Fraulein Hilda
Rookie
- May 23, 2009
- 1,068
- 55
- 0
- Banned
- #41
That said, anything that gets passed will surely be better than what exists now.
How do you know? All you have are promises from a street organizer that has accomplished nothing.
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.
That said, anything that gets passed will surely be better than what exists now.
As to rationing health care?
That's ALREADY being done now by the private insurers.
Huh...WHA??That said, anything that gets passed will surely be better than what exists now.
The French system rations healthcare. So does Canada's. So does Great Britain's.
The problem with libs is they point to these systems as gold standards, but when you corner them about rationing, they say, well, we won't have a system like... They want it both ways.
A politician who has no qualms about canning 200,000 employees of auto dealers will have no qualms about closing clinics and hospitals he does not think are necessary.
Americans can buy as much health care as they want, and it's none of the goddamned government's business how much they should have.
The French system rations healthcare. So does Canada's. So does Great Britain's.
The problem with libs is they point to these systems as gold standards, but when you corner them about rationing, they say, well, we won't have a system like... They want it both ways.
A politician who has no qualms about canning 200,000 employees of auto dealers will have no qualms about closing clinics and hospitals he does not think are necessary.
Americans can buy as much health care as they want, and it's none of the goddamned government's business how much they should have.
France, Canada and even Mexico's public health care programs have a greater emphasis on PREVENTIVE care. Remove the millions of people who don't see a doctor because they have no insurance and no cash to pay for emergency visits and who ultimately become more seriously ill because of it, and you wil have a far less expensive government health care program. That's not "rationing." That's common sense.
It's also a far stretch to compare this problem with that of the auto industry. Why should auto dealership employees sit around picking their noses when people aren't buying new cars? There will ALWAYS be a demand for health care.
The French system rations healthcare. So does Canada's. So does Great Britain's.
The problem with libs is they point to these systems as gold standards, but when you corner them about rationing, they say, well, we won't have a system like... They want it both ways.
A politician who has no qualms about canning 200,000 employees of auto dealers will have no qualms about closing clinics and hospitals he does not think are necessary.
Americans can buy as much health care as they want, and it's none of the goddamned government's business how much they should have.
France, Canada and even Mexico's public health care programs have a greater emphasis on PREVENTIVE care. Remove the millions of people who don't see a doctor because they have no insurance and no cash to pay for emergency visits and who ultimately become more seriously ill because of it, and you wil have a far less expensive government health care program. That's not "rationing." That's common sense.
It's also a far stretch to compare this problem with that of the auto industry. Why should auto dealership employees sit around picking their noses when people aren't buying new cars? There will ALWAYS be a demand for health care.
As to rationing health care?
That's ALREADY being done now by the private insurers.
Except, you are free to buy any health care you want now.
A government rationed system does not let you do that.
The French system rations healthcare. So does Canada's. So does Great Britain's.
The problem with libs is they point to these systems as gold standards, but when you corner them about rationing, they say, well, we won't have a system like... They want it both ways.
A politician who has no qualms about canning 200,000 employees of auto dealers will have no qualms about closing clinics and hospitals he does not think are necessary.
Americans can buy as much health care as they want, and it's none of the goddamned government's business how much they should have.
Nice scare tactic. Hospitals are already being closed because of govt mandate. The govt ALREADY pays most of the bills because of medicare/medicaid.
The whole crux of both health care proposals is to get those who fall through the cracks at least the insurance to help with soaring medical costs.
The French system rations healthcare. So does Canada's. So does Great Britain's.
The problem with libs is they point to these systems as gold standards, but when you corner them about rationing, they say, well, we won't have a system like... They want it both ways.
A politician who has no qualms about canning 200,000 employees of auto dealers will have no qualms about closing clinics and hospitals he does not think are necessary.
Americans can buy as much health care as they want, and it's none of the goddamned government's business how much they should have.
Nice scare tactic. Hospitals are already being closed because of govt mandate. The govt ALREADY pays most of the bills because of medicare/medicaid.
So you're saying government will only accellerate those closings. Then it's not a scare tactic. You proved my point.
Medicare and Medicaid shift costs to private and third party payers. Government will force providers to accept lower reimbursement with no means of recovering that elsewhere.
Many will quit.
"Preventative care" is simply a cynical code phrase for putting gubmint in charge of everything all the time.France, Canada and even Mexico's public health care programs have a greater emphasis on PREVENTIVE care. Remove the millions of people who don't see a doctor because they have no insurance and no cash to pay for emergency visits and who ultimately become more seriously ill because of it, and you wil have a far less expensive government health care program. That's not "rationing." That's common sense.
We live in a republic, not a democracy, pudinhead.Of course, but your point was equally ridiculous. People shouldn't have to move because they want their voice to be heard in government. That's why we live in a democracy.
And we're not the ones pining for the benevolent socialist patronage of the places that our ancestors left.....You are.
So, rather than trying to make everyone else go along with your program, it behooves you to GTFO, since the grass is so green over there.
Well I hope whoever's got your medical expenses covered pays for anger management. And btw, we live in a DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC.
Nice scare tactic. Hospitals are already being closed because of govt mandate. The govt ALREADY pays most of the bills because of medicare/medicaid.
So you're saying government will only accellerate those closings. Then it's not a scare tactic. You proved my point.
Medicare and Medicaid shift costs to private and third party payers. Government will force providers to accept lower reimbursement with no means of recovering that elsewhere.
Many will quit.
Quit? And go where? WalMart?
We live in a republic, not a democracy, pudinhead.
And we're not the ones pining for the benevolent socialist patronage of the places that our ancestors left.....You are.
So, rather than trying to make everyone else go along with your program, it behooves you to GTFO, since the grass is so green over there.
Well I hope whoever's got your medical expenses covered pays for anger management.
If not, he could go to wonderful places like France or Mexico and get it for FREE ! ....
Oh, puuullleeeease!! ...Save your amateurish mind reading exercises for someone else.Well I hope whoever's got your medical expenses covered pays for anger management. And btw, we live in a DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC.
( In Two Parts )
First what the Democrats are considering It's still a work in progress; heres what I know about it
Democrats want to expand the role of the Federal Government in the health insurance industry, and as a start they will probably tax small employers who dont provide health insurance to their employees. Then they would use those revenues to subsidize the un-insured.
Like the Republicans they will also have to go after the $300 billion employer tax subsidy, meaning the 'equivalence-to-wages' of the presently non-taxed employer provided health insurance benefit. Max Baucus, Senate Finance Chairman himself has acknowledged the need to do that, saying, it makes him feel like Willy Sutton because he recognizes that is where the money is. Using some part of that recaptured tax expenditure, they would create a government subsidized health insurance plan.
Once theres government (subsidized) insurance, the private insurance companies will disappear from the scene and we will be left with a single payer system, which probably everyone would agree is their real goal. Therefore they seem to be planning on doing that by vastly expanding federal regulations of health insurance and, for now, staying with the present job-related system, partly concentrating on employers to get this done.
Because many employers are too small, employing too few people, using employer provided insurance will never accomplish what needs to be done.
The Democrats are estimating costs for their plan at $1.5 trillion OR MORE over 10-years. Since their plan, unlike the Republican plan does nothing to encourage competition, that estimate will no doubt be on the low side.
Honestly, there is no competition within the health insurance industry, unless you are healthy. There are so many problems that are not addressed by the insurance industry, and the bottom line is that they are in business to make money, not to provide people with decent healthcare.
After my insurance company assured me that when I moved from one state to another, I would be given a similar policy as the one I had in Colorado at a similar price, they are now saying I have to go through underwriting which means I am being denied coverage.
Because I have a pre-existing condition, I checked this out thoroughly with my insurer along with several agents. Now they are trying to fuck me and tell me that even if they accept me, my rates will go from $350 to $1500 per month with a high deductible. On top of that, they are doubling the rate for my kids based on my genetic disorder, even though my kids are not likely to have it.
Because I am self-employed, I have private insurance. Now the only way to get insurance will be to go to work for a company that provides insurance. I was responsible and had coverage, but now because I became sick due to a genetic disorder, I am being hung out to dry.
As far as I'm concerned, the insurance companies can all go fuck themselves and the government can take over, because that's the only way I will be covered at least for the next nineteen years.
I agree that people should be responsible and pay for insurance if they want coverage. However, the insurance companies do whatever they can to not cover those who become sick through no fault of their own. Basically, it's a scam.
So please, tell me again how great the insurance companies are and how wonderful it is to have all these choices, because I get zero choices even though I had coverage.
So please tell me again how our system is the greatest in the world.
As to rationing health care?
That's ALREADY being done now by the private insurers.
Except, you are free to buy any health care you want now.
A government rationed system does not let you do that.
Some people can buy any healthcare they want.
That said, anything that gets passed will surely be better than what exists now.
How do you know? All you have are promises from a street organizer that has accomplished nothing.
( In Two Parts )
First what the Democrats are considering It's still a work in progress; heres what I know about it
Democrats want to expand the role of the Federal Government in the health insurance industry, and as a start they will probably tax small employers who dont provide health insurance to their employees. Then they would use those revenues to subsidize the un-insured.
Like the Republicans they will also have to go after the $300 billion employer tax subsidy, meaning the 'equivalence-to-wages' of the presently non-taxed employer provided health insurance benefit. Max Baucus, Senate Finance Chairman himself has acknowledged the need to do that, saying, it makes him feel like Willy Sutton because he recognizes that is where the money is. Using some part of that recaptured tax expenditure, they would create a government subsidized health insurance plan.
Once theres government (subsidized) insurance, the private insurance companies will disappear from the scene and we will be left with a single payer system, which probably everyone would agree is their real goal. Therefore they seem to be planning on doing that by vastly expanding federal regulations of health insurance and, for now, staying with the present job-related system, partly concentrating on employers to get this done.
Because many employers are too small, employing too few people, using employer provided insurance will never accomplish what needs to be done.
The Democrats are estimating costs for their plan at $1.5 trillion OR MORE over 10-years. Since their plan, unlike the Republican plan does nothing to encourage competition, that estimate will no doubt be on the low side.
Honestly, there is no competition within the health insurance industry, unless you are healthy. There are so many problems that are not addressed by the insurance industry, and the bottom line is that they are in business to make money, not to provide people with decent healthcare.
After my insurance company assured me that when I moved from one state to another, I would be given a similar policy as the one I had in Colorado at a similar price, they are now saying I have to go through underwriting which means I am being denied coverage.
Because I have a pre-existing condition, I checked this out thoroughly with my insurer along with several agents. Now they are trying to fuck me and tell me that even if they accept me, my rates will go from $350 to $1500 per month with a high deductible. On top of that, they are doubling the rate for my kids based on my genetic disorder, even though my kids are not likely to have it.
Because I am self-employed, I have private insurance. Now the only way to get insurance will be to go to work for a company that provides insurance. I was responsible and had coverage, but now because I became sick due to a genetic disorder, I am being hung out to dry.
As far as I'm concerned, the insurance companies can all go fuck themselves and the government can take over, because that's the only way I will be covered at least for the next nineteen years.
I agree that people should be responsible and pay for insurance if they want coverage. However, the insurance companies do whatever they can to not cover those who become sick through no fault of their own. Basically, it's a scam.
So please, tell me again how great the insurance companies are and how wonderful it is to have all these choices, because I get zero choices even though I had coverage.
So please tell me again how our system is the greatest in the world.
Your unfortunate experience is indicative of yet another failure by the private sector (insurers) to do what they promise, thereby almost inviting government control. I hope "Dude" gets to see your story.
That said, anything that gets passed will surely be better than what exists now.
How do you know? All you have are promises from a street organizer that has accomplished nothing.
The thread is about BOTH parties' proposals. I don't have time to address your stupid spin on the subject.