Free speech vs. taxation without representation

[manifold]

Yes, MA is officially a commonwealth. But in reality it looks, walks and quacks more like a socialist republic.

I live here.

The govt here tells us you must have insurance or pay a yearly tax/fine to the govt for not having it. I call that govt intrusion but not socialism.

We dont have socialism in my state, we have very liberal legislative and executive politicial tendancies though.

Split hairs much?


and btw: We most certainly do have socialism here, and federally. What do you think Social Security is? What do you think Unemployment Insurance and Welfare is? We might not be Socialist, as far as the whole state ownership of the means of production goes, but we certainly do have many socialist programs. And I'm not against them necessarily either, I just think there exists an optimal level, which MA (and the Fed) are in danger of exceeding to the point of diminishing returns.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Yes, MA is officially a commonwealth. But in reality it looks, walks and quacks more like a socialist republic.

I live here.

The govt here tells us you must have insurance or pay a yearly tax/fine to the govt for not having it. I call that govt intrusion but not socialism.

We dont have socialism in my state, we have very liberal legislative and executive politicial tendancies though.

Split hairs much?


and btw: We most certainly do have socialism here, and federally. What do you think Social Security is? What do you think Unemployment Insurance and Welfare is? We might not be Socialist, as far as the whole state ownership of the means of production goes, but we certainly do have many socialist programs. And I'm not against them necessarily either, I just think there exists an optimal level, which MA (and the Fed) are in danger of exceeding to the point of diminishing returns.

Under the definition of the word socialism we dont have socialism, which is what i was referring to, hence you accurately describing me as splitting hairs.

We do have programs that fit into an agenda, like the ones you described, that can be considered socialist in nature.

I gotta respond to the other post about our health care.


In the last 2 years waiting times for specialists have gone from 2-3 weeks to 7-10 weeks.
Availability of PCP(Primary Care Physicians, not drugs ) has declined. It takes over 3 months to get an appointment if you want to get a new doctor, it used to be almost instant.

Also my state is almost 2billion in debt from trying to pay for the program when just 3 short years ago we had a surplus.

So yes we have had some negative consequences from Devaul Patrick running Mitt Romneys proposal.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I live here.

The govt here tells us you must have insurance or pay a yearly tax/fine to the govt for not having it. I call that govt intrusion but not socialism.

We dont have socialism in my state, we have very liberal legislative and executive politicial tendancies though.

Split hairs much?


and btw: We most certainly do have socialism here, and federally. What do you think Social Security is? What do you think Unemployment Insurance and Welfare is? We might not be Socialist, as far as the whole state ownership of the means of production goes, but we certainly do have many socialist programs. And I'm not against them necessarily either, I just think there exists an optimal level, which MA (and the Fed) are in danger of exceeding to the point of diminishing returns.

Under the definition of the word socialism we dont have socialism, which is what i was referring to, hence you accurately describing me as splitting hairs.

We do have programs that fit into an agenda, like the ones you described, that can be considered socialist in nature.

I gotta respond to the other post about our health care.


In the last 2 years waiting times for specialists have gone from 2-3 weeks to 7-10 weeks.
Availability of PCP(Primary Care Physicians, not drugs ) has declined. It takes over 3 months to get an appointment if you want to get a new doctor, it used to be almost instant.

Also my state is almost 2billion in debt from trying to pay for the program when just 3 short years ago we had a surplus.

So yes we have had some negative consequences from Devaul Patrick running Mitt Romneys proposal.

I would assume then that most Ma. residents aren't really on board with Obamacare. If my assumption is wrong, I won't be shocked.

 

[Ravi]

With all the new people in the system in MA it isn't surprising there are problems with wait times. That should eventually even out. Too soon to decide if the program will be successful or not.

In the meantime, the disruption of the town halls on the subject get more intense and more common. On FOX last night a reporter was told by some of the people that were disrupting that they weren't even citizens of the districts in question. Which speaks to the point of my OP.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

With all the new people in the system in MA it isn't surprising there are problems with wait times. That should eventually even out. Too soon to decide if the program will be successful or not.

In the meantime, the disruption of the town halls on the subject get more intense and more common. On FOX last night a reporter was told by some of the people that were disrupting that they weren't even citizens of the districts in question. Which speaks to the point of my OP.

They are citizens of the US so what does it matter if they're in their district or not ? They're in their country!

You stated "With all the new people in the system in MA it isn't surprising there are problems with wait times". Do you have a Source for that information?

The reason I ask is because the New York Times is reporting

The new state budget in Massachusetts eliminates health care coverage for some 30,000 legal immigrants to help close a growing deficit, reversing progress toward universal coverage just as Congress looks to the state as a model for overhauling the nation’s health care system.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/us/15insure.html

So if what you say is true then the New York times is reporting a lie. Which is it?

It''s clear that one of you isn't being honest here.

 

[Ravi]

With all the new people in the system in MA it isn't surprising there are problems with wait times. That should eventually even out. Too soon to decide if the program will be successful or not.

In the meantime, the disruption of the town halls on the subject get more intense and more common. On FOX last night a reporter was told by some of the people that were disrupting that they weren't even citizens of the districts in question. Which speaks to the point of my OP.

They are citizens of the US so what does it matter if they're in their district or not ? They're in their country!

You stated "With all the new people in the system in MA it isn't surprising there are problems with wait times". Do you have a Source for that information?

The reason I ask is because the New York Times is reporting

The new state budget in Massachusetts eliminates health care coverage for some 30,000 legal immigrants to help close a growing deficit, reversing progress toward universal coverage just as Congress looks to the state as a model for overhauling the nation’s health care system.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/us/15insure.html

So if what you say is true then the New York times is reporting a lie. Which is it?

It''s clear that one of you isn't being honest here.

Someone posted an article a while back, I think it was PC, that discussed the reasons the system was having problems. It only makes perfect sense, people that didn't used to have health insurance went to the ER...now they go to the doctor. Please don't get so hysterical...I didn't mean to malign your precious New York Time's.

It matters if you are going to another district because in that case you are interfering with the local government and the local people...in other words, you are not allowing people to interact with THEIR elected officials.

 

[manifold]

Ravi,

Are you suggesting that they should require that attendees show proof of residence to be allowed in?

 

[Ravi]

No, just pointing out how anti-Democracy the disrupting groups are being...especially if they are not members of the district.

 

[Mr Magoo]

Our day nears as conservatives will stop Hussein Obama's socialism....Americans want conservative values and opportunity benefit from taking risk...no hand outs

 

[Lonestar_logic]

With all the new people in the system in MA it isn't surprising there are problems with wait times. That should eventually even out. Too soon to decide if the program will be successful or not.

In the meantime, the disruption of the town halls on the subject get more intense and more common. On FOX last night a reporter was told by some of the people that were disrupting that they weren't even citizens of the districts in question. Which speaks to the point of my OP.

They are citizens of the US so what does it matter if they're in their district or not ? They're in their country!

You stated "With all the new people in the system in MA it isn't surprising there are problems with wait times". Do you have a Source for that information?

The reason I ask is because the New York Times is reporting

The new state budget in Massachusetts eliminates health care coverage for some 30,000 legal immigrants to help close a growing deficit, reversing progress toward universal coverage just as Congress looks to the state as a model for overhauling the nation’s health care system.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/us/15insure.html

So if what you say is true then the New York times is reporting a lie. Which is it?

It''s clear that one of you isn't being honest here.

Someone posted an article a while back, I think it was PC, that discussed the reasons the system was having problems. It only makes perfect sense, people that didn't used to have health insurance went to the ER...now they go to the doctor. Please don't get so hysterical...I didn't mean to malign your precious New York Time's.

It matters if you are going to another district because in that case you are interfering with the local government and the local people...in other words, you are not allowing people to interact with THEIR elected officials.

You can malign them all you want, problem is you haven't been able to prove their report wrong. Which means you are full of shit and whatever article you read was also full of shit. Period.

Voicing concerns about the direction this country is going is not an interference, it's a constitutional right and every citizens duty.

 

[Ravi]

They are citizens of the US so what does it matter if they're in their district or not ? They're in their country!

You stated "With all the new people in the system in MA it isn't surprising there are problems with wait times". Do you have a Source for that information?

The reason I ask is because the New York Times is reporting http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/us/15insure.html

So if what you say is true then the New York times is reporting a lie. Which is it?

It''s clear that one of you isn't being honest here.

Someone posted an article a while back, I think it was PC, that discussed the reasons the system was having problems. It only makes perfect sense, people that didn't used to have health insurance went to the ER...now they go to the doctor. Please don't get so hysterical...I didn't mean to malign your precious New York Time's.

It matters if you are going to another district because in that case you are interfering with the local government and the local people...in other words, you are not allowing people to interact with THEIR elected officials.

You can malign them all you want, problem is you haven't been able to prove their report wrong. Which means you are full of shit and whatever article you read was also full of shit. Period.

Voicing concerns about the direction this country is going is not an interference, it's a constitutional right and every citizens duty.

I disagree in this instance. Voicing your concerns is fine...preventing others from interacting with their elected officials is not fine.

I've no interest in proving their report wrong. IMO, it is too soon to declare the MA insurance program a failure. Sorry if that upsets you.

 

[jillian]

And how is healthcare in Ma.?

MASSACHUSETTS HAS been lauded for its healthcare reform, but the program is a failure. Created solely to achieve universal insurance coverage, the plan does not even begin to address the other essential components of a successful healthcare system.

Mass. healthcare reform is failing us - The Boston Globe''

Who's more dishonest than you? What makes the Mass plan a "failure" according to YOUR link?

First, it has not achieved universal healthcare, although the reform has been a boon to the private insurance industry. The state has more than 200,000 without coverage, and the count can only go up with rising unemployment.

Second, the reform does not address the problem of insurance being connected to jobs. For individuals, this means their insurance is not continuous if they change or lose jobs. For employers, especially small businesses, health insurance is an expense they can ill afford.

You know... the type of thing that they're trying to address now.... but that the loons are trying to prevent because of their friendly little insurance lobby that is spending over 1 million a day to fight exactly those things.

Good that their money wasn't wasted on you... but seems you need to misrepresent to pursue their agenda.

 

[Vast LWC]

Well let's stop bitching and moaning about it, and show up at the next Town Hall meeting and shout these people down right to their face.

If we incite them to violence and get to beat the crap out of them, all the better.

 

[Vast LWC]

My instant response to the woman at the first Town Hall that made all the news would have been to get about 2 inches from her face and start screaming "Why are you such a lying whore???" at her.

That would have been within my free speech rights, and anyone who was with her would surely have tried to spring to her defense, causing them to act violently, allowing me to legally defend myself by beating them silly.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I just read something funny today. It seems that the DNC put out an ad attacking town hall attendees as "angry mobs", and included the RNC phone number to call and complain. The RNC responded by including an option on their phone menu to press a button to voice concerns about issues raised in the DNC ad . . . and it forwarded the calls to the DNC switchboard.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Anyone honest must acknowledge the behavior of many of those 'protesting' health care reform is both irrational and uncivil; their behavior is tantamount to yelling "fire!" in a crowded theater.
The marches protesting Bush&Co's invasion and occupation of Iraq were generally civil, only the most extreme elements acted foolishly, and they were few in number (and in many cases arrested; and the arrests were viewed as appropriate and necessary by the vast majority who marched silently). I would add that the leaders at the marches I attended encouraged peaceful protest; this is not the case (with the recent exception of John McCain) of Republican leadership today. In fact the defacto leader of the Republican Party, Rush Limbaugh, fans the flames of insurrection.

 

[nodoginnafight]

If you have one group spewing hatred and negativity and another group talking about compassion and optimism - ALWAYS stick with the compassionate group!

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Someone posted an article a while back, I think it was PC, that discussed the reasons the system was having problems. It only makes perfect sense, people that didn't used to have health insurance went to the ER...now they go to the doctor. Please don't get so hysterical...I didn't mean to malign your precious New York Time's.

It matters if you are going to another district because in that case you are interfering with the local government and the local people...in other words, you are not allowing people to interact with THEIR elected officials.

You can malign them all you want, problem is you haven't been able to prove their report wrong. Which means you are full of shit and whatever article you read was also full of shit. Period.

Voicing concerns about the direction this country is going is not an interference, it's a constitutional right and every citizens duty.

I disagree in this instance. Voicing your concerns is fine...preventing others from interacting with their elected officials is not fine.

I've no interest in proving their report wrong. IMO, it is too soon to declare the MA insurance program a failure. Sorry if that upsets you.

I haven't seen any of these protesters taping up the mouths of others. They are as free to voiice their concerns as well. No one is stopping them.

Your concession is duly noted.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

And how is healthcare in Ma.?

MASSACHUSETTS HAS been lauded for its healthcare reform, but the program is a failure. Created solely to achieve universal insurance coverage, the plan does not even begin to address the other essential components of a successful healthcare system.

Mass. healthcare reform is failing us - The Boston Globe''

Who's more dishonest than you? What makes the Mass plan a "failure" according to YOUR link?

First, it has not achieved universal healthcare, although the reform has been a boon to the private insurance industry. The state has more than 200,000 without coverage, and the count can only go up with rising unemployment.

Second, the reform does not address the problem of insurance being connected to jobs. For individuals, this means their insurance is not continuous if they change or lose jobs. For employers, especially small businesses, health insurance is an expense they can ill afford.

You know... the type of thing that they're trying to address now.... but that the loons are trying to prevent because of their friendly little insurance lobby that is spending over 1 million a day to fight exactly those things.

Good that their money wasn't wasted on you... but seems you need to misrepresent to pursue their agenda.

What would such a system provide? The prestigious Institute of Medicine, part of the National Academy of Sciences, has defined five criteria for healthcare reform. Coverage should be: universal, not tied to a job, affordable for individuals and families, affordable for society, and it should provide access to high-quality care for everyone.

The state's plan flunks on all counts.

First, it has not achieved universal healthcare, although the reform has been a boon to the private insurance industry. The state has more than 200,000 without coverage, and the count can only go up with rising unemployment.

Second, the reform does not address the problem of insurance being connected to jobs. For individuals, this means their insurance is not continuous if they change or lose jobs. For employers, especially small businesses, health insurance is an expense they can ill afford.

Third, the program is not affordable for many individuals and families. For middle-income people not qualifying for state-subsidized health insurance, costs are too high for even skimpy coverage. For an individual earning $31,213, the cheapest plan can cost $9,872 in premiums and out-of-pocket payments. Low-income residents, previously eligible for free care, have insurance policies requiring unaffordable copayments for office visits and medications.

Fourth, the costs of the reform for the state have been formidable. Spending for the Commonwealth Care subsidized program has doubled, from $630 million in 2007 to an estimated $1.3 billion for 2009, which is not sustainable.

Fifth, reform does not assure access to care. High-deductible plans that have additional out-of-pocket expenses can result in many people not using their insurance when they are sick. In my practice of child and adolescent psychiatry, a parent told me last week that she had a decrease in her job hours, could not afford the $30 copayment for treatment sessions for her adolescent, and decided to meet much less frequently.

Decide for youself if it' s failure. But it certainly looks that way to me.

But if you have a different POV or can prove this article is inaccurate in any way, I'd be interested in hearing it.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Note post above re "honesty".