cool pic, who's the guy?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
cool pic, who's the guy?
Nope, he ran on "uniting." Looks like "bipartisanship" is his baby.
Consequences, consequences...
I knew some idiot would say something like this. Its hard being bipartisanship when the other side says..no matter what, I am voting against this. No matter what.
Are you serious saying this?
Screw the republicans. He tried to appease them, they said no matter what, we are saying no. Screw em.
I was glad to see the president is going to present his own healthcare bill.
The forces of evil have held back national health insurance for too long.
Every other Western democracy has it, and we should have it too.
cool pic, who's the guy?
C-Bass.
I knew some idiot would say something like this. Its hard being bipartisanship when the other side says..no matter what, I am voting against this. No matter what.
Are you serious saying this?
Screw the republicans. He tried to appease them, they said no matter what, we are saying no. Screw em.
I was glad to see the president is going to present his own healthcare bill.
The forces of evil have held back national health insurance for too long.
Every other Western democracy has it, and we should have it too.
Guess what these ten countries have in common? Guess what they don't, besides Elvis and CrusaderFrank and divecon?
High Living Standard Countries
Doesn't seem to be a list of the criteria or who compiled the data on that one, Gomer.Guess what these ten countries have in common? Guess what they don't, besides Elvis and CrusaderFrank and divecon?
High Living Standard Countries
Do you really think that's logical?Compromise won't work when only one is at the table. It's now (past) time for President Obama to move forward with universal health care for all Americans.
The insurance industry has for too long inserted its agents between the patient and their doctor, putting profit first and medical care a distant second.
A governmental insurance program available to all Americans can be administered more economically then the private sector. Government will not pay huge bonuses, nor need to hire salespersons, district managers, or lawyers to limit payouts.
Cost to medical providers will be reduced as their need to interact with scores of insurance companies will be reduced to one; denials will be eliminated and tort reform will become reality if independent arbitrators are hired to resolve disputes.
See HR 676 for the general idea.
Remind me again, which country did Teddy Kennedy go to for treatment?
You mean like the fact that Medicare costs nearly ten times -adjusted for inflation- as much as it was projected to cost, back in '65?
What was being paid for private insurance is irrelevant to the fact that costs have exploded under Medicare.....Which is proof positive that bureaucrats are completely incapable of controlling costs.You mean like the fact that Medicare costs nearly ten times -adjusted for inflation- as much as it was projected to cost, back in '65?
Ummm.....What were we paying for private insurance in 1965?
Medicare has lower overhead and is more efficiently run than any private insurer. The reason the private sector is spending billions to defeat this bill is not because they care for their customers, but they care for their bottom line.
Someone is threatening the goose that lays the golden eggs and the insurance companies aren't happy. At least they have the republicans protecting their interests. If only we could get the republicans to protect our interests
Here's one piece, from esteemed PhD. economist Walter E. Williams, who rarely if ever gets his facts wrong.Dude,
Facts? Post a link with evidence that your 'facts' are in fact factual.
At its start, in 1966, Medicare cost $3 billion. The House Ways and Means Committee, along with President Johnson, estimated that Medicare would cost an inflation-adjusted $12 billion by 1990. In 1990, Medicare topped $107 billion. That's nine times Congress' prediction. Today's Medicare tab comes to $420 billion with no signs of leveling off. How much confidence can we have in any cost estimates by the White House or Congress?
What was being paid for private insurance is irrelevant to the fact that costs have exploded under Medicare.....Which is proof positive that bureaucrats are completely incapable of controlling costs.You mean like the fact that Medicare costs nearly ten times -adjusted for inflation- as much as it was projected to cost, back in '65?
Ummm.....What were we paying for private insurance in 1965?
Medicare has lower overhead and is more efficiently run than any private insurer. The reason the private sector is spending billions to defeat this bill is not because they care for their customers, but they care for their bottom line.
Someone is threatening the goose that lays the golden eggs and the insurance companies aren't happy. At least they have the republicans protecting their interests. If only we could get the republicans to protect our interests
Your party man e-mail blast hack-in-the-box demonization of insurance companies is falling totally flat, especially considering how grossly overburdened with rules and regulations they are already.
Come back when you have something that anyone couldn't already get from the WH jabbering point list.
As usual, you also neglect to factor in the costs associated with states keeping their citizens captive to in-state insurance providers, and an FDA red tape monster that forces pharm companies and medical equipment inventors to go through approval processes that cost in excess of $500 BILLION per approval......And those are just for starters.
But g'head and keep the DNC yammering points a-comin.
As usual, you also neglect to factor in the costs associated with states keeping their citizens captive to in-state insurance providers, and an FDA red tape monster that forces pharm companies and medical equipment inventors to go through approval processes that cost in excess of $500 BILLION per approval......And those are just for starters.
But g'head and keep the DNC yammering points a-comin.
I agree with allowing insurers to compete in all states. Put it on the internet, let the consumer pick from hundreds of offerors
I'm also OK with eliminating red tape in getting FDA approval. But with restrictions on patent extensions allowed before a drug can go generic. As long as we are talking free trade, let me buy my drugs from the cheapest source available. Even if it means importing them. Make doctors and hospitals advertise what procedures are going to cost as well as impartial ratings of which doctors and hospitals are the best and who is not cutting it.