Government Health Care Plan? 90% of Democrats, 75% of Independents, 50% of Republicans – say “YES”

Published on June 22nd, 2009

Daylife/Reuters Pictures used by permission

Obama addresses a meeting of millionaires

Americans overwhelmingly support substantial changes to the health care system and are strongly behind one of the most contentious proposals Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

The poll found that most Americans would be willing to pay higher taxes so everyone could have health insurance and that they said the government could do a better job of holding down health-care costs than the private sector.

Across a number of questions, the poll detected substantial support for a greater government role in health care, a position generally identified with the Democratic Party. When asked which party was more likely to improve health care, only 18 percent of respondents said the Republicans, compared with 57 percent who picked the Democrats. Even one of four Republicans said the Democrats would do better…

Daylife/Getty Images used by permission

Congressional Republicans say “NO”

Republicans in Congress have fiercely criticized the proposal as an unneeded expansion of government that might evolve into a system of nationalized health coverage and lead to the rationing of care.

But in the poll, the proposal received broad bipartisan backing, with half of those who call themselves Republicans saying they would support a public plan, along with nearly three-fourths of independents and almost nine in 10 Democrats…

They clearly indicate growing confidence in the government’s ability to manage health care. Half of those questioned said they thought government would be better at providing medical coverage than private insurers, up from 30 percent in polls conducted in 2007. Nearly 60 percent said Washington would have more success in holding down costs, up from 47 percent.

Why should anyone have confidence in insurance companies? Is there anyone left who hasn’t been screwed by their automobile insurance, homeowners coverage, medical insurance company? We all know these slimeballs would steal their mother’s purse if they could skive another 5% from a settlement.

230 users responded in " Government Health Care Plan? 90% of Democrats, 75% of Independents, 50% of Republicans – say “YES” "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Alfred1 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:11 am

Not credible:

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/healthcare/june_2009/americans_evenly_divided_over_urgency_of_health_care_reform

See Rassmussen for other related polls.

# 2 Buzz said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:12 am

How is attack by germ, virus or trauma any different than attack by foreign army? (other than the obvious)

We have a pentagon for the latter and you’re on your own in the US for the formers. But not in most of the rest of the world.

It’s time we joined the world on this one.

# 3 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:13 am

As usual, NYT gets it wrong. No wonder they are gong BK…

Most Voters Say Health Insurance Should Not Be Mandatory
http://tinyurl.com/myrq5h

Americans Evenly Divided Over Urgency of Health Care Reform
http://tinyurl.com/n6ek83

# 4 Ron Larson said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:13 am

I keep hearing crap like “We don’t want a bureaucrat between you and your doctor”. How is that any different than an insurance agent between them now?

The sad fact is, our insurance based medical system is fundamentally flawed. All you have to do is read the stories of the people who were insured, and then retroactively cancelled because they had made the mistake of actually getting sick, to understand that insurance companies are not structured to benefit us.

I’d like all of these so-called wise republicans to try to buy health insurance when they are 45 and have had colon cancer in the past. Good luck. Even if you could find a company who would issue a real policy, it would costs over $2000 a month.

If people are so damn worried about illegal aliens getting free medical care, then (a) realize they already so via emergency rooms (b) demand Medicare member cards to authenticate valid beneficiaries.

# 5 Alfred1 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:14 am

Both the economy and Obama and his policies are being actively PROMOTED by the media…they are not credible sources of information…

For example, the economy is still nosediving, job losses haven’t abated…yet no reports on the homeless, families thrown into turmoil…nothing but spin how nice Obama’s family is…

Its like living in pre-Collapse Soviet Union.

# 6 Alfred1 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:21 am

#2 Can you point to a Government payer system in the world that is successful at delivering affordable health care, that doesn’t ration health care, especially to seniors, and doesn’t bankrupt the country?

If you could, Obama care would be unstoppable, THEN you would find folks like me wanting it.

I await your answer.

# 7 MikeR said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:29 am

Alfred1:

Can you point to a single health insurance company in the world that is successful at delivering affordable health care and that doesn’t ration health care, especially to seniors?

Also, please name one developed nation that has gone bankrupt due to public health care cost.

# 8 Alfred1 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:33 am

Q: What does your health care plan contain to address racial disparities in access to care?

A: The first problem with our current health care system is that it’s upside down. It focuses on intervention. We wait until people are catastrophically ill, and then we spend enormous amounts of money trying to fix them. We need to be putting the money on the preventive side. Prevention is a lot less expensive than is intervention. The second thing, there has to be ownership of the individual consumer. As long as the government, the employer, as long as the doctor is in charge of your health care, and you have no idea what it costs, and you have no idea what they’re doing, and you don’t control it, we’re never going to get the system fixed. And the third thing that has to happen is that we have portable medical records. And the policies that we can put in place have to start with individuals buying in, not only on insurance, but buying in on health, their own personal, to start with.

http://ontheissues.org/2008/Mike_Huckabee_Health_Care.htm

That is something I could support…it doesn’t result in Government control over me…it relies upon personal choice…initiative…and won’t bankrupt the country…

It is immoral we bankrupt the country for our personal needs, it is generational theft to do so.

# 9 Now for Something Completely Different said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:33 am

#6 We have the only health care system that is ‘bankrupting’ a country. Canada and Norway aren’t bankrupt because of their health care system (the financial collapses lately aren’t because of foreign healthcare, but because of American greedy pig f**ker companies that pushed risky home mortgages to make more money than was safe). We do have “one of” the most high tech health care systems in the world! Good for us! Yet some of THE WORST results! Horrible life span, infant mortality, obesity, cancer rates, etc. For paying as MUCH as we do, for the high tech system we created, how come our health is SO bad?

# 10 Alfred1 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:36 am

#7 Non sequitur…no health plan is tries to cover all…they have models for profitability.

Hukabee is thinking “out of the box”, prevention is better than intervention after illness…it has the possibility of working…

Unlike Obama care, the Government won’t crush those who dare not follow its health directives….preserving our freedom to be stupid, which is our right.

# 11 Alfred1 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:37 am

#9 Canada and Norway aren’t bankrupt because they exploit their oil, gas, and coal deposits…whereas we do not.

# 12 dusanmal said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:39 am

There is one glaring omission here: 99% of subjects have not experienced Govt. controlled/run/meddled health care. What they want is some utopian idea. If passed, what they’ll get is quite cold reality.

# 13 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:39 am

#10 Most voters rejects Obama’s HC plan anyway. As documented above.

# 14 Alfred1 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:40 am

#12 It will be worse than a DMV experience…especially when one is turned down because they are too old to spend too much money on…the criteria results in illegal immigrants being cared for at the expense of senior citizens.

# 15 Mac Guy said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:41 am

Other results of the same poll:

Question: “If the government were to guarantee health insurance for all Americans, what effect would that have on the national economy?”

Answer: 28% say “improve economy,” while 37% say “hurt economy”

63% are concerned that if the government were to create a national healthcare system, the quality of their own care would be hurt.

68% are concerned that if the government created a national healthcare system, access to tests would become more limited than it is now.

There are four sides to every story:
1 – Yours.
2 – Mine.
3 – The truth.
4 – Statistics.

# 16 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:42 am

10,

The NEJM did a study on prevention costs and found it debatable that it saved anything.

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/358/7/661

I know that you don’t read and comprehend very well, so I’ll synapse it for you…

“Our findings suggest that the broad generalizations made by many presidential candidates can be misleading. These statements convey the message that substantial resources can be saved through prevention. Although some preventive measures do save money, the vast majority reviewed in the health economics literature do not. Careful analysis of the costs and benefits of specific interventions, rather than broad generalizations, is critical. Such analysis could identify not only cost-saving preventive measures but also preventive measures that deliver substantial health benefits relative to their net costs; this analysis could also identify treatments that are cost-saving or highly efficient (i.e., cost-effective).”

# 17 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:43 am

14,

So, private insurers never reject someone due to age, disease or “profitability”?

# 18 faxon said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:47 am

I don’t know much about health care issues, but I doubt that the government can do anything right.

# 19 Don Quixote said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:49 am

Alfred1, your lobbyist roots are showing.

Taking cost out of a system creates a less expensive system to operate. Single payer where the doctor isn’t rewarded by the pharmaceutical companies and supported by insurance companies who determine his direction in health care administration has to be the best solution for all. better cheaper medical care bringing the US in line with other more developed countries. The same government we trust to conduct wars for the country, surely can administer it’s heath care system. Just add more names to the Medicare rolls. The system is already in place.

# 20 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 6:55 am

#19 these measures have lead to an acute physician shortage in UK & Canada, France is now facing same…

# 21 Mac Guy said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:02 am

#20 – Actually, the US is facing a similar shortage.

# 22 Mike D said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:03 am

Congress / Senate . . . for the benefit of the people . . . Are you kidding?
Check the contributions to those opposing universal healthcare from those standing to lose the most – the healthcare lobby – mainly the drug companies. There is, I believe, a big difference between reasonable profit versus rape and pillage. One example; a prescription I take costs less than 50 cents per dose outside the USA. This same drug, made at the same facility, WHO certified, costs over $12.00 per dose in the US. I feel safer in a French hospital than I do in a US hospital – been there done that. Go live there – no thank you – this is my home and I am attempting to make it better, one piece at a time.
It is very difficult to make someone understand a problem if their livelihood depends on their not understanding the problem.
Obviously if you are ill and cannot afford healthcare, or get health insurance, then you should die and not burden society. The same should apply to the elderly. These groups do not contribute to the positive value (money) of society and have outlived their need (become a burden – costing money). So what you’re a war hero, inventor, mother, etc. that was then this is now.
This is a form of forced Euthanasia. The Nazi governments was very successful with this on the mentally ill (beginning) to wholesale genocide (end). The big difference now versus then is financial manipulation is achieving the current object. Sorry for the sarcastic note, but what have we become?

# 23 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:03 am

20,

US facing doctor shortage… approaching critical levels…

http://upi.com/Top_News/2009/04/27/US-faces-growing-doctor-shortages/UPI-50441240832817/

DUN DUN DUN!!!

[Please drop the WWW from URLs as WordPress doesn't display it properly... plus it's unnecessary. Named, you know better!- ed.]

# 24 jbenson2 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:10 am

NY Times poll – unbiased?

Does anyone, except for the far left, really believe anything printed by that rag.

# 25 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:18 am

# 23 Named said, “DUN DUN DUN!!!”

Right, I read about this and the effect that gov HC pgms Medi-care, etc. have had on this problem. Interesting and good point.

# 26 FlatAffect said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:20 am

Quick question for anyone:

Doesn’t Congress have free, universal health care for themselves and their families, for the rest of their lives, all at taxpayer expense?

If I’ve been misinformed, I apologize for mentioning it. I’m just trying to disprove or confirm a rumor I heard.

# 27 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:24 am

26,

True.

# 28 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:25 am

25 Paddy-O

Yes, its terrible that physicians have more clients. Absolutely the worst thing to happen to a doctor is gaining more clients. That might make them more money.

# 29 smartalix said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:26 am

I have lived in a social-medicine state. In fact, one of my daughters was born in the US, another in Germany. There was a world of difference in paperwork, cost, experience, and environment. I have yet to find a person who experienced both EU and American systems who favors the US way.

# 30 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:31 am

29,

Smartalix, meet Paddy-O. He believes he’s a world traveler and has experienced everything first hand. He likes to be called Patrick now. I believe its due to getting a lock for his basement door and therefore, his maturity. Soon, he might move out of his mothers basement entirely!

# 31 jbenson2 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:32 am

I have lived in a social-medicine state. In fact, I moved my entire family to England for 2 years. There was a world of difference in the service and quality of work.

After watching the Brits in my town begging to be treated by the local dentist, the lack of hospital rooms, and the incredible fiscal problems the necessary tax burden created on the economy, I have yet to find a person who experienced both EU and American systems who favors the EU way.

# 32 sargasso said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:35 am

Watch out for the doctors with legs in both private consultancies and government hospitals, flipping off unprofitable patient cases to the state run institutions while creating waiting lists for public hospitals which force the very ill to seek private medical care.

# 33 Hmeyers said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:43 am

I’d like to see health care reforms and the end to employer + insurance companies ties.

I hope whatever is done is done right and gently.

# 34 chuck said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:51 am

“The poll found that most Americans would be willing to pay higher taxes so everyone could have health insurance”

Of those polled – how many actually pay federal taxes?

And of those who do actually pay taxes – if it had been explained that the real costs would require a 50% increase in taxes – would they be so willing to pay, then?

If we taxed all the people on the Forbes 400 richest people list, at 100% (taking all their income as well as all their money, assets, property, etc) we’d have enough money to run the health care system for a year. Then how do we pay for next year?

We have nationalized health care in Canada. The only reason it “works” is because we pay substantially higher taxes adn we live next door to the U.S. where we can go for real emergencies and pay $$.

# 35 deowll said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:52 am

To Buzz and others. Anybody that thinks that most of the rest of the world has free medical care is to ignorant for mere words to describe.

Governments are not a source of wealth. Anything they give they have to take first.

If you want high end medical insurance you could buy it or you can simply have them take the cost out of the private sector by taxation. You are still going to end up paying for it. The fact that it comes out of your pay check every time you buy something and as income tax doesn’t change the fact that you will pay for it.

Please get this through your thick heads. You can have the government run your insurance agency or somebody else do it but you will still get to pay for it. Nobody is going to give you free anything.

# 36 qb said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:53 am

#1 Alfred1 said “Not credible: rasmussenreports.com…..”

What does he have against the Rasmussen Reports?

# 37 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:54 am

35,
“Please get this through your thick heads. You can have the government run your insurance agency or somebody else do it but you will still get to pay for it. Nobody is going to give you free anything.”

Absolutely. But, when 300 million people pay into a system, it will be cheaper than when 1 million pay into it.

That’s why you get SO MUCH for so little tax.

# 38 ramuno said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:09 am

We have a government run health care system now…Medicare. It is only for people over 65. It is well run and doesn’t bankrupt anything. Let’s just extend that system for all.

# 39 MikeN said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:11 am

Any chance insurance would act as insurance against a major medical problem, and not paying for every little cost?

Any chance people without insurance won’t be charged 3 times as much as people with insurance?

# 40 atmusky said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:16 am

Actually I think we should stop calling it Health Insurance and just admit we are talking about a Health Care Payment Service. Once you do that then the idea of a one payer service is understandable and makes sense.

No need for duplicate services just focus on reducing the services administrative costs and controlling fraud.

Those that are against this should just admit they don’t want tax payer funds to pay for Health Care. The problem is our system of employer paid health care insurance is no longer sustainable do to global competition.

Without employer paid insurance or government paid health care private insurers can pretty much refuse to pay for anything and dump anyone at anytime. The only thing that keeps them in line know is either employers or government. As more people figure this out and more employers have to dump health insurance more people will understand we have to move to a government based system.

# 41 gooddebate said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:19 am

#4 Ron

The assumption you’re making is that the current system is the baseline of where we start. This isn’t the case. The current system is half way between the free market and complete socialization that you’re promoting. The truth is that we don’t really know what would happen if it was a true free market, just like we don’t really know what would happen if we socialized it completely.

The real question is which philosophy is better. Should we be moving toward a free market system or a socialized system or something else.

When you say you don’t see the difference between a bureaucrat between you and your doctor and an insurance company between you and your doctor I think you’ve misunderstood the difference between the systems. They both have the incentive to save money but the insurance agent can’t afford to have too many people actually die or even have too many bad experiences. The bureaucrat couldn’t care less about the outcomes. What’s he going to say, ‘oh, sorry about that.’ Lets start an investigation into why so many people are dying.

I say the philosophy where the incentive is to improve care and have cost effectiveness is where we should be going. Socialization provides neither, just distributed suffering.

# 42 mike said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:21 am

Yea; it is not like the government runs any other program poorly. They are wonderful at Medicare, Medicaid, Post Office, NEA, FDA, etc. This cannot possibly fail…

# 43 Cirdan said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:24 am

The only thing Government Healthcare will do is bankrupt America. Look at health care in California…it has made california completely bankrupt. Government healthcare will bankrupt America allowing Obamamessiah to come in and install communism. Or atleast full socialism.

(Karl Marx said, socialism is the path to communism)

# 44 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:24 am

#17, So, private insurers never reject someone due to age, disease or “profitability”?

Yes, they do.

So why create another gov agency to do the same thing, yet cost more?

#37, “Please get this through your thick heads. You can have the government run your insurance agency or somebody else do it but you will still get to pay for it. Nobody is going to give you free anything.”

Absolutely. But, when 300 million people pay into a system, it will be cheaper than when 1 million pay into it.

If you really think all 300 million are going to be paying into it, you are insane.

According to Obama’s campaign speeches, only those making over $250,000/yr will pay into it. Unless, of course, he is a liar and will raise taxes even more on everybody.

Are you sure your other name isn’t Mr. Fusion?

# 45 Cirdan said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:26 am

#38

Medicare is completely and fully bankrupt. This is EXACTLY why we shouldn’t do Gov’t Healthcare…it will end up like Medicare completely corrupted and bankrupt bringing in no money.

# 46 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:27 am

#38, We have a government run health care system now…Medicare. It is only for people over 65. It is well run and doesn’t bankrupt anything. Let’s just extend that system for all.

Which Obama has said is inefficient on numerous occasions. If the current system is so inefficient, what makes him think the next one won’t be?

# 47 risin the short bus said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:28 am

Dejavu on this subject.. was here yesterday… anyway. The System cant be much worse than we currently have…
I needed a simple Employmenty Physical for my next Job, called the HMO to make an appointment in march… was told nothing available until September.. Real TRUE story.. thats what I got for 450$ per month insurance cost… I went to a private doctor and got everything done in a few days..but at my expense…
Alfred1..what is your personal situation with regard to health care?… How are you paying for it?..We dont know who u are..just tell us.. you are so against what is proposed…can you tell us what your personal situation is? I am curuious.

# 48 Sea Lawyer said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:28 am

Get rid of the progressive tax brackets and all exemptions and credits, then we can talk about what most Americans claim they are willing to pay for.

# 49 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:30 am

If you want to keep HC costs down, you need to start putting more money back in people’s pockets.

Start giving people tax breaks for all medical related expenses.

Then you don’t have to pay the bureaucrat to do the same thing the patient would be doing.

Of course, that would mean the government giving up control of the cash. Think we could convince them of that?

# 50 freddybobs68k said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:34 am

@ 31 jbenson2

What a load of rubbish and I suspect lies.

Much of my family lives in the Uk. I regularly work with people in the Germany, Ireland and the Uk, as well as all over the US. I’ve lived and worked in these countries too. The US system is awful in any meaningful comparison.

Most of the issues presented in the US about such a system – such as ‘rationing’ or some other such crap, is just scaremongering. Government run health schemes work, and work well. They are more efficient, and cheaper. They are easier and better for citizens. So yeah – the insurance companies are running around screaming the sky’s falling. Its communism – obviously.

They aren’t perfect – but compared to the expensive, personal bankruptcy engine the US has – they are better in almost every dimension.

Other people arguing against it, probably get all their world view from the fox scaremonger network…

At best the arguments against seem to only have some ideological complaint as opposed to any actual experience, or truly pragmatic explanation.

# 51 joe said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:39 am

Why should I have to pay for Dvorak’s sex change operation?

# 52 MikeN said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:42 am

If all of these savings can happen, then why wait for a government takeover of health care to implement them? Why not demonstrate these wonderful saving in Medicare right now?

# 53 ridin the short bus said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:43 am

WELL SAID #50… I too work with allot of folks from the aformentioned countries and they are all generally happy with the health care system in their respective countries and have a piece of mind knowing they wont be financially devestated when they become sickly in any manner.. Thanks you for your words freddybobs68k. I tried yesterday in vane to say what you have stated here and now!!!

# 54 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:43 am

What the whole argument boils down to is this:
One group of people want the gov’t to be able to take $ out of the wallets of another group of people under threat of force to pay for their H.C. The other group wishes to have free choice as to H.C.

# 55 ridin the short us said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:50 am

Where is the Free choice now?.. You are tied to some HMO or Health Care Net work or…etc.. and the Doctor you may want may not be “available” becasue everyone wants that doctor, so yuou are assigned a physician… so where is the free choice now you speak of…its all real reterick.. it the minority with all the the money that always get their way at the expense of the majority.. it all has to stop…
Flat tax.. and 1 man 1 vote… that would be a fair america… All of the devestated and Broke economies of europe after WW-II decided to impliment what they have today… Where are we?

# 56 Sea Lawyer said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:51 am

#54, heh, and as long as the first group outnumbers the second group, then it’s just democracy working as intended.

# 57 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:52 am

# 55 ridin the short us said, “Where is the Free choice now?”

Good question. Currently there too much gov’t interference in what you can and/or must purchase from whom.

# 58 Mr. Fusion, said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:02 am

Gol darn it !!! That effen spam filter stopped me again. OK, so I’m breaking this up into parts.

#1 & 3,

Hhmmm, it seems Rassmussun is consistently wrong. Didn’t they also call the November election as McCain ahead?

The NYT poll,
85 percent of respondents said the health care system needed to be fundamentally changed or completely rebuilt
http://tinyurl.com/l9klvk

Kaiser Research,
It is more important than ever to take on health
care reform now – 61%
http://tinyurl.com/nk7dp2 pg 4

# 59 Mr. Fusion, said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:02 am

Part Deux

NBC / WSJ poll,
Do you favor or (Obama’s) plan?
55% – yes
35% – no
http://tinyurl.com/nk7dp2

Pew Research,
Change system so all are covered for necessary care
Favor – 75%
Oppose – 21%
http://tinyurl.com/n59h3h

# 60 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:04 am

44 LL,
“So why create another gov agency to do the same thing, yet cost more?”
Health care in the US is currently the most expensive in the world. Other socialized health care in the world is cheaper. You might just be wrong about that point. Now, one thing that socialized care DOESN’T do is kick you off when you get sick. You get treated. And then you get treated again if necessary. Private Insurers do NOT want to treat you even once. It’s bad business to pay out.

“If you really think all 300 million are going to be paying into it, you are insane.

According to Obama’s campaign speeches, only those making over $250,000/yr will pay into it. Unless, of course, he is a liar and will raise taxes even more on everybody.”

First off, Obama is a politician. There has been precious little he has done as promised. All politicians are liars. You do realize that right?

And yes, taxes can be collected at many sources; income, state, sales etc. And all those taxes pay for so many things.

# 61 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:06 am

# 58 Mr. Fusion, said, “Didn’t they also call the November election as McCain ahead?”

Nope. They actually had the most accurate results and called Obama as the winner in November. Bzzt. Another box of Rice-a-Roni for ya. BTW- You ran out on the Oberfurer thread when you lied about his ratings…

# 62 Mr. Fusion, said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:07 am

#30, Named,

He likes to be called Patrick now.

With all due respect to you sir, he will always be Cow-Patty to me. Simply because of the similarity between what she writes and that favorite bovine comment for a lie.

# 63 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:07 am

# 56 Sea Lawyer said, “#54, heh, and as long as the first group outnumbers the second group, then it’s just democracy working as intended.”

Correct, like when we had black slavery.

# 64 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:11 am

Well, it seems we are all in agreement with my post #54.

If any disagree, please state, in a lucid fashion, your disagreement(s).

Thank you in advance.

# 65 RTaylor said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:13 am

Most physicians try to keep their Medicare patients to 50% or less. Many don’t take Medicaid at all. Other private providers keep their payments a few dollars above Federal programs. The only way this will work is rationed care. No you’re not entitled to a new liver, that $50K in chemo will not be allowed because it’s only 20% successful. Americans will have to accept the fact they aren’t entitled to every option. The best option is probably to rename and restructure Medicare, forcing those that can’t afford private insurance to pay on a sliding scale. Additional funding will be through taxation. Due to 60 years of public education propaganda, Americans have learned to despise the word socialism, even though most doesn’t even know what it means.

# 66 meetsy said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:22 am

I fear that the health insurance companies won’t go lightly on this one. They’ve raised rates about 1000 percent over the last 10 years (remember when you could insure your whole family for under $200 a month?) The most glaring problem I see, which O’s plan doesn’t even start to talk about: we aren’t limiting drug costs (they can charge whatever they want). Add to that a bunch of government workers making decisions…and that spells trouble.
Why not just make all insurance, hospitals and clinics NON PROFIT. What’s the deal with letting them make a profit on the sick and dying? Greedy bastards.
Of course, my experiences may be tainting my view…I will never forget my dying mother sitting in a wheelchair, DISCHARGED before I was able to arrive (I had 30 minutes notice, it was 7am when they called me). She was in great pain and totally confused (brain tumor in her brain stem…from diagnosis to death in 6 weeks). She had GREAT insurance plus Medicare. This is how the insured are treated.
The hospital administrator said “she’s dying, we don’t deal with dying. We NEED the bed.” (Note the hospital was not at full capacity…AND the day my Mom was rousted — the hospital charged for a FULL DAY. They didn’t even wait for a “noon checkout” like the Ritz Carlton would have!)
Our health insurance system has already failed. It’s limping along, and those under-served, under-insured are the very most screwed.

# 67 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:23 am

64 Paddy-O

You’re 54 is incorrect. You don’t have free choice now.

# 68 Sea Lawyer said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:23 am

So I have to say, if the federal government wants to start up its own health insurance company to “compete” with private companies, then go for it. But it should be opt-in, funded exclusively through premiums paid by members, and it should not have access to the general treasury piggy-bank.

Then we can really measure how much more efficient/competitive the government program is, and not just see another demonstration of how it can use its power to tax and compel participation to low-ball and crowd out private choices.

# 69 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:26 am

# 67 Named said, “You’re 54 is incorrect. You don’t have free choice now.”

I said “lucid”. Read the post and show where I said free choice currently exists… Let me know…

# 70 Mr. Fusion, said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:26 am

#44, Liberty Loser

According to Obama’s campaign speeches, only those making over $250,000/yr will pay into it. Unless, of course, he is a liar and will raise taxes even more on everybody.

Who said only those paying over $250K are financing it? Oh, right, You did so it must be a fact.

# 71 ridin the short bus said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:29 am

#43 if you want to play with Quotes: karl marx Also said… Marx argued that capitalism, like previous socioeconomic systems, will produce internal tensions which will lead to its destruction…
Interesting how things come full circle…

# 72 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:31 am

# 70 Mr. Fusion, said, “Who said only those paying over $250K are financing it?”

O’Mama did as he promised no tax increases for those making under $250k/year. Bzzt, another box for you.

BTW – Why did you leave the Oberfurer thread after lying about his ratings?

# 73 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:37 am

#60, Now, one thing that socialized care DOESN’T do is kick you off when you get sick. You get treated. And then you get treated again if necessary.

Um, I hate to break it to you but Daschle and Biden have both stated there would be rationing based on who’s the most productive in society (i.e., “Old People will just have to deal with getting old.”)

First off, Obama is a politician. There has been precious little he has done as promised. All politicians are liars. You do realize that right?

BUT, BUT, BUT!!! That was one of his campaign promises — “spread the wealth.” Now you are saying it just going to take it?

# 74 ArianeB said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:38 am

Wow, the Conservatives and their ad hominem arguments about government health care. Amazingly misinformed, and mostly tied to pure ideological philosophy irrelevant of the facts.

When private insurance companies stop denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, or denying payment for stupid reasons in the name of “profit”, then I will trust private insurance. That isn’t going to happen unless the insurers are forced into it.

http://cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/16/health.care.hearing/index.html

Conservative talk all high and mighty that private for profit health care is the best, despite overwhelming evidence that it is not. I’ve seen a very vocal opponent of “socialized medicine” drasticall change his mind after an auto accident and an insurance policy that would not cover most of his injuries, and a $100,000 medical bill.

# 75 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:40 am

69 Paddy-0 (i made it a Zero! So clever)

“The other group wishes to have free choice as to H.C.”

You have choice insofar as your insurance company gives it. So, your insurance company has choice, you have a paycheck to write.

# 76 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:40 am

#70, Who said only those paying over $250K are financing it? Oh, right, You did so it must be a fact.

He did. If he isn’t going to raise taxes on those making less than 250k/yr (as he promised), then logically, only those above it are going to pay into it.

# 77 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:44 am

73,

“Um, I hate to break it to you but Daschle and Biden have both stated there would be rationing based on who’s the most productive in society.”
Good thing private insurance doesn’t ration, right? At least you won’t go bankrupt trying to survive an illness.

“BUT, BUT, BUT!!! That was one of his campaign promises — “spread the wealth.” Now you are saying it just going to take it?”
Very poor grammar, as you’re obviously very angry and rushed. What I said was that he failed to deliver on many campaign promises. Like EVERY POLITICIAN IN THE WORLD. Doesn’t mean socialized health care is bad.

# 78 Insurance man...NOT said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:51 am

I wonder if the few against universal health care here in this blog are not working for the Insurance companies?… or some other special self serving interest… it appears that even in this blog a mojority of the bloggers are for universal health care of some sorts…

# 79 Floyd said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:53 am

Some comments:
1. Private health insurance is currently amazingly expensive if you’re not a member of a group policy.

2. Disclosure: my sister works for Golden Rule, a major healthcare provider. She might be out of a job if there’s public health insurance.

3. Maybe what we need is single payer public health insurance, but with some of the health insurance companies used to handle the insurance premiums, per government rules. The idea is that these companies know what is going on in healthcare, including possible scams (yes, some doctors and hospitals do attempt scams and often succeeed).

4.The companies get paid for their work, and the Gummint gets knowledgeable workers.

# 80 tcc3 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:53 am

What 54 really boils down to Patrick is one group is ok with the rich getting treatment, normal folks going bankrupt, and letting the poor die.

# 81 bill said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:59 am

Gee, How about a ‘popular vote’ on it?

# 82 badtimes said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:00 am

Nate Silver’s got some good analysis on recent HC polling (at fivethirtyeight.com).
Warning- if you’re a Rasmussen fan, you won’t like it. Looks like they’re the outlier again.

# 83 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:01 am

79,

There is always the business of supplemental insurance. Most socialized systems have some services delivered but not covered. For example, plaster cast vs Aircast (walking). Plaster = Free, Aircast = $140. Supplemental insurance would cover that.

Pharma would also fall under supplemental in some cases, so the insurance companies would just adapt to the changing market. Isn’t that what all the big companies say to us when they’re culling the workforce?

# 84 GigG said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:13 am

Why should or can anyone say yes to a plan that doesn’t exist yet?

# 85 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:24 am

# 78 Insurance man…NOT said, “it appears that even in this blog a mojority of the bloggers are for universal health care of some sorts…”

Yes, the majority of ess productive people wish to take from those more productive. It has always been thus. That’s why theft exists in this world.

# 86 Dallas said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:27 am

Majority of people have no idea what the problem is – especially the republicans.

The GOP is brainwashing people to think Obama’s plan calls for the government to render medical services – WRONG.

WE NEED A SINGLE PAYER SYSTEM TO CUT COSTS.

The insurance companies are leaching $600B a year on producing nothing but profits. These profits are paying for GOP lobbyists.

# 87 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:35 am

#54 – PatDick,

I want free choice of health care. That’s why I want a government plan. Right now, if I decide to stop working, I have no health care. If I change jobs, I may have to change doctors to one not of my choosing. If my company chooses to change coverage, I may lose my doctor or lose coverage for some aspects of my diabetes care.

I want choice in health care.

I want a government plan.

# 88 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:41 am

Doesn’t anyone think about the implications of our current systems on our corporations? Even our CEOs are too stupid to recognize that right now, not only are we unable to compete with China and India, our corporations are unable to compete with any of the industrialized nations as well.

Why?

Simple, long ago, our corporations thought they were fighting communism and voluntarily picked up the tab for social welfare. Now, they’re too busy paying health care and contributing to 401Ks and pensions and administering all of the stuff we call “human resources” to be able to compete on a level playing field.

Other countries let their governments deal with social welfare thus freeing their corporations to compete in their fields of business.

Why are we hamstringing our companies like this?

# 89 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:41 am

#77, Good thing private insurance doesn’t ration, right? At least you won’t go bankrupt trying to survive an illness.

I never said private didn’t ration. Every business rations. It’s how you stay in business.

as you’re obviously very angry and rushed. What I said was that he failed to deliver on many campaign promises. Like EVERY POLITICIAN IN THE WORLD.

Rushed, not angry. I think with my brain and not my emotions.

Doesn’t mean socialized health care is bad.

Which is one of the stupidest things I’ve heard. “Yes, Obama, lied but he isn’t lying about this.”

They man ain’t exactly batting a thousand these days, Scooter.

# 90 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:42 am

So, no one has argued against my basic premise as posted earlier. Thanks.

# 91 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:45 am

#87, So, basically, you want the option to freeload on those who aren’t?

Brilliant! I want that, too!

# 92 John Paradox said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:48 am

# 24 jbenson2 said,
NY Times poll – unbiased?
Does anyone, except for the far left, really believe anything printed by that rag.

I don’t have quotes from others, but apparently Sean Hannity decided to quote the NYT.
http://members.cox.net/ditto-busters/blogger.html

March 17th posting.

# 42 mike said,
Yea; it is not like the government runs any other program poorly. They are wonderful at Medicare, Medicaid, Post Office, NEA, FDA, etc. This cannot possibly fail…

Why do you hate our troops?

J/P=?

# 93 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:48 am

89, LL

Obama is not socialized health care. He is the President of the United States. Just in case you forgot that.

90, Paddy-0 (Again, a zero. So VERY clever)

Yes. I did. Twice. But, you have comprehension issues.

# 94 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:03 am

# 93 Named said, “Yes. I did. Twice.”

Nope. You simply think that the words “wish” & “have” have the same definition…

# 95 Buzz said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:05 am

Alfred 1 keeps arguing speculations. Let’s ground this idea: If the government is formed to assure the common defense, then find the right way to have that edict cover the defense against disease and trauma.

It’s not a detailed notion; it’s a basic principle for having government in the first place.

The arguments that the solution will end up looking like this or that deficient legacy agency, department or previous governmental program are pure bogus offal. There’s no reason, for instance, that the DMV analogy or metaphor would apply. Right now there are good DMVs and bad DMVs, depending on your state or whether or not you bother to make an appointment for services.

Around the world there are many examples of health programs, hosipitals and government-supported health care systems that flat out work just fine.

Republicans love to point out the negatives and ignore the positives because that tends to make them look more dramatically powerful and right, but it just ain’t so.

All their durm und strang ignores the factoid that in the industrialized world, protection of the population from exterior armies is not the only function of governance.

So instead of having a system that prevents health issues from eating every ounce of savings, we have a system that makes insurance companies and Big Medicine rich. Do you really like paying $700 – $1100 per month for family coverage? Do you really like having a cap on that so when an automobile accident ends up draining all your coverage, they come after your house and savings?

Republicans do. It’s good for business.

You and your kids would be a helluva lot better off moving outside the USA from a health care standpoint. And the population is pissed that congress and past administrations have failed so miserably on this issue.

# 96 Sea Lawyer said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:06 am

#88, Scott, employer provided healhcare, like 401(k)s and paid vacation, is a fringe benefit that is part of an overall compensation package meant to attract desirable workers. That is all it is. Somewhere along the line, people have gotten this idea that employers are under some kind of obligation to provide these things – they are not.

And now we have a proposed plan floating around Congress that actually wants to enact a statutory obligation of employers to either provide health benefits, or pay an additional tax so the government can.

Neither of these is going to do anything about increasing the competitiveness of American business. And as Greg Mankiw noted on his blog, the CBO also came to the same conclusion about any proposed healthcare reform

http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2009/05/healthcare-competitiveness-fallacy.html

# 97 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:07 am

94, Paddy-0 (I’m trademarking this 0)

You’ve got two problems in your life:
1, comprehension.
2, admitting defeat.
You’re almost as bad as Alfred1… the difference being that I don’t think you’re a lunatic…. yet.

And your link in your name? CLEVER! Its a perfect link for a fascist.

# 98 t0llyb0ng said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:24 am

We don’t need “socialized medicine.” But we do need socialized health insurance. Even here in Amerika.

Private health insurance doesn’t work. Greed will leave YOU out in the cold. Simply human nature.

# 99 jacksmith said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:27 am

AMERICA’S NATIONAL HEALTHCARE EMERGENCY!

It’s official. America and the World are now in a GLOBAL PANDEMIC. A World EPIDEMIC with potential catastrophic consequences for ALL of the American people. The first PANDEMIC in 41 years. And WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES will have to face this PANDEMIC with the 37th worst quality of healthcare in the developed World.

STAND READY AMERICA TO SEIZE CONTROL OF YOUR NATIONAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM.

We spend over twice as much of our GDP on healthcare as any other country in the World. And Individual American spend about ten times as much out of pocket on healthcare as any other people in the World. All because of GREED! And the PRIVATE FOR PROFIT healthcare system in America.

And while all this is going on, some members of congress seem mostly concern about how to protect the corporate PROFITS! of our GREED DRIVEN, PRIVATE FOR PROFIT NATIONAL DISGRACE. A PRIVATE FOR PROFIT DISGRACE that is in fact, totally valueless to the public health. And a detriment to national security, public safety, and the public health.

Progressive democrats and others should stand firm in their demand for a robust public option for all Americans, with all of the minimum requirements progressive democrats demanded. If congress can not pass a robust public option with at least 51 votes and all robust minimum requirements, congress should immediately move to scrap healthcare reform and demand that President Obama declare a state of NATIONAL HEALTHCARE EMERGENCY! Seizing and replacing all PRIVATE FOR PROFIT health insurance plans with the immediate implementation of National Healthcare for all Americans under the provisions of HR676 (A Single-payer National Healthcare Plan For All).

Coverage can begin immediately through our current medicare system. With immediate expansion through recruitment of displaced workers from the canceled private sector insurance industry. Funding can also begin immediately by substitution of payroll deductions for private insurance plans with payroll deductions for the national healthcare plan. This is what the vast majority of the American people want. And this is what all objective experts unanimously agree would be the best, and most cost effective for the American people and our economy.

In Mexico on average people who received medical care for A-H1N1 (Swine Flu) with in 3 days survived. People who did not receive medical care until 7 days or more died. This has been the same results in the US. But 50 million Americans don’t even have any healthcare coverage. And at least 200 million of you with insurance could not get in to see your private insurance plans doctors in 2 or 3 days, even if your life depended on it. WHICH IT DOES!

Contact congress and your representatives NOW! AND SPREAD THE WORD!

God Bless You

Jacksmith – WORKING CLASS

# 100 Mr. Fusion, said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:32 am

#89, Liberty Loser,

I never said private didn’t ration. Every business rations. It’s how you stay in business.

So if private business rations, it is good, BUT if government rations, it is bad.

… I think with my brain and not my emotions.

Doesn’t mean socialized health care is bad.

Which is one of the stupidest things I’ve heard. “Yes, Obama, lied but he isn’t lying about this.”

Gee, isn’t that an emotional response? No argument, no rational thought, no counter point, no analysis, no critiquing, no discussion on the merits, no refutation, no intelligent idea, no explanation. Nope, just an emotional knee jerk response about it being stupid.

How typical of those who don’t like Obama. It doesn’t matter what the issue is, just because it is a Democrat / Obama idea, it must be bad. No plan of their own, just more NO !!!

# 101 sac said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:36 am

#90, Cow-Patty,

So, no one has argued against my basic premise as posted earlier. Thanks.

It was unanimous, you’re a jerk.

# 102 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:44 am

#100, So if private business rations, it is good, BUT if government rations, it is bad.

Correct. It is doing something not in it’s constitutional mandate.

How hard is that to understand?

Gee, isn’t that an emotional response?

Dang, you’re slick. You got me. You are correct. I was laughing my ass off

How could you tell?

How typical of those who don’t like Obama. It doesn’t matter what the issue is, just because it is a Democrat / Obama idea, it must be bad. No plan of their own, just more NO !!!

It’s not Obama. It just so happens he is the messenger here. If McCain was up there spouting that crap, I’d be carping on him as well.

And just so you know, I did think the Spy ROTC thingy was a good thing from what I could find on it. But it wasn’t posted here so I couldn’t comment.

# 103 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:47 am

#100, BTW . . . how did the Kool Aid session go with your buddies?

They gonna pay their back taxes and pay the correct taxes from here on out?

# 104 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:49 am

#93, Obama is not socialized health care. He is the President of the United States. Just in case you forgot that.

But, if he’s a liar, how can I trust what he is preaching is truth?

# 105 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:52 am

#100, No plan of their own, just more NO !!!

Here’s a plan. One I’ve shown you twice already.

How typical of those who like Obama. It doesn’t matter what the issue is, just because it is a Democrat / Obama idea, it must be good. No plan of their own, just more YES, MY LORD !!!

• Create a tax credit for health insurance: Instead of encouraging people to participate in the government health insurance program, individuals and families could receive a refundable tax credit to purchase health insurance. This would give them the freedom to choose a plan that makes the most sense for their individual needs.

• Reform the tax treatment of health insurance: Currently our tax code is biased in favor of employer-provided health insurance and against those who purchase healthcare from the individual market. Congress should extend the tax treatment of employer-provided health insurance to individual health insurance. This would make individual insurance more affordable.

• Enable individuals to purchase health insurance from any state: State regulations can greatly raise the cost of health insurance. Instead of being limited to policies issued in their state, individuals should be able to purchase insurance from anywhere in the country.

# 106 t0llyb0ng said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:53 am

Quit talkin’ about “healthcare.” That word doesn’t exist & it’s not the issue.

What we have here in Amerika is a health INSURANCE problem. The people that need it don’t have it, and they ain’t never gonna get it until we collectively realize that private health insurance simply does not work.

You want “supplemental” health insurance, you can have all you want—but buy it on your own damn dime.

# 107 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:55 am

#106, You want “supplemental” health insurance, you can have all you want—but buy it on your own damn dime.

And whose dime will the other insurance be on?

# 108 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 12:04 pm

PatDick,

So, no one has argued against my basic premise as posted earlier. Thanks.

You missed my post #87.

# 109 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 12:06 pm

105,

Too flawed…

Create a tax credit for health insurance: Instead of encouraging people to participate in the government health insurance program, individuals and families could receive a refundable tax credit to purchase health insurance. This would give them the freedom to choose a plan that makes the most sense for their individual needs. – You’ve just created another immense “program” that needs administration and funding. Say nothing of the fact that some people don’t have enough credits to get the break. And that is the situation you currently have.

Reform the tax treatment of health insurance: Currently our tax code is biased in favor of employer-provided health insurance and against those who purchase healthcare from the individual market. Congress should extend the tax treatment of employer-provided health insurance to individual health insurance. This would make individual insurance more affordable. The reason why employer insurance is cheaper is because it’s a POOL, just like a tax base. The average of 1000 employees taking out a claim is much smaller than a family of 4. And that is why individual rates are higher. And always will be. The risk of paying out to 4 is practically 100%.

Enable individuals to purchase health insurance from any state: State regulations can greatly raise the cost of health insurance. Instead of being limited to policies issued in their state, individuals should be able to purchase insurance from anywhere in the country. – States have certain rights, and they protect those rights. And this is why health insurance regulation is different. If state A insures against smokers issues and state B doesn’t because it’s banned smoking, how does your solution reconcile it?

And lastly, there is no mechanism in your “solution” to GUARANTEE insurance to ALL Americans regardless of current, past or even genetic defects.

# 110 t0llyb0ng said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 12:07 pm

“And whose dime will the other insurance be on?”

Everybody’s dime. Out of one big pot. No, I don’t know how to run that. Only know private (greed) health insurance doesn’t work. You figure it out. I’m not an actuary.

# 111 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 12:08 pm

#108, You’ll have to excuse him for being confused. I was, too.

I thought you were in the group wanting to take money out of other people’s wallets. I guess “free choice” was the wrong words to describe that.

# 112 Sea Lawyer said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 12:16 pm

#110, tollybong, lol. So the difference between “your own damn dime” and “everybody’s dime” is that it was your dime until everybody else decided they have a better use for it than you did.

# 113 t0llyb0ng said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 12:22 pm

You know what I mean. One big pool of insurance dough which is the single payer. Which is what I meant by “socialized health insurance.” Cut out private sector health insurance altogether, since they obviously suck.

& probably cheaper in the long run for The Big Insurance Pool to pay your premiums when you can’t, for whatever reason.

& no, Mexican interlopers should not be included in The Big Insurance Pool.

# 114 spinnyd said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 12:22 pm

#99 jacksmith said– you do know there are many decaffinated brands on the market today that taste and smell just like the real thing?

We already have had an experimental healthcare program running for 60+ years, the VA, and as any yet can tell you– you don’t want the government to run your healthcare.

# 115 lame excuse said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 12:36 pm

#114 Pulling at Strings.. Using the VA..is a Lame Excuse….

# 116 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 12:45 pm

#113, We know what you meant but I don’t think you know what YOU meant?

Where does the money in this big pot come from?

# 117 jescott418 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 12:51 pm

You know I understand this argument for government health care. But my question is. With Social Security and Medicare having difficulties how is health care not going to end up in the boat? Why all of a sudden do many think the government can run health care any better? Certainly the ideal of reduced costs for everyone is good right? Just ask Canadian’s how government run health care is? You go ahead, bet you will get mixed results. See, I understand the argument for it. I just think many have no ideal how much it may costs us. I think the other concern is that this will leave the possibility of smaller companies dropping insurance and expecting the government plan to kick in. I think their are many questions and details that need to be talked about and I do not see this being settled by this fall or even next year as Obama wants it. I remember Clinton trying to win over everyone on this and our budget was in much better shape and we were not in a severe recession.

# 118 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 12:52 pm

#109

You’ve just created another immense “program” that needs administration and funding. Say nothing of the fact that some people don’t have enough credits to get the break. And that is the situation you currently have.

There is no program needed. You send in your receipt and the government gives you your money back.

The reason why employer insurance is cheaper is because it’s a POOL, just like a tax base. The average of 1000 employees taking out a claim is much smaller than a family of 4. And that is why individual rates are higher. And always will be. The risk of paying out to 4 is practically 100%.

I am not arguing the costs of group vs individual. I am saying treat the individual the same way you treat the group. Currently, the government gives good tax credits to employer-provided insurance. Why can’t individuals get the same response?

States have certain rights, and they protect those rights. And this is why health insurance regulation is different. If state A insures against smokers issues and state B doesn’t because it’s banned smoking, how does your solution reconcile it?

The state shouldn’t be doing the insuring. The insurance companies should be ensuring they are following each state’s regulations if they plan to sell insurance in that state. How simple can that be?

And lastly, there is no mechanism in your “solution” to GUARANTEE insurance to ALL Americans regardless of current, past or even genetic defects.

And neither does the government’s.

# 119 tcc3 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 1:04 pm

111 – LL

“Free Choice” sounds great until its “Pay up or die you worthless poor person”

# 120 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 1:06 pm

#111 – Liberty,

I don’t have to excuse anyone. It is incorrect to assume that one must be in one camp or the other.

There is a camp that recognizes that the money is being taken out of our pockets now and is simply not producing useful results.

There is a camp that recognizes the trap we are in now with respect to being stuck working in jobs we may hate or working at all because no one can afford to retire.

There is a camp that recognizes that our corporations footing the bill is one of the many things crushing our economy.

You and he, if you are not the same person, are under a fatally flawed assumption.

Read The Tyranny of Dead Ideas for more information.

# 121 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 1:15 pm

#119, Don’t give me any that bleeding heart crap. Quit thinking with your emotions. Emotions don’t pay the bills.

People get care now.

Yes, the insurance companies are paying the bill.

Yes, I am paying the insurance companies.

I still haven’t seen the answer as to if we are already paying for it, why make it worse buy letting the government run it? The government couldn’t pour piss out of a boot if the instructions were on the heel. They damned sure can’t run an agency of that size.

I’ll tell you why I don’t want that — I want free choice.

# 122 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 1:23 pm

#120, I’ve read parts of it. I find his ideas intriguing. However, I find his predictions off base. The government could very well ensure catastrophe doesn’t happen by following #105 above.

Think about it. If the government could easily afford to pay for your insurance for you (as everybody claims), why can’t they just not take as much from you and let you pay for it yourself? And it would be cheaper, too, because you don’t have to pay some bureaucrat to write the check! Where is the logical fallacy in that?

# 123 tcc3 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 1:35 pm

Its only bleeding heart crap when its not your heart that’s bleeding.

# 124 eaglescout1998 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 1:35 pm

I do not believe that the problem with health care in this country is that too many people have insurance. I believe the problem is that too many people have it and use it to pay for everything. If people had to pay for the lion share of their health care from savings there would be true competiton in the marketplace and prices would drop like a rock. Insurance has made it so that people don’t care about the price.

# 125 Sea Lawyer said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 1:46 pm

#124, eaglescout, it has been suggested by others that health “insurance” shouldn’t be used to pay for routine doctor visits, just as you don’t file an auto insurance claim to pay for an oil change. I don’t know how much it really matters.

# 126 eaglescout1998 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 1:52 pm

#124, I should do a better job at proof-reading. The first sentence should read: “I do not believe that the problem with health care in this country is that too many people LACK insurance.”

# 127 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 1:54 pm

#123, My apologies. I didn’t know you were speaking literally.

I thought you meant this:

Definition of Bleeding Heart:

“A person who is considered excessively sympathetic toward those who claim to be underprivileged or exploited.”

# 128 Greg Allen said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 2:26 pm

“Public option” sounds nice but will never work.

When they get back in power, the conservatives will defund any program for the working poor.

The only reason they can’t kill social security is because everybody has invested in it.

Mandatory single-payer is the only workable model.

# 129 Greg Allen said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 2:32 pm

Liberty lover,

But all people DO NOT get care now.

Under the conservative health insurance thousands and thousand of people die each year for lack of health insurance.

http://tinyurl.com/47evf

Under the conservative system, we pay more and get less… and thousands of people needlessly die.

Your system is a disaster.

# 130 RSweeney said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 2:40 pm

Let’s see how the numbers look when people realize that Obama plans to save money by turning off your too-old mom’s oxygen machine.

Hey, all those 30+ yr old people we didn’t trust years ago are now taking all the health benefits, might as well turn them off and take a government paid vacation with the savings.

After all, we all know it will never be our turn to have the government decide we aren’t worth fixing.

# 131 Sea Lawyer said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 2:41 pm

“Mandatory single-payer is the only workable model.”

And then the government can dictate to health service providers the most they can charge, since it will be the only purchaser. What a great system of incentives you’ve got there.

# 132 Hugh Ripper said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 2:52 pm

Alfred1. Health care need not necessarily be about profitability. It can be about health care, you know. All it needs to do is break even.

# 133 qb said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 3:07 pm

Funny, I could have sworn that this guy was a bleeding heart.

# 134 qb said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 3:16 pm

#132 Hugh Ripper, you crazy devil. If you keep talking like that then the military has to start making money. Maybe police departments should be making money as well.

That only makes sense. We shouldn’t the military and police by how safe our neighborhoods are, or reduction in crime, increases in national safety, or successfully winning wars. We should judge them by their profitability.

Wow, looking it that way you realize the WW2 was a complete loser.

# 135 Holdfast said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 3:21 pm

First, a quote from 60 years ago.
“No society can legitimately call itself civilised if a sick person is denied medical aid because of lack of means.”
Aneurin Bevan

Ever heard of him? He helped create a healthcare system that, despite the best efforts of business and right wing politicians, is still working today. A lot of people in the USA think that we Brits are quiet and unlikely to argue. If the National Health Service was abolished, we would have a ***** revolution!

Is it perfect? No.
Why? To many of those politicians trying to save money and follow your system!
How can it be improved? Leave healthcare to those who actually care…

The National Health Service – the only civilised way to behave.

# 136 Hugh Ripper said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm

#134 QB – That private prison scheme is a real money maker I hear. If America only had more criminals then think of the profits!

Support the investors! Rob a 7-Eleven and / or liquor store today! Get America back on its feet!

# 137 qb said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 3:37 pm

#136 Hugh

This is all starting to make sense now. At least it’s consistent.

P.S. I apologize for my typos in a previous comment. Remember to proof, remember to proof.

# 138 t0llyb0ng said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 3:44 pm

“Where does the money in this big pot come from?”

From the money that used to be paid to private health insurers.

How much should everyone pay a month? I don’t know. 20 bucks? 40 bucks. Whatever it is.

# 139 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 3:54 pm

I see people are still arguing that the gov’t should steal even more from citizens wallets and give to them. What low life thieves.

# 140 Hugh Ripper said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 4:04 pm

#139 As opposed to insurance companies taking your money and then welching on the deal when you get sick?

The government isn’t stealing your money. You’re giving it to them with your consent. Grow a pair, Paddy, and refuse to pay your taxes.

# 141 Patrick said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 4:10 pm

# 108 Misanthropic Scott said, “You missed my post #87.”

No, I read it. You want a gov mandated system where the gov’t takes, by force if necessary, $ from my pocket to give to someone else. (Choice #1 on my list)

You didn’t give a different scenario than what I presented. Thanks for playing though.

# 142 tcc3 said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 5:07 pm

Yes Patrick, stop driving on our evil socialized roads and bridges too.

Strap on your gun and go stand a post. Heaven knows we cant steal money from citizens to pay for the military.

I hear the water main across town needs replacing. Better get the shovel.

# 143 web said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 5:16 pm

Dear leader has been watching old Logan’s Run reruns.

That’s the solution!

# 144 chuck said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 5:31 pm

A modest proposal:

Members of Congress enjoy a very cushy tax-payer funded health plan. They pay nothing into the plan and get full coverage.

I’ll go along with any Obama health-care plan that forces Congress to use the same plan as regular tax-payers, including paying the premiums themselves.

# 145 web said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 5:32 pm

# 65 RTaylor said, “The only way this will work is rationed care. No you’re not entitled to a new liver, that $50K in chemo will not be allowed because it’s only 20% successful. Americans will have to accept the fact they aren’t entitled to every option.”

But they are entitled to government provided health-care? Who makes these decisions some benevolent Washington bureaucrat?

“Due to 60 years of public education propaganda, Americans have learned to despise the word socialism, even though most doesn’t even know what it means.”

Please feel free to enlighten us. Americans are ignorant of so many things.

# 146 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 5:40 pm

118 LL

“There is no program needed. You send in your receipt and the government gives you your money back.”

Oh, really? Is that all? No vetting? No validation? No accreditation? Just send in a piece of paper and get your credit? Nice!

“I am not arguing the costs of group vs individual. I am saying treat the individual the same way you treat the group. Currently, the government gives good tax credits to employer-provided insurance. Why can’t individuals get the same response?”

No, you’re not arguing against it. But, in your fantasy land, insurance corporations believe in fairness and kindness. In the real world, they care about risk and rates of return. As I stated earlier, which you ignored, 1000 people will claim a significant portion less than a family of 4. And that is REAL MONEY we’re talking about. Not imagicnation land of fairies and insurance companies that “care.” What are you… a COMMIE?

“The state shouldn’t be doing the insuring. The insurance companies should be ensuring they are following each state’s regulations if they plan to sell insurance in that state. How simple can that be?”

Did you not just answer your own question? Are you telling me that there is no insurance company in the US that sells in more than one state?

And yes. The Federal Government SHOULD guarantee availability of health care to all. After all, the US is apparently a “modern” country. If the right to arms was written in a time of muskets and powder pouches can be assumed to include assault rifles and rocket launchers, I’m sure you can include health care as part of the fiduciary responsibility for the US Government to “protect” it’s citizens.

# 147 web said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 5:50 pm

# 135 Holdfast said, “The National Health Service – the only civilised way to behave.”

Councel Housing – The only way to live.

Where did all of this depending upon government come from? All people do is sit on their ass and cry I want, I want!

# 148 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 5:57 pm

147,

So… do you get your water from the local well? Transportation by the horse your reared from a babe? Electricity from your own generator?

No. You get it from the public good so that your money can be spent on dildo’s for you wife and tv’s and computers for yourself.

When you have guaranteed fundamental services delivered FAR BELOW the cost, the public can then support commercial enterprises that deal with everything else.

I think the term is “civilization”…

# 149 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:02 pm

#129, But all people DO NOT get care now.

But they have that option if they can get to an emergency room.

http://tinyurl.com/47evf

18,000 each year. That is 0.006% of the entire US population.

Did you know that 42,000 die each year in auto accidents? That is 0.014% of the entire US population.

#133, Funny, I could have sworn that this guy was a bleeding heart.

He was. But he didn’t advocate the government nanny the people. In fact, just the opposite — money changers were bad.

#134, Hugh Ripper, you crazy devil. If you keep talking like that then the military has to start making money. Maybe police departments should be making money as well.

Actually, they do have a budget and if they run a deficit, they lay people off. The federal government just sells bonds to the Fed who prints the money out of thin air (which is what will happen when any federal HC system starts running a deficit).

#138, “Where does the money in this big pot come from?”

From the money that used to be paid to private health insurers.

How much should everyone pay a month? I don’t know. 20 bucks? 40 bucks. Whatever it is.

In #106, you stated that not everybody had insurance. So obviously, the money we are paying now is still not enough. Where are you going to get the rest?

#146, “There is no program needed. You send in your receipt and the government gives you your money back.”

Oh, really? Is that all? No vetting? No validation? No accreditation? Just send in a piece of paper and get your credit? Nice!

It works with mandatory auto insurance.

You are missing the point. It doesn’t matter what the insurance company does or charges. You get to deduct your medical expenses right off your tax return.

Did you not just answer your own question? Are you telling me that there is no insurance company in the US that sells in more than one state?

If you have insurance bought from a company in Michigan and you vacation in Florida and have to go to the hospital, even if the insurance company doesn’t normally sell policies in Florida, you are still covered. That being said, why does it matter where my address is?

And yes. The Federal Government SHOULD guarantee availability of health care to all.

No, they shouldn’t. If I told you to go fuck yourself, you would get really upset. How can you expect me to not get upset if the government tells me to go fuck myself and pay up?

BTW . . . how did your Kool Aid session go? Are you buddies up on the cell phone tax laws yet?

# 150 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:03 pm

#148, One again, Mr. Fusion, you seem to think local and state efforts are part of the federal government’s responsibility.

# 151 Mr. Fusion said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:14 pm

Liberty Loser,

Yup. The only options are reducing taxes. Instead of fixing the problem, you want to reduce taxes.

How would a family of 4 or 5 pay that $1,000 per month for insurance with $30,000 gross income? You have a plan? Because a sizable number of ordinary Joes and Jills out there are supporting their families on less.

The median wage for hourly workers in America is $11.95 an hour. That comes to $25,000 per year. Do you really think a tax credit is going to help them?

# 152 Mr. Fusion said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:26 pm

#150, Liberty Loser,

That was Named in #148.

However, …

#149,

#129, But all people DO NOT get care now.

But they have that option if they can get to an emergency room.

Not quite. An emergency room only has to stabilize them before releasing them. Read your own link. They were 37% more likely to die if they were uninsured even when treated in an Emergency Room.

18,000 each year. That is 0.006% of the entire US population.

That is 18,000 that did not need to die. They were killed by a system that values an insurance card more than the life of a patient.

In #106, you stated that not everybody had insurance. So obviously, the money we are paying now is still not enough. Where are you going to get the rest?

I would expect to pay LESS under a government run, single payer system.

The US Health Insurance companies all run at a profit. The health costs run to almost 15% of the GDP. Most other western nations spend way under 10% GDP. You do the math.

# 153 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:29 pm

#151, Yup. The only options are reducing taxes. Instead of fixing the problem, you want to reduce taxes.

I didn’t say anything about lowering taxes. I said to stop taking so much. It’s a matter of semantics

The median wage for hourly workers in America is $11.95 an hour. That comes to $25,000 per year. Do you really think a tax credit is going to help them?

They buy what they can and expense it (perhaps a 1:1 reimbursement). Yes, the federal government takes less money, but some insurance is better than none, right? If they can’t afford the $0 copay plan, perhaps they can get catastrophic only.

# 154 LibertyLover said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:36 pm

#152, That was Named in #148.

Mr. Fusion by any other name . . . Either you are the same person or you are reading out of the same book because your comments are near identical to other posts under that name.

#129, snip

You are thinking with your emotions again.

I don’t understand your reasoning behind my having to pay for someone without insurance?

How many homeless people have you put on your couch lately?

How many empty tanks of gas have you filled up other than your own?

In #106, you stated that not everybody had insurance. So obviously, the money we are paying now is still not enough. Where are you going to get the rest?

I would expect to pay LESS under a government run, single payer system.

The US Health Insurance companies all run at a profit. The health costs run to almost 15% of the GDP. Most other western nations spend way under 10% GDP. You do the math.

So why haven’t you moved there yet? Do you really hate this country so much you want to change it?

# 155 Mr. Fusion said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:40 pm

#149, Liberty Loser,

And yes. The Federal Government SHOULD guarantee availability of health care to all.

No, they shouldn’t. If I told you to go fuck yourself, you would get really upset. How can you expect me to not get upset if the government tells me to go fuck myself and pay up?

Why shouldn’t they? Because you don’t want to contribute to America? You think you are special enough that you shouldn’t pay any taxes? When WE THE PEOPLE decide that we want something, WE THE PEOPLE, by democratic means will get it.

It is the selfishness of people like you that contributed to the financial meltdown. You don’t care what happens as long as you get your share. Some day when you grow up and get a job, you will realize that there is no one giving money away. It has to be earned.

No, you don’t work. Your answers are very simple minded and dream world like. You want us to believe you own a very profitable company yet don’t seem to understand basic attributes of a small business. The typical kid living out a fantasy in mommy’s basement.

Just another phony.

# 156 Sea Lawyer said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 7:59 pm

#155, Fusion,

Haha, it’s funny that you call somebody selfish immediately after postings “When WE THE PEOPLE decide that we want something, WE THE PEOPLE, by democratic means will get it.”

We want it, you have it, we outnumber you, so go fuck yourself you greedy asshole.

# 157 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:09 pm

149, LL,

It works with mandatory auto insurance.

So, you’re saying that there is absolutely no validation done. You just send in a paper and you get your money? In fact, there isn’t even an administration set up to handle said mail ins?

“You are missing the point. It doesn’t matter what the insurance company does or charges. You get to deduct your medical expenses right off your tax return.”

So, the insurance company says individual claims are now 1 million dollars. But the government will pay you back. And the government would claim that “hey! That’s the market rate and we’re willing to pay it.”

“If you have insurance bought from a company in Michigan and you vacation in Florida and have to go to the hospital, even if the insurance company doesn’t normally sell policies in Florida, you are still covered. That being said, why does it matter where my address is?”

Why? When on vacation, you get travel insurance. When living in your state, you get insurance built by the state regulation. What is the purpose of the state if their laws matter only in terms of corporate sign-up? Address DO matter. Unless you believe in the abolition of all state power and vest it totally within the federation.

“No, they shouldn’t. If I told you to go fuck yourself, you would get really upset. How can you expect me to not get upset if the government tells me to go fuck myself and pay up?”

If you told me to fuck myself, why would I care? You’re just another bag of meat taking up space. It’s not like you’re important to me.

Tell me, in your fantasy land of total independence… where do you get your water? Electricity? Roads? And the infrastructure that you use to type “comments” onto a blog? Is it a “society?”

“BTW . . . how did your Kool Aid session go? Are you buddies up on the cell phone tax laws yet?” No idea what you’re talking about. so… Go fuck yourself.

# 158 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:12 pm

156,

“We want it, you have it, we outnumber you, so go fuck yourself you greedy asshole.”

That is the foundation of a democracy. And it’s probably why historically not everyone could be a member. In fact, when I look over the ocean at Iraq, the Muslim Theocracy that was elected is a direct result of bringing them “democracy”.

# 159 Sea Lawyer said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:18 pm

#158,

Which is precisely why constitutions are created – to help curtail many of the shenanigans that are characteristic of democracies.

# 160 Mr. Fusion said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:21 pm

#157, Named,

Liberty Loser thinks that taxes are all evil. Just because a law is on the books about a certain activity being taxable (employer perks, including use of a car or cell phone), he feels it shouldn’t be paid. He is above the law.

It is the rational like that that has me convinced he is just another teenager wannabe fantasy land punk kid. He has no real world experience. Oh, but he wants us to believe he owns a successful small business with 40%+ profit.

# 161 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:29 pm

159,

Democracy – tyranny of the masses

Until we get a philosopher king a la Plato, it’s the best we got.

The US is an interesting case. It used to be a constitutional Republic, and now its a half-republic and half-democracy and the constitution can be put on hold for any purpose by the President. Except for the right to bear arms.

# 162 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:31 pm

160 Mr. Fusion,

If I answer you, does this confirm that we are different people, in opposition to the beliefs of “Liberty” Lover?

BTW, did you notice that his so called “emotionless” comments are so full of… well… emotion? Poor kid…

# 163 Thomas said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:54 pm

#68

I like it!

#87
The solution to your problem is not a government run program but instead changing the system so that insurance agencies sell to individuals instead of companies. If that were the case, then you could choose whatever coverage you want regardless of job. In addition, there are other solutions for dealing with the poor or unemployed. Vouchers and such can be issued so that you can still choose which system you want.

#144

> Members of Congress enjoy a
> very cushy tax-payer
> funded health plan. They
> pay nothing into the plan
> and get full coverage.

Hell, why don’t we all get that plan where we all pay nothing into it and get full coverage? It is a self-perpetuating machine!

Everyone agrees that *something* must be done to health care system and the health care coverage system. Where there is disagreement is in the implementation. There are plenty of things that can be done to improve the system that do not entail new taxes or behemoth government agencies. A monolithic government agency in charge of billions of dollars and how they are doled out to the public sounds ripe for abuse.

# 164 Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 9:03 pm

“A monolithic government agency in charge of billions of dollars and how they are doled out to the public sounds ripe for abuse.”

Depends on how you let YOUR government run it.

And, since we know that multi-billion dollar corporations have failed in their duties, its time to remove their privilege.

# 165 Uncle Patso said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:24 pm

When my mother gave birth to my siblings and me, she got to stay in the hospital two weeks each time and, amazing as it seems now, my father could actually afford it, on his salary working at a small-town lumber yard!

Imagine that! I mean, just think about that for a minute. Two weeks! On what was essentially a laborer’s salary!

What the heck happened?

Now jump forward a few decades. Earlier this year, my wife slipped and fell and broke her elbow. It seems a small thing but it was extremely painful and required outpatient surgery. Let’s see, one ER visit, one visit to the orthopedic surgeon’s office, four hours in the hospital for the repair surgery, one follow-up visit, one visit to a physical therapist, two pain prescriptions and half a dozen x-rays. I’m not sure all the bills have come in yet, but so far, if we hadn’t had good insurance, we’d be out more than we paid for our last three cars combined, more than $20,000.

Three out of five times the main person seen was a Nurse Practitioner, not a full doctor.

Yet the American Medical Association says there are too many doctors and lobbies to close some medical schools.

The doctor that treated my siblings and me (and my parents and most of my extended family and about half the people in the town) when we were children didn’t own an airplane, as far as I know. He had a nice car, but it wasn’t imported. It wasn’t even a Cadillac, if I remember correctly.

Our current family physician’s waiting room is full of magazines about amateur aerobatics.

Medicine, like so many other former services and industries, has abandoned the “fee for service” philosophy for one of money mining. No one thinks much any more about improving the product or service, only about how to maximize profit in every possible conceivable way.

I blame the business world’s adoration of Harvard MBAs. The bean-counters have taken over. Just ask JCD what that means.

I saw a newspaper headline the other day that said unexpected medical bills are behind 80% of personal bankruptcies.

Sorry for the length, but the discussion seemed a bit too theoretical and begged for some plain facts.

Here’s to your very good health!

# 166 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 2:37 am

#141 – Patrick,

You read my post? Really??!!? And, that’s your conclusion?

Wow!! You really are incapable of thought. You are also incapable of processing what you read.

After reading your posts for some time, I should not be surprised by this.

# 167 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 2:41 am

#121 – LibertyLoser,

#119, Don’t give me any that bleeding heart crap. Quit thinking with your emotions. Emotions don’t pay the bills.

People get care now.

You really believe that, don’t you?

Amazing.

Do you know what it means to get emergency room only treatment? Do you know what it means to be without preventative medicine? Do you know what it means to never enter a regular doctor’s office?

I don’t think so. I don’t think you’re capable of understanding this simple fact.

I don’t think you’re capable of noticing the effect on the nation as a whole as we pay over 16% of GDP on health care and still end up with the worst care in the developed democratic world.

# 168 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 2:45 am

#122, 105 – LibertyLoser,

You’ve obviously put a lot of thought into that. However, you have missed two points. One, I for one, prefer Obama’s plan to anything I’ve heard from the repugs. However, it is by far, not the best plan I’ve heard.

Point two, you still leave corporations in charge of health insurance. The problem with this is that they are legally bound solely to maximize shareholder profit above all else.

What does this mean for actual humans, even those lucky enough to have insurance?

It means that such corporations are legally required to deny health coverage at every possible opportunity.

If you have any kind of a medical condition, you know that this is exactly what they do. Deny. Deny. Deny.

It’s their job. And, they’re very good at it.

# 169 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 2:48 am

#127 – LibertyLoser,

Definition of Bleeding Heart:

“A person who is considered excessively sympathetic toward those who claim to be underprivileged or exploited.”

Definition of a heartless bastard:

One who does not give a shit about those who are less fortunate than him/herself, i.e. you.

# 170 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 2:52 am

#133 – qb,

Nope. It’s a little known fact that in the neocon bible, Jesus always checked for citizenship and health insurance before healing the sick.

# 171 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 2:56 am

#139 – Patrick,

I see people are still arguing that the gov’t should steal even more from citizens wallets and give to them. What low life thieves.

You’re getting robbed now … big time. You’re just too stupid to notice. We pay more now than any developed democratic nation in the world, 50% more as a percentage of GDP than the next highest country.

And, we get less.

Why are you so happy to pay the CEO of United Healthcare a $130,000,000/yr salary for denying coverage?

Perhaps if we had a better system, they’d cover that brain replacement surgery you so desperately need.

# 172 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 3:02 am

#144 – Chuck,

Good idea.

While we’re at it, let’s tie their salaries to some multiple of the median household income. That would effectively put them on commission.

We do need to take action like that to put government interest in line with those of people instead of corporations.

Unfortunately, we can’t afford to buy the number of politicians that corporations can, so we’re stuck with our corporatocracy.

# 173 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 3:05 am

#145 – web,

But they are entitled to government provided health-care? Who makes these decisions some benevolent Washington bureaucrat?

I believe such decisions should be made by a panel of citizen’s groups, health care workers, government workers, and others. I think this is how it is typically done in other countries.

Today, in the U.S. such decisions are made based on wealth of the individual.

Is that more fair? I think not.

No system covers everyone for everything. No system is perfect. The one we have today is about as far from perfect as it is possible to get.

# 174 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 3:10 am

#149 – LibertyLoser,

#129, But all people DO NOT get care now.

But they have that option if they can get to an emergency room.

Do you get all of your care in emergency rooms? Why not?

#134, Hugh Ripper, you crazy devil. If you keep talking like that then the military has to start making money. Maybe police departments should be making money as well.

I guess you’ve never heard of municipal bonds.

# 175 rf farms said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 3:15 am

If you are going to makeup numbers. Just use 99.99%.
That way maybe the 200,000,000+ who don’t want it, can feel that they are just in the 0.01% of the people.

My math is as good as the B.O.

We need to open Long Term Care places in Mexico so “IF” we send someone back to Mexico, we can still give them the best care the USA can offer.

One last part of the new health plan not talked about.
If you make under $50,000 You will get a rebate check for your time and expenses after you get your free health care visit.

# 176 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 3:16 am

#154 – LibertyLoser,

#152, That was Named in #148.

Mr. Fusion by any other name . . . Either you are the same person or you are reading out of the same book because your comments are near identical to other posts under that name.

Nice to know you can admit your mistakes and apologize for them. What a great example of personal responsibility you set.

So why haven’t you moved there yet? Do you really hate this country so much you want to change it?

Are you f___ing kidding me??!!? America Love It Or Leave It??!!? Everything the country does is right by definition? Nothing can ever be improved?

You know … I bet there were people who said the same thing around a thousand years ago.

# 177 GF said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 4:08 am

Cough, bullshit.

# 178 qb said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 5:08 am

There’s a few things I don’t get here. The US spend (% of GDP) on health care has equal portions of public and private already (1st in the world in private, 3rd in the world in public). In other words, the US already has a large public health care system – some of you make it sound like one doesn’t exist currently. Some of you derisively call other countries “socialist” who spend less in public funding per capita than the US does.

Also, neither side really talks about the costs of US health and some of the poor ratings it gets when compared to OECD nations. It doesn’t sound to me like anyone cares about the effectiveness of it. Sorry Obama supporters, I only see the odd bone thrown that way. Let’s be honest, your costs are way ahead of any other nation, are crippling your businesses and institutions, and aren’t adequately addressing the care of about 80 million people (uninsured and underinsured). The reality is that your current systems have become a large hidden tax on your corporations, large and small.

# 179 Named said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 5:20 am

178 qb,

It seems that facts are the second most hated thing in the US… After Mexicans/Blacks/Arabs.

# 180 Mr. Fusion said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 5:25 am

#165, Uncle Pat,

I blame the business world’s adoration of Harvard MBAs. The bean-counters have taken over.

Oh so very true. I never thought an accountant would hold the power of who lives and dies, but, …

I hope Aunty is feeling better. My best to her.

# 181 Mr. Fusion said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 5:42 am

#178, qb,

The reality is that your current systems have become a large hidden tax on your corporations, large and small.

The truth is very few people realize how big a tax is already being paid by private corporations. That is one of the costs that has injured the auto makers (and all our manufacturing) so much.

The truth is we know about the cost. It is accepted, along with the inefficiency, inequity, and burdens by so many because anything else would be socialism. And in America, the only thing less palatable than socialism, is communism. You will notice how so many of the right wing nuts automatically trot out the “s” word to refute a point.

Good point though, something others have nibbled around the edges of.

# 182 Mr. Fusion said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 5:45 am

RE 181,

Second paragraph, first sentence should have read:

The truth is we know about the cost IN society.

My apologies.

# 183 Named said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 6:03 am

181 Mr. Fusion
“The truth is very few people realize how big a tax is already being paid by private corporations. That is one of the costs that has injured the auto makers (and all our manufacturing) so much.”

Well known that Toyota enjoyed opening up a plant in Canada since health costs are assumed by the nation / province and not the corp.

# 184 LibertyLover said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 6:12 am

#155, Why shouldn’t they? Because you don’t want to contribute to America?

I do contribute to America. I own a company that feeds 30 mouths. How many do you feed?

It is the selfishness of people like you

If your wife were dying of cancer and you had the money to save her but that money could be used to save the lives of 10 other people, would you let your wife die to save those other 10?

If you can truthfully say yes, then I will accept your definition of “selfish.” Until then, you know not of what you speak.

Named said, on June 22nd, 2009 at 8:09 pm

149,So, you’re saying that there is absolutely no validation done. You just send in a paper and you get your money? In fact, there isn’t even an administration set up to handle said mail ins?

How does the federal government verify income and deductions now? That’s a trick question. You have to have an income in order to file a tax return.

Think logically for a moment. That’s what the insurance is for. You get any money you spent on your premiums returned to you. Perhaps I wasn’t clear.

States recognize each other’s driver’s licenses. It’s called cooperation, not protectionism.

If you told me to fuck myself, why would I care? You’re just another bag of meat taking up space. It’s not like you’re important to me.

Ah, so my opinion doesn’t matter. Only yours. Nice rebuttal.

“BTW . . . how did your Kool Aid session go? Are you buddies up on the cell phone tax laws yet?” No idea what you’re talking about. so… Go fuck yourself.

Sure you do. You are really Mr. Fusion.

#158, That is the foundation of a democracy.

Sadly, that is what this country has become. It is supposed to be a republic.

#160, Liberty [Loser] thinks that taxes are all evil.

Nope, just federal taxes that allow the federal government to usurp more power than they are allowed.

but he wants us to believe he owns a successful small business with 40%+ profit.

Nope, I’m happy with 25%.

#162, If I answer you, does this confirm that we are different people, in opposition to the beliefs of “Liberty” Lover?

Nope, it just proves you will go to any length to convince people your two names are two different people. I don’t believe it.

#169, How many homeless people have you put on your couch this week? How many empty tanks of gas have you filled up? How much time did you donate to social causes last year?

You and Fusion/Named seem to think the definition of sympathy is forcing someone else to do your charity work for you.

#170, Nope. It’s a little known fact that in the neocon bible, Jesus always checked for citizenship and health insurance before healing the sick.

Nice twist.

Actually, he didn’t ask other people to do it for him. He did it himself.

#174, I guess you’ve never heard of municipal bonds.

Yes, and they have to be approved by the citizens before they are sold. The Fed prints them willy-nilly.

#176, So why haven’t you moved there yet? Do you really hate this country so much you want to change it?

Are you f___ing kidding me??!!? America Love It Or Leave It??!!? Everything the country does is right by definition? Nothing can ever be improved?

Sure, it could be improved, but your method of improvement is not right. These other countries are already doing what you want. Wouldn’t it be easier to just move there?

# 185 Named said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 6:39 am

184, LL,

I think you’re missing the point here…
“Think logically for a moment. That’s what the insurance is for. You get any money you spent on your premiums returned to you. Perhaps I wasn’t clear.”

You claimed that individuals should get the same benefit that employers get with regards to tax write offs for health insurance. But, as I explained earlier, insurance companies prefer to deal with a business because the pool is larger and the likelyhood of 100% claim rate is nil. A family of four would defintely claim 100%. So, you give a tax break or credit. Wonderful. The premium is 35000 dollars for the year. should you just take out a loan for the premium and then hope you get it back with your income filing? You haven’t really thought this through.

“States recognize each other’s driver’s licenses. It’s called cooperation, not protectionism.”
Ah, so the drivers license infrastructure is exactly the same as insurance registration, claims and hosptial treatment? Oh, no it’s not. But, I guess when you need a sophistic argument you go with whats available.

“Ah, so my opinion doesn’t matter. Only yours. Nice rebuttal.”

Did I say MY opinion mattered? Nope. You’re taking too much of a shine to me. Which I understand. But remember this: opinions are like assholes – that’s your opinion and you’re an asshole. (well, you’re not REALLY an asshole)…

“Sure you do. You are really Mr. Fusion.”

Actually, no I DON’T know what you’re talking about. But, I’ll let you have your little game.

I appreciate your concern of big bad government getting in your way, but it’s YOUR government. You can mold it in the shape it should be. Corporations are the ones shaping your government now, and that’s why your country is fucked up WRT health care, or the lack thereof. What you fail to believe is that your government is a “good thing.” It is. Put the citizens welfare at the forefront like it deserves and let the business fight it out like they should.

# 186 LibertyLover said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 7:15 am

#185, So, you give a tax break or credit. Wonderful. The premium is 35000 dollars for the year. should you just take out a loan for the premium and then hope you get it back with your income filing? You haven’t really thought this through.

There are state regulations that limit the size of the premiums to prevent that from happening.

“States recognize each other’s driver’s licenses. It’s called cooperation, not protectionism.”
Ah, so the drivers license infrastructure is exactly the same as insurance registration,

Why is it fanatics always use straw men to try and bolster their arguments?

Sigh. If states can cooperate with driver’s licenses, then then can surely learn to cooperate on other issues. There. Did that help?

Put the citizens welfare at the forefront like it deserves and let the business fight it out like they should.

I agree. And I agree with the problem of large corporations. However, having the government do what is clearly a private industry practice is not the answer. The government, not once, has ever successfully ran a bureaucracy of the size proposed.

# 187 Patrick said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 7:23 am

# 171 Misanthropic Scott said, “You’re getting robbed now … big time.”

Yep, I don’t need even more hands of low life types in my pockets. Are you for the gov stealing even MORE $ from the citizens via this?

# 188 Patrick said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 7:24 am

# 142 tcc3 said, “Yes Patrick, stop driving on our evil socialized roads and bridges too. ”

Grow a brain. I pay via gas taxes.

# 189 Named said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 7:41 am

186 LL,

You make two contradictory comments. I like it.

“There are state regulations that limit the size of the premiums to prevent that from happening.”
and
“Sigh. If states can cooperate with driver’s licenses, then then can surely learn to cooperate on other issues. There. Did that help?”

Under which regulation then? See the issue? And that is divisive. And states want money too. Lots of money.

“The government, not once, has ever successfully ran a bureaucracy of the size proposed.”
To coin a phrase…. CITATION NEEDED. Too vague and far reaching a claim to be considered seriously.

Guess I’ll see you on the other health insurance thread?

# 190 LibertyLover said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 8:08 am

#189, You make two contradictory comments. I like it.

Only because you refuse to see past the party line.

Under which regulation then?

Google “state insurance premium regulations”.

You’ll get way more information than you need.

“The government, not once, has ever successfully ran a bureaucracy of the size proposed.”
To coin a phrase…. CITATION NEEDED. Too vague and far reaching a claim to be considered seriously.

If you don’t know that, no amount of proof is going to convince you.

Guess I’ll see you on the other health insurance thread?

Absolutely!

# 191 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 8:11 am

#187 – Patrick,

# 171 Misanthropic Scott said, “You’re getting robbed now … big time.”

Yep, I don’t need even more hands of low life types in my pockets. Are you for the gov stealing even MORE $ from the citizens via this?

You’re still missing the point. It’s the CEO of United Healthcare earning $130,000,000/yr who is robbing you blind.

Would you rather give $30,000/yr to him for insurance that won’t cover most conditions or $20,000/yr to the government to get better coverage and as a side effect cover the 67,000,000 uninsured and underinsured?

For my money, I’d rather spend less, get more, and get everyone covered. This is not a pipe dream; it’s reality in every other developed democratic nation in the world.

Let’s join the civilized countries.

# 192 Mr. Fusion said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 8:49 am

#186, Liberty Loser,

Why is it fanatics always use straw men to try and bolster their arguments?

Like this one?

From #184,

If your wife were dying of cancer and you had the money to save her but that money could be used to save the lives of 10 other people, would you let your wife die to save those other 10?

# 193 Mr. Fusion said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 9:07 am

#190, Liberty Loser,

“The government, not once, has ever successfully ran a bureaucracy of the size proposed.”
To coin a phrase…. CITATION NEEDED. Too vague and far reaching a claim to be considered seriously.

If you don’t know that, no amount of proof is going to convince you.

So the DoD is not well run? Why do you hate our troops.

Every other nation in the Western World has a national health insurance program of some sort. Not one of them is about to go bankrupt, not even Iceland. All their citizens enjoy a better health care system than does the average American. All of them have a longer life expectancy and lower infant mortality than does America.

They can not only do it, but do it well, and for some unknown reason you don’t think Americans can do it? Why do you hate America?

BTW, I have only gotten great service from our local, State run BMV. The only licensing office I ever had a difficult time with was privately owned.

When I called the State Revenue service last year I was on hold for a half hour. It was during tax season but they cleared up the problem right away; in less than 10 minutes. Yesterday I spent over an hour on the phone with my mortgage company about an error they made. Nope, I didn’t get it fixed.

In fact I can’t think of a bad experience I’ve had with government. Well, my bro-in-law had a hard time getting a building permit once. As soon as he called the Sheriff and said the guy was looking for a bribe did the application get signed. He did it in front of the registrar. Of course my bro-in-law got shafted by the electrician who quit in the middle of the job and wanted full pay. Yup, more private enterprise at work.

So what have you been screwed out of because of bad government?

# 194 Named said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 9:18 am

190, Liberty Lawyer

“Google “state insurance premium regulations”.

You’ll get way more information than you need.”

Yes. But none of it related to what you imagine to happen.

# 195 tankfixer said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 9:51 am

Appoligies to John, Paul, George and Ringo

One, two, three, four…
Hrmm!
One, two, (one, two, three, four!)

Let me tell you how it will be;
There’s one for you, nineteen for me.
‘Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

Should five per cent appear too small,
Be thankful I don’t take it all.
‘Cause I�m the taxman,
Yeah, I�m the taxman.

(if you drive a car, car;) – I’ll tax the street;
(if you try to sit, sit;) – I’ll tax your seat;
(if you get too cold, cold;) – I’ll tax the heat;
(if you take a walk, walk;) – I’ll tax your feet.

Taxman!

‘Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

Don’t ask me what I want it for, (ah-ah, mister Wilson)
If you don’t want to pay some more. (ah-ah, mister heath)
‘Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

Now my advice for those who die, (taxman)
Declare the pennies on your eyes. (taxman)
‘Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

And you’re working for no one but me.

Taxman!

# 196 LibertyLover said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 9:56 am

#191, You’re still missing the point. It’s the CEO of United Healthcare earning $130,000,000/yr who is robbing you blind.

The man is getting paid quite well for making the stockholders happy.

Him. If you don’t understand that, you are not American.

And don’t get me started on the 20k. The government can’t tie their shoelaces for that.

#192, Why is it fanatics always use straw men to try and bolster their arguments?

Like this one?

From #184,

If your wife were dying of cancer and you had the money to save her but that money could be used to save the lives of 10 other people, would you let your wife die to save those other 10?

That is a very valid argument and not a straw man.

You claim selfishness is not helping others. What’s to say they money you take away from someone can’t be put to good use elsewhere. Put your money where your mouth is. Say you would let your wife die.

So the DoD is not well run?

Nope. $600 hammers?

Every other nation in the Western World has a national health insurance program of some sort.

And every other nation in the Western World has or had a King. Why can’t you think for yourself and stop wanting to be like everybody else. If everybody was jumping off a bridge, would you?

You still haven’t answered my question about why you just don’t move there if it’s the paradise you say it is.

So what have you been screwed out of because of bad government?

50% of my hard earned money.

#194,

“Google “state insurance premium regulations”.

You’ll get way more information than you need.”

Yes. But none of it related to what you imagine to happen.

Take a reading class.

# 197 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 10:21 am

#196 – LibertyLover,

#191, You’re still missing the point. It’s the CEO of United Healthcare earning $130,000,000/yr who is robbing you blind.

The man is getting paid quite well for making the stockholders happy.

Yes. By not providing health care.

Him. If you don’t understand that, you are not American.

And don’t get me started on the 20k. The government can’t tie their shoelaces for that.

Simple math. The next highest paying country pays 1/3 less of their GDP for health coverage and does cover all of their citizens.

Is Germany so much better than the U.S. in your mind?

If not, why is it that they cover everyone for 1/3 less than we pay to NOT cover everyone?

And, why do they get better results?

The answer is simple. The CEO of United Healthcare (and all employees of all health insurance companies in the U.S.) are tasked with NOT providing coverage. It’s their job. They do it well. Why would we want to pay for a company that does not want to cover us for anything?

# 198 LibertyLover said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 10:30 am

#197, So what you are saying is the German Government is better than America’s and the corporations combined?

# 199 Sea Lawyer said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 10:52 am

#196, LL, “You claim selfishness is not helping others. What’s to say they money you take away from someone can’t be put to good use elsewhere.”

And that is what we refer to as the Broken Window Fallacy.

# 200 LibertyLover said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 11:07 am

Maybe you’re right.

I just can’t seem to get it across that taking someone’s money for their own uses reduces the spending power of everyone.

# 201 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 12:22 pm

#198 – LibertyLover,

#197, So what you are saying is the German Government is better than America’s and the corporations combined?

No. I’m saying that the German government is doing a better job providing health care than our insurance companies are.

We haven’t given our government a chance to see how they will do. We The Idiots ™ seem to prefer staying with a known broken system to trying something that may fix it.

# 202 LibertyLover said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 12:31 pm

#201, And this takes me back to my original question, if it is that important to you, why aren’t you over there?

# 203 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 12:34 pm

#202 – LibertyLoser,

A) Immigration into the EU is not that simple.
B) I’d like to see things get fixed here.
C) I have actually considered Canada. There are practical implications in leaving one’s country.
D) Why am I explaining my life and motives to a loser who can’t tell when his money is being stolen?

# 204 LibertyLover said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 1:04 pm

#203,
A) Immigration into the EU is not that simple.

Actually, in 2005 Germany made it easier if you have a good education.

Assuming you do, it would be pretty simple now.

B) I’d like to see things get fixed here.

I would, too. Unfortunately, the cure most people have in mind is worse than the disease.

D) Why am I explaining my life and motives to a loser who can’t tell when his money is being stolen?

Mine’s not being stolen. I only pay about $100/mth through my company.

Be that as it may, I am really curious. I keep hearing everybody complain about how bad it is here and how good it is over there and I just for the life of me can’t figure out why more people aren’t moving there. What is the reason so many people come to the US vs Germany. If it’s so bad, why do they still come?

# 205 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 1:24 pm

#204 – LibertyLover,

Mine’s not being stolen. I only pay about $100/mth through my company.

A decent family plan costs about $30,000/yr. If you have a family plan, your company is paying the other $28,800. If that is the case, it is another $28,800 they could be paying you in salary.

So, whether you ever get to see the money first or not, you are indeed being robbed.

# 206 LibertyLover said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 1:41 pm

#205, We are not paying $30,000/yr. I should know because I own the company. It is ~$100/mth/person. The company picks up the other half.

That is some kind of propaganda to scare people.

# 207 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 3:16 pm

#206 – LL,

Maybe insurance is cheaper where you live. I couldn’t find a decent family plan for under $30K/yr when I searched for myself without a company in the picture. I pay more than you do now with my company paying the lion’s share.

# 208 soundwash said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 3:26 pm

It’s a NY Times Poll, of course it supports the Bamster.

a more reliable Rasmussen poll
has Americans divided evenly

“44% of Americans say the Obama administration should wait on health care reform until the economy improves.

43% say health care reform should move ahead now, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of 10,000 adults nationwide. Twelve percent (12%) are not sure which course is best.

Some of my points
A) No matter what your opinion it is INSANE to design the plan when there
is a power vacuum in all three houses
of government. especially when you have corrupt folks from the 90’s who helped create the current financial crisis playing a role in writing it.

Debating something this important over summer recess guarantees underhanded
tactics will ensue.

I’ll bet a Dollar that when the final
draft is printed up for the senate to
read, a NEW crisis will emerge which of course, will require that everybody vote
“Yes” without reading it.. in keeping with the “Never let a crisis go to waste
theme”

b) the entitlement crowd will abuse the crap out any system we come with. they
already abuse the crap out of the current medicaid system. you MUST have this addressed. -same goes for the majority
of vendors that file medicaid claims

c) the rest of the planet is rapidly moving out of any and all holdings they
have in USD’s. -Unlike us mind numb Americans, everyone else knows our
dollar is about to collapse.

No matter how much obama says the
plan is funded, it wont make a hill of
beans difference when 70% of our
medical supplies/materials are imported and imports cost jump 1000% or more
from a worthless dollar.

d) when has any president or congress
in recent history kept their word on the cost of a plan or how it is to be payed
for?

e) as always, if we could stop the
rampant corruption racing through the
all levels of federal government we
would have plenty of surplus to fund this
and a whole lot more..

f) we are bankrupt as a country “right now” the only good argument FOR universal
care is that by next year 50% will be unemployed because of this year’s
“October surprise” -so yeah, we’ll need
it now because half the country will be
without health care (or dead from phase two of the swine flu scam)

rasmussen poll

-s

# 209 LibertyLover said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 3:31 pm

#207, I’m in Texas. Where are you at?

30k/yr. That’s a lot. The cheapest we could find was 8k/yr if we went straight to the insurance company. And I’m a tobacco user.

With prices that high, you are either extremely well educated and can charge a lot for your services or your company has a large billable staff behinds the scenes paying your salary.

In either case, you are obviously in high demand. It must feel good to know that.

# 210 Mr. Fusion said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 7:22 pm

#196, Liberty Loser,

So the DoD is not well run?

Nope. $600 hammers?

I guess you have never sold anything to the military. A few years ago I got into a contract to equip some refurbished Army trucks with new seat belts. My boss disparately tried to stop the deal. Marketing over rode him and the sale was on. Seat belts that would have sold for $40 became $150+ items. Simply because we had to do all the testing to their standards with full verification of each step. I spent hours compiling paperwork, test data, third party data, country of origin, etc to satisfy their requirements.

If the contract was on-going the per unit costs would have lessened, but the result would still be we had to prove that our product would work. No, this is not a bad policy. An pilot doesn’t want to discover at 45,000 feet that something doesn’t work, the soldier doesn’t want to find out while under enemy fire that something doesn’t work when it is needed the most, and the Navy just doesn’t want to ever find out it doesn’t work.

So while a $600 hammer sounds silly, it works and will do the job. Second, you don’t know what the requirements of that hammer were or the specifications it was made to.

# 211 Mr. Fusion said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 7:32 pm

#196, Liberty Loser,

And every other nation in the Western World has or had a King. Why can’t you think for yourself and stop wanting to be like everybody else. If everybody was jumping off a bridge, would you?

In case you didn’t stay awake in history class, at one time so did America. Most European countries have gotten rid of their monarchies are diminished them to ceremonial roles only. There is not one monarch in Europe today with any real power.

Another weak, desperate argument.

“So what have you been screwed out of because of bad government”?

50% of my hard earned money.

And now you are trying to suggest the government took 50% of your money? Riiiiight !!! [/sarcam]

Typical, you right wing nuts can’t tell us what onerous taxes Obama has imposed upon you (note, the tobacco tax was just signed Friday and doesn’t take effect for some time yet) and then you claim ridiculous amounts like that.

You see this is the type of argument that gives you away as a poser. All rhetoric and no substance. Straight out of the Liebertarian handbook.

# 212 Sea Lawyer said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 7:45 pm

#210, Fusion,

Yep, that is definitely a major source of the reason why procurement contracts in DoD looked ridiculous from the outside. Instead of just buying a hammer off the shelf, they would contract the creation of a special milspec hammer. There were some pretty extensive overhauls to the contracting and procurement policies for DoD in the 90’s, and I’m pretty sure Al Gore was quite involved in pushing the issue. Much credit to him for that.

# 213 gtrogue said, on June 23rd, 2009 at 9:50 pm

#151. That’s an easy one. If you only make $30,000/yr you shouldn’t have a family of four.

I lost my job in February. I have enough money to continue living my normal life, without any cuts, for the next 1.5 years without earning a single penny during that time. I am currently paying for my own insurance. I can do all of these things because I made good, responsible decisions about my life. Because of those decisions I don’t need handouts.

If anybody thinks that government run healthcare would be cheaper you really need to get your heads examined. When the government needs money it has only two choices- cut services or raise taxes. When you cut services it means you have to take money from other services or you have to cut the services offered for care (or quality). Since the government has a very difficult time cutting services once they have been added, they have to raise taxes. Since costs are always increasing (Medicare is more expensive today than it was 10 years ago) we have a situation where taxes will continue to creep up indefinitely.
I currently pay about $400/month for my health insurance. The gov. took more than that out of my paycheck every month for Social Security. An relatively small increase in my tax rate would also result in me paying more for insurance. We only need to look at our European brothers to see how socialist programs ramp up taxes. Many of them are paying 50% or more of their income in taxes, and these aren’t the guys making >$250,000/yr. I have a Dutch friend that makes $75,000/yr and pays 50% of it in income taxes off the top.

One other thing. I really don’t understand why Europeans have anything to say about this issue. The USA isn’t Europe. This country was founded by people who did not want to be European and follow the European ways. The Europeans are jealous of America’s success and feel the need to drag us down to their level.

# 214 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 24th, 2009 at 3:22 am

#209 – LibertyLover,

#207, I’m in Texas. Where are you at?

New York. Such a difference in costs also lobbies for a national plan.

# 215 LibertyLover said, on June 24th, 2009 at 4:02 am

#213, New York. Such a difference in costs also lobbies for a national plan.

Or perhaps you should consider moving. People move all the time for economic reasons. I used to live in another state and moved to Texas because the COL was lower.

# 216 Mr. Fusion said, on June 24th, 2009 at 6:13 am

#212, SL,

Instead of just buying a hammer off the shelf, they would contract the creation of a special milspec hammer.

A hammer is not just a hammer. Unless you know the requirements of the hammer there is no legitimate criticism. For example, and I’m pulling this out my ass, the hammer might have been non-conducting, be a certain weight, have a hitting face with specific characteristics, an energy limiter on the handle, etc. In short, we don’t know even what this hammer was to be used for.

As for the DoD’s requirements, I notice you totally lost the argument when you instituted Gore’s name to blame.

# 217 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 24th, 2009 at 6:44 am

#214 – LL,

The cost of living may be lower, but likely so is the income level. If my percentage disposable income remains the same, it leaves me with a higher number of dollars, which makes travel easier.

Of course, nothing is easy right now …

# 218 LibertyLover said, on June 24th, 2009 at 7:57 am

#217, What do you do for a living?

# 219 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 24th, 2009 at 9:38 am

#218, Are you trying to track me down? I’m a geek.

# 220 LibertyLover said, on June 24th, 2009 at 11:40 am

#219, I have nothing but geeks working for me (I’m the Head Geek In Charge). I’m always looking for talent and I don’t really care what their politics are as long as the can do their job.

# 221 Sea Lawyer said, on June 24th, 2009 at 1:03 pm

#126, Fusion, who was blaming Gore? I was giving him credit for pushing the regulatory reforms that happened. I still remember him going on Letterman when he was running for VP in 1992 and demonstrating the $100 (I’ve made that number up obviously) ashtrays that the government was required to buy. Things are MUCH better than they used to be.

# 222 Sea Lawyer said, on June 24th, 2009 at 1:03 pm

Above was directed at #216.

# 223 Sea Lawyer said, on June 24th, 2009 at 1:10 pm

#216, and yes, of course, if you really need a specially made hammer, then that is what you need. But if you are just hammering nails for a construction project, then any old hammer will likely do. The problem was that everything that was procured had to be specced, which greatly increased the costs, as you very accurately detailed. But that mandatory requirement is no longer in place these days.

# 224 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 24th, 2009 at 1:22 pm

#220 – LL,

I’ll keep that in mind. Thanks.

# 225 Uncle Patso said, on June 25th, 2009 at 3:00 am

225th!

# 180 Mr. Fusion said, in part:

“I hope Aunty is feeling better. My best to her.”

Much better; thank you kindly.

# 226 Mr. Fusion said, on June 25th, 2009 at 5:53 am

#223, SL,

As I understand, there are three levels of specs. The first are consumer items which must be the same as what is sold to consumers. Things such as bar soap and food. These are generally “off the shelf” items for general use.

The next level are items for government use and must meet higher, stricter requirements. Uniforms, writing pens and paper, desks, furniture, etc.

The third are mission critical use. Everything used in an airplane is mission critical. I remember Senator Proxmire (sp) years ago railed about the $600 ashtray without mentioning how it had to meet this requirement. As I recall these ashtrays were for use in very long range patrol aircraft and the number required was very few.

All civilian aircraft are under similar requirements, only they get more a little more leeway as they can transfer the item over many planes.

# 227 Patrick said, on June 26th, 2009 at 11:25 am

# 191 Misanthropic Scott said, “You’re still missing the point. It’s the CEO of United Healthcare earning $130,000,000/yr who is robbing you blind.”

Nope, not if I’m not buying. My choice, not yours. YOU are missing the point about freedom and why this country was founded in the 1st place…

# 228 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 26th, 2009 at 11:54 am

#227 – Patrick,

So, are you honestly saying you do not have health insurance?

I would think you’d be smart enough to select a plan from among those Radio Shack is offering this year.

If it’s not United Healthcare robbing you blind, then it’s BC/BS or Aetna or CIGNA or some other health insurance company. I’m sure yours also pays the CEO an obscene amount of money for the express purpose of denying health care to their insureds.

http://tinyurl.com/6d8jww

# 229 Patrick said, on June 26th, 2009 at 12:44 pm

#228 Address the point Scott. It is NOT the gov’s job to tell what I must buy for my personal use. Face it your argument is having the Fed gov do something that is blatantly unconstitutional. If you can’t address my point don’t bother typing.

# 230 Misanthropic Scott said, on June 28th, 2009 at 9:07 am

#229 – PatDick,

That’s funny as all hell. You ignore my point while asserting that I have ignored yours. You’re an even bigger ass than I thought.

Do you or do you not have health insurance?

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!