Iran Fights - Obama Slights

[jeffrockit]

Are you on crystal meth? The world loves Obama. He is perceived to represent what America is always saying it is - for freedom etc etc - not what that totalitarian puppet who previously occupied the WH was all about..

..as for Iran - keep you nose out. Last time the US interfered Ollie North ended up in a Senate hearing.....

That is true because when polled, it showed that 58 percent of Europeans want the United States to be weakened. They want a weaker America and that is what the Obama administration represents to them. That is a popularity we should not want or be happy about.

Don't you mean that's Neal Boortz's OPINION????

Nope, this is based on the Pew Research poll conducted in Europe in 2008. That poll showed that nearly 60% of Europeans wanted the United States to be weaker.
I Googled it...you can too as it's not that difficult.

 

[jeffrockit]

Anyone can go to the doctor any time they want, even if they dont have money.

The libs don't get that. They continue with that lie because they are ok with the govt. taking control of 17% of our economy.

Great. Let's leave the whole thing in File 13 (again). I hope you and yours enjoy your rising private health insurance premiums, on average 10% a year.

I have said many times that we need an overhaul of health care, just not by the govt. Can you not see that with the govt involved, it has nothing to do with how much they care about us and everything to do with increasing their political power. Do you honestly believe that the politicians are pushing this bill because of us and how much they care?
In the many times I have asked that question, I never get a straight answer. Care to change that?

 

[MaggieMae]

That is true because when polled, it showed that 58 percent of Europeans want the United States to be weakened. They want a weaker America and that is what the Obama administration represents to them. That is a popularity we should not want or be happy about.

Don't you mean that's Neal Boortz's OPINION????

Nope, this is based on the Pew Research poll conducted in Europe in 2008. That poll showed that nearly 60% of Europeans wanted the United States to be weaker.
I Googled it...you can too as it's not that difficult.

If you took the time to Google it, then why not post the link?

 

[MaggieMae]

The libs don't get that. They continue with that lie because they are ok with the govt. taking control of 17% of our economy.

Great. Let's leave the whole thing in File 13 (again). I hope you and yours enjoy your rising private health insurance premiums, on average 10% a year.

I have said many times that we need an overhaul of health care, just not by the govt. Can you not see that with the govt involved, it has nothing to do with how much they care about us and everything to do with increasing their political power. Do you honestly believe that the politicians are pushing this bill because of us and how much they care?
In the many times I have asked that question, I never get a straight answer. Care to change that?

The health care industry will NOT police itself. That's become evident and that's why the issue is front/center (again). I'm actually more in favor of the trigger option, which is really nothing more than a threat that if they continue with their monopolistic, discriminatory practices, within a certain timeframe a public option WILL be instituted.

 

[Toronado3800]

Sister, I'm surprised at your silliness!

Ouch, calling someone silly now. You speak well and should know making someone angry with a poorly chosen initial statement only entrenches them in their thoughts. Rush isn't one to learn from.

4. My ability to articulate has rarely required 'translation,' and when it does, I don't think, based on the erudition of your post, it is your services that will be called upon.

Instead of privately suggesting something to you I chose to do it in a public and equally silly way to your post.

I am honestly confused by the math.

"and the U.S. administration's request for $75 million for democracy promotion in Iran."

If health care costs America 1 billion dollars this year than that's 13.3 times as much as the 75 million right? If somehow healthcare costs 1 trillion dollars additional a year then its 13,333 times as much. I just don't think that many additional procedures are going to be performed.

For Obama care to be a million times more expensive it would have to cost America 75 trillion bucks over the same amount of time. Even if it does that is just money largely recirculating our economy since most folks get in country medical care.....

how to equate.... I go to McDonalds for a burger. It cost me a dollar. Does it cost America a dollar? Not really since I just gave my buck to a different American. If I get an MRI does it cost America $800? Not really since my American insurance company just paid my American hospital the money. In both cases I'm out the buck or 800 bucks but the doctor or someone at McDonalds should in theory have my money to recirculate at my place of employment.

My views on healthcare seem unusual. I've seen folks with no insurance get surgeries performed then almost walk away from the bill entirely. The cost those procedures is then spread out to the tax payers and those who show up for treatment the next day. No one gets thrown out of the hospital when even something like Gallbladder surgery is absolutely necessary. Sure it gets put off but I feel thanks to this we already have "universal coverage".

If I'm paying $150 a month for private healthcare now and end up paying $160 a month for equal "universal" healthcare it costs me $10 a month more when initially tracking the money. If go an additional step and add in the costs we're already paying for items like the surgeries performed on those w/o insurance though I believe SOME if not all of that $10 a month will be recovered.

Political Chick, perhaps I just give you a difficult time because you do make very good points while I give others who cuss each other out less trouble just because I somehow expect less from them. My apologies.

 

[jeffrockit]

Great. Let's leave the whole thing in File 13 (again). I hope you and yours enjoy your rising private health insurance premiums, on average 10% a year.

I have said many times that we need an overhaul of health care, just not by the govt. Can you not see that with the govt involved, it has nothing to do with how much they care about us and everything to do with increasing their political power. Do you honestly believe that the politicians are pushing this bill because of us and how much they care?
In the many times I have asked that question, I never get a straight answer. Care to change that?

The health care industry will NOT police itself. That's become evident and that's why the issue is front/center (again). I'm actually more in favor of the trigger option, which is really nothing more than a threat that if they continue with their monopolistic, discriminatory practices, within a certain timeframe a public option WILL be instituted.

Again, no answer to my question:
Do you honestly believe that the politicians are pushing this bill because of us and how much they care about us?

 

[MaggieMae]

I have said many times that we need an overhaul of health care, just not by the govt. Can you not see that with the govt involved, it has nothing to do with how much they care about us and everything to do with increasing their political power. Do you honestly believe that the politicians are pushing this bill because of us and how much they care?
In the many times I have asked that question, I never get a straight answer. Care to change that?

The health care industry will NOT police itself. That's become evident and that's why the issue is front/center (again). I'm actually more in favor of the trigger option, which is really nothing more than a threat that if they continue with their monopolistic, discriminatory practices, within a certain timeframe a public option WILL be instituted.

Again, no answer to my question:
Do you honestly believe that the politicians are pushing this bill because of us and how much they care about us?

Some do, some don't. A better question is whose pockets did over $6 million in lobbying against this bill go into?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Sister, I'm surprised at your silliness!

Ouch, calling someone silly now. You speak well and should know making someone angry with a poorly chosen initial statement only entrenches them in their thoughts. Rush isn't one to learn from.

4. My ability to articulate has rarely required 'translation,' and when it does, I don't think, based on the erudition of your post, it is your services that will be called upon.

Instead of privately suggesting something to you I chose to do it in a public and equally silly way to your post.

I am honestly confused by the math.

"and the U.S. administration's request for $75 million for democracy promotion in Iran."

If health care costs America 1 billion dollars this year than that's 13.3 times as much as the 75 million right? If somehow healthcare costs 1 trillion dollars additional a year then its 13,333 times as much. I just don't think that many additional procedures are going to be performed.

For Obama care to be a million times more expensive it would have to cost America 75 trillion bucks over the same amount of time. Even if it does that is just money largely recirculating our economy since most folks get in country medical care.....

how to equate.... I go to McDonalds for a burger. It cost me a dollar. Does it cost America a dollar? Not really since I just gave my buck to a different American. If I get an MRI does it cost America $800? Not really since my American insurance company just paid my American hospital the money. In both cases I'm out the buck or 800 bucks but the doctor or someone at McDonalds should in theory have my money to recirculate at my place of employment.

My views on healthcare seem unusual. I've seen folks with no insurance get surgeries performed then almost walk away from the bill entirely. The cost those procedures is then spread out to the tax payers and those who show up for treatment the next day. No one gets thrown out of the hospital when even something like Gallbladder surgery is absolutely necessary. Sure it gets put off but I feel thanks to this we already have "universal coverage".

If I'm paying $150 a month for private healthcare now and end up paying $160 a month for equal "universal" healthcare it costs me $10 a month more when initially tracking the money. If go an additional step and add in the costs we're already paying for items like the surgeries performed on those w/o insurance though I believe SOME if not all of that $10 a month will be recovered.

Political Chick, perhaps I just give you a difficult time because you do make very good points while I give others who cuss each other out less trouble just because I somehow expect less from them. My apologies.

No, no, no- my bad!
1) I missed the math due to hyperbole! 75 million compared to 1 trillion (healthcare), then we are not talking a million times more, but 10,000 times more. So, the comparison is a pair of happy meals vs. a new Lexus,
2) I missed the humor of your post.

And I really appreciate that neither of us resorts to the 'cussing.'

Am I correct that, reading the above post, you are not in favor of ObamaCare?
If so, we are on the same page.

And, if so, you will appreciate this from Mark Steyn:

". In the end, there’s no such thing as an independent Canadian economy. It remains a branch plant for the U.S. Over 80 percent of Canadian exports come to America. So when people talk about the Canadian model as something that should be emulated, they forget that it only works because it’s next to the American model. Canadian dependence on the United States is particularly true in health care, the most eminent Canadian idea looming in the American context. That is, public health care in Canada depends on private health care in the U.S. A small news story from last month illustrates this:

A Canadian woman has given birth to extremely rare identical quadruplets. The four girls were born at a U.S. hospital because there was no space available at Canadian neonatal intensive care units. Autumn, Brook, Calissa, and Dahlia are in good condition at Benefice Hospital in Great Falls, Montana. Health officials said they checked every other neonatal intensive care unit in Canada, but none had space. The Jepps, a nurse and a respiratory technician were flown 500 kilometers to the Montana hospital, the closest in the U.S., where the quadruplets were born on Sunday.

Canadian health care in a nutshell. After all, you can’t expect a G-7 economy of only 30 million people to be able to offer the same level of neonatal intensive care coverage as a town of 50,000 in remote, rural Montana. And let’s face it, there’s nothing an expectant mom likes more on the day of delivery than 300 miles in a bumpy twin prop over the Rockies. Everyone knows that socialized health care means you wait and wait and wait—six months for an MRI, a year for a hip replacement, and so on. But here is the absolute logical reductio of a government monopoly in health care: the ten month waiting list for the maternity ward."

https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2008&month=01

Be well.

 

[MaggieMae]

Sister, I'm surprised at your silliness!

Ouch, calling someone silly now. You speak well and should know making someone angry with a poorly chosen initial statement only entrenches them in their thoughts. Rush isn't one to learn from.


Instead of privately suggesting something to you I chose to do it in a public and equally silly way to your post.

I am honestly confused by the math.

"and the U.S. administration's request for $75 million for democracy promotion in Iran."

If health care costs America 1 billion dollars this year than that's 13.3 times as much as the 75 million right? If somehow healthcare costs 1 trillion dollars additional a year then its 13,333 times as much. I just don't think that many additional procedures are going to be performed.

For Obama care to be a million times more expensive it would have to cost America 75 trillion bucks over the same amount of time. Even if it does that is just money largely recirculating our economy since most folks get in country medical care.....

how to equate.... I go to McDonalds for a burger. It cost me a dollar. Does it cost America a dollar? Not really since I just gave my buck to a different American. If I get an MRI does it cost America $800? Not really since my American insurance company just paid my American hospital the money. In both cases I'm out the buck or 800 bucks but the doctor or someone at McDonalds should in theory have my money to recirculate at my place of employment.

My views on healthcare seem unusual. I've seen folks with no insurance get surgeries performed then almost walk away from the bill entirely. The cost those procedures is then spread out to the tax payers and those who show up for treatment the next day. No one gets thrown out of the hospital when even something like Gallbladder surgery is absolutely necessary. Sure it gets put off but I feel thanks to this we already have "universal coverage".

If I'm paying $150 a month for private healthcare now and end up paying $160 a month for equal "universal" healthcare it costs me $10 a month more when initially tracking the money. If go an additional step and add in the costs we're already paying for items like the surgeries performed on those w/o insurance though I believe SOME if not all of that $10 a month will be recovered.

Political Chick, perhaps I just give you a difficult time because you do make very good points while I give others who cuss each other out less trouble just because I somehow expect less from them. My apologies.

No, no, no- my bad!
1) I missed the math due to hyperbole! 75 million compared to 1 trillion (healthcare), then we are not talking a million times more, but 10,000 times more. So, the comparison is a pair of happy meals vs. a new Lexus,
2) I missed the humor of your post.

And I really appreciate that neither of us resorts to the 'cussing.'

Am I correct that, reading the above post, you are not in favor of ObamaCare?
If so, we are on the same page.

And, if so, you will appreciate this from Mark Steyn:

". In the end, there’s no such thing as an independent Canadian economy. It remains a branch plant for the U.S. Over 80 percent of Canadian exports come to America. So when people talk about the Canadian model as something that should be emulated, they forget that it only works because it’s next to the American model. Canadian dependence on the United States is particularly true in health care, the most eminent Canadian idea looming in the American context. That is, public health care in Canada depends on private health care in the U.S. A small news story from last month illustrates this:

A Canadian woman has given birth to extremely rare identical quadruplets. The four girls were born at a U.S. hospital because there was no space available at Canadian neonatal intensive care units. Autumn, Brook, Calissa, and Dahlia are in good condition at Benefice Hospital in Great Falls, Montana. Health officials said they checked every other neonatal intensive care unit in Canada, but none had space. The Jepps, a nurse and a respiratory technician were flown 500 kilometers to the Montana hospital, the closest in the U.S., where the quadruplets were born on Sunday.

Canadian health care in a nutshell. After all, you can’t expect a G-7 economy of only 30 million people to be able to offer the same level of neonatal intensive care coverage as a town of 50,000 in remote, rural Montana. And let’s face it, there’s nothing an expectant mom likes more on the day of delivery than 300 miles in a bumpy twin prop over the Rockies. Everyone knows that socialized health care means you wait and wait and wait—six months for an MRI, a year for a hip replacement, and so on. But here is the absolute logical reductio of a government monopoly in health care: the ten month waiting list for the maternity ward."

https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2008&month=01

Be well.

But PC, you're talking about health CARE, while the issue at hand is availability of health CARE to all Americans who need it without eventually bankrupting those hospitals like the one in Montana that must provide it "free" if one cannot pay because he has no insurance . No one is disputing that the USA doesn't have the best, just the worst way of distributing it. And private health care insurers currently dictate who will get insurance and who won't.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Ouch, calling someone silly now. You speak well and should know making someone angry with a poorly chosen initial statement only entrenches them in their thoughts. Rush isn't one to learn from.


Instead of privately suggesting something to you I chose to do it in a public and equally silly way to your post.

I am honestly confused by the math.

If health care costs America 1 billion dollars this year than that's 13.3 times as much as the 75 million right? If somehow healthcare costs 1 trillion dollars additional a year then its 13,333 times as much. I just don't think that many additional procedures are going to be performed.

For Obama care to be a million times more expensive it would have to cost America 75 trillion bucks over the same amount of time. Even if it does that is just money largely recirculating our economy since most folks get in country medical care.....

how to equate.... I go to McDonalds for a burger. It cost me a dollar. Does it cost America a dollar? Not really since I just gave my buck to a different American. If I get an MRI does it cost America $800? Not really since my American insurance company just paid my American hospital the money. In both cases I'm out the buck or 800 bucks but the doctor or someone at McDonalds should in theory have my money to recirculate at my place of employment.

My views on healthcare seem unusual. I've seen folks with no insurance get surgeries performed then almost walk away from the bill entirely. The cost those procedures is then spread out to the tax payers and those who show up for treatment the next day. No one gets thrown out of the hospital when even something like Gallbladder surgery is absolutely necessary. Sure it gets put off but I feel thanks to this we already have "universal coverage".

If I'm paying $150 a month for private healthcare now and end up paying $160 a month for equal "universal" healthcare it costs me $10 a month more when initially tracking the money. If go an additional step and add in the costs we're already paying for items like the surgeries performed on those w/o insurance though I believe SOME if not all of that $10 a month will be recovered.

Political Chick, perhaps I just give you a difficult time because you do make very good points while I give others who cuss each other out less trouble just because I somehow expect less from them. My apologies.

No, no, no- my bad!
1) I missed the math due to hyperbole! 75 million compared to 1 trillion (healthcare), then we are not talking a million times more, but 10,000 times more. So, the comparison is a pair of happy meals vs. a new Lexus,
2) I missed the humor of your post.

And I really appreciate that neither of us resorts to the 'cussing.'

Am I correct that, reading the above post, you are not in favor of ObamaCare?
If so, we are on the same page.

And, if so, you will appreciate this from Mark Steyn:

". In the end, there’s no such thing as an independent Canadian economy. It remains a branch plant for the U.S. Over 80 percent of Canadian exports come to America. So when people talk about the Canadian model as something that should be emulated, they forget that it only works because it’s next to the American model. Canadian dependence on the United States is particularly true in health care, the most eminent Canadian idea looming in the American context. That is, public health care in Canada depends on private health care in the U.S. A small news story from last month illustrates this:

A Canadian woman has given birth to extremely rare identical quadruplets. The four girls were born at a U.S. hospital because there was no space available at Canadian neonatal intensive care units. Autumn, Brook, Calissa, and Dahlia are in good condition at Benefice Hospital in Great Falls, Montana. Health officials said they checked every other neonatal intensive care unit in Canada, but none had space. The Jepps, a nurse and a respiratory technician were flown 500 kilometers to the Montana hospital, the closest in the U.S., where the quadruplets were born on Sunday.

Canadian health care in a nutshell. After all, you can’t expect a G-7 economy of only 30 million people to be able to offer the same level of neonatal intensive care coverage as a town of 50,000 in remote, rural Montana. And let’s face it, there’s nothing an expectant mom likes more on the day of delivery than 300 miles in a bumpy twin prop over the Rockies. Everyone knows that socialized health care means you wait and wait and wait—six months for an MRI, a year for a hip replacement, and so on. But here is the absolute logical reductio of a government monopoly in health care: the ten month waiting list for the maternity ward."

https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2008&month=01

Be well.

But PC, you're talking about health CARE, while the issue at hand is availability of health CARE to all Americans who need it without eventually bankrupting those hospitals like the one in Montana that must provide it "free" if one cannot pay because he has no insurance . No one is disputing that the USA doesn't have the best, just the worst way of distributing it. And private health care insurers currently dictate who will get insurance and who won't.

Interesting.

1. Universal Health Care means rationing. Limiting avaiability.

2. If one wishes to indemnify said hospitals, why not simply accept bills for payment by federal government, rather than a trillion dollar plan that is unwanted and unwarrented.

3. "Food debit cards help 27 million people buy food, similar to the number who need help buying health coverage. In all fifty states, debit card technology has transformed the federal food stamp program, which used to be notorious for fraud and abuse. (Only 2 percent of card users are found to be ineligible, according to the General Accounting Office.) Cards are loaded with a specific dollar amount monthly, depending on family size and income, and allow cardholders to shop anywhere. The same strategy could be adapted to provide purchasing power to families who need help buying high-deductible health coverage. It's what all Americans used to buy (see chart 5), and it's all that's needed for families with moderate incomes, who can afford a routine doctor visit. "
http://defendyourhealthcare.us/downgradinghealthcare.html

 

[midcan5]

If we want to counter terrorism as it exists today, we need to stop interfering in the politics of other nations. We make our nation the focus of the crazies.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If we want to counter terrorism as it exists today, we need to stop interfering in the politics of other nations. We make our nation the focus of the crazies.

Good way for a lib to begin the new year, and get those street creds: Blame America for terrorism!

What consistency!

 

[MaggieMae]

No, no, no- my bad!
1) I missed the math due to hyperbole! 75 million compared to 1 trillion (healthcare), then we are not talking a million times more, but 10,000 times more. So, the comparison is a pair of happy meals vs. a new Lexus,
2) I missed the humor of your post.

And I really appreciate that neither of us resorts to the 'cussing.'

Am I correct that, reading the above post, you are not in favor of ObamaCare?
If so, we are on the same page.

And, if so, you will appreciate this from Mark Steyn:

". In the end, there’s no such thing as an independent Canadian economy. It remains a branch plant for the U.S. Over 80 percent of Canadian exports come to America. So when people talk about the Canadian model as something that should be emulated, they forget that it only works because it’s next to the American model. Canadian dependence on the United States is particularly true in health care, the most eminent Canadian idea looming in the American context. That is, public health care in Canada depends on private health care in the U.S. A small news story from last month illustrates this:

A Canadian woman has given birth to extremely rare identical quadruplets. The four girls were born at a U.S. hospital because there was no space available at Canadian neonatal intensive care units. Autumn, Brook, Calissa, and Dahlia are in good condition at Benefice Hospital in Great Falls, Montana. Health officials said they checked every other neonatal intensive care unit in Canada, but none had space. The Jepps, a nurse and a respiratory technician were flown 500 kilometers to the Montana hospital, the closest in the U.S., where the quadruplets were born on Sunday.

Canadian health care in a nutshell. After all, you can’t expect a G-7 economy of only 30 million people to be able to offer the same level of neonatal intensive care coverage as a town of 50,000 in remote, rural Montana. And let’s face it, there’s nothing an expectant mom likes more on the day of delivery than 300 miles in a bumpy twin prop over the Rockies. Everyone knows that socialized health care means you wait and wait and wait—six months for an MRI, a year for a hip replacement, and so on. But here is the absolute logical reductio of a government monopoly in health care: the ten month waiting list for the maternity ward."

https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2008&month=01

Be well.

But PC, you're talking about health CARE, while the issue at hand is availability of health CARE to all Americans who need it without eventually bankrupting those hospitals like the one in Montana that must provide it "free" if one cannot pay because he has no insurance . No one is disputing that the USA doesn't have the best, just the worst way of distributing it. And private health care insurers currently dictate who will get insurance and who won't.

Interesting.

1. Universal Health Care means rationing. Limiting avaiability.

2. If one wishes to indemnify said hospitals, why not simply accept bills for payment by federal government, rather than a trillion dollar plan that is unwanted and unwarrented.

3. "Food debit cards help 27 million people buy food, similar to the number who need help buying health coverage. In all fifty states, debit card technology has transformed the federal food stamp program, which used to be notorious for fraud and abuse. (Only 2 percent of card users are found to be ineligible, according to the General Accounting Office.) Cards are loaded with a specific dollar amount monthly, depending on family size and income, and allow cardholders to shop anywhere. The same strategy could be adapted to provide purchasing power to families who need help buying high-deductible health coverage. It's what all Americans used to buy (see chart 5), and it's all that's needed for families with moderate incomes, who can afford a routine doctor visit. "
http://defendyourhealthcare.us/downgradinghealthcare.html

Are you advocating a single payer system (which most folks can't distinguish between a "universal" system, but are in fact, totally different)? Frankly, I often wondered whatever happened to that idea. But I think Obama's intent was to keep the private insurers in business, so single-payer was out.

 

[PoliticalChic]

But PC, you're talking about health CARE, while the issue at hand is availability of health CARE to all Americans who need it without eventually bankrupting those hospitals like the one in Montana that must provide it "free" if one cannot pay because he has no insurance . No one is disputing that the USA doesn't have the best, just the worst way of distributing it. And private health care insurers currently dictate who will get insurance and who won't.

Interesting.

1. Universal Health Care means rationing. Limiting avaiability.

2. If one wishes to indemnify said hospitals, why not simply accept bills for payment by federal government, rather than a trillion dollar plan that is unwanted and unwarrented.

3. "Food debit cards help 27 million people buy food, similar to the number who need help buying health coverage. In all fifty states, debit card technology has transformed the federal food stamp program, which used to be notorious for fraud and abuse. (Only 2 percent of card users are found to be ineligible, according to the General Accounting Office.) Cards are loaded with a specific dollar amount monthly, depending on family size and income, and allow cardholders to shop anywhere. The same strategy could be adapted to provide purchasing power to families who need help buying high-deductible health coverage. It's what all Americans used to buy (see chart 5), and it's all that's needed for families with moderate incomes, who can afford a routine doctor visit. "
http://defendyourhealthcare.us/downgradinghealthcare.html

Are you advocating a single payer system (which most folks can't distinguish between a "universal" system, but are in fact, totally different)? Frankly, I often wondered whatever happened to that idea. But I think Obama's intent was to keep the private insurers in business, so single-payer was out.

Not at all.

I'm advocating keeping government out of free market solutions to health care

...except for legislation that accomplished the following:

1. Allow the 1300 companies to sell in every state.
2. Tort reform limiting damages to actual costs.
3. No state mandates: buy what coverage you wish.
4. Use the tax system to incentivize more professionals into the medical field.
5. Encourage more to buy their own health insurance with tax deductibility.


The above is based upon the following:
1. The United States has the best healthcare in the world, based on life expectancy.

2. The principle of ‘liberty’ puts each of us in control of making the decisions that will affect our lives, for better of for worse. Thomas Jefferson put it like this: “It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods of no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”


Whenever there is a 2000 page bill, the sotto voce purpose is to make sure that no one can know what is in it.

 

[MaggieMae]

Interesting.

1. Universal Health Care means rationing. Limiting avaiability.

2. If one wishes to indemnify said hospitals, why not simply accept bills for payment by federal government, rather than a trillion dollar plan that is unwanted and unwarrented.

3. "Food debit cards help 27 million people buy food, similar to the number who need help buying health coverage. In all fifty states, debit card technology has transformed the federal food stamp program, which used to be notorious for fraud and abuse. (Only 2 percent of card users are found to be ineligible, according to the General Accounting Office.) Cards are loaded with a specific dollar amount monthly, depending on family size and income, and allow cardholders to shop anywhere. The same strategy could be adapted to provide purchasing power to families who need help buying high-deductible health coverage. It's what all Americans used to buy (see chart 5), and it's all that's needed for families with moderate incomes, who can afford a routine doctor visit. "
http://defendyourhealthcare.us/downgradinghealthcare.html

Are you advocating a single payer system (which most folks can't distinguish between a "universal" system, but are in fact, totally different)? Frankly, I often wondered whatever happened to that idea. But I think Obama's intent was to keep the private insurers in business, so single-payer was out.

Not at all.

I'm advocating keeping government out of free market solutions to health care

...except for legislation that accomplished the following:

1. Allow the 1300 companies to sell in every state.
2. Tort reform limiting damages to actual costs.
3. No state mandates: buy what coverage you wish.
4. Use the tax system to incentivize more professionals into the medical field.
5. Encourage more to buy their own health insurance with tax deductibility.


The above is based upon the following:
1. The United States has the best healthcare in the world, based on life expectancy.

2. The principle of ‘liberty’ puts each of us in control of making the decisions that will affect our lives, for better of for worse. Thomas Jefferson put it like this: “It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods of no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”


Whenever there is a 2000 page bill, the sotto voce purpose is to make sure that no one can know what is in it.

Ah yes, so simple. How come the Republican Party has never taken the initiative on those points, but instead wait until health care becomes front and center by Democrats? This could all be history revisited by now. Instead, the health care industry was allowed to become a monopolistic behemoth beyond the reach of average Americans. Enter a dramatic solution by the Democrats. And so here we are.

 

[hylandrdet]

Iran's fight is not our fight.

You fail to see the forest for the trees.

And sadly, within a few months - or perhaps even weeks, you may wish to reconsider...

No everything's fine.

If there was one lesson we'd learned from Vietnam, it is this. Let the people handle their own country's problems.

Since military action is out of the question, and with no real global support for sanctions, there's nothing we can do but to monitor the situation. My attention is now focused on Yemen. Food for thought.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Are you advocating a single payer system (which most folks can't distinguish between a "universal" system, but are in fact, totally different)? Frankly, I often wondered whatever happened to that idea. But I think Obama's intent was to keep the private insurers in business, so single-payer was out.

Not at all.

I'm advocating keeping government out of free market solutions to health care

...except for legislation that accomplished the following:

1. Allow the 1300 companies to sell in every state.
2. Tort reform limiting damages to actual costs.
3. No state mandates: buy what coverage you wish.
4. Use the tax system to incentivize more professionals into the medical field.
5. Encourage more to buy their own health insurance with tax deductibility.


The above is based upon the following:
1. The United States has the best healthcare in the world, based on life expectancy.

2. The principle of ‘liberty’ puts each of us in control of making the decisions that will affect our lives, for better of for worse. Thomas Jefferson put it like this: “It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods of no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”


Whenever there is a 2000 page bill, the sotto voce purpose is to make sure that no one can know what is in it.

Ah yes, so simple. How come the Republican Party has never taken the initiative on those points, but instead wait until health care becomes front and center by Democrats? This could all be history revisited by now. Instead, the health care industry was allowed to become a monopolistic behemoth beyond the reach of average Americans. Enter a dramatic solution by the Democrats. And so here we are.

Now, friend Mag, I don't think you can find any post where I have included myself as a Republican- or a Democrat.

My specification has always been as a conservative. So, I do not answer as a Republican.

But as to why did they " wait until health care becomes front and center by Democrats," it is because the issue has been thrust upon them as a wedge issue by the Democrats and their lap dogs of the Fourth Estate.

"...monopolistic behemoth beyond the reach of average Americans..."
I think this is known as 'begging the question' in logic. It is clearly untrue, as almost 90% of the folks respond as satisfied with their health care.

“…while the numbers clearly show that people are happier with their own health care than with the system as a whole, there is no dimension with which their happier than the quality of care they personally receive…a mere 15 percent complain about the quality of care they receive.”.(New England Journal of Medicine)
Health Beat: The Quality Question

Among insured Americans, 82 percent rate their health coverage positively. Among insured people who've experienced a serious or chronic illness or injury in their family in the last year, an enormous 91 percent are satisfied with their care, and 86 percent are satisfied with their coverage.
ABCNEWS.com : U.S. Health Care Concerns Increase


The most recent ABC News/Washington Post poll (June 21) finds that 83 percent of Americans are very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the quality of their health care, and 81 percent are similarly satisfied with their health insurance.

They have good reason to be. If you're diagnosed with cancer, you have a better chance of surviving it in the United States than anywhere else, according to the Concord Five Continent Study. And the World Health Organization ranked the United States No. 1 out of 191 countries for being responsive to patients' needs, including providing timely treatments and a choice of doctors.
Defend Your Healthcare

"dramatic solution by the Democrats"
Bogus.

Since my post is, as you say, "Ah yes, so simple," we should apply Occam's razor, and see whether any of the 'problems' with healthcare raised by the Democrats is not easily solved using my 5-step solution.

And consider this, if as is claimed, millions more are covered, why is there not a strong push to increase the number of doctors?

No, this bill is not about healthcare, and I suspect that you are far too intelligent to have been fooled...you've allowed your bias to blind you.

The agenda is politcal, not medical.

And, yes here we are: having been given the government of the United States, the Democrats will pass this bill, and if it survivews to consumation, most- because they will not be exposed to very serious illness, will not notice that care is more difficult to come by, and a bit more expensive, and for most, they will accept as the folks in Orwell's 1984 did the changes in enemy from Eurasia to Eastasia.

 

[rdean]

During the Bush years, Iran presented a solid, unified front against the US. Now, when Obama is president, they are fracturing.

Right wing neocons in this country say we could be doing something to help. But seriously, who do they want to "help"?

The government of Iran is an extreme right wing government which is against the teaching of evolution, promotes prayer in public schools, and advocates a national religion.

Considering what Republicans did to the middle class here, I'm not even sure which side they are on in Iran.

 

[saveliberty]

During the Bush years, Iran presented a solid, unified front against the US. Now, when Obama is president, they are fracturing.

Right wing neocons in this country say we could be doing something to help. But seriously, who do they want to "help"?

The government of Iran is an extreme right wing government which is against the teaching of evolution, promotes prayer in public schools, and advocates a national religion.

Considering what Republicans did to the middle class here, I'm not even sure which side they are on in Iran.

So you quickly claim any residual Bush effect as your own when the results are favorable, but deny any negatives when it suits you. Once again proving your partisan hackery.

 

[rdean]

During the Bush years, Iran presented a solid, unified front against the US. Now, when Obama is president, they are fracturing.

Right wing neocons in this country say we could be doing something to help. But seriously, who do they want to "help"?

The government of Iran is an extreme right wing government which is against the teaching of evolution, promotes prayer in public schools, and advocates a national religion.

Considering what Republicans did to the middle class here, I'm not even sure which side they are on in Iran.

So you quickly claim any residual Bush effect as your own when the results are favorable, but deny any negatives when it suits you. Once again proving your partisan hackery.

Come on, you have to agree, Bush unified Iran. The constant threats of bombs and invasion. How can you not see that?
You see that, right?