing, singing and dancing in the streets Democrats, Liberals and Progressives - we did it! This is a massive victory for our country, our congress, and our president. This sends a huge message to the entire world that despite the deep divisions in our society, we can pull our collective heads out of our asses, recognize a problem and begin to solve it! This bill isn't perfect, it doesn't solve every problem but it's a beginning. I've been doing the Charlie Brown Happy-Dance for two days - we did it!
A quick link to give some balance to the feeble right-wing propaganda machine - from a Republican no less!
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value=""></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
http://www.frumforum.com/waterloo
Civility . . .
One thing I didn't understand at the start of the thread was the ugly comment about Pelosi costing taxpayers "plenty" by flying between the Bay Area and Washington D.C. Being in D.C. to attend to congressional business is what every member of Congress is supposed to do, yet they are also supposed to visit their home districts frequently. Pretty much every member of Congress flies back and forth from their home districts, so it's pointless to blame Pelosi for doing this.
One thing I didn't understand at the start of the thread was the ugly comment about Pelosi costing taxpayers "plenty" by flying between the Bay Area and Washington D.C. Being in D.C. to attend to congressional business is what every member of Congress is supposed to do, yet they are also supposed to visit their home districts frequently. Pretty much every member of Congress flies back and forth from their home districts, so it's pointless to blame Pelosi for doing this.
Flying around
I know here in Canada there's always some tempest in a teapot about some politician or another, even the Prime Minister flying around too much and how much they spend doing it. Well maybe some of the lesser ones should be taking commercial flights but I expect our Prime Minister and the top execs, even though I can't stand to look at him, to be out there and seeing what's going on around the country. Not holed up in their office all the time. It's a pittance really in the big scheme of things and both Canada and the USA are massive in size so of course it's gonna cost some money, that's the way it is.
I know here in Canada there's always some tempest in a teapot about some politician or another, even the Prime Minister flying around too much and how much they spend doing it. Well maybe some of the lesser ones should be taking commercial flights but I expect our Prime Minister and the top execs, even though I can't stand to look at him, to be out there and seeing what's going on around the country. Not holed up in their office all the time. It's a pittance really in the big scheme of things and both Canada and the USA are massive in size so of course it's gonna cost some money, that's the way it is.
randycmaynard
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
- Messages
- 655
No you shouldn't be rejoicing and singing in the streets
Count the cost - you're rear, mine and everyone elses is going to be paying out our collective asses for this mess. There will be no savings of $2,500 yearly - if anything it will cost you that much and more if you make any kind of decent money at all. Keep in mind all those numbers from CBO were and still are preliminary it will cost far, far more than most of you will be willing to want to pay for this mess.
No, don't rejoice - hard to dance when a big chunk of you're rear is gone!
Count the cost - you're rear, mine and everyone elses is going to be paying out our collective asses for this mess. There will be no savings of $2,500 yearly - if anything it will cost you that much and more if you make any kind of decent money at all. Keep in mind all those numbers from CBO were and still are preliminary it will cost far, far more than most of you will be willing to want to pay for this mess.
No, don't rejoice - hard to dance when a big chunk of you're rear is gone!
While your dancing in the street
You had better hope to hell you dont break your leg and find out just how bad the ER is right now.. After 5 Billion in cuts just what do you think it will be like? Insurance rates are going to be higher than your house payments/
You had better hope to hell you dont break your leg and find out just how bad the ER is right now.. After 5 Billion in cuts just what do you think it will be like? Insurance rates are going to be higher than your house payments/
48bencix
Well-known member
Now we can move on
I appreciate all of the hard work that went into passing the Health Care bill. Nancy Pelosi is certainly brilliant and very dogged. Of course the Repubs will try everything to derail this. I just wish we had their mindset when they got us into Iraq, if we had, we probably would not still be there 7 years later!
Anyway, I am thrilled about this and pleased that President Obama can finally move onto other things that need to be done for our country. Health Care coverage is a base to build from, we still need alternate energy sources, and financial reform so that we don't get into such a huge mess again.
I appreciate all of the hard work that went into passing the Health Care bill. Nancy Pelosi is certainly brilliant and very dogged. Of course the Repubs will try everything to derail this. I just wish we had their mindset when they got us into Iraq, if we had, we probably would not still be there 7 years later!
Anyway, I am thrilled about this and pleased that President Obama can finally move onto other things that need to be done for our country. Health Care coverage is a base to build from, we still need alternate energy sources, and financial reform so that we don't get into such a huge mess again.
Apropos of the moment...
This is for many of us, even the album title fits...
http://popup.lala.com/popup/504684672188473802
This is for many of us, even the album title fits...
http://popup.lala.com/popup/504684672188473802
Ultimately,
both parties lie and are filled with scoundrels.
The difficulty with somehing like this is that when governments destroy the private sector (which they will as that is the goal, having a public option and nothing else) those who are ... undesirable can simply be socially engineered away.
Perhaps as a woman I know who has a few chronic conditions said it most aptly: As soon as someone like me is undesirable, it is off to the gas chambers we go.
And don't say that the demos AND the repubs don't believe the same thing.
both parties lie and are filled with scoundrels.
The difficulty with somehing like this is that when governments destroy the private sector (which they will as that is the goal, having a public option and nothing else) those who are ... undesirable can simply be socially engineered away.
Perhaps as a woman I know who has a few chronic conditions said it most aptly: As soon as someone like me is undesirable, it is off to the gas chambers we go.
And don't say that the demos AND the repubs don't believe the same thing.
lordkenmore
Well-known member
"those who are ... undesirable can simply be socially engineered away."
Is the private sector going to be better in this case? Emphatically NO. You don't have to look far to see insurance companies do anything and everything they can to avoid paying a claim. In fact, insurance companies like to have people stay healthy a long time, many years, pay in huge amount of premiums, and then--when they have even a relatively minor problem come up--immediately drop dead before they cost the company a dime.
It's funny, because I've heard many conservatives whine about how the government will take this or that option away. Reduce the number of people getting this test. Eliminate that treatment. Etc, etc, etc. Yet, this is standard business procedure at any insurance company. But I guess insurance companies are not government, so it must be OK, even if people end up dropping dead right and left.
Is the private sector going to be better in this case? Emphatically NO. You don't have to look far to see insurance companies do anything and everything they can to avoid paying a claim. In fact, insurance companies like to have people stay healthy a long time, many years, pay in huge amount of premiums, and then--when they have even a relatively minor problem come up--immediately drop dead before they cost the company a dime.
It's funny, because I've heard many conservatives whine about how the government will take this or that option away. Reduce the number of people getting this test. Eliminate that treatment. Etc, etc, etc. Yet, this is standard business procedure at any insurance company. But I guess insurance companies are not government, so it must be OK, even if people end up dropping dead right and left.
Pardon the length of this post, but for anyone who's more interested in what this law actually does, here ya go:
____________
Good afternoon,
Since the House of Representatives voted to pass health reform
legislation on Sunday night, the legislative process and its political
impact have been the focus of all the newspapers and cable TV pundits.
Outside of DC, however, many Americans are trying to cut through the
chatter and get to the substance of reform with a simple question: "What
does health insurance reform actually mean for me?" To help, we've put
together some of the key benefits from health insurance reform.
Let's start with how health insurance reform will expand and
strengthen coverage:
a.. This year, children with pre-existing conditions can no longer
be denied health insurance coverage. Once the new health insurance exchanges
begin in the coming years, pre-existing condition discrimination will become
a thing of the past for everyone.
b.. This year, health care plans will allow young people to remain
on their parents' insurance policy up until their 26th birthday.
c.. This year, insurance companies will be banned from dropping
people from coverage when they get sick, and they will be banned from
implementing lifetime caps on coverage. This year, restrictive annual limits
on coverage will be banned for certain plans. Under health insurance reform,
Americans will be ensured access to the care they need.
d.. This year, adults who are uninsured because of pre-existing
conditions will have access to affordable insurance through a temporary
subsidized high-risk pool.
e.. In the next fiscal year, the bill increases funding for
community health centers, so they can treat nearly double the number of
patients over the next five years.
f.. This year, we'll also establish an independent commission to
advise on how best to build the health care workforce and increase the
number of nurses, doctors and other professionals to meet our country's
needs. Going forward, we will provide $1.5 billion in funding to support
the next generation of doctors, nurses and other primary care
practitioners -- on top of a $500 million investment from the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
Health insurance reform will also curb some of the worst insurance
industry practices and strengthen consumer protections:
a.. This year, this bill creates a new, independent appeals process
that ensures consumers in new private plans have access to an effective
process to appeal decisions made by their insurer.
b.. This year, discrimination based on salary will be outlawed. New
group health plans will be prohibited from establishing any eligibility
rules for health care coverage that discriminate in favor of higher-wage
employees.
c.. Beginning this fiscal year, this bill provides funding to states
to help establish offices of health insurance consumer assistance in order
to help individuals in the process of filing complaints or appeals against
insurance companies.
d.. Starting January 1, 2011, insurers in the individual and small
group market will be required to spend 80 percent of their premium dollars
on medical services. Insurers in the large group market will be required to
spend 85 percent of their premium dollars on medical services. Any insurers
who don't meet those thresholds will be required to provide rebates to their
policyholders.
e.. Starting in 2011, this bill helps states require insurance
companies to submit justification for requested premium increases. Any
company with excessive or unjustified premium increases may not be able to
participate in the new health insurance exchanges.
Reform immediately begins to lower health care costs for American
families and small businesses:
a.. This year, small businesses that choose to offer coverage will
begin to receive tax credits of up to 35 percent of premiums to help make
employee coverage more affordable.
b.. This year, new private plans will be required to provide free
preventive care: no co-payments and no deductibles for preventive services.
And beginning January 1, 2011, Medicare will do the same.
c.. This year, this bill will provide help for early retirees by
creating a temporary re-insurance program to help offset the costs of
expensive premiums for employers and retirees age 55-64.
d.. This year, this bill starts to close the Medicare Part D 'donut
hole' by providing a $250 rebate to Medicare beneficiaries who hit the gap
in prescription drug coverage. And beginning in 2011, the bill institutes a
50% discount on prescription drugs in the 'donut hole.'
Thank you,
Nancy-Ann DeParle
Director, White House Office of Health Reform
____________
Good afternoon,
Since the House of Representatives voted to pass health reform
legislation on Sunday night, the legislative process and its political
impact have been the focus of all the newspapers and cable TV pundits.
Outside of DC, however, many Americans are trying to cut through the
chatter and get to the substance of reform with a simple question: "What
does health insurance reform actually mean for me?" To help, we've put
together some of the key benefits from health insurance reform.
Let's start with how health insurance reform will expand and
strengthen coverage:
a.. This year, children with pre-existing conditions can no longer
be denied health insurance coverage. Once the new health insurance exchanges
begin in the coming years, pre-existing condition discrimination will become
a thing of the past for everyone.
b.. This year, health care plans will allow young people to remain
on their parents' insurance policy up until their 26th birthday.
c.. This year, insurance companies will be banned from dropping
people from coverage when they get sick, and they will be banned from
implementing lifetime caps on coverage. This year, restrictive annual limits
on coverage will be banned for certain plans. Under health insurance reform,
Americans will be ensured access to the care they need.
d.. This year, adults who are uninsured because of pre-existing
conditions will have access to affordable insurance through a temporary
subsidized high-risk pool.
e.. In the next fiscal year, the bill increases funding for
community health centers, so they can treat nearly double the number of
patients over the next five years.
f.. This year, we'll also establish an independent commission to
advise on how best to build the health care workforce and increase the
number of nurses, doctors and other professionals to meet our country's
needs. Going forward, we will provide $1.5 billion in funding to support
the next generation of doctors, nurses and other primary care
practitioners -- on top of a $500 million investment from the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
Health insurance reform will also curb some of the worst insurance
industry practices and strengthen consumer protections:
a.. This year, this bill creates a new, independent appeals process
that ensures consumers in new private plans have access to an effective
process to appeal decisions made by their insurer.
b.. This year, discrimination based on salary will be outlawed. New
group health plans will be prohibited from establishing any eligibility
rules for health care coverage that discriminate in favor of higher-wage
employees.
c.. Beginning this fiscal year, this bill provides funding to states
to help establish offices of health insurance consumer assistance in order
to help individuals in the process of filing complaints or appeals against
insurance companies.
d.. Starting January 1, 2011, insurers in the individual and small
group market will be required to spend 80 percent of their premium dollars
on medical services. Insurers in the large group market will be required to
spend 85 percent of their premium dollars on medical services. Any insurers
who don't meet those thresholds will be required to provide rebates to their
policyholders.
e.. Starting in 2011, this bill helps states require insurance
companies to submit justification for requested premium increases. Any
company with excessive or unjustified premium increases may not be able to
participate in the new health insurance exchanges.
Reform immediately begins to lower health care costs for American
families and small businesses:
a.. This year, small businesses that choose to offer coverage will
begin to receive tax credits of up to 35 percent of premiums to help make
employee coverage more affordable.
b.. This year, new private plans will be required to provide free
preventive care: no co-payments and no deductibles for preventive services.
And beginning January 1, 2011, Medicare will do the same.
c.. This year, this bill will provide help for early retirees by
creating a temporary re-insurance program to help offset the costs of
expensive premiums for employers and retirees age 55-64.
d.. This year, this bill starts to close the Medicare Part D 'donut
hole' by providing a $250 rebate to Medicare beneficiaries who hit the gap
in prescription drug coverage. And beginning in 2011, the bill institutes a
50% discount on prescription drugs in the 'donut hole.'
Thank you,
Nancy-Ann DeParle
Director, White House Office of Health Reform
Some how a certain vocal group in this country has gotten to repeat the mantra "I got mine, screw you" over and over again that it's getting to be part of the fabric of this country. This piece of the fabric needs to be ripped out and burned. We all sink or swim together.
You think the uninsured don't cost you anything? Think again. Apparently this can[t be repeated enough. They cost us more than insuring them. If a low income person comes into the ER with a life threatening condition and is treated for say $50,000, not an unreasonable figure, that cost is past on to all of us. Now if they had basic insurance costing $2,000 a year that is 25 years of coverage! That cost is spread over many, many more people, net cost to each of us, less. Plus, preventive treatment might have stopped the emergency from happening - why is that so hard for many to understand?
Take off your partisan glasses, look at your family and neighbors who are uninsured, what exactly do you want for them? Those against the plan offered NO, Zero, Zip alternatives- no is not an answer. You don't like the plan? Offer a solution, don't just stand there going "Naa NAA NAA, I can't hear you".
You think the uninsured don't cost you anything? Think again. Apparently this can[t be repeated enough. They cost us more than insuring them. If a low income person comes into the ER with a life threatening condition and is treated for say $50,000, not an unreasonable figure, that cost is past on to all of us. Now if they had basic insurance costing $2,000 a year that is 25 years of coverage! That cost is spread over many, many more people, net cost to each of us, less. Plus, preventive treatment might have stopped the emergency from happening - why is that so hard for many to understand?
Take off your partisan glasses, look at your family and neighbors who are uninsured, what exactly do you want for them? Those against the plan offered NO, Zero, Zip alternatives- no is not an answer. You don't like the plan? Offer a solution, don't just stand there going "Naa NAA NAA, I can't hear you".
the difference with private...
....is that you have more choice. And you can self pay.
No, it isn't affordable, but if the difference "I will sacrifice my assets for my health" at least you're alive.
And the not paying for things by private industry is not the equivalent of 'society re-engineering.'
And, as for partisan glasses, everyone has them. They are rampant on this site. There are a few people here like me who thinks that both major political parties in this country do not have the nation's best interest at heart, but most of the people on this site just think that one party is just angels, and the other devils. The reality is both parties are out for their own enrichment, and don't give a damn about anyone but themselves. Anyone who believes otherwise is, in my opinion, deluding themselves.
....is that you have more choice. And you can self pay.
No, it isn't affordable, but if the difference "I will sacrifice my assets for my health" at least you're alive.
And the not paying for things by private industry is not the equivalent of 'society re-engineering.'
And, as for partisan glasses, everyone has them. They are rampant on this site. There are a few people here like me who thinks that both major political parties in this country do not have the nation's best interest at heart, but most of the people on this site just think that one party is just angels, and the other devils. The reality is both parties are out for their own enrichment, and don't give a damn about anyone but themselves. Anyone who believes otherwise is, in my opinion, deluding themselves.
appliguy
Well-known member
To quote Miss Josephine from the movie Beauty Shop...
"Settle down hussies this ain't no remake of White Mama, Black Mama......I throw the piece card on ya!!!!" I said that to say this......I think it is fine for people to have differences of opinions but PLEASE let us remember to have respect for ourselves and for the other members who post here and keep a civil tounge in our heads....so far this thread has gotten a little heated but not to bad.....but PLEASE lets not let it get any worse than it is right now. PAT COFFEY
"Settle down hussies this ain't no remake of White Mama, Black Mama......I throw the piece card on ya!!!!" I said that to say this......I think it is fine for people to have differences of opinions but PLEASE let us remember to have respect for ourselves and for the other members who post here and keep a civil tounge in our heads....so far this thread has gotten a little heated but not to bad.....but PLEASE lets not let it get any worse than it is right now. PAT COFFEY
to answer Foraloysius
Our indigent children are basically covered in the USA by medicaid, the tricky part is when you have a child with a serious problem say a heart defect. If daddy has good insurance the cost of treating this child will eventually climb to the lifetime max and the insurance lapses. Even if Mom and Dad own a lucrative business the cost of additonal insurance is a fortune. However to qualify for medicaid a hospital social worker will evaluate the assets, business, home, bank accounts. they have to spend until they meet the criteria for medicaid which = darn near broke. The same scenario is possible for an adult 64 years of age, an untimely illness can take everything one has worked for beyond the cap amount on their employer policy, Until they qualify for medicaid. The kicker is at 65 they qualify by age for medicare that covers expenses at 80%. hope this makes sense and helps. alr2903
Our indigent children are basically covered in the USA by medicaid, the tricky part is when you have a child with a serious problem say a heart defect. If daddy has good insurance the cost of treating this child will eventually climb to the lifetime max and the insurance lapses. Even if Mom and Dad own a lucrative business the cost of additonal insurance is a fortune. However to qualify for medicaid a hospital social worker will evaluate the assets, business, home, bank accounts. they have to spend until they meet the criteria for medicaid which = darn near broke. The same scenario is possible for an adult 64 years of age, an untimely illness can take everything one has worked for beyond the cap amount on their employer policy, Until they qualify for medicaid. The kicker is at 65 they qualify by age for medicare that covers expenses at 80%. hope this makes sense and helps. alr2903
for/FOR
not to drone on forever but our policies have Max out of pocket per year, up until a lifetime cap. If your lucky you would retire at 65, a hospital bill would be paid at 80%, then if you have an insurance say from a pension they pay 80% of the 20% medicare did not pay. There are other payment schemes, medicaid spend down. Also in the usa station has it's merits, some not all political figures, and their families end up with their final balance, quote written off. A hospital in a politicians district can solve many problems and may be a leading reason, some of our politicians are unaware of runaway costs, but that's my opinion alr2903
not to drone on forever but our policies have Max out of pocket per year, up until a lifetime cap. If your lucky you would retire at 65, a hospital bill would be paid at 80%, then if you have an insurance say from a pension they pay 80% of the 20% medicare did not pay. There are other payment schemes, medicaid spend down. Also in the usa station has it's merits, some not all political figures, and their families end up with their final balance, quote written off. A hospital in a politicians district can solve many problems and may be a leading reason, some of our politicians are unaware of runaway costs, but that's my opinion alr2903
If members of congress get a fart sideways they can be taken to the Office of the Attending Physician in the Capitol Building and if more care is needed, they can be taken by ambulance or helicopter to Bethesda Naval Hospital. Rarely do they have to deal with worries about medical bills, not that they don't have good insurance which is why it seems so ironic that people with some of the best health insurance are telling the nation that less fortunate people don't merit health insurance protection. It amazes me how people so quick to say that certain types of people are damned for all eternity can't see the evil in their own actions for which they are going to have to answer.
and of course, the converse...
...that these people who get this kind of treatment devise EVERYTHING for the American people but it does not apply to them.
Social security? No, they have their own retirement plan.
Medical care? No, they have their own.
Secure shelters for NBC attack? Yeah they have 'em, civilians don't.
Etc.
...that these people who get this kind of treatment devise EVERYTHING for the American people but it does not apply to them.
Social security? No, they have their own retirement plan.
Medical care? No, they have their own.
Secure shelters for NBC attack? Yeah they have 'em, civilians don't.
Etc.
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.
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.
randycmaynard
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
- Messages
- 655
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!
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!
randycmaynard
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
- Messages
- 655
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!!!!!!!!
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
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.
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.
randycmaynard
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
- Messages
- 655
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.
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.
randycmaynard
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
- Messages
- 655
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!!!!
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!!!!
58limited
Well-known member
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.
" 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?
http://www.cfr.org/publication/13325/
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?
http://www.cfr.org/publication/13325/
randycmaynard
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
- Messages
- 655
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, 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".
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".
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
45 miles east of nashville is a free brand new powerclean!
- Latest: gelaundry4ever
-
-
Sponsored
