MANDATORY health insurance

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Google "log cabin Republicans" and "teabagging." You'll see the real lack of maturity from the other side.

What, I'm not allowed to call someone an asshole without making it even by calling someone on the other side an asshole, too?

At this moment, in this thread, about this topic, I don't care what crass, immature jokes some leftwingers made about the rightwingers. I'm talking about Rush Limbaugh making a gay joke about Barney Frank.
 
Both sides do. But anyone who thinks the Democratic Party (as shown wonderfully by Earnie just now) doesn't should think again.

I'm pretty sure Earnie isn't a Democrat. In fact I would even say he's never voted Democratic in his life...and probably never plans to do so. ;)
 
So since I listen to Rush on occasion, I'm stupid (no, wait, "very very" stupid), I'm unable to think, my Christian faith should be questioned, and I'm just not a good person? That's what I'm reading.

Denial and anger are the first steps in the grieving process...keep going though...you can get past your Rush love, you really can. :hug:

;)
 
As I see it, taking a broad view of things, there are two basic problems in this country when it comes to healthcare.

#1. We have no real mechanism for caring for the sick. The insurance industry does not exist to take care of sick people. It exists to assist the healthy. It only makes sense--the insurance model works only as long as people are paying in more than the company pays out. But we've come to depend on insurance not only to help us out when we get sick, but also to cover all the other health-related expenses. Chronic illness is not a profitable model for an insurance company.

#2. The cost of routine and preventative care has gotten so exorbitant that it's outside the range of many people's budgets. Routine and preventative car for your car, for example is much cheaper. We need to find a way to make routine and preventative care affordable.

I'm more and more convinced that insurance isn't the solution for anything beyond catastrophic care. The insurance companies aren't really effective for us (or profitable for them--unless they routinely deny care to those who need it) for anything else.

I've also been thinking about this whole diefication of the free market. One of the things that frustrates me about conservatives (on this board and beyond) is their seeming belief in the goodness of the free market, and their unwillingness to acknowledge that no system is perfect, and that capitalism has some pretty serious flaws of its own. The biggest flaw as I see it is the very thing that makes it so effective--it harnesses human ambition (some might say human greed). The thing is just because it works doesn't mean its inherently good. Capitalism does not, for example, have anything to do with the teachings of say, Jesus Christ (apologies to non-Christians here). His teachings are about what we should be. The free market deals with the way we ARE.

It is vital to acknowledge the limits and moral dangers of the free market, because I believe there is an ethical and an unethical way to engage in business. There's nothing wrong with trying to make a profit--there is something wrong with taking that effort to maximize profits to the point where you are hurting the people you are supposed to be providing a service to and/or the people who work for you. There are always ways to cut costs and maximize profits but not all of those ways are right. It seems much of the modern business world does not see such a distinction--increased profit by itself is the ultimate and only good. And many conservatives ape this thinking without fully considering its ramifications.

We have decided as a society that education is something that should not be limited to those who can afford it. We've taken it outside of the free market arena (with varying degrees of success, I admit. After government-run programs have their own set of problems, also having to do with human nature). I think it may be time to do the same with health care.

And if education could be a model, perhaps we might find a solution. You have public schools, you have private schools for-profit, and private schools that are non-profits. My feeling is that the worst of the three is the for-profit school. These schools can often end up sacrificing what is best for the students for what will maximize the bottom line. Our school was a non-profit, and of course we had to be competitive, to stay in business--we needed to bring in more students, and provide topnotch education, but that was for the purpose of keeping our doors open and serving our students, not for the purpose of enriching stockholders.

Could we have a health care system with public, private for-profit, and private non-profit options?

Interesting post. We may not ultimately reach the same conclusions but at least I understand how you've reached yours.
You've demonstrated that you've given the subject much thought and I, for one, appreciate it.
 
Interesting post. We may not ultimately reach the same conclusions but at least I understand how you've reached yours.
You've demonstrated that you've given the subject much thought and I, for one, appreciate it.

Thanks, INDY. As I said, before, though it may not always seem like it, I AM glad you're around FYM. A mutual congratulation society isn't so much fun and it certainly wouldn't provoke me to do the kind of thinking I have done on this issue over the past few days.
 
there should't be any for-profit private insurance companies. The idea of profit and industry should never be a part of the healthcare discussion. There should only ever be one motive in healthcare, and that's healing people or preventing them from getting sick in the first place. Money shouldn't come into it. Ever.
So... if you can throw a baseball 95 MPH then, "Here's your $10 million per year." If you wanna be a trail lawyer and sue doctors then "No caps on settlements, go get what you can from that jury," and if you have nice cheekbones and wanna play a doctor on TV then "Here's your $100,000 per episode." But the men and women that actually save lives with their hands and heal the sick with their compassion. Well it's a nice slap on the back, a pair of scrubs with your name on them and meager little salary for your efforts.

That'll certainly ease the enrollement crush for med schools which will lessen the number of providers which will lead to ipso facto rationing.

Well, that's one way to decrease how much we spend on healthcare.

This is why I hate the argument that for-profit health insurance companies are necessary because they create competition and competition breeds research and innovation.
Even though that's exactly what happens as the U.S. leads the world in innovations and new technologies.
The motivation should be to ultimately live in a world where there's no such thing as a terminal disease or an incurable disease, not to make a buck.

Then how would funeral homes and gravediggers "make a buck"?
 
So... if you can throw a baseball 95 MPH then, "Here's your $10 million per year." If you wanna be a trail lawyer and sue doctors then "No caps on settlements, go get what you can from that jury," and if you have nice cheekbones and wanna play a doctor on TV then "Here's your $100,000 per episode." But the men and women that actually save lives with their hands and heal the sick with their compassion. Well it's a nice slap on the back, a pair of scrubs with your name on them and meager little salary for your efforts.

Oh yeah, our doctors in Canada are all receiving "meager" little salaries. Like family/general practitioners who were earning on average $203K in Ontario 8 years ago. Boy, they're sure in the effin' poor house, I don't even know how they manage to eat on a daily basis.

And most "trial lawyers" don't make big bucks, either. It's the corporate guys who are well compensated, and I would sort of think that, you know, it's one thing to expect a corporation like Microsoft or IBM to be paying their lawyers $950/hr, but maybe we shouldn't expect a 67-year-old diabetic to foot that sort of bill....I mean, maybe it's just me??
 
A little much, don't you think? I mean, really, that's quite unnecessary.

I don't think so. If you fall for his propaganda, you're not that bright, and if you believe his hate, then yeah, you're a complete, total, utter dick. Sure, that's not every listener, and I apologise for sweeping it that wide, but for those who are that moronic that they believe they've got a Nazi Socialist Muslim president destroying their freedoms by first shaking up their Best in the World (ahem, 37th best) health care system, and then continue to laugh along at the following gay jokes, then umm, yeah, no apologies to those people. They're at best woefully ignorant, and at worst.... never mind.
 
If you listen to Keith Olbermann or go to the Daily Kos, you really don't deserve to be alive. See? I can do it, too. And you see how stupid something like that sounds, Earnie?

Well, saying someone doesn't deserve to be alive is a *tad* extreme, but yeah, if someone said to you that they believe everything Olbermann says unquestionably, (and I think he's dumb and his show a waste of time, but not anywhere near as rabidly hateful as Rush, nor do I think he plays on his audience in any similar way), then I'm totally fine with you calling them stupid.

I actually don't like Olbermann specificaly because his show in style and content skates too close to the right wing dumb/hate media echo chamber. But he's still no Hannity, Beck or Limbaugh.
 
Both sides do. But anyone who thinks the Democratic Party (as shown wonderfully by Earnie just now) doesn't should think again.

If you listen to Keith Olbermann or go to the Daily Kos, you really don't deserve to be alive. See? I can do it, too. And you see how stupid something like that sounds, Earnie?



can you do anything other than get offended?
 
you know, it's one thing to expect a corporation like Microsoft or IBM to be paying their lawyers $950/hr, but maybe we shouldn't expect a 67-year-old diabetic to foot that sort of bill....I mean, maybe it's just me??


if people were responsible and thought ahead, then they'd have these kinds of savings in their Health Savings Accounts.

because that's what gets us the best health care in the world.
 
Even though that's exactly what happens as the U.S. leads the world in innovations and new technologies.

I'm not going to even touch your salary portion of this post because it's ridiculous and anitram has pretty much showed you why...

But under your plan all innovation would disappear. You want to eliminate 3 rd parties that allow inflated cost so big pharma and device companies can afford their huge salaries and research, you hate government grants, and if everyone was waiting underneath a healthcare savings fund innovation would be gone. I don't know how you can't see this?
 
Do you ever get tired of defending this asshole? I mean isn't there a point when your moral conscious kicks in and says this guy isn't worth defending sometimes?

Where was I defending what he said? What he said was immature. Happy? I was making a point that both sides engage in stupid 13-year old tactics. Like the whole "teabagging" thing? Ridiculous...

Do you think I agree with 100% of everything he says? Well I don't, so wise up.

can you do anything other than get offended?

Excuse you, but when someone suggests that I'm stupid, potentially hijacking Christianity for political reasons, and "just not a good person" because I listen to Rush Limbaugh, then I have a problem with that. Somehow I get the feeling that if I had said when Earnie said, substituting Rush for Olbermann or Jon Stewart or God forbid Barack Obama, then 95% of this forum, you leading the charge, would have rushed in to challenge what I said.

Since you seem to be in the business of telling people how to feel, can you give me some examples of your recent posts in response to BVS and others stating how the GOP and the town hall protesters make them "honestly sad?" Give me a break. Don't you have anything better to do than going around being "sad" because of a political movement? Go on, Irvine. Tell them how they should feel and react instead.

I don't care how you feel about Rush or about me for that matter. To suggest that I'm not a good person because of a radio host I listen to is absurd. Earnie had the decency to halfway correct himself later, a trait I've never seen from you. If you find absolutely nothing wrong with what Earnie said- or worse, if that's how you go about living your life- then with all due respect, I pray to God our paths never cross, for my sake.

By the way, Rush made a dumb comment and I responded by pointing out dumb comments made by liberals recently. That's apparently bad. At a town hall the other day, Barney Frank was challenged on how much universal healthcare is going to cost, and on all the money we are borrowing from people my age. Rather than addressing the man's concern, he responded by pointing to the apparent waste of money that was the Iraq War. That's apparently acceptable. How does that make sense?
 
I saw a whistleblower who used to work for Cigna on tv yesterday- I think it was MSNBC, not sure. He suggested that some of the town hall protesters could be health insurance company employees. There was a memo uncovered from some insurance company suggesting that employees do that.
 
Since you seem to be in the business of telling people how to feel, can you give me some examples of your recent posts in response to BVS and others stating how the GOP and the town hall protesters make them "honestly sad?" Give me a break. Don't you have anything better to do than going around being "sad" because of a political movement? Go on, Irvine. Tell them how they should feel and react instead.

I'm not sad because of the "political movement" but the caliber of uninformed individuals that are making up this movement, and I would think it would make you sad as well, or at least a little embarassed. I think "the movement" would get a lot more respect if it had some informed mouthpieces.

By the way, Rush made a dumb comment and I responded by pointing out dumb comments made by liberals recently. That's apparently bad. At a town hall the other day, Barney Frank was challenged on how much universal healthcare is going to cost, and on all the money we are borrowing from people my age. Rather than addressing the man's concern, he responded by pointing to the apparent waste of money that was the Iraq War. That's apparently acceptable. How does that make sense?

I think the difference is that Iraq war and healthcare are two very important issues. One conservatives are willing to turn their head and ignore where the money is coming from, but then all of a sudden they're concerned when it's an issue that the Dems brought up, that's called hypocricy, Barney just called them out on it.

I think what you did was try a tit for tat approach your guy says something completely assinine so you try and point out how the other side makes stupid comments as well... difference being that you are comparing someone who is considered a legit news source by some and worshipped and rallied under to a bunch of no name bloggers and cable news hosts.
 
I saw a whistleblower who used to work for Cigna on tv yesterday- I think it was MSNBC, not sure. He suggested that some of the town hall protesters could be health insurance company employees. There was a memo uncovered from some insurance company suggesting that employees do that.

I'd believe it. I just found out that my dental policy was apparently "terminated" in December of 2008 but they've still managed (out of the goodness in their hearts) to cash all eight payment checks since then.
You can't get more crooked than an insurance company, so let's stop defending them and attacking each other. We know where the real targets are:
insurers.gif


:angry:
 
At a town hall the other day, Barney Frank was challenged on how much universal healthcare is going to cost, and on all the money we are borrowing from people my age. Rather than addressing the man's concern, he responded by pointing to the apparent waste of money that was the Iraq War. That's apparently acceptable. How does that make sense?


Why is it that deficits are good to fight wars and bad to help US citizens? Suddenly the Republicans are all about controlling deficits. It's just a little suspect, you know.
 
I know. Neighborhood isn't even on it. I was really just looking for a pic with Cigna in it, since they are the main perpetrators. :angry:
 
Excuse you, but when someone suggests that I'm stupid, potentially hijacking Christianity for political reasons, and "just not a good person" because I listen to Rush Limbaugh, then I have a problem with that. Somehow I get the feeling that if I had said when Earnie said, substituting Rush for Olbermann or Jon Stewart or God forbid Barack Obama, then 95% of this forum, you leading the charge, would have rushed in to challenge what I said.

Rush made a dumb comment and I responded by pointing out dumb comments made by liberals recently



so the answer is "no," then?
 
Poll: Nearly Half Of Americans Believe “Death Panel” Falsehood | The Plum Line

There’s a pretty striking finding buried in the new NBC/WSJ poll: It turns out nearly half of Americans believe the “death panel” fib.

The pollster read a series of predictions about the health care plan, and asked Americans whether they were “likely to happen” or “unlikely to happen.” In the “death panel” one, Americans were asked whether the health care proposal…

Will allow the government to make decisions about when to stop providing medical care to the elderly

Likely to happen: 45
Unlikely to happen: 50
 
Poll: Nearly Half Of Americans Believe “Death Panel” Falsehood | The Plum Line

There’s a pretty striking finding buried in the new NBC/WSJ poll: It turns out nearly half of Americans believe the “death panel” fib.

The pollster read a series of predictions about the health care plan, and asked Americans whether they were “likely to happen” or “unlikely to happen.” In the “death panel” one, Americans were asked whether the health care proposal…

Will allow the government to make decisions about when to stop providing medical care to the elderly

Likely to happen: 45
Unlikely to happen: 50

that is unbelievable...
 
that is unbelievable...

Is it really though?

I'm not shocked.

We still have people in here who daily link Iraq with 9/11.
Those that believe Palin would be a good President.
Those that believe Dinosaurs and evolution are a hoax.
Those that believe global warming was made up to push a socialist agenda.

There's a good portion of humanity that just don't care to dig deeper than the headlines. And then there's a good portion of those that like to read deeper than the headlines but only believe that to which will benefit their own self interest.

I'm not shocked at all...

The world is full of stupid people...
 
politico.com

Obama turns to faith leaders
By: Josh Gerstein
August 19, 2009 07:32 PM EST

With his health reform efforts on the ropes, President Barack Obama is courting the religious community with an unabashedly moral message that played little role in the White House’s earlier arguments for changing America’s health care system.

Speaking on a conference call Wednesday evening with what organizers estimated were 140,000 members of churches and religious groups, Obama also suggested that some critics of his health care proposals were violating the Biblical commandment against lying.

“I know there’s been a lot of misinformation in this debate and there are some folks out there who are, frankly, bearing false witness,” Obama said on the call, which was played out live on the internet. “I need you to spread the facts and speak the truth.”

The president faulted opponents of his proposals for circulating “ludicrous ideas” aimed at frightening the public about the prospect of reform.

“This notion that somehow we are setting up death panels that will decide whether elderly people get to live or die: that is just an extraordinary lie,” Obama said emphatically. He said a provision in House legislation that would authorize payment for end-of-life counseling was “entirely voluntary” and would simply put the poor or middle class on par with wealthier Americans.

“It gives you an option that people who can afford fancy lawyers already exercise,” the president said.

However, Obama seemed to concede that critics of his efforts had won the upper hand in the public relations battle. He said his opponents have succeeded in raising the fears of elderly Americans that reform to thehealth insurance system could jeopardize Medicare.

“Many of you have older members of your congregations. They’re all now scared to death that somehow we’re talking about cutting Medicare benefits,” Obama said. “That is, again, simply not true.”

In an odd bit of messaging, Obama urged the religious communities, many of which offer outreach and even sanctuary to illegal aliens, not to believe reports that health reform would cover foreigners in the U.S. illegally.

“That’s not true. It does not provide health insurance for those individuals,” Obama said.

Obama also insisted the plan would not provide government funding for abortion.

“These are all fabrications that have been put out there in order to discourage people from meeting what I consider to be a core ethical and moral obligation: that is that we look out for one another, that I am my brother’s keeper, I am my sister’s keeper. In the wealthiest nation on earth right now, we are neglecting to live up to that call,” Obama said.

Obama did not take questions following his six-minute statement on the teleconference. However, earlier Wednesday he did take questions submitted in advance by Rabbis.

Religious metaphors and imperatives were in full force during the calls, which were part of an effort by religious groups to organize “40 days” of action for health care reform.

“We are God's partners in matters of life and death," Obama said during the call with Jewish leaders, according to a post on Twitter by Washington-area Rabbi Jack Moline.

During the afternoon call, Obama did not address the hottest issues in the health reform debate at the moment: whether the White House-backed plan will include a government-run health plan open to all Americans, known as the “public option.”

Before Obama spoke, his domestic policy adviser, Melody Barnes, did get a question about the president’s stance. She did not answer it immediately, but later returned to the subject. She assured participants that Obama still supports a public option, though she said there might also be other ways to reduce costs and give Americans more choices.

“He believes the public option is the best way to achieve those goals. He’s also said that he’s open to other good ideas,” Barnes said. “But, at this point, he thinks the public option seems like the best one and the best way to lower costs and increase competition”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom