View Full Version : Obama's Health Care Overhaul: Your Opinions
Opening the thread starting with the following report. But please feel free to comment on anything regarding Obama's health care plan.
Nearly 4M to pay health insurance penalty by 2016
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER – 58 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Nearly 4 million Americans — the vast majority of them middle class — will have to pay the new penalty for not getting health insurance when President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law kicks in, according to congressional estimates released Thursday.
The penalties will average a little more than $1,000 apiece in 2016, the Congressional Budget Office said in a report.
Most of the people paying the fine will be middle class. Obama pledged in 2008 not to raise taxes on individuals making less than $200,000 a year and couples making less than $250,000. Republicans have criticized the penalties, even though the idea for a mandate was originally proposed by the GOP in the 1990s and is part of the Massachusetts health care plan signed into law in 2006 by then Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican. Attorneys general in more than a dozen states are working to challenge the mandate in federal court as unconstitutional.
"The individual mandate tax will fall hardest on Americans who can least afford to pay it, many of whom were promised subsidies by the Democrats and who the president has promised would not pay higher taxes," said Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan, the top Republican on the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee.
Democrats argue the mandate and the penalties are a necessary part of a massive overhaul designed to expand coverage to millions who now lack it. They point out that getting young, healthy Americans in the insurance pool will reduce costs for others.
Americans who don't get qualified health insurance will be required to pay penalties starting in 2014, unless they are exempt because of low income, religious beliefs, or because they are members of American Indian tribes. The penalties will be fully phased in by 2016.
About 21 million nonelderly residents will be uninsured in 2016, according to projections by the CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation. Most of those people will be exempt from the penalties.
Under the new law, the penalties will be phased in starting in 2014. By 2016, those who must get insurance but don't will be fined $695 or 2.5 percent of their household income, whichever is greater. After 2016, the penalties will be increased by annual cost-of-living adjustments. People will not be required to get coverage if the cheapest plan available costs more than 8 percent of their income.
The penalties will be collected by the Internal Revenue Service through tax returns. However, the IRS will not have the authority to bring criminal charges or file liens against those who don't pay.
About 3 million of those required to pay fines in 2016 will have incomes below $59,000 for individuals and $120,000 for families of four, according to the CBO projections. The other 900,000 people who must pay the fine will have higher incomes.
The government will collect about $4 billion a year in fines from 2017 through 2019, according to the report.
MsDemeanor
04-22-2010, 01:57 PM
I don't feel that Obama's plan goes far enough or acts fast enough. Single payer is my preference. If we have to continue to feed the insurance cartel, there at least needs to be a Medicare For All buy-in option; this could easily be made available within the next year. And I fail to understand why so many of the policy changes aren't slated to take effect for months or years. Why is it so hard to say "starting May 1st, you cannot cancel or refuse someone for a pre-existing condition"? What about that requires months or years to enact? Oh, yeah, it's like credit card reform, where we had to give the banks lots of time to jack up rates, cancel folks, rewrite policies, and just all around fuck over as many people as possible.
As for the three million people who elect to pay the non-enforceable penalty instead of getting taxpayer-subsidized insurance? *shrug, whatever*
Apocalipstic
04-22-2010, 02:39 PM
Yeah, I think we should have a single payer system. The healthcare changes fall WAY short of what I think they should be, but I understand the heavily charged political situation we are in.
I do think the media is trying to freak people out...as usual.
The penalties will be collected by the Internal Revenue Service through tax returns. However, the IRS will not have the authority to bring criminal charges or file liens against those who don't pay.
About 3 million of those required to pay fines in 2016 will have incomes below $59,000 for individuals and $120,000 for families of four, (key: many of these will qualify for MAJOR subsidizes, so why avoid having health care?) according to the CBO projections. The other 900,000 people who must pay the fine will have higher incomes.
If you want to know exactly what your premiums (and subsidizes would be, click below)
http://healthreform.kff.org/SubsidyCalculator.aspx
IF you want an easy to understand detailed explanation of the plan click here
http://healthreform.kff.org/
I agree much of the media is designed to keep people afraid very very afraid (especially of the big bad Government - heaven forbid that the people wake up to the fact the WE ARE the government).
MsMerrick
04-22-2010, 04:18 PM
Single Payer, thats ta way to go. Create law, prohibiting Insurance Companies, being for Profit, go back to when they were non profit, thats another way to go, and actually my preference. I could live with all the rest of teh HC Bill,if that was done.d
Apocalipstic
04-22-2010, 04:24 PM
Great point M! Health care should not be for profit. There should be no Health Care "Industry".
Linus
04-22-2010, 04:58 PM
I personally would prefer, being Canadian and all, single payer for the necessity stuff (e.g., general physician, non-cosmetic surgery, accident, emergency, long term, etc). Anything beyond that: insurance.
MsDemeanor
04-22-2010, 06:12 PM
Other than cosmetic surgery, what is not "necessity stuff"?
Report: Health overhaul will increase nation's tab
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer – 23 mins ago
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law will increase the nation's health care tab instead of bringing costs down, government economic forecasters concluded Thursday in a sobering assessment of the sweeping legislation.
A report by economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department said the health care remake will achieve Obama's aim of expanding health insurance — adding 34 million Americans to the coverage rolls.
But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president's twin goal of controlling runaway costs, raising projected spending by about 1 percent over 10 years. That increase could get bigger, however, since the report also warned that Medicare cuts in the law may be unrealistic and unsustainable, forcing lawmakers to roll them back.
The mixed verdict for Obama's signature issue is the first comprehensive look by neutral experts. In particular, the warnings about Medicare could become a major political liability for Democratic lawmakers in the midterm elections. The report projected that Medicare cuts could drive about 15 percent of hospitals and other institutional providers into the red, "possibly jeopardizing access" to care for seniors.
The report from Medicare's Office of the Actuary carried a disclaimer saying it does not represent the official position of the Obama administration. White House officials have repeatedly complained that such analyses have been too pessimistic and lowball the law's potential to achieve savings.
The report acknowledged that some of the cost-control measures in the bill — Medicare cuts, a tax on high-cost insurance and a commission to seek ongoing Medicare savings — could help reduce the rate of cost increases beyond 2020. But it held out little hope for progress in the first decade.
"During 2010-2019, however, these effects would be outweighed by the increased costs associated with the expansions of health insurance coverage," wrote Richard S. Foster, Medicare's chief actuary. "Also, the longer-term viability of the Medicare ... reductions is doubtful." Foster's office is responsible for long-range costs estimates.
Republicans said the findings validate their concerns about Obama's 10-year, nearly $1 trillion plan to remake the nation's health care system.
"A trillion dollars gets spent, and it's no surprise — health care costs are going to go up," said Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., a leading Republican on health care issues. Camp added that he's concerned the Medicare cuts will undermine care for seniors.
In a statement, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sought to highlight some positive findings for seniors. For example, the report concluded that Medicare monthly premiums would be lower than otherwise expected, due to the spending reductions.
"The Affordable Care Act will improve the health care system for all Americans and we will continue our work to quickly and carefully implement the new law," the statement said. Passed by a divided Congress after a year of bitter partisan debate, the law would create new health insurance markets for individuals and small businesses. Starting in 2014, most Americans would be required to carry health insurance except in cases of financial hardship. Tax credits would help many middle-class households pay their premiums, while Medicaid would pick up more low-income people. Insurers would be required to accept all applicants, regardless of their health.
A separate Congressional Budget Office analysis, also released Thursday, estimated that 4 million households would be hit with tax penalties under the law for failing to get insurance.
The U.S. spends $2.5 trillion a year on health care, far more per person than any other developed nation, and for results that aren't clearly better when compared to more frugal countries. At the outset of the health care debate last year, Obama held out the hope that by bending the cost curve down, the U.S. could cover all its citizens for about what the nation would spend absent any reforms. The report found that the president's law missed the mark, although not by much. The overhaul will increase national health care spending by $311 billion from 2010-2019, or nine-tenths of 1 percent. To put that in perspective, total health care spending during the decade is estimated to surpass $35 trillion.
Administration officials argue the increase is a bargain price for guaranteeing coverage to 95 percent of Americans. They also point out that the law will decrease the federal deficit by $143 billion over the 10-year period, even if overall health care spending rises.
The report's most sober assessments concerned Medicare.
In addition to flagging the cuts to hospitals, nursing homes and other providers as potentially unsustainable, it projected that reductions in payments to private Medicare Advantage plans would trigger an exodus from the popular program. Enrollment would plummet by about 50 percent, as the plans reduce extra benefits that they currently offer. Seniors leaving the private plans would still have health insurance under traditional Medicare, but many might face higher out-of-pocket costs.
In another flashing yellow light, the report warned that a new voluntary long-term care insurance program created under the law faces "a very serious risk" of insolvency.
Linus
04-23-2010, 04:03 AM
Other than cosmetic surgery, what is not "necessity stuff"?
Varies from province to province. One of the specific ones is trans surgery/support. Right now, only Ontario and B.C. provide this as part of their health care. Some provinces include dental, some chiropratic, etc.
After reading the last news article that Jet posted, I wonder if anyone considered the aging baby boomers who will, in the near future, have the biggest affect on the health care system. With people living longer and the boomers being such a large segment of society now and many at or entering an age where additional medical services may be needed, health care becomes critical. Having it like this doesn't bode well in the long run.
Miss Scarlett
04-23-2010, 04:20 AM
Both Houses of Congress are owned by big business. The fact that this got through at all is amazing to me. It's a start. Hopefully Congress won't screw it up too much in the future.
The arguments and backlash are reminiscent of the carrying on when the Civil Rights bills were being passed. Medicare too.
Hopefully when America realizes that this is not the apocalypse after all they will stop all the whining, wailing and gnashing...well, I can dream can't I?
At the very least "Medicare Advantage" should be required to change its name. It is a private insurance company, it is NOT Medicare. I have no problem with this private insurance company losing customers. And while we are at it AARP should be abolished too, as it is just a front group for private insurance. I want all private insurance companies to lose all of their customers and get everyone on a not for profit system.
The reform process is not over people. Check out Alan Grayson's proposal to allow anyone to buy into Medicare at cost. I would even be agreeable for anyone under 65 to buy into Medicare at cost plus 5% or something to help cover costs for others.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/10/grayson-offers-medicare-b_n_492831.html
Apocalipstic
04-23-2010, 09:12 AM
President Obama is actually a Baby Boomer, as are most members of Congress, I am sure some thought was given to the cost?
If we were not at war, we would have plenty of money for this.
If we were not so anti-immigration, we would have plenty of money to pay for this.
I think it is important to provide health care for all of us, The US is only as strong as the weakest among us, and right now, that is pretty darn weak.
Maybe I know more people without insurance? Performers, artists, musicians, food and beverage workers, stage managers, directors, av people.....on and on....I am fine with paying higher taxes if the money goes to helping this situation.
Linus
04-24-2010, 07:11 AM
For those wondering, you can now figure out how many chickens you'll need on hand to pay for various health care procedures: http://lowdenplan.com/
I figure I might need 4,000 chickens but since I'm vegetarian/vegan I wonder if I can pay with Seitan Spicy Wings. :cheesy:
casey35
04-24-2010, 07:22 AM
I may not have the right for this opinion but this is mine. I personally dont think that we the tax payers should have to pay for others insurance. If you dont have insurance which i dont then it should be your responsablity to get some.
Linus
04-24-2010, 07:25 AM
I may not have the right for this opinion but this is mine. I personally dont think that we the tax payers should have to pay for others insurance. If you dont have insurance which i dont then it should be your responsablity to get some.
So what happens when you get hurt in an accident (fell off a ladder say because your foot slipped), have no job and have been out of work for 9+ months and insurance costs $600 a month (as it does in parts of NYC)? Why is it wrong to be compassionate and caring for one another, even if we are strangers to each other?
Ive been turned down for insurance because of pre-exhistiing problems I have had..if I am able to get insurance it will cost me 1/2 of my monthly paycheck.
My generation has been called " Generation Jones " ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Jones ) . As I look at life now days,,Id say yea..we are. Here we are approaching middle age or are middle aged and have no health insurance. I hope they get this thing figured out.
casey35
04-24-2010, 09:08 AM
I do understand the need of insurance and for those who are declined from insurance. But the government needs to back out of our personal life. I do not believe that the government should tell me what i can do and what i cant. For me to hear from our leaders it unamerican to not vote for the health care pisses me off. I have served my country and I for one believe it still america and we have choices what we want and what we dont.
theoddz
04-24-2010, 10:16 AM
I do understand the need of insurance and for those who are declined from insurance. But the government needs to back out of our personal life. I do not believe that the government should tell me what i can do and what i cant. For me to hear from our leaders it unamerican to not vote for the health care pisses me off. I have served my country and I for one believe it still america and we have choices what we want and what we dont.
I totally get your point here, Casey, about not wanting government intrusion into our personal lives....for most things. Thing is, when we have uninsured Americans, we all pay the costs. When I say we ALL pay, we do, especially those of us who are (lucky enough) to have a job and bring home a paycheck these days. Let me explain.
People who don't have health coverage can't usually get in to see private doctors, where a simple office visit usually costs about $125, if you pay out of pocket and you don't have any xrays, tests or procedures done, because those are extra. These people can't the afford the $125 and they usually don't even bother trying to get in to a private doctor because they are denied even an appointment when they call, being told that "Dr. Soandsuch doesn't accept uninsured patients".
When you are sick and/or injured, you must get medical attention, and that's non-negotiable, because you must live. If you can't go to a private doctor, the only alternative is the Emergency Room, because they can't turn you down. At a minimum, they have to stabilize and treat you and, if they are a community-funded facility, then they MUST, by law, take a certain percentage of medically indigent patients. People know this, so this is the route most of them take. Oh, and by the time these folks come in to the ER, they usually have much MUCH more complicated scenarios going on than if they'd just sought treatment for when the problem first started. People who are uninsured though typically put off seeking medical attention until the last cryin' second, because they know they can't afford it and they're scared to death of not just the medical problem, but the expense associated with care.
Care at an Emergency Department is the most expensive care you can get, anywhere, but when you don't have any choice, that's where you go, whether you can "afford" it or not. In the past, there were programs that provided monetary offset or sliding scale reduced costs to people who couldn't afford to pay, or even programs that picked up the entire costs of services to medically indigents. In today's economy, however, those have gradually dwindled down to next to nothing, or nil. Someone has to pay those costs, or the (community funded, especially) hospitals would go under. This is happening more and more, and I beg you to show me one community funded facility now that isn't operating in the red. They can only do this for so long before they disappear and there is no facility whatsoever, for the folks who have no money and no insurance. The entire community loses. Now, in my lifetime, it's been pretty well accepted that some of these community funded facilities have been of the research oriented type and they have had some of the best equipment and facilities of any hospital in any community. In other words, if you were really, really sick, or banged up in an accident, that's where you wanted to go for the most aggressive treatment or care. These places depend on tax dollars for the greater source of their operating budgets. As their expense goes up, so does the demand for our tax dollars to fund them.
Now, that said, I ask you. Wouldn't you rather spend a few less tax dollars to help buy some of these uninsured Americans some level of basic health care?? If they had health insurance, they wouldn't always be clogging up ERs and charging the most expensive level of care to the taxpayers. They would be going to primary care doctors who charge FAR less for office visits than a trip to the ER would ever cost. These folks would have access to routine preventive care so that more complicated medical issues can be, hopefully, averted. I say, let the big insurance industry bear the burden of the costs of most of the care, in the form of negotiated costs, and take the huge burden of the costs of ER visits for non-emergent care off of the shoulders of the taxpayers.
I'm so sick and tired of hearing so many people who DO have health coverage, or are in a position to pay for their care, grumble about why they should have to bear the costs of paying for people who don't have coverage or are not lucky enough to be in the same position of being able to afford and pay for their care. It's the exact same thing as saying "I've got mine, so fuck you.". That doesn't work in a (civilized) society.
We really ARE all interconnected, in society, whether or not we want to admit it or not. Someone's got to pay these huge costs and it's, ultimately, going to fall on the guy whom it's always fallen on.....the taxpayer. The only question that's left to answer is how it's going to be paid. I, as a single filer (I am not legally married), pay approximately 28% of my salary in federal taxes. Of the amount I have left, after that's taken out, I pay about $160 per month for the premium of my health care coverage/insurance. I would rather pay, say, 29 or 30% in federal taxes.....or it may even be a bit less, if we had a single payer system, similar to the VA (#1 Ranking, consistently, in Patient Satisfaction, nationally), to cover EVERY American. Just by sheer volume alone, the cost of medical services and pharmaceuticals would be beaten down....way, waaaaaay down.
~Theo~ :bouquet:
MsMerrick
04-24-2010, 10:51 AM
I do understand the need of insurance and for those who are declined from insurance. But the government needs to back out of our personal life. I do not believe that the government should tell me what i can do and what i cant. For me to hear from our leaders it unamerican to not vote for the health care pisses me off. I have served my country and I for one believe it still america and we have choices what we want and what we dont.
Personally I would rather the Government than the Insurance Companies. You don't get any choices with them
MsDemeanor
04-24-2010, 11:42 AM
If you dont have insurance which i dont then it should be your responsablity to get some.
I do not believe that the government should tell me what i can do and what i cant.
Okay, let me get this straight. You don't have insurance. You think it's everyone's responsibility to get insurance. You don't think the the government should tell you that you have to get insurance.
While I ponder the hypocrisy, I'll point out a few things. When the Republicans jumped on the "everyone must have insurance" bandwagon years ago, it was all about "personal responsibility" and that those who are responsible and have insurance shouldn't have to pay for the irresponsible folks who don't have insurance. Now that the Democrats are asking for the same thing, it's "the government forcing". Bottom line, if everyone was responsible (republican word) and got insurance, then the government wouldn't have to force you (democrat word) to get it.
Oh, and government tells citizens, institutions, corporations, etc. every damn day in a thousand different ways what we can and can't do. They're called laws, and without them we'd have anarchy rather than society.
betenoire
04-24-2010, 12:07 PM
I'm interested to see how this all plays out. I do hope that eventually your government moves toward a more Canadian model of healthcare.
Because then you won't have less power and control over your lives than what you have now - you will have more.
Imagine how nice it would be to go to ANY doctor you wanted to go to, rather than only being able to choose from one of the half-dozen doctors mandated by your shitty insurance policy?
Those of you who think that you'll be taxed out the ass for this health care don't know what you are talking about. You just don't. I am married to an american who still lives in the US. I know what I pay in taxes a month. I also know what he pays for his insurance. Between his insurance and "copays" he pays out MORE than I do a month in taxes. Add to that his taxes and he pays out way WAY more a month than I do. Just to survive and have something that resembles a good quality of living. What kind of bullshit is that?
Linus
04-24-2010, 12:16 PM
I'm interested to see how this all plays out. I do hope that eventually your government moves toward a more Canadian model of healthcare.
Because then you won't have less power and control over your lives than what you have now - you will have more.
Imagine how nice it would be to go to ANY doctor you wanted to go to, rather than only being able to choose from one of the half-dozen doctors mandated by your shitty insurance policy?
Those of you who think that you'll be taxed out the ass for this health care don't know what you are talking about. You just don't. I am married to an american who still lives in the US. I know what I pay in taxes a month. I also know what he pays for his insurance. Between his insurance and "copays" he pays out MORE than I do a month in taxes. Add to that his taxes and he pays out way WAY more a month than I do. Just to survive and have something that resembles a good quality of living. What kind of bullshit is that?
As a Canadian living here, I've discovered that as well. The quality of doctor I see (I go to the Callen-Lorde Center in Manhattan) is equal to what I got in Toronto. It boggles my mind why I pay for insurance and then, on top of that, I have to do a co-pay. K and I have discussed it and we'll likely move to the likes of either BC or Halifax when we have kids. I've determined there is no way we could afford all the coughs, scrapped knees, broken bones and the like if we remained in the US.
betenoire
04-24-2010, 12:38 PM
As a Canadian living here, I've discovered that as well. The quality of doctor I see (I go to the Callen-Lorde Center in Manhattan) is equal to what I got in Toronto. It boggles my mind why I pay for insurance and then, on top of that, I have to do a co-pay. K and I have discussed it and we'll likely move to the likes of either BC or Halifax when we have kids. I've determined there is no way we could afford all the coughs, scrapped knees, broken bones and the like if we remained in the US.
Exactly. That's another one of the lies that people are told and then pass on. Health Care in the US is -not- better quality care than it is in Canada.
People sometimes ask if I would move to the US rather than have Nick move to Canada. I always look at them as though they are insane. Of COURSE not.
When I moved back to Ontario after a year in BC I forgot to let OHIP know that I was back in the province. So after 3 months of not living in BC I lost my BC coverage, and I didn't have coverage from Ontario yet because I didn't remember to go ask for it. Anyway. Long story short I had to go see my family doctor once and pay for it out of pocket. It cost me $27 dollars. I'm pretty sure that Nick's COPAY is higher in the US than my uninsured doctor visit in Canada cost.
Damn, healthcare in the US must be really not be cost-efficient at all. I guess that's what you get when healthcare is overseen by people out to make lots and lots of money.
theoddz
04-24-2010, 01:39 PM
Exactly. That's another one of the lies that people are told and then pass on. Health Care in the US is -not- better quality care than it is in Canada.
People sometimes ask if I would move to the US rather than have Nick move to Canada. I always look at them as though they are insane. Of COURSE not.
When I moved back to Ontario after a year in BC I forgot to let OHIP know that I was back in the province. So after 3 months of not living in BC I lost my BC coverage, and I didn't have coverage from Ontario yet because I didn't remember to go ask for it. Anyway. Long story short I had to go see my family doctor once and pay for it out of pocket. It cost me $27 dollars. I'm pretty sure that Nick's COPAY is higher in the US than my uninsured doctor visit in Canada cost.
Damn, healthcare in the US must be really not be cost-efficient at all. I guess that's what you get when healthcare is overseen by people out to make lots and lots of money.
Interesting that you should bring up the "profit factor" in the American health care system. It wasn't always like this. Here's the originations of the idea that American health care should be a means for big business to make enormous amounts of money for not caring for Americans.
3qpLVTbVHnU
I find it uniquely interesting that Kaiser Permanente has this huge ol' website "explaining" how Obama's health care legislation can "work". And if this recent legislation is so damned "good", why are the likes of Kasier (which runs the largest of the FOR profit health care systems ) in favor of it??
See why I don't trust any of them?? That ol' "if it looks too good to be true...." keeps rumbling around in the back of my brain.
~Theo~ :bouquet:
Toughy
04-24-2010, 04:48 PM
Kaiser is a funny animal.........it is both for-profit and not-for profit.........
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaiser_Permanente
Kaiser Permanente is an integrated managed care organization, based in Oakland, California, United States, founded in 1945 by industrialist Henry Kaiser and physician Sidney Garfield. Kaiser Permanente is a consortium of three distinct groups of entities: the Kaiser Foundation Health Plan and its regional operating subsidiaries, Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, and the autonomous regional Permanente Medical Groups. As of 2006, Kaiser Permanente operates in nine states and the District of Columbia, and is the largest managed care organization in the United States.
Kaiser Permanente has 8.6 million health plan members,[2] 167,300 employees,[2] 14,600 physicians,[2] 35 medical centers,[2] 431 medical offices,[2] and $1.3 billion in net income on $34.4 billion in operating revenues.[1] The Health Plan and Hospitals operate under state and federal non-profit tax status, while the Medical Groups operate as for-profit partnerships or professional corporations in their respective regions.
betenoire
04-25-2010, 05:27 AM
I've seen that clip from Sicko before, but it didn't strike me as any less sick this time. I'm sorry, but anybody who can hear "All the incentives are toward less medical care, because the less care they give them the more money they make" and think "I like that!" is just an appallingly terrible person.
And did you see how much Nixon blinked when he said "And I want every american to be able to have that care when they need it"? Excessive blinking is one of the ways to tell someone is lying.
casey35
04-25-2010, 07:28 AM
Okay, let me get this straight. You don't have insurance. You think it's everyone's responsibility to get insurance. You don't think the the government should tell you that you have to get insurance.
While I ponder the hypocrisy, I'll point out a few things. When the Republicans jumped on the "everyone must have insurance" bandwagon years ago, it was all about "personal responsibility" and that those who are responsible and have insurance shouldn't have to pay for the irresponsible folks who don't have insurance. Now that the Democrats are asking for the same thing, it's "the government forcing". Bottom line, if everyone was responsible (republican word) and got insurance, then the government wouldn't have to force you (democrat word) to get it.
Oh, and government tells citizens, institutions, corporations, etc. every damn day in a thousand different ways what we can and can't do. They're called laws, and without them we'd have anarchy rather than society.
I pay for my own medical bills out of my pocket. The fact that i have a full time job dont mean i have insurance. I have always paid my medical bills out of pocket. I guess i am damn lucky i am not sickly.
Diavolo
04-25-2010, 07:57 AM
Personally I don't think Obama's health plan went far enough. I think left to his own devices, it would have. I think he is a very smart man with a very keen understanding of what we face here in America. But he had to negotiate and it's not what it could have been. I also learned something from the husband of a friend of mine. He work in the Senate. The news was making a big deal out of how many pages the bill was. According to Matt, it's mostly triple spaced and it doesn't take that long for anyone to read the bill.
I lived in German in the late 70's. I hurt my foot to the point that I couldn't walk on it. I had to go to a German Doctor. The school referred me to a guy. I went, I saw him three times, he fixed my foot and there was never a bill for his services. About 5 years ago a friend of mine was at a wedding in Italy. She slipped off of a curb and shattered her ankle. The Italian Doctor patched her up, casted her foot, gave her crutches and sent her no bill.
I don't want the Government to be everything to everyone, but it needs to be something to the people. Personally, I want the same health plan that is provided to Congress. Period.
Currently I have Kaiser. My deductable is $2700 and I have a 30% co-pay. I pay $300 a month for that privilege. I currently hold 27 powerlifting records and I rode my bike on three 100 mile rides last year and did all the training necessary to accomplish that. I cannot get Blue Cross. I told them to send their CEO into the parking lot and I would kick his ass just to prove my healthiness. But because I'm 200 pounds of 51yo muscle with a ticker that's gone haywire twice in the last 15 years, they won't insure me. I don't have any high risk behavior. I'm just solid like a rock. It's bullshit. I want that same plan that Chuck Grassley has. I'm in much better shape than that asshat.
I pay for my own medical bills out of my pocket. The fact that i have a full time job dont mean i have insurance. I have always paid my medical bills out of pocket. I guess i am damn lucky i am not sickly.
Yeah, Casey, you are lucky you are not sickly, What do you suppose should happen to those who are not so lucky? Should we just let people die on the streets if they can't afford to pay out of pocket or get insurance?
This is a serious question, Casey, what do you suppose we do with the 23 year old "healthy person" who has a serious auto accident. Let's say it was no one's fault - just hit some black ice, wiped out and broke their neck. Should we just kick them out of the ER as soon as we learn they do not have the money to cover the costs?
Let's change that scenario to a middle aged woman between jobs who discovers a lump in her breast? How much do you think Cancer treatment costs? Should we toss her out if she can't afford it?
I am asking sincerely Casey, in your world, what is your plan for these people?
casey35
04-25-2010, 08:25 AM
Well let see, we have people who dont work they dont want to work so us tax payer pay their bills. We have those who dont want to take their kids to the doctor they would just perfer to take them to the e r. We have those who are druggies that we pay for. You know what i am one who is tired of paying for those who cant get off their ass and work. I paid for my own son being born. When i went to set up payments they treated me like shit because i did not have medicaid. What the hell is that. I dont take no hand out from anyone. I think the health care is bad but i dont think the government running it is any better. I know my opinion is not your taste but guess what i dont take anything from anyone i pay my own way in this life.
respectfully, I would really appreciate it if you answered my question.
I repeat: What is you plan for the above two scenarios?
No need to get all angry, I am asking a sincere question as respectfully as I can. Would you grant me the same courtesy and answer it?
Thanks.
key
I have a question regarding the buy a policy or pay a penalty thing. I'm serious, because I haven't seen or read it anywhere.
If you can't afford the insurance and instead opt for paying a penalty.. what do you do for healthcare? Continue on as folks have done going to an ER for a cough due to cold? Wait for an astronomical bill to come that you can't pay and let it get taken from your state taxes? I guess my question is.. do you pay a penalty and THEN pay the same bill you couldn't afford without this plan?
If socialism means an across the board policy ( like Canada) wherein healthcare is paid for via taxes, then I am all about some socialism. Bring it!
Healthcare means so much more than any of our politicians think or espouse. It’s being able to see your doctor when you are sick as often as is necessary and not having to pay because it’s already paid for.
It’s talking to your doctor and explaining things to them and having a meaningful conversation about your medical problem.
It’s getting all the health care you need anywhere you go for as long as you live without ever worrying about cost.
It’s not being told you will lose your job if you are sick and don’t come in.
It’s never getting a bill from anyone for your health care.
casey35
04-25-2010, 08:37 AM
For those who does not have insurance i think there should be insurance based on your income and with a rider that allows your preexisting conditions. Hospital do not turn people away that are injured even if they dont have health care. In my opinion the government needs to set down with insurance company and put a restrictions on them. Make them keep prices down for the people to afford them. For those who have posted dont assume you know people or what they have gone thru . If they are not in line for the health bill. This is america last I looked and I believe we all are allowed our opinions.
I have a question regarding the buy a policy or pay a penalty thing. I'm serious, because I haven't seen or read it anywhere.
Healthcare means so much more than any of our politicians think or espouse. It’s being able to see your doctor when you are sick as often as is necessary and not having to pay because it’s already paid for.
It’s talking to your doctor and explaining things to them and having a meaningful conversation about your medical problem.
It’s getting all the health care you need anywhere you go for as long as you live without ever worrying about cost.
It’s not being told you will lose your job if you are sick and don’t come in.
It’s never getting a bill from anyone for your health care.
We are the only developed country on the planet who will send a GDamn bill to someone from outside the country who needs doctor care while visiting us. How inhospitable can we be? No one better claim that we are a "Christian Country" who demands that we treat our guests (heck our own fellow citizens) with such contempt.
As for your first question, my guess is yes, those who choose the fine will carry on as is (I believe) and if they end up in the ER? ??? The fine does not get collected until you fill your tax return, so maybe if you don't file, you can avoid it....til...
It's an F-ed way to go, but it's is a small step in the right direction, and given our political climate, it is no small feat that Obama accomplished even this much.
For those who does not have insurance i think there should be insurance based on your income .
Casey, do you know that this is exactly what the Health Care Reform bill is?
Premiums are based on income, with subsidies for those who can't afford them.
What is wrong with that?
apretty
04-25-2010, 08:51 AM
I may not have the right for this opinion but this is mine. I personally dont think that we the tax payers should have to pay for others insurance. If you dont have insurance which i dont then it should be your responsablity to get some.
wowzers.
what about parks, schools, libraries, DO YOU USE ANY OF THOSE?
casey35
04-25-2010, 08:51 AM
We are the only developed country on the planet who will send a GDamn bill to someone from outside the country who needs doctor care while visiting us. How inhospitable can we be? No one better claim that we are a "Christian Country" who demands that we treat our guests (heck our own fellow citizens) with such contempt.
As for your first question, my guess is yes, those who choose the fine will carry on as is (I believe) and if they end up in the ER? ??? The fine does not get collected until you fill your tax return, so maybe if you don't file, you can avoid it....til...
It's an F-ed way to go, but it's is a small step in the right direction, and given our political climate, it is no small feat that Obama accomplished even this much.
yep it sounds like a hell away to go . I would just perfer to be toss in jail then i would not have to worry about it or maybe we all need to go on medicaid and let someone else take care of us.
yep it sounds like a hell away to go . I would just perfer to be toss in jail then i would not have to worry about it or maybe we all need to go on medicaid and let someone else take care of us.
I have no doubt that you work hard for whatever you have in your life. I just wonder why you are so convinced that most other people (even poor people) work as hard as you do? And that even with working so hard are still not able to provide something as basic as health care for themselves or their families?
I am not saying there are no freeloaders in our country, in every country. But why would you make everyone else, everyone who works as hard as you do, suffer without basic care because of them?
BTW, if you make less than 250K you got a tax cut this year, did you know that?
Honestly, it sounds like you are bitter about how hard you have to work and still not be able to afford your basic needs - like decent on demand health care. It seems to me that you are taking your frustration out on your fellow citizens instead of the broken system that values astronomical profits for a few over basic care for everyone.
Which is more important to you? That a few among us are able to get filthy rich, or that everyone get basic care and not have to go bankrupt to cover medical bills? Keeping the system that way it is (for profit) enshrines mega-profit for some over care for all.
I have a question regarding the buy a policy or pay a penalty thing. I'm serious, because I haven't seen or read it anywhere.
If you can't afford the insurance and instead opt for paying a penalty.. what do you do for healthcare? Continue on as folks have done going to an ER for a cough due to cold? Wait for an astronomical bill to come that you can't pay and let it get taken from your state taxes?
Jess,
I suspect you havent seen the particulars because they have yet to be worked out. As with most big legislation....the idea is in the bill, the particulars are a whole different ball game.
Here in Mass with our mandatory health insurance, you are penalized, this year, at approx $1,100 if you are not in one the exclusion categories. If you are without insurance and seek medical care, you are billed for the cost of the care provided.
Each year the penalty increases.
Here, I have found, the subsidized insurance is a heck of a lot cheaper than private insurance even tho the coverage is a little less and there are co-pays for everything including hospitalization.
If memory serves, Canadian health care is not totally free i.e there are some minimal copays.
I would love to see a socialized system of health care in this country. Aside from getting care when it is needed, there would be greater flexibility in employment. How many of us have turned down jobs we want because the health care benefits were subpar?
But the socialized plans are not without pitfalls that are incongruent to the American lifestyle. In socialized medicine, you get good and timely primary care but there are waiting lists for specialists and surgery. Americans wait???
And there are some exclusions i.e. if over a certain age, they will not do certain types of care like dialysis. These vary from country to country.
Maybe this will be a stepping stone to something new and different and more cost efficient.
Jess,
I suspect you havent seen the particulars because they have yet to be worked out. As with most big legislation....the idea is in the bill, the particulars are a whole different ball game.
Here in Mass with our mandatory health insurance, you are penalized, this year, at approx $1,100 if you are not in one the exclusion categories. If you are without insurance and seek medical care, you are billed for the cost of the care provided.
Each year the penalty increases.
Here, I have found, the subsidized insurance is a heck of a lot cheaper than private insurance even tho the coverage is a little less and there are co-pays for everything including hospitalization.
If memory serves, Canadian health care is not totally free i.e there are some minimal copays.
I would love to see a socialized system of health care in this country. Aside from getting care when it is needed, there would be greater flexibility in employment. How many of us have turned down jobs we want because the health care benefits were subpar?
But the socialized plans are not without pitfalls that are incongruent to the American lifestyle. In socialized medicine, you get good and timely primary care but there are waiting lists for specialists and surgery. Americans wait???
And there are some exclusions i.e. if over a certain age, they will not do certain types of care like dialysis. These vary from country to country.
Maybe this will be a stepping stone to something new and different and more cost efficient.
Canadian Health Care (http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/healthcare/public_vs_private.html)
We don't have co-pays.
It isn't *free* b/c we all pay into it. We just don't pay anything at the point of service.
From the above link:
Public health care is governed by the Canada Health Act. It's designed to make sure that all eligible people in the country have reasonable access to insured health services on a prepaid basis, without direct charges at the point of service.
Simply put, if you break your leg chasing the Canadian dream, you have the right to get fixed up without opening your wallet – except to pull out your provincial health insurance card.
The act is also designed to make sure that the delivery of health care is pretty consistent across the country. Ottawa has found that the best way to do that is by attaching conditions to the cash it transfers to the provinces to cover health care.
Among those conditions are that health care must be:
Portable.
Universal.
Accessible.
Free from extra charges (for insured services).
By portable, Ottawa means if you move from one province or territory to another, you won't lose your coverage. This doesn't mean you can go looking for health services in another province or country because the waiting list at home is too long for your liking. It does, however, mean that your out-of-province in-laws will be covered if they suddenly fall sick while on their annual visit.
Under the universality criterion, all insured residents of a province or territory must be entitled to the insured health services provided by the provincial or territorial health care insurance plan. Doesn't matter if you're rich or poor. You can't buy your way to the front of the line.
By accessible, the CHA means "insured persons in a province or territory have reasonable access to insured hospital, medical and surgical-dental services on uniform terms and conditions, unprecluded or unimpeded, either directly or indirectly, by charges [user charges or extra-billing] or other means [e.g., discrimination on the basis of age, health status or financial circumstances]."
-------------
Another tidbit: Through all entities in its public-private system, the U.S. spends more per capita than any other nation in the world, but is the only wealthy industrialized country in the world that lacks some form of universal health care. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_health_care_systems_in_Canada_an d_the_United_States)
One More Interesting Article: U.S. health care lies about Canada (http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/francis/archive/2009/05/12/health-care-lies-about-canda.aspx)
It's my understanding that the system in Canada is based on the US Medicare system. Do you Canadians know if this is true?
Also, when Taiwan and South Korea went shopping around the planet for the best system to replicate in their country guess which system they chose? yep, you go it, the US Medicare system. So sad that other countries can see how great our single payer system is and want to use it as a model for their country, yet we can not simply extend this to all of our citizens.
We are one twisted country.
Well let see, we have people who dont work they dont want to work so us tax payer pay their bills. We have those who dont want to take their kids to the doctor they would just perfer to take them to the e r. We have those who are druggies that we pay for. You know what i am one who is tired of paying for those who cant get off their ass and work.
I think I understand where Casey is coming from. Our country was founded on self reliance and it served us well for a long time.
Unfortunately our society has become much more complex over time and general taxes, spread amongst all, have been paying for things we deemed are beneficial to most i.e. property taxes pay for school systems, so even those of us without kids have been footing the bill for those that do for a long time.
We tend to forget that we, as individuals, benefit in many ways from generalized taxes.
It's my understanding that the system in Canada is based on the US Medicare system. Do you Canadians know if this is true?
Also, when Taiwan and South Korea went shopping around the planet for the best system to replicate in their country guess which system they chose? yep, you go it, the US Medicare system. So sad that other countries can see how great our single payer system is and want to use it as a model for their country, yet we can not simply extend this to all of our citizens.
We are one twisted country.
From what I read, and even on the gov't website, Medicare is actually the unofficial name for our publicly funded universal health care system. It is governed by the Canada Health Care Act..."Framed by the Canada Health Act, the principles governing our health care system are symbols of the underlying Canadian values of equity and solidarity."
Canada's Health Care System (Medicare) (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/medi-assur/index-eng.php)
Wiki: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(Canada))
Medicare (French: assurance-maladie) is the unofficial name for Canada's publicly funded universal health insurance system[1]. The formal terminology for the insurance system is provided by the Canada Health Act and the health insurance legislation of the individual provinces and territories.
Under the terms of the Canada Health Act, all "insured persons" (basically, legal residents of Canada, including permanent residents) are entitled to receive "insured services" without copayment. Such services are defined as medically necessary services if provided in hospital, or by 'practitioners' (usually physicians).[2] Approximately 70% of Canadian health expenditures come from public sources, with the rest paid privately (both through private insurance, and through out-of-pocket payments). The extent of public financing varies considerably across services. For example, approximately 99% of physician services, and 90% of hospital care, are paid by publicly funded sources, whereas almost all dental care is paid for privately.[3] Most doctors are self-employed private entities.
-----------
Note: When I wrote no co-payments, I meant we don't pay out of pocket for doctor visits/surgeries. We do pay minimal out of pocket for Prescriptions. (I've never paid more than five dollars for any prescription). Rx, dental, vision is usually covered via employer.
Linus
04-25-2010, 10:07 AM
It's my understanding that the system in Canada is based on the US Medicare system. Do you Canadians know if this is true?
I don't believe it was but they were created within a year of each other so I wouldn't be surprised if there were discussions between the two countries. What I think is important to add to the discussion is that while Canadians pay for health insurance through taxes, as others have stated, and there are limited to no co-pays (there are some prescription co-pays but that's a different from all the doc visits/hospital/etc. and it varies from province to province), because the cost is spread out across the country, the per person cost is lower. It would be impressive if a similar thing could be done here. To be honest, I'd imagine that everyone would be covered and costs on a per capita basis would likely drop.
This link does a nice comparison between the two countries including costs (2006 figures were $1000 difference, with Canada on the cheaper end per person)
casey35
04-25-2010, 10:17 AM
I have no doubt that you work hard for whatever you have in your life. I just wonder why you are so convinced that most other people (even poor people) work as hard as you do? And that even with working so hard are still not able to provide something as basic as health care for themselves or their families?
I am not saying there are no freeloaders in our country, in every country. But why would you make everyone else, everyone who works as hard as you do, suffer without basic care because of them?
BTW, if you make less than 250K you got a tax cut this year, did you know that?
Honestly, it sounds like you are bitter about how hard you have to work and still not be able to afford your basic needs - like decent on demand health care. It seems to me that you are taking your frustration out on your fellow citizens instead of the broken system that values astronomical profits for a few over basic care for everyone.
Which is more important to you? That a few among us are able to get filthy rich, or that everyone get basic care and not have to go bankrupt to cover medical bills? Keeping the system that way it is (for profit) enshrines mega-profit for some over care for all.
No i am not bitter because i do not have healthcare. What i do not like is the way they are going about things. I get tired of hearing our congress saying if you not for this then we are unamerican. I am kinda wondering what you all going to say when they put a heavy tax on us to where we cant afford things. When i was in Scotland do you know how many had cars or lived with there parents and grandparents because they was so heavily tax that they could not afford to live on there own. Let see what the bill is and see how bad they fuck us before i will agree to anything.
It really gets under my skin when I see people who would rather let other people suffer A LOT than to have themselves suffer a little bit. In my world, all citizens should be required to sacrifice a little bit so that all of us can have basic standards of living, a social safety net. It's called living in a civilized world - caring about complete strangers simply because they share the planet with us.
When I think about it, it is really a selfish reason why I care enough about people I don't even know to sacrifice some of my hard earned money for them. I know that as hard as I work (self employed for over 10 years now), and as healthy as I am (95% veggie, fit as a fiddle) I am not immune to the twists of fate and misfortunes that can befall any of us. I would hope and pray that complete strangers would care about me if I needed them.
Not to mention that my neighbor getting treated for their TB, or SARS, or H1N1 asap is in MY best interest!
If some freeloader takes advantage of that big deal! I would rather 10 freeloaders get something for nothing than to let one honest person suffer needlessly. But, that is just me – even though I do not claim Christianity as my one religion, I do believe that Jesus had it right when he said “Whatsoever you do to the least among you, that you do unto Me.”
theoddz
04-25-2010, 11:26 AM
No i am not bitter because i do not have healthcare. What i do not like is the way they are going about things. I get tired of hearing our congress saying if you not for this then we are unamerican. I am kinda wondering what you all going to say when they put a heavy tax on us to where we cant afford things. When i was in Scotland do you know how many had cars or lived with there parents and grandparents because they was so heavily tax that they could not afford to live on there own. Let see what the bill is and see how bad they fuck us before i will agree to anything.
Casey, I'm not picking on you here, but do you make $250K/year or more?? What's wrong with "how they're going about it"?? Because your taxes haven't gone up and won't go up to support this bill, which:
* Insurance companies can no longer deny coverage to children who were born with illnesses or have pre-existing conditions.
* Insurance companies are prohibited from dropping people because they get sick.
* They must allow children to stay on their parent's insurance plans until age 26.
* Starting in 2014, insurance companies can no longer deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions.
* Insurance companies in 2014 will be barred from imposing annual limits on the amount of coverage people can get. There also will be no lifetime coverage limits.
* 32 million Americans who are currently uninsured will be covered.
* The uninsured and self-employed people will be able to buy insurance through state-based exchanges with government subsidies given to those who can't afford it.
* There will be limits on what people have to pay for premiums and out-of-pocket costs based on income.
* Wasteful spending on insurance company executive salaries will be stopped by limiting how much of people's insurance premiums can go toward company administration and profits. A company that goes over the limit has to rebate it back to consumers.
* Insurance companies will be forced to end discrimination against women by charging more for groups with high percentage of women.
* Large employers will pay a penalty if they don't provide health coverage and their employees have to get subsidies in the exchanges to buy their own insurance.
* Small businesses that provide their workers with insurance will get tax credits that cover 35% of premium costs immediately and 50% in 2014.
* Seniors will get additional help for prescription drugs by closing the Medicare "donut hole" or coverage gap, which requires patients to pay the full cost of prescription drugs that cost between $2,830 and $6,440. The donut hole affects about one in four Medicare recipients, forcing them to start splitting their drugs or stop taking medications altogether. Seniors who fall into the donut hole will get a $250 rebate this year, a 50% discount on brand-name drugs starting next year and the donut hole will be completely eliminated by 2020.
* In 2018, there will be an excise tax on employer-provided health plans costing more than $27,500 for family coverage and $10,200 for individual coverage. The tax is imposed only on the amount of the premium that goes over the threshold. It is to be paid by the insurance companies.
************************************************** *****
You see, I don't see Obama's health bill as costing either YOU or ME more in taxes, because neither you or I make over $250K/year. In fact, you and me both are going to see our taxes actually go down. :winky::thumbsup:
I just don't understand why you think something like this is about taxing either you or me to death......but it is going to cost the big health insurance companies their huge profit margins and obscene executive pay and bonuses. The only way these insurance companies can "fight back" is to spread lies and misinformation to the average American. They hope to generate fear, and that fear will manifest itself in making John and Jane Q. Public run to the voting box and cast his/her vote in favor of keeping Wall Street in control of our political system.
My suggestion to anyone in this country who is buying into the misinformation and lies is to turn off Fox News and do some reading. Spend LESS time with Pogo.com, American Idol and the X-Box and educate yourself on political happenings and where the money flow in this country is heading. Become active in the political process and know who and what you are voting for.....and why.
Knowledge really is power. :winky:
~Theo~ :bouquet:
Casey, I'm not picking on you here, but do you make $250K/year or more?? What's wrong with "how they're going about it"?? Because your taxes haven't gone up and won't go up to support this bill, which:
* Insurance companies can no longer deny coverage to children who were born with illnesses or have pre-existing conditions.
* Insurance companies are prohibited from dropping people because they get sick.
* They must allow children to stay on their parent's insurance plans until age 26.
* Starting in 2014, insurance companies can no longer deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions.
* Insurance companies in 2014 will be barred from imposing annual limits on the amount of coverage people can get. There also will be no lifetime coverage limits.
* 32 million Americans who are currently uninsured will be covered.
* The uninsured and self-employed people will be able to buy insurance through state-based exchanges with government subsidies given to those who can't afford it.
* There will be limits on what people have to pay for premiums and out-of-pocket costs based on income.
* Wasteful spending on insurance company executive salaries will be stopped by limiting how much of people's insurance premiums can go toward company administration and profits. A company that goes over the limit has to rebate it back to consumers.
* Insurance companies will be forced to end discrimination against women by charging more for groups with high percentage of women.
* Large employers will pay a penalty if they don't provide health coverage and their employees have to get subsidies in the exchanges to buy their own insurance.
* Small businesses that provide their workers with insurance will get tax credits that cover 35% of premium costs immediately and 50% in 2014.
* Seniors will get additional help for prescription drugs by closing the Medicare "donut hole" or coverage gap, which requires patients to pay the full cost of prescription drugs that cost between $2,830 and $6,440. The donut hole affects about one in four Medicare recipients, forcing them to start splitting their drugs or stop taking medications altogether. Seniors who fall into the donut hole will get a $250 rebate this year, a 50% discount on brand-name drugs starting next year and the donut hole will be completely eliminated by 2020.
* In 2018, there will be an excise tax on employer-provided health plans costing more than $27,500 for family coverage and $10,200 for individual coverage. The tax is imposed only on the amount of the premium that goes over the threshold. It is to be paid by the insurance companies.
************************************************** *****
You see, I don't see Obama's health bill as costing either YOU or ME more in taxes, because neither you or I make over $250K/year. In fact, you and me both are going to see our taxes actually go down. :winky::thumbsup:
I just don't understand why you think something like this is about taxing either you or me to death......but it is going to cost the big health insurance companies their huge profit margins and obscene executive pay and bonuses. The only way these insurance companies can "fight back" is to spread lies and misinformation to the average American. They hope to generate fear, and that fear will manifest itself in making John and Jane Q. Public run to the voting box and cast his/her vote in favor of keeping Wall Street in control of our political system.
My suggestion to anyone in this country who is buying into the misinformation and lies is to turn off Fox News and do some reading. Spend LESS time with Pogo.com, American Idol and the X-Box and educate yourself on political happenings and where the money flow in this country is heading. Become active in the political process and know who and what you are voting for.....and why.
Knowledge really is power. :winky:
~Theo~ :bouquet:
While the list of goodies above regarding insurance reform ( I truly don't see this as healthcare reform) is all good.. I see no where limits being placed on insurance companies for what they can charge or how often they can increase. That is one of the greater issues I have with this bill. It is NOT what Mr Obama wanted. It is not what our country needs. It may be a start, but until insurance companies get capped and until pharmecuticals have shorter limits set on the time before drugs can be made generically, then we are still at their mercy. Until malpractice suits stop making decisions for our medical professionals and until more med students become general practioners again instead of cosmetic surgeons ( because that is where the big bucks vs low risk is), we are still at their mercy.
Frankly, this country and the folks running it have forgotten what "mercy" really means.
theoddz
04-25-2010, 12:00 PM
While the list of goodies above regarding insurance reform ( I truly don't see this as healthcare reform) is all good.. I see no where limits being placed on insurance companies for what they can charge or how often they can increase. That is one of the greater issues I have with this bill. It is NOT what Mr Obama wanted. It is not what our country needs. It may be a start, but until insurance companies get capped and until pharmecuticals have shorter limits set on the time before drugs can be made generically, then we are still at their mercy. Until malpractice suits stop making decisions for our medical professionals and until more med students become general practioners again instead of cosmetic surgeons ( because that is where the big bucks vs low risk is), we are still at their mercy.
Frankly, this country and the folks running it have forgotten what "mercy" really means.
I so totally agree with you, Jess, but like you said, it's "a start" in the right direction. I would have liked to have seen this bill go waaaaaay further. In fact, I'd have liked to have seen a single payer system be implemented, right off the bat. Thing is, too many people have been making far too much money for far too long and they won't be giving it up overnight and certainly not without a huge ol' fight!! Just this little big of legislation in the right direction has big insurance chafing at the bit and throwing millions of their ill-begotten "blood money" into the grist mills of lies and misinformation systems, such as Faux/Fox News. It's working, too....just look at all the people who mistakenly believe that their taxes are going to go through the roof, instead of actually being lowered. Until that blood money is wrested from the grips of the fat cats, we won't see true health reform, but slow-acting hybrids and "half dones", until the job is done.
Mother says, "How do you eat an elephant??......One bite at a time." :winky:
~Theo~ :bouquet:
casey35
04-25-2010, 12:58 PM
Keys, I have mercy for those who work but if u are lazy ass then i say take a flying leap. I must not be liberal thank god. Seems congress thinks that money is grown on trees thats why they are spending it as fast as they can make it before you know it gas will be 10 dollars a gallon and milk will be 8. When you are living paycheck to paycheck like I am I have to worry about taking care of me and my own cant worry about taking care of anyone else. If you consider this selfish I am sorry but I was raised to be self reliant not let government take care of me. My question is who going to be paying this back us, our children, grandchildren, or great grandchildren?
Corkey
04-25-2010, 01:55 PM
Keys, I have mercy for those who work but if u are lazy ass then i say take a flying leap. I must not be liberal thank god. Seems congress thinks that money is grown on trees thats why they are spending it as fast as they can make it before you know it gas will be 10 dollars a gallon and milk will be 8. When you are living paycheck to paycheck like I am I have to worry about taking care of me and my own cant worry about taking care of anyone else. If you consider this selfish I am sorry but I was raised to be self reliant not let government take care of me. My question is who going to be paying this back us, our children, grandchildren, or great grandchildren?
So how much faux news do you watch? Did you not just read what Theo posted? That is the actual language of the law, it isn't a bill anymore it's the law. If one makes 250K a year or more, your taxes will go up, but not astronomically. If you make less than 250K a year your taxes will go down. Please stop and read the law before you quote the ignorance of faux news.
theoddz
04-25-2010, 03:04 PM
Keys, I have mercy for those who work but if u are lazy ass then i say take a flying leap. I must not be liberal thank god. Seems congress thinks that money is grown on trees thats why they are spending it as fast as they can make it before you know it gas will be 10 dollars a gallon and milk will be 8. When you are living paycheck to paycheck like I am I have to worry about taking care of me and my own cant worry about taking care of anyone else. If you consider this selfish I am sorry but I was raised to be self reliant not let government take care of me. My question is who going to be paying this back us, our children, grandchildren, or great grandchildren?
Casey, again, I'm not picking on you, but I do see the fear in your posts, and yes, I want to see our gov't "live within its means" as much as you do. I don't relish the thought of our children, grandchildren, greats and on down the line, have to pick up the tab and be burdened with financial irresponsibility engaged in during our generation's tenure. This isn't what's going to happen with this legislation, however.
Please, PLEASE, read a little more about the financial impact and SAVINGS that health care reform NOW....THIS legislation, in particular, will generate, over the next two to three decades. We'll be saving our economy trillions of dollars.....ya, read that.....trillions. Did you know that many of the points listed in my post above that comprise this law were actually originally proposed by more than one conservative Republican "think tanks" in recent years gone by?? Mitt Romney (conservative Republican), when he was Governor of the State of Massachusetts, revamped that state's health care system by implementing many of these very same principles and required each and every citizen of Massachusetts to purchase health insurance. He did the very same thing that this national law does, only on a state level and it's been extremely successful in that state, not to mention the savings it has made in that state's budget.
I'm not, in any way, trying to discourage your opinion. I think it's wonderful that you have one on this issue, because so many folks are undecided. That's okay. All's I'm asking is that you have an educated opinion, and not one borne of fear, lies and misinformation. Really, research it!!! At least keep an open mind and read more. You might be (pleasantly) surprised. :winky:
~Theo~ :bouquet:
Linus
04-25-2010, 05:45 PM
Keys, I have mercy for those who work but if u are lazy ass then i say take a flying leap. I must not be liberal thank god. Seems congress thinks that money is grown on trees thats why they are spending it as fast as they can make it before you know it gas will be 10 dollars a gallon and milk will be 8. When you are living paycheck to paycheck like I am I have to worry about taking care of me and my own cant worry about taking care of anyone else. If you consider this selfish I am sorry but I was raised to be self reliant not let government take care of me. My question is who going to be paying this back us, our children, grandchildren, or great grandchildren?
What about those that can't work (e.g., many soldiers coming back from various locations are suffering PTSD), cannot find work (many people are more than willing to work but can't even find the simplest of jobs) or have retired from work finally (however, many are going back to work because they can't afford to retire)?
The reality is there will be no one single answer that will address everything nor will it be solved in a year. We cannot end up back in the 1950s where prosperity seemed endless. Society has drastically changed thanks to advertising (increased our consumerism beyond what, IMO, we really need), the internet (communication -- both medium and language -- has changed drastically), cultural advances, etc. I think as long as we don't lose our humanity, things will work out in some manner (we may not know what it is now and it may be vastly different in the future but we should try to avoid losing our hope and optimism in general).
The saddest part for me is to read on here where another lesbian, another poor person has come to believe that instead of reaching out to help each other we must fight like dogs over the scraps of bone that the fat cats toss us from time to time.
This is exactly how the rich and greedy want us. So desperate that we come to fear that working together, helping each other, yes even sacrificing for another will somehow threaten our very safety, and the little bit of almost nothing that we have to work so hard to get and maintain. Americans attacking other Americans for being "lazy ass." The ole Ronald Reagan Welfare Queen myth alive and well. The other side of that myth is that the rich people among us "earned" all their obscene wealth. (gag)
I was raised to believe that many hands make the load lighter. That I am not an island, that I actually need other people, and that they actually need me. That is called community, society, and working together towards a bigger goal than any one of us could attain on our own it is not a bad thing.
I was raised to believe that the citizens of this country ARE the Government. This great American Experiment of a Government Of the People, For the People, By the People is not some legend. It is alive (though barely breathing thanks to the rich raping and pillaging it for the last 30 years - thanks Reagan and every President since) But we can revive that great American Spirit that founded this country, that ordinary citizens can create a government (many hands working together) that meets the needs of its citizens as outlined in the Preamble.
1)Form a more perfect Union (Federal Standards while respecting states rights)
2) Establish Justice (write and enforce these standards, and have an equal and fair justice system)
3) Ensure domestic tranquility (no prejudice, no hate, minority rights not trampled by majority)
4) Provide for the Common Defense (this is the only one the cons want you know about)
5) Promote the General Welfare (yes, gov. supporting ways to have basic needs met - education, food, shelter, and health care)
6)Ensure the blessings of Liberty (when basic needs are met people are free to experiment, to grow, to innovate, to be entrepreneurial)
Roosevelt said it best when he said. We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
Thank you for key for breaking the issue down to something we all need to keep in mind.
Being notoriously behind the times, I was watching Michael Moore's "Capitalism" today. As he probed, albeit drama and all, into the financial sector and its pervasive effect on the government which ends up dumping on the little guy, I was feeling a similar scenario in relation to health care.
The financial sector wanted us to believe that their mortgages and deriatives and other instruments of control over our lives and freedom were beneficial to us. The federal treasury helped the cause and led the bailout when it was on the brink of supposedly collapsing by dipping into the pockets of the taxpayer not once but twice throwing us into unprecidented debt.
Now, we have a President who wants change in health care - a laudable and welcomed idea. And, he turns to financial folks and the health care lobby to devise something plausible for all. Somehow, to me, asking those who created the problem to solve the problem makes me automatically suspect of the process and the final result.
I love the idea of every American having health insurance or the right to be sick without the fear of bankruptcy. But I fear we will be facing the same game playing and slight of hand tactics as we did in the financial industry.
The rich and well to do seldom willingly give up potential profits without some tricks up their sleeves.
Specifically, I expect we will find, if it is not already occuring, our insurance companies taking out life insurance policies on us. They already know what our state of health is. It is a suckers bet to sure up the bottom line with hefty death payments.
The misstatement of costs associated with this program is misleading as well. It is common knowledge that what Congress passed is very similar to what is already in use here in Mass. And the folks in Mass will tell you they had no idea of how quickly the subsidized program would grow. They would tell you that thousands of small businesses dropped their employee coverage. Why? They could have paid $6-10,000 per employee for insurance or a $500.00 per employee penalty. Seems like a no brainer to me and to them. So suddenly the program almost doubled overnight.
With insurance comes the freedom to seek care and seek care is what people did. The cash register was open 24/7.
The costs were growing so fast, and the tax base was shrinking thanks to the economy, so we had a $1.00 a pack increase on smokes, increased the sales tax, increased fees for unrelated programs, upped the premium costs to participants to almost double (still a bargain tho), increased co-pays etc.
Common sense says you can't enact something like this without some financial fallout. And the projections of costs by government pundits looking to ease the pain by manipulating the figures isn't the least bit reliable. It's a vicious cycle....income has been stagnant for decades, costs are skyrocketing, disposable income is an outdated concept. Getting something for nothing aint real folks.
I also fear with the proliferation of gene based illnesses and diseases, that if we can't find a way to fix them, we may seek other, less palatable ways to eradicate the costs associated with them.
And, most of all, the social worker in me, fears that we, as a society, have become very complacent, very willing to look the other way as long as our standard of living remains untouched. We, are willing to remain silent when our officials circumvent the Constitution, when they ignore the laws and checks and balances that were built into the system, and when they deliberately refuse to act when the handwriting is on the wall. And, I worry that we will see more people getting angry with one another rather than putting their anger where it belongs.
I love health care for all. But, I am hesitate to believe all the rhetoric that surrounds what was passed. Time tends to prove one way or another what truth is. Personally, if they had a devirative on the bill and the costs it will impose on society, I'd sink every dollar I have right now into it..... cuz I'm willing to bet there will be a short lived peak before the reality plunges use deeper into debt. And the insiders will make a bizillion bucks both at the peak and during the bailout....just like they did in finance.
Now, I must go temper my rising blood pressure and quell the acid building in my stomach.
casey35
04-26-2010, 05:31 PM
The saddest part for me is to read on here where another lesbian, another poor person has come to believe that instead of reaching out to help each other we must fight like dogs over the scraps of bone that the fat cats toss us from time to time.
This is exactly how the rich and greedy want us. So desperate that we come to fear that working together, helping each other, yes even sacrificing for another will somehow threaten our very safety, and the little bit of almost nothing that we have to work so hard to get and maintain. Americans attacking other Americans for being "lazy ass." The ole Ronald Reagan Welfare Queen myth alive and well. The other side of that myth is that the rich people among us "earned" all their obscene wealth. (gag)
I was raised to believe that many hands make the load lighter. That I am not an island, that I actually need other people, and that they actually need me. That is called community, society, and working together towards a bigger goal than any one of us could attain on our own it is not a bad thing.
I was raised to believe that the citizens of this country ARE the Government. This great American Experiment of a Government Of the People, For the People, By the People is not some legend. It is alive (though barely breathing thanks to the rich raping and pillaging it for the last 30 years - thanks Reagan and every President since) But we can revive that great American Spirit that founded this country, that ordinary citizens can create a government (many hands working together) that meets the needs of its citizens as outlined in the Preamble.
1)Form a more perfect Union (Federal Standards while respecting states rights)
2) Establish Justice (write and enforce these standards, and have an equal and fair justice system)
3) Ensure domestic tranquility (no prejudice, no hate, minority rights not trampled by majority)
4) Provide for the Common Defense (this is the only one the cons want you know about)
5) Promote the General Welfare (yes, gov. supporting ways to have basic needs met - education, food, shelter, and health care)
6)Ensure the blessings of Liberty (when basic needs are met people are free to experiment, to grow, to innovate, to be entrepreneurial)
Roosevelt said it best when he said. We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
Dear Key, what saddens me is that some other person is judging me on my opinion, someone who does not even know who I am. I have opened my home to those who need help no matter who or what they are. I am done discussing this matter. I am tired of people thinking I am uneducated, selfish, or stupid because I have a different opinion.
Corkey
04-26-2010, 05:37 PM
Dear Key, what saddens me is that some other person is judging me on my opinion, someone who does not even know who I am. I have opened my home to those who need help no matter who or what they are. I am done discussing this matter. I am tired of people thinking I am uneducated, selfish, or stupid because I have a different opinion.
No one is judging you, get off the pitty party and stand up for what you say you believe in. You espouse that which has been proven to be wrong and now you want to play the I'm being judged card. it doesn't fly. Opinions are a dime a dozen, facts are just that facts.
No one is judging you, get off the pitty party and stand up for what you say you believe in. You espouse that which has been proven to be wrong and now you want to play the I'm being judged card. it doesn't fly. Opinions are a dime a dozen, facts are just that facts.
Actually, she was judged. I don't blame her for wanting to step away from the conversation. Her first judgement was that she was racist. She apologized and it wasn't enough.
I have had this conversation on this site before and will not subject my home to it again. Be clear. Not coming to defend anyone. Just noting that yes, she was judged. Please go back and read it all from the beginning.
Sometimes a healthy distance gives us all a better perspective. I try not to judge folks who have a different experience in life than I have had. I try not to judge folks who say things with words that don't sit well with me. I try. Sometimes I fail to make my point clearly or concisely without ruffling feathers. I guess if I put myself out there, then I am due my own lil ass whooping.
If someone tries and feels they have failed and says they need to step aside, that should be honored and enough. Just my opinion.
Corkey
04-26-2010, 05:52 PM
Actually, she was judged. I don't blame her for wanting to step away from the conversation. Her first judgement was that she was racist. She apologized and it wasn't enough.
I have had this conversation on this site before and will not subject my home to it again. Be clear. Not coming to defend anyone. Just noting that yes, she was judged. Please go back and read it all from the beginning.
Sometimes a healthy distance gives us all a better perspective. I try not to judge folks who have a different experience in life than I have had. I try not to judge folks who say things with words that don't sit well with me. I try. Sometimes I fail to make my point clearly or concisely without ruffling feathers. I guess if I put myself out there, then I am due my own lil ass whooping.
If someone tries and feels they have failed and says they need to step aside, that should be honored and enough. Just my opinion.
If she feels so judged then maybe it's best she remove herself from the thread. The parting shot of " I am tired of people thinking I am uneducated, selfish, or stupid because I have a different opinion." is pure pitty me BS. It's manipulative and high school angst.
If she feels so judged then maybe it's best she remove herself from the thread. The parting shot of " I am tired of people thinking I am uneducated, selfish, or stupid because I have a different opinion." is pure pitty me BS. It's manipulative and high school angst.
I saw it as her giving reason for removing herself. Her right to do so. I see a lot of shit as high school angst and it saddens me.
Corkey
04-26-2010, 06:04 PM
I saw it as her giving reason for removing herself. Her right to do so. I see a lot of shit as high school angst and it saddens me.
I see it as "no one agrees with me so I'm going to go into a corner and pout".
It's politics folks, not high school.
Whew... not to beat a dead horse, as it is no longer about her but about our responses to her action. I think you really want to beat up on her because she didn't agree with you. Sorry. I like your additions to most threads and all, but I gotta part ways on this one man. A woman stands up for what she truly feels is right and gets bashed for it. Some do it with an educational purpose. Some do it just to be right.
Our purpose here is to grow. By here, I mean on this lil planet.. not website. How are we supposed to do that when folks just immediately bash us back into the ground? It happened to her. It has happened to others.
I just erased an entire two paragraphs outlining exactly what my "gut reaction" to this healthcare law really is. I know it would make me no friends. Here is how I will pretty it up. It is crap. It is not what should have been done and now will only delay what needs to be done in its undoing. Period. I can't afford insurance. I have chronic illness. I will be asked to pay a penalty AND pay my medical bills out of pocket. I have to now pay attorney fees to find ways to protect my home. I think it was an act of cowardice and a disservice to the American people. Meanwhile, every year that this is allowed to stand, my penalties will increase just as the Romney care in Mass has done.
Would have been better off without it. That is the statement from a poor person who can't afford it. It will do me no favors.
Corkey
04-26-2010, 06:40 PM
Jess, it isn't personal, never has been. For 5 years I had no health care at all. No job, and No prospect of being hired because of my disability. I fought tooth and nail for my SSOC disability benefits. This law is better than doing nothing while people starve to death waiting on disability to kick in. Had I been able to get medical intervention sooner I may not have had to have shoulder surgery when I did. That would have saved $25,000. for the one shoulder. I worked all my life paid into the system for over 30 years and now have the benefit of Medicare, which I also have to have a separate health care insurance to cover everything Medicare doesn't, which is everything. I lost my home, had to move back with my ex, till I met the one person who just didn't care about my ableness and who took care of me. I am lucky, I know this, there are thousands out here who have no one to take care of them, to love them and pay for the medical help they need till the system decides it's gonna give them what they have paid for. Yet when President Obama signed this law, it made white america stand up and become ever bigger racists.
Is this law perfect, no it is a step in the right direction. Could more have been done, yes, but lets just bemoan every one who it will benefit in the mean time. When presented with facts of what the law actually does for the people it is ment to help there is such outrage that people actually have to step up and be responsible.
Boggles my mind.
"I must not be liberal thank god. "
That is a quote from the person who left because she felt like she was being judged. That was posted long before I posted my rant about wishing she cared enough to work together politically to change our f-ed up system (not just health care, the entire predator capitalist system we operate under).
The other thing I could not stand reading from her over and over was how lazy she thought other people (I guess people in need specifically) were. F that! Most poor people have to work twice as hard to get half as much in this country. And if anyone should know that she should!
Anyway. I agree with you Jess that this "reform" is f-ed up, but after not having health insurance for the 10 years that I have been self employed, I don't care, I want to see a doctor without fear of going bankrupt due to what they may find.
Jess, there are hardship waivers in this law, have you looked through it? Are you sure that your only option is to take the fine and pay out of pocket? If you feel comfortable PMing me (or posting here) with details of your situation I could comb through this bill and try and answer your specific questions.
Have you done the subsidy calculator already?
casey35
04-26-2010, 08:38 PM
To those who are what they are . Hope u all well. But I still believe what i believe. We will see taxes raised and I will be waiting for the day to say I told you so.
Corkey
04-26-2010, 08:41 PM
Oh good grief. Does this mean you actually read the law? Or is it a thumb your nose at everyone who disagrees with you? All we ask is that you read it, digest what it means, even to you.
Here I'll even do your leg work for you.
Here it is :http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11307/Reid_Letter_HR3590.pdf
casey35
04-26-2010, 08:56 PM
[QUOTE=Corkey;93041]Oh good grief. Does this mean you actually read the law? Or is it a thumb your nose at everyone who disagrees with you? All we ask is that you read it, digest what it means, even to you.
Here I'll even do your leg work for you.
Here it is :http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11307/Reid_Letter_HR3590.pdf[/QU
At this time I would not care what the bill said. To me they can take the bill and shove it up where the sun dont shine. I really dont fucking care. Sorry to those who know me for using the foul language.
Corkey
04-26-2010, 08:57 PM
[QUOTE=Corkey;93041]Oh good grief. Does this mean you actually read the law? Or is it a thumb your nose at everyone who disagrees with you? All we ask is that you read it, digest what it means, even to you.
Here I'll even do your leg work for you.
Here it is :http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11307/Reid_Letter_HR3590.pdf[/QU
At this time I would not care what the bill said. To me they can take the bill and shove it up where the sun dont shine. I really dont fucking care. Sorry to those who know me for using the foul language.
Done trying to reason with a rock.
casey35
04-26-2010, 08:59 PM
[quote=casey35;93053]
Done trying to reason with a rock.
That fine but I did not have a disagreement with u. Most of mine was to Key. I read yours and understood them.
Corkey
04-26-2010, 09:03 PM
[quote=Corkey;93055]
That fine but I did not have a disagreement with u. Most of mine was to Key. I read yours and understood them.
But did you read the law????? Do you understand it????? Look I'm willing to debate here, but I'd like to be on an even keel. I can't debate opinion, I can only debate facts. If you haven't read the law you have not the facts to debate with. Make since?
christie
04-26-2010, 09:35 PM
"I must not be liberal thank god. "
That is a quote from the person who left because she felt like she was being judged. That was posted long before I posted my rant about wishing she cared enough to work together politically to change our f-ed up system (not just health care, the entire predator capitalist system we operate under).
The other thing I could not stand reading from her over and over was how lazy she thought other people (I guess people in need specifically) were. F that! Most poor people have to work twice as hard to get half as much in this country. And if anyone should know that she should!
Anyway. I agree with you Jess that this "reform" is f-ed up, but after not having health insurance for the 10 years that I have been self employed, I don't care, I want to see a doctor without fear of going bankrupt due to what they may find.
Jess, there are hardship waivers in this law, have you looked through it? Are you sure that your only option is to take the fine and pay out of pocket? If you feel comfortable PMing me (or posting here) with details of your situation I could comb through this bill and try and answer your specific questions.
Have you done the subsidy calculator already?
Key -
Thank you for your offer. I have read the bill and know not only what it won't entail for Jess, but also the fallout to both mine and my special needs son's current coverage. Part of my job is benefits administration and I also can forecast the impact it will have on the coverage we currently offer to our employees.
Just a few thoughts off the top of my head...
Yes, its grand that pre-exists will be no longer. What it doesn't do is cap the premium for those with pre-exists. Unfortunately, I believe that most currently uninsured folks will have higher premiums b/c of this "oversight" in the bill. That will only burden the subsidy/funding issue further.
The tax on the "cadillac plans" - I see this as being handed down to employers in rate hikes - I currently offer three different coverages to our employees - all three would fall into this category. Do you think that BCBS is gonna just absorb the cost?? Hell no. We will see it in rate increases, but they will be much more than the 12-15% per year increases we have seen over the last 4 years and it will effectively force the small business who has employed folks for over 57 years to drop health coverage.
That the federal government would oversee any new plans?? Oh hell no - if Medicare is a shining example of oversight, I'll pass, thanks. Don't even get me started on the Part D debacle and how most of the legislators supporting it went on to be bankrolled by the pharmaceutical companies.
I watched as the state of TN took Medicaid dollars and pooled them into several managed care programs. Anyone caring to take a look at that successful model, feel free to google "TennCare." It was a fiasco that left many covered individuals without medical care because the administration of the plans was so fucked up, providers stopped accepting patients if they were TNCare recipients.
Do I think we need a single payer system? Yes. Do I think that people such as my beloved Jess need to battle chronic, debilitating illness without consistent, proper, adequate medical care? No. Do I think that ANYONE should have to choose between healthcare and food? No. Do I want my government, who has a glorious way of fucking up the simplest of things, involved in the insurance coverage that my son depends on? No. I want a solution - a workable solution. Not a Band-Aid on a gushing artery.
I think this was another "throwing a bone" so that it looked good for midterm elections. I think it was a piss poor effort and would have rather our elected officials really grown a set of balls and went for the tougher fight of Single Payer. It really would have been worth it and not felt like we were sold out or that they settled yet once again.
MsDemeanor
04-26-2010, 10:07 PM
If it weren't for the Party Of No, aka the Senate Republicans, filibustering virtually everything that has come through the Senate (they really have, go check for yourself) and refusing to sign on to absolutely anything the Obama supports, even if those same Republicans have written or sponsored the same language/ideas/concepts in the past, then we'd have real health reform. Instead, we have a few dozen people who are so hell bent on the black man in the white house failing that they will screw over this entire country and not give a rats ass.
Their latest slimy decision, buy the way, was to filibuster debate of Wall Street Reform in the Senate. They didn't filibuster a bill, they said we won't even allow this to be discussed on the floor of the Senate, in front of the American People. I officially have nothing nice to say to and/or about any Republican. The Senate Republicans are the scum of the earth, and anyone who supports them is swimming in the same scum.
I'm over it.
If it weren't for the Party Of No, aka the Senate Republicans, filibustering virtually everything that has come through the Senate (they really have, go check for yourself) and refusing to sign on to absolutely anything the Obama supports, even if those same Republicans have written or sponsored the same language/ideas/concepts in the past, then we'd have real health reform. Instead, we have a few dozen people who are so hell bent on the black man in the white house failing that they will screw over this entire country and not give a rats ass.
Their latest slimy decision, buy the way, was to filibuster debate of Wall Street Reform in the Senate. They didn't filibuster a bill, they said we won't even allow this to be discussed on the floor of the Senate, in front of the American People. I officially have nothing nice to say to and/or about any Republican. The Senate Republicans are the scum of the earth, and anyone who supports them is swimming in the same scum.
I'm over it.
But to be fair most Democrats are just as slimey as the Republicans. But to be fair, at this point the only decent handful of politicians in Washington right now are in the Democratic Party (and the Independent, Democratic/Socialist Bernie Sanders).
And I agree, anyone supporting any Republican at this time in our nations history is, in my opinion, a traitor to this country and should be treated accordingly. They are dragging us back to pre-revolution days. I honestly think that is what they mean when they say they want to "take our country back". Back to when women and blacks and any other minority were simply rich white men's property.
How these rich white men are (still) convincing poor people to fight for their rights to own them is baffling, just baffling to me. But then again when the only news and information available to these poor communities is Fox "News" and Rush Limbaugh....well, it does begin to make sense. Keep the poor people afraid of the other poor people so they never band together. It has worked for generation after generation.
Key -
Yes, its grand that pre-exists will be no longer. What it doesn't do is cap the premium for those with pre-exists.
So, what this means it does not change what you have now - insurance co's being able to raise rates as much as they want. They were trying to raise rates 20-30-40% as this bill was being debated. But the change is that they can't drop you, like they had been doing.
The tax on the "cadillac plans" - I see this as being handed down to employers in rate hikes - I currently offer three different coverages to our employees - all three would fall into this category. Do you think that BCBS is gonna just absorb the cost?? Hell no. We will see it in rate increases, but they will be much more than the 12-15% per year increases we have seen over the last 4 years and it will effectively force the small business who has employed folks for over 57 years to drop health coverage.
So, if the co does drop it's plans, they better give that benefit money directly to the employee so they can shop for their own coverage. This may be helpful to getting us on the path to single payer. HC should not (in my opinion) be employer based. Hopefully you work at a union shop so the union can fight to make sure this happens (benefit $ goes directly to employees).
That the federal government would oversee any new plans?? Oh hell no - if Medicare is a shining example of oversight, I'll pass, thanks.
You know what the second most satisfied group of healthcare recipients are in the US? Recipients of Medicare. Know what the first is? Recipients of the VA. (Our Socialist Medicine). Know what the least satisfied is? Private Insurance.
Don't even get me started on the Part D debacle and how most of the legislators supporting it went on to be bankrolled by the pharmaceutical companies.
Part D is what you get when Republicans are in charge. They care nothing, not one iota about human people, only corporate "persons". Period.
I watched as the state of TN took Medicaid dollars and pooled them into several managed care programs. Anyone caring to take a look at that successful model, feel free to google "TennCare." It was a fiasco that left many covered individuals without medical care because the administration of the plans was so fucked up, providers stopped accepting patients if they were TNCare recipients.
More Republicans in charge I imagine. Just a guess.
Do I think we need a single payer system? Yes.
With all due respect, you just went off about how Government can't do it right? Who do want administering this single payer system? A private company? That answers to ....it's shareholders...not the people using it's service? Give me the Government (who I can fire at 2 year intervals if need be) running this system any day over a private company only out to make a profit, answerable only to the bottom line. That is how we got in this mess to begin with Healthcare (actually it's denial) for profit.
Do I think that people such as my beloved Jess need to battle chronic, debilitating illness without consistent, proper, adequate medical care? No. Do I think that ANYONE should have to choose between healthcare and food? No. Do I want my government, who has a glorious way of fucking up the simplest of things, involved in the insurance coverage that my son depends on? No. I want a solution - a workable solution. Not a Band-Aid on a gushing artery.
Again, you want a CEO making 7 million a year deciding your and your son's health care "coverage" People who rail against the government running things, I ask. So we should privatize everything? Is there nothing so precious to you that you want to have control (through the political process) over who gets to "control" it? You want everything to be about the bottom line and making sure someone makes a buck off it? Like corporations have not f-ed the country up (can we say a housing bubble that nearly destroyed this country? how about a military contractor that lost 9 billion dollars in cash and electrocuted our troops in the shower? how about giving away American's well paying jobs to communists so that their shareholders could make more money, geesh I could go on and on about predatory capitalism, talk about a gushing artery)
Whew! Enough.
I think this was another "throwing a bone" so that it looked good for midterm elections. I think it was a piss poor effort and would have rather our elected officials really grown a set of balls and went for the tougher fight of Single Payer. It really would have been worth it and not felt like we were sold out or that they settled yet once again.
Again, the contradiction. You hate the Government running things, but you want single payer. I don't get it. Please explain.
christie
04-27-2010, 07:21 AM
Key -
Thank you for your response. It was late when I responded and I am certain that I was not as clear as I could have been. My apologies. I see your responses and questions very valid and I will be back later to try and clarify.
C
If it weren't for the Party Of No, aka the Senate Republicans, filibustering virtually everything that has come through the Senate (they really have, go check for yourself) and refusing to sign on to absolutely anything the Obama supports, even if those same Republicans have written or sponsored the same language/ideas/concepts in the past, then we'd have real health reform. Instead, we have a few dozen people who are so hell bent on the black man in the white house failing that they will screw over this entire country and not give a rats ass.
Their latest slimy decision, buy the way, was to filibuster debate of Wall Street Reform in the Senate. They didn't filibuster a bill, they said we won't even allow this to be discussed on the floor of the Senate, in front of the American People. I officially have nothing nice to say to and/or about any Republican. The Senate Republicans are the scum of the earth, and anyone who supports them is swimming in the same scum.
I'm over it.
Yeah, Rachel Maddow's whole show last night was done using the Republican image with the "just say no" thing written over it. Yes, the Republicans have attempted to stop everything being addressed by democrats ( along with a handful of dem's who have proven where they stand which is alongside the republicans).
here's the way I see it laid out now... We KNOW who is going to vote how on whatever issue comes down the pike, and like the healthcare law, there were enough votes to pass it. So why bother watering shit down anymore. You know you have enough votes, just do it, yes you can..yes you should...
I no longer have any faith in either of the primary parties and will seek independents who have a proven track record in their voting history to spend my vote on.
christie
04-27-2010, 12:19 PM
So, what this means it does not change what you have now - insurance co's being able to raise rates as much as they want. They were trying to raise rates 20-30-40% as this bill was being debated. But the change is that they can't drop you, like they had been doing.
I am not sure how you figure that “they were trying to raise rates 20-40% - our renewal came out during this time and it was 12.65%, and according to our broker, this is the average they are seeing across the board in Virginia. It may be that your state was seeing carriers raise rates 20-40% and not necessarily across the country.
So, if the co does drop it's plans, they better give that benefit money directly to the employee so they can shop for their own coverage. This may be helpful to getting us on the path to single payer. HC should not (in my opinion) be employer based. Hopefully you work at a union shop so the union can fight to make sure this happens (benefit $ goes directly to employees).
Union shops in my industry are few and far between. Out of the approximate 3400 like businesses, less than 30% are union. That being said, it would mean that the employees would be the ones to suffer, as is with most things and the trickledown effect.
You and I share the opinion that healthcare should not be the responsibility of employers. I would like to see group formation, such as a buncha queers like us, so that we can get competitive rates based on a diverse demographic
You know what the second most satisfied group of healthcare recipients are in the US? Recipients of Medicare. Know what the first is? Recipients of the VA. (Our Socialist Medicine). Know what the least satisfied is? Private Insurance.
I wouldn’t doubt that Medicare recipients are satisfied with their coverage. I also wouldn’t doubt those with VA coverage. I know that my parents, both covered by military benefits and Medicare recipients, are both very happy with their coverage.
My negativity towards Medicare is its funding, or rather, lack thereof, and that it runs in a deficit. There were reports earlier this year that Medicare funding is set to be exhausted by 2017. That is the shining example I spoke of in my earlier post.
Part of the Medicare (and Social Security) funding issue is that when you reach a certain income level each year, you (and your employer’s matching contribution) stops. For 2010, the base is $106,800. I have never understood the rationale that once you make a certain amount, you should contribute less tax. I realize that the tax rate is equitable, yet it seems that the upper echelon of earners should contribute on all of their taxable income, just as those who make $20K annually do.
Part D is what you get when Republicans are in charge. They care nothing, not one iota about human people, only corporate "persons". Period.
Just to clarify, the Medicare reform bill vote was 54 to 44 with 11 Democrats in favor and 9 Republicans not.
Its been my opinion for many years that the party lines aren’t nearly as clear as they once were, and for me, really mean nothing. I don't like making sweeping generalizations about people of a group. I'm more of a wait and see kinda woman.
More Republicans in charge I imagine. Just a guess.
Wrong. Gov. Ned McWherter was a big ole Democrat.
With all due respect, you just went off about how Government can't do it right? Who do want administering this single payer system? A private company? That answers to ....it's shareholders...not the people using it's service? Give me the Government (who I can fire at 2 year intervals if need be) running this system any day over a private company only out to make a profit, answerable only to the bottom line. That is how we got in this mess to begin with Healthcare (actually it's denial) for profit.
Yep. I went off about how government are a big ole buncha fuckups. For me, in a perfect world, healthcare would be not-for-profit and fee subsidy based, with the only need for insurance to be catastrophic coverage.
Remember the good ole days when physicians were in it not for the money, but rather because they felt a calling? (much in the same way I feel that teachers have a calling, because they certainly aren’t in that $106K bracket) When they were paid in eggs, milk, produce or whatever barter the patient could afford.
I am not so niaeve to believe that medical care doesn’t cost money but when I compare the cost of one of Jess’s monthly meds at $234 vs. a Canadian generic for $55, I really don’t get why its not possible for that same generic to be available here in the US. I understand that the length of patents is to that pharmaceuticals can recoup monies spent in R&D of new drugs, but do we REALLY need a prescription drug that grows EYELASHES?!?
The pharmaceutical industry, to me, is as big an offense as is the insurance carriers.
Again, you want a CEO making 7 million a year deciding your and your son's health care "coverage" People who rail against the government running things, I ask. So we should privatize everything? Is there nothing so precious to you that you want to have control (through the political process) over who gets to "control" it? You want everything to be about the bottom line and making sure someone makes a buck off it? Like corporations have not f-ed the country up (can we say a housing bubble that nearly destroyed this country? how about a military contractor that lost 9 billion dollars in cash and electrocuted our troops in the shower? how about giving away American's well paying jobs to communists so that their shareholders could make more money, geesh I could go on and on about predatory capitalism, talk about a gushing artery)
Whew! Enough.
Unfortunately, everything IS about the bottom line because healthcare is for profit. As long as it is this way, we will continue to have the CEO’s as the top deciding for us minions.
When we work for companies that make a profit and we benefit from that profit either in bonuses, salaries or benefits, we don’t bitch about it. Its only when the profit is made at our expense does it seem to be an issue.
You and I share the same opinion of companies who outsource jobs; yet, that is another thread topic.
I feel like we have to choose the lesser of evils (there’s that damned phrase again) as to the administration – on one hand, I don’t want that corporate muckety muck in the driver’s seat, but yet, I can see that he(she) can run a business successfully. On the other, I don’t trust Government to do it because they like to run things at a deficit.
Again, the contradiction. You hate the Government running things, but you want single payer. I don't get it. Please explain.
My explanation above should have covered the contradiction. I am just weary of feeling like we settle.
Thanks for engaging. Hope this makes more sense now.
AtLast
04-27-2010, 02:25 PM
If it weren't for the Party Of No, aka the Senate Republicans, filibustering virtually everything that has come through the Senate (they really have, go check for yourself) and refusing to sign on to absolutely anything the Obama supports, even if those same Republicans have written or sponsored the same language/ideas/concepts in the past, then we'd have real health reform. Instead, we have a few dozen people who are so hell bent on the black man in the white house failing that they will screw over this entire country and not give a rats ass.
Their latest slimy decision, buy the way, was to filibuster debate of Wall Street Reform in the Senate. They didn't filibuster a bill, they said we won't even allow this to be discussed on the floor of the Senate, in front of the American People. I officially have nothing nice to say to and/or about any Republican. The Senate Republicans are the scum of the earth, and anyone who supports them is swimming in the same scum.
I'm over it.
I'm at your side. I can get ticked at some of the Dems and Obama, too (he is too moderate), but, the GOP of today has lost any semblance of a soul or conscience. Mostly a bunch of privileged white men that just can't take having an African American president above them.
I am wondering if the GOP is going to shoot itself in the foot with the latest antics concerning Wall Street Reform. Perhaps they might want to pull back on their cockiness about the mid-term election outcomes. Any immigration legislative proposals might also bring a very big onslaught of organized Democratic support among Latinos also with the AZ actions.
I don't always fall in with far-left or progressive ideology on everything, but, I am disgusted with the Republicans (and Blue Dog Dems), their wing-nut Teabag auxiliary and brainless cheerleader, Sister Sarah. Glenn Beck is nothing more than a propagator of domestic terrorism and even more vile and mentally disturbed than Limbaugh.
Health Care reform even in the form it ended up (far too moderate), will indeed make a big difference to me as it kicks in over the next few years. hell, if the only thing that was included was the pre-existing condition clauses, I would benefit even though I pay for my insurance myself in CA!
The corporate house of health care still needs to be hit, and hit hard by a single payer system! This is not a done deal and as all of the reform measures take place, people will see this, especially small business.
dreadgeek
04-27-2010, 03:40 PM
I may not have the right for this opinion but this is mine. I personally dont think that we the tax payers should have to pay for others insurance. If you dont have insurance which i dont then it should be your responsablity to get some.
I'm curious can you explain what the difference between these are:
Scenario 1: There's a program that people can buy into. This pools the risk. Those who are healthy are, essentially, paying for those who are less healthy. By the time that you, yourself, become less healthy there are other people who have flowed into the system to pay for those who are less healthy which now includes you.
Scenario 2: There's program everyone contributes to. The population that is more healthy pays more into the system then they use in services. The population that is less healthy gets more in services then they are *currently* paying in.
Now, have I described an insurance policy, Medicare or single-payer national healthcare?
The thing is, that description could more or less apply to *any* of them!
So my question is this:
Why is it that if in one scenario, a large, corporation is making profits beyond the dreams of avarice it is a Good Thing (r) and the way the world should work but if in another scenario it is the government that is paying the health care providers that is 'tax payers paying for other's health care'. Both are pools of risk, the two seem pretty much the same as far as I can tell. The *difference* is this: Aetna has one goal and that is to make a profit. If, in the course of doing so, someone happens to get needed medical attention no one at Aetna will shed a tear. But if there is SOME way to deny your claim, they will.
Now, as far as paying for others. In my department, there are a bunch of middle-aged folks, with middle-aged people's problems, and a number of twenty-somethings. The fact of the matter is, the twenty-somethings are *paying* for us middle-aged people. The kids, as we call them, hardly use their healthcare at all while us old farts use it rather often. Should the kids be able to pull out of the insurance because it'll be a decade before they start using the health insurance in a manner closer to what us older folks do?
dreadgeek
04-27-2010, 03:55 PM
Well let see, we have people who dont work they dont want to work so us tax payer pay their bills. We have those who dont want to take their kids to the doctor they would just perfer to take them to the e r. We have those who are druggies that we pay for. You know what i am one who is tired of paying for those who cant get off their ass and work. I paid for my own son being born. When i went to set up payments they treated me like shit because i did not have medicaid. What the hell is that. I dont take no hand out from anyone. I think the health care is bad but i dont think the government running it is any better. I know my opinion is not your taste but guess what i dont take anything from anyone i pay my own way in this life.
Casey:
As to your second point. I'll tell you as a parent. When I didn't take my son to the doctor, it was because I didn't have health insurance!
As far as your paying your own way in life:
Please answer the following:
1) How much money did you pay and to whom did you pay it, for the road you drive to and from work on?
2) If you have ever had to call the fire department, how much did you pay and to whom did you pay it?
3) If you have ever called the police, how much did you pay and to whom did you pay it?
4) If you use the public library, how much do you pay and to whom do do you pay it?
5) Who do you pay to insure that your employer maintains a safe work environment?
6) How much do you pay and to whom do you pay it to have someone test the medicines you take for safety?
7) How much do you pay and to whom do you pay it to have someone test your food to make sure it is safe.
8) How much do you pay and to whom do you pay it, to ensure that the person in the semi next to you, doing 60 mph is licensed?
9) How much do you pay and to whom do you pay for the air traffic controller who makes sure that the plane you are on doesn't fly into another plane?
10) How much do you pay and to whom do you pay it to make sure that criminals are locked up behind bars where they belong?
11) How much do you pay and to whom do you pay it to have your mail delivered to you daily?
Your statement that you don't take anything from anyone simply isn't true--UNLESS--you live off the grid. But you are here, on the Internet, so that tells me you are not off the grid. You are using satellites that you don't lease time on. You are using microwave transmission towers that you don't lease time on. You make use of hundreds of little services that you pay your taxes for but that you do not pay for directly. Some portion of your taxes goes to pay the NIH and CDC workers who maintain public health but you have never written a check to the NIH or the CDC. Some portion of your taxes go to pay the police but you have never paid an individual cop for showing up. Some portion of your taxes goes to pay for the roads but, toll bridges not-with-standing, chances are you don't pay to drive on the surface streets in town.
As one Supreme Court justice said at the beginning of the last century "taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society". There is an entire infrastructure, supporting your "I'm a self-made-woman" illusions that you utterly take for granted. If you had to pay for all those invisible services that make the wheels of modern life turn, it would be prohibitively expensive.
Now, again, if you live off-the-grid none of that applies to you but you're using a computer, which means you're on the grid, and I know, for a fact, that you aren't paying to rent satellite, microwave and fibre time. Yet, your electrons flow over the same pathways that my electrons flow over because we pay into it *together*.
dreadgeek
04-27-2010, 04:03 PM
Keys, I have mercy for those who work but if u are lazy ass then i say take a flying leap. I must not be liberal thank god. Seems congress thinks that money is grown on trees thats why they are spending it as fast as they can make it before you know it gas will be 10 dollars a gallon and milk will be 8. When you are living paycheck to paycheck like I am I have to worry about taking care of me and my own cant worry about taking care of anyone else. If you consider this selfish I am sorry but I was raised to be self reliant not let government take care of me. My question is who going to be paying this back us, our children, grandchildren, or great grandchildren?
I'm curious, how much are you willing to cut defense spending? How many years are YOU prepared to spend away from YOUR family and friends fighting in some country that you may not have known existed a year before you got shipped there? Because someone is doing that job, and it most likely isn't you, and you ARE depending upon someone else to do that.
Why is it that we can spend any amount of money you mention on defense but we begrudge even public education!
And our country was *not* founded on 'self-reliance'. You will not find self-reliance in the Constitution nor will you find self-reliance in the Declaration of Independence (yes, I checked). If we were founded on self-reliance may I ask why the Benjamin Franklin said, "we must all hang together, or surely we will all hang separately". Doesn't sound very "I got my liberty, too bad about yours you lazy ass" to me. If we were founded on self-reliance, why did the founders create a postal service or the first public library system? If we were founded on self-reliance why did we create a public education system?
We are not orangutans, Casey. If we were, your philosophy would be perfectly in keeping with the nature of our species. Orangutans have minimal contact with one another and spend most of their time alone. But we aren't orangs. We are a social primate.
Years ago, E.O. Wilson, the great entomologist, was asked what he thought of communism. His response was, "great idea, wrong species". Well, I would say that the same applies to libertarianism, great idea, for orangutans, but not the right system for our species.
dreadgeek
04-27-2010, 04:09 PM
Dear Key, what saddens me is that some other person is judging me on my opinion, someone who does not even know who I am. I have opened my home to those who need help no matter who or what they are. I am done discussing this matter. I am tired of people thinking I am uneducated, selfish, or stupid because I have a different opinion.
You have a right to your opinion. Other people have a right to an opinion *about* their opinion.
If you believe you are right--and you clearly do--then convince us. Show that your position is better thought out, more coherent and has greater internal consistency. People *can* be convinced, but throwing tantrums and crying about your rights to free speech isn't a convincing argument.
AtLast
04-27-2010, 05:35 PM
There is NO GOVERNMENT take-over of health-care in the US!! The health-care companies remain the SAME PRIVATELY held and run companies! If you are not covered in the VA system, your health-care is NOT PUBLIC. Yes, we all will be required to buy health insurance and the health-care industry is going to have more restrictions put upon it. Since they make over a 400% profit, I don't think any of this is going to hurt them! Now, the CEO's might have to take home a smaller multi-million dollar (or billion dollar) bonus, but I'm sure they can still pay their bills. Oh, and shell out for lobbying against a public system that would not only benefit everyone, but cost less!!
Overall, I am not against a profit-driven industry. However, what is it that some do not understand about the relationship of an inflated profit margin in the health-care industry to the continuing increase of medical care? And how this actually ends up in higher taxation and a larger national deficit in the long-run? I am in no way an economic wiz at, but even I can put this together. Also, the private healthcare industry will be receiving millions more customers under this reform plan without any competition from a public system at all. Not really a lot of reform going on. I guess some will twist this around in terms of existing programs such as MediCare. Funny how the likes of tea baggers don't want anyone messing with their MediCare!!!
The GOP and major private heal-care companies has done an excellent job of brainwashing, haven't they? You know, the elected Republican folks sitting in DC are also part of the GOVERNMENT!! In fact, they have quite a nice benefit package that we all pay for and will continue to do so when they retire. They do have Cadillac health-care benefits paid for by taxpayers directly. So, the rest of us shouldn't have this same coverage and access?
I just can't stand it that there still exists people that believe that health-care reform is a government take-over!! If you only want the private sector involved in health-care, OK, just say so and demonstrate the economic and social advantages, but stop all of the anti-government conspiracy BS.
I pay my way too and have no problem with chipping in taxes for the greater good. Sure, I don't like those that take advantage of things, but, frankly this is a very small number!! A healthier population leads to a healthier economy! And now there is actually some kind of mechanism requiring people to get healh insurance and leveling out things some.
And I am fed-up with swipes about people don't work! As someone else stated, poor people work harder than ought to be allowed! Hell, these days, look at how many people are working 2 or 3 jobs to make-up for job loss. And I'll gladly support someone that is getting themselves clean and sober in going to school or getting other employment training.. and I'll help foot the bill for their kids, too!
casey35
04-27-2010, 05:41 PM
Casey:
As to your second point. I'll tell you as a parent. When I didn't take my son to the doctor, it was because I didn't have health insurance!
As far as your paying your own way in life:
Please answer the following:
1) How much money did you pay and to whom did you pay it, for the road you drive to and from work on?
2) If you have ever had to call the fire department, how much did you pay and to whom did you pay it?
3) If you have ever called the police, how much did you pay and to whom did you pay it?
4) If you use the public library, how much do you pay and to whom do do you pay it?
5) Who do you pay to insure that your employer maintains a safe work environment?
6) How much do you pay and to whom do you pay it to have someone test the medicines you take for safety?
7) How much do you pay and to whom do you pay it to have someone test your food to make sure it is safe.
8) How much do you pay and to whom do you pay it, to ensure that the person in the semi next to you, doing 60 mph is licensed?
9) How much do you pay and to whom do you pay for the air traffic controller who makes sure that the plane you are on doesn't fly into another plane?
10) How much do you pay and to whom do you pay it to make sure that criminals are locked up behind bars where they belong?
11) How much do you pay and to whom do you pay it to have your mail delivered to you daily?
Your statement that you don't take anything from anyone simply isn't true--UNLESS--you live off the grid. But you are here, on the Internet, so that tells me you are not off the grid. You are using satellites that you don't lease time on. You are using microwave transmission towers that you don't lease time on. You make use of hundreds of little services that you pay your taxes for but that you do not pay for directly. Some portion of your taxes goes to pay the NIH and CDC workers who maintain public health but you have never written a check to the NIH or the CDC. Some portion of your taxes go to pay the police but you have never paid an individual cop for showing up. Some portion of your taxes goes to pay for the roads but, toll bridges not-with-standing, chances are you don't pay to drive on the surface streets in town.
As one Supreme Court justice said at the beginning of the last century "taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society". There is an entire infrastructure, supporting your "I'm a self-made-woman" illusions that you utterly take for granted. If you had to pay for all those invisible services that make the wheels of modern life turn, it would be prohibitively expensive.
Now, again, if you live off-the-grid none of that applies to you but you're using a computer, which means you're on the grid, and I know, for a fact, that you aren't paying to rent satellite, microwave and fibre time. Yet, your electrons flow over the same pathways that my electrons flow over because we pay into it *together*.
Well geez, I think i do pay for most of that, due to the fact I pay taxes and home owner insurance. Pay state taxes and county and city taxes. Pay taxes on everything I have or use. I do not have medcaid or food stamps. I dont sit on my ass and draw money from the government. So I do pay my fair share in life.
casey35
04-27-2010, 05:49 PM
But to be fair most Democrats are just as slimey as the Republicans. But to be fair, at this point the only decent handful of politicians in Washington right now are in the Democratic Party (and the Independent, Democratic/Socialist Bernie Sanders).
And I agree, anyone supporting any Republican at this time in our nations history is, in my opinion, a traitor to this country and should be treated accordingly. They are dragging us back to pre-revolution days. I honestly think that is what they mean when they say they want to "take our country back". Back to when women and blacks and any other minority were simply rich white men's property.
How these rich white men are (still) convincing poor people to fight for their rights to own them is baffling, just baffling to me. But then again when the only news and information available to these poor communities is Fox "News" and Rush Limbaugh....well, it does begin to make sense. Keep the poor people afraid of the other poor people so they never band together. It has worked for generation after generation.
key you are an ass hole because my family is republican, My Dad served 34 years in the military so u need to back up and get off your high horse thinking u are always right.
Corkey
04-27-2010, 05:54 PM
key you are an ass hole because my family is republican, My Dad served 34 years in the military so u need to back up and get off your high horse thinking u are always right.
I'm sorry, what in the hell has this got to do with health care? I'm not going to report you for this out burst, I can't say the same for anyone else, but it isn't called for. If you can't debate the issues, perhaps you need to look inward as to why.
Toughy
04-27-2010, 05:55 PM
Aj........I am always astonished at your ability to break it down............
I think the crux of the question is this:
Is health care a right or a privilege?
I think it is a right, therefore I think a single payor (government financed) system is the only Constitutional way to provide health care.
Each individual pays taxes.........those taxes pay for what we believe are rights............roads, the library, police, fire, infrastructure which used to be sewer, electrical, prison, roads, communication, and shit I can't even imagine (remember the internet was not on my radar 25 years ago).
Medicare has some serious issues..........that's because Republicans don't believe government works or is a good idea and they set up Medicare Part D to fail and to bankrupt Medicare. Republicans have been passing laws that insure the government will fail since Reagan. If you set it up to fail............it will fail............
By the way...........I am one of those single payor beneficiaries ............a recipient of true socialized medicine.......I get my health care from the VA.......
if the VA system is good enough for me and my sister and brother veterans...........then it's good enough for Joe the fucking fake plumber..........
mmmmmmmmmmmm................not sure where I am/was going with this...........so......I'm out for now...........
dreadgeek
04-27-2010, 06:00 PM
Well geez, I think i do pay for most of that, due to the fact I pay taxes and home owner insurance. Pay state taxes and county and city taxes. Pay taxes on everything I have or use. I do not have medcaid or food stamps. I dont sit on my ass and draw money from the government. So I do pay my fair share in life.
You seem to be missing the point so I'll try this again.
You claimed, erroneously, that you pay your own way. That doesn't mean that you pay *part* of something and others pay *part* of something. If I'm 'paying my own way' to the movies, I'm not putting in a dollar, and my wife puts in another dollar, and the person who is behind us in line puts in yet another dollar and so on. Rather, it means that whatever gouging I'm about to endure at the box office, I pay every red cent myself.
You pay taxes. I pay taxes and by doing so, we ALL, can afford things like roads, satellite connections, etc. that (and this is the really important bit) would not be able to afford to pay, out of our own pockets, by ourselves. That is not "I pay for everything myself" which is what your original statement was, Casey.
You draw innumerable benefits from the government that you do not actually pay for directly because you cannot afford to do so. You may *think* that you are completely self-contained, dependent upon no one else, but that is an illusion. It is an illusion maintained by the hard work and sweat of thousands upon thousands of ordinary workers, who get up every morning and go to work for the government--local, state and federal. THEY maintain the roads, so you aren't being charged $2.50 a quarter mile to get out of your neighborhood. THEY maintain the air traffic control system so you aren't paying the truly exorbitant amount you would have to pay if you had to contract that on your own. THEY keep the streets safe and show up when your house is on fire, services that would be prohibitively expensive if you had to pay for it yourself. One day you're going to get old and you're going to start collecting Social Security and Medicare. Will you THEN be 'lazy', 'sitting on your ass'? Think carefully before you answer because that's a lot of people's parents you're talking about if you're going to say those retirees are lazy, shiftless and of no account.
You are not 'self-made'. A whole network of support created a society that is not, just to take one obvious example, Somalia. If you lived in that society, you would be too busy trying to just take care of the daily necessities like clean water to do whatever it is you do.
I have to make one last comment on your boasts (and they are boasts) about how hard you work and your complaints about how others are lazy. My day began at 5:15 this morning, I will be off work in about 10 minutes and then I will go to class and be in class until about 8:30. Tomorrow, I have a 'short' day that will mean I leave the house around 6:30 and home about 7:00 and then I'll have a couple of hours of homework to do before Thursday when I'll have another 6:30 to 8:30 kind of day. The next three *years* of my life is going to look like that and then there'll be a year of working part-time (at the same job, my boss wants to hold onto me that badly) while going to school full time for another year and three month practicum in a lab. THEN I get to find another job in a lab someplace.
I bring this up because it seems to me that the people who *most* begrudge those who collect welfare or are on disability or social security or medicaid are those who boast loudest and longest about how hard-working they are. In the meantime, many of us get up and pull insanely long days, have not much in the way of days off because of outside commitments with things like, oh, school and yet, for the most part, we aren't the people I hear shouting about how lazy other people are. I don't begrudge people on welfare or disability or unemployment or medicaid what pittance they get. I don't begrudge that my tax dollars go to pay for people to be on welfare or what-have-you. One, I'm too busy to begrudge them that; two, I am far too aware that I am extraordinarily lucky to live in the comfort that I do; and three I am all too painfully aware that but for a twist of fate, there goes Adrienne Davis.
Now, you'll react however you react. You'll look at those who are less fortunate than you and perhaps you will see them and realize it could just as easily be you there, or you may look at them and see someone who is lazy, shiftless and don't want to work. That's all on you. But I have to say that I find it instructive and interesting that those who yell loudest about how hard working they are are the also the first people to complain about others who don't work as hard. I take PRIDE in being able to push myself longer, faster and harder than almost anyone around me. Maybe I'm just too high on that feeling of being a superwoman to begrudge those who don't have it as good as I do.
Toughy
04-27-2010, 06:12 PM
key you are an ass hole because my family is republican, My Dad served 34 years in the military so u need to back up and get off your high horse thinking u are always right.
I am a flaming ass progressive...who voted for Reagan the first time and was a Republican.......my family on my father's side has bunches of career military........bunches of them for generations.......some of them were warriors who met the Mayflower and some of them were on the Mayflower or with the Conquistadors.............
I would suggest, as a Vietnam Era veteran, that you might need to back up yourself.
And............just to be clear...........you never actually addressed any of dreadgeek's points.......
I, for one, want to know how you think a flawed bill that addresses the payment of health care costs ....and it will benefit you regardless of what you think........is somehow going to cause you harm?
It's a shame that you refuse to access food stamps and other government programs that you actually paid for........you paid ahead for a time you (or someone else) might have a need for assistance.
Thinking you can do everything alone......well.......one day you will find out asking for help and getting it in the form of health care or food or housing or ______ is not a sin or a sign of weakness or a hand-out .........
getting food stamps or any other 'entitlement benefit' is simply a hand-up based on your previous payment of taxes into the system......by not accessing the services you have already paid for makes you a fool and hungry and bitter ...........
by the way........calling folks names to avoid answering questions or responding to thoughtful posts is childish at best..............careful how you show your own ass.......
Corkey
04-27-2010, 06:19 PM
casey, there are plenty of Vets here, some of us served in various wars. My father was also a Vet and a republican, that has not a damn thing to do with this issue of health care. Like Toughy we served and are entitled to our benefits, if you'd like to put your name on the dotted line and join those of us who have served, you too can have health care, oh it's provided by the government.
If you'd like to play games with this, I'm afraid it wont serve you well.
casey35
04-27-2010, 07:05 PM
This is the last i am going to reply. I am tired of people calling people unamerican if we do not feel like you or have the same opinion as you do. The reason why i call Key a bad name is because he said that republicans were unamerican. To me that was uncalled for. No one has the right to call an american citizen unamerican. So if you want to report me that fine with me.
Toughy
04-27-2010, 09:15 PM
This is the last i am going to reply. I am tired of people calling people unamerican if we do not feel like you or have the same opinion as you do. The reason why i call Key a bad name is because he said that republicans were unamerican. To me that was uncalled for. No one has the right to call an american citizen unamerican. So if you want to report me that fine with me.
quote the post that called you or anyone else (key) unamerican and I will stand with you and denounce that kind of rhetoric.........otherwise..........you tell lies and think you can get away with it based on some victim stance.
I don't give two shits why you acted like a two year old when you called key names.........you acted like a two year old and that has no place in an articulate discussion.
That ignorant racist law passed in AZ gives the police the right to decide who they think might not be an american............goddess help all my nieces/nephews and great nephews/nieces who are brown and white if they ever cross the border from New Mexico into Arizona....that law gives some redneck AZ lawman the right to decide who they think needs papers to prove they are american...
spit..........and no fucking popcorn
AtLast
04-27-2010, 09:58 PM
key you are an ass hole because my family is republican, My Dad served 34 years in the military so u need to back up and get off your high horse thinking u are always right.
Aside from the name calling here, you have struck yet another nerve for me and the countless members here that I know to have served in the military (I have not). And not just a few of whom had to exit due to DADT.
I get really angry when I hear not only the nonsense about those that work, don't work or don't want to work (tell me, how many of these so called slackers have you interviewed personally?), but also when a person falls back on family history of military service as a shot against liberal or progressive social thinkers as being non-patriotic.
I don't come from a distinguished US military family, but my Dad, brother, 2 Uncles and several cousins served as enlisted women and men (on the front lines) in the military from WWII onward, covering it, Korea, Vietnam, & Desert Storm. Additionally, I have relatives that were relocated to camps here in the Good ‘Ole USA under the Enemy Aliens Acts along with the Japanese and other immigrant groups at the very same time my Uncles were serving in WWII overseas. Thinking maybe it is I that ought to be so pissed at the government!! I have both family and friends with loved ones in Afghanistan & Iraq right now, which are on their 3rd & 4th tour of duty.
Although I question the politics about the various wars we have been and are engaged in, I thank and shake the hand of every single service person I run into in public in a uniform. I do this because I mean it and support them and know that they do not make the war policy. I lost several friends in Vietnam before they reached age 20. I was sickened by how the Vietnam veterans were treated upon their return home- even if I disagreed with that conflict.
I have had times that the people I am with when I walk up to service people and thank them that think its weird due to my political thoughts and social ideology. What I say to them is that I can disagree with the politics and still appreciate the sacrifices these people are making on my behalf. I am no less a patriot than any tea bagging, anti-government nut-cake when it comes to supporting those that serve. I also have expressed appreciation for those that have served the US in many other kinds of ways such as through the Peace Corps, Vista, Habitat for Humanity, etc. All of these people are giving something back.
I can appreciate your beliefs, although, you do appear to have some bigoted views, as your own. But, please do not assume that those of us that have more liberal political and ideological attitudes are somehow not patriotic or do not recognize what our military does and what their entire family goes through when they are serving.
Frankly, this liberal queer has no problem with more of my tax money going to the various programs to benefit service people that need so much support returning from the wars we are in and are not getting. That makes me sick, too! They deserve better.
Toughy
04-27-2010, 10:40 PM
Aside from the name calling here, you have struck yet another nerve for me and the countless members here that I know to have served in the military (I have not). And not just a few of whom had to exit due to DADT.
I get really angry when I hear not only the nonsense about those that work, don't work or don't want to work (tell me, how many of these so called slackers have you interviewed personally?), but also when a person falls back on family history of military service as a shot against liberal or progressive social thinkers as being non-patriotic.
I don't come from a distinguished US military family, but my Dad, brother, 2 Uncles and several cousins served as enlisted women and men (on the front lines) in the military from WWII onward, covering it, Korea, Vietnam, & Desert Storm. Additionally, I have relatives that were relocated to camps here in the Good ‘Ole USA under the Enemy Aliens Acts along with the Japanese and other immigrant groups at the very same time my Uncles were serving in WWII overseas. Thinking maybe it is I that ought to be so pissed at the government!! I have both family and friends with loved ones in Afghanistan & Iraq right now, which are on their 3rd & 4th tour of duty.
Although I question the politics about the various wars we have been and are engaged in, I thank and shake the hand of every single service person I run into in public in a uniform. I do this because I mean it and support them and know that they do not make the war policy. I lost several friends in Vietnam before they reached age 20. I was sickened by how the Vietnam veterans were treated upon their return home- even if I disagreed with that conflict.
I have had times that the people I am with when I walk up to service people and thank them that think its weird due to my political thoughts and social ideology. What I say to them is that I can disagree with the politics and still appreciate the sacrifices these people are making on my behalf. I am no less a patriot than any tea bagging, anti-government nut-cake when it comes to supporting those that serve. I also have expressed appreciation for those that have served the US in many other kinds of ways such as through the Peace Corps, Vista, Habitat for Humanity, etc. All of these people are giving something back.
I can appreciate your beliefs, although, you do appear to have some bigoted views, as your own. But, please do not assume that those of us that have more liberal political and ideological attitudes are somehow not patriotic or do not recognize what our military does and what their entire family goes through when they are serving.
Frankly, this liberal queer has no problem with more of my tax money going to the various programs to benefit service people that need so much support returning from the wars we are in and are not getting. That makes me sick, too! They deserve better.
thank you..............
sometimes the simplest thing says it all..................
dreadgeek
04-27-2010, 10:51 PM
This is the last i am going to reply. I am tired of people calling people unamerican if we do not feel like you or have the same opinion as you do. The reason why i call Key a bad name is because he said that republicans were unamerican. To me that was uncalled for. No one has the right to call an american citizen unamerican. So if you want to report me that fine with me.
You know, I can't help but notice that you focused on the post where you got butthurt and ignored the post where your position was systematically but very respectfully dismantled before your very eyes. I didn't call you un-American. I said that your position that America was "founded on self-reliance" was not even wrong. I said that you appeared to be missing the point but, again, didn't call you names. I didn't mention your family at all but demonstrated that you are not the self-made, monad that is your *self-proclaimed* image of yourself.
I also have to say that I find it the very height of irony that a Republican and conservative would be calling people out on questioning the patriotism of other Americans. You invoked your father's years of service as a rhetorical device. It's a way of saying "my family is more American than thou". Except, as Corkey pointed out, there are *at least* three veterans on this thread that I am aware of (Corkey, Toughy and myself). I have a three-generation tradition of military service in my family--three consecutive generations--and it wouldn't surprise me if one of my grand-children makes it a fourth. In fact, just in my immediate family the *only* people who have not worn the uniform are my granddaughter (who is 2), my mother and my daughter-in-law. My father, my sister, my son and I all wore the uniform of the US Army. My sister made a career out of it and my son aspires to. I would have but I was kicked out (three guesses as to why). So pulling the veteran card here is not going to help much.
Either you have an argument or you don't. If you have an argument, make your argument. I can be convinced, I'm sure that the rest of us can be convinced, so convince us. Convince us that as a matter of social contract, we should be prepared to let, for instance, people whose jobs have been moved overseas by some corporation to starve because there are people who cheat the unemployment system. Convince us that, as a matter of policy, we should let those who are disabled starve for lack of food or die for lack of medical care because they are disabled. Convince us that the newborn baby should starve or not get medical care because her mother is a 17 year old girl who made one mistake, one night and couldn't bring herself to terminate the pregnancy. Convince us that the most well-off, the strongest in society, should have no compunction about trampling on the bodies of the weakest and the poorest and that, as we grind their faces into the mud, we should be telling them that this is no more than what they deserve because they are lazy. If you are right. If your vision of society is the one that is best for society, convince me.
Convince me that America is less free because of the 40-hour work week. Convince me that America needs no public schools or libraries. Convince me that America is less productive because there are laws against child labor, because of unemployment insurance, social security insurance, Medicare. Convince me that there should be no VA because SOME veterans are strung out on drugs or drink or both.
I recognize that there are cheats in the system but I'm not prepared to burn the whole thing to the ground, penalize those who have merely fallen on hard times, to satisfy some sense of righteous indignation. But you can convince me, if you are right and you are very, very good. Go for it. That's a tall mountain to climb, you might want to bring oxygen.
Cheers
aj
How do we get through to people who refuse to debate in facts, or to even defend their opinion with any clarity. F-you is not a rebuttal founded in information. Even if their information is based on dubious sources we at least have a ground from which to discuss the matter. As far as I can see the biggest concern to Casey is that her taxes will go up. Many people have pointed out that her taxes have actually been lowered. If she recently did her taxes, surely she sees her return is larger this year.
Dreadgeek I totally appreciate all the time you took to present your case. I think what we are seeing in reaction is pretty typical for our tea party citizens and other conservatives. They do not operate from facts, only fears. So all the rational debate in the world simply will not compute for these people. I admit that my facts are peppered with emotional appeals. But even this does not seem to get through.
There must be someone among us with the NLP skills that can instruct us on how best to get through to them.
I am not anti-Republican. In my opinion Eisenhower was the last great Republican President we had. He warned us against the Military Industrial Complex, taxes on the rich (equivalent to about 3 million a year in today's dollars) were upwards of 70-90%. Heck I even praise Nixon for giving us the G-Blessed EPA! What happened to "real" conservative values. As in conserving our environment, conserving our blood and treasure, conserving our economy by not allowing any person (corporate or human) to get "too big to fail."
What to do what to do? I can't stand watching poor people defend the rights of the rich. HELP!
Actually, I just thought of something. Maybe the biggest concern to Casey (and others) is that she not be seen as "taking a hand out." There is a lot of pride/shame going on there. I am sure Casey represent many of our citizens in this regard. They don't want to associate themselves with what they perceive as weakness (the "lazy asses"). How do you convince someone with such pride/shame that getting help is not a bad thing? Again someone with NLP language skills might be able to chime in here and give us all a hand. Anyone?
How do we get through to people who refuse to debate in facts, or to even defend their opinion with any clarity. F-you is not a rebuttal founded in information. Even if their information is based on dubious sources we at least have a ground from which to discuss the matter. As far as I can see the biggest concern to Casey is that her taxes will go up. Many people have pointed out that her taxes have actually been lowered. If she recently did her taxes, surely she sees her return is larger this year.
Dreadgeek I totally appreciate all the time you took to present your case. I think what we are seeing in reaction is pretty typical for our tea party citizens and other conservatives. They do not operate from facts, only fears. So all the rational debate in the world simply will not compute for these people. I admit that my facts are peppered with emotional appeals. But even this does not seem to get through.
There must be someone among us with the NLP skills that can instruct us on how best to get through to them.
I am not anti-Republican. In my opinion Eisenhower was the last great Republican President we had. He warned us against the Military Industrial Complex, taxes on the rich (equivalent to about 3 million a year in today's dollars) were upwards of 70-90%. Heck I even praise Nixon for giving us the G-Blessed EPA! What happened to "real" conservative values. As in conserving our environment, conserving our blood and treasure, conserving our economy by not allowing any person (corporate or human) to get "too big to fail."
What to do what to do? I can't stand watching poor people defend the rights of the rich. HELP!
Actually, I just thought of something. Maybe the biggest concern to Casey (and others) is that she not be seen as "taking a hand out." There is a lot of pride/shame going on there. I am sure Casey represent many of our citizens in this regard. They don't want to associate themselves with what they perceive as weakness (the "lazy asses"). How do you convince someone with such pride/shame that getting help is not a bad thing? Again someone with NLP language skills might be able to chime in here and give us all a hand. Anyone?
Perhaps first by not talking about them as if they aren't here. Or talking in a language someone w/o your same skill ( vocabulary) set may not understand.
What I, as a reader, just witnessed in your above post was beyond rude. I know you truly mean well. I know you truly wish to be able to assist someone with seeing things through a different lens. As someone who does take an interest ( completely NON partisan, as I think both parties suck), I am watching you fail miserably.
I agree with many many points you and others ( dreadgeek, Kobi, christie, et al ) have expressed. I am also the adult child of someone who refused "to take a handout" when my dad decided to exercise his right to be a fuckhead. I and my siblings along with my mother suffered at the hands of not only his assholishness but because of my mother's pride. So, I get where the not wanting to be dependent upon what has been seen as a "handout" comes from. My mom may not have had to work herself to utter ruin had she accepted help. She may not have become the willful, self determined, non-negotiable woman she did.
The problem is this... You present a case that may perhaps be unknown to someone else. You present what you see as "positive" and a gradual slide forward. You fail to see how she sees things or take into consideration where she is coming from. You do not speak to her. Get it?
There is good AND bad in this piece of now history. Perhaps if we can reasonably see all sides and figure out where it needs to go next we can begin to forge those bridges. If you can't see the other side, you will never breech it.( By you I mean ANY "you", not just you, key.)
The choice to keep banging your head against a wall, as someone else hinted to, I believe the wordage was "talking to a rock" ( lovely, no? ), or you can try to use a different approach. It's always YOUR choice to engage or not. It's always YOUR choice as to a change in strategy or NOT.
For me the question you asked bears another worthy avenue. Do you REALLY wish to engage, or do you just want to make a point? As I see it, those with the most ammunition should be the ones more willing to offer a different road than tossing it.
Sorry for the further derail. My bad.
Corkey
04-28-2010, 12:58 PM
When someone refuses to speak to facts, and only comes at the debate with emotion, then it isn't a debate, it is in fact manipulative and childish. Now did I use any words that were so over the head that they cannot be understood? No. Fact: if one makes over $250 K a year their taxes will go up. Fact: if one makes less than $250 K a year they will go down.
The rest of her argument was lost in emotion.
So while banging heads on a wall and "talking to a rock" which btw weren't exactly used, may seem harsh, they are in fact exactly what is happening.
MY .02
Apocalipstic
04-28-2010, 01:26 PM
Many states especially in the South which have large polulations of poor people have been brought up not to be "freeloaders". This goes way back, maybe even to before the Scots Irish (who predominantly settled these areas) came to the US and to the reception they received when they got here.
Casey, I totally get you not wanting a handout and working for what you have, however, for me I think it is a good thing for us to all share the burden of making sure every single US citizen has health insurance. I have also always paid for myself, never taken unemployment etc. I am lucky to have insurance though and even if I have to pay extra taxes, I want us all to. I want YOU to have insurance. :) We all need it.
I know you will agree that when people say Southerner's are lazy and don't want to work, we know that is not true. I think most people given the chance of work they can do well at and make a good living would pick to work. I agree that some people do not have this work ethic. My belief is that some have been so beat down over generations that living off the system seems like a good idea, but for most of us, really, we would rather go to work every day.
Think about what a burden would be lifted if we all shared in making sure every single US citizen had insurance. How many Mothers and Dads would sleep better.
For me, it is worth it to help pay for that. I dream of that day.
We don't have to agree, but I do wish you would think about it. :)
dreadgeek
04-28-2010, 01:35 PM
As far as I can see the biggest concern to Casey is that her taxes will go up.
At the risk of going all "meta" on everyone here, I think that there's actually another issue that really comprises the elephant in the room. So I'm going to name it (I will call it George, and I will hug it and squeeze it and call it George! Sorry couldn't help myself). The question isn't about taxes, it's about *merit*. Even more than I heard Casey concerns about her taxes, I heard her concerns about lazy people (undeserving) who don't want to work (not meriting help). That was the theme that I kept reading in different words. And it's a question I think is actually at the heart of our current debates about social programs.
I'm willing to bet that Casey does *not* include wounded veterans in her list of lazy people who don't want to work. (I may be wrong here.) I'm willing to bet that she believes that they ARE deserving of medical care and help going to school. This is a position I don't disagree with. The problem seems to be who 'deserves' help. I (and it seems many others) believe that there are people who fall on hard times and what they need from society is a hand back up to their feet. Some of us may have been born into hard times. Some of us may have fallen on hard times one or more times in our youth or later. My position is that despite the fact that there will be people who game the system, we should be a society that has a safety net and the social contract should be like this: "if you cannot do for yourself because you are disabled, we will do for you. If you can do for yourself, but you have fallen on hard times, we will do what it takes to help you get back on your feet. If you were born into hard times, we will not hold you responsible for the circumstances of your birth and we will help you get into a position so your children won't be born into hard times. For that, we expect you to do your best, obey the laws, maybe do something nice for your neighbors once in a while and generally try to leave the place a little cleaner than you found it when you got here."
Others would disagree with that social contract. I don't know precisely what they would replace it with but, for reasons I'll get into later, I think that the harsher we decide society should be the more short-sighted we are being as a culture.
I want to digress about this whole 'rugged individualism' ethic. While on the surface it's admirable, a couple of people (Jess for one) has pointed to the downside of this. Yes, if one *can* do for oneself one should try their best to do so. However, kids in the mix changes the calculus on that one for me. Think about it this way: Which is more admirable? The mother who has a sick child who *refuses* to take that child to the hospital because "I've never taken a thing from anyone" and she has neither the insurance or the cash to pay or the mother who swallows her pride and goes to the hospital and gets her child medical care even if it means having to ask for charity. I would say that latter. Now, that might be self-serving because that mother was me some 20 years ago. My son was two, I was just out of the Army (not by choice), my marriage had just fallen apart and the only job skills I had were what I'd learned at McDonald's and cryptography. I grew up in privilege, believe that sitting on the doorstep of the county welfare office, my son in my lap, waiting for those doors to open, was the most humbling experience of my life. But I *HAD* to. My parents had cut me off, I had no job skills and my ex-husband had less skills than I did and couldn't hold a job to boot! It was humble myself or watch my kid starve. To this day, I still maintain that watching him starve would've been the easier path at the time, I would have had my pride intact.
Back to the issue of merit. Here's why I think having a truly harsh society is against ALL our interests. As long as I could get welfare, food stamps and medicaid I had no reason to steal or turn to other forms of crime. There was an *option* so I never really had to face my son starving--maybe sometimes there was less food, maybe sometimes I went a couple or three days without eating to make things stretch, but I didn't have to turn to stealing bread from the grocery store so my son could eat. But I can well imagine what I might have been driven to had there been no options. And that is the short-sightedness that mystifies me. One, to me obvious, lesson of history is this: as long as people can feed their children, put a roof over their head, give them some kind of bed to sleep in, some clothes on their backs and some shoes on their feet, they are very, very unlikely to revolt. But when people are watching their children starve or die from malnutrition or disease that *could* be cured but they cannot get the cure, they *will* revolt. It seems to me that social welfare in all its forms, is an insurance policy society pays to keep the wolves of temptation to revolution outside the door. It strikes me as short-sighted to not see a lesson that so obviously litters the fields of history (French revolution end-stage Weimer Germany, Zimbabwe at the end of the last century, the Russian Revolution of 1917, and on and on.)
When someone refuses to speak to facts, and only comes at the debate with emotion, then it isn't a debate, it is in fact manipulative and childish. Now did I use any words that were so over the head that they cannot be understood? No. Fact: if one makes over $250 K a year their taxes will go up. Fact: if one makes less than $250 K a year they will go down.
The rest of her argument was lost in emotion.
So while banging heads on a wall and "talking to a rock" which btw weren't exactly used, may seem harsh, they are in fact exactly what is happening.
MY .02
I have to say I so agree with this. At some point you have to have your human reaction and just holler! One of the problems we have right now, as a society, is that we are in the grips of a meme that makes dialog difficult. That meme is that 'facts' are just a synonym for 'opinion'. It's not. Everyone has a right to their own opinions but no one has a right to their own facts. If someone refuses to acknowledge that there's one set of facts about he world, it really DOES feel like talking to a rock.
Perhaps first by not talking about them as if they aren't here. Or talking in a language someone w/o your same skill ( vocabulary) set may not understand.
What I, as a reader, just witnessed in your above post was beyond rude.
"key you are an ass hole"..... ~Casey35
Maybe it's just me, but I prefer to not correspond directly to people who call me an asshole.
And excuse me, but you are assuming that Casey did not understand what I was writing? Darling, I am a high school drop out, my vocabulary is not *that* advanced. Who exactly is being condescending to who?
Casey has been asked very direct very simple questions to which she has refused to answer. Instead she resorts to name calling. There is no point for me to address her directly anymore. But I do not believe that she is the only one with her fears and freak outs (mostly due to conservative media's Misinformation and Propaganda Machine). I would like to learn how to talk to people like her.
So what is your suggestion for when someone calls you an asshole and refuses to answer simple questions about their beliefs and opinions?
casey35
04-28-2010, 07:41 PM
But to be fair most Democrats are just as slimey as the Republicans. But to be fair, at this point the only decent handful of politicians in Washington right now are in the Democratic Party (and the Independent, Democratic/Socialist Bernie Sanders).
And I agree, anyone supporting any Republican at this time in our nations history is, in my opinion, a traitor to this country and should be treated accordingly. They are dragging us back to pre-revolution days. I honestly think that is what they mean when they say they want to "take our country back". Back to when women and blacks and any other minority were simply rich white men's property.
How these rich white men are (still) convincing poor people to fight for their rights to own them is baffling, just baffling to me. But then again when the only news and information available to these poor communities is Fox "News" and Rush Limbaugh....well, it does begin to make sense. Keep the poor people afraid of the other poor people so they never band together. It has worked for generation after generation.
This is the Admin:
We don't allow folks to post under other members names.
Please create your own screen name if you wish to participate.
"key you are an ass hole"..... ~Casey35
Maybe it's just me, but I prefer to not correspond directly to people who call me an asshole.
And excuse me, but you are assuming that Casey did not understand what I was writing? Darling, I am a high school drop out, my vocabulary is not *that* advanced. Who exactly is being condescending to who?
Casey has been asked very direct very simple questions to which she has refused to answer. Instead she resorts to name calling. There is no point for me to address her directly anymore. But I do not believe that she is the only one with her fears and freak outs (mostly due to conservative media's Misinformation and Propaganda Machine). I would like to learn how to talk to people like her.
So what is your suggestion for when someone calls you an asshole and refuses to answer simple questions about their beliefs and opinions?
To be honest key, after she said she had left the conversation, I would have dropped it. I try when I can to help people see things from perhaps a different point of view than their own frame of reference. Sometimes I don't execute it very well. At some point I just give up, especially after someone has either made an afront to me or asked me to disengage. I will respect that.
We all have relatives or neighbors or someone we know who we argue with about just about anything political. Sometimes it feels like pulling your hair out trying to get them to hear what you are saying. It hurts and can be exasperating to continue to try to make someone "hear" something other than what is firmly implanted in their head.
I truly do believe you were trying your best to engage. I have seen nothing from you that would suggest otherwise. I don't think the name calling toward you was deserved. That kinda tosses anyones argument out the window in my opinion and at least for me, closes that door of communication.
I get called lovely names for attempting to try to help some folks see something different. It can enrage me. It can hurt. What it cannot do is force my hand or my mind to do anything other than keep trying. I eventually learn that some folks will just never see anything or any point of view other than their own. My best option is to continue trying elsewhere.
The energy you have put into this discussion tells me you do care. My own investment in conversations that are important to me can sometimes feel very sad. I try like hell to see all sides and it is really difficult when engaging with others who can't. I try add helpful items, but ya know, sometimes they are overlooked or dismissed and all that is focused on is the negative counterproductive position of folks stuck in their own frame of reference.
Anyway, don't give up being open minded. I know you are and appreciate it a lot. Sometimes ya just got know when to fold 'em.
As far as this law goes, I have consulted an atty and have found out what legally I need to do to protect my home so I can now join the ranks of those who cannot afford care and use the resources available to get help. I still do not understand why politicians make things so much more difficult than the simple common sense book keeping procedures they should be. But hey, they would all be out of work if they actually made things make sense.
MsDemeanor
04-29-2010, 09:54 AM
I still do not understand why politicians make things so much more difficult than the simple common sense book keeping procedures they should be.
2 words - corporate donations
AtLast
04-29-2010, 10:41 AM
Thinking that only reasonable people can recognize reason. Or even their life's experiences. Doesn't matter what level of education they have at all. Neither of my parents were educated in terms of formal schooling. Yet, they both had the capacity to listen to other people's views.
The health-Care Reform measures haven't even been fully implemented and won't be for a few years. Time will tell us if these measure work well for the many. I am hopeful even though I don't think the bill does enough to knock down the real culprits behind increased costs- the private health-care companies. There is no way that they can continue to make profits of more than 400% and costs be decreased.
I don't have a problem with businesses making a profit, but not over 400% and executives raking in multi-million dollar bonuses with people being denied needed health-care!
Looking at this along with the arrogance of the Wall Street bandits now appearing before Congress, I see no other way but government intervention to protect consumers. And the fact of the matter is that I come from a multi-generational small business family. There is a big difference between private businesses in which there exists honesty and honor in making a fair profit and not screwing people.
BornBronson
04-29-2010, 04:18 PM
Obama's health care bill,I don't like it.That is all.
2 words - corporate donations
Do you know about www.youstreet.org ?
For a measly $6 a year from every voting age citizen we could publicly fund every Federal Election. NO corporate donations at all.
Of course we have to hand count every paper ballot (instead of outsourcing our votes to private companies).
But once these two item are in place
(heck throw in instant run off voting - so make it 3, oh yeah and repeal Citizen United - 4 - God these Cons have screwed us but good)
Then
maybe then
We the People will have our country back.
2 words - corporate donations
two more words.. very true
MsDemeanor
04-29-2010, 06:29 PM
Do you know about www.youstreet.org (http://www.youstreet.org) ?
For a measly $6 a year from every voting age citizen we could publicly fund every Federal Election. NO corporate donations at all.
I'd like to see every election in this country, right down to dog catcher, publicly funded. The millions of dollars that Meg Whitman is wasting in CA right now is beyond disgusting.
jus' checkin' to see how the thread is going. some constructive opinions and good food for thought i hope.
bye
j
AtLast
04-29-2010, 06:55 PM
I'd like to see every election in this country, right down to dog catcher, publicly funded. The millions of dollars that Meg Whitman is wasting in CA right now is beyond disgusting.
Absolutely! Every US election! And I'd like to see the US do what other contries do... LIMIT campaigning time! One month, period! We live in a constant state of campaigning in the US and this is one of the top reasons nothing gets done! It is what so much of the deadlock in Congress is about..... and I thik this goes on with both major parties.
Yes, Whitman appears to buying her way right into office!
Actually, I am always discusted about the sums of money spent on political campains. To say it lights, it is a pet peeve of mine!
Diavolo
04-29-2010, 09:22 PM
I'd like to see every election in this country, right down to dog catcher, publicly funded. The millions of dollars that Meg Whitman is wasting in CA right now is beyond disgusting.
I don't even like Steve Poizner and Meg Whitman's ad was so offensive to me that I would never cast a vote for her. Even for dog catcher. Especially for dog catcher.
Diavolo
04-29-2010, 09:24 PM
Obama's health care bill,I don't like it.That is all.
Not helpful, nor constructive. Why don't you like it? What does it do that you don't like? Or are you just parroting the party line? More information please.
dreadgeek
04-30-2010, 06:25 AM
Obama's health care bill,I don't like it.That is all.
So what precisely would you like to see? What is it that you don't like? How could the bill be better? If you were writing the bill, how would you have written it?
Your saying you don't like it isn't really, ummm, informative. It would be helpful and would move the discussion forward if you were to say *why*. Otherwise, it seems you're just overturning the pot to see what happens next.
dreadgeek
04-30-2010, 06:28 AM
jus' checkin' to see how the thread is going. some constructive opinions and good food for thought i hope.
bye
j
I'm curious. This is your third post on this subject and the only one that wasn't a copy-paste of some article somewhere. We know what you think other people think about this bill, what we still don't know is what *you* think about this bill. Pardon me for quibbling about this but I’m far less interested in what you think of the articles written about the bill (clearly you think they are well-written) than I am in what *you* think about the bill. So if it's not too much of an imposition, would you mind telling us what you think about the bill in your own words and why you think that, in your own words? Thanks in advance.
Cheers
Aj
Apocalipstic
04-30-2010, 08:37 AM
Obama's health care bill,I don't like it.That is all.
I really don't either to be honest, I think we should have a single payer system.
The new Health Care Bill falls wayyyyyyyyyyy short of where I think it should be and I am very disappointed.
Yes, I understand that a lot of politic-ing had to happen to get what we got, but I wish somehow more could have been done. Way way more.
Yes, I understand that some people are too proud to accept help from the rest of us.
Bottom line though, I believe it is our right to have health-care and know that health-care is provided for EVERYONE in the USA.
I am fine with paying extra taxes to help this happen.
I'm curious. This is your third post on this subject and the only one that wasn't a copy-paste of some article somewhere. We know what you think other people think about this bill, what we still don't know is what *you* think about this bill. Pardon me for quibbling about this but I’m far less interested in what you think of the articles written about the bill (clearly you think they are well-written) than I am in what *you* think about the bill. So if it's not too much of an imposition, would you mind telling us what you think about the bill in your own words and why you think that, in your own words? Thanks in advance.
Cheers
Aj
Hi dreadgeek,
I posted the articles as updated information from the news on the days they were released. I started the thread because there seems to be much concern over the health care overhaul and yet, I didn't see or find any thread on this subject. So I thought I would start this thread so that people could express their opinions. I happened to see the first article that i posted and thought it might be a good way to start the thread.
This thread is for the benefit of members who might want open dialogue or to just express their opinions. This thread is NOT for my benefit. I'm unsubscribed and have no desire to express any opinion. I just happened to notice there was a lot of posting so I thought I would drop and read some of the posts.
dreadgeek
04-30-2010, 10:44 AM
Hi dreadgeek,
I posted the articles as updated information from the news on the days they were released. I started the thread because there seems to be much concern over the health care overhaul and yet, I didn't see or find any thread on this subject. So I thought I would start this thread so that people could express their opinions. I happened to see the first article that i posted and thought it might be a good way to start the thread.
This thread is for the benefit of members who might want open dialogue or to just express their opinions. This thread is NOT for my benefit. I'm unsubscribed and have no desire to express any opinion. I just happened to notice there was a lot of posting so I thought I would drop and read some of the posts.
Thank you, I guess.
betenoire
04-30-2010, 12:09 PM
Thank you, I guess.
*snort*
Oh benevolent Jet, thank thee bunches for thine thread that thou hast bestowed upon ye members of bee eff pee dot com in thy mercy. We all supplicate the heck out of ourselves. Amen.
dreadgeek
04-30-2010, 12:19 PM
*snort*
Oh benevolent Jet, thank thee bunches for thine thread that thou hast bestowed upon ye members of bee eff pee dot com in thy mercy. We all supplicate the heck out of ourselves. Amen.
*sniff*
Such generosity is an inspiration to us all! I have seen the way of the online bodhisattva. I feel humbled. Don't you feel humbled?
betenoire
04-30-2010, 12:21 PM
*sniff*
Such generosity is an inspiration to us all! I have seen the way of the online bodhisattva. I feel humbled. Don't you feel humbled?
Totally. Someone just found their way to the top of my "people who's feet I should wash with my hair" list.
betenoire
04-30-2010, 12:25 PM
<<@>>
.............................
You smell real pretty today, Juney. I love you.
Myths and facts about 'Obamacare' (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2011/01/health_care_myths.html)
YQPj_Rpo9IU&feature=player_embedded#!
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.