View Full Version : Are Republicans About to Get Rolled on Healthcare
Business_Casual
02-20-10, 09:44
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100219/pl_nm/us_usa_healthcare1
Obama will release his version of healthcare reform. Will it be another left-wing nightmare or just bi-partisan enough to get RINOs on board?
variablebinary
02-20-10, 09:59
It's not in the interest of the GOP to see Obama win, so there will still be plenty of opposition.
Guess we will see.
John_Wayne777
02-20-10, 10:33
What they ought to do is insist on a slim package of just the stuff that makes sense...buying insurance across state lines, tort reform, etc.
Obama and co will try to make minor changes to the existing abortion. The Republicans have to stand united against the vast majority of the bill....and the yahoos who voted with the dems on all those procedural votes that brought the healthcare plan to the point where it could potentially pass in the first place need to hold their damn water.
rickrock305
02-20-10, 12:18
if its from a Democrat, of course the Republicans will say no.
Belmont31R
02-20-10, 12:46
if its from a Democrat, of course the Republicans will say no.
They are there to represent the people that elected them...if that means not buying into Obamacare then so be it. I didn't elect my representative to go to DC to vote for socialist BS with trillions of new spending and taxes.
They are there to represent the people that elected them...if that means not buying into Obamacare then so be it. I didn't elect my representative to go to DC to vote for socialist BS with trillions of new spending and taxes.
And yet when the republicans/conservatives oppose things like this people just write it off as just opposing the opposite party not thinking as to why they are opposing. Its funny Ive seen quite an alarming amount of politicians lately that say the more people that oppose this healthcare bill, the more they will fight to approve it:eek:
if its from a Democrat, of course the Republicans will say no.
I don't really care what side of the party lines someone stands on, if it comes from this President or Pelosi and her thugs I hope they say no. You guys can bicker all you want about Democrats vs Republicans but the bottom line is any of the proposed healthcare reform bills will be a nightmare for this country and it doesn't matter who you voted for in the last election or who you plan to vote for in the next.
rickrock305
02-20-10, 13:09
They are there to represent the people that elected them...
you really believe thats what they're doing? :D
rickrock305
02-20-10, 13:13
And yet when the republicans/conservatives oppose things like this people just write it off as just opposing the opposite party not thinking as to why they are opposing. Its funny Ive seen quite an alarming amount of politicians lately that say the more people that oppose this healthcare bill, the more they will fight to approve it:eek:
they're only opposing it because of partisan politics, not for the good of the country.
they all voted for the prescription drug plan didn't they?
same thing with the stimulus plans. they all voted against it yet run back to their districts and tout what great programs its brought to them. they height of hypocrisy.
ForTehNguyen
02-20-10, 14:38
Obama is releasing his version? WTF happened to the Separation of Powers? Obama wants to be a king, not a president.
I think Obama is making a huge mistake. His ego just will not let this die and it sounds like he's just mixing together and repackaging the same proposals from the House and Senate that have the Dems running scared for the 2010 elections.
He already had his best shot at passing this abomination and came very close to doing so, but that ship has sailed for now.
What they ought to do is insist on a slim package of just the stuff that makes sense...buying insurance across state lines, tort reform, etc.
This! We need something to bring health care costs down. We do not need more bloated government programs (i.e. medicare/medicade). However, the only bill that came close to passing, was stripped of anything that might harm the insurance companies profits.
I hate threads like this because it the same old Dem v. Rep crap. Both parties have been bought and paid for and they're screwing ALL of us. Big insurance and big pharma are running this show.
This! We need something to bring health care costs down. We do not need more bloated government programs (i.e. medicare/medicade). However, the only bill that came close to passing, was stripped of anything that might harm the insurance companies profits.
I hate threads like this because it the same old Dem v. Rep crap. Both parties have been bought and paid for and they're screwing ALL of us. Big insurance and big pharma are running this show.
this is kinda where i am. i think i want both parties to crash an burn a little.
they're only opposing it because of partisan politics, not for the good of the country.
they all voted for the prescription drug plan didn't they?
same thing with the stimulus plans. they all voted against it yet run back to their districts and tout what great programs its brought to them. they height of hypocrisy.
I tell you what, Im against the healthcare bill and these outrageous stimulus bills and any decision to vote against it is an ok decision by me. Whether its your idea of partisan politics or not. Im not saying every republican out there that votes against it would get my vote but I think more than you'd be willing to bet on are waking up and voting how their constituency says to.
Who in the hell is stupid enough to think this a responsible effort to improve the health care of America????
I guess there really is one born every minute.
if its from a Democrat, of course the Republicans will say no.
This make me laugh. The Democrats bitch and moan about the Republicans blocking health care, when in fact its the Dems themselves that have blocked health care reform. They had a super majority in the Senate (and still have the majority) and a majority in the house. Why couldn't it get passed then? Because their own party CAN'T even agree on this crap, yet they don't want to appear incompetent (but they do) so they try to put it on the Republicans. The Dems could have passed this BS legislation last year if they themselves were able to unite around it. :rolleyes:
they're only opposing it because of partisan politics, not for the good of the country.
And the Dems are trying to ram it through for their own political gain, not for the good of the country. Most major polls (and I'm not talking about ones from Fox, MSNBC or CNN) shows the majority of Americans do not want this type of healthcare reform. The only good thing to come out of this IF it gets shoved through, is that a lot of Dems on the Hill will be out of a job by the end of the year.
If public, gov't run health care is so great, why was there a Canadian politician down here in FL getting heart surgery? Afterall, Canada has a gov't run system.
http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2010/02/a_canadian_politician_gets_hea.php
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5h0QC7bditrEb3wYz_6_b-gsGGDxA
Big insurance and big pharma are running this show.
This is a populist position not supported by the facts or common sense. This is demonstrably not true. "Big Insurance and big pharma" are caught in a system they did not develop or encourage and from which they cannot escape.
Govt intervention and govt destruction of the insurance market have created a monster. Now the govt claims they can save us from the monster they created.
Do you think "Big Insurance" wants to pay every time you go to the doctor for any reason? To deal with the government for everything and have the gov looking over their shoulder blaming them for everything?
Do you think "Big Pharma" wants to subsidize the rest of the worlds medicine and pass the costs onto the US market (this is what happens with the price controls in effect in other countries). If you take a good look at the economics of "big pharma" (and many researchers have) they make a lot less money (by margin) than a lot of other companies do. They do research and develop a lot of potential medications that don't pan out. And they get sued for lots of big bucks for many of the ones they do get to market.
Govt has destroyed healthcare.
MarshallDodge
02-24-10, 14:46
Govt intervention and govt destruction of the insurance market have created a monster. Now the govt claims they can save us from the monster they created.
Govt has destroyed healthcare.
Right on!!!
They need to back off rather than throw more money at it.
GermanSynergy
02-24-10, 15:47
I voted "A left wing nightmare that gets RINO votes"....
rickrock305
02-24-10, 20:02
This make me laugh. The Democrats bitch and moan about the Republicans blocking health care, when in fact its the Dems themselves that have blocked health care reform. They had a super majority in the Senate (and still have the majority) and a majority in the house. Why couldn't it get passed then? Because their own party CAN'T even agree on this crap, yet they don't want to appear incompetent (but they do) so they try to put it on the Republicans. The Dems could have passed this BS legislation last year if they themselves were able to unite around it. :rolleyes:
And the Dems are trying to ram it through for their own political gain, not for the good of the country. Most major polls (and I'm not talking about ones from Fox, MSNBC or CNN) shows the majority of Americans do not want this type of healthcare reform. The only good thing to come out of this IF it gets shoved through, is that a lot of Dems on the Hill will be out of a job by the end of the year.
If public, gov't run health care is so great, why was there a Canadian politician down here in FL getting heart surgery? Afterall, Canada has a gov't run system.
http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2010/02/a_canadian_politician_gets_hea.php
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5h0QC7bditrEb3wYz_6_b-gsGGDxA
i don't disagree with you at all. i'm not saying the Democrats are smelling like roses here. You're right, they couldn't even pass it with the majority they had which is laughable. But the Republicans sure are trying to do anything about it either.
The backlash is a direct result of their backroom dealings and giveaways to insurance companies. Forcing people to buy insurance is ridiculous. And healthcare reform without some type of public option is a waste of time. (I'm not saying government run healthcare, I'm saying some type of government provided healthcare. There is a difference.)
rickrock305
02-24-10, 20:03
This is a populist position not supported by the facts or common sense. This is demonstrably not true. "Big Insurance and big pharma" are caught in a system they did not develop or encourage and from which they cannot escape.
Govt intervention and govt destruction of the insurance market have created a monster. Now the govt claims they can save us from the monster they created.
Do you think "Big Insurance" wants to pay every time you go to the doctor for any reason? To deal with the government for everything and have the gov looking over their shoulder blaming them for everything?
Do you think "Big Pharma" wants to subsidize the rest of the worlds medicine and pass the costs onto the US market (this is what happens with the price controls in effect in other countries). If you take a good look at the economics of "big pharma" (and many researchers have) they make a lot less money (by margin) than a lot of other companies do. They do research and develop a lot of potential medications that don't pan out. And they get sued for lots of big bucks for many of the ones they do get to market.
Govt has destroyed healthcare.
This is laughable. You should look up what insurance and pharma spends on lobbying. Your post is full of factual inaccuracies and half-truths.
Yes, they did help develop and encourage it, and continue to profit from it.
And healthcare reform without some type of public option is a waste of time. (I'm not saying government run healthcare, I'm saying some type of government provided healthcare. There is a difference.)
Exactly wrong. FAIL. EPIC FAIL. You cannot have govt provided healthcare over the long term. It does not work. And it is immoral to steal from me to pay for your healthcare.
They could reform healthcare without a public option and do a good job that would drastically lower prices and make it much more affordable. But they won't. Freedom is against the politicians basic nature.
This is laughable. You should look up what insurance and pharma spends on lobbying. Your post is full of factual inaccuracies and half-truths.
Yes, they did help develop and encourage it, and continue to profit from it.
No it is not laughable. It is 100% the truth. What is factually inaccurate?
The size of the insurance industry's lobbying budget and pharma's lobbying budget just shows that I am right. They have to spend to try and get the rules favorably bent in their direction because government is so entwined and has screwed up healthcare so badly.
You don't know what you are talking about. Big Insurance and Big Pharma did not develop the system with twisted incentives to consume healthcare. Politicians did by mucking around in things. Insurance companies and Pharmaceutical companies have to live in the system and therefore try their best to make the govt meddling go in their favor. Do some research on why we have employer provided healthcare, and on the twisted incentives that mark our system.
rickrock305
02-24-10, 21:25
Exactly wrong. FAIL. EPIC FAIL. You cannot have govt provided healthcare over the long term. It does not work.
its working for plenty of other countries.
And it is immoral to steal from me to pay for your healthcare.
your opinion. i don't mind the tax increase. don't force your morals on me.
They could reform healthcare without a public option and do a good job that would drastically lower prices and make it much more affordable. But they won't. Freedom is against the politicians basic nature.
possibly. probably not.
GermanSynergy
02-24-10, 21:28
its working for plenty of other countries.
your opinion. i don't mind the tax increase. don't force your morals on me.
possibly. probably not.
Where is it "working"? I grew up under socialized medicine, BTW. It sucks. High taxes? Check. Death panels? Check. Sucky service? Check. This is German healthcare. The same healthcare system that told my grandfather they would not pay for a pacemaker, he was too old and it cost too much. The same healthcare system they denied my grandmother treatment for her cataracts, asking her "why do you need two good eyes- you're old".
rickrock305
02-24-10, 21:41
No it is not laughable. It is 100% the truth. What is factually inaccurate?
that insurance companies pay every time someone goes to the doctor.
that the insurance and pharma companies didn't help develop or encourage the current system (by which they profit greatly)
that big pharma subsidizes the rest of the world.
let me add, the reason they get sued is because their medications kill or severly injure people...and you want me to feel bad about that? :confused:
The size of the insurance industry's lobbying budget and pharma's lobbying budget just shows that I am right. They have to spend to try and get the rules favorably bent in their direction because government is so entwined and has screwed up healthcare so badly.
its exactly the opposite. lobbyists are basically the ones writing the laws, not congress. you can bet that whoever spends the most money on lobbying are the ones who the laws will favor.
You don't know what you are talking about. Big Insurance and Big Pharma did not develop the system with twisted incentives to consume healthcare. Politicians did by mucking around in things. Insurance companies and Pharmaceutical companies have to live in the system and therefore try their best to make the govt meddling go in their favor. Do some research on why we have employer provided healthcare, and on the twisted incentives that mark our system.
"Mucking around in things"? Thats your brilliant analysis? :rolleyes:
rickrock305
02-24-10, 21:54
Where is it "working"? I grew up under socialized medicine, BTW. It sucks. High taxes? Check. Death panels? Check. Sucky service? Check. This is German healthcare.
Canada, France, Norway, Israel, the list goes on and on.
Nothing is perfect, but plenty are a far cry better than what we currently have.
The same healthcare system that told my grandfather they would not pay for a pacemaker, he was too old and it cost too much. The same healthcare system they denied my grandmother treatment for her cataracts, asking her "why do you need two good eyes- you're old".
the same exact thing goes on here ALL THE TIME. people travel out of the country here all the time for care due to treatments that are too expensive or are not even available here. people are continually denied treatment by their insurance companies.
I'll leave you with this. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948, proclaimed that “everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of oneself and one’s family, including food, clothing, housing, and medical care.”
[QUOTE=rickrock305;582506]its working for plenty of other countries.
QUOTE]
And that's exactly why people from all over the world in those countries where their gov't run health care is "working" still come here to get health care.
Recent example would be the Canadian PM.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2510700
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And that UN quote you just posted doesn't mean that it has to be provided by the government. There are better options out there.
rickrock305
02-24-10, 21:59
[QUOTE=rickrock305;582506]its working for plenty of other countries.
QUOTE]
And that's exactly why people from all over the world in those countries where their gov't run health care is "working" still come here to get health care.
Recent example would be the Canadian PM.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2510700
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And that UN quote you just posted doesn't mean that it has to be provided by the government. There are better options out there.
right, and our system is so great people go outside this country ALL THE TIME to get treatment. and its increasing.
And that UN quote you just posted doesn't mean that it has to be provided by the government. There are better options out there.
such as?
GermanSynergy
02-24-10, 22:01
Canada, France, Norway, Israel, the list goes on and on.
Nothing is perfect, but plenty are a far cry better than what we currently have.
the same exact thing goes on here ALL THE TIME. people travel out of the country here all the time for care due to treatments that are too expensive or are not even available here. people are continually denied treatment by their insurance companies.
I'll leave you with this. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948, proclaimed that “everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of oneself and one’s family, including food, clothing, housing, and medical care.”
Who is going to pay for all of this? What about the grifters, illegal immigrants and deadbeats that won't pay into the universal healthcare scheme because they don't work or pay taxes? :mad:
this is kinda where i am. i think i want both parties to crash an burn a little.
I don't want them to burn a "little"... I want them to burn ALOT! I think it was the late George Wallace who said " There's not a dime's worth of difference between a Republican and a Democrat.....Looking at the gross amount of stupidy that is going on in Washington, I'd say George was right...
rickrock305
02-24-10, 22:03
Who is going to pay for all of this? What about the grifters, illegal immigrants and deadbeats that won't pay into the universal healthcare scheme because they don't work or pay taxes? :mad:
we all are. and collectively it will make us better as a nation.
i don't believe illegal immigrants should be entitled to anything.
I think the main problem with this is that we have a government (Congress and the POTUS) willing to spend $1 trillion or more on this issue when:
(1) the gov't has no money
and
(2) they ought to be concentrating on something more important like jobs right now.
GermanSynergy
02-24-10, 22:07
we all are. and collectively it will make us better as a nation.
i don't believe illegal immigrants should be entitled to anything.
What do you mean "we"? You mean the folks that go out every day to earn a living? What about the deadbeats that refuse to work or contribute to society?
Are you a Democrat by chance?
its working for plenty of other countries.
it is? name one where it has worked long term... All the ones you will try and mention are failures -- the healthcare results for almost all treatments pale in comparison to ours and the tax rates are much much higher than their economies can sustain in the long term. They have structural unemployment twice the US normal unemployment, healthcare systems that provide lousy care (which is why people from these countries come to the US if they can afford to), and taxes that cripple their economy and which they will not be able to sustain in the long term
your opinion. i don't mind the tax increase. don't force your morals on me.
What is my opinion? That it is immoral to steal from me to pay your healthcare? Your morals allow extortion and theft? Don't force YOUR MORALS on me at the point of a gun, which is what you want to do.
possibly. probably not.
No, exactly right. What I said is the only way to successfully reform healthcare. The govt has screwed up healthcare so badly and has destroyed the market for healthcare services. That is a fact. The only way to fix it is to restore that market.
that insurance companies pay every time someone goes to the doctor.
what? I don't think I said that
that the insurance and pharma companies didn't help develop or encourage the current system (by which they profit greatly)
This is 100% true. They did not develop or encourage the current system. The current system revolves around employer sponsored healthcare. Do you know why? Do a little research into wage controls during WW2.
Have you looked at profit margins of health insurance companies?
health insurers, at least the for-profit ones (there are also not for profit ones) had an average profit margin of 3.4% (over the last year, the quote was from mid 2009)
http://www.usnews.com/money/blogs/flowchart/2009/08/25/why-health-insurers-make-lousy-villains.html
and pharmaceuticals?
They had a profit margin of 16.4%. Which is more, but not obscene in any way (lots of industries have much higher)
I bet any health insurer would LOVE to be able to cut their bureaucracy in half in order to be able to not mess with govt mandates and regulations and huge amounts of claims that they should not be paying in the first place. Even if it meant slashing their gross income, their profits would probably be higher in a reformed system (reformed by getting the govt out)
that big pharma subsidizes the rest of the world.
I never said that. What I said, and this is 100% demonstrably true, is that the US Healthcare system subsidizes the rest of the worlds medicines. Do you know how? Each medicine on the market takes a certain amount of money to develop, test, market, and manufacture. Rolled into that are the costs for all the failed R&D and tests etc for medicines that never make it to market. Plus the overhead of staff, regulatory compliance, etc. All those costs, plus a reasonable profit for the investors (which provide the capital to do the R&D in the first place and which demand a reasonable return for their investments) is reflected in the costs of medicine. Additionally the potential market determines the cost as well because a small market for a drug like something for a rare disease (versus something like a statin for Cholesterol which almost everyone could use) means that there is less potential customers to spread these costs across. However, almost the complete rest of the world looks almost purely at the cost of manufacturing the medicine and puts in price controls. France, Canada, all the wonderful model countries you want to say work better than us. They all limit how much they are willing to pay for these medicines. That cost that they are willing to pay is less than the cost that the medicines actually cost when you look at the total cost of the medicine as I outlined above. That difference, the difference between the actual cost and what their price controls say they will pay, gets pushed to those countries who do not have price controls. Those countries get to make up the difference. Who are those countries? Mainly the US. So
we get to help these countries pay for their medicines. Why do the pharma companies play ball? Because they have to. Many of these countries have threatened to break patents and make the drugs locally if the big pharmaceuticals who develop the drugs don't pay ball.
Let me make a simple example. Lets say the per pill cost for some drug is $10. That is the real cost of that pill including that pills share of R&D, tests, failed drugs, overhead, etc. Lets say it actually costs $3 to make. Plus day to day overhead etc which means some other country determines that they will pay $4.50 for it. So that company then shifts the extra $5.50 to us and we end up paying $15.50 for that same pill.
Btw, the same phenomenon occurs in govt payments for medicaid and medicare. Procedure X has a real cost to provide of $100. Govt sets the reimbursement level at $75. That missing $25 gets shifted to the private payer which means we pay more for the same service due to cost shifting by the govt.
let me add, the reason they get sued is because their medications kill or severly injure people...and you want me to feel bad about that? :confused:
Did I ask you to feel bad about real damages? No. But there are lots and lots of cases where they get sued for damages that were not caused by the medicine or where the punitive damages come to many many times the actual damages. What happens to those costs incurred to cover those judgements? It gets spread out to us, the customer.
The size of the insurance industry's lobbying budget and pharma's lobbying budget just shows that I am right. They have to spend to try and get the rules favorably bent in their direction because government is so entwined and has screwed up healthcare so badly.
its exactly the opposite. lobbyists are basically the ones writing the laws, not congress. you can bet that whoever spends the most money on lobbying are the ones who the laws will favor.
I won't disagree that given the current system, that the lobbyists try and bend the "fixes" to benefit them. However what I said is correct. The govt has screwed things up so badly in trying to be "progressive" that any attempt to fix it by putting on bandages to the system will just make it worse and of course the actors in the system (ie, healthcare players, pharmaceuticals, etc) all want to have a hand in it so that the further screw ups do not put them at a disadvantage even more.
You don't know what you are talking about. Big Insurance and Big Pharma did not develop the system with twisted incentives to consume healthcare. Politicians did by mucking around in things. Insurance companies and Pharmaceutical companies have to live in the system and therefore try their best to make the govt meddling go in their favor. Do some research on why we have employer provided healthcare, and on the twisted incentives that mark our system.
"Mucking around in things"? Thats your brilliant analysis? :rolleyes:
Exactly. Don't quibble with the words. Politicians screwed up the system, whether intentionally or not (for example, wage controls in WW2 had the unintended consequence of pushing healthcare into employer hands). The system is full of perverse incentives for people to consume as much healthcare as they can since they do not pay for it directly. Tax incentives keep it in the hands of employers. Everything about are healthcare system is a direct consequence of politicians trying to "fix" things and the system reacting to that mucking around by the politicians.
Don't be stupid, man. Quibbling about "mucking around"? That is a polite way to say that politicians screwed the pooch royally when trying to shape the healthcare system to their ideology.
Canada, France, Norway, Israel, the list goes on and on.
Nothing is perfect, but plenty are a far cry better than what we currently have.
FAIL. None of these countries provides the healthcare results that the US does. And they do it with much higher taxes and toll on their economy that they will not be able to sustain over the long run. Many of them are downgrading their systems due to run away costs that they cannot meet. See the NHS in the UK and also Canada. Canada has admitted that they cannot continue to offer the case they do now.
Also, costs have been rising just as fast in these other healthcare paradises as in the US.
see http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2009/12/16/health-care-myth-government-slows-cost-growth/
the same exact thing goes on here ALL THE TIME. people travel out of the country here all the time for care due to treatments that are too expensive or are not even available here. people are continually denied treatment by their insurance companies.
Some people do travel to other countries for routine operations. Many of which are cosmetic (but not all). If you look at it however, most of the traveling to other countries is for routine treatments, cosmetic surgery, etc. Those coming here come because they need care that they can only get here.
True market based reform would solve this problem. Govt control would not.
I'll leave you with this. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948, proclaimed that “everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of oneself and one’s family, including food, clothing, housing, and medical care.”
Quoting the UN does not get you very far with me. Unfortunately you should read the history of the founding of the UN. It was not a freedom based organization... Go enlighten yourself.
That which you quote the UN does not proclaim a right. It proclaims a goal that people need to work toward. The govt should do nothing to stand in their way of achieving that. But it does. However, stealing money from me to give it to someone else is immoral. Wealth Redistribution is an immoral thing and does nothing to solve the problems for which it is claimed to be needed. And it stands directly in the way of people achieving that goal set out by the UN. High taxes is detrimental to the well being of a country and its ability to provide the economic growth necessary to achieve the goals outlined in the UN quote.
right, and our system is so great people go outside this country ALL THE TIME to get treatment. and its increasing.
such as?
True market oriented healthcare where the individual is first line responsible for the health of himself and his family, relying on charity, churches, friends, community only as a last resort. A system in which people enjoy the rewards of their own labor instead of having it stolen and given to someone else who made bad choices. One in which the Freedom of the individual was respected and in which personal charity is encouraged and rewarded.
Having a system without employer supplied healthcare, without perverse incentives, where the healthcare recipient paid first dollar for his own care, and had a backup catastrophic insurance plan for those big health items. A system that rewards a good lifestyle (lifestyle is the number one problem in the US in terms of cause of health problems) and punishes a bad lifestyle (the opposite of what we have now where people do not have to worry about their lifestyle choices because healthcare is a right which will fix their problems).
we all are. and collectively it will make us better as a nation.
No, forced charity never makes anyone better. That comes from genuine charity given freely.
All your plan and wetdream will provide is a huge debt, damaged economy, and loss of jobs, and a damaged healthcare system (more damaged than it already is, which is pretty bad)
i don't believe illegal immigrants should be entitled to anything.
I can agree with you on this statement.
rickrock305
02-25-10, 01:05
What do you mean "we"? You mean the folks that go out every day to earn a living? What about the deadbeats that refuse to work or contribute to society?
thats a tough one. as it is right now, we're still paying for them.
Are you a Democrat by chance?
no
rickrock305
02-25-10, 01:13
hey eguns...
http://midwestpoet.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/dead-horse.jpg
:D
back at ya!
hey eguns...
http://midwestpoet.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/dead-horse.jpg
:D
rickrock305
02-25-10, 01:15
just sayin, i think we've beaten this one to death. we're just running around in circles now.
but thanks for keeping it semi-civil at least and not degenerating into stupid insults.
Belmont31R
02-25-10, 06:17
just sayin, i think we've beaten this one to death. we're just running around in circles now.
but thanks for keeping it semi-civil at least and not degenerating into stupid insults.
I thought this was a perfect case AGAINST all the people like you who think socialized gov health care is just the greatest thing since sliced bread...
Canadian Prime Minister goes to the US for the best care (his own words): http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5h0QC7bditrEb3wYz_6_b-gsGGDxA
rickrock305
02-25-10, 06:42
I thought this was a perfect case AGAINST all the people like you who think socialized gov health care is just the greatest thing since sliced bread...
Canadian Prime Minister goes to the US for the best care (his own words): http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5h0QC7bditrEb3wYz_6_b-gsGGDxA
its one case.
i could counter with a case of a guy i know here. he was diagnosed with cancer, the docs here told him there was nothing they could do and he had a couple months to live.
he had to go to Mexico to receive the treatment he got. basically it was a program of intense detoxification and natural medicine not available in the United States. long story short he beat the cancer and is now healthy.
thats a perfect case of how our health system doesn't work.
Business_Casual
02-25-10, 06:56
its one case.
i could counter with a case of a guy i know here. he was diagnosed with cancer, the docs here told him there was nothing they could do and he had a couple months to live.
he had to go to Mexico to receive the treatment he got. basically it was a program of intense detoxification and natural medicine not available in the United States. long story short he beat the cancer and is now healthy.
thats a perfect case of how our health system doesn't work.
First of all, no one believes that holist medicine is superior to normal medicine. That story is a non-starter. At least counter a real news story that actually happened with a real news story that actually happened. Making up a "friend" doesn't wash.
Secondly, we have crushing unemployment, debt auctions that are failing due to their sheer size, a collapsing Euro and Obama is spending 5 hours in a health care summit because his majorities in both houses of congress can't pass a bill? Is this for real?
M_P
Belmont31R
02-25-10, 06:56
its one case.
i could counter with a case of a guy i know here. he was diagnosed with cancer, the docs here told him there was nothing they could do and he had a couple months to live.
he had to go to Mexico to receive the treatment he got. basically it was a program of intense detoxification and natural medicine not available in the United States. long story short he beat the cancer and is now healthy.
thats a perfect case of how our health system doesn't work.
Damn who would have thought after all these years with billions spent on research, and lots of PHD's dedicating their lives to cancer....the cure all along has been in Mexico!!! :rolleyes:
rickrock305
02-25-10, 06:58
Damn who would have thought after all these years with billions spent on research, and lots of PHD's dedicating their lives to cancer....the cure all along has been in Mexico!!! :rolleyes:
hey, its a true story. happened to a good friend of mine's dad. i know it flies in the face of what you believe in, but so does reality. :D
the problem is doctors in this country pay no attention to natural and homeopathic remedies, preferring to prescribe drugs and radiation instead. problem is, sometimes the natural route is the better one, as evidenced in this case.
i don't disagree with you at all. i'm not saying the Democrats are smelling like roses here. You're right, they couldn't even pass it with the majority they had which is laughable. But the Republicans sure are trying to do anything about it either.
The backlash is a direct result of their backroom dealings and giveaways to insurance companies. Forcing people to buy insurance is ridiculous. And healthcare reform without some type of public option is a waste of time. (I'm not saying government run healthcare, I'm saying some type of government provided healthcare. There is a difference.)
That doesn't happen. Once the gov gets their hands on healthcare they will take control of it. Listen to this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRdLpem-AAs Besides we already have some type of government provided healthcare.
rickrock305
02-25-10, 08:40
First of all, no one believes that holist medicine is superior to normal medicine.
in some cases it is.
That story is a non-starter. At least counter a real news story that actually happened with a real news story that actually happened. Making up a "friend" doesn't wash.
you're really gonna sit here and call me a liar because it doesn't fit with your predetermined notion? thats pretty low
here, i'll do your homework for you too...
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/03/27/india.medical.travel/index.html
http://www.fastcompany.com/node/798973/print
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/IndustryInfo/story?id=2320839&page=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/21/health/21patient.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15513596/
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/health/6866797.html
According to Modern Healthcare, there were 750,000 Americans who traveled abroad for healthcare in 2007 and this number is predicted to increase 700% to 6 million by 2010.
Secondly, we have crushing unemployment, debt auctions that are failing due to their sheer size, a collapsing Euro and Obama is spending 5 hours in a health care summit because his majorities in both houses of congress can't pass a bill? Is this for real?
M_P
yes, its for real. and its the smart thing to do. we need healthcare reform because it will help the problem of crushing unemployment. small businesses are being crushed by the current healthcare system
rickrock305
02-25-10, 08:43
Once the gov gets their hands on healthcare they will take control of it. Listen to this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRdLpem-AAs Besides we already have some type of government provided healthcare.
you just contradicted yourself.
hey, its a true story. happened to a good friend of mine's dad. i know it flies in the face of what you believe in, but so does reality. :D
the problem is doctors in this country pay no attention to natural and homeopathic remedies, preferring to prescribe drugs and radiation instead. problem is, sometimes the natural route is the better one, as evidenced in this case.
I had a family member who traveled outside the US for experimental health care, mainly because the procedures couldn't get FDA approval yet (or ever?). Are you sure the reason this person left the US was because better care can be had elsewhere, or because regulation disallows said care in the US?
rickrock305
02-25-10, 08:47
I had a family member who traveled outside the US for experimental health care, mainly because the procedures couldn't get FDA approval yet (or ever?). Are you sure the reason this person left the US was because better care can be had elsewhere, or because regulation disallows said care in the US?
Both.
Doctors here said there was nothing they could do for him, that he basically had to wait around to die.
He had to travel to Mexico because the care he received there is not available in the US.
Both.
Doctors here said there was nothing they could do for him, that he basically had to wait around to die.
He had to travel to Mexico because the care he received there is not available in the US.
If you're saying that the US's regulated health care industry failed him, how is turning more power over to the government going to help things? Maybe his non-existent treatment option would be paid for by tax dollars?
Business_Casual
02-25-10, 08:53
in some cases it is.
you're really gonna sit here and call me a liar because it doesn't fit with your predetermined notion? thats pretty low even for a douche like yourself.
here, i'll do your homework for you too...
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/03/27/india.medical.travel/index.html
http://www.fastcompany.com/node/798973/print
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/IndustryInfo/story?id=2320839&page=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/21/health/21patient.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15513596/
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/health/6866797.html
According to Modern Healthcare, there were 750,000 Americans who traveled abroad for healthcare in 2007 and this number is predicted to increase 700% to 6 million by 2010.
yes, its for real. and its the smart thing to do. we need healthcare reform because it will help the problem of crushing unemployment. small businesses are being crushed by the current healthcare system
No, I didn't call you liar because it doesn't fit my predetermined notions, I called you a liar because I don't believe you. You see, some of us still believe in truth, not just when that truth is convenient to whatever socialist agenda we subscribe to at the moment.
M_P
rickrock305
02-25-10, 08:53
If you're saying that the US's regulated health care industry failed him, how is turning more power over to the government going to help things? Maybe his non-existent treatment option would be paid for by tax dollars?
In his case it probably wouldn't help. His problem was not with insurance or cost of healthcare but more to do with the FDA which is a separate issue. I'm just pointing out the fact that plenty of people here go abroad for their healthcare for a variety of reasons. In his case it was treatment options, but for others its cost. It was in response to people pointing out the Canadian PM coming here for treatment.
rickrock305
02-25-10, 08:55
Post removed.
Business_Casual
02-25-10, 08:56
It is 1859 again, Gentlemen.
M_P
In his case it probably wouldn't help. His problem was not with insurance or cost of healthcare but more to do with the FDA which is a separate issue. I'm just pointing out the fact that plenty of people here go abroad for their healthcare for a variety of reasons. In his case it was treatment options, but for others its cost. It was in response to people pointing out the Canadian PM coming here for treatment.
I'm just having trouble seeing how arguing that regulation is chasing out good treatment options is beneficial to your cause, especially when the proposed reform wouldn't change anything in this regard.
rickrock305
02-25-10, 09:02
I'm just having trouble seeing how arguing that regulation is chasing out good treatment options is beneficial to your cause, especially when the proposed reform wouldn't change anything in this regard.
Again, i'm simply making the point that plenty of people here travel abroad for healthcare as well.
John_Wayne777
02-25-10, 09:23
Hopefully the infractions and warnings I've just handed out will be sufficient to keep this thread from turning into a flame fest again.
hey, its a true story. happened to a good friend of mine's dad. i know it flies in the face of what you believe in, but so does reality. :D
the problem is doctors in this country pay no attention to natural and homeopathic remedies, preferring to prescribe drugs and radiation instead. problem is, sometimes the natural route is the better one, as evidenced in this case.
I believe that his body overcame the cancer and was strengthened in doing so by the "treatment" he received. Your story is countered by the scores of people who have gone to Mexico for "cancer treatment" and have died. Google is your friend.
I personally believe that a lot of holistic types of medicine have value. As does traditional medicine. That is not the debate in this topic though.
yes, its for real. and its the smart thing to do. we need healthcare reform because it will help the problem of crushing unemployment. small businesses are being crushed by the current healthcare system
We do need healthcare reform. It is crushing small business. The reform however that would actually help is not being considered. Your FRANCE model, or any other get the govt involved model would not help unemployment, or small business, or the end user. Here is the reform that would help:
* remove the tax advantages of employer sponsored healthcare. Put in place an temporary incentive to convert healthcare expenses into cash compensation
* put in place personal tax exemptions or credits for purchasing health insurance
* allow a countrywide market for health insurance
* remove all govt mandates on what must be covered by insurance
* remove all community rating and must issue rules
* allow lots more types of groups to be formed that can buy health insurance (right now the group market is more than heavily regulated)
* set up incentives to move most people to catastrophic insurance and HSA combos. People need to be self rationing on health care instead of the govt or insurance companies doing the rationing. Make insurance be insurance and not a service plan (which is the bulk of the problem with rising costs)
* set up a true high risk pool for those people who otherwise cannot get insurance. This is not based on income but on insurability in the normal market
* set up incentives to encourage charitable giving by individuals and companies that are directed to healthcare (for anyone wanting to dispute the effectiveness of this, this is a very minor point -- don't waste your time)
* tort reform that protects real damages people, but that limits junk suits and overbearing punitive damages. People injured by true malpractice need to be protected. People and lawyers trying to make a buck at the expense of the medical profession
THAT reform listed above would fix the healthcare system. And not cost more money in taxes and overburden our public finances and probably result in better care.
Again, i'm simply making the point that plenty of people here travel abroad for healthcare as well.
Yes, and thankfully they have the option to. Because some people (a tiny, very tiny minority) some of the time (infrequently, very infrequently) choose to use healthcare available outside the United States, does not mean the systems of healthcare outside the United States are universally better. Assuming the Mexican cancer treatment story is dead on, perfectly honest and not leaving out details like (the guy had been doing chemo for a while, the cancer was shrinking, but before the doctors in the US could give him the "all clear" he went off to Mexico and got "cured") but rather the story is 100% legit . . .. surely there is a reason the FDA hasn't approved that treatment for all Americans. More over the Brits don't offer the holistic cures that are available south of the border. It isn't even on the table. What is being offered is the opportunity to be taxed heavily and provided substandard care while still being prevented holistic cures by the FDA and inserting buereacrats (who need to be paid) into an all ready bloated system meaning either what you get for what you pay is going to decrease or what you pay is going to increase to give you the same services you enjoy now. Can't afford health care now? Just wait until you can't afford rent but you'll have healthcare at the same level (as everyone else . . . who are all waiting in line . . . buget cuts you know, 1/5th the doctors on staff, most of the doctors having moved to countries where they can make a profit vs. running in the red.)
It is good to have the option to shop abroad. Personally, I like to buy my art near the Nile. If someone wants to shop for healthcare abroad. . . . well, they should. I wouldn't want anybody to get in the way of my cheesy ebony carvings and batiks. On the other hand, we have a system here in place that allows doctors to turn a profit & turning a profit is usually motivation to work & work hard. There are only so many slots for doctors in the phonebook (metaphorically speaking) and that assurance of profit means that the U.S. draws the best and brightest from all over the world. I think that is a good thing & a fundamental reason to make sure doctors can keep making a profit in our society.
Yes, our current system is not perfect. It could almost be called bad. National Healthcare as is being fielded by Obama and Co. is a way to make a bad thing worse. . . not better. It is akin to blood letting as a cure for diabetes!
Business_Casual
02-25-10, 13:26
When we have socialized health care, and illegals find out they can see a doctor in the USA for free, I wonder what that will do to the border problem? I'm going to guess it won't help the situation.
M_P
Looks like the Washington Post has put in their thoughts on the subject:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/25/AR2010022505948.html?hpid=topnews
When we have socialized health care, and illegals find out they can see a doctor in the USA for free, I wonder what that will do to the border problem? I'm going to guess it won't help the situation.
M_P
Currently the illegals come into Texas to the hospitals, get treated and go back home without paying. The hospitals have to treat them.
ForTehNguyen
02-26-10, 07:57
Paul Ryan: Hiding Spending Doesn't Reduce Spending (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPxMZ1WdINs&feature=player_embedded)
Opening up insurance across state lines will keep insurance costs down.
High deductible plans will also keep costs down, the higher your deductible is the lower your premium is. The more money directly coming out of your pocket will make the consumer more conscious, do I really need to see the allergist or can I get by with my allergies. HSA's also help you save on taxes.
I believe that his body overcame the cancer and was strengthened in doing so by the "treatment" he received. Your story is countered by the scores of people who have gone to Mexico for "cancer treatment" and have died. Google is your friend.
I personally believe that a lot of holistic types of medicine have value. As does traditional medicine. That is not the debate in this topic though.
Just a FYI, MANY and I mean MANY mexicans come to me for their eye care because they don't think that the doctors in Mexico provide the same level of care. If they can afford to come across the border, they always do. This is reiterated time and time again.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.