Fla. doc's sign warns off Obama supporters

[boedicca]

‘(1) Electronic matching against existing Federal and State data, including vital records, employment history, enrollment systems, tax records, and other data determined appropriate by the Secretary to serve as evidence of eligibility and in lieu of paper-based documentation.

What part of this law is confusing you?

Look pretty clear what they can do with patient data.

 

[boedicca]

gathering the medical information to discern better treatments are NOT DONE by NAME attached.....

it is anonymous, by the insurance companies and gvt, who does these same studies for medicare.

You don't know this - and the bill includes a big loophole that whatever else the Secretary wants the Secretary will get.

 

[goldcatt]

Now what happened to America's concerns about government intrusion into their personal records? You all bitched to high heaven over the Patriot Act and the government listening in on your phone conversations and emails....now it's OK to have some GS-2 governemnt worker look at your medical records and determine what you get and don't get?

You gotta be shitting me!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's all because of Obama...you don't want to go against your President's agenda so you blindly support him no matter what. What makes ANY of you better than the neo-cons who blindly followed Bush?

It doesn't work that way under what was passed, and you're smart enough to know it.

But even if it did, I fail to see the difference between some governemnt employee doing it and some insurance company clerk using the exact same information for the exact same purpose. What's the difference? The end result is exactly the same.

It does work that way...go back and read the law as passed....

and insurance companies that trade information on your MEDICAL information ONLY hasn't got anything to do with the government matching your medical records to every single record they have on file for you to dtermine what gets doled out to you. All you have to do is read the law.

You supporters of this massive intrusion into your personal lives by the government sure don't seem to care about abuses of the system all of a sudden...what happened?

My personal life ha been intruded upon by the private insurers for years, and for the exact same purpose - except instead of matching my info to government files they sell it to credit agencies who rate my risk for employers.

Intrusion is intrusion is intrusion, what does it matter who does it? Unlike some people, I don't see any difference here. Government isn't inherently evil, the profit motive isn't inherently good, and one is no better or worse or different than the other. Fucked is fucked.

 

[boedicca]

and your finacial situation and age will determine what level of treatment will be given to this sick person. If the person has more value then more and better treatment will be available to this person.

The moral hazard for the government is to deny treatment to those who have outlived their Tax Paying usefulness.

 

[Immanuel]

It doesn't work that way under what was passed, and you're smart enough to know it.

But even if it did, I fail to see the difference between some governemnt employee doing it and some insurance company clerk using the exact same information for the exact same purpose. What's the difference? The end result is exactly the same.

It does work that way...go back and read the law as passed....

and insurance companies that trade information on your MEDICAL information ONLY hasn't got anything to do with the government matching your medical records to every single record they have on file for you to dtermine what gets doled out to you. All you have to do is read the law.

You supporters of this massive intrusion into your personal lives by the government sure don't seem to care about abuses of the system all of a sudden...what happened?

My personal life ha been intruded upon by the private insurers for years, and for the exact same purpose - except instead of matching my info to government files they sell it to credit agencies who rate my risk for employers.

Intrusion is intrusion is intrusion, what does it matter who does it? Unlike some people, I don't see any difference here. Government isn't inherently evil, the profit motive isn't inherently good, and one is no better or worse or different than the other. Fucked is fucked.

Except until last month, you had the option not to purchase health insurance if you were really worried about it. That option is ticking away and has a very limited lifespan.

Geez, isn't the encroachment of government upon our liberties so exciting? I can't wait to see what's next.

Immie

 

[goldcatt]

It does work that way...go back and read the law as passed....

and insurance companies that trade information on your MEDICAL information ONLY hasn't got anything to do with the government matching your medical records to every single record they have on file for you to dtermine what gets doled out to you. All you have to do is read the law.

You supporters of this massive intrusion into your personal lives by the government sure don't seem to care about abuses of the system all of a sudden...what happened?

My personal life ha been intruded upon by the private insurers for years, and for the exact same purpose - except instead of matching my info to government files they sell it to credit agencies who rate my risk for employers.

Intrusion is intrusion is intrusion, what does it matter who does it? Unlike some people, I don't see any difference here. Government isn't inherently evil, the profit motive isn't inherently good, and one is no better or worse or different than the other. Fucked is fucked.

Except until last month, you had the option not to purchase health insurance if you were really worried about it. That option is ticking away and has a very limited lifespan.

Geez, isn't the encroachment of government upon our liberties so exciting? I can't wait to see what's next.

Immie

Theoretically the option has always existed not to have insurance, but pragmatically for the average family the consequences or potential consequences are too great to make it a viable option.

I'm looking at pragmatic outcomes here, not what's theoretically possible.

 

[Immanuel]

My personal life ha been intruded upon by the private insurers for years, and for the exact same purpose - except instead of matching my info to government files they sell it to credit agencies who rate my risk for employers.

Intrusion is intrusion is intrusion, what does it matter who does it? Unlike some people, I don't see any difference here. Government isn't inherently evil, the profit motive isn't inherently good, and one is no better or worse or different than the other. Fucked is fucked.

Except until last month, you had the option not to purchase health insurance if you were really worried about it. That option is ticking away and has a very limited lifespan.

Geez, isn't the encroachment of government upon our liberties so exciting? I can't wait to see what's next.

Immie

Theoretically the option has always existed not to have insurance, but pragmatically for the average family the consequences or potential consequences are too great to make it a viable option.

I'm looking at pragmatic outcomes here, not what's theoretically possible.

Unfortunately, it is no longer theoretical either. That's my biggest beef in the whole debate. I would not choose to go without insurance, but at least I had the theoretical ability to do so if I wanted or needed to.

That right is now gone.

What's next and which party will remove it?

Right now the odds on favorites are the Democrats but only because Bush screwed Republican chances for the next 16 - 20 years.

Immie

 

[boedicca]

There's one big difference between encroachment by private parties and by the Government.

It is nearly impossible to sue the government for damages. If a private party mishandles one's data, one has legal recourse. One may also opt out of some commercial data sharing.

 

[Coyote]

There's one big difference between encroachment by private parties and by the Government.

It is nearly impossible to sue the government for damages. If a private party mishandles one's data, one has legal recourse. One may also opt out of some commercial data sharing.

The end result is no difference.

 

[boedicca]

There's one big difference between encroachment by private parties and by the Government.

It is nearly impossible to sue the government for damages. If a private party mishandles one's data, one has legal recourse. One may also opt out of some commercial data sharing.

The end result is no difference.

That is so untrue.

Government has so much more power than any private business - as well as access to a great deal of private information (tax returns) that a financial services or telemarketing firm would not. No private business can fine you or send you to jail for refusing to purchase their product.

 

[goldcatt]

Except until last month, you had the option not to purchase health insurance if you were really worried about it. That option is ticking away and has a very limited lifespan.

Geez, isn't the encroachment of government upon our liberties so exciting? I can't wait to see what's next.

Immie

Theoretically the option has always existed not to have insurance, but pragmatically for the average family the consequences or potential consequences are too great to make it a viable option.

I'm looking at pragmatic outcomes here, not what's theoretically possible.

Unfortunately, it is no longer theoretical either. That's my biggest beef in the whole debate. I would not choose to go without insurance, but at least I had the theoretical ability to do so if I wanted or needed to.

That right is now gone.

What's next and which party will remove it?

Right now the odds on favorites are the Democrats but only because Bush screwed Republican chances for the next 16 - 20 years.

Immie

It is still theoretically possible, if you want to pay the tax/fine/whatever you want to call it instead. Or if you qualify for an exemption. But I do understand your concern, I just don't look at it from the same point of view. Freedom to me means freedom from more than "just" government.

I agree Democrats and Republicans are the same as far as wanting control, they just have slightly different methods of acheiving the same goals.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

My personal life ha been intruded upon by the private insurers for years, and for the exact same purpose - except instead of matching my info to government files they sell it to credit agencies who rate my risk for employers.

Intrusion is intrusion is intrusion, what does it matter who does it? Unlike some people, I don't see any difference here. Government isn't inherently evil, the profit motive isn't inherently good, and one is no better or worse or different than the other. Fucked is fucked.

Except until last month, you had the option not to purchase health insurance if you were really worried about it. That option is ticking away and has a very limited lifespan.

Geez, isn't the encroachment of government upon our liberties so exciting? I can't wait to see what's next.

Immie

Theoretically the option has always existed not to have insurance, but pragmatically for the average family the consequences or potential consequences are too great to make it a viable option.
I'm looking at pragmatic outcomes here, not what's theoretically possible.

Since when is freedom NOT a viable option?

I seem to recall many complaining about government abuse of power...yet the Congress, NOT the American people, just took a whole new chunk of our freedom to choose, for them to embark on their political daliances with. What's next...fat taxes, increased cost of health coverage because you ate at too many fast food restaurants this year, your liver function is off so you are ordered to attend alcohol rehab or face fines...WHEN WILL IT STOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Todays science fiction is tomorrows reality. "Gattica" is becoming a reality.