I thought we had a thread for healthcare reform, but I can't find it. Maybe it was one of the other threads that got off topic. At any rate, I thought you may enjoy reading a portion of the transcript from the weekly address.The transcript in it's entirity as well as the video is enclosed in the link.
QuoteAs we draw close to finalizing - and passing - real health insurance reform, the defenders of the status quo and political point-scorers in Washington are growing fiercer in their opposition. In recent days and weeks, some have been using misleading information to defeat what they know is the best chance of reform we have ever had. That is why it is important, especially now, as Senators and Representatives head home and meet with their constituents, for you, the American people, to have all the facts.
So, let me explain what reform will mean for you. And let me start by dispelling the outlandish rumors that reform will promote euthanasia, cut Medicaid, or bring about a government takeover of health care. That's simply not true. This isn't about putting government in charge of your health insurance; it's about putting you in charge of your health insurance. Under the reforms we seek, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.
And while reform is obviously essential for the 46 million Americans who don't have health insurance, it will also provide more stability and security to the hundreds of millions who do. Right now, we have a system that works well for the insurance industry, but that doesn't always work well for you. What we need, and what we will have when we pass health insurance reform, are consumer protections to make sure that those who have insurance are treated fairly and that insurance companies are held accountable.
We will require insurance companies to cover routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms, colonoscopies, or eye and foot exams for diabetics, so we can avoid chronic illnesses that cost too many lives and too much money.
We will stop insurance companies from denying coverage because of a person's medical history. I will never forget watching my own mother, as she fought cancer in her final days, worrying about whether her insurer would claim her illness was a preexisting condition. I have met so many Americans who worry about the same thing. That's why, under these reforms, insurance companies will no longer be able to deny coverage because of a previous illness or injury. And insurance companies will no longer be allowed to drop or water down coverage for someone who has become seriously ill. Your health insurance ought to be there for you when it counts - and reform will make sure it is.
With reform, insurance companies will also have to limit how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses. And we will stop insurance companies from placing arbitrary caps on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime because no one in America should go broke because of illness.
In the end, the debate about health insurance reform boils down to a choice between two approaches. The first is almost guaranteed to double health costs over the next decade, make millions more Americans uninsured, leave those with insurance vulnerable to arbitrary denials of coverage, and bankrupt state and federal governments. That's the status quo. That's the health care system we have right now.
So, we can either continue this approach, or we can choose another one - one that will protect people against unfair insurance practices; provide quality, affordable insurance to every American; and bring down rising costs that are swamping families, businesses, and our budgets. That's the health care system we can bring about with reform.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/08/obama-uses-jobs-report-to_n_254563.html
Then why do most in congress say they won't also go on the same plan if it's gonna be so great?
Quote from: me on August 09, 2009, 12:47:03 PM
Then why do most in congress say they won't also go on the same plan if it's gonna be so great?
Not because of the bullshit people like you are spreading around.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 10, 2009, 09:54:41 AM
Not because of the bullshit people like you are spreading around.
Then what is their reason since you're so smart? Also why is questioning something spreading bull shit? Since when is it against the law to question our government?
Quote from: Exterminator on August 10, 2009, 09:54:41 AM
Not because of the bullshit people like you are spreading around.
Then all the assholes (the congress) has to do is answer the frickin questions that the people want answered...and LISTEN to what the people want....THAT is THEIR JOB!!......If is BULLSHIT, then they need to CLARIFY....but I don't think they know how to, because THEY don't understand what is in the Bill either.... :rant:
Quote from: me on August 10, 2009, 10:18:13 AM
Then what is their reason since you're so smart?
Why don't you go to their websites and read their opinions yourself?
QuoteAlso why is questioning something spreading bull shit? Since when is it against the law to question our government?
Spreading the shit you and Henry do is not questioning the government; it is intentionally propagating misinformation...some call it lying.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 10, 2009, 11:38:35 AM
Then all the assholes (the congress) has to do is answer the frickin questions that the people want answered...and LISTEN to what the people want....THAT is THEIR JOB!!......If is BULLSHIT, then they need to CLARIFY....but I don't think they know how to, because THEY don't understand what is in the Bill either.... :rant:
And how many of their website have
you visited to read their opinions? Even one?
Quote from: Exterminator on August 10, 2009, 04:08:01 PM
And how many of their website have you visited to read their opinions? Even one?
That's the problem you go to their web sites and get their opinion about what's in the bill but not what is actually in the bill because non of them have read it. What the people who are going to the town hall meetings are doing is asking that their congressmen read the bill and don't be in such a hurry to pass it.
:groan:
Henry for President!
Quote from: Exterminator on August 11, 2009, 08:38:55 AM
You can't fix stupid.
And I ask again. Why is it stupid to have a different opinion than yours? Isn't it stupid to assume there is no opinion other than your opinion?
Quote from: me on August 11, 2009, 09:11:54 AM
And I ask again. Why is it stupid to have a different opinion than yours? Isn't it stupid to assume there is no opinion other than your opinion?
It's ok to have an INFORMED opinion, once you have ACTUALLY READ THE BILL YOURSELF! :rolleyes:
Quote from: Bo D on August 11, 2009, 10:12:25 AM
It's ok to have an INFORMED opinion, once you have ACTUALLY READ THE BILL YOURSELF! :rolleyes:
These guys are the one's who are supposed to read it....and then go to townhalls and explain to those of us who hired them to do this work....and they damn well better have the answers....and they are not doing this....because THEY don't understand it...or they are hiding crap.
Quote from: Bo D on August 11, 2009, 10:12:25 AM
It's ok to have an INFORMED opinion, once you have ACTUALLY READ THE BILL YOURSELF! :rolleyes:
If I am not allowed to have an opinion because I have not read the entire bill, then is it ok for the senators and congress to have opinions and the power to enact the bill when they haven't read it? Seems like it would be even more important for them to read and understand it than someone who actually can't do anything about it. I don't think insisting they read the darn thing before they make it law unreasonable.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 11, 2009, 11:15:13 AM
These guys are the one's who are supposed to read it....and then go to townhalls and explain to those of us who hired them to do this work....and they damn well better have the answers....and they are not doing this....because THEY don't understand it...or they are hiding crap.
Wasn't very long ago, it seems you were complaining about bills not being posted in time for you to read them (as if you actually would.)
Now you want somebody else to do the work for you?
Is it any wonder this country is so screwed up? You get what you deserve.
Quote from: Bo D on August 11, 2009, 11:30:02 AM
Wasn't very long ago, it seems you were complaining about bills not being posted in time for you to read them (as if you actually would.)
Now you want somebody else to do the work for you?
Is it any wonder this country is so screwed up? You get what you deserve.
Excuse me but isn't it their job to read the bills before they pass them?
Quote from: me on August 11, 2009, 12:20:47 PM
Excuse me but isn't it their job to read the bills before they pass them?
Of course it is! And it's YOUR job to watch over them and make sure they do. And remember what they did on election day!
Of course you probably overlooked the same situation over the Patriot Bill a while back.
:rolleyes:
Quote from: me on August 11, 2009, 12:20:47 PM
Excuse me but isn't it their job to read the bills before they pass them?
Can you prove that they haven't or are you just talking more of your typical lying smack?
And yes, it's a rhetorical question...not that you'll know what that means.
Quote from: Bo D on August 11, 2009, 12:27:06 PM
Of course it is! And it's YOUR job to watch over them and make sure they do. .
and THAT is what people are doing....they are getting PISSED off!!...THEY clearly do NOT like what is IN this Bill.
that is pretty clear Bo.....that is why there is protests, and very disgruntled people at the townhalls.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 11, 2009, 12:57:13 PM
and THAT is what people are doing....they are getting PISSED off!!...THEY clearly do NOT like what is IN this Bill.
that is pretty clear Bo.....that is why there is protests, and very disgruntled people at the townhalls.
Tell us, Henry. What EXACTLY is in the bill to be pissed off about?
Or maybe you would just rather believe OUTRIGHT LIES such as this ...
"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care," ... Sarah Palin
Even her fellow conservatives are muttering behind her back and questioning her sanity after that little gem.
Quote from: Bo D on August 11, 2009, 01:09:30 PM
Or maybe you would just rather believe OUTRIGHT LIES such as this ...
"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care," ... Sarah Palin
Even her fellow conservatives are muttering behind her back and questioning her sanity after that little gem.
I don't particularly approve of that statement either but did ya ever think maybe she read the bill and isn't speaking out of lack of knowledge? Like I said though, I don't feel she should have made that statement and don't know what she was thinking when she made it so I'm not basing any part of my opinion on it.
Quote from: me on August 11, 2009, 01:35:17 PM
I don't particularly approve of that statement either but did ya ever think maybe she read the bill and isn't speaking out of lack of knowledge? Like I said though, I don't feel she should have made that statement and don't know what she was thinking when she made it so I'm not basing any part of my opinion on it.
If she had read the bill, that makes the statement even worse. Everyone agrees that there is no such language in the bill.
Quote from: Bo D on August 11, 2009, 01:45:56 PM
If she had read the bill, that makes the statement even worse. Everyone agrees that there is no such language in the bill.
I know what she meant when she said it but she should have chosen her words a little more carefully. The part of the language that bothers me is the "cost effective" language. If a $50 pill to end someone's life is more "cost effective" than the treatment what decision are they going to make as to which treatment a person will receive? My understanding is the person won't be able to make the choice and neither will the doctor the choice will be made for them.
Quote from: me on August 11, 2009, 03:25:56 PM
I know what she meant when she said it but she should have chosen her words a little more carefully. The part of the language that bothers me is the "cost effective" language. If a $50 pill to end someone's life is more "cost effective" than the treatment what decision are they going to make as to which treatment a person will receive? My understanding is the person won't be able to make the choice and neither will the doctor the choice will be made for them.
Your understanding is wrong.
Sweet baby Jeebus hanging on the cross! I cannot believe what I am reading! You people think this is Nazi Germany or something? Who in their right minds thinks anyone sitting in a decision maker seat is capable of administering this proposed program in the manner being speculated about herein? (Besides Palin the Pony). :rolleyes:
You guys should be writing for the resurrection of Tales From The Crypt for crying out loud!
And please, which one of you is making more than 250k a year? That's what I thought. . . :rolleyes:
"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"
You morons will be praising this healthcare solution once you lose your friggin jobs and get sick. . .
Hell, private insurance doesn't even pay for friggin testing anymore, until AFTER you meet your 1-2k annual deductable. They just collect the monthly premiums, bank them, and deny all claims by putting them back onto you or toward your deductables. SOP for all of them. The fuggers drive a percentage of folks to stroke or heart attack just by the stress they create in the business practices.
When you start having to shell out 475 bucks a quarter for the required blood tests to keep you on your maintenance medications, along with another 75-100 bucks a visit to the doctor each quarter, on top of the costs of your meds, you'll get on your high horse and be squalling about that too. . . :rolleyes:
Already do that, haven't ever complained. Was very glad to have it when the 37,000 dollar hospital bill came for my husbands appendectomy and stay in ICU. He goes on medicare next month, maybe it will be cheaper for us then. We had GM insurance and paid no premiums ot of pocket but always always paid for full price for doctor visits, imunizations, tests done at the doctor's office and for many years did not have eye, dental or drug coverage. (People forget that,) Now we pay premiums, and yes I know they are very low, have deductables (which aren't so low) and our drug coverage costs have triples and frankly I still would rather have this than what the government is proposing until they can explain it fully to me. I sure as heck don't want to pay for non citizens health care. Let their own country pay for it.
Quote from: Palehorse on August 11, 2009, 03:44:23 PM
Sweet baby Jeebus hanging on the cross! I cannot believe what I am reading! You people think this is Nazi Germany or something? Who in their right minds thinks anyone sitting in a decision maker seat is capable of administering this proposed program in the manner being speculated about herein? (Besides Palin the Pony). :rolleyes:
You guys should be writing for the resurrection of Tales From The Crypt for crying out loud!
And please, which one of you is making more than 250k a year? That's what I thought. . . :rolleyes:
"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"
You morons will be praising this healthcare solution once you lose your friggin jobs and get sick. . .
Hell, private insurance doesn't even pay for friggin testing anymore, until AFTER you meet your 1-2k annual deductable. They just collect the monthly premiums, bank them, and deny all claims by putting them back onto you or toward your deductables. SOP for all of them. The fuggers drive a percentage of folks to stroke or heart attack just by the stress they create in the business practices.
When you start having to shell out 475 bucks a quarter for the required blood tests to keep you on your maintenance medications, along with another 75-100 bucks a visit to the doctor each quarter, on top of the costs of your meds, you'll get on your high horse and be squalling about that too. . . :rolleyes:
If you actually believe that OUR government is capable of successfully running OUR healthcare, then maybe YOU should be writing for the Tales From The Crypt as a docudrama...and do you REALLY think this is NOT going to cost ALL of us dearly, for this SO-CALLED Free Healthcare....it amazed me that the sky was falling when Bush was dealing with the patriot act...and we ALL survived that just fine....now, we have a president who is spending TRILLIONS..and pushing a health care as fast as possible....and is trying to silence anybody who is objecting to it..... :rolleyes:
I have had no insurance for period for 11yrs. A friend of mine in Muncie has no insurance either and had 3 heart attacks within a 5 month period a couple of years ago and got in a program which furnishes her drugs and medical care for nothing and she is being well taken care of. There are things out there if one knows where to look.
Quote from: Anne on August 11, 2009, 04:14:34 PM
Already do that, haven't ever complained. Was very glad to have it when the 37,000 dollar hospital bill came for my husbands appendectomy and stay in ICU. He goes on medicare next month, maybe it will be cheaper for us then. We had GM insurance and paid no premiums out of pocket but always always paid for full price for doctor visits, immunizations, tests done at the doctor's office and for many years did not have eye, dental or drug coverage. (People forget that,) Now we pay premiums, and yes I know they are very low, have deductables (which aren't so low) and our drug coverage costs have triples and frankly I still would rather have this than what the government is proposing until they can explain it fully to me. I sure as heck don't want to pay for non citizens health care. Let their own country pay for it.
First of all, don't count on it being any cheaper. Once you hit medicare/aid you'll have to purchase supplemental insurance just to keep things where they are now. And wait until you see how much that crap costs you. . .
Secondly, no one is saying you have to replace what you have. The point is coverage; if you do not have it this would be provided. If you choose you can switch.
Thirdly, you say you don't want to pay for those whose immigration status is illegal, but the fact is you are already paying for it! (This would formalize the process and unify the charges, level of service, etc. for everyone who falls under the coverage). That 37 k you spent for an appendectomy will be 40k next year once the write offs are factored in for the uninsured and illegals that are rendered care for humanitarian reasons this year. (Part of the driver for this bill).
In addition, all those huge deductions that they apply your diagnostic testing toward would be out the window when it comes to testing. That would have to be covered by whatever insurance you choose. Period. One of the largest obstacles toward proactive maintenance care are the thousands of dollars in testing that insurers force us to pay for by applying it toward those huge deductibles. And it hits most of us at the time of our lives when our income is fixed, when we can least afford it.
And if you think you won't need medicare supplement insurance you'll be just one of two medical emergencies from being one of those people the POTUS is talking about losing their homes. Even if it is paid for. Think you can just file bankruptcy? Better think again. In some situations under the Chimp's changes to the bankruptcy laws, they will put you out in a heartbeat.
Finally, the whole reason we need to do this is to control the skyrocketing costs that are being driven by the fact hospitals in many cases are forced to care for those who are uninsured or have an immigration status of illegal. It doesn't matter if the reasons they do are legislated or due to humanitarian driven policy, it happens and should happen and every single one of us already is paying for it. And those programs out there that subsidize healthcare procedures and medications for those who are presently not covered, who do you think is paying for them? If it is a private organization they subsist on donations, if it is a corporate entity the costs associated with the subsidization are factored into the drug prices for those who can pay, or written off within the corporate tax strategy, reducing the level of taxes they pay. (Who's making up the difference? We are). You're paying already but you just don't know it. . .or don't want to.
Some of you are so high and mighty as to take offense at words a person may utilize in expressing themselves. The position you are taking is one of the most selfish and offensive I've ever encountered in my lifetime. You would deny care to those in need, deny a person the right to live their lives out within a home they worked the lions share of it to pay for, turn away a dying child because of the immigration status of its parents; and for what? To keep yourself fat and sassy and to hell with humanity. How can you look at yourself in the mirror?
One day the bad karma you are so lavishly spreading toward the least of us will return to you, and the tables will be turned. Karma is all that will keep you from suffering the same fate as that which you thrust upon the rest of us; those in your current position being mindful of it and possessing the compassion you so sorely lack.
Mom is paying $225pr month for her supplemental insurance and it covers everything her medicare doesn't which is quite a bit. She does not have prescription coverage but only pays $4 for her prescriptions because of where she gets her medication.
My biggest problem with this whole thing is I don't understand why, if its so important, don't they take the time to get it right and let congress read the bill and ask questions about the parts no one, including the congressmen, understand. Figure out where all this money is going to come from before they pass anything and don't, as Gitner suggested, just raise the national debt ceiling. He is trying to do too much too fast and not thinking into the future and the effect it will have on our long term economy. There are just too many unanswered questions.
I'm sick of this! Here, read it (them) all you smug pundits, and then you can talk about it.
Senate version
http://help.senate.gov/BAI09A84_xml.pdf
House version
http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
I don't think any of you have read these documents. But I have. So I really do have something to base this statement on:
Me, Henry, you have your heads so far up your butts you are deaf, blind and suffocating!
Ya see, there really isn't any provision in either bill for euthanasia, or encouraging euthanasia. There is the same criteria on transplants that has always been there -- to wit: you have to have a good chance of survival before wasting the donated organ.
As for raising my taxes, I already pay for Medicare, Medicaid, the indigent and the illegals. The only people who will be added are those who are currently self-pay. I have no problem with that, so long as the hospitals and doctors are not allowed to charge one price for the insured, and twice as much for those who self-pay. That's what happens now.
I don't want to read another absurd word unless you can swear to me that you have read both bills. I did.
there are programs out there that allow the medicare recipient to obtain supplemental health care and the state picks up the tab. there is not a monthly premium paid by the medicare recipient, and the 100.00 or so deduction is no longer deducted by social security, so the monthly check is increased by that amount.
have your mother check out these programs, two that come to mind are Evercare and Wellcare. You will need to have her check the coverage for her maintenance drugs to see what program is best for her at the pharmacy. Prescriptions can range from zero copay to about 3.00 each.
Open enrollment begins soon, so it is a good time to check.
I believe the wellcare also includes one set of eyeglasses and one dental visit each year, in addition to regular medical coverage. Depending of course on the State and County of residence, these could be an excellent way to reduce her costs for needed medication, Her Medicare part D would be replaced by that program, and administered by the insurance carrier.
This is not a good plan for people who are on the Tri Care plan after retirement, and sometimes not good for GM plans that are grandfathered in with no changes. But it sure wouldnt hurt to check it out.
Quote from: Elaine on August 11, 2009, 07:18:34 PM
there are programs out there that allow the medicare recipient to obtain supplemental health care and the state picks up the tab. there is not a monthly premium paid by the medicare recipient, and the 100.00 or so deduction is no longer deducted by social security, so the monthly check is increased by that amount.
have your mother check out these programs, two that come to mind are Evercare and Wellcare. You will need to have her check the coverage for her maintenance drugs to see what program is best for her at the pharmacy. Prescriptions can range from zero copay to about 3.00 each.
Open enrollment begins soon, so it is a good time to check.
I believe the wellcare also includes one set of eyeglasses and one dental visit each year, in addition to regular medical coverage. Depending of course on the State and County of residence, these could be an excellent way to reduce her costs for needed medication, Her Medicare part D would be replaced by that program, and administered by the insurance carrier.
This is not a good plan for people who are on the Tri Care plan after retirement, and sometimes not good for GM plans that are grandfathered in with no changes. But it sure wouldnt hurt to check it out.
And each one of us is currently paying for these "free programs" one way or another; increased taxes and/or increased prices. . . Draining social program coffers only forces increased taxation rates for the middle class, as it is now. That is being proposed to be changed. . . Read the damned bill for crying out loud!
Quote from: Palehorse on August 11, 2009, 07:42:16 PM
Read the damned bill for crying out loud!
Yes! Yes! Yes! I gave you the frickin' links. You have no excuse.
Quote from: Palehorse on August 11, 2009, 07:42:16 PM
And each one of us is currently paying for these "free programs" one way or another; increased taxes and/or increased prices. . . Draining social program coffers only forces increased taxation rates for the middle class, as it is now. That is being proposed to be changed. . . Read the damned bill for crying out loud!
well we are paying in a way, but the federal government pays a portion and the state pays a portion, if there are copays, they are minimal. this program is not for people who do not work, or dont have a history of work, they are for people who receive social security.
i want to see healthcare changed, costs reduced, insurance available to americans, but i do worry that the federal government cannot administer them.
Quote from: Elaine on August 11, 2009, 07:46:32 PM
. . .
i want to see healthcare changed, costs reduced, insurance available to americans, but i do worry that the federal government cannot administer them.
And private insurers have done such an outstanding job at getting this done?! :rolleyes:
Quote from: Elaine on August 11, 2009, 07:46:32 PM
... but i do worry that the federal government cannot administer them.
Well then, who did you have in mind? Halliburton?
Quote from: Elaine on August 11, 2009, 07:18:34 PM
there are programs out there that allow the medicare recipient to obtain supplemental health care and the state picks up the tab. there is not a monthly premium paid by the medicare recipient, and the 100.00 or so deduction is no longer deducted by social security, so the monthly check is increased by that amount.
have your mother check out these programs, two that come to mind are Evercare and Wellcare. You will need to have her check the coverage for her maintenance drugs to see what program is best for her at the pharmacy. Prescriptions can range from zero copay to about 3.00 each.
Open enrollment begins soon, so it is a good time to check.
I believe the wellcare also includes one set of eyeglasses and one dental visit each year, in addition to regular medical coverage. Depending of course on the State and County of residence, these could be an excellent way to reduce her costs for needed medication, Her Medicare part D would be replaced by that program, and administered by the insurance carrier.
This is not a good plan for people who are on the Tri Care plan after retirement, and sometimes not good for GM plans that are grandfathered in with no changes. But it sure wouldnt hurt to check it out.
Thanks for the info I'll have her check that out.
Quote from: LOsborne on August 11, 2009, 07:14:49 PM
I don't want to read another absurd word unless you can swear to me that you have read both bills.
It's a lot easier for them to just whine on incessantly.
Quote
24 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—
39
O:\BAI\BAI09A84.xml [file 1 of 6] S.L.C.
1 (1) the Federal employees health benefits pro2
gram under chapter 89 of title 5, United States
3 Code, allows Members of Congress to have afford4
able choices among competing health benefit plans;
5 (2) the Federal employees health benefits pro6
gram ensures that the health benefit plans available
7 to Members of Congress meet minimum standards of
8 quality and effectiveness;
9 (3) millions of Americans have no meaningful
10 choice in health benefits, because health benefit
11 plans are either unavailable or unaffordable; and
12 (4) all Americans should have the same kinds
13 of meaningful choices of health benefit plans that
14 Members of Congress, as Federal employees, enjoy
15 through the Federal employees health benefits pro16
gram.
17 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the
18 Senate that Congress should establish a means for all
19 Americans to enjoy affordable choices in health benefit
20 plans, in the same manner that Members of Congress have
21 such choices through the Federal employees health bene22
fits program.
From the senate bill
Quote from: LOsborne on August 11, 2009, 07:14:49 PM
I'm sick of this! Here, read it (them) all you smug pundits, and then you can talk about it.
Senate version
http://help.senate.gov/BAI09A84_xml.pdf
House version
http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
I don't think any of you have read these documents. But I have. So I really do have something to base this statement on:
Me, Henry, you have your heads so far up your butts you are deaf, blind and suffocating!
Ya see, there really isn't any provision in either bill for euthanasia, or encouraging euthanasia. There is the same criteria on transplants that has always been there -- to wit: you have to have a good chance of survival before wasting the donated organ.
As for raising my taxes, I already pay for Medicare, Medicaid, the indigent and the illegals. The only people who will be added are those who are currently self-pay. I have no problem with that, so long as the hospitals and doctors are not allowed to charge one price for the insured, and twice as much for those who self-pay. That's what happens now.
I don't want to read another absurd word unless you can swear to me that you have read both bills. I did.
Don't even TRY to tell my YOU read this WHOLE thing, and understand it.... :no: ;D
There is enough carbley-goo BS in it....I DO NOT TRUST THIS GOVERNMENT....THEY BETTER take the time to be damn sure EVERYBODY understands WHAT this is going to mean to each and every one of us.....I have been buzzing through this every evening....and there is a whole lot in there that CAN make one extremely skeptical on what their intent IS.....
I will say this, I do NOT particularly CARE for OUR Government RUNNING anything that is going to effect my life anymore than they ALREADY do...........giving them MORE power over our lives is a bad, bad thing....as it is now, I think is better than what I may very well become....I think we, overall have it much better than other countries that HAVE social or universal or whatever you want to call it....State run healthcare....
I want this debate to continue for a while.....Prove that these "Pundits' are wrong with their analyses...we need to be SURE this is the right thing to do.........there will be ONE hell of a revolution IF this is remotely wrong......I know you will NEVER get 100% of the people to go along with anything...........I think the protests that are going on is a very alarming sign that we HAVE to slow down......
BIG Government is A BAD THING...if you think THAT comment is absurd or I am "just whinning incessantly"...then get used to it.....I'm not backing down for a second.....and I will fight this administrations desire to control the sheeple....until I die. :yes: I'm not alone on this, and statistic's support it.......the growing deficits, with massive increases in spending........it is ALL happening TOO damn FAST......slow the F... down....take a breath.
Quote from: Bo D on August 11, 2009, 01:01:48 PM
Tell us, Henry. What EXACTLY is in the bill to be pissed off about?
Notice how he completely avoided the question? He bitches the loudest and has absolutely no idea what he is even bitching about beyond whatever Rush told him. What a freakin' sheep.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/ (http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/)
Quote
Kavita Patel, who works with Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett and who worked for years before as a physician, debunks the myth that reform will mean a "government takeover" of health care or lead to "rationing." To the contrary, reform will forbid many forms of rationing that are currently being used by insurance companies.
Melody Barnes, the President's Director of the Domestic Policy Council, debunks the malicious myth that reform would encourage or even require euthanasia for seniors.
Matt Flavin, Director of Veterans and Wounded Warrior Policy, explains that nothing in health insurance reform will affect veterans' access to the care they get now. To the contrary, the President's budget greatly expands coverage for veterans who have been denied access in the past.
Christina Romer, Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, debunks the myth that health insurance reform will hurt small businesses. To the contrary, reform will ease the burdens on small businesses and help level the playing field with big firms who pay much less to cover their employees on average.
Robert Kocher of the National Economic Council debunks the myth that Health Insurance Reform would be financed by cutting Medicare benefits. To the contrary, reform would simply eliminate waste and unnecessary subsidies to insurance companies.
Linda Douglass of the White House Office of Health Reform debunks the myth that reform will force you out of your current insurance plan or force you to change doctors. To the contrary, reform will expand your choices, not eliminate them.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 11, 2009, 05:07:02 PM
If you actually believe that OUR government is capable of successfully running OUR healthcare, then maybe YOU should be writing for the Tales From The Crypt as a docudrama...
You're right, Henry, Our government consists of nothing but a bunch of buffoons incapable of administering anything. Take, for example, the postal service...when is the last time you heard of anyone mailing a letter and it actually being delivered to its intended recipient? The whole thing is in freakin' shambles...the roads and bridges are impassable, none of the traffic lights work, the electric grid fails constantly, police and fire departments never respond (because the 911 system is so fu@ked up!)...even our military is in such ruin that a handful of high school kids with sling shots could probably take out a whole brigade. Don't even get me started on the mismanagement of our nuclear arsenal...I'm surprised the terrorists aren't firing our own missiles at us...yet. And what's up with all of those other agencies? The FDA doesn't prevent people from getting food poisoning any better than the FAA prevents planes from constantly crashing into each other and the CDC? People still die...if they were worth a shit, they'd have put a stop to that a long time ago! No, it's mass chaos and we certainly don't need to add fuel to that fire by adding something as huge and complicated as health care coverage for those who don't have it to the mix! What the hell are they thinking?
What a douche... :rolleyes:
Quote from: Palehorse on August 11, 2009, 06:18:07 PM
Some of you are so high and mighty as to take offense at words a person may utilize in expressing themselves. The position you are taking is one of the most selfish and offensive I've ever encountered in my lifetime. You would deny care to those in need, deny a person the right to live their lives out within a home they worked the lions share of it to pay for, turn away a dying child because of the immigration status of its parents; and for what? To keep yourself fat and sassy and to hell with humanity. How can you look at yourself in the mirror?
One day the bad karma you are so lavishly spreading toward the least of us will return to you, and the tables will be turned. Karma is all that will keep you from suffering the same fate as that which you thrust upon the rest of us; those in your current position being mindful of it and possessing the compassion you so sorely lack.
Hear, hear.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 12, 2009, 09:22:15 AM
Don't even TRY to tell my YOU read this WHOLE thing, and understand it.... :no: ;D
Oh give me a break. Just because you have problems with comprehension doesn't mean everyone does. Yes, I read it. Or rather
them. They have been available since mid-July. There is some pork in each version, but I assume it will go away when both houses try to reconcile the two versions.
Since you claim to carefully weigh all sides of an issue, I am appalled that you are too lazy to read the bills. I guess it's more fun to skimp the research and parrot the "talking points" of Rush and Beck.
Quote from: Palehorse on August 11, 2009, 06:18:07 PM
First of all, don't count on it being any cheaper. Once you hit medicare/aid you'll have to purchase supplemental insurance just to keep things where they are now. And wait until you see how much that crap costs you. . .
Secondly, no one is saying you have to replace what you have. The point is coverage; if you do not have it this would be provided. If you choose you can switch.
Thirdly, you say you don't want to pay for those whose immigration status is illegal, but the fact is you are already paying for it! (This would formalize the process and unify the charges, level of service, etc. for everyone who falls under the coverage). That 37 k you spent for an appendectomy will be 40k next year once the write offs are factored in for the uninsured and illegals that are rendered care for humanitarian reasons this year. (Part of the driver for this bill).
In addition, all those huge deductions that they apply your diagnostic testing toward would be out the window when it comes to testing. That would have to be covered by whatever insurance you choose. Period. One of the largest obstacles toward proactive maintenance care are the thousands of dollars in testing that insurers force us to pay for by applying it toward those huge deductibles. And it hits most of us at the time of our lives when our income is fixed, when we can least afford it.
And if you think you won't need medicare supplement insurance you'll be just one of two medical emergencies from being one of those people the POTUS is talking about losing their homes. Even if it is paid for. Think you can just file bankruptcy? Better think again. In some situations under the Chimp's changes to the bankruptcy laws, they will put you out in a heartbeat.
Finally, the whole reason we need to do this is to control the skyrocketing costs that are being driven by the fact hospitals in many cases are forced to care for those who are uninsured or have an immigration status of illegal. It doesn't matter if the reasons they do are legislated or due to humanitarian driven policy, it happens and should happen and every single one of us already is paying for it. And those programs out there that subsidize healthcare procedures and medications for those who are presently not covered, who do you think is paying for them? If it is a private organization they subsist on donations, if it is a corporate entity the costs associated with the subsidization are factored into the drug prices for those who can pay, or written off within the corporate tax strategy, reducing the level of taxes they pay. (Who's making up the difference? We are). You're paying already but you just don't know it. . .or don't want to.
Some of you are so high and mighty as to take offense at words a person may utilize in expressing themselves. The position you are taking is one of the most selfish and offensive I've ever encountered in my lifetime. You would deny care to those in need, deny a person the right to live their lives out within a home they worked the lions share of it to pay for, turn away a dying child because of the immigration status of its parents; and for what? To keep yourself fat and sassy and to hell with humanity. How can you look at yourself in the mirror?
One day the bad karma you are so lavishly spreading toward the least of us will return to you, and the tables will be turned. Karma is all that will keep you from suffering the same fate as that which you thrust upon the rest of us; those in your current position being mindful of it and possessing the compassion you so sorely lack.
Get a grip. Geeze. I know when or if we lose his GM coverage, which hasn't happened yet, we will have to buy supplemental coverage. We have already looked into it and the best policy we have found is around $150 apiece. I guess you think it is not acceptable to be grateful for the coverage we have. You are right, I don't want to pay for the health coverage of illegal aliens. I am not in the habit of rewarding bad behavior, as in breaking the law. And don't think for a moment that a dying child would be turned away from an emergency room, you conplain about misleading statments and lies of conservatives and then you throw in something like that. You don't know me or what I do to or for people. Don't be so judgemental.
Quote from: Anne on August 12, 2009, 07:37:08 PM
... I don't want to pay for the health coverage of illegal aliens. I am not in the habit of rewarding bad behavior, as in breaking the law. ...
But that is exactly what the self-insured do now. Illegals go to the emergency room. They don't pay for it. Guess who does?
Of course we do and I do not have a problem with emergency care, I have a problem with all the other stuff. I don't think they should be rewarded with free health care of a routine nature and all the other things they get. They are breaking the law every day by being here illegally and being rewarded for it. I have no problem with legal immigrants, I just don't like the laws of our country being thrown in our face.
I have read parts of one of the health care bills and I think you would have to be a lawyer to remotely understand it. And contrary to President Obama's statement yesterday the AARP does not endorse the bill, it has stated that it has not found anything detrimental the medicare in the bill, but is not endorsing the bill as a whole.
Quote from: Anne on August 12, 2009, 07:37:08 PM
. . . Don't be so judgemental.
Is that not what you are doing by making statements against the content of this bill without even reading it?
Quote from: LOsborne on August 12, 2009, 07:26:01 PM
Oh give me a break. Just because you have problems with comprehension doesn't mean everyone does.
Exactly!
QuoteSince you claim to carefully weigh all sides of an issue, I am appalled that you are too lazy to read the bills. I guess it's more fun to skimp the research and parrot the "talking points" of Rush and Beck.
Not only on this subject but on every subject for which he offers "his" opinion...nothing more than sppon-fed drivel.
Quote from: Palehorse on August 13, 2009, 08:18:55 AM
Is that not what you are doing by making statements against the content of this bill without even reading it?
Maybe so against a bill, not a person. I have read parts of the bill, it is so convoluted that everything could have two meanings or none at all. It is written for lawyers and I don't happen to have one on retainer.
Quote from: Anne on August 13, 2009, 11:23:30 AM
I have read parts of the bill, it is so convoluted that everything could have two meanings or none at all.
Example?
Page 106 line 19: the Commissioner shall establish a mechanism whereby there is an adjusment made of the premium amounts payable among QHBP offering entities offeing Exchange-participating health benefits plans of premiums collected for such plans that takes into account (in a manner specified by the Commissioner) the differences in the risk characteristics of (continues to page 107) individuals and employers enrolled under the different Exchange-participating health benefits plans offered by such entities so as to minimize the impact of adverse selection of enrollees among the plans offered by such entities.
Page 146 line 3: (A) in case of individual coverage, not less than 72.5 percent of the applicable preminum (as defined in section 4980B(f)(4) of such Code, subjecty to paragraph (2) of the lowest cost plan offered by the employer that is a qualified health benefits plan (or is such current employment-based health plan;.....
Page 167 line 19: Health Care Coverage. (a) Tax Imposed. -In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of (continues to page 168)(1)the taxpayer's modified adjust gross income for the taxable year, over (2)the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.
I found these ythree passages by just scrolling through the first couple hundred pages and stopping at random. Can I figure out what these particular passages mean? Yes, if I had the time and was willing to spend the money on ink to print the whole thing out. I don't think most people have the time,to do that. If President Obama wants the majority of the population to understand this bill then they need to make it easy to understand.
Quote from: Anne on August 13, 2009, 02:32:35 PM
I found these ythree passages by just scrolling through the first couple hundred pages and stopping at random. Can I figure out what these particular passages mean? Yes, if I had the time and was willing to spend the money on ink to print the whole thing out. I don't think most people have the time,to do that. If President Obama wants the majority of the population to understand this bill then they need to make it easy to understand.
The majority of the population are idiots and I don't think that it's any more necessary that them to understand this bill than it is for them to understand the tax code or even their own insurance policies from a private carrier. Since when does the President of the United States have to pander to the lowest common denominator?
Quote from: Exterminator on August 13, 2009, 04:28:06 PM
The majority of the population are idiots and I don't think that it's any more necessary that them to understand this bill than it is for them to understand the tax code or even their own insurance policies from a private carrier. Since when does the President of the United States have to pander to the lowest common denominator?
He has to carry his weight. We pander to the lower denominators every day around here. :razz: :biggrin:
Quote from: Exterminator on August 13, 2009, 04:28:06 PM
The majority of the population are idiots and I don't think that it's any more necessary that them to understand this bill than it is for them to understand the tax code or even their own insurance policies from a private carrier. Since when does the President of the United States have to pander to the lowest common denominator?
So in other words you don't understand what it is saying either you're just taking the word of congress for what it means. Don't you think it's just a little bit important to know for sure what we're getting in for rather than find out after it's too late?
Quote from: Exterminator on August 13, 2009, 04:28:06 PMSince when does the President of the United States have to pander to the lowest common denominator?
There IS a precedent for that.
The previous administration ... :biggrin:
Quote from: Bo D on August 13, 2009, 05:29:24 PM
There IS a precedent for that.
The previous administration ... :biggrin:
:yes: :biggrin:
Quote from: Anne on August 13, 2009, 02:32:35 PM
Can I figure out what these particular passages mean? Yes, if I had the time ...
What's the problem? The first excerpt defines how risk would be distributed among the various Qualified Health Benefit Plans, if an inordinate number of high-risk individuals opt for any particular plan.
The second excerpt was cut off before we got to the verb, but the existing phrase tells us seventy-two and a half percent of the premium is the bottom line for something (presumably specified in the verbage the poster did not include,) for those choosing individual coverage.
The third excerpt tells us anyone not meeting the requirements of subsection (d) -- which the poster again did
not include -- is subject to two and half percent tax on any AGI
over the amount the amount specified in section 6012(a)(1).
It ain't rocket surgery, boys and girls. Failing to include necessary phrases does not make it brain science, either.
Quote from: me on August 13, 2009, 04:51:26 PM
So in other words you don't understand what it is saying either you're just taking the word of congress for what it means. Don't you think it's just a little bit important to know for sure what we're getting in for rather than find out after it's too late?
In other words, I
do understand what it is saying. That your ilk can't doesn't make it bad policy by default. The bottom line is this...something has to be done and there are no perfect systems. We can sit around and talk about reforming health care forever and nothing will ever get done or we can admit that our current plan is not a perfect one and that adjustments will need to be made after it is implemented and we can accomplish something now.
Quote from: Bo D on August 13, 2009, 05:29:24 PM
There IS a precedent for that.
The previous administration ... :biggrin:
Yes, but the previous administration
was the lowest common denominator.
Hell, the last administration was simply Dick Cheney.
What a DICK.
:yes: :yes: :yes:
Quote from: Anne on August 13, 2009, 11:23:30 AM
Maybe so against a bill, not a person. . . .
Said bill provides the means for those without insurance to obtain it, and keep their homes they worked 20-40 years to pay for. Your opposition to this is a denial of this care by proxy; just as effective as you slamming the door shut on them yourself.
Most of those in opposition to this bill are parroting the propaganda against it that was bought and paid for by the
very industry it is meant to rein in, the insurance industry. They want the American people (sheeple) to herd up against it because it threatens the profiteering they have been engaging in for almost twenty years or more. And what better way to do this than create a bunch of false propaganda with the PR firm you have on retainer, and let them provide it to those public shills (IE Rush et AL), and let them scare the crap out of the sheep! Then all they have to do is sit back and listen to them bleat!
Think that isn't what is going on? Read the story from a man who spent almost twenty years doing this very thing for a major player in the insurance industry: CIGNA!
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/17/potter.health.insurance/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/17/potter.health.insurance/index.html)
He could no longer be party to this fleecing of Americans and quit because of it!
The POTUS knows this crap is going on and wants it stopped. We need a reform of healthcare and the sooner we get it, the sooner we can all get back to our lives!
Refutation of e-mail spam on Health Bill:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/jul/30/e-mail-analysis-health-bill-needs-check-/
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090811/NEWS05/908110364
The facts about the proposed health-care bill
Star news services
Don't believe everything you read. Or hear. Or are told about health care. There's a lot of suspect information out there. "There's been a lot of noise, and it's certainly made people wonder about what is being proposed because so much false information has been put out," said Brooks Jackson, director of FactCheck.org, a Web site dedicated to debunking (or backing up) political claims. Answers to questions are based on the Democrats' current House bill.
Question: Does the legislation include provisions to encourage euthanasia for senior citizens?
Answer: No. This has become one of the most misleading claims made in the health-care debate, advanced by conservative commentators such as Rush Limbaugh. The House bill would give seniors on Medicare the option -- it's not mandatory -- to sit down with a doctor for an "advance care planning consultation" every five years to discuss options should they become seriously ill. Topics could include development of a living will. AARP endorses the provision.
Q: Will the government start paying for abortions?
A: That's unclear. Neither House nor Senate versions of the legislation contains any requirement that federal funding be made available for abortions. Claims that tax dollars will be used for abortions, as a television ad from the Family Research Council contends, are premature and somewhat misleading. But the legislation is short on many details. Depending on how regulations are written, it's possible that some women who get federally subsidized insurance could buy plans that cover abortions.
Q: Will illegal immigrants receive free health care?
A: Provisions in the House and Senate bills explicitly prohibit people who are "not lawfully present in the United States" from receiving federal aid to help them buy health insurance. Democrats have resisted GOP efforts to put tougher documentation requirements on those applying for aid, arguing that could discourage many poor people from signing up. No matter what happens with the bills, illegal immigrants will almost certainly still be able to obtain care in emergency rooms.
Q: Can I keep my current insurance like President Barack Obama has said?
A: Maybe. If you have insurance through your employer like most people, and your employer decides to keep offering it (and it already meets federal minimum standards that will be set), then sure. But those standards aren't set, so it's hard to say what they will require -- and it's tough to know how many employers are going to keep offering health care if a public plan is available.
Q: I have an individual insurance plan, not through my employer. Can I keep it?
A: It could be grandfathered in, yes. But if the insurers make any change -- like in benefits or premiums -- they would have to meet the federal standards.
Q: Do I have to have health insurance?
A: Yes. Otherwise you would face a tax penalty.
Q: Do I have to enroll in the new public insurance plan?
A: No. In fact, if your company offers health insurance, you couldn't. The new plan would be for individuals and small businesses that can't afford coverage. Big companies can provide insurance or pay 8 percent of payroll and let employees find their own insurance as individuals on the health-care exchange, which would include the public plan and other providers. Small businesses would participate in the exchange, offer their own insurance or pay 2 to 6 percent of payroll to let workers find their own insurance as individuals.
Q: What if I can't afford the premium of the new public plan?
A: The legislation provides what it calls "affordability credits," which help people with incomes of up to four times the federal poverty limit -- or about $88,000 for a family of four.
Q: What would the effect be on private insurance?
A: The Lewin Group, a health-care consulting firm, says the number of people without insurance would be reduced by 33 million. If all employers are eligible for the exchange, the number of people with private insurance would drop by 83 million; if only small employers were eligible for the exchange, private coverage would drop by 35 million.
Q: How much would the change cost?
A: The Congressional Budget Office estimates government costs would increase by more than $1 trillion over 10 years, but additional revenues and cost-savings measures bring the impact on the federal deficit down to $239 billion over 10 years.
Q: Will there be new taxes to pay for it?
A: There could be a sliding surcharge on the income of the top 1.2 percent of earners. It would apply to families with income of more than $350,000 a year and individuals making at least $280,000. The surcharge would be only on income over the thresholds. It would range from 1 percent to 5.4 percent (for families making more than $1 million).
Q: How would the legislation control costs?
A: It calls for applying cost-containment formulas intended to protect against overpayment to various services, including hospitals and hospice and home health care. It also calls for cutting payment rates for Medicare Advantage plans, saving $156 billion over 10 years.
Q: Will the government ration care?
A: This is almost impossible to say. The bill would prohibit insurers from denying coverage to anyone with a pre-existing condition, thus eliminating one form of rationing in the current system. The legislation would also give the federal government the authority to set minimum benefits levels that insurers would have to offer in order to sell policies in the new exchanges. That could mean more coverage for millions of individuals and many small businesses that currently are shut out of the health-care system.
Most controversially, the bills would fund more research into the comparative effectiveness of various drugs and medical procedures. The legislation does not dictate that the research be used to limit coverage of any procedures. And many doctors and other health-care experts see this kind of research as critical to improving the quality of care. Nonetheless, some critics say the provisions someday could allow the government to use this research to limit what Medicare or other government insurance programs would cover.
Q: Does the bill advocate assisted suicide?
A: No. It would block funds for counseling that presents suicide or assisted suicide as an option.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32412764/ns/politics-the_new_york_times/
False 'death panel' rumor has familiar roots
Assertion was not born of anonymous e-mailers or partisan bloggers
WASHINGTON - The stubborn yet false rumor that President Obama's health care proposals would create government-sponsored "death panels" to decide which patients were worthy of living seemed to arise from nowhere in recent weeks.
Advanced even this week by Republican stalwarts including the party's last vice-presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, and Charles E. Grassley, the veteran Iowa senator, the nature of the assertion nonetheless seemed reminiscent of the modern-day viral Internet campaigns that dogged Mr. Obama last year, falsely calling him a Muslim and questioning his nationality.
But the rumor — which has come up at Congressional town-hall-style meetings this week in spite of an avalanche of reports laying out why it was false — was not born of anonymous e-mailers, partisan bloggers or stealthy cyberconspiracy theorists.
Rather, it has a far more mainstream provenance, openly emanating months ago from many of the same pundits and conservative media outlets that were central in defeating President Bill Clinton's health care proposals 16 years ago, including the editorial board of The Washington Times, the American Spectator magazine and Betsy McCaughey, whose 1994 health care critique made her a star of the conservative movement (and ultimately, New York's lieutenant governor).
There is nothing in any of the legislative proposals that would call for the creation of death panels or any other governmental body that would cut off care for the critically ill as a cost-cutting measure. But over the course of the past few months, early, stated fears from anti-abortion conservatives that Mr. Obama would pursue a pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia agenda, combined with twisted accounts of actual legislative proposals that would provide financing for optional consultations with doctors about hospice care and other "end of life" services, fed the rumor to the point where it overcame the debate.
On Thursday, Mr. Grassley said in a statement that he and others in the small group of senators that was trying to negotiate a health care plan had dropped any "end of life" proposals from consideration.
A pending House bill has language authorizing Medicare to finance beneficiaries' consultations with professionals on whether to authorize aggressive and potentially life-saving interventions later in life. Though the consultations would be voluntary, and a similar provision passed in Congress last year without such a furor, Mr. Grassley said it was being dropped in the Senate "because of the way they could be misinterpreted and implemented incorrectly."
'Opportunity to weaken the president'
The extent to which it and other provisions have been misinterpreted in recent days, notably by angry speakers at recent town hall meetings but also by Ms. Palin — who popularized the "death panel" phrase — has surprised longtime advocates of changes to the health care system.
"I guess what surprised me is the ferocity, it's much stronger than I expected," said John Rother, the executive vice president of AARP, which is supportive of the health care proposals and has repeatedly declared the "death panel" rumors false. "It's people who are ideologically opposed to Mr. Obama, and this is the opportunity to weaken the president."
The specter of government-sponsored, forced euthanasia was raised as early as Nov. 23, just weeks after the election and long before any legislation had been drafted, by an outlet decidedly opposed to Mr. Obama, The Washington Times.
Palin stands by 'death panel' claim
No 'death panel' in health care bill
In an editorial, the newspaper reminded its readers of the Aktion T4 program of Nazi Germany in which "children and adults with disabilities, and anyone anywhere in the Third Reich was subject to execution who was blind, deaf, senile, retarded, or had any significant neurological condition."
Noting the "administrative predilections" of the new team at the White House, it urged "anyone who sees the current climate as a budding T4 program to win the hearts and minds of deniers."
The editorial captured broader concerns about Mr. Obama's abortion rights philosophy held among socially conservative Americans who did not vote for him. But it did not directly tie forced euthanasia to health care plans of Mr. Obama and his Democratic allies in Congress.
When the Democrats included money for family planning in a proposed version of the stimulus bill in January, the socially conservative George Neumayr wrote for the American Spectator: "Euthanasia is another shovel ready job for Pelosi to assign to the states. Reducing health care costs under Obama's plan, after all, counts as economic stimulus, too — controlling life, controlling death, controlling costs."
Ms. McCaughey, whose 1994 critique of Mr. Clinton's plan was hotly disputed after its publication in The New Republic, weighed in around the same time.
She warned that a provision in the stimulus bill would create a bureaucracy to "monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost-effective," was carried in a commentary she wrote for Bloomberg News that gained resonance throughout the conservative media, most notably with Rush Limbaugh and the Fox News Channel host Glenn Beck.
The legislation did not direct the coordinator to dictate doctors' treatments. A separate part of the law — regarding a council set up to coordinate research comparing the effectiveness of treatments — states that the council's recommendations cannot "be construed as mandates or clinical guidelines for payment, coverage or treatment."
But Ms. McCaughey's article provided another opportunity for others to raise the specter of forced euthanasia. "Sometimes for the common good, you just have to say, 'Hey, Grandpa, you've had a good life,' " Mr. Beck said.
The syndicated conservative columnist Cal Thomas wrote, "No one should be surprised at the coming embrace of euthanasia." The Washington Times editorial page reprised its reference to the Nazis, quoting the Aktion T4 program: "It must be made clear to anyone suffering from an incurable disease that the useless dissipation of costly medications drawn from the public store cannot be justified."
The notion was picked up by various conservative groups, but still, as Mr. Obama and Congress remained focused on other matters, it did not gain wide attention. Former Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota, an advocate for the health care proposals, said he was occasionally confronted with the "forced euthanasia" accusation at forums on the plans, but came to see it as an advantage. "Almost automatically you have most of the audience on your side," Mr. Daschle said. "Any rational normal person isn't going to believe that assertion."
But as Congress developed its legislation this summer, critics seized on provisions requiring Medicare financing for "end of life" consultations, bringing the debate to a peak. To David Brock, a former conservative journalist who once impugned the Clintons but now runs a group that monitors and defends against attacks on liberals, the uproar is a reminder of what has changed — the creation of groups like his — and what has not.
"In the 90s, every misrepresentation under the sun was made about the Clinton plan and there was no real capacity to push back," he said. "Now, there is that capacity."
Still, one proponent of the euthanasia theory, Mr. Neumayr, said he saw no reason to stop making the claim.
"I think a government-run plan that is administered by politicians and bureaucrats who support euthanasia is inevitably going to reflect that view," he said, "and I don't think that's a crazy leap."
Robert Pear contributed reporting.
This story, "False 'Death Panel' Rumor Has Some Familiar Roots," originally appeared in The New York Times.
Y,
While I certainly appreciate your having taken the time to post this information, you're forgetting that our forum members for whom this is not already known are functionally illiterate and are thus only capable of considering what they hear on the radio. Could we perhaps work together to rpovide a radio broadcast for them? Of course, it will have to be passionate and vehement, vis-a-vis, a flamboyant preacher or a faith healer for them to believe it but given enough emoting, perhaps even they would listen.
Quote from: followsthewolf on August 15, 2009, 11:57:00 AM
Hell, the last administration was simply Dick Cheney.
Remember when W was asked what he thought of Edwards as the running mate for Kerry? He said, "Dick Cheney could be president." And I thought, Someone needs to tell him -- Dick Cheney
is president.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 17, 2009, 09:03:10 PM
Y,
While I certainly appreciate your having taken the time to post this information, you're forgetting that our forum members for whom this is not already known are functionally illiterate and are thus only capable of considering what they hear on the radio. Could we perhaps work together to rpovide a radio broadcast for them? Of course, it will have to be passionate and vehement, vis-a-vis, a flamboyant preacher or a faith healer for them to believe it but given enough emoting, perhaps even they would listen.
Us functionally illiterate folk don't believe the government is responsible for us from cradle to grave. We believe you should work for what you get not have it handed to you. Some will do better than others and if you're one of the ones who happen not to have it so well it is not up to someone else to pay your way. If this health care thing is going to be so great why won't congress go on it too? I mean gee why should they have it better than us? Yes, someone needs to get the insurance companies in line but to put it in the government's hands....... Maybe they won't pull the plug on grandma....kind of hard to do if it don't get plugged in in the first place. It will be HMO, or what ever that was with the insurance companies, on a bigger scale. A bunch of people with no medical knowledge making decisions about treatments and hospital stays.
Y, I posted the links to the bills themselves. If the health care reform detractors can't be bothered to read the actual proposed legislation, why do you think they will read and understand you post discussing the actual bills?
My problem is too much of it is left open for interpretation which, yes, it could be what you all are saying but on the other hand it could be what the others are saying just as easily. Why take a chance and let them rush it though? Work on it and get it right don't let this be another stimulus thing. If these things are not intended to happen take the wording out that makes it look bad. Where's the problem in that? It is worded so those things can happen just them saying, "no that's not what that means", don't prove a thing. It's written in such a way that if they chose it can and will happen. "Cost effective"
Quote from: me on August 17, 2009, 09:53:08 PM
Us functionally illiterate folk don't believe the government is responsible for us from cradle to grave. We believe you should work for what you get not have it handed to you. Some will do better than others and if you're one of the ones who happen not to have it so well it is not up to someone else to pay your way. If this health care thing is going to be so great why won't congress go on it too? I mean gee why should they have it better than us? Yes, someone needs to get the insurance companies in line but to put it in the government's hands....... Maybe they won't pull the plug on grandma....kind of hard to do if it don't get plugged in in the first place. It will be HMO, or what ever that was with the insurance companies, on a bigger scale. A bunch of people with no medical knowledge making decisions about treatments and hospital stays.
All you are doing is parroting the same old tired bullshit talking points that have already been refuted here and illustrating, once again, that your choice in life is to remain ignorant of the facts. People like you who refuse to learn about a subject before you spew your crap have no place whatsoever in the national debate.
Quote from: me on August 17, 2009, 10:09:47 PM
My problem is too much of it is left open for interpretation which, yes, it could be what you all are saying but on the other hand it could be what the others are saying just as easily. Why take a chance and let them rush it though? Work on it and get it right don't let this be another stimulus thing. If these things are not intended to happen take the wording out that makes it look bad. Where's the problem in that? It is worded so those things can happen just them saying, "no that's not what that means", don't prove a thing. It's written in such a way that if they chose it can and will happen. "Cost effective"
No, it's not written that way; you just don't have the reading skills to understand it. :rolleyes:
even washington NOW want's a "do-over".... :yes:
Like I said...they'll keep talking and talking about this and nothing will get accomplished. You repubs are famous for that. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Exterminator on August 18, 2009, 11:03:03 AM
Like I said...they'll kee ptalking and talking about this and nothing will get accomplished. You repubs are famous for that. :rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
(http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2009/08/18/tomo/story.jpg)
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/18/reinhardt.health.inflation/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/18/reinhardt.health.inflation/index.html)
Commentary: Frightening future if health reform fails
By Uwe Reinhardt
Special to CNN
Editor's note: Uwe Reinhardt is James Madison professor of political economy at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. From 1986 to 1995 he served as a commissioner on the Physician Payment Review Committee, established in 1986 by Congress to advise it on issues related to the payment of physicians.
Uwe Reinhardt says health costs are rising at unsustainable pace, gobbling up middle-class incomes.
(CNN) -- Watching the angry outbursts at town hall meetings on health reform and the continuing public ambivalence about current efforts to reform our health system almost makes me wish that the reform effort fails.
Perhaps Americans need to be taught a basic lesson on the economics of employment-based health insurance before they will feel as smugly secure with it as they do now and before they will stop nitpicking health-reform efforts to death over this or that detail.
And America's currently insured middle class will be increasingly desperate if health reform fails. Millions more such families will see their take-home pay shrink. Millions will lose their employment-based insurance, especially in medium and small-sized firms. And millions will find themselves inexorably priced out of health care as we know it.
Milliman Inc., an employee benefits consulting firm, publishes annually its Milliman Medical Index on the total health spending by or for a typical American family of four with private health insurance. The index totals the family's out-of-pocket spending for health care plus the contribution employers and employees make to that family's job-related health insurance coverage.
The Milliman Medical Index stood at $8,414 in 2001. It had risen to $16,700 by 2009. It is likely to rise to $18,000 by next year. That is more than a doubling of costs in the span of a decade!
Since 2005, the index has grown at an average annual compound rate of 8.4 percent. Suppose we make it 8 percent for the coming decade. Then today's $16,700 will have grown to slightly over $36,000 by 2019.
Economists are convinced that this $36,000 would come virtually all out of the financial hides of employees, even if the employer pretended to be paying, say, 80 percent of the employment-based health insurance premiums. In the succinct words of the late United Automobile Worker Union leader Douglas Fraser:
"Before you start weeping for the auto companies and all they pay for medical insurance, let me tell you how the system works. All company bargainers worth their salt keep their eye on the total labor unit cost, and when they pay an admittedly horrendous amount for health care, that's money that can't be spent for higher [cash] wages or higher pensions or other fringe benefits. So we directly, the union and its members, feel the costs of the health care system." ("A National Health Policy Debate," Dartmouth Medical School Alumni Magazine, Summer 1989: 30)
Unfortunately, very few rank-and-file workers appreciate this fact. Aside from their still modest out-of-pocket payments and contributions to employment-based insurance premiums, most employees seem sincerely to believe that the bulk of their family's health care is basically paid for by "the company," which is why so few members of the middle class have ever been much interested in controlling health spending in this country.
The price for that indifference will be high. If efforts at better cost containment fail once again, and health care costs rise to $36,000 on average for a typical American family of four under age 65 -- as almost surely it would -- that $36,000 will be borne entirely by the family. That family's disposable income would be much higher if the growth of future health spending was better controlled. And, as noted, many smaller firms will stop altogether providing job-based health insurance.
It would be a major problem for families with an income of less than $100,000 a year. In 2007, only about 25 percent of American families had a money income of $100,000 or more. Close to 60 percent had family incomes of less than $75,000.
Here it must be remembered that the wages and salaries of the solid American middle class have been relatively stagnant in recent years and are likely to remain so for the next decade. Unemployment is not likely to fall significantly soon, regardless of what stock prices do on Wall Street. Indeed, often stock prices rise as firms lay off workers to drive up profits through leaner payrolls.
This prospect -- relatively stagnant family incomes combined with family health-care costs that double every decade -- is what America's middle class should contemplate as it thinks about the imperative of health reform.
It is a pity that this central issue seems to have been shoved aside by mendacious distortions from Sarah Palin, Betsy McCaughey, Rush Limbaugh and other extremist commentators seeking to frighten Americans with their prattle about "death panels" and "pulling plugs on granny" that no bill before Congress even remotely envisions.
But no, focus on the negative propaganda being put out there by the very industry that is raping you! :rolleyes:
Funny how some sheeple will listen to any shill out there. . .
Thanks, PH; I was debating whether or not to post the entire article although I doubt our resident pundits will even take the time to read and/or understand what it's saying. Henry will probably avoid it altogether, though, because it shows how health care costs already erode take-home pay and how they will continue to rise if left unchecked and that flies directly into the face of his 'let the workers keep more of their money' mantra. That ilk is only capable of thinking of things in single, disconnected terms rather than as one piece of a larger and much more complex puzzle.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 18, 2009, 02:06:52 PM
Thanks, PH; I was debating whether or not to post the entire article although I doubt our resident pundits will even take the time to read and/or understand what it's saying. Henry will probably avoid it altogether, though, because it shows how health care costs already erode take-home pay and how they will continue to rise if left unchecked and that flies directly into the face of his 'let the workers keep more of their money' mantra. That ilk is only capable of thinking of things in single, disconnected terms rather than as one piece of a larger and much more complex puzzle.
I tried to limit it to just a few sections, but ended up posting the whole thing because I strongly believe it is directly on point as well. I've been complaining for years about how we pay more and more for less with these insurance companies, and I continue to be dumbfounded at how so many people are failing to see how they are being robbed!
I posted it in the futile hope that perhaps a Princton professor's perspective on this effort might open their eyes to things. . . :-\
I wouldn't bet on it you guys.
Any time you quote anything from a "professor," it's just another "one a them intellect-ules spoutin' off again" you know.
Or, you'll be accused of having an over-sized ego, or being gay, or whatever else comes to mind when one is intellectually empty.
The subject of future unchecked health care costs scares the bejeezus out of me, though.
And Henry, I do NOT want to hear that "but congress won't even accept this kind of coverage for themselves" line either. It is a lie plain and simple!
READ THE FRIGGIN' BILL: This bill is intended to provide the SAME coverage as members of congress enjoy, as well as the same choices! The POTUS has said so, the bills say so, and yet people still continue to swallow that plethora of tripe being put out there by the very industry raping us! Wake up!
There is no death panel, nobody besides the immediate family is going to unplug grandma, and you aren't going to have to wait in the crowds of folks at the local free clinic to see your own doctor!
Quote from: followsthewolf on August 18, 2009, 02:21:57 PM
I wouldn't bet on it you guys.
Any time you quote anything from a "professor," it's just another "one a them intellect-ules spoutin' off again" you know.
Or, you'll be accused of having an over-sized ego, or being gay, or whatever else comes to mind when one is intellectually empty.
The subject of future unchecked health care costs scares the bejeezus out of me, though.
And yet they accept as "the gospel" anything spewed by shills that are subsidized by the very industry this bill is trying to reform and regulate! Rush Hambone says it and it is accepted as the unvarnished truth! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Yup, pretty soon the majority will be unable to afford healthcare!
Rush will simply laugh about the costs, though. He's isolated from any cost-affiliated cares by the money he's earned from the fools that support him. Bet he's just giggling like a little girl about his status and the way he's gotten there.
Quote from: followsthewolf on August 18, 2009, 02:33:19 PM
Rush will simply laugh about the costs, though. He's isolated from any cost-affiliated cares by the money he's earned from the fools that support him. Bet he's just giggling like a little girl about his status and the way he's gotten there.
Ironic isn't it?!
I am basically through arguing (with the zone).....I will NEVER get excited about turning MORE power over to the Government....and IF you cannot see that, by READING the BILL, then, there is nothing to argue about......I'm done.
I know our current system is FAR from perfect.....but it IS better than other countries....the POOR get FREE healthcare now.....the VAST majority of the working class already has employer provided insurance...let's FIX it without GIVING Washington the controls.
the bottom line IS.....the TRUTH will prevail. Americans are speaking out against this...for one main reason....the are SICK of Government MIS-Managing OUR Taxes.
60,000 senior citizens have quit AARP since July 1 due to the group's support for a health care overhaul, a spokesman for the organization said Monday.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-08-17-aarp-health-overhaul_N.htm (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-08-17-aarp-health-overhaul_N.htm)
54% Say Passing No Healthcare Reform Better Than Passing Congressional Plan
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/august_2009/54_say_passing_no_healthcare_reform_better_than_passing_congressional_plan (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/august_2009/54_say_passing_no_healthcare_reform_better_than_passing_congressional_plan)
Thirty-five percent (35%) of American voters say passage of the bill currently working its way through Congress would be better than not passing any health care reform legislation this year. However, a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that most voters (54%) say no health care reform passed by Congress this year would be the better option.
Again, this is nothing short of fallout due to the automatic belief of the propaganda being spewed against this bill.
We don't need healthcare reform? Tell that to the 6 million+ unemployed folks when their healthcare coverage either runs out or becomes unaffordable. Tell that to the senior citizens that are going to be tossed out of the homes they worked their entire lives to obtain, when their "pre-existing condition" forces them to choose between their home or a medical procedure needed to keep their spouse alive.
The poor do not get free healthcare, you and I pay for it as long as we pay taxes. And what quality of care do they receive when they get it???
You enjoying paying what you do now for the medical testing you have to have performed? I don't. And it is only going to get worse. . .
Quote from: Palehorse on August 18, 2009, 04:40:29 PM
Again, this is nothing short of fallout due to the automatic belief of the propaganda being spewed against this bill.
We don't need healthcare reform? Tell that to the 6 million+ unemployed folks when their healthcare coverage either runs out or becomes unaffordable. Tell that to the senior citizens that are going to be tossed out of the homes they worked their entire lives to obtain, when their "pre-existing condition" forces them to choose between their home or a medical procedure needed to keep their spouse alive.
The poor do not get free healthcare, you and I pay for it as long as we pay taxes. And what quality of care do they receive when they get it???
You enjoying paying what you do now for the medical testing you have to have performed? I don't. And it is only going to get worse. . .
In addition, how many Americans do you think are still holding jobs simply because they need the medical coverage and cannot afford to retire because of the costs to obtain it?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 18, 2009, 04:28:37 PM
60,000 senior citizens have quit AARP since July 1 due to the group's support for a health care overhaul, a spokesman for the organization said Monday.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-08-17-aarp-health-overhaul_N.htm (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-08-17-aarp-health-overhaul_N.htm)
From the same article ...
"on average AARP loses some 300,000 members a month, but he couldn't say how many more members had quit for other reasons in that time period."
"AARP gained some 400,000 new members during the same period and that 1.5 million members renewed their membership."
...........
Let's see .... 60K quit. 400K joined up and 1.5M renewed.
That makes it 1.9M for and 60K against. Roughly 32 to 1 for. I would say that's pretty much a landslide approval.
:biggrin:
Quote from: Palehorse on August 18, 2009, 01:46:24 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/18/reinhardt.health.inflation/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/18/reinhardt.health.inflation/index.html)
Commentary: Frightening future if health reform fails
By Uwe Reinhardt
Special to CNN
Editor's note: Uwe Reinhardt is James Madison professor of political economy at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. From 1986 to 1995 he served as a commissioner on the Physician Payment Review Committee, established in 1986 by Congress to advise it on issues related to the payment of physicians.
Uwe Reinhardt says health costs are rising at unsustainable pace, gobbling up middle-class incomes.
(CNN) -- Watching the angry outbursts at town hall meetings on health reform and the continuing public ambivalence about current efforts to reform our health system almost makes me wish that the reform effort fails.
Perhaps Americans need to be taught a basic lesson on the economics of employment-based health insurance before they will feel as smugly secure with it as they do now and before they will stop nitpicking health-reform efforts to death over this or that detail.
And America's currently insured middle class will be increasingly desperate if health reform fails. Millions more such families will see their take-home pay shrink. Millions will lose their employment-based insurance, especially in medium and small-sized firms. And millions will find themselves inexorably priced out of health care as we know it.
Milliman Inc., an employee benefits consulting firm, publishes annually its Milliman Medical Index on the total health spending by or for a typical American family of four with private health insurance. The index totals the family's out-of-pocket spending for health care plus the contribution employers and employees make to that family's job-related health insurance coverage.
The Milliman Medical Index stood at $8,414 in 2001. It had risen to $16,700 by 2009. It is likely to rise to $18,000 by next year. That is more than a doubling of costs in the span of a decade!
Since 2005, the index has grown at an average annual compound rate of 8.4 percent. Suppose we make it 8 percent for the coming decade. Then today's $16,700 will have grown to slightly over $36,000 by 2019.
Economists are convinced that this $36,000 would come virtually all out of the financial hides of employees, even if the employer pretended to be paying, say, 80 percent of the employment-based health insurance premiums. In the succinct words of the late United Automobile Worker Union leader Douglas Fraser:
"Before you start weeping for the auto companies and all they pay for medical insurance, let me tell you how the system works. All company bargainers worth their salt keep their eye on the total labor unit cost, and when they pay an admittedly horrendous amount for health care, that's money that can't be spent for higher [cash] wages or higher pensions or other fringe benefits. So we directly, the union and its members, feel the costs of the health care system." ("A National Health Policy Debate," Dartmouth Medical School Alumni Magazine, Summer 1989: 30)
Unfortunately, very few rank-and-file workers appreciate this fact. Aside from their still modest out-of-pocket payments and contributions to employment-based insurance premiums, most employees seem sincerely to believe that the bulk of their family's health care is basically paid for by "the company," which is why so few members of the middle class have ever been much interested in controlling health spending in this country.
The price for that indifference will be high. If efforts at better cost containment fail once again, and health care costs rise to $36,000 on average for a typical American family of four under age 65 -- as almost surely it would -- that $36,000 will be borne entirely by the family. That family's disposable income would be much higher if the growth of future health spending was better controlled. And, as noted, many smaller firms will stop altogether providing job-based health insurance.
It would be a major problem for families with an income of less than $100,000 a year. In 2007, only about 25 percent of American families had a money income of $100,000 or more. Close to 60 percent had family incomes of less than $75,000.
Here it must be remembered that the wages and salaries of the solid American middle class have been relatively stagnant in recent years and are likely to remain so for the next decade. Unemployment is not likely to fall significantly soon, regardless of what stock prices do on Wall Street. Indeed, often stock prices rise as firms lay off workers to drive up profits through leaner payrolls.
This prospect -- relatively stagnant family incomes combined with family health-care costs that double every decade -- is what America's middle class should contemplate as it thinks about the imperative of health reform.
It is a pity that this central issue seems to have been shoved aside by mendacious distortions from Sarah Palin, Betsy McCaughey, Rush Limbaugh and other extremist commentators seeking to frighten Americans with their prattle about "death panels" and "pulling plugs on granny" that no bill before Congress even remotely envisions.
But no, focus on the negative propaganda being put out there by the very industry that is raping you! :rolleyes:
Funny how some sheeple will listen to any shill out there. . .
One day these facts are going to pimp slap those of you opposing healthcare reform right across the chops. What will you be saying then?
Quote from: Exterminator on August 18, 2009, 02:06:52 PM
Henry will probably avoid it altogether, though, because it shows how health care costs already erode take-home pay and how they will continue to rise if left unchecked and that flies directly into the face of his 'let the workers keep more of their money' mantra. That ilk is only capable of thinking of things in single, disconnected terms rather than as one piece of a larger and much more complex puzzle.
I DID read it punk....
and I don't disagree with it.....We ALL want something done about Healthcare reform......but we need to SLOW it down....with this current BILL........TOO many people DO not LIKE it.....
btw, why has Tort Reform seemed to quietly slip away here.......THAT is an issue that needs to be debated....
Quote from: Palehorse on August 17, 2009, 02:24:08 PM
Most of those in opposition to this bill are parroting the propaganda against it that was bought and paid for by the very industry it is meant to rein in, the insurance industry. They want the American people (sheeple) to herd up against it because it threatens the profiteering they have been engaging in for almost twenty years or more. And what better way to do this than create a bunch of false propaganda with the PR firm you have on retainer, and let them provide it to those public shills (IE Rush et AL), and let them scare the crap out of the sheep! Then all they have to do is sit back and listen to them bleat!
You have to admit that it is diabolically clever of them to have manipulated such a swath of the population to continue not only to argue in favor of the ass-reaming they've been taking for all of these years but to ask them to give it to them even harder! Some of these companies, like AIG and its subsidiaries are undoubtedly funding their propaganda campaign with bailout funds...how cool is that? It worked for the banks; why not the insurance companies?
When you drive into any major city and look at the skyline, who owns most of the major buildings you'll see? Yep, banks and insurance companies...those with most of the money.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 18, 2009, 04:24:57 PM
I am basically through arguing (with the zone).....I will NEVER get excited about turning MORE power over to the Government....and IF you cannot see that, by READING the BILL, then, there is nothing to argue about......I'm done.
I note with interest that you completely avoided my post about those things the government already manages with a great deal of accuracy...very large and important infrastructure programs...way bigger than this. And you can't even correctly conjugate the most basic word in the English language so if you expect me to believe that you read this legislation, which I doubt, and understood it, I'm calling you a liar...again.
QuoteI know our current system is FAR from perfect.....but it IS better than other countries....the POOR get FREE healthcare now.....the VAST majority of the working class already has employer provided insurance...let's FIX it without GIVING Washington the controls.
Which countries, Henry; Ethiopia? The vast majority of the working class have "employer provided" health care at the expense of their wages and it'll get much worse. I knew you wouldn't bother to read the article PH posted because if you did and aren't to dumb to understand what it is saying, you would realize that you fall squarely into that category of people for whom employers will no longer be providing insurance in 10 years. Your company might seem like a 'big' company to you but they're not.
Quotethe bottom line IS.....the TRUTH will prevail. Americans are speaking out against this...for one main reason....the are SICK of Government MIS-Managing OUR Taxes.
The truth will only prevail, Henry, when you liars who now nothing about what you're talking about sit down and STFU.
Quote from: Bo D on August 18, 2009, 04:44:57 PM
From the same article ...
"on average AARP loses some 300,000 members a month, but he couldn't say how many more members had quit for other reasons in that time period."
"AARP gained some 400,000 new members during the same period and that 1.5 million members renewed their membership."
...........
Let's see .... 60K quit. 400K joined up and 1.5M renewed.
That makes it 1.9M for and 60K against. Roughly 32 to 1 for. I would say that's pretty much a landslide approval.
:biggrin:
Looks like you just exposed more of Henry's lies.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 18, 2009, 05:00:18 PM
I DID read it punk....
and I don't disagree with it.....We ALL want something done about Healthcare reform......but we need to SLOW it down....with this current BILL........TOO many people DO not LIKE it.....
btw, why has Tort Reform seemed to quietly slip away here.......THAT is an issue that needs to be debated....
You're the punk here, you redneck faggot, and you need to learn to just stay the fuck out of conversations that your dumb ass has no chance whatsoever of understanding. Stick to your stupid bar and grill...it's about your speed.
Real Classy... ;)
The bottom line, AGAIN, ASSHOLE.....Real Americans are winning this thing...and Loudly speaking the truths....the TRUTH will prevail....and THAT is why the POTUS is dropping like a rock in the polls..... ;) ;D
take a couple of Mydols, go play in your garden and see if your feminine, pansy ass feels a little better in the morning... ;D
PUNK ;)
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/22/24797024_df1c84f4b1.jpg)
Quote from: Bo D on August 19, 2009, 08:42:34 AM
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/22/24797024_df1c84f4b1.jpg)
OFF TOPIC:
You see the History Channel's special on Woodstock??
First of all, for those of you who have taken time to know me, understand that I USUSALLY try to take the high road in most situations.....But, there are times when a person has to strap on his gloves and come out swinging...so the following is out of my normal way of communications, and I will more than likely NOT properly conjugate my verbs in a fashion that will suit ALL people....nor will I give a rat's ass.
I thought about being funny and starting with Exterminator, you ignorant slut..............but screw that...Exterminator, you stupid dumb fuck!!...seriously, your ability to understand anybody else's views on here that falls outside of your self-centered, egotistical piece of shit brain of yours is fucking amazing.
I have stated SEVERAL times that I am in favor of reforming our healthcare system. I am simply NOT in favor of turning more and more power, blindly, to our already, too powerful government......especially when our government is largely "liberal".....which is JUST another word for socialist....
James Madison once said..."If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one...."
So, EX....YOU STFU....don't think that YOU can cry and whine your opinion around here and insinuate you know what you are talking about...because I clearly see it as people like YOU, who is the ruination of this country....the attitude of "doing something is better than nothing" is the biggest fucking cop out I have EVER heard.....and pretending YOU fucking understand this Bill, because you "read it"...is fucking bullshit...........the fuckers who wrote this piece of shit cannot even explain it to their OWN constituents at town halls ALL across this nation....
And another thing pussboy, you can suck it with your bullshit that the government is capable of managing programs with a great deal of accuracy...what a fucking dumbass moron you are.............medicare is on pace to be bankrupt in 2020, Social Security is for all practical purposes ALREADY there...Our Military, even though we have the greatest soldiers on the planet.....is a POORLY administratively ran program... its own auditors admit the military cannot account for 25 percent of what it spends....
Amtrack is doing just PEACHY isn't it dumb ass........oh, an the IRS is simply marvelous...so is our Public School systems, RIGHT douch' bad?.........and FEMA and the DMV?............FedEx and UPS are examples of PRIVATE companies who do it right........the Post Office is fucking struggling to stay in existence....... So YOU STFU, will ya?.....
And I 100% understand the article Palehorse posted about "employer provided" health care and it's expense........but do you HONESTLY think a government who has totally dicked up nearly EVERY program it institutes with fraud and mismanagement, will make things LESS expensive?.............how fucking stupid are you anyway?
So kiss it you big puss, I am and always WILL state MY fucking Opinion on here with a great deal of pride, backed up by my OWN research and studies on any issue I decide to discuss....
Okay, with all that said, I will return to my regular Henry Hawk self, and go hang out in my bar and grille, because I don't understand what the brilliant minded Exterminator has to say... :yes:
You know, I'm going to admit something here, and some of you won't like it. I just recently reapplied for, and got public assistance. Which is EBT (food stamps) and medicaid. I have used my medicaid (which is Hoosier Healthwise and backed by Anthem) for the first time this last weekend to get an eye exam and a new pair of bifocals. With medicaid, you don't get a wide selection of frames (not a worry for me, I'm not that picky, I just want to see) and you don't get any extras on the glasses. I will have lined bifocals, and the polycarbonate lens. If I should happen to lose or break them in the next year and I still have the medicaid (which I doubt I will) I can get one pair of replacements at no cash cost. But what I want to use the medicaid for....I can't. Which is dental. I need all my teeth pulled and dentures (not a pleasant thought). I can't even get ALL my teeth pulled (or surgically removed) because my yearly limit is $600. An oral surgeon will charge at least $120 for each tooth removed, and a dentist will charge approx $90 per tooth. I have more than 6 teeth that need to go. And even if I could get them all pulled.....I would be walking around with my lips all sucked in between my gums because I then don't have the $650 I would need to go to affordable dentures. There are limits to the 'free' medical, dental, and vision care that poor people can get, and rarely can you get ALL that you need, even with the medicaid plans that ask for a copay (and those do exist too).
When I didn't have medicaid and I needed new glasses, I went to the clinic on Ohio street, I got an eye exam for $25. Then took my prescription to Walmart and selected a pair of frames, chose a progressive lens for my bifocals, and paid $120 for my glasses.
I also went to the clinic for dental care. It cost me $35 to be seen by the dentist. Because I had filled out a financial statement that showed I had not earnings, I wasn't charged for the x-rays. We then set up a plan for my future dental care. It would cost me $35 per visit, I would need to make 3 of them..and each time I would have several teeth removed. By the third visit, I would be able to place the dentures. WHICH I would first have had to went to Muncie to have made, for $650. I was in the same position, I could afford to have them all pulled, but I wouldn't be able to get my new teeth, because I just don't have that kind of money. So I don't do anything. This is the situation of the poor. And the partial help you can get with reduced pricing, and the current medicaid program.
I'll also add, that the ONLY reason I can even get medicaid is because I'm a single mother without a job. If I had a job, I would not be eligible.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 19, 2009, 09:07:30 AM"liberal".....which is JUST another word for socialist....
Well now....that just about sums it up, doesn't it?
:rolleyes:
tsk tsk tsk, Henry.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall get the shit beat out of them.
Quote from: pariann on August 19, 2009, 09:13:02 AM
You know, I'm going to admit something here, and some of you won't like it. I just recently reapplied for, and got public assistance. Which is EBT (food stamps) and medicaid. I have used my medicaid (which is Hoosier Healthwise and backed by Anthem) for the first time this last weekend to get an eye exam and a new pair of bifocals. With medicaid, you don't get a wide selection of frames (not a worry for me, I'm not that picky, I just want to see) and you don't get any extras on the glasses. I will have lined bifocals, and the polycarbonate lens. If I should happen to lose or break them in the next year and I still have the medicaid (which I doubt I will) I can get one pair of replacements at no cash cost. But what I want to use the medicaid for....I can't. Which is dental. I need all my teeth pulled and dentures (not a pleasant thought). I can't even get ALL my teeth pulled (or surgically removed) because my yearly limit is $600. An oral surgeon will charge at least $120 for each tooth removed, and a dentist will charge approx $90 per tooth. I have more than 6 teeth that need to go. And even if I could get them all pulled.....I would be walking around with my lips all sucked in between my gums because I then don't have the $650 I would need to go to affordable dentures. There are limits to the 'free' medical, dental, and vision care that poor people can get, and rarely can you get ALL that you need, even with the medicaid plans that ask for a copay (and those do exist too).
When I didn't have medicaid and I needed new glasses, I went to the clinic on Ohio street, I got an eye exam for $25. Then took my prescription to Walmart and selected a pair of frames, chose a progressive lens for my bifocals, and paid $120 for my glasses.
I also went to the clinic for dental care. It cost me $35 to be seen by the dentist. Because I had filled out a financial statement that showed I had not earnings, I wasn't charged for the x-rays. We then set up a plan for my future dental care. It would cost me $35 per visit, I would need to make 3 of them..and each time I would have several teeth removed. By the third visit, I would be able to place the dentures. WHICH I would first have had to went to Muncie to have made, for $650. I was in the same position, I could afford to have them all pulled, but I wouldn't be able to get my new teeth, because I just don't have that kind of money. So I don't do anything. This is the situation of the poor. And the partial help you can get with reduced pricing, and the current medicaid program.
I'll also add, that the ONLY reason I can even get medicaid is because I'm a single mother without a job. If I had a job, I would not be eligible.
What's not to like about it? Personally, I'm very happy to hear you are getting some assistance, what little there is to obtain, and your situation is a prime example of part of my perspective here. That stuff surrounding the dental seems like a crock of political BS to me. People should be able to obtain dentures via public assistance! That is just not right! :rant:
As it stands now anyone not covered under an employer health plan cannot get the medical, dental, vision care they desperately need, and many that ARE covered cannot get it either! Why? Because the deductibles and premiums are so high they have little to no discreationary funds left from their paychecks to pay for them!
In the meantime the companies insuring us are sitting back collectiong billions in premiums and schemeing on methods to obtain even more. This bill is meant to rein them in, get people affordable coverage, and coverage that PAYS for the services we need. . .
I seriously doubt that congress will ever be capable of arriving at a solution that the people would find universally acceptable, and if they ever do it will take 8 years for it to happen. In the meantime most of us will be priced right out of the coverage a lot of us need to assure quality of life, and those that do not have it, or are forced to use the present public assistance program, will barely get enough to allow them to stay alive. . .
Quote from: Bo D on August 19, 2009, 10:14:30 AM
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall get the shit beat out of them.
Not the peace-makers manufactured by Colt! :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
Quote from: Palehorse on August 18, 2009, 02:24:28 PM
And Henry, I do NOT want to hear that "but congress won't even accept this kind of coverage for themselves" line either. It is a lie plain and simple!
READ THE FRIGGIN' BILL: This bill is intended to provide the SAME coverage as members of congress enjoy, as well as the same choices! The POTUS has said so, the bills say so, and yet people still continue to swallow that plethora of tripe being put out there by the very industry raping us! Wake up!
There is no death panel, nobody besides the immediate family is going to unplug grandma, and you aren't going to have to wait in the crowds of folks at the local free clinic to see your own doctor!
Congress gets the best doctors and the best care available and if you think that's what the rest of us will get you're delusional. There is already a shortage of good doctors and with the influx of additional people it will be harder than ever to see any doctor at all in a timely manner. I don't understand why the liberals that are thinking this bill is such a good thing don't understand that. Some of the evidence sited by conservatives may well be anecdotal but it is from real people with real experience in the situation not some statistic drawn up by a person who can slant it either way depending on who they talk to.
Quote from: me on August 19, 2009, 11:23:20 AM
Congress gets the best doctors and the best care available and if you think that's what the rest of us will get you're delusional. There is already a shortage of good doctors and with the influx of additional people it will be harder than ever to see any doctor at all in a timely manner. I don't understand why the liberals that are thinking this bill is such a good thing don't understand that. Some of the evidence sited by conservatives may well be anecdotal but it is from real people with real experience in the situation not some statistic drawn up by a person who can slant it either way depending on who they talk to.
well me,...the POTUS said so... :yes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 19, 2009, 11:42:58 AM
well me,...the POTUS said so... :yes:
Oh ya, that's right. How silly of me to realize there aren't enough doctors already. :doh: ..maybe they're gonna come from the same place the money is.... :wink:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 19, 2009, 09:07:30 AM
I thought about being funny and starting with Exterminator, you ignorant slut..............but screw that...Exterminator, you stupid dumb fuck!!...seriously,
Yeah, I'm the dumb fuck here, you illiterate clerk. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Palehorse on August 19, 2009, 10:28:33 AM
What's not to like about it?
Those that get so bent out of shape that there are people like me who are perfectly able to work, and end up on public assistance. They see you get it, and then don't understand how difficult it is for those of us out of work to even find a job, while they are clocking in and out of their own jobs, and paying the taxes, which in turn are allowing me to at least be able to see what they are posting derogatory about people like me.
Was that a good run on sentence? :wink:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 19, 2009, 11:42:58 AM
well me,...the POTUS said so... :yes:
And you both ignore the very same "anecdotal evidence" that supports the opposing view, and dismiss off handed and without any consideration what so ever, first hand evidence that supports the opposing perspective from people you know! Not to mention individuals whose job it is to evaluate such things, and those who have been educated in some of the finest institutions of learning in this country, and served in their fields for decades.
Now there's a constructive approach if I ever saw one! :rolleyes:
Doing these things lends more support to the position that the root driver of your opposition is nothing less than "sour grapes", as opposed to true concerns supported by factual evidence and data.
Each of us is being robbed by the insurance industry and the facts supporting this assertion have been presented already. Many of us are not only angry about it, but find it disturbingly unbelieveable that the brainwashing initiative undertaken by that industry has been so successful; as evidenced by the fact some of you seem to be willing to be financially ruined by them and want more.
When you find yourselves uninsured and in a situation similar to, or worse, than Pari's, I wonder how you'll feel then? The fact is unless something is done about it, a majority of those reading this will find themselves in that very situation, despite the fact you may be gainfully employed at the time. And you'll be put there because you feared change, you feared taking action, and you consider yourself untouchable to what is going on.
My wife and I have been lucky to this point in our lives, and our joint adjusted gross income places us squarely in danger of reaching that "class" wherein we
may see
our income tax increase. Yet both of us stand in solid support of this healthcare reform initiative.
Our jobs are in industries that historically have been "safe" during economic downturns, yet both of us will be unemployed within the next 12 months. The only outstanding debt we have is on our home, yet when healthcare out of pocket costs reach 36k/year we'll be financially crippled by them. Even if we are able to maintain an income level similar to that which we have today.
Those of you making less than we do in a year in combined adjusted gross income, are on a faster track surrounding reaching critical mass over healthcare costs. You'll be put out of your homes by it, your bank accounts emptied, and your possessions sitting on the curb if things are left as they are today; yet you stand in favor of leaving things alone. You are cutting your nose off to spite your face, and when you're sitting out there watching the local authorities empty your home you'll be crying, praying, and hoping for help, but by then it will be too late for that.
Something has to be done, not next year, not in 3-5 years, but NOW! And the sooner you educate yourselves and understand that what is being proposed is the first step toward a solution to prevent these things from ruining each one of us, the sooner we can get back to living our lives.
That propaganda surrounding the doctor shortage impact, is nothing more than pure fanatical scare tactics. Do you have a doctor today? You'll have the same doctor if this bill passes. The patient headcount that doctor chooses to see will not change unless he/she chooses to change it.
Quote from: pariann on August 19, 2009, 12:11:48 PM
Those that get so bent out of shape that there are people like me who are perfectly able to work, and end up on public assistance. They see you get it, and then don't understand how difficult it is for those of us out of work to even find a job, while they are clocking in and out of their own jobs, and paying the taxes, which in turn are allowing me to at least be able to see what they are posting derogatory about people like me.
Was that a good run on sentence? :wink:
Not bad...what really offends me is that our the douche here on this forum who doesn't have a clue how close he is to being in exactly the same position as you've found yourself has absolutely zero empathy even while he claims to be such a good christian. The hypocrisy is astounding; the ignorance, pathetic.
Quote from: Palehorse on August 19, 2009, 12:25:05 PM
My wife and I have been lucky to this point in our lives, and our joint adjusted gross income places us squarely in danger of reaching that "class" wherein we may see our income tax increase. Yet both of us stand in solid support of this healthcare reform initiative.
Me, too! Funny how those of us who'll actually be paying the bill don't have a problem with it while those who won't seem to think they have a right to bitch.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 19, 2009, 12:32:51 PM
Me, too! Funny how those of us who'll actually be paying the bill don't have a problem with it while those who won't seem to think they have a right to bitch.
The irony is thick sin't it?!
You can't fix stupid.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 19, 2009, 12:26:27 PM
Not bad...what really offends me is that our the douche here on this forum who doesn't have a clue how close he is to being in exactly the same position as you've found yourself has absolutely zero empathy even while he claims to be such a good christian. The hypocrisy is astounding; the ignorance, pathetic.
what is the mater with you?..seriously.
For the zillionth time....I am in favor of reform.....I agree we need to address the problem....I just think having our government intervene in the fashion they are proposing is NOT the way...and you don't know diddly shit about my "Christian" walk....ZERO.
I have NO problem telling ANYTHING to your face Ex....ZERO. I am NOT ashamed of my stance and beliefs....THEY are very MUCH American.
Palehorse, I too have been fortunate....I have a pretty decent insurance that my boss pays 100% of my premiums...and, yet with 5 kids, I STILL have plenty of $$ to pay when I have to utilize any significant hospital stay....I want nothing more than to find a fix for this problem....but, I will say it again.....expanding the gov, expanding the deficit and being somewhat reckless on passing something for the mere sake of passing it is wrong.
What you are not understanding is that I am in Pari's position only I can't even get the help she is getting. I have nothing, no insurance and no medicaid. I have no young children so I can't get medicaid unless I have a serious illness and I fall between the cracks on medicare. I have needed new glasses for approx. 5yrs but make do with what I have. I haven't been to a dentist for 11yrs but need to see one badly. Now are you happy that I've divulged more than I ever intended to on an open forum. I had to give up what insurance I did have in '99' because the cost increased from $127pr month to over $400 and the deductible went from $500 to $2000. Did I over use it? No I didn't use it at all so why such a dramatic increase? It did not cover dental or eye exams either and only 80% of doctor visits "if" you went to a doctor who was in their network. So don't pull that crap on me that I'm being thoughtless and selfish when it comes to the uninsured and not wanting them to be covered 'cause it don't wash. I am one of those who is in that situation and still don't like the proposed health care plan. IMO those of you who are well insured at this point are wishing bad health care on all of us thinking only of yourselves and wanting something for nothing. You hear the word "free" and your mind is blank to anything else.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 19, 2009, 12:32:51 PM
Me, too! Funny how those of us who'll actually be paying the bill don't have a problem with it while those who won't seem to think they have a right to bitch.
what makes you actually think that the average Joe will NOT be paying for this bill?..........it is ALWAYS the middleclass that gets stuck wit it..........and IF you think expanding our government will NOT increase my taxes then you are being foolish Ex.
It is common sense....really.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 19, 2009, 01:38:04 PM
what makes you actually think that the average Joe will NOT be paying for this bill?..........it is ALWAYS the middleclass that gets stuck wit it..........and IF you think expanding our government will NOT increase my taxes then you are being foolish Ex.
It is common sense....really.
The average Joe like you is paying more now than you would if this bill passes and you don't pay shit for taxes as it is compared to those of us who don't have a clan of little inbred hell-spawn running around.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 19, 2009, 01:56:55 PM
I am simply tired of people like you who have absolutely no clue what they're talking about spouting off for no other reason than you heard some bullshit from Rush.
you must be listening to Rush an awful lot to know what I am 'spouting' about..........cause I don't listen to him all that much....it seems to me that you are parroting Olbermann....and the MSNBC boys...
and $1 trillion-plus for a bill IS reckless, when we do not HAVE the money to spend in the first place....and many democrats are in agreement and are having their own doubts......there are TOO many legitimate critics out there that feel this is not a good thing.
Quote from: me on August 19, 2009, 01:33:33 PM
What you are not understanding is that I am in Pari's position only I can't even get the help she is getting. I have nothing, no insurance and no medicaid. I have no young children so I can't get medicaid unless I have a serious illness and I fall between the cracks on medicare. I have needed new glasses for approx. 5yrs but make do with what I have. I haven't been to a dentist for 11yrs but need to see one badly. Now are you happy that I've divulged more than I ever intended to on an open forum. I had to give up what insurance I did have in '99' because the cost increased from $127pr month to over $400 and the deductible went from $500 to $2000. Did I over use it? No I didn't use it at all so why such a dramatic increase? It did not cover dental or eye exams either and only 80% of doctor visits "if" you went to a doctor who was in their network. So don't pull that crap on me that I'm being thoughtless and selfish when it comes to the uninsured and not wanting them to be covered 'cause it don't wash. I am one of those who is in that situation and still don't like the proposed health care plan. IMO those of you who are well insured at this point are wishing bad health care on all of us thinking only of yourselves and wanting something for nothing. You hear the word "free" and your mind is blank to anything else.
If you think this is a reasonable reply then you are the delusional one. This just makes you look even worse, are you impaired or something? And you are being worse than thoughtless and selfish!
Again with your opinion? You already know my thoughts on that subject. If I wanted something for nothing . . . oh hell nevermind. You aren't worth the energy or effort.
Forget about it. . .
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 19, 2009, 02:16:16 PM
and $1 trillion-plus for a bill IS reckless, when we do not HAVE the money to spend in the first place....and many democrats are in agreement and are having their own doubts......there are TOO many legitimate critics out there that feel this is not a good thing.
A trillion dollars isn't a lot to spend if you get $5 trillion worth of value but that notwithstanding, I asked for you to provide something specific, not a generality. I know you won't because you can't if you have no clue whatsoever what the bill says.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 19, 2009, 02:16:16 PM
you must be listening to Rush an awful lot to know what I am 'spouting' about..........cause I don't listen to him all that much....it seems to me that you are parroting Olbermann....and the MSNBC boys...
and $1 trillion-plus for a bill IS reckless, when we do not HAVE the money to spend in the first place....and many democrats are in agreement and are having their own doubts......there are TOO many legitimate critics out there that feel this is not a good thing.
Henry to them all of we critics on either side are hate mongers, racist's, and ignorant. That is what they are being told at any rate. They will not even try to understand where we are coming from and it is pointless to even try. I won't stoop to name calling and belittling them like they do us because that is not my way even though I am tempted sometimes just out of frustration. Hell,they don't even see that we are saying yes, we do need some kind of reform just not what is being proposed at this time. They think it can just be passed and then worked out and it just don't work that way. They can't see that congress is trying to take over our lives on a big time scale because they aren't truly listening to what's going on.
I am neither impaired nor am I selfish I am concerned about the unanswered questions and the double speak that is going along with this bill. I will not be shouted down or silenced just because my opinion is different and I will not be shamed into changing my mind by being belittled.
I was pointing the finger at no one when I made that statement "those of you" that was in the collective sense and aimed at no one.
None the less, I am offended by your stonewalling and ignorant implications.
Truth be told the only reason you are against this initiative is because it is being proposed by the current democratic POTUS; and it matters not who or what it impacts. You parrot untruths and imply what is not within the language of the various versions of this bill, even going so far as to spew outright lies as if they were the unvarnished truth! You've told so many lies for so long that you now believe them yourself. You even refuse to consider the empirical evidence provided to you that clearly demonstrates the truth.
Each one of you already knows that if this is left to congress to accomplish it will never be done, ever; especially once they start "discussing" things and imparting the influence of their constituents that happen to be those who hold the purse strings in the insurance industry.
Bleat on sheeple, bleat on!
If opinions are being called lies now so be it. I guess that's going to be the way of things now, if you don't lie someones opinion just call them a liar and that makes you, (the collective you), right. Liberals have it all figured out don't they? :rolleyes:
Me....I have supported my opinions with numerous links.....and I'm STILL a liar...just because we don't support this administration.........we have been called racist..
I am through here....I really am. :no:
Baaaah! Bahhhhh! Baaaaah!
Quote from: Palehorse on August 19, 2009, 03:19:00 PM
Baaaah! Bahhhhh! Baaaaah!
is THAT the sound of SHEEPle I hear?..... :razz:
Oops hit modify instead of quote...... >:(
You know it's odd. I didn't support Hillary's bill which wasn't near as encompassing as this one, or some of Bush's health care reforms but I wasn't called selfish, a liar, or told I was ignorant, a racist, a hate monger, selfish, or any of the other things that are being said by the liberals now about anyone who disagrees with congress or the president. What is so different? Why are things getting to the point where no one can disagree now without that happening.
Could someone please explain that without all the name calling. It appears to me to be divide and conquer because that seems to be what is happening lately. Shout down and belittle the opposition until they give in or give up. Stand back and look at the whole picture not just your little safety zone of which ever side you happen to be on.
Quote from: me on August 19, 2009, 03:13:46 PM
If opinions are being called lies now so be it. I guess that's going to be the way of things now, if you don't lie someones opinion just call them a liar and that makes you, (the collective you), right. Liberals have it all figured out don't they? :rolleyes:
It is my opinion that the sky is green with little wavy yellow stripes.
Quote from: me on August 19, 2009, 02:51:23 PM
Henry to them all of we critics on either side are hate mongers, racist's, and ignorant.
Absolutely! It isn't simply a coincidence that the two most vocal opponents of this bill on this forum are also the two people here who can't quite figure out when to use saw instead of seen or were instead of was.
QuoteHell,they don't even see that we are saying yes, we do need some kind of reform just not what is being proposed at this time.
Sure, I hear you but I don't believe for a minute that you have any idea what is being proposed and your posts support my position.
QuoteThey think it can just be passed and then worked out and it just don't work that way.
That is exactly how it works with any system (and apparently I should have used doesn't and don't in my examples above as well).
Quote from: Palehorse on August 19, 2009, 06:34:18 PM
Yes. . . in fact it is.
and of course it was coming from ....... YOU
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 19, 2009, 07:24:30 PM
and of course it was coming from ....... YOU
No. . . I'm not the sheep and certainly not the parrot either! :razz:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 19, 2009, 09:07:30 AM
"liberal".....which is JUST another word for socialist....
And freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose. Join my revolution TODAY!
Wow.
You ARE a Joplin junkie, aren't you? :biggrin: :biggrin:
Yeah. Me, too. :yes:
Awww, wolfie, you're jes tryin' to take another li'l piece of my heart.
I think he'd like to come down on me with a ball and chain most of the time....
You're being too hard on yourself, me. You need to trust me, and try just a little bit harder.
Quote from: LOsborne on August 19, 2009, 10:08:34 PM
Awww, wolfie, you're jes tryin' to take another li'l piece of my heart.
You know you got it, if it makes you feel good, now :yes:
Health insurance premiums for family coverage in Indiana rose an estimated 116 percent from 2000 through 2009, according to a separate report released Wednesday by Families USA, a Washington-based consumer-advocacy group. During that same period, the median earnings of Indiana workers rose by about 15 percent.
Family coverage in Indiana now carries an average annual premium of $14,355, up from about $6,628 in 2000, the group said.
And they are going up yet again next year, with 42% of employers saying they will pass along the increase to their employees. (9%).
http://www.indystar.com/article/20090820/BUSINESS/908200447/Health+insurance+set+to+take+big+jump (http://www.indystar.com/article/20090820/BUSINESS/908200447/Health+insurance+set+to+take+big+jump)
But we don't need this healthcare reform bill right now. . . :rolleyes:
Never did get an answer to this question.
Quote from: me on August 19, 2009, 04:16:17 PM
You know it's odd. I didn't support Hillary's bill which wasn't near as encompassing as this one, or some of Bush's health care reforms but I wasn't called selfish, a liar, or told I was ignorant, a racist, a hate monger, selfish, or any of the other things that are being said by the liberals now about anyone who disagrees with congress or the president. What is so different? Why are things getting to the point where no one can disagree now without that happening.
Could someone please explain that without all the name calling. It appears to me to be divide and conquer because that seems to be what is happening lately. Shout down and belittle the opposition until they give in or give up. Stand back and look at the whole picture not just your little safety zone of which ever side you happen to be on.
Quote from: Palehorse on August 20, 2009, 06:56:51 AM
Health insurance premiums for family coverage in Indiana rose an estimated 116 percent from 2000 through 2009, according to a separate report released Wednesday by Families USA, a Washington-based consumer-advocacy group. During that same period, the median earnings of Indiana workers rose by about 15 percent.
Family coverage in Indiana now carries an average annual premium of $14,355, up from about $6,628 in 2000, the group said.
And they are going up yet again next year, with 42% of employers saying they will pass along the increase to their employees. (9%).
http://www.indystar.com/article/20090820/BUSINESS/908200447/Health+insurance+set+to+take+big+jump (http://www.indystar.com/article/20090820/BUSINESS/908200447/Health+insurance+set+to+take+big+jump)
But we don't need this healthcare reform bill right now. . . :rolleyes:
The single minded thinkers (and I use the term loosely) can't see how much this costs the economy or why the large price tag is an investment.
Quote from: me on August 20, 2009, 07:33:44 AM
Stand back and look at the whole picture...
I think it's
you who isn't looking at the whole picture.
How yah like it?
Quote
What is so different? Why are things getting to the point where no one can disagree now without that happening.
Name one thing, just
one, that any of you have supported since this POTUS took the oath. Let me help you; "
There isn't anything"! Nothing but opposition since January, and in fact the negativity started the day after the election. I find it amazing to see how staunch steadfast support was exhibited while the Chimp was in office, and he was spending just as much as the new guy is. The difference? The new guy's a democrat.
I never raised the spector of racism, but now that you've brought it up I really wonder just how much that is impacting your decision making process? (Rhetorical, but if you insist we can go down that path. I just prefer to stay focused at this point).
You and your ilk have been too busy looking for something negative to wail about since the election, and it hasn't stopped since. It seems to have become an unhealthy obsession for each one of you and is so all-encompassing as to blind you to even those things that are negatively impacting your life the most. Literally unhealthy.
What do I mean? You stated yesterday that you have no healthcare insurance, well Missy you are just a heart attack, stroke, hip replacement, etc. away from becoming one of those people the POTUS is trying to get congress to protect! Yet, you spit upon him and fight tooth and nail to oppose anything he puts forth.
This bill would make your life easier, and require health care companies to COVER all diagnostic testing and stop applying those charges toward a policy deductible, and make said deductibles more reasonable as opposed to 2k or more! (I'm not covered by any policy!) But you would be once this bill passes. Automatically.
"Their going to tax" - Yes. Those making 250k and above will see an increase in taxes. Employers providing coverage that does NOT meet the federal requirements will be taxed per the rates contained within the bill. This serves as a financial incentive to employers to comply with the federal policy and punishes them if they do not.
"But, we need to go over this bill. . .blah, blah, blah!"
Look, show me ONE bill congress has passed in the last 3 decades that was perfect upon its inception. Just one. (Hint: No such animal). The reality is we have to start somewhere and delaying this thing until congress can go over each and every line in it and explain it to every single one of you to your satisfaction will lead to a decade of congressional waffling and the end result will be congress bowing to the special interest groups, in this case the insurance industry. In the meantime millions of us will be financially ruined, or die due to untreated illness, or both. What purpose will that serve? Shall we go ahead and kill millions of our fellow Americans in order to allow each one of them to comprehend what "as outlined within sub section 2.19 item 4" means? And in the end do what we should be doing today, only 10 years too late?
The lion's share of you in opposition to this bill will not accept or even consider empirical evidence supporting the need for this bill. In fact, most of you ignore the fact that a lot of the things used to demonstrate why this reform bill should be passed are biting you in the ass right here and right now. Instead, you choose to believe lies, rumors, and innuendo; eating up the fear-mongering messages and spewing them as truth. Even when they are proven to be lies you persist. And you insist upon perfection from this POTUS, despite the fact the chimp was never ever near that idealistic achievement.
The irony surrounding the fact that so many of you were so willing to bitch slap Iraq and couldn't wait to put our men and women into the line of fire, in order to crack skulls and spend billions in the process; never one time stopping to hear those asking for diplomacy, perfection, and accountability then, and now asking for that very thing, is astounding! Then there's the fact that 90% of you would financially and physically benefit from the passing of this legislation, yet you squall against it like a cat with its tail under a rocker. Man, if that doesn't scream with irony I don't know what does. I'd rather spend a billion dollars taking care of my fellow Americans here at home, than chasing mirages in the litterbox of the middle east oil fields, despite your squalling.
"Oh, it's going to fall upon the shoulders of the middle class". - How many times does the POTUS have to say those making 250k and above will shoulder the burden, along with non-compliant companies? Just because the shrubs said it and lied does not mean this POTUS is not telling the truth. But you act upon the assumption that he is. . .
You will not or are unwilling to listen to the voices of reason and have failed to acknowledge one single thing that supports the need for this change; above and beyond acceptable limitations. The only thing you seem to respond to is the very thing you spew out - negativity. . .
And you've known me long enough to know if you spoon me bullshit I'll
shovel it right back at you!
Very well said, PH; you obviously have a lot more patience than I...or maybe you just enjoy :wall:
Quote from: Exterminator on August 20, 2009, 08:31:20 AM
Very well said, PH; you obviously have a lot more patience than I...or maybe you just enjoy :wall:
Thanks. . . but I am running out of Advil! :rant:
The democrats control the House and the Senate.........if the bill does not pass, don't blame the Republicans....
can you name a bill that deserves PRAISE?....
Palehorse, I would hope you know me well enough to know that I am not racially motivated....the bottom line for me is, I am anti-liberal....I want a MORE Conservative movement...
I am sure there will be some good things to happen IF this heathcare bill passes....but, to simply pass this bill without any serious debate by the people would be wrong. With democrats in control of washington....i think, yelling and bitching at the republicans is a moot point....
and since you brought up the iraq war......i have noticed we are STILL there....i thought the dems was in a hurry to bring everyone home....
and do you REALLY believe that there will be NO taxes on ANYONE who makes less than $250,000 just because the POTUS said so?
That is it for me today....I have said my 2 cents for the day....
later.
Quote from: Palehorse on August 20, 2009, 06:56:51 AM
Health insurance premiums for family coverage in Indiana rose an estimated 116 percent from 2000 through 2009, according to a separate report released Wednesday by Families USA, a Washington-based consumer-advocacy group. During that same period, the median earnings of Indiana workers rose by about 15 percent.
Family coverage in Indiana now carries an average annual premium of $14,355, up from about $6,628 in 2000, the group said.
And they are going up yet again next year, with 42% of employers saying they will pass along the increase to their employees. (9%).
http://www.indystar.com/article/20090820/BUSINESS/908200447/Health+insurance+set+to+take+big+jump (http://www.indystar.com/article/20090820/BUSINESS/908200447/Health+insurance+set+to+take+big+jump)
But we don't need this healthcare reform bill right now. . . :rolleyes:
I heard a report on the radio this morning that health insurance premiums are projected to hit $24,000.00 for the average family by 2020 if nothing is done.
I found a link to that report I heard about. I guess my memory isn't working too well yet.
It wasn't 2020, it was 2018. And it wasn't $24,000, it was $25,000.
Awww..crap. Here ... just read the damn thing yourself.
http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml (http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml)
"Employer and Employee Health Insurance Costs
Over the last decade, employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have increased 119 percent.
Employees have seen their share of job-based coverage increase at nearly the same rate during this period jumping from $1,543 to $3,354.
The cumulative increase in employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have raised at four times the rate of inflation and wage increases during last decade. This increase has made it much more difficult for businesses to continue to provide coverage to their employees and for those workers to afford coverage themselves.
* The average employer-sponsored premium for a family of four costs close to $13,000 a year, and the employee foots about 30 percent of this cost.
Health insurance costs are the fastest growing expense for employers. Employer health insurance costs overtook profits in 2008, and the gap grows steadily.
* Total health insurance costs for employers could reach nearly $850 billion by 2019. Individual and family spending will jump considerably from $326 billion in 2009 to $550 billion in 2019.
* The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that job-based health insurance could increase 100 percent over the next decade. Employer-based family insurance costs for a family of four will reach nearly $25,000 per year by 2018 absent health care reform."
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 20, 2009, 08:58:59 AM
The democrats control the House and the Senate.........if the bill does not pass, don't blame the Republicans....
No, I'll just blame the people that are so filled with hate and sour grapes that they spoke before thinking. . .
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 20, 2009, 08:58:59 AM
can you name a bill that deserves PRAISE?....
Yes, this one. Change we NEED - now. Not 10 years from now.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 20, 2009, 08:58:59 AM
Palehorse, I would hope you know me well enough to know that I am not racially motivated....the bottom line for me is, I am anti-liberal....I want a MORE Conservative movement...
There is a time for diplomacy and a time for action. I find it completely unacceptable to stall any longer on this vitally important issue. It should have been initiated while Clinton was in office, and he tried. One would think congress would have exercised a little initiative in the subsequent decade and proactively addressed it. But hey, they'd have to do some work then. . .
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 20, 2009, 08:58:59 AM
I am sure there will be some good things to happen IF this heathcare bill passes....but, to simply pass this bill without any serious debate by the people would be wrong. With democrats in control of washington....i think, yelling and bitching at the republicans is a moot point....
What the last decade hasn't been long enough? Moreover, why haven't our congressional representatives been doing something about this sinc ethe Clinton administration brought it up back then? Answer: Because these monster insurance companies have been lining their pockets to keep them from it. They have the long green to do it and have been spoon feeding them the same crap they are now feeding the media and people who oppose this bill.
Stop drinking their kool aid and consider the good points in this bill! Focusing on the lies and deceptions blinds you to what is right, and there is a LOT right in this bill!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 20, 2009, 08:58:59 AM
and since you brought up the iraq war......i have noticed we are STILL there....i thought the dems was in a hurry to bring everyone home....
Wow. . . even more irony. You preach a conservative approach that will kill millions on healthcare reform and then demand quick action that will also result in the deaths of millions. . . You working for the angel of death or something? :razz:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 20, 2009, 08:58:59 AM
and do you REALLY believe that there will be NO taxes on ANYONE who makes less than $250,000 just because the POTUS said so?
Yes. And until it is proven otherwise I shall continue to believe it. Why shouldn't I?
The fact is club fed already knows that taxes are going to increase at the state and local levels for the middle class folks, and the tit's going dry there anyway. They have to, and the stimulus funding in part is intended to delay that for as long as possible for the middle class.
This bill is going to be utilized to increase the burden upon those making 250k and up, to validate the action even though they were going to do it whether the bill passes or not.
That did not answer my question which was this:
QuoteQuote from: me on August 19, 2009, 04:16:17 PM
You know it's odd. I didn't support Hillary's bill which wasn't near as encompassing as this one, or some of Bush's health care reforms but I wasn't called selfish, a liar, or told I was ignorant, a racist, a hate monger, selfish, or any of the other things that are being said by the liberals now about anyone who disagrees with congress or the president. What is so different? Why are things getting to the point where no one can disagree now without that happening.
Could someone please explain that without all the name calling. It appears to me to be divide and conquer because that seems to be what is happening lately. Shout down and belittle the opposition until they give in or give up. Stand back and look at the whole picture not just your little safety zone of which ever side you happen to be on.
Quote from: Palehorse on August 20, 2009, 08:19:16 AM
How yah like it?
Name one thing, just one, that any of you have supported since this POTUS took the oath. Let me help you; "There isn't anything"! Nothing but opposition since January, and in fact the negativity started the day after the election. I find it amazing to see how staunch steadfast support was exhibited while the Chimp was in office, and he was spending just as much as the new guy is. The difference? The new guy's a democrat.
I never raised the spector of racism, but now that you've brought it up I really wonder just how much that is impacting your decision making process? (Rhetorical, but if you insist we can go down that path. I just prefer to stay focused at this point).
You and your ilk have been too busy looking for something negative to wail about since the election, and it hasn't stopped since. It seems to have become an unhealthy obsession for each one of you and is so all-encompassing as to blind you to even those things that are negatively impacting your life the most. Literally unhealthy.
What do I mean? You stated yesterday that you have no healthcare insurance, well Missy you are just a heart attack, stroke, hip replacement, etc. away from becoming one of those people the POTUS is trying to get congress to protect! Yet, you spit upon him and fight tooth and nail to oppose anything he puts forth.
This bill would make your life easier, and require health care companies to COVER all diagnostic testing and stop applying those charges toward a policy deductible, and make said deductibles more reasonable as opposed to 2k or more! (I'm not covered by any policy!) But you would be once this bill passes. Automatically.
"Their going to tax" - Yes. Those making 250k and above will see an increase in taxes. Employers providing coverage that does NOT meet the federal requirements will be taxed per the rates contained within the bill. This serves as a financial incentive to employers to comply with the federal policy and punishes them if they do not.
"But, we need to go over this bill. . .blah, blah, blah!"
Look, show me ONE bill congress has passed in the last 3 decades that was perfect upon its inception. Just one. (Hint: No such animal). The reality is we have to start somewhere and delaying this thing until congress can go over each and every line in it and explain it to every single one of you to your satisfaction will lead to a decade of congressional waffling and the end result will be congress bowing to the special interest groups, in this case the insurance industry. In the meantime millions of us will be financially ruined, or die due to untreated illness, or both. What purpose will that serve? Shall we go ahead and kill millions of our fellow Americans in order to allow each one of them to comprehend what "as outlined within sub section 2.19 item 4" means? And in the end do what we should be doing today, only 10 years too late?
The lion's share of you in opposition to this bill will not accept or even consider empirical evidence supporting the need for this bill. In fact, most of you ignore the fact that a lot of the things used to demonstrate why this reform bill should be passed are biting you in the ass right here and right now. Instead, you choose to believe lies, rumors, and innuendo; eating up the fear-mongering messages and spewing them as truth. Even when they are proven to be lies you persist. And you insist upon perfection from this POTUS, despite the fact the chimp was never ever near that idealistic achievement.
The irony surrounding the fact that so many of you were so willing to bitch slap Iraq and couldn't wait to put our men and women into the line of fire, in order to crack skulls and spend billions in the process; never one time stopping to hear those asking for diplomacy, perfection, and accountability then, and now asking for that very thing, is astounding! Then there's the fact that 90% of you would financially and physically benefit from the passing of this legislation, yet you squall against it like a cat with its tail under a rocker. Man, if that doesn't scream with irony I don't know what does. I'd rather spend a billion dollars taking care of my fellow Americans here at home, than chasing mirages in the litterbox of the middle east oil fields, despite your squalling.
"Oh, it's going to fall upon the shoulders of the middle class". - How many times does the POTUS have to say those making 250k and above will shoulder the burden, along with non-compliant companies? Just because the shrubs said it and lied does not mean this POTUS is not telling the truth. But you act upon the assumption that he is. . .
You will not or are unwilling to listen to the voices of reason and have failed to acknowledge one single thing that supports the need for this change; above and beyond acceptable limitations. The only thing you seem to respond to is the very thing you spew out - negativity. . .
And you've known me long enough to know if you spoon me bullshit I'll shovel it right back at you!
Quote from: me on August 20, 2009, 09:22:48 AM
That did not answer my question which was this:
Could someone please explain that without all the name calling. It appears to me to be divide and conquer because that seems to be what is happening lately. Shout down and belittle the opposition until they give in or give up.
I call it the Rush Limbaugh tactic.
See what I mean, PH? Nothing new or of any substance...just the same old BS rhetoric over and over.
Quote from: me on August 20, 2009, 09:22:48 AM
That did not answer my question which was this:
Same answer - I just chose to edit out the flotsam in the previously quoted inquiry. . .
Quote from: Palehorse on August 20, 2009, 08:19:16 AM
How yah like it?
Name one thing, just one, that any of you have supported since this POTUS took the oath. Let me help you; "There isn't anything"! Nothing but opposition since January, and in fact the negativity started the day after the election. I find it amazing to see how staunch steadfast support was exhibited while the Chimp was in office, and he was spending just as much as the new guy is. The difference? The new guy's a democrat.
I never raised the spector of racism, but now that you've brought it up I really wonder just how much that is impacting your decision making process? (Rhetorical, but if you insist we can go down that path. I just prefer to stay focused at this point).
You and your ilk have been too busy looking for something negative to wail about since the election, and it hasn't stopped since. It seems to have become an unhealthy obsession for each one of you and is so all-encompassing as to blind you to even those things that are negatively impacting your life the most. Literally unhealthy.
What do I mean? You stated yesterday that you have no healthcare insurance, well Missy you are just a heart attack, stroke, hip replacement, etc. away from becoming one of those people the POTUS is trying to get congress to protect! Yet, you spit upon him and fight tooth and nail to oppose anything he puts forth.
This bill would make your life easier, and require health care companies to COVER all diagnostic testing and stop applying those charges toward a policy deductible, and make said deductibles more reasonable as opposed to 2k or more! (I'm not covered by any policy!) But you would be once this bill passes. Automatically.
"Their going to tax" - Yes. Those making 250k and above will see an increase in taxes. Employers providing coverage that does NOT meet the federal requirements will be taxed per the rates contained within the bill. This serves as a financial incentive to employers to comply with the federal policy and punishes them if they do not.
"But, we need to go over this bill. . .blah, blah, blah!"
Look, show me ONE bill congress has passed in the last 3 decades that was perfect upon its inception. Just one. (Hint: No such animal). The reality is we have to start somewhere and delaying this thing until congress can go over each and every line in it and explain it to every single one of you to your satisfaction will lead to a decade of congressional waffling and the end result will be congress bowing to the special interest groups, in this case the insurance industry. In the meantime millions of us will be financially ruined, or die due to untreated illness, or both. What purpose will that serve? Shall we go ahead and kill millions of our fellow Americans in order to allow each one of them to comprehend what "as outlined within sub section 2.19 item 4" means? And in the end do what we should be doing today, only 10 years too late?
The lion's share of you in opposition to this bill will not accept or even consider empirical evidence supporting the need for this bill. In fact, most of you ignore the fact that a lot of the things used to demonstrate why this reform bill should be passed are biting you in the ass right here and right now. Instead, you choose to believe lies, rumors, and innuendo; eating up the fear-mongering messages and spewing them as truth. Even when they are proven to be lies you persist. And you insist upon perfection from this POTUS, despite the fact the chimp was never ever near that idealistic achievement.
The irony surrounding the fact that so many of you were so willing to bitch slap Iraq and couldn't wait to put our men and women into the line of fire, in order to crack skulls and spend billions in the process; never one time stopping to hear those asking for diplomacy, perfection, and accountability then, and now asking for that very thing, is astounding! Then there's the fact that 90% of you would financially and physically benefit from the passing of this legislation, yet you squall against it like a cat with its tail under a rocker. Man, if that doesn't scream with irony I don't know what does. I'd rather spend a billion dollars taking care of my fellow Americans here at home, than chasing mirages in the litterbox of the middle east oil fields, despite your squalling.
"Oh, it's going to fall upon the shoulders of the middle class". - How many times does the POTUS have to say those making 250k and above will shoulder the burden, along with non-compliant companies? Just because the shrubs said it and lied does not mean this POTUS is not telling the truth. But you act upon the assumption that he is. . .
You will not or are unwilling to listen to the voices of reason and have failed to acknowledge one single thing that supports the need for this change; above and beyond acceptable limitations. The only thing you seem to respond to is the very thing you spew out - negativity. . .
And you've known me long enough to know if you spoon me bullshit I'll shovel it right back at you!
Apparently you cannot digest my answers any better than you can the various versions of the bills within the links previously provided. Perhaps we should ask congress to debate my answer? :rolleyes:
Quote from: Exterminator on August 20, 2009, 09:30:36 AM
See what I mean, PH? Nothing new or of any substance...just the same old BS rhetoric over and over.
Yes I do! :rant:
Quote"Their going to tax" - Yes. Those making 250k and above will see an increase in taxes. Employers providing coverage that does NOT meet the federal requirements will be taxed per the rates contained within the bill. This serves as a financial incentive to employers to comply with the federal policy and punishes them if they do not.
Quote"Oh, it's going to fall upon the shoulders of the middle class". - How many times does the POTUS have to say those making 250k and above will shoulder the burden, along with non-compliant companies? Just because the shrubs said it and lied does not mean this POTUS is not telling the truth. But you act upon the assumption that he is. . .
Ok, in regard to the tax thing. It isn't only the income tax that will be raised on the affluent but, as you have seen, there will also be a tax increase in goods which will hit everyone not just the affluent and will hurt the little guy even more. You can't just think about the income tax here. Also Bush's tax cut will fall off next year and that will be on the little guy too not just the affluent who didn't get it in the first place. I would imagine those who don't pay taxes will not be getting their $300 earned income credit any longer which is going to hurt them. The VAT is still being knocked around which would be 25% at least and that is on top of state sales tax, who is that going to hurt the worst? That is on food too if you'd care to go read about it. You can't just look at the income tax part of the equation.
QuoteThis bill would make your life easier, and require health care companies to COVER all diagnostic testing and stop applying those charges toward a policy deductible, and make said deductibles more reasonable as opposed to 2k or more! (I'm not covered by any policy!) But you would be once this bill passes. Automatically.
What health care company? Private ones won't stick around because they're not going to be able to make any money so it will be a government ran health care company which will decide if you should have the testing or the treatment and that could be just as bad or worse than the private ones.
QuoteLook, show me ONE bill congress has passed in the last 3 decades that was perfect upon its inception. Just one. (Hint: No such animal). The reality is we have to start somewhere and delaying this thing until congress can go over each and every line in it and explain it to every single one of you to your satisfaction will lead to a decade of congressional waffling and the end result will be congress bowing to the special interest groups, in this case the insurance industry. In the meantime millions of us will be financially ruined, or die due to untreated illness, or both. What purpose will that serve? Shall we go ahead and kill millions of our fellow Americans in order to allow each one of them to comprehend what "as outlined within sub section 2.19 item 4" means? And in the end do what we should be doing today, only 10 years too late?
Speaking of special interest groups who would profit. David Axelrod ring a bell?
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/08/19/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5253089.shtml
QuoteThe irony surrounding the fact that so many of you were so willing to bitch slap Iraq and couldn't wait to put our men and women into the line of fire, in order to crack skulls and spend billions in the process; never one time stopping to hear those asking for diplomacy, perfection, and accountability then, and now asking for that very thing, is astounding! Then there's the fact that 90% of you would financially and physically benefit from the passing of this legislation, yet you squall against it like a cat with its tail under a rocker. Man, if that doesn't scream with irony I don't know what does. I'd rather spend a billion dollars taking care of my fellow Americans here at home, than chasing mirages in the litterbox of the middle east oil fields, despite your squalling.
They, the terrorists, quit attacking us here didn't they?
Quote from: me on August 20, 2009, 12:17:22 PM
Ok, in regard to the tax thing. It isn't only the income tax that will be raised on the affluent but, as you have seen, there will also be a tax increase in goods which will hit everyone not just the affluent and will hurt the little guy even more. You can't just think about the income tax here. Also Bush's tax cut will fall off next year and that will be on the little guy too not just the affluent who didn't get it in the first place. I would imagine those who don't pay taxes will not be getting their $300 earned income credit any longer which is going to hurt them. The VAT is still being knocked around which would be 25% at least and that is on top of state sales tax, who is that going to hurt the worst? That is on food too if you'd care to go read about it. You can't just look at the income tax part of the equation.
What health care company? Private ones won't stick around because they're not going to be able to make any money so it will be a government ran health care company which will decide if you should have the testing or the treatment and that could be just as bad or worse than the private ones.
Speaking of special interest groups who would profit. David Axelrod ring a bell?
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/08/19/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5253089.shtml
They, the terrorists, quit attacking us here didn't they?
VAT applies to businesses and presently is being utilized within European and other foreign countries as a means of eliminating the sales tax cheating. It is going to impact business if and when it ever passes, which I highly doubt is going to happen given the current flight of manufacturing from US soil. A red herring surrounding healthcare reform so why are you raising this here??
The state level increases in tax rates have nothing to do with the federal government, nor healthcare. Again, off topic with the singular exception that the federal government recognized this would become a very impactive situation for the average American and so is undertaking efforts to shift the burden rate upon those making 250k or more per year in AGI.
Look around. See all those big buildings and vast tracts of prime real estate? Who do you think holds the titles to those things. In a lot of cases heath insurance companies. Now, do you really think they're going to just pull up stakes and liquidate that easily? Not when they're sitting on the golden goose called healthcare insurance! It's been popping out golden eggs in the form of our premiums, and application of charges toward exorbitant deductible rates for a very long time now. They can absorb a hit, in fact a sustained hit, for quite some time to come. You need to investigate just how much that multi billion dollar sector of the business has been generating for these entities at the expense of American health and on our dime!
See what I mean, PH? Read the last statement in the above 12:17 post. Despite absolute and incontrovertable evidence to the contrary, some people still believe that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq. How can you even begin to address such ignorance and what makes you think it will do any good? The rest of the so-called "facts" in that post aren't any better...don't waste your time.
By Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
With budget deficits soaring and President Obama pushing a trillion-dollar-plus expansion of health coverage, some Washington policymakers are taking a fresh look at a money-making idea long considered politically taboo: a national sales tax.
This Story
Once Considered Unthinkable, U.S. Sales Tax Gets Fresh Look
Special Report: Health-Care Reform
Common around the world, including in Europe, such a tax -- called a value-added tax, or VAT -- has not been seriously considered in the United States. But advocates say few other options can generate the kind of money the nation will need to avert fiscal calamity.
At a White House conference earlier this year on the government's budget problems, a roomful of tax experts pleaded with Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner to consider a VAT. A recent flurry of books and papers on the subject is attracting genuine, if furtive, interest in Congress. And last month, after wrestling with the White House over the massive deficits projected under Obama's policies, the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee declared that a VAT should be part of the debate.
"There is a growing awareness of the need for fundamental tax reform," Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said in an interview. "I think a VAT and a high-end income tax have got to be on the table."
A VAT is a tax on the transfer of goods and services that ultimately is borne by the consumer. Highly visible, it would increase the cost of just about everything, from a carton of eggs to a visit with a lawyer. It is also hugely regressive, falling heavily on the poor. But VAT advocates say those negatives could be offset by using the proceeds to pay for health care for every American -- a tangible benefit that would be highly valuable to low-income families.
Liberals dispute that notion. "You could pay for it regressively and have people at the bottom come out better off -- maybe. Or you could pay for it progressively and they'd come out a lot better off," said Bob McIntyre, director of the nonprofit Citizens for Tax Justice, which has a health financing plan that targets corporations and the rich.
A White House official said a VAT is "unlikely to be in the mix" as a means to pay for health-care reform. "While we do not want to rule any credible idea in or out as we discuss the way forward with Congress, the VAT tax, in particular, is popular with academics but highly controversial with policymakers," said Kenneth Baer, a spokesman for White House Budget Director Peter Orszag.
ad_icon
Still, Orszag has hired a prominent VAT advocate to advise him on health care: Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and author of the 2008 book "Health Care, Guaranteed." Meanwhile, former Federal Reserve chairman Paul A. Volcker, chairman of a task force Obama assigned to study the tax system, has expressed at least tentative support for a VAT.
Rest of the article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/26/AR2009052602909.html
Quote from: Exterminator on August 20, 2009, 03:52:45 PM
See what I mean, PH? Read the last statement in the above 12:17 post. Despite absolute and incontrovertable evidence to the contrary, some people still believe that there was a connection between 9/11 and Iraq. How can you even begin to address such ignorance and what makes you think it will do any good? The rest of the so-called "facts" in that post aren't any better...don't waste your time.
Cripes. I see exactly! :yes:
Doom and gloom because a democrat, who happens to want to give every consideration to every option by exercising due diligence, is in the white house. . .
Nope. . . I am through with this. See yah in the soup line!
Hum, terrorists were blowing our shit up....we were talking their legs off and treating it like a police action and they continued to blow our shit up.....we go to war and start cutting off their money supply and support system and attacking them and the attacks here stopped.....So whats not to connect?
Quote from: me on August 20, 2009, 04:50:19 PM
Hum, terrorists were blowing our shit up....we were talking their legs off and treating it like a police action and they continued to blow our shit up.....we go to war and start cutting off their money supply and support system and attacking them and the attacks here stopped.....So whats not to connect?
I felt like I was coming down with a cold yesterday. I took a different route home from work and today I feel much better. Route 301 has medicinal powers.
What's not to connect?
Quote from: Bo D on August 20, 2009, 04:58:28 PM
I felt like I was coming down with a cold yesterday. I took a different route home from work and today I feel much better. Route 301 has medicinal powers.
What's not to connect?
Boy is that ever grabbing at straws..... :rolleyes: And you say we make stupid statements???
Quote from: me on August 20, 2009, 05:02:13 PM
Boy is that ever grabbing at straws..... :rolleyes: And you say we make stupid statements???
You just don't get it! :rolleyes:
It's no more grabbing at straws than your statement connecting 9-11 and Iraq.
Besides ... it's my opinion. And if it's an opinion you can't say it's wrong. :biggrin:
Quote from: Bo D on August 20, 2009, 05:04:23 PM
You just don't get it! :rolleyes:
It's no more grabbing at straws than your statement connecting 9-11 and Iraq.
Besides ... it's my opinion. And if it's an opinion you can't say it's wrong. :biggrin:
Nope, it's just an opinion which is what I'm trying to get across to the other knuckleheads on here. It don't make anyone any dumber than anyone else it is just a different point of view and shouldn't be an opening for someone to call you names, cuss at you, or belittle you. Call you silly maybe or disagree with you but not try to get their point across through bully tactics which is all that is. Cursing and belittling don't make them right it just makes them rude.
Besides route 301 could have had medicinal powers of a sort if there was something you were allergic to and the other route did which would mean even though it didn't truly have medicinal power it still worked. See there really is a connection... :biggrin: Think outside the box..... :wink:
Quote from: me on August 20, 2009, 05:43:36 PM
Nope, it's just an opinion which is what I'm trying to get across to the other knuckleheads on here. It don't make anyone any dumber than anyone else it is just a different point of view
Yet ... for an opinion to have any validity at all, it must be based on at least
some facts.
Quote from: Bo D on August 21, 2009, 08:43:01 AM
Yet ... for an opinion to have any validity at all, it must be based on at least some facts.
But when the facts could go either way there has to be a decisions on which facts you chose to base your opinion on.
Quote from: Bo D on August 20, 2009, 04:58:28 PM
I felt like I was coming down with a cold yesterday. I took a different route home from work and today I feel much better. Route 301 has medicinal powers.
What's not to connect?
LMFAO! Very well done!
Quote from: me on August 20, 2009, 05:43:36 PM
It don't make anyone any dumber than anyone else...
In your case, it do(sic).
Quote from: me on August 21, 2009, 09:24:30 AM
But when the facts could go either way there has to be a decisions on which facts you chose to base your opinion on.
And when those "facts" are proven to be lies, it makes any opinion based upon them the very same thing.
At this point in the game neither can be proven as fact because of the fact it hasn't passed and we are only hearing about intentions which cannot be proven either way until it actually happens. Therefore we are only stating our opinions based on our interpretation of the different aspects of the bill and what they might actually end up being. You hope it will turn out the way you have been understanding it and been told it was and I'm afraid it may turn out the way I have been understanding it and recognize what it could turn out to be. Look at the people he has surrounded himself with and the power he has given them, his czars, and what they might do to the bill once it has passed. Read up on them and some of their ideologies and tell me it doesn't concern you. Obama isn't the be all and end all some of this could well be out of his control once it has passed. And most of all I do not trust those in congress.
Quote from: me on August 21, 2009, 12:48:05 PM
At this point in the game neither can be proven as fact because of the fact it hasn't passed and we are only hearing about intentions which cannot be proven either way until it actually happens. Therefore we are only stating our opinions based on our interpretation of the different aspects of the bill and what they might actually end up being. You hope it will turn out the way you have been understanding it and been told it was and I'm afraid it may turn out the way I have been understanding it and recognize what it could turn out to be.
That's such bullshit...it's English and says what it says. Your inability to understand it doesn't change what it says which is factual.
Quote from: me on August 21, 2009, 12:48:05 PM
At this point in the game neither can be proven as fact because of the fact it hasn't passed and we are only hearing about intentions which cannot be proven either way until it actually happens. Therefore we are only stating our opinions based on our interpretation of the different aspects of the bill and what they might actually end up being. You hope it will turn out the way you have been understanding it and been told it was and I'm afraid it may turn out the way I have been understanding it and recognize what it could turn out to be. Look at the people he has surrounded himself with and the power he has given them, his czars, and what they might do to the bill once it has passed. Read up on them and some of their ideologies and tell me it doesn't concern you. Obama isn't the be all and end all some of this could well be out of his control once it has passed. And most of all I do not trust those in congress.
Fact! Grapes CAN and ARE grown in England! And there IS a thriving wine industry there.
Yet ... did that stop you from posting that stupid lie from your inbox?
Quote from: me on January 08, 2009, 05:31:12 PM
And they used to grow grapes in England but can't now because the climate is too cold so where's the global warming there? Check that out... :razz:
http://theunknownzone.us/smf/index.php?topic=12324.105 (http://theunknownzone.us/smf/index.php?topic=12324.105)
Fact: The bill hasn't passed yet.
Fact: The biggest part of congress hasn't read any part of it.
Fact: The President hasn't even read it but is only going by what he is being told is in it and being assured that what he wants is in there.
Fact: Obama has appointed czars to oversee the workings of it and they can do whatever they want without the approval of congress.
Fact: It has not been explained to my satisfaction that none of the things I see possibly happening won't.
Fact: You guy's are just taking congress and Obama's word for those things not happening when, in fact, none of them know for sure since they haven't read it and most of them had nothing to do with drafting it but are only taking the word of the ones who did what's in it.
Fact: None of us really know for sure how this will turn out.
Quote from: me on August 21, 2009, 02:12:13 PM
Fact: The biggest part of congress hasn't read any part of it.
Prove it.
QuoteFact: The President hasn't even read it but is only going by what he is being told is in it and being assured that what he wants is in there.
Prove it.
QuoteFact: It has not been explained to my satisfaction that none of the things I see possibly happening won't.
Fact: Congress is not required to explain every piece of legislation to the satisfaction of every housewife in Anderson.
QuoteFact: You guy's are just taking congress and Obama's word for those things not happening when, in fact, none of them know for sure since they haven't read it and most of them had nothing to do with drafting it but are only taking the word of the ones who did what's in it.
There you go again, presenting as fact something you have no way of knowing.
QuoteFact: None of us really know for sure how this will turn out.
Correct...nothing ventured, nothing gained.
Congressman Mike Rogers' opening statement on Health Care reform in Washington D.C.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G44NCvNDLfc
Mike Rogers obviously doesn't have any more of a clue than you do. What I would love to see happen is that health care reform happens but that those of you who oppose it never see any benefit from it...that would be just.
Obviously he does he even pointed out the parts he was referring to. You are only hearing what you want to hear and not paying attention. Have you ever asked yourself who wrote the bill in the first place, not who introduced it to congress but who wrote it?
Quote from: me on August 27, 2009, 10:19:13 AM
Obviously he does he even pointed out the parts he was referring to. You are only hearing what you want to hear and not paying attention. Have you ever asked yourself who wrote the bill in the first place, not who introduced it to congress but who wrote it?
Certainly not the insurance industry. If the litmus test for healthcare reform is a perfect solution, it will never happen because there are no perfect solutions.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 27, 2009, 10:36:11 AM
Certainly not the insurance industry. If the litmus test for healthcare reform is a perfect solution, it will never happen because there are no perfect solutions.
But there ARE other solutions that do not require as much gov intervention...the republicans have offered three bills that have been ignored.....they included tort reforms, tax breaks for business to cover employees, private healthcare accounts to just name a few.....so, though there may be NO perfect solutions...there are other solution that should be looked at more seriously.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 11:04:42 AM
But there ARE other solutions that do not require as much gov intervention...the republicans have offered three bills that have been ignored.....they included tort reforms, tax breaks for business to cover employees, private healthcare accounts to just name a few.....so, though there may be NO perfect solutions...there are other solution that should be looked at more seriously.
Here's an opinion of what the Republicans are offering ...
Mr. Steele's Health-Reform Distortions
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Michael S. Steele's Aug. 24 op-ed, "Protecting Our Seniors," showed that the Republican National Committee chairman has a great future ahead of him -- as a writer of fiction. His health-care reform column was tethered neither to facts nor reality.
Contrary to Mr. Steele's creative writing exercise, health-reform bills pending in Congress do not ration care, dictate the terms of end-of-life care, enable government to dictate medical decisions or cut Medicare benefits. These are discredited canards designed to scare seniors for partisan, political purposes.
Instead, the health-reform bills would provide significant new benefits for seniors. They would help to close the big gap in prescription drug coverage (the infamous "doughnut hole") for seniors needing multiple medicines; eliminate co-payments and deductibles for preventive care services; extend cost-sharing subsidies for more low-income seniors; and extend the life of the Medicare trust fund by five years.
These are important health-care improvements that seniors will share as our nation moves toward high-quality, affordable health coverage and care for all Americans.
RON POLLACK
Executive Director
Families USA
Washington
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/26/AR2009082603532.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/26/AR2009082603532.html)
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 11:04:42 AM
But there ARE other solutions that do not require as much gov intervention...the republicans have offered three bills that have been ignored.....they included tort reforms, tax breaks for business to cover employees, private healthcare accounts to just name a few.....so, though there may be NO perfect solutions...there are other solution that should be looked at more seriously.
Read below, Henry, for an example of one of those jokes you are calling an alternative. How easily you will jump on anything simply because it was offered by a republican would be almost funny if it weren't so pathetic. The repubs had every opportunity to offer a solution to the health care problem and every opportunity to get it passed for at least the first half of this decade and they did nothing. The time has come for them to sit down and shut up and let the people who really want to accomplish something get it done.
Here's another great article on the Republicans' offerings....
Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, this week revealed a secret Republican plan that would end up eliminating all federal farm subsidies; closing down Yellowstone and Yosemite national parks; selling off the interstate highway system; and canceling Head Start, subsidized school lunches and the entire college loan program.
The plan came to light as a result of an op-ed piece this week in The Washington Post in which the party chairman committed the GOP to spending an ever-increasing share of the federal budget, and the national income, on Medicare. When combined with other Republican promises -- to balance the budget, protect defense spending and never, ever raise anyone's taxes -- the inescapable inference is that the government would run out of money for every other domestic program sometime around 2035.
Steele's stunning announcement brings the conservative strategy of "starving the beast" to a new level. Under the guise of protecting the elderly, Republicans hope to realize their dream of eliminating half a dozen Cabinet agencies, firing tens of thousands of government workers and ending government regulation as we know it.
Steele's op-ed was the latest salvo in his party's campaign to defeat President Obama's health-care reform effort at all costs and build public support for a Republican alternative that remains, to this day, a closely held secret. The new Seniors' Health Care Bill of Rights, however, hints at the outlines of the GOP domestic strategy.
Steele promised that under the Republican health plan, runaway Medicare spending would continue unabated. Not only would that mean no cuts in benefits, but it would ensure that reimbursement rates to doctors, hospitals and drugmakers would continue to rise faster than inflation, regardless of how much they earn or how unnecessary or wasteful the services they provide. Any effort to contain future spending growth, Republicans now believe, is nothing more than a "raid" on Medicare, the government-run health plan that Republicans were against before they were for it.
The country's top Republican official also vowed to cut off all federal funding for research to determine what are the most effective treatments for heart disease, cancer, diabetes and even that new scourge, restless leg syndrome. Left unclear was whether he prefers to have such research done by the pharmaceutical and medical-device industries, but one suspects that is the case.
On the issue of end-of-life care, Steele was uncompromising: In a Republican world, no government funds could be used to pay doctors to provide information about living wills, hospices or palliative care, whether seniors and their families ask for it or not.
"Government programs that seem benign at first can become anything but," Steele explained in articulating the new philosophy. Once back in power, look for Republicans to apply the same approach to issues such as flu vaccinations, disaster relief and air traffic control.
According to Steele, Republicans will also seek to outlaw "any effort to ration health care based on age." You don't have to be a lawyer like Steele to understand that would effectively make it a federal crime for any hospital to refuse a heart transplant to a 95-year-old, or for any doctor to refuse to prescribe Viagra to a sexually precocious seventh-grader. Although Steele did not indicate what the penalty would be, he did not rule out the death penalty.
Indeed, Republicans seem determined to preserve the uniquely American system under which health care is rationed today -- on the basis of employment status and ability to pay. According to the respected Institute of Medicine, this market-based approach to rationing has held the number of untimely deaths each year to a mere 18,000 uninsured souls. Thanks to Medicare, all of those victims are younger than 65, but apparently that is the kind of age-based rationing that real Republicans can embrace.
After reading his broadside, one is left wondering exactly what health reform plan Steele thought he was attacking. At one point, Steele claims that Democrats would prevent Americans from keeping their doctors or an insurance plan they like. Later, he warns that government will soon be setting caps on how many heart surgeries could be performed in the United States each year. Where is he getting this stuff? Has the chairman of the Republican Party somehow gotten hold of a top-secret plan for a government takeover of the health-care system that GOP operatives snatched during a break-in at Democratic National Committee headquarters?
If all that sounds spurious and unsubstantiated, it is. And like many of the overstated claims in this column, its purpose is to highlight the lies, distortions and political scare tactics that Steele and other Republicans have used to poison the national debate over health reform.
Have you no shame, sir? Have you no shame?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/25/AR2009082503136.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/25/AR2009082503136.html)
It is apparently difficult to think clearly while tea-bagging.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 27, 2009, 11:27:41 AM
The time has come for them to sit down and shut up and let the people who really want to accomplish something get it done.
Tell that to those at the Town Halls who CLEARLY do not want, what the democrats are proposing...
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 12:21:37 PM
Tell that to those at the Town Halls who CLEARLY do not want, what the democrats are proposing...
At least that's what they have been told to think.
Quote from: Bo D on August 27, 2009, 12:24:36 PM
At least that's what they have been told to think.
Exactly! The problem with this whole thing is that rather than letting the evidence and facts craft the discussions and decisions, people are taking conclusions (fed to them by the usual propaganda outlets) and then looking for evidence to support them.
I say this with all due respect, but you guys are full of shit!!.. ;D These are people from ALL walks of life...who ARE very well informed.....just go to youtube...and look at town halls...they are loaded with REAL people who simply do NOT want a gov controlled healthcare...and THAT is what we are having shoved down our throats.....it is NOT that complicating...nor does anybody HAVE to listen to Rush to get it.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=townhalls&search_type=&aq=f (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=townhalls&search_type=&aq=f)
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 12:35:38 PM
I say this with all due respect, but you guys are full of shit!!.. ;D These are people from ALL walks of life...who ARE very well informed.....just go to youtube...and look at town halls...they are loaded with REAL people who simply do NOT want a gov controlled healthcare...and THAT is what we are having shoved down our throats.....it is NOT that complicating...nor does anybody HAVE to listen to Rush to get it.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=townhalls&search_type=&aq=f (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=townhalls&search_type=&aq=f)
Is it my imagination or am I seeing a few of the same faces over and over in those videos? And I swear I've seen them before somewhere .....
Wait! I remember those guys! They were bit actors in several movies I've seen! Anything for a buck.
:biggrin:
Quote from: Bo D on August 27, 2009, 12:41:55 PM
Is it my imagination or am I seeing a few of the same faces over and over in those videos? And I swear I've seen them before somewhere .....
Wait! I remember those guys! They were bit actors in several movies I've seen! Anything for a buck.
:biggrin:
they probably look familiar to you, because they are EVERYWHERE....your neighbors, co-workers, accountant, plumbers, teachers, military personel.....they are the ones who are not too excited about turning their perfectly good healthcare plans over to the Government....these are the ones, who reflect the dropping approval ratings of this POTUS....they are real people.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 12:50:14 PM
they probably look familiar to you, because they are EVERYWHERE....your neighbors, co-workers, accountant, plumbers, teachers, military personel.....they are the ones who are not too excited about turning their perfectly good healthcare plans over to the Government....these are the ones, who reflect the dropping approval ratings of this POTUS....they are real people.
Tell me! Just exactly what is perfectly good about your current health plan?
My insurance premiums are breaking me to the point where this season I will have to drop the dental and optical coverage (not that it was much good anyway.)
My HMO is deciding what doctor I can see.
My HMO is deciding what treatment is best for me.
My HMO is denying payment for a life-threatening emergency because I had to visit an emergency room while I was on an out-of-town trip.
Give me a break! :rolleyes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 12:50:14 PMturning their perfectly good healthcare plans over to the Government....
ANOTHER LIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How can ANYONE take an educated stance on this issue? You all have me so freaking confused. Everyone is calling everyone else liars, from the media to my peers. :rolleyes:
Quote from: pariann on August 27, 2009, 01:03:34 PM
How can ANYONE take an educated stance on this issue? You all have me so freaking confused. Everyone is calling everyone else liars, from the media to my peers. :rolleyes:
This has been posted before, but just for you.....
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200: (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200:)
Quote from: Bo D on August 27, 2009, 12:57:01 PM
ANOTHER LIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No it is not....I can show you one right off the bat....go to page 167 of House Bill.....Tax on Individuals Without Acceptable Health Care Coverage......the IRS, through this bill will be granted the right to enforce the mandate of insurance on, not only businesses, but private individuals.....it is ALLOWING the IRS, to intervene....is just ONE passage that clearly shows, that THEY can and WILL force EVERYONE, the deem, to get on the National coverage....
you guys maybe need to read this thing....I got accused of not reading it....and I have read it...and there are several passages that is directing government intervention.....and taxing companies that does not meet GOVERNMENT standards....IT SUCKS!!...
Here's an example ... the Town Hall screamers are saying that the plan will give free health care to illegal aliens.
Fact:
"SEC. 246. NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS.
Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 01:21:46 PM
No it is not....I can show you one right off the bat....go to page 167 of House Bill.....Tax on Individuals Without Acceptable Health Care Coverage......the IRS, through this bill will be granted the right to enforce the mandate of insurance on, not only businesses, but private individuals.....it is ALLOWING the IRS, to intervene....is just ONE passage that clearly shows, that THEY can and WILL force EVERYONE, the deem, to get on the National coverage....
you guys maybe need to read this thing....I got accused of not reading it....and I have read it...and there are several passages that is directing government intervention.....and taxing companies that does not meet GOVERNMENT standards....IT SUCKS!!...
You said ....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 12:50:14 PMturning their perfectly good healthcare plans over to the Government....
Section 401 TAX ON INDIVIDUALS
WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.
And dumb ol' Chuck Grassley's "death panels" ....
http://thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com/2009/08/video-grassley-admits-no-death-panels.html (http://thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com/2009/08/video-grassley-admits-no-death-panels.html)
Now he says "It won't do that."
"First tell the lie, then perpetuate it, then defend it, then perpetuate it some more:"
and WHO defines what is ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE?
Quote from: Bo D on August 27, 2009, 12:41:55 PM
Is it my imagination or am I seeing a few of the same faces over and over in those videos? And I swear I've seen them before somewhere .....
Wait! I remember those guys! They were bit actors in several movies I've seen! Anything for a buck.
:biggrin:
You're confusing those videos with the ones of ACORN. The reason you are seeing the same people is because some of those videos are the same town hall meetings cut up into different segments not different town hall meetings. Ya'll really need to get out more and start payin' attention to things around you and quit being so stubborn about this. Check out the health czar who is not accountable to congress and think about the power he has once the bill is passed and congress hands are tied. Look what has happened with the cash for clunkers. Dealers everywhere aren't getting paid so what about the doctors will they get paid after they perform their services? How long will it take? How many more hoops will they have to jump through than they do already? How many will continue to be doctors?
As for the cost. From what I understand the price of beer will be doubling, federal sales tax, in approx 2 months. Is that going to hurt the rich? No, its going to hurt the middle income, those on a fixed income, and the lower income people. Well, they don't need to drink beer you say.....damn cigarettes and tobacco products have already doubled on them utility rates have gone through the roof, C&T, and next will be sugared products. Then add on top of that Bush tax cuts expiring and that is mostly on the middle and lower income who pay taxes. How much is this helping? You, Ex, are lucky enough to be in the affluent crowd so you don't see what it's doing to those of us who aren't. At this point I could afford private health insurance more than this "free" health care.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 01:35:47 PM
and WHO defines what is ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE?
It is CLEARLY DEFINED if only you would take the time to actually read it.
Quote from: Bo D on August 27, 2009, 12:56:00 PM
Tell me! Just exactly what is perfectly good about your current health plan?
My insurance premiums are breaking me to the point where this season I will have to drop the dental and optical coverage (not that it was much good anyway.)
My HMO is deciding what doctor I can see.
My HMO is deciding what treatment is best for me.
My HMO is denying payment for a life-threatening emergency because I had to visit an emergency room while I was on an out-of-town trip.
Why doesn't somebody take a stab at answering my question?
Quote from: Bo D on August 27, 2009, 01:41:52 PM
Why doesn't somebody take a stab at answering my question?
What that boils down to is the way it was turned in. The codes used have a lot to do with whether a certain thing gets covered or not. Do you think this "free" health care will be any different?
Quote from: me on August 27, 2009, 01:36:49 PM
Ya'll really need to get out more and start payin' attention to things around you and quit being so stubborn about this.
Why don't ypu quit being so stubborn and read the friggin bill?
Quote from: me on August 27, 2009, 01:36:49 PM
As for the cost. From what I understand the price of beer will be doubling, federal sales tax, in approx 2 months. Is that going to hurt the rich? No, its going to hurt the middle income, those on a fixed income, and the lower income people. Well, they don't need to drink beer you say.....damn cigarettes and tobacco products have already doubled on them utility rates have gone through the roof, C&T, and next will be sugared products. Then add on top of that Bush tax cuts expiring and that is mostly on the middle and lower income who pay taxes. How much is this helping? You, Ex, are lucky enough to be in the affluent crowd so you don't see what it's doing to those of us who aren't. At this point I could afford private health insurance more than this "free" health care.
And here's what Michael Steele would do ...
"Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, this week revealed a secret Republican plan that would end up eliminating all federal farm subsidies; closing down Yellowstone and Yosemite national parks; selling off the interstate highway system; and canceling Head Start, subsidized school lunches and the entire college loan program.
The plan came to light as a result of an op-ed piece this week in The Washington Post in which the party chairman committed the GOP to spending an ever-increasing share of the federal budget, and the national income, on Medicare. When combined with other Republican promises -- to balance the budget, protect defense spending and never, ever raise anyone's taxes -- the inescapable inference is that the government would run out of money for every other domestic program sometime around 2035.
Steele's stunning announcement brings the conservative strategy of "starving the beast" to a new level. Under the guise of protecting the elderly, Republicans hope to realize their dream of eliminating half a dozen Cabinet agencies, firing tens of thousands of government workers and ending government regulation as we know it."
Quote from: me on August 27, 2009, 01:45:43 PM
What that boils down to is the way it was turned in. The codes used have a lot to do with whether a certain thing gets covered or not. Do you think this "free" health care will be any different?
It CERTAINLY can't be any worse that what I have now! And from reading THE BILL, it WILL be better.
Quote from: Bo D on August 27, 2009, 01:18:17 PM
This has been posted before, but just for you.....
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200: (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200:)
Do you think I'm going to be any less confused? From what I'm understanding, no matter what is written there, and how clearly stated it is, everyone is calling everyone else a liar when they interpret what IS clearly stated. I can't get an educated opinion on this issue. :(
Show me him saying it or the bill not just an "oped" piece.
Quote from: Bo D on August 27, 2009, 01:48:56 PM
It CERTAINLY can't be any worse that what I have now! And from reading THE BILL, it WILL be better.
Then you'd better get your glasses changed or if you don't wear them get some.
Quote from: pariann on August 27, 2009, 01:49:48 PM
Do you think I'm going to be any less confused? From what I'm understanding, no matter what is written there, and how clearly stated it is, everyone is calling everyone else a liar when they interpret what IS clearly stated. I can't get an educated opinion on this issue. :(
I gave you an educated opinion. :yes:
Quote from: me on August 27, 2009, 01:51:27 PM
Show me him saying it or the bill not just an "oped" piece.
There is no "bill" because the Republicans haven't offered one. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Bo D on August 27, 2009, 01:55:36 PM
I gave you an educated opinion. :yes:
I want my OWN educated opinoin. LOL It's probably not wise to listen to just one. That's where we keep getting people calling other people liars. Anyway. I don't even care. I've lived 48 years with subpar health care, just about anything is going to be better, even if it ends up that I will be selected to let die after a certain age. The way it is for me right now, that's exactly what's going to happen. No medical treatment when I'm old and infirm.
Quote from: pariann on August 27, 2009, 02:03:13 PM
I want my OWN educated opinoin. LOL It's probably not wise to listen to just one. That's where we keep getting people calling other people liars. Anyway. I don't even care. I've lived 48 years with subpar health care, just about anything is going to be better, even if it ends up that I will be selected to let die after a certain age. The way it is for me right now, that's exactly what's going to happen. No medical treatment when I'm old and infirm.
I'm not trying to be a smartass here, but the best way to get an educated opinion is to read the bill.
Quote from: Bo D on August 27, 2009, 01:56:51 PM
There is no "bill" because the Republicans haven't offered one. :rolleyes:
Wrong.....They have offered THREE...
n May, Republicans in the House and the Senate formed a bicameral coalition to produce the130-page " Patients Choice Act of 2009 (http://www.house.gov/ryan/PCA/)"
In June, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) introduced a 41-page proposal.... "Health Care Freedom Plan" (http://demint.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=0db98529-0230-3564-0e4b-fe84bdb1971b&Month=6&Year=2009&Type=PressRelease)
And in July, the Republican Study Committee, under the leadership of Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), unveiled a 130-page plan. "Empowering Patients First Act," (http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:iyWxuCZgvvgJ:rsc.tomprice.house.gov/UploadedFiles/RSC_EPFA_Three-Page_Summary--FINAL.pdf+Empowering+Patients+First+Act&hl=en&gl=us)
All three are very interesting and WORTH National attention...
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 12:35:38 PM
I say this with all due respect, but you guys are full of shit!!.. ;D These are people from ALL walks of life...who ARE very well informed...
No they're not; they're the same bunch of dumb rednecks as were downtown at that tea-bagging party.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 02:22:45 PM
Wrong.....They have offered THREE...
All three are very interesting and WORTH National attention...
Why is there NO RECORD of their ever being introduced as A BILL?
Quote from: Bo D on August 27, 2009, 02:44:35 PM
Why is there NO RECORD of their ever being introduced as A BILL?
Well, bo....there is:
HR 2520 (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2520) ...you will find the Patients Choice Act....
H.R.3400 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3400:) Empowering Patients First Act
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 03:01:23 PM
Well, bo....there is:
HR 2520 (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2520) ...you will find the Patients Choice Act....
H.R.3400 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3400:) Empowering Patients First Act
There
are and how are these bills different from that offered by the other side of the aisle?
Quote from: Exterminator on August 27, 2009, 03:29:39 PM
There are and how are these bills different from that offered by the other side of the aisle?
It does not raise taxes or increase government spending...but uses the money we currently spend more effectively.
All this came about because Bo said the republicans did not offer one...and THAT is wrong...(or a lie, to use YOUR terminalogy)....
Then he said there is NO record of these bills ever being introduced....again...wrong.
Are they different.........off the cuff, YES they are...try reading them and see for yourself.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 03:40:12 PM
It does not raise taxes or increase government spending...but uses the money we currently spend more effectively.
Are you absolutely certain that both of those things are true and if I can prove you wrong on either of them, will yuou admit you don't know what you're talking about and stay out of any further discussions about health care reform?
Quote from: Exterminator on August 27, 2009, 03:55:39 PM
Are you absolutely certain that both of those things are true and if I can prove you wrong on either of them, will yuou admit you don't know what you're talking about and stay out of any further discussions about health care reform?
Am I certain that those things are TRUE?...What THINGS are you talking about?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 04:02:43 PM
Am I certain that those things are TRUE?...What THINGS are you talking about?
That it will not increase government spending.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 27, 2009, 04:04:31 PM
That it will not increase government spending.
Paul Ryan says:
My plan, The Patients' Choice Act, ensures universal, affordable health care for all Americans. Under The Patients' Choice Act, patients and doctors would control their health care decisions - not insurance companies and federal government bureaucrats. Equally important, my proposal does not raise taxes or increase government spending, but uses the money we currently spend more effectively.Now, is he lying?....who knows...THAT is what he is selling his Bill on....PROVE him wrong!...
And before you get all jiggy....I am not promoting this one over any other at this time....I am pointing out that there ARE alternatives.....that have been introduced, but seems as if they are NOT being discussed.....WHY IS THAT?...hmmmm :confused: :rolleyes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 04:16:25 PM
Paul Ryan says:
My plan, The Patients' Choice Act, ensures universal, affordable health care for all Americans. Under The Patients' Choice Act, patients and doctors would control their health care decisions - not insurance companies and federal government bureaucrats. Equally important, my proposal does not raise taxes or increase government spending, but uses the money we currently spend more effectively.
Now, is he lying?....who knows...THAT is what he is selling his Bill on....PROVE him wrong!...
Only if you agree to my conditions.
QuoteAnd before you get all jiggy....I am not promoting this one over any other at this time....I am pointing out that there ARE alternatives.....that have been introduced, but seems as if they are NOT being discussed.....WHY IS THAT?...hmmmm :confused: :rolleyes:
Perhaps because they really don't effect any real change at all?
Quote from: Exterminator on August 27, 2009, 04:21:08 PM
Only if you agree to my conditions.
all I will admit is that Paul Ryan does not know what he is talking about IF you COULD prove that he is wrong
....(which you can't)and I will ALWAYS be around to discuss WHATEVER I want on here (
unless the admin thinks differently), despite YOUR lack of ability to understand what a REAL conservative view or ideology brings to a discussion....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 03:40:12 PM
All this came about because Bo said the republicans did not offer one...and THAT is wrong...(or a lie, to use YOUR terminalogy)....
Then he said there is NO record of these bills ever being introduced....again...wrong.
My bad. I couldn't find them on Thomas locator.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 04:16:25 PM
Under The Patients' Choice Act, patients and doctors would control their health care decisions - not insurance companies and federal government bureaucrats.
As long as there are HMO's, insurance companies WILL control health care decisions.
See my post in this thread.
IMO insurance is a nice name for extortion but it is, unfortunately, a necessary evil in a lot of cases. I would still rather give my money to a private company than the government.
Quote from: me on August 27, 2009, 06:52:16 PM
IMO insurance is a nice name for extortion ...
Damned well told, sister. I am bemused by all this talk of "choice." If you have insurance, your choices are limited by the doctors and hospitals approved by your insurance plan (ever notice that everything is initially denied, awaiting more info from your doctor?) If you don't have insurance, your choices are limited by what you can afford.
Don't think the Medicaid/Medicare folks skate either. Just
try to find a doctor who is accepting new Medicare patients.
One part of what some of those four hundred people my company employs do, is investigate Medicare fraud. The patients are not the ones perpetrating the fraud. It's the doctors, the hospitals, and the skilled nursing facilities.
As simplistic as it sounds, the problem is profit. So long as there is money to be made providing healthcare, it's going to be a dirty business. That is the only reason I lean toward the public option. The government never made a nickel doing anything.
Ron Paul: How To Solve The Healthcare Crisis
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDWWI7A9f6U&feature=related)
very interesting...if you got 7 minutes....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 28, 2009, 10:16:38 AM
Ron Paul: How To Solve The Healthcare Crisis
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDWWI7A9f6U&feature=related)
very interesting...if you got 7 minutes....
No offense, Henry, but does anyone READ anymore? I hate those damned Youboob editorials.
Quote from: Bo D on August 28, 2009, 10:19:01 AM
No offense, Henry, but does anyone READ anymore? I hate those damned Youboob editorials.
I read quite a bit...but I also love hearing from the horses mouth sometimes...I can work and listen to stuff like this and keep productive.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 27, 2009, 04:29:31 PM
all I will admit is that Paul Ryan does not know what he is talking about IF you COULD prove that he is wrong....(which you can't)
and I will ALWAYS be around to discuss WHATEVER I want on here (unless the admin thinks differently), despite YOUR lack of ability to understand what a REAL conservative view or ideology brings to a discussion....
Thanks, Henry...you've answered the question exactly as we expected you to. 'Nuff said...
Quote from: Bo D on August 28, 2009, 10:19:01 AM
No offense, Henry, but does anyone READ anymore? I hate those damned Youboob editorials.
Consider your audience.
Quote from: me on August 27, 2009, 06:52:16 PM
I would still rather give my money to a private company than the government.
Given the recent bail outs the banks and insurance companies have gotten, perhaps you'd like to re-think that strategy.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 28, 2009, 01:10:08 PM
Thanks, Henry...you've answered the question exactly as we expected you to. 'Nuff said...
what....do you have a mouse in your pocket?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 28, 2009, 01:19:10 PM
what....do you have a mouse in your pocket?
Nope, but we'll ask around...
Who here on the forum fully expected that Henry doesn't have a clue what he's talking about...that he hasn't read any of the health care proposals offered by either democrats or republicans and he is just spouting off rhetoric that he's been fed from his insurance-funded right-wing whack-job radio personalities?
:coffee: :blah:
Sure you do..an original thought would cause your head to explode :razz:
:razz:
QuotePast efforts to overhaul the nation's health care system had different proponents, different opponents and different plans that were under consideration. But they have two things in common: They all ended in failure, and in every case, opponents used fear as a key weapon in their arsenal.
Quote
Republicans insist that fear is not part of their strategy in trying to defeat the current health overhaul effort. "No one's trying to scare people with sound bites. I mean, you know, I've not done that, and I don't know any of the leaders in the House and Senate that have done that," Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele said on NPR earlier this week.
But that's not convincing to many political scientists like Oberlander, who say they're hearing a lot of what they consider to be deliberate scare tactics.
"Fear is crowding out the truth. And the truth ought to count for something in health care reform and American politics. And right now it doesn't," he says.
The current debate isn't yet over, but so far at least, biology has defeated logic every time
http://att.npr.mlogic.mobi/news.jsp?key=535513&rc=ne&p=0&single=true#p_2
Hum, Canada has it, England has it, a lot of other countries have it but yet they come here for treatment a lot. Wonder why that is......
Oh, and since you do so much reading and question asking who drafted the bill, not who added or changed certain parts who wrote the bill in the first place?
Quote from: me on August 29, 2009, 07:03:31 AM
Hum, Canada has it, England has it, a lot of other countries have it but yet they come here for treatment a lot. Wonder why that is......
There you go throwing out that lie again. Have you no integrity whatsoever?
Oh, oops, I forgot you can't take people's practical experience with it to draw a conclusion you have to look at stats drawn up by the people who are for it. Silly me using that anecdotal evidence and common sense again to help form an opinion. Oh gee I can't wait 'til the "free" health care comes into effect....gosh I'll get the best doctors and the most advanced care ever imagined...I'm soooo excited. And who's going to pay for all this???????? Well the rich and affluent of course like Charlie Wrangle, Barney Franks, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, & Harry Reid. Of course they won't be on the same plan, no, they want us to have all that wonderful care for our very own and they'll stick with what they already have which we are paying for. They're going to be so excited when those wonderful tax hikes for the rich take place and it includes them. It will be so wonderful when the tax break drops off next year and the extra tax on goods and services takes effect so the lower and middle income aren't hurt by any tax increases. Golly pa the gubments gonna help us out.....oh btw....no cost of living increase in Social Security next year 'cause even though costs for things are going up we gotta fund that "free" health care.
Quote from: me on August 29, 2009, 08:00:18 AM
Oh, oops, I forgot you can't take people's practical experience with it to draw a conclusion you have to look at stats drawn up by the people who are for it. Silly me using that anecdotal evidence and common sense again to help form an opinion.
Oh, gee, silly me for not believing that the two or three stories some clown from Andertucky keeps bandying about are more statistically significant than an empirical analysis of the actual data. Are you really that stupid?
The rest of your post is nothing more than the same baseless tripe you continue to spew long after it has been soundly disproven.
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes: indeed...trying to imply that there are droves of people coming here from England or Canada for health care. It is an outright lie.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 29, 2009, 09:01:37 AM
:rolleyes: indeed...trying to imply that there are droves of people coming here from England or Canada for health care. It is an outright lie.
Did I say droves? No I did not...droves of people can't afford to come here for treatment.
Quote from: me on August 29, 2009, 09:22:34 AM
Did I say droves? No I did not...droves of people can't afford to come here for treatment.
You said 'a lot' and that is a lie.
Prove it.
Prove it isn't...you made the assertion. You can't because it's a lie and you know it. When Farrah was sick, she went to Germany to get treated...why do you think that is?
Likewise, Henry's contention that the so-called protestors are from all walks of life is a lie as well. They're in front of the statehouse right now and there are no professionals or blacks or asians or anyone else in that crown but a bunch of fat, middle-aged, unwashed, bearded rednecks wearing baseball caps.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 29, 2009, 10:54:10 AM
Prove it isn't...you made the assertion. You can't because it's a lie and you know it. When Farrah was sick, she went to Germany to get treated...why do you think that is?
Likewise, Henry's contention that the so-called protestors are from all walks of life is a lie as well. They're in front of the statehouse right now and there are no professionals or blacks or asians or anyone else in that crown but a bunch of fat, middle-aged, unwashed, bearded rednecks wearing baseball caps.
Crown? You don't say? Do you really think you should be posting on a Saturday morning? :wink:
Quote from: Exterminator on August 29, 2009, 10:54:10 AM
Prove it isn't...you made the assertion. You can't because it's a lie and you know it. When Farrah was sick, she went to Germany to get treated...why do you think that is?
Likewise, Henry's contention that the so-called protestors are from all walks of life is a lie as well. They're in front of the statehouse right now and there are no professionals or blacks or asians or anyone else in that crown but a bunch of fat, middle-aged, unwashed, bearded rednecks wearing baseball caps.
To get an unproven treatment, probably coffee enemas which obviously didn't work, rather than treatments which would have been available to her here.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 29, 2009, 10:54:10 AM
Prove it isn't...you made the assertion. You can't because it's a lie and you know it. When Farrah was sick, she went to Germany to get treated...why do you think that is?
Likewise, Henry's contention that the so-called protestors are from all walks of life is a lie as well. They're in front of the statehouse right now and there are no professionals or blacks or asians or anyone else in that crown but a bunch of fat, middle-aged, unwashed, bearded rednecks wearing baseball caps.
you are stupid ass..........you really are....I don't know about today....I had NO idea of anything going on today...but the one I went too, was 1000's of business men and women, stay at home moms, military from ALL sorts of branches, construction workers, retirees'..........the only rednecks that were there was the one's that channel 59 found and interviewed.....say what you want, I WAS THERE.....almost everyone from my company was there...none are rednecks....
the one today was NOT a well organized one...probably one that was staged by the democrats to make it appear a certain way.....
Quote from: me on August 29, 2009, 01:30:17 PM
To get an unproven treatment, probably coffee enemas which obviously didn't work, rather than treatments which would have been available to her here.
Actually, the treatments she got in Germany did work...temporarily...the size of her tumors was reduced and she lived much longer than her original prognosis. Nice try, though...you dolt.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 29, 2009, 08:28:01 PM
you are stupid ass.....
Were you not warned by the moderator here about this?
Quote.....you really are....I don't know about today....I had NO idea of anything going on today...but the one I went too, was 1000's of business men and women, stay at home moms, military from ALL sorts of branches, construction workers, retirees'..........the only rednecks that were there was the one's that channel 59 found and interviewed.....say what you want, I WAS THERE.....almost everyone from my company was there...none are rednecks....
the one today was NOT a well organized one...probably one that was staged by the democrats to make it appear a certain way.....
You're an abject liar unless you consider someone who sells used tires on Indy's south side a "businessman". I was there and saw it and there was zero diversity in that crowd. You could have scooped the entire lot of them (you) up and dropped them into the infield at a NASCAR race, added some Bud Light and the'd have all fit right in...without a change in clothing.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 31, 2009, 08:55:21 AM
Were you not warned by the moderator here about this?
You're an abject liar unless you consider someone who sells used tires on Indy's south side a "businessman". I was there and saw it and there was zero diversity in that crowd. You could have scooped the entire lot of them (you) up and dropped them into the infield at a NASCAR race, added some Bud Light and the'd have all fit right in...without a change in clothing.
If that is what you believe...then YOU are a liar....period...or you have NO concept of what Americans are all about....I granted there was NOT a diverse crowd regarding African Americans or Asians....but the Vast majority of Americans ARE white, hard working, tax paying Americans....there WERE african americans and asians there....I saw them...
Now, with all that said....I am THROUGH (I know I have said this before)...this brings out the worst in me....I DID call you a stupid ass....and, I have only lowered myself down to a level of intelligence that I am bigger than....YOU have your very strong opinon on things, and clearly see things much differently than I do. It is no longer worth any time or effort to discuss this any longer....I have better things to do with my time.
Time will tell the truth....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 31, 2009, 09:11:50 AM
If that is what you believe...then YOU are a liar....period...or you have NO concept of what Americans are all about....I granted there was NOT a diverse crowd regarding African Americans or Asians....but the Vast majority of Americans ARE white, hard working, tax paying Americans....there WERE african americans and asians there....I saw them...
Americans...you make a mockery of the term and are a perfect example of why much of the world sees us the way they do...a bunch of uneducated neanderthals.
As far as your claim that there were African Americans and Asians there, I'm calling bullshit unless they showed up after I left the area shortly after noon. You can't count curious passers-by as part of your crowd of protesters. Can you not be honest enough to admit who the makeup of the group? I almost took pictures because I knew you'd lie...next time I will.
QuoteNow, with all that said....I am THROUGH (I know I have said this before)...this brings out the worst in me....I DID call you a stupid ass....and, I have only lowered myself down to a level of intelligence that I am bigger than....YOU have your very strong opinon on things, and clearly see things much differently than I do. It is no longer worth any time or effort to discuss this any longer....I have better things to do with my time.
I am sure that in your mind, you believe that you've "lowered" yourself to my intelligence level...go with that. :rolleyes:
Your time, by the way, as a good "Christian" and what not, would be better served actually doing something to help those less fortunate than you. I note with interest that this is the second such circle jerk you've attended...when's the last time you volunteered to serve food at the mission? I'm guessing never.
So typical. You don't have a valid argument so you put the person down with whom you're discussing the issue. I for one will not back down. Henry don't let him name call and belittle you out of voicing your opinion that's what he's all about. Name calling, belittling, and bullying don't make you right Ex and I'll bet in person you also bang your fist and raise your voice in attempt to make the other person back down.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 31, 2009, 09:22:54 AM
Americans...you make a mockery of the term and are a perfect example of why much of the world sees us the way they do...a bunch of uneducated neanderthals.
As far as your claim that there were African Americans and Asians there, I'm calling bullshit unless they showed up after I left the area shortly after noon. You can't count curious passers-by as part of your crowd of protesters. Can you not be honest enough to admit who the makeup of the group? I almost took pictures because I knew you'd lie...next time I will.
I am sure that in your mind, you believe that you've "lowered" yourself to my intelligence level...go with that. :rolleyes:
Your time, by the way, as a good "Christian" and what not, would be better served actually doing something to help those less fortunate than you. I note with interest that this is the second such circle jerk you've attended...when's the last time you volunteered to serve food at the mission? I'm guessing never.
again...WHERE did you read that I was at this last ...whatever your talking about....protest....I was NOT at this one, never claimed I was....if you would learn to read....
I have worked at a food missions several times.....up until a year and a half ago, I did every fourth friday at Ovid Church...Our church ran a food kitchen......I have spent time at the Christian Center.....Just because I don't get on here a BRAG about my personal life, like ...certain people on here....
What ever so-called protest you witnessed this weekend was NOT a well organized protest, that is why I said it was probably a lie, by the democrats to make this seem like YOU guys want it too...Nobody I knew even heard about this protest.....the one I am talking about, is the one earlier this year.....you claim you was there, but I know you are lying...because I WAS THERE....and I SAW and KNEW many people there...and if you call disabled vets, and marines a MOCKERY to America...then I have LOST ALL respect for you...becasue I too, wish I took pictures...and I will next time...
Uhm.....which certain people are you referring to that brag about their personal life? Kimmi? Myself? Locutus? Mr442? Hmmm??
Quote from: pariann on August 31, 2009, 09:52:10 AM
Uhm.....which certain people are you referring to that brag about their personal life? Kimmi? Myself? Locutus? Mr442? Hmmm??
Nope none of the above mentioned names.... :no:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 31, 2009, 09:55:34 AM
Nope none of the above mentioned names.... :no:
[/quote
Just who are those folk, Henry+
Quote from: followsthewolf on August 31, 2009, 09:57:37 AM
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 31, 2009, 09:55:34 AM
Nope none of the above mentioned names.... :no:
[/quote
Just who are those folk, Henry+
Henry+...? and new and imporved Henry?... :razz:
I'm NOT going to mention any names....I'm absoutly certain everyone knows exactly who I am talking about....including the person I am talking about.
I am really at a loss to see too many people who share much of their personal lives on here. I know the names I mentioned do, some not as deeply as others. Me, pfft, I'm not afraid to brag, complain, sob, or anything about my personal life. it is what it is. And it's all I know. LOL
Quote from: pariann on August 31, 2009, 10:09:53 AM
I am really at a loss to see too many people who share much of their personal lives on here. I know the names I mentioned do, some not as deeply as others. Me, pfft, I'm not afraid to brag, complain, sob, or anything about my personal life. it is what it is. And it's all I know. LOL
I was NOT talking about you Pari.....I don't see you as a braggart....you, simply share your life, the way YOU see it...and I enjoy your posts.....you add a nice touch here.... ;) :yes:
Quote from: me on August 31, 2009, 09:34:26 AM
So typical. You don't have a valid argument so you put the person down with whom you're discussing the issue. I for one will not back down. Henry don't let him name call and belittle you out of voicing your opinion that's what he's all about. Name calling, belittling, and bullying don't make you right Ex and I'll bet in person you also bang your fist and raise your voice in attempt to make the other person back down.
I'm sorry but there is no argument to be had if the two of you have nothing to offer but lies.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 31, 2009, 09:44:30 AM
again...WHERE did you read that I was at this last ...whatever your talking about....protest....I was NOT at this one, never claimed I was....if you would learn to read....
I have worked at a food missions several times.....up until a year and a half ago, I did every fourth friday at Ovid Church...Our church ran a food kitchen......I have spent time at the Christian Center.....Just because I don't get on here a BRAG about my personal life, like ...certain people on here....
What ever so-called protest you witnessed this weekend was NOT a well organized protest, that is why I said it was probably a lie, by the democrats to make this seem like YOU guys want it too...Nobody I knew even heard about this protest.....the one I am talking about, is the one earlier this year.....you claim you was there, but I know you are lying...because I WAS THERE....and I SAW and KNEW many people there...and if you call disabled vets, and marines a MOCKERY to America...then I have LOST ALL respect for you...becasue I too, wish I took pictures...and I will next time...
I thought you said you were through...more lies.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 31, 2009, 10:27:37 AM
I thought you said you were through...more lies.
Okay.....NOW, I'm through... :yes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 31, 2009, 09:44:30 AM
again...WHERE did you read that I was at this last ...whatever your talking about....protest....I was NOT at this one, never claimed I was....if you would learn to read....
I stand corrected but are you seriously insinuating that I can't read? Dude, you have the literacy of a 7-year-old...and not a very bright one...you really shouldn't be casting stones.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 31, 2009, 09:44:30 AM
...and if you call disabled vets, and marines a MOCKERY to America...then I have LOST ALL respect for you...
And don't even play the veteran card, loser; you aren't one.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 31, 2009, 09:44:30 AM
...becasue I too, wish I took pictures...and I will next time...
Ah, just read this again and noted tha you
wish you took pictures. Didn't anyone you know?
Look; someone took pictures! (http://www.meetup.com/The-Indy-Defenders-of-Liberty/photos/589804/#8173641) So where's all of this diversity you're talking about Henry? Where are the blacks and the Asians and anyone else except for a bunch of middle aged, semi-literate, white Rush Limbaugh fans?
They say a picture is worth a thousand words...here are a bunch of pictures and they are worth three (four if you count the contraction as two): you're a liar.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 31, 2009, 10:31:49 AM
And don't even play the veteran card, loser; you aren't one.
I will play the veteran card...I AM Proud of ALL veteran's.....and just because I am not one, does not mean I do not support nor have respect for them....and there were several at the tea party....SEVERAL...
leave me alone and I will quit commenting...you are NOT making this easy.
The pictures, Henry...where's the diversity?
At the ones you don't have pictures of.... :razz: That was just one of many not the "only" one.
Quote from: Exterminator on August 31, 2009, 10:51:19 AM
The pictures, Henry...where's the diversity?
Quote from: me on August 31, 2009, 02:55:23 PM
At the ones you don't have pictures of.... :razz: That was just one of many not the "only" one.
One? There's a whole album of pictures at the link I posted...from virtually every possible angle. Not too bright, are ya?
So you're saying you drove all over the country and have pictures of all of the get togethers then? You surely wouldn't be judging all of them by one would you? No not you who checks every detail of every little thing and knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that they were all the same.
Quote from: me on August 31, 2009, 03:16:35 PM
So you're saying you drove all over the country and have pictures of all of the get togethers then? You surely wouldn't be judging all of them by one would you? No not you who checks every detail of every little thing and knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that they were all the same.
I am talking about the get together that Henry was at in which he said there was great diversity in the crowd. If you can't keep up with the conversation, stay out of it.
I think you had better investigate that article a little closer Ex. Also there aren't pictures of all of the almost 1000 people who attended that get together. As a matter of fact in that first pic I seen of the two guys holding the sign the one on the left could well be a latin american. You are making a blanket statement based on pictures of a small part of a large crowd at one of the gatherings. How can you tell there aren't any doctors, attorneys, or professional people in that picture or in the crowd for that matter? Did you meet and talk to each one individually? Did you have a run down sheet one each one? Can you recognize a veteran in civilian clothes as being a veteran? Do you have first hand knowledge on each one's education? Sure look like a lot of well dressed semi literate red-necks to me.
Quote from: me on August 31, 2009, 05:38:42 PM
Sure look like a lot of well dressed semi literate red-necks to me.
You and the rest of the NASCAR crowd, I'm sure. :rolleyes:
"It is an old strategy of tyrants to delude their victims into fighting their battles for them." Franklin Roosevelt, 1936.
Quote from: Exterminator on September 01, 2009, 09:13:03 AM
"It is an old strategy of tyrants to delude their victims into fighting their battles for them." Franklin Roosevelt, 1936.
Keep reading that and I'm sure you'll catch on. :wink:
Quote from: me on September 01, 2009, 10:58:47 AM
Keep reading that and I'm sure you'll catch on. :wink:
Maybe you should do a little more reading...the irony of people like you protesting against something that is in your best interest because you aren't bright enough to recognize that you are being manipulated by exactly those businesses that stand to lose the most if reform happens is pathetic. Did you know that when Social Security and Medicare were first introduced, conservatives said that they would bankrupt the country and they would turn the U.S. into a fascist or communist police state? Same tired arguments...
Quote from: Exterminator on September 01, 2009, 11:09:48 AM
Maybe you should do a little more reading...the irony of people like you protesting against something that is in your best interest because you aren't bright enough to recognize that you are being manipulated by exactly those businesses that stand to lose the most if reform happens is pathetic. Did you know that when Social Security and Medicare were first introduced, conservatives said that they would bankrupt the country and they would turn the U.S. into a fascist or communist police state? Same tired arguments...
Um, pay attention Ex and notice what's going on right now. Seems to be coming to pass. Still seems strange to me that when Bush tried to do something about Social Security the dems said there is nothing wrong with it and now all of a sudden there is. Don't you find that odd? The thing is he was trying to privatize it and put it back in our hands and the dems didn't like it they want to keep it where they can still get their hands on it.
Quote from: me on September 01, 2009, 11:16:00 AM
Um, pay attention Ex and notice what's going on right now. Seems to be coming to pass.
Oh, bullshit...60 years later?
QuoteStill seems strange to me that when Bush tried to do something about Social Security the dems said there is nothing wrong with it and now all of a sudden there is. Don't you find that odd? The thing is he was trying to privatize it and put it back in our hands and the dems didn't like it they want to keep it where they can still get their hands on it.
Bush tried no such thing; he only gave it lip service and what if it had been privatized and invested in the stock market; where would we be now? You should be damned glad no one paid attention to such a stupid idea.
Quote from: Exterminator on September 01, 2009, 11:30:34 AM
Oh, bullshit...60 years later?
Bush tried no such thing; he only gave it lip service and what if it had been privatized and invested in the stock market; where would we be now? You should be damned glad no one paid attention to such a stupid idea.
The dems wouldn't even discuss it other than to keep saying it wasn't in trouble. They were more interested in trying to discredit Bush and coming up with bogus charges to take care of real business.
Quote from: me on September 01, 2009, 01:53:05 PM
The dems wouldn't even discuss it other than to keep saying it wasn't in trouble. They were more interested in trying to discredit Bush and coming up with bogus charges to take care of real business.
Real business like putting Social Security funds into the control of the same people we just had to bail out? Are you high?
Quote from: Exterminator on September 01, 2009, 02:14:30 PM
Real business like putting Social Security funds into the control of the same people we just had to bail out? Are you high?
Ah, but it wasn't going to be mandatory so at least you had a choice on what was done with
your money.
Quote from: me on September 01, 2009, 02:20:51 PM
Ah, but it wasn't going to be mandatory so at least you had a choice on what was done with your money.
Yeah, that would have been wonderful...people like you would have invested and lost it and the rest of us would end up paying to support you for the rest of your lives...great freakin' idea. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Exterminator on September 01, 2009, 02:34:46 PM
Yeah, that would have been wonderful...people like you would have invested and lost it and the rest of us would end up paying to support you for the rest of your lives...great freakin' idea. :rolleyes:
Nope, I'm smarter than to invest didn't even go for the 401K.
Yes, or to waste money on silly things like health insurance apparently. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Exterminator on September 01, 2009, 05:11:33 PM
Yes, or to waste money on silly things like health insurance apparently. :rolleyes:
If ya ain't got it, (money), ya can't get it, (health insurance). Like I said earlier, not everyone is fortunate to be affluent like you.
Quote from: me on September 01, 2009, 05:32:53 PM
If ya ain't got it, (money), ya can't get it, (health insurance). Like I said earlier, not everyone is fortunate to be affluent like you.
I'm anything but affluent but the obvious point you miss is that if you ain't got it (money), they can't take it (taxes) and you would still have it (health insurance)...yet you continue to argue against it. WTF?
Here we go again. My smile is pasted on my face. LOL
You should really be more careful about using 'pasted' and 'face' in the same sentence. :icon_twisted:
I've been writing about discussion at the PAC meeting last night. I'm in serious mode. Whatever you are trying to say, is totally escaping me at the moment. :spooked:
Boring!
I do have my moments, ya know. LOL
I'm not missing any point. What I'm trying to say is I would rather have no insurance than what is currently being proposed because of what it is going to cost for this "free" health care. You just really don't get it do you?
Quote from: me on September 02, 2009, 10:27:04 AM
I'm not missing any point. What I'm trying to say is I would rather have no insurance than what is currently being proposed because of what it is going to cost for this "free" health care. You just really don't get it do you?
Yes, I get it...you wouldn't be paying anything just like you don't now because my costs are higher to cover people like you.
Quote from: Exterminator on September 02, 2009, 11:10:59 AM
Yes, I get it...you wouldn't be paying anything just like you don't now because my costs are higher to cover people like you.
:rolleyes: And just how do you figure that? I did have insurance and damn good insurance until 10yrs ago. You no nothing about me so quit trying to throw things off by thinking you do and making asinine statements.
Quote from: me on September 02, 2009, 01:12:16 PM
:rolleyes: And just how do you figure that? I did have insurance and damn good insurance until 10yrs ago. You no nothing about me so quit trying to throw things off by thinking you do and making asinine statements.
Uh, I haven't alluded to anything you haven't told us in these forums so shut your pie-hole.
Quote from: Exterminator on September 02, 2009, 01:39:31 PM
Uh, I haven't alluded to anything you haven't told us in these forums so shut your pie-hole.
No, you are assuming I have never had insurance and that you are paying out of your pocket for any care I do happen to get. That would be a wrong assumption. Yes, I am on Social Security now but
I worked and put into it
you didn't. So how do you figure you are paying for anything for me? You are paying for what might be yours when you reach my age. At any rate that is how it was supposed to work when it was implemented until congress started borrowing from it. And if you make another old lady joke out of this I'm gonna whoop ya.... >:(
LOL.....stop that!
Quote from: me on September 02, 2009, 01:52:26 PM
No, you are assuming I have never had insurance and that you are paying out of your pocket for any care I do happen to get. That would be a wrong assumption. Yes, I am on Social Security now but I worked and put into it you didn't. So how do you figure you are paying for anything for me? You are paying for what might be yours when you reach my age. At any rate that is how it was supposed to work when it was implemented until congress started borrowing from it.
But it isn't the way it works at all; is it? It isn't a bank account and what happens to the money I'm contributing if I die before I reach retirement? Poof!
QuoteAnd if you make another old lady joke out of this I'm gonna whoop ya.... >:(
You couldn't catch me. :razz:
Quote from: Exterminator on September 02, 2009, 03:00:13 PM
But it isn't the way it works at all; is it? It isn't a bank account and what happens to the money I'm contributing if I die before I reach retirement? Poof!
No one gets near what they contribute usually, well except for congress who contributed nothing for the most part. They get, I think its somewhere around, $10,000pr month for life. What a crock.
QuoteYou couldn't catch me. :razz:
Don't bet on it bucko.... :biggrin: :razz:
Quote from: Exterminator on September 02, 2009, 03:00:13 PM
You couldn't catch me. :razz:
I have a friend I say that to all the time.
Quote from: me on September 02, 2009, 03:08:44 PM
No one gets near what they contribute usually, well except for congress who contributed nothing for the most part. They get, I think its somewhere around, $10,000pr month for life.
That avatar you're using kinda fits, 'cause your a$$ must be pretty huge with all those little "factoids" you seem to pull out of it.
"Under a law enacted in 1983,
all members of Congress both contribute to and receive benefits from the Social Security system. Upon retirement, members receive either a combination of federal pension and Social Security benefits or Social Security alone, depending upon when their term of service started and how they configured their individual plan.
Members elected after 1983 pay into the Federal Employees Retirement System. Members elected before 1983 participate in the older Civil Service Retirement Program. In both cases,
members of Congress contribute to the plans at a slightly higher rate than ordinary federal employees.
As of 2002, 411 retired members were receiving benefits under CSRS at an average rate of
$55,788 per year and 71 were receiving benefits under FERS (or a combination of CSRS and FERS) with
$41,856 per year in average benefits.
Members do not automatically received lifetime pensions. How much they receive and how long they receive it depends on many factors, including age, length of service (including military) and choice of plans, etc."
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blcongress.htm (http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blcongress.htm)
More REAL facts ....
All members of Congress pay Social Security taxes in the same amounts as they would if they were employed in the private sector at the same salary level. The amount of a congressional pension varies and depends on years of service, age at the time of retirement, and salary.
http://www.senate.gov/reference/common/faq/retirement_for_members.shtml (http://www.senate.gov/reference/common/faq/retirement_for_members.shtml)
Damn and here I've been going around for 30yrs+ thinking that....Thanks Bo I feel a little better now. I have been railing on both repubs and dems for that one....
Quote from: Bo D on September 02, 2009, 03:40:54 PM
More REAL facts ....
All members of Congress pay Social Security taxes in the same amounts as they would if they were employed in the private sector at the same salary level. The amount of a congressional pension varies and depends on years of service, age at the time of retirement, and salary.
http://www.senate.gov/reference/common/faq/retirement_for_members.shtml (http://www.senate.gov/reference/common/faq/retirement_for_members.shtml)
:spooked:
Is there an ointment for that ;D
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on September 02, 2009, 06:28:21 PM
:spooked:
Is there an ointment for that ;D
I hear preparation H works on it. :biggrin:
Quote from: me on September 02, 2009, 03:08:44 PM
Don't bet on it bucko.... :biggrin: :razz:
Oooooo...I can almost hear the clanking of your walker gaining on me! :razz:
Quote from: Palehorse on September 02, 2009, 09:24:22 PM
I hear preparation H works on it. :biggrin:
I think she uses KY. Makes it easier to pull all those big fabrications out of her beeehind.
I think you should know you're talking to an active red head who borders on being hyperactive here and though I might be swinging a 10lb sledge now instead of a 16 I can still whip yer ass ya little upstart..... :razz: I might also add I can use a lasso to reel ya in if I have to..... :icon_twisted:
I could have sworn you were blond.
Quote from: Bo D on September 03, 2009, 09:20:00 AM
I could have sworn you were blond.
Nope just practicin' for it. :biggrin:
Quote from: me on September 03, 2009, 09:18:23 AM
I think you should know you're talking to an active red head who borders on being hyperactive here and though I might be swinging a 10lb sledge now instead of a 16 I can still whip yer ass ya little upstart..... :razz: I might also add I can use a lasso to reel ya in if I have to..... :icon_twisted:
That's probably true only because I don't hit women but you should still try to avoid letting your fingers write checks that your ass can't cash. And I'm guessing it's been quite a few years since your hair was naturally red? :razz:
Quote from: Exterminator on September 03, 2009, 11:25:49 AM
That's probably true only because I don't hit women but you should still try to avoid letting your fingers write checks that your ass can't cash. And I'm guessing it's been quite a few years since your hair was naturally red? :razz:
I have never and will never put any kind of coloring on my hair. If it turns white so be it I will have earned every last strand.
Quote from: me on September 03, 2009, 11:32:29 AM
I have never and will never put any kind of coloring on my hair. If it turns white so be it I will have earned every last strand.
:blah:
Quote from: me on September 03, 2009, 11:32:29 AM
I have never and will never put any kind of coloring on my hair. If it turns white so be it I will have earned every last strand.
I put color on my hair. I earned all those white strands I have, but I don't need to share what I earn with everyone else. :wink:
The American Medical Association has weighed in on the new health care bill.....
The Allergists voted to scratch it, but the Dermatologists advised not to make any rash moves.
The Gastroenterologists had sort of a gut feeling about it, but the Neurologists thought the Administration had a lot of nerve.
The Obstetricians felt they were all laboring under a misconception.
Ophthalmologist considered the idea shortsighted.
Pathologists yelled, "Over my dead body!" while the Pediatricians said, 'Oh, Grow up!'
The Psychiatrists thought the whole idea was madness, while the Radiologists could see right through it.
Surgeons decided to wash their hands of the whole thing.
The Internists thought it was a bitter pill to swallow, and the Plastic Surgeons said, "This puts a whole new face on the matter."
The Podiatrists thought it was a step backward, and the Urologists were pissed off at the whole idea.
The Anesthesiologists thought the whole idea was a gas, and the Cardiologists didn't have the heart to say yes.
In the end, the Proctologists won out, leaving the entire decision up to the assholes in Washington.
- author unknown
Clever :biggrin:
(http://www.salon.com/comics/boll/2009/09/17/boll/story.jpg)
Thanks for reminding me of "This Modern World"
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_VNwI8smDoQc/Rd-HSN7SiAI/AAAAAAAAANM/XGcIdcZy9PI/s400/93-06-15-managed-comp.jpg)
If there are 47/48 million people uninsured and it will cost $1 trillion dollars over the next ten years with the government sponsored healthcare, why don't they just pass a bill that: 1) companies cannot drop healthcare plans for their employees without government approval 2) preminums cannot be raised above the inflation rate 3) people who can afford to buy insurance can't be turned down because of pre existing conditions 4) put 47/48 million dollars in a trust to pay for insurance for the people who are currently uninsured. That sounds a lot cheaper and easier than what is going on now. Tell me why this won't work or what I have missed.
Quote from: Anne on September 25, 2009, 02:48:30 PM
If there are 47/48 million people uninsured and it will cost $1 trillion dollars over the next ten years with the government sponsored healthcare, why don't they just pass a bill that: 1) companies cannot drop healthcare plans for their employees without government approval 2) preminums cannot be raised above the inflation rate 3) people who can afford to buy insurance can't be turned down because of pre existing conditions 4) put 47/48 million dollars in a trust to pay for insurance for the people who are currently uninsured. That sounds a lot cheaper and easier than what is going on now. Tell me why this won't work or what I have missed.
Loosely, that is what the POTUS is trying to get done!
Quote from: Palehorse on September 25, 2009, 02:55:41 PM
Loosely, that is what the POTUS is trying to get done!
And now do the math...let's round the number to 50 million people (which will probably be low ten years from now). 1 trillion divided by 50 million is 20,000 or $2,000.00 per person per year. What do you think health insurance premiums cost?
Quote from: Exterminator on September 25, 2009, 03:30:46 PM
And now do the math...let's round the number to 50 million people (which will probably be low ten years from now). 1 trillion divided by 50 million is 20,000 or $2,000.00 per person per year. What do you think health insurance premiums cost?
Over the last decade, employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have increased 119 percent.
Employees have seen their share of job-based coverage increase at nearly the same rate during this period jumping from $1,543 to $3,354.4
The cumulative increase in employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have raised at four times the rate of inflation and wage increases during last decade. This increase has made it much more difficult for businesses to continue to provide coverage to their employees and for those workers to afford coverage themselves.
* The average employer-sponsored premium for a family of four costs close to $13,000 a year, and the employee foots about 30 percent of this cost. Health insurance costs are the fastest growing expense for employers. Employer health insurance costs overtook profits in 2008, and the gap grows steadily.
* Total health insurance costs for employers could reach nearly $850 billion by 2019. Individual and family spending will jump considerably from $326 billion in 2009 to $550 billion in 2019.
* The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that job-based health insurance could increase 100 percent over the next decade. Employer-based family insurance costs for a family of four will reach nearly $25,000 per year by 2018 absent health care reform.
http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml (http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml)
Yeah but "me" and Henry "just don't like it". Who cares about the numbers?!?
Quote from: Palehorse on September 25, 2009, 02:55:41 PM
Loosely, that is what the POTUS is trying to get done!
Then my question is where does the 48 million become 1 trillion and why gut medicare advantage. Also where in the bills does it prevent companies dropping health care, prevent premiums being raised beyond inflation, and dropping the level of coverage?
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on September 25, 2009, 04:11:24 PM
Yeah but "me" and Henry "just don't like it". Who cares about the numbers?!?
Here are some reason's WHY, we have legitimate issues with it.....From the National Center for Policy AnalysisPg 22 of the HC Bill MANDATES the Govt will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS THAT SELF-INSURE!! This is true. The HOUSE bill requires a report on "the financial solvency and capital reserve levels of employers that self-insure."
Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get. This is true. The HOUSE bill creates a "Health Benefits Advisory Committee" that will "recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans."
Pg 354 Sec 1177 - Govt WILL RESTRICT ENROLLMENT of Special needs people. This is mostly true. Government already has the authority to restrict enrollment. This provision in the HOUSE bill will extend that authority until 2013.
Pg 42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC Benefits for you. This is true. The Health Choices Commissioner (a new government bureaucrat created in the HOUSE bill) will establish "qualified health benefits plan standards ... including the enforcement of such standards."
PG 50 Section 152 in HC bill - HC WILL BE PROVIDED TO ALL NON-US CITIZENS, illegal or otherwise The HOUSE bill requires all health care to be provided "without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services." This could be interpreted as requiring health care to be provided to illegal aliens.
Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill- ALL NON-RESIDENT ALIENS will be exempt from individual taxes. (Resident Americans will pay) Amazingly, this is true. The HOUSE bill says the tax "shall not apply to any individual who is a non-resident alien."
Pg 58 HC Bill - Govt will have real-time access to individuals finances & a National ID Healthcard will be issued. This is mostly true. Although it isn't a mandate. This section in the HOUSE bill lists this as a "goal" of health reform, to "enable the real-time (or near real time) determination of an individual's financial responsibility at the point of service and, to the extent possible, prior to service, including whether the individual is eligible for a specific service with a specific physician at a specific facility, which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card;
Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for electronic funds transfer, no choice. This is true. The HOUSE bill would "enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice."
Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating an HC EXCHANGE to bring private HC plans under Govt control. This is true. The HOUSE bill creates an artificial government-controlled market (an "exchange") that will operate outside the free market.
PG 84 Sec 203 HC bill - Govt mandates ALL benefit pkgs for private HC plans in the Exchange. This is true. The HOUSE bill mandates that "the Commissioner shall specify the benefits to be made available under Exchange-participating health benefits plans."
PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs. for of Benefit Levels for Plans This is true. There are several benefit level specifications that the government will require in this section of the HOUSE bill.
Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Govt will use groups i.e., ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt HC plan. This may be true. The HOUSE bill creates an outreach system to sign up people for health insurance. It doesn't specifically mention ACORN, but it is certainly possible ACORN could be used.
pg 124 lines 24-25 HC No company can sue Government on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Government Monopoly. This is true. "There shall be no administrative or judicial review of a payment rate or methodology established" in the HOUSE bill.
pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill -DOCTORS/ AMA - The Govt will tell you what your salary will be. This is true for doctors who participate in the public plan.
Pg 145 Line 15-17 An Employers MUST auto enroll employees into public option plan. NO CHOICE. This isn't exactly true. If employers don't offer coverage or otherwise contribute to employees' health insurance, they must enroll into a public plan.
Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay for HC for part time employees AND their families. This is true, except it is on page 146.
Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer with payroll 400k & above, who does not provide public option, pays 8% tax on all payroll. This is true.
Pg 150 Lines 9-13 Businesses with payroll btw 251k & 400k who doesn't provide public option pays 2-6% tax on all payroll. This is true. The HOUSE bill includes a sliding-scale tax schedule for businesses with payrolls starting at $250,001.
Pg 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesn't have acceptable HC according to the Govt will be taxed 2.5% of income. This is true. The HOUSE bill requires you to have "acceptable" insurance, or you will be taxed.
Pg 195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Admin (GOVT) will have access to ALL Americans finances/personal records. This is true for people who received subsidized insurance through the exchange.
PG 203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax."This section in the HOUSE bill doesn't want the tax to be treated as a "tax" for purposes of other sections of the tax code. Complicated, but funny how they worded it.
Quote from: Exterminator on September 25, 2009, 03:30:46 PM
And now do the math...let's round the number to 50 million people (which will probably be low ten years from now). 1 trillion divided by 50 million is 20,000 or $2,000.00 per person per year. What do you think health insurance premiums cost?
I would think that having a group of 50 million would be cheaper than individual policies. $1 million dollars per person should buy insurance for more than one year. We are told our employer paid insurance is $600 per family per month, $7,200 a year.
Quote from: Olias on September 25, 2009, 03:36:39 PM
Over the last decade, employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have increased 119 percent.
Employees have seen their share of job-based coverage increase at nearly the same rate during this period jumping from $1,543 to $3,354.4
The cumulative increase in employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have raised at four times the rate of inflation and wage increases during last decade. This increase has made it much more difficult for businesses to continue to provide coverage to their employees and for those workers to afford coverage themselves.
* The average employer-sponsored premium for a family of four costs close to $13,000 a year, and the employee foots about 30 percent of this cost. Health insurance costs are the fastest growing expense for employers. Employer health insurance costs overtook profits in 2008, and the gap grows steadily.
* Total health insurance costs for employers could reach nearly $850 billion by 2019. Individual and family spending will jump considerably from $326 billion in 2009 to $550 billion in 2019.
* The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that job-based health insurance could increase 100 percent over the next decade. Employer-based family insurance costs for a family of four will reach nearly $25,000 per year by 2018 absent health care reform.
http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml (http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml)
Limiting premium increases to inflation rates would keep this from happening, right, unless the amount of coverage is increased, of course.
Quote from: Anne on September 25, 2009, 04:40:31 PM
Limiting premium increases to inflation rates would keep this from happening, right, unless the amount of coverage is increased, of course.
That would be a very good start!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 25, 2009, 04:22:51 PM
Here are some reason's WHY, we have legitimate issues with it.....
From the National Center for Policy Analysis
Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get.
This is true. The HOUSE bill creates a "Health Benefits Advisory Committee" that will "recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans."
"The NCPA's goal is to develop and promote private alternatives to government regulation and control" http://www.ncpa.org/about/ (http://www.ncpa.org/about/)
Yeah ... and that's mostly why we just suffered the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
Anyway ... let's just tackle my favorite pet peeve ....
"recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans."
Please tell me how that is different from our
current HMO plans? The way I see it, having a "Health Benefits Advisory Committee" manned by doctors, nurses, and health care practitioners recommending covered benefits, etc. is a hell of a lot better than a bunch o
f insurance company bean counters mandating my benefits.
Quote from: Olias on September 25, 2009, 04:59:45 PM
"The NCPA's goal is to develop and promote private alternatives to government regulation and control" http://www.ncpa.org/about/ (http://www.ncpa.org/about/)
Yeah ... and that's mostly why we just suffered the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
Anyway ... let's just tackle my favorite pet peeve ....
“recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.”
Please tell me how that is different from our current HMO plans? The way I see it, having a “Health Benefits Advisory Committee” manned by doctors, nurses, and health care practitioners recommending covered benefits, etc. is a hell of a lot better than a bunch of insurance company bean counters mandating my benefits.
I'm not saying our current plan does not need fixed.....I AM in favor of reform....just not the one that is being presented...
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 25, 2009, 05:04:05 PM
I'm not saying our current plan does not need fixed.....I AM in favor of reform....just not the one that is being presented...
Come on, Henry. Please tell us, in your OWN words, EXACTLY what is wrong with the "one that is being presented."
All you have done is parrot a shopping list of half-truths and near-lies from the very organizations who stand to
profit most if the status quo is maintained.
(http://edsteinink.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/stei090701.gif)
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on September 25, 2009, 09:30:06 PM
(http://edsteinink.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/stei090701.gif)
Exactly. All that cartoon needs is a pack of sheep in the observation gallery! :yes:
:biggrin:
:juggle2:
I see this thread has gone silent. :biggrin:
Quote from: Olias on September 25, 2009, 05:08:38 PM
Come on, Henry. Please tell us, in your OWN words, EXACTLY what is wrong with the "one that is being presented."
All you have done is parrot a shopping list of half-truths and near-lies from the very organizations who stand to profit most if the status quo is maintained.
doubt he can. doubt he knows WHAT is being presented. bet if the exact same plan had come from bush, he'd have been all for it. bet he wouldn't have known THEN what it was.
Quote from: awol on September 29, 2009, 01:22:59 PM
doubt he can. doubt he knows WHAT is being presented. bet if the exact same plan had come from bush, he'd have been all for it. bet he wouldn't have known THEN what it was.
yeah, go with that.... :rolleyes:
Huh...'nuff said. :biggrin:
Finance Committee Democrat Won't Read Text of Health Bill, Says Anyone Who Claims They'll Understand It 'Is Trying to Pull the Wool Over Our Eyes'
(http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930)
"I don't expect to actually read the legislative language because reading the legislative language is among the more confusing things I've ever read in my life,"
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/12/health.care/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/12/health.care/index.html)
# Story Highlights
# Senate Finance Committee is expected to vote on health overhaul plan Tuesday
# Industry group: Private health insurance would rise over next decade under plan
# Panel spokesman calls analysis "a health insurance company hatchet job"
# The $829 billion compromise plan excludes government-run public option
The White House blasted the report Monday, calling it inaccurate and self-serving.
"This is a self-serving analysis from the insurance industry, one of the major opponents of health insurance reform," White House spokesman Reid Cherlin said.
"It comes on the eve of a vote that will reduce the industry's profits. It is hard to take it seriously. The analysis completely ignores critical policies [that] will lower costs for those that have insurance, expand coverage and provide affordable health insurance options to millions of Americans who are priced out of today's health insurance market or are locked out by unfair insurance company practices."
Finance Committee spokesman Scott Mulhauser called the analysis "a health insurance company hatchet job -- plain and simple."
And the propaganda continues! More self serving tripe from the scamming insurance industry!
Of course the White House is going to say it's tripe since they have their own agenda.
Quote from: me on October 12, 2009, 03:12:48 PM
Of course the White House is going to say it's tripe since they have their own agenda.
that was my thought too Me...
Quote from: me on October 12, 2009, 03:12:48 PM
Of course the White House is going to say it's tripe since they have their own agenda.
And the insurance companies don't have an agenda? Who stands to profit most if healthcare reform fails?
Quote from: Olias on October 12, 2009, 03:36:09 PM
And the insurance companies don't have an agenda? Who stands to profit most if healthcare reform fails?
< Locutus grins from ear to ear as he raises his hand to answer. >
It's amazing how many people don't have a smidgen of a clue.
Quote from: me on October 12, 2009, 03:12:48 PM
Of course the White House is going to say it's tripe since they have their own agenda.
The agenda of providing affordable health care to all Americans? WTF are they thinking? :rolleyes:
Quote from: Olias on October 12, 2009, 03:36:09 PM
And the insurance companies don't have an agenda? Who stands to profit most if healthcare reform fails?
The people. :razz:
Quote from: me on October 12, 2009, 04:26:16 PM
The people. :razz:
I'm all ears waiting for you to explain that one. Of course, I'm assuming that since you used this --> :razz:, one won't be forthcoming any time soon.
Quote from: Exterminator on October 12, 2009, 03:40:44 PM
The agenda of providing affordable health care to all Americans? WTF are they thinking? :rolleyes:
the vast majority of Americans already have affordable health care......we are talking about twenty to thirty million that need REAL help.....so what is the agenda? Taxing more Americans to pay for something that is not needed for ALL Americans....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 12, 2009, 04:37:27 PM
the vast majority of Americans already have affordable health care......we are talking about twenty to thirty million that need REAL help.....so what is the agenda? Taxing more Americans to pay for something that is not needed for ALL Americans....
Affordable care? $15,000 a year in premiums alone for me is NOT affordable. And that doesn't even count the procedures and prescriptions the INSURANCE COMPANY won't pay for!
$12,000/yr. in premiums.
Is that affordable for the "average American"?
Of course, if you're lucky enough to have corporate benefits that defray the costs, you are the "in" crowd.
Gallup: 80% are ok with current health care (http://wellsy.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/gallup-80-are-ok-with-current-health-care/)
I'm not saying we don't need to do something, but believe me or not.......MOST Americans are satisfied....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 12, 2009, 04:37:27 PM
the vast majority of Americans already have affordable health care......we are talking about twenty to thirty million that need REAL help.....so what is the agenda? Taxing more Americans to pay for something that is not needed for ALL Americans....
You just do not get it do you? You are already paying in the form of higher visit/procedure costs and escalating deductible levels, not to mention exclusionary policies surrounding the payment! If you call 15k a year out of pocket in premiums and 2k per person deductibles "affordable", there is no hope for you. You have already over-dosed on the kool aid!
Quote from: Olias on October 12, 2009, 04:59:46 PM
Affordable care? $15,000 a year in premiums alone for me is NOT affordable. And that doesn't even count the procedures and prescriptions the INSURANCE COMPANY won't pay for!
Yup! And don't forget the quarterly blood tests for liver/kidney function and chem-screens that they do not pay for either! At $475 bucks per quarter that's just short of 2 grand a year you'll be shelling out once you are required to take maintenance medicines; on top of the prescription costs!
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 12, 2009, 08:24:44 PM
Gallup: 80% are ok with current health care (http://wellsy.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/gallup-80-are-ok-with-current-health-care/)
I'm not saying we don't need to do something, but believe me or not.......MOST Americans are satisfied....
:det:
and if you think it is NOT going to cost you .... when the Gov "fixes" this....you are being delusional....the GOV is NOT going to make this better.....mark my words....
let's have this chat in a few months and see HOW much better our lives are.....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 12, 2009, 08:24:44 PM
Gallup: 80% are ok with current health care (http://wellsy.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/gallup-80-are-ok-with-current-health-care/)
I'm not saying we don't need to do something, but believe me or not.......MOST Americans are satisfied....
Instead of linking to some blog which shows only PART of the poll results, why don't you link to the poll itself?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/123149/Cost-Is-Foremost-Healthcare-Issue-for-Americans.aspx (http://www.gallup.com/poll/123149/Cost-Is-Foremost-Healthcare-Issue-for-Americans.aspx)
Interesting that your link headline is "Gallup: 80% are OK with current health care"
While the actual headline on the Gallup site is "Cost Is Foremost Healthcare Issue for Americans"
Some quotes from the REST of the poll.
"Close to 4 in 10 Americans (38%) -- by far the largest percentage mentioned for any issue -- cite the cost or affordability of healthcare as the nation's biggest healthcare problem."
"One in four insured Americans say reductions in what their insurance plan covers is a major problem for them; slightly fewer (18%) say insurance paperwork is a major problem. These figures compare with 42% of insured Americans who say rising healthcare costs pose a major problem."
"Close to 4 in 10 Americans (38%) -- by far the largest percentage for any issue -- explicitly cite the cost or affordability of healthcare as the nation's biggest healthcare problem."
"After cost generally, the next-highest-ranked issues are the number of uninsured Americans (mentioned by 15%), followed by insurance companies and "insurance company greed" (13%)."
(http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/rhdypaga50ejcrgqnimxbq.gif)
"Bottom Line
Gallup finds that the biggest healthcare concern to Americans, in terms of both the nation and their own personal lives, is cost. The cost factor is deeply troubling on a personal level to the uninsured population, but also ranks as the top concern of the insured."
I have said all along, I thing we need some reform..........but, the fact is the majority of Americans are satisfied..........so, we dont need to overhaul the WHOLE thing, we need to fix the high costs associated with it....
tort reform is one way and it is being ignored in the Bill....
You really don't know anything about it and are only parroting what you've heard from your rightwing demagogues.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 09:34:00 AM
I have said all along, I thing we need some reform..........but, the fact is the majority of Americans are satisfied..........so, we dont need to overhaul the WHOLE thing, we need to fix the high costs associated with it....
tort reform is one way and it is being ignored in the Bill....
You really just don't get it.
First you post a blogger who claims
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 12, 2009, 08:24:44 PMGallup: 80% are ok with current health care
I'm not saying we don't need to do something, but believe me or not.......MOST Americans are satisfied....
and then "the fact is the majority of Americans are satisfied"
Satisfied with what?
When are you going to realize that this debate is not about health care quality, but the cost of that health care?
Damn!!!
I love my doctor and the care I receive!!! I get the best care health care available! But I won't be able to
afford it much longer.
Quote from: Exterminator on October 13, 2009, 09:45:20 AM
You really don't know anything about it and are only parroting what you've heard from your rightwing demagogues.
that is ALWAYS you and your ilk's retort...........suck it.
I know every bit as much about what is going on as you do.....except I see that this is NOT a good thing that they are trying to pass....and you see it as a good thing, because you believed in the Parroting of BHO....you listen to the left wing kooks and accept it as what they tell you.....believe it or not, I have read many parts of the bill, and what I do understand is, that they are NOT clear with their language and leave a lot of loopholes the could open up a can of worms....
Have YOU read it?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 09:57:51 AM
that is ALWAYS you and your ilk's retort...........suck it.
Back off, Bubba. Don't call me an ilk! :rant:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 09:57:51 AM
I see that this is NOT a good thing that they are trying to pass....
I asked you this before and you never answered. Can you quote the portion(s) of the bill that you think "is NOT a good thing" and tell me why?
And please don't post some blogger's words ... I want to hear yours, please.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 09:57:51 AM
that is ALWAYS you and your ilk's retort...........suck it.
That's the sting of the truth you're feeling.
Quote...believe it or not, I have read many parts of the bill...
Not.
Quote...and what I do understand is, that they are NOT clear with their language...
This is where that whole literacy issue comes into play.
Quote from: Olias on October 13, 2009, 10:01:44 AM
I asked you this before and you never answered. Can you quote the portion(s) of the bill that you think "is NOT a good thing" and tell me why?
Of course he can't.
Quote from: Olias on October 13, 2009, 09:52:14 AM
You really just don't get it.
First you post a blogger who claims
and then "the fact is the majority of Americans are satisfied"
Satisfied with what?
When are you going to realize that this debate is not about health care quality, but the cost of that health care?
Damn!!! I love my doctor and the care I receive!!! I get the best care health care available! But I won't be able to afford it much longer.
Okay...I go along with that........but the reform they are offering is ridicules......such as
enable electronic funds transfers....this needs to be clarified.........I know factcheck says there is no problems with this.......I don't believe them........for it says.....
enable electronic funds transfers...this is just ONE example of what I don't like.....THIS is not reform....it is controlling.
Where is the encouragement of MSA?....tax credits to encourage coverage...instead of TAX and penalizing those who don't? or offer vouchers...... TORT reform to reduce predatory and frivolous malpractice lawsuits against physicians and hospitals...
I think there are better ways than allowing Gov to control TOO much of what is going on....
I'm not thrilled about the "Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits"....page 22, section 123....
again, I know we have similar committees........I don't think GOV Ran committees is going to make things better.....I DON'T TRUST OUR GOV.....DEM OR REPUB....I DON'T TRUST THEM....AND I WILL NEVER LIKE IT.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 10:15:06 AM
Okay...I go along with that........but the reform they are offering is ridicules......such as enable electronic funds transfers....this needs to be clarified.........I know factcheck says there is no problems with this.......I don't believe them........for it says.....enable electronic funds transfers...this is just ONE example of what I don't like.....THIS is not reform....it is controlling.
I think I speak for everyone when I say WTF?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 10:26:37 AM
I'm not thrilled about the "Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits"....page 22, section 123....
Is this supposed to be an answer to Olias' question?
Quote...I don't think GOV Ran committees is going to make things better...
Classic!
Quote from: Exterminator on October 13, 2009, 10:27:54 AM
I think I speak for everyone when I say WTF?
Guess that means you don't mind being required to set up an automatic fund transfer to the Government for your "free" health care coverage.
Quote from: me on October 13, 2009, 10:34:43 AM
Guess that means you don't mind being required to set up an automatic fund transfer to the Government for your "free" health care coverage.
He has NEVER read it....so his best retort is WTF?...
Quote from: me on October 13, 2009, 10:34:43 AM
Guess that means you don't mind being required to set up an automatic fund transfer to the Government for your "free" health care coverage.
I guess that means that I have no freaking idea what the hell he was trying to say.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 10:15:06 AM
Okay...I go along with that........but the reform they are offering is ridicules......such as enable electronic funds transfers....this needs to be clarified.........I know factcheck says there is no problems with this.......I don't believe them........for it says.....enable electronic funds transfers...this is just ONE example of what I don't like.....THIS is not reform....it is controlling.
You must be kidding! WTH is wrong EXACTLY with ENABLING electronic funds transfers? Do you realize how much money electronic funds transfers save in the billing process?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 10:26:37 AM
I'm not thrilled about the "Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits"....page 22, section 123....
You never had an HMO? I don't know about you but I sure as hell would rather have a "Health Benefits Advisory Committee" made up of doctors and nurses RECOMMENDING covered benefits rather than the bean counters of the insurance company MANDATING covered benefits and DENYING benefits to pump up the company bottom line!
Quote from: me on October 13, 2009, 10:34:43 AM
Guess that means you don't mind being required to set up an automatic fund transfer to the Government for your "free" health care coverage.
I was wrong yesterday to insinuate that you had any intelligence. :rolleyes:
Quote from: me on October 13, 2009, 10:34:43 AM
Guess that means you don't mind being required to set up an automatic fund transfer to the Government for your "free" health care coverage.
"This section of the House bill actually deals with administrative simplification - - things like making billing more efficient so your doctor can spend more time caring for patients and less time fighting with insurance companies. The actual language sets standards for electronic funds transfers between health care providers and insurance companies - - it has nothing to do with the patient's bank account."
Do you want to try again or are you satisfied with the extent to which you have already displayed your ignorance?
Quote from: Olias on October 13, 2009, 10:42:57 AM
I was wrong yesterday to insinuate that you had any intelligence. :rolleyes:
I certainly questioned it at the time. :biggrin:
Quote from: Exterminator on October 13, 2009, 10:43:55 AM
"This section of the House bill actually deals with administrative simplification - - things like making billing more efficient so your doctor can spend more time caring for patients and less time fighting with insurance companies. The actual language sets standards for electronic funds transfers between health care providers and insurance companies - - it has nothing to do with the patient's bank account."
Do you want to try again or are you satisfied with the extent to which you have already displayed your ignorance?
again more talking points from factcheck.org...........can you think for yourself?.............THAT is always YOUR retort when I give you an answer...........hell, you simply copied and pasted your answer.......parrot.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 10:48:40 AM
again more talking points from factcheck.org...........can you think for yourself?.............THAT is always YOUR retort when I give you an answer...........hell, you simply copied and pasted your answer.......parrot.
Because their answer is the correct one. Please enlighten us with your basis for not believing them and be specific. I'm betting you can't because you have no idea what the hell you're talking about.
Quote from: Exterminator on October 13, 2009, 10:54:19 AM
Because their answer is the correct one. Please enlighten us with your basis for not believing them and be specific. I'm betting you can't because you have no idea what the hell you're talking about.
You go right ahead and keep believing that.
Quote from: me on October 13, 2009, 10:57:41 AM
You go right ahead and keep believing that.
Why don't you go bone a chicken or make some noodles or something and stay out of the grown-ups' conversations.
Quote from: Exterminator on October 13, 2009, 10:59:18 AM
Why don't you go bone a chicken or make some noodles or something and stay out of the grown-ups' conversations.
You mean you're finally going to start conversing like an adult? Unbelievable...truly unbelievable
Quote from: me on October 13, 2009, 11:01:17 AM
You mean you're finally going to start conversing like an adult? Unbelievable...truly unbelievable
I'm still waiting for you or Henry to tell us all why you think factcheck is lying. Now's your chance to prove you're not just an old, senile wind-bag.
Quote from: Exterminator on October 13, 2009, 11:03:09 AM
I'm still waiting for you or Henry to tell us all why you think factcheck is lying. Now's your chance to prove you're not just an old, senile wind-bag.
the bill says.....enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment......I think it is pretty clear...that is DIRECTLY from the bill...........say what you want or factcheck can say what they want...........they WANT to enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment...I personally do not think I want a law, stating Gov can have access to my account without my consent....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 11:23:31 AM
the bill says.....enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment......I think it is pretty clear...that is DIRECTLY from the bill...........say what you want or factcheck can say what they want...........they WANT to enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment...I personally do not think I want a law, stating Gov can have access to my account without my consent....
Are you an insurance company or a health care provider?
The legislative summary says the intent in the section is "to adopt standards for typical transactions"
between insurance companies and health care providers.Which part of this are you having difficulty understanding?
Quote from: Exterminator on October 13, 2009, 11:30:22 AM
Are you an insurance company or a health care provider?
The legislative summary says the intent in the section is "to adopt standards for typical transactions" between insurance companies and health care providers.
Which part of this are you having difficulty understanding?
That may be what the summary says or "intends"..(carefull with that word).......but the BILL itself says EXACTLY what I stated.....and mentions NOTHING about insurance companies and healthcare providers....it says
enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment...
44% Favor Health Care Reform, 50% Oppose
Monday, October 12, 2009
Forty-four percent (44%) of voters nationwide now favor the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That's little changed from a week ago. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 50% are opposed to the plan.
The numbers have been remarkably stable throughout the debate. Currently, 23% Strongly Favor the legislative effort and 39% are Strongly Opposed.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform
:laugh: :laugh:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 12:12:00 PM
That may be what the summary says or "intends"..(carefull with that word).......but the BILL itself says EXACTLY what I stated.....and mentions NOTHING about insurance companies and healthcare providers....it says enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment...
Oh for pete's sake, are you freaking serious?
Quote from: Exterminator on October 13, 2009, 12:20:50 PM
Oh for pete's sake, are you freaking serious?
why are you being so difficult on this........it is plain and simple what it says.........IF it means something else, then they should say it in the Bill....seriously all of this is my point...........it is obviously not clear to everyone..........but, it reads very clearly in the bill on page 59.......maybe then need say what they mean then....it would NOT be that difficult would it? I think THEY know exactly what they 'INTEND'....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 12:28:27 PM
why are you being so difficult on this........it is plain and simple what it says.........IF it means something else, then they should say it in the Bill....seriously all of this is my point...........it is obviously not clear to everyone..........but, it reads very clearly in the bill on page 59.......maybe then need say what they mean then....it would NOT be that difficult would it? I think THEY know exactly what they 'INTEND'....
Guess we know now that all they are reading is the summaries and not the actual bill which takes on a whole different tone. It also explains why they think they understand it, they haven't seen the legal jargon in the actual bill which changes the entire thing and makes it differ from the summary. In essence they're reading the headline and not reading the article accompanying it.
Quote from: me on October 13, 2009, 12:43:57 PM
Guess we know now that all they are reading is the summaries and not the actual bill which takes on a whole different tone. It also explains why they think they understand it, they haven't seen the legal jargon in the actual bill which changes the entire thing and makes it differ from the summary. In essence they're reading the headline and not reading the article accompanying it.
but yet all we do is parrot Rush Limbaugh....who we don't even listen too... ;D
My view is IF this is such a great bill..........THEN PASS IT!!!..............What are they waiting on?
Quote from: me on October 13, 2009, 12:43:57 PM
Guess we know now that all they are reading is the summaries and not the actual bill which takes on a whole different tone. It also explains why they think they understand it, they haven't seen the legal jargon in the actual bill which changes the entire thing and makes it differ from the summary. In essence they're reading the headline and not reading the article accompanying it.
Who is this "they" you speak of? On the other hand, I haven't seen you quote directly from the bill, choosing instead to post your ridiculous claims that you read in an e-mail from somebody. :rolleyes: Sometimes I think you need some good English wine. The DO grow grapes there, you know.
Some of you are just one serious medical incident from joining the couple in the following story; in fact we ALL are. Lose your job, lose your coverage, and you will become just another statistic; homeless, jobless, and invisible to people just like yourselves. You'll understand then but by then it will be too late.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/10/13/cancer.insurance.finances/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/10/13/cancer.insurance.finances/index.html)
WEST PALM BEACH, Florida (CNN) -- Leslie Elder's eyelids fluttered open, and through the fog of pain medication, she saw the emergency room doctors pull back the curtain in her room.
Leslie and Jim Elder say they were forced to cancel their health insurance.
Leslie and Jim Elder say they were forced to cancel their health insurance.
She could tell that the news was bad.
"They didn't have to say a word. I knew from their faces that something wasn't right," said Elder, 60, who hours earlier had stumbled into the ER with a stabbing pain in her abdomen. "Then one doctor said, 'Your right kidney ... it's breaking apart. You have a tumor ... and you also have a tumor in your left kidney.' "
The words "You have a tumor" were not new to Elder; her grim financial situation was.
Elder had cancer twice before -- in 1988, doctors found a tumor in her right breast, and in 2001, they found one in her left breast -- except back then, she was insured. By the time she learned that she had kidney cancer in September 2005, she was uninsured.
"All I could think of was 'Oh, my god, I'm going to go broke. We'll be living in a cardboard house,' " Elder said. " 'How am I going to do this?' It was the most honest feeling of powerlessness."
Insurance conflict
Elder and her husband, Jim, say their health insurance carrier, Nationwide Insurance, forced them into an impossible situation by raising the rates on their policy over several years. Eventually, they were forced to cancel.
"Nationwide denies any inference that the company inappropriately raised rates for the coverage that was provided from 1987 until the time the Elders canceled the policy," spokeswoman Liz Christopher said in a statement.
The Elders are broke and on the cusp of bankruptcy because of medical bills, and they're not alone. A study published in the June issue of the American Journal of Medicine found that in 2007, 62 percent of personal bankruptcies were because of medical debts. The same study indicated that in 1981, only 8 percent of bankruptcy filings could be traced to medical bills.
"Health insurance premiums track directly with the underlying cost of medical care," said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, which represents 1,300 health insurance carriers in the United States. "As the cost of providing care increases, premiums increase accordingly."
The Elders boil it down to health insurance companies putting profits ahead of human life. Video Watch more on the Elders' struggle »
"The insurance companies are choosing who will live and who will die," Leslie Elder said.
Nationwide Insurance says it did not break any law by increasing the Elders' insurance premium.
"Health insurance rates were and are highly regulated by various state insurance departments, and any premium increases for the Elders and other policyholders would have been made in full compliance with state laws in effect at that time," Christopher said.
The Florida Department of Insurance Regulation, which oversees companies like Nationwide, said in a statement, "There is no law that limits the amount of rate requested by an insurer." Insurance officials add that their office reviews all rate requests, ensuring that the requests are not excessive or discriminatory.
The Elders bristle at the notion that their experience could be cast as anything but "excessive" and "discriminatory."
Health care bills before the Senate and House are designed, in part, to rid the market of health care discrimination, especially as it relates to pre-existing conditions like Elder's cancer.
Zirkelbach says the industry agrees with removing pre-existing conditions from consideration for pricing policies but stresses that reform should not come by way of raising taxes or cutting benefits for other programs like Medicare.
The Obama administration has said repeatedly that health care reform would not cut benefits or raise taxes.
The Elders are not hopeful that health care reform -- even if it excludes pre-existing condition clauses from health insurance policies -- will help them any time soon.
According to the bill currently before the House, it will be 2014 before self-employed families like them will actually have access to health insurance. By then, Elder will be near eligibility for Medicare.
While the debate in Congress continues, Elder says she is waiting anxiously -- waiting for reform, and for her cancer to come back.
A contentious relationship
The Elders did not always have such a contentious relationship with their health insurance carrier, and they were not always broke. In fact, before their insurance troubles, they were solidly middle-class business owners.
However, in 1988, things began changing. It was the year of Elder's first breast cancer diagnosis. When the family's plan required payment of a $250 deductible and a 20 percent share of the costs of medical care, the Elders could afford it.
Years after that first diagnosis, things started getting shaky. Jim Elder says the premiums crept up slowly at first and then more dramatically.
"You do ask why, why, why," Jim Elder said. "Why are we stuck with all these huge bills when we're supposedly covered?"
A recent Kaiser Family Foundation study examining U.S. health insurance policies generally found that from 1999 to 2009, the average family premium more than doubled. The Elders say that over the life of their Nationwide Insurance policy, their premiums nearly quadrupled.
The Elders believe that their health insurance premiums soared higher than those of the average family because of Leslie's previous cancer diagnosis.
"What is the message here? Survive cancer but then go drop dead because we can't make any money off you anymore?" Leslie Elder asked. "[The insurance companies] figure, 'You're useless. Get lost.' "
Nationwide says, "While we're empathetic to the Elders' situation, we stand by the policy coverages provided to the Elders while they were customers."
To cope with high premiums, the Elders played a precarious, yet common, game. They increased their deductible to offset the high premiums. By the time Leslie Elder got breast cancer for a second time, in 2001, the family's deductible was up to $5,000.
What happened next would send shock waves through the Elder household.
"As I'm recuperating, I receive $21,000 of bills that I was responsible for," Leslie Elder said. Under the Elders' policy with Nationwide they did, in fact, owe so much, in part because of rising health care costs, and in part because their deductible was now so high.
She was stunned and confused -- not just about the bills but about how they were going to pay. What still confounds Leslie and Jim Elder: How the cost of medical care, and medical insurance, went sky high in just over a decade.
Health Library
Late in 2001, the Elders were scrambling for affordable coverage. They dropped their policy with Nationwide Insurance and signed up for a more affordable policy with Aetna, by starting a group policy including employees in a small business they were running at the time. Eventually, Aetna would increase the Elders' premium to nearly $1,000 per month. It was too much. In 2005, the Elders dropped their health insurance policy for the second time.
"I sat down and seriously thought about it for a long time and said, 'I'm not going to do this,' " Leslie Elder said. "I am not going to pay. Never mind 'I'm not going to'; there was no way I could."
In a statement, Aetna said that Leslie Elder's previous cancer diagnoses were not the culprit for the rate increase.
Although the company did not cite a specific reason for the increased rate, Cynthia Michener, an Aetna spokeswoman said: "There can be other contributing factors to rate increases for small business policies, including, for example, the aggregate cost of the entire pool of small business policies in the state."
Zirkelbach said, "Everybody who has health care coverage should have the peace of mind that their coverage is going to be there when they need it. We have proposed to eliminate pre-existing condition exclusions entirely so that everybody has peace of mind that coverage will be there, that they won't be paying based on their health status."
Through it all, there was one bright spot: A generous family member paid the more than $80,000 in hospital bills stacked up during Leslie Elder's 2005 kidney cancer treatment. Still, the family is struggling to pay down the bill of more than $21,000 from 2001.
Leslie Elder says that even if she could afford it, because of her pre-existing condition, she is "uninsurable." Without coverage, she cannot afford follow-up exams for cancer, so Elder has no idea whether her cancer has come back. In a strange way, she says, not knowing is better.
"I don't think I could bear to listen to those words again. ... 'You have cancer,' " Elder said. "I've said to my husband, if I start to get sick, just set me up with a nice pill cocktail on a beach, because nobody cares. That's the message you hear every day from insurance companies."
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 12:28:27 PM
why are you being so difficult on this.....
Gee, I don't know; could it be because you are being ridiculous?
Quote...it is plain and simple what it says.........IF it means something else, then they should say it in the Bill...
Actually, it does say it in the bill but you are either intentionally taking it out of context or you can't read well enough to get past the talking points your ilk keep spewing.
Here is the full text of the section from which you have conveniently plucked one sentence to try to use as a basis for your ridiculous stance and it is clearly discussing standardization of data transactions between business entities, not individuals:
SEC. 1173A. STANDARDIZE ELECTRONIC ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSACTIONS.
(a) STANDARDS FOR FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSACTIONS.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall adopt and regularly update standards consistent with the goals described in paragraph (2).
(2) GOALS FOR FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSACTIONS.—The goals for standards under paragraph (1) are that such standards shall—
''(A) be unique with no conflicting or redundant standards;
''(B) be authoritative, permitting no additions or constraints for electronic transactions, including companion guides;
(C) be comprehensive, efficient and robust, requiring minimal augmentation by paper transactions or clarification by further communications;
(D) enable the real-time (or near real time) determination of an individual's financial responsibility at the point of service and, to the extent possible, prior to service, including whether the individual is eligible for a specific service with a specific physician at a specific facility, which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card;
(E) enable, where feasible, near real-time adjudication of claims;
(F) provide for timely acknowledgment, response, and status reporting applicable to any electronic transaction deemed appropriate by the Secretary;
(G) describe all data elements (such as reason and remark codes) in unambiguous terms, not permit optional fields, require that data elements be either required or conditioned upon set values in other fields, and prohibit additional conditions; and
(H) harmonize all common data elements across administrative and clinical transaction standards.
(3) TIME FOR ADOPTION.—Not later than 2 years after the date of implementation of the X12 Version 5010 transaction standards implemented
under this part, the Secretary shall adopt standards under this section.
(4) REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC STANDARDS.—The standards under this section shall be developed, adopted and enforced so as to—
(A) clarify, refine, complete, and expand, as needed, the standards required under section 1173;
(B) require paper versions of standardized transactions to comply with the same standards as to data content such that a fully compliant, equivalent electronic transaction can be populated from the data from a paper version;
(C) enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice;
(D) require timely and transparent claim and denial management processes, including tracking, adjudication, and appeal processing;
(E) require the use of a standard electronic transaction with which health care providers may quickly and efficiently enroll with a health plan to conduct the other electronic transactions provided for in this part; and
(F) provide for other requirements relating to administrative simplification as identified by the Secretary, in consultation with stake holders.
(5) BUILDING ON EXISTING STANDARDS.—In developing the standards under this section, the Secretary shall build upon existing and planned standards.
(6) IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT.—Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit to
the appropriate committees of Congress a plan for the implementation and enforcement, by not later than 5 years after such date of enactment, of the
standards under this section. Such plan shall include—
(A) a process and timeframe with milestones for developing the complete set of standards;
(B) an expedited upgrade program for continually developing and approving additions and modifications to the standards as often as annually to improve their quality and extend their functionality to meet evolving requirements in health care;
(C) programs to provide incentives for, and ease the burden of, implementation for certain health care providers, with special consideration given to such providers serving rural or underserved areas and ensure coordination with standards, implementation specifications, and certification criteria being adopted under the HITECH Act;
(D) programs to provide incentives for, and ease the burden of, health care providers who volunteer to participate in the process of setting standards for electronic transactions;
(E) an estimate of total funds needed to ensure timely completion of the implementation plan; and
(F) an enforcement process that includes timely investigation of complaints, random audits to ensure compliance, civil monetary and programmatic penalties for non-compliance consistent with existing laws and regulations, and a fair and reasonable appeals process building off of enforcement provisions under this part.
(b) LIMITATIONS ON USE OF DATA.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the use of information collected under this section in a manner that would adversely affect any individual.
(c) PROTECTION OF DATA.—The Secretary shall ensure (through the promulgation of regulations or otherwise) that all data collected pursuant to subsection (a) are—
(1) used and disclosed in a manner that meets the HIPAA privacy and security law (as defined in section 3009(a)(2) of the Public Health Service
Act), including any privacy or security standard adopted under section 3004 of such Act; and
(2) protected from all inappropriate internal use by any entity that collects, stores, or receives the data, including use of such data in determinations of
eligibility (or continued eligibility) in health plans, and from other inappropriate uses, as defined by the Secretary.
(2) DEFINITIONS.—Section 1171 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d) is amended—
(A) in paragraph (7), by striking ''with reference to'' and all that follows and inserting ''with reference to a transaction or data element of health information in section 1173 means implementation specifications, certification criteria, operating rules, messaging formats, codes, and code sets adopted or established by the Secretary for the electronic exchange and use of information''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
(9) OPERATING RULES.—The term 'operating rules' means business rules for using and processing transactions. Operating rules should address the following:
(A) Requirements for data content using available and established national standards.
(B) Infrastructure requirements that establish best practices for streamlining data flow to yield timely execution of transactions.
(C) Policies defining the transaction related rights and responsibilities for entities that are transmitting or receiving data.
(3) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 1179(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d–8(a)) is amended, in the matter before paragraph (1)—
(A) by inserting ''on behalf of an individual'' after ''1978)''; and
(B) by inserting ''on behalf of an individual'' after ''for a financial institution.''
(b) STANDARDS FOR CLAIMS ATTACHMENTS AND COORDINATION OF BENEFITS .—
(1) STANDARD FOR HEALTH CLAIMS ATTACHMENTS.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and
Human Services shall promulgate a final rule to establish a standard for health claims attachment transaction described in section 1173(a)(2)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d–2(a)(2)(B)) and coordination of benefits.
(2) REVISION IN PROCESSING PAYMENT TRANSACTIONS BY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—Section 1179 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d–8) is amended, in the matter before paragraph (1)—
(i) by striking ''or is engaged'' and inserting ''and is engaged''; and
(ii) by inserting ''(other than as a business associate for a covered entity)''
after ''for a financial institution''.
(B) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by paragraph (1) shall apply to transactions occurring on or after such date (not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act) as the Secretary of Health
and Human Services shall specify.
Quote from: me on October 13, 2009, 12:43:57 PM
Guess we know now that all they are reading is the summaries and not the actual bill which takes on a whole different tone. It also explains why they think they understand it, they haven't seen the legal jargon in the actual bill which changes the entire thing and makes it differ from the summary. In essence they're reading the headline and not reading the article accompanying it.
No, you dullard, we're not. It is you and Henry who are taking an individual statement out of context and trying to distort it to mean that which it clearly does not.
Yes, that is a bad situation but it is also anecdotal just like the things I posted about Nationalized health care and Government ran care in other countries and am chastised for. Why can it be used on one side as an example and not the other?
Quote from: Palehorse on October 13, 2009, 01:27:57 PM
Some of you are just one serious medical incident from joining the couple in the following story; in fact we ALL are. Lose your job, lose your coverage, and you will become just another statistic; homeless, jobless, and invisible to people just like yourselves. You'll understand then but by then it will be too late.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/10/13/cancer.insurance.finances/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/10/13/cancer.insurance.finances/index.html)
WEST PALM BEACH, Florida (CNN) -- Leslie Elder's eyelids fluttered open, and through the fog of pain medication, she saw the emergency room doctors pull back the curtain in her room.
Leslie and Jim Elder say they were forced to cancel their health insurance.
Leslie and Jim Elder say they were forced to cancel their health insurance.
She could tell that the news was bad.
"They didn't have to say a word. I knew from their faces that something wasn't right," said Elder, 60, who hours earlier had stumbled into the ER with a stabbing pain in her abdomen. "Then one doctor said, 'Your right kidney ... it's breaking apart. You have a tumor ... and you also have a tumor in your left kidney.' "
The words "You have a tumor" were not new to Elder; her grim financial situation was.
Elder had cancer twice before -- in 1988, doctors found a tumor in her right breast, and in 2001, they found one in her left breast -- except back then, she was insured. By the time she learned that she had kidney cancer in September 2005, she was uninsured.
"All I could think of was 'Oh, my god, I'm going to go broke. We'll be living in a cardboard house,' " Elder said. " 'How am I going to do this?' It was the most honest feeling of powerlessness."
Insurance conflict
Elder and her husband, Jim, say their health insurance carrier, Nationwide Insurance, forced them into an impossible situation by raising the rates on their policy over several years. Eventually, they were forced to cancel.
"Nationwide denies any inference that the company inappropriately raised rates for the coverage that was provided from 1987 until the time the Elders canceled the policy," spokeswoman Liz Christopher said in a statement.
The Elders are broke and on the cusp of bankruptcy because of medical bills, and they're not alone. A study published in the June issue of the American Journal of Medicine found that in 2007, 62 percent of personal bankruptcies were because of medical debts. The same study indicated that in 1981, only 8 percent of bankruptcy filings could be traced to medical bills.
"Health insurance premiums track directly with the underlying cost of medical care," said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, which represents 1,300 health insurance carriers in the United States. "As the cost of providing care increases, premiums increase accordingly."
The Elders boil it down to health insurance companies putting profits ahead of human life. Video Watch more on the Elders' struggle »
"The insurance companies are choosing who will live and who will die," Leslie Elder said.
Nationwide Insurance says it did not break any law by increasing the Elders' insurance premium.
"Health insurance rates were and are highly regulated by various state insurance departments, and any premium increases for the Elders and other policyholders would have been made in full compliance with state laws in effect at that time," Christopher said.
The Florida Department of Insurance Regulation, which oversees companies like Nationwide, said in a statement, "There is no law that limits the amount of rate requested by an insurer." Insurance officials add that their office reviews all rate requests, ensuring that the requests are not excessive or discriminatory.
The Elders bristle at the notion that their experience could be cast as anything but "excessive" and "discriminatory."
Health care bills before the Senate and House are designed, in part, to rid the market of health care discrimination, especially as it relates to pre-existing conditions like Elder's cancer.
Zirkelbach says the industry agrees with removing pre-existing conditions from consideration for pricing policies but stresses that reform should not come by way of raising taxes or cutting benefits for other programs like Medicare.
The Obama administration has said repeatedly that health care reform would not cut benefits or raise taxes.
The Elders are not hopeful that health care reform -- even if it excludes pre-existing condition clauses from health insurance policies -- will help them any time soon.
According to the bill currently before the House, it will be 2014 before self-employed families like them will actually have access to health insurance. By then, Elder will be near eligibility for Medicare.
While the debate in Congress continues, Elder says she is waiting anxiously -- waiting for reform, and for her cancer to come back.
A contentious relationship
The Elders did not always have such a contentious relationship with their health insurance carrier, and they were not always broke. In fact, before their insurance troubles, they were solidly middle-class business owners.
However, in 1988, things began changing. It was the year of Elder's first breast cancer diagnosis. When the family's plan required payment of a $250 deductible and a 20 percent share of the costs of medical care, the Elders could afford it.
Years after that first diagnosis, things started getting shaky. Jim Elder says the premiums crept up slowly at first and then more dramatically.
"You do ask why, why, why," Jim Elder said. "Why are we stuck with all these huge bills when we're supposedly covered?"
A recent Kaiser Family Foundation study examining U.S. health insurance policies generally found that from 1999 to 2009, the average family premium more than doubled. The Elders say that over the life of their Nationwide Insurance policy, their premiums nearly quadrupled.
The Elders believe that their health insurance premiums soared higher than those of the average family because of Leslie's previous cancer diagnosis.
"What is the message here? Survive cancer but then go drop dead because we can't make any money off you anymore?" Leslie Elder asked. "[The insurance companies] figure, 'You're useless. Get lost.' "
Nationwide says, "While we're empathetic to the Elders' situation, we stand by the policy coverages provided to the Elders while they were customers."
To cope with high premiums, the Elders played a precarious, yet common, game. They increased their deductible to offset the high premiums. By the time Leslie Elder got breast cancer for a second time, in 2001, the family's deductible was up to $5,000.
What happened next would send shock waves through the Elder household.
"As I'm recuperating, I receive $21,000 of bills that I was responsible for," Leslie Elder said. Under the Elders' policy with Nationwide they did, in fact, owe so much, in part because of rising health care costs, and in part because their deductible was now so high.
She was stunned and confused -- not just about the bills but about how they were going to pay. What still confounds Leslie and Jim Elder: How the cost of medical care, and medical insurance, went sky high in just over a decade.
Health Library
Late in 2001, the Elders were scrambling for affordable coverage. They dropped their policy with Nationwide Insurance and signed up for a more affordable policy with Aetna, by starting a group policy including employees in a small business they were running at the time. Eventually, Aetna would increase the Elders' premium to nearly $1,000 per month. It was too much. In 2005, the Elders dropped their health insurance policy for the second time.
"I sat down and seriously thought about it for a long time and said, 'I'm not going to do this,' " Leslie Elder said. "I am not going to pay. Never mind 'I'm not going to'; there was no way I could."
In a statement, Aetna said that Leslie Elder's previous cancer diagnoses were not the culprit for the rate increase.
Although the company did not cite a specific reason for the increased rate, Cynthia Michener, an Aetna spokeswoman said: "There can be other contributing factors to rate increases for small business policies, including, for example, the aggregate cost of the entire pool of small business policies in the state."
Zirkelbach said, "Everybody who has health care coverage should have the peace of mind that their coverage is going to be there when they need it. We have proposed to eliminate pre-existing condition exclusions entirely so that everybody has peace of mind that coverage will be there, that they won't be paying based on their health status."
Through it all, there was one bright spot: A generous family member paid the more than $80,000 in hospital bills stacked up during Leslie Elder's 2005 kidney cancer treatment. Still, the family is struggling to pay down the bill of more than $21,000 from 2001.
Leslie Elder says that even if she could afford it, because of her pre-existing condition, she is "uninsurable." Without coverage, she cannot afford follow-up exams for cancer, so Elder has no idea whether her cancer has come back. In a strange way, she says, not knowing is better.
"I don't think I could bear to listen to those words again. ... 'You have cancer,' " Elder said. "I've said to my husband, if I start to get sick, just set me up with a nice pill cocktail on a beach, because nobody cares. That's the message you hear every day from insurance companies."
Again, I understand we need to do something.......I have had my own, lump sum of med bills to tend to, that I wish had a better resolution to, other than sucking up my savings accounts....
I am just not convinced that THIS resolution is going to SAVE me money or COST me money or my job...
I WANT SOMETHING DONE....I want THAT to be CLEAR....
Quote from: Palehorse on October 13, 2009, 01:27:57 PM
Some of you are just one serious medical incident from joining the couple in the following story; in fact we ALL are. Lose your job, lose your coverage, and you will become just another statistic; homeless, jobless, and invisible to people just like yourselves. You'll understand then but by then it will be too late.
And here's another one to show just how far insurance companies will go to make more money - deny coverage to babies.
http://www.examiner.com/x-8543-SF-Health-News-Examiner~y2009m10d12-Fat-baby-No-insurance (http://www.examiner.com/x-8543-SF-Health-News-Examiner~y2009m10d12-Fat-baby-No-insurance)
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 01:33:37 PM
I am just not convinced that THIS resolution is going to SAVE me money or COST me money or my job...
I WANT SOMETHING DONE....I want THAT to be CLEAR....
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
Quote from: Olias on October 13, 2009, 01:34:49 PM
And here's another one to show just how far insurance companies will go to make more money - deny coverage to babies.
http://www.examiner.com/x-8543-SF-Health-News-Examiner~y2009m10d12-Fat-baby-No-insurance (http://www.examiner.com/x-8543-SF-Health-News-Examiner~y2009m10d12-Fat-baby-No-insurance)
Looks to me like they changed their minds on this.
QuoteUPDATE: Rocky Mountain Health Plans has now said it will cover Alex Lange, a baby they previously refused to give health insurance because of his weight.
"A recent situation in which we denied coverage to a heavy, yet healthy, infant brought to our attention a flaw in our underwriting system for approving infants," says Steve ErkenBrack, president and CEO, Rocky Mountain Health Plans.
Quote from: Exterminator on October 13, 2009, 01:30:59 PM
(C) enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice;
they want to automaticly settle a bill for health care payment......by having access to YOUR account.
THAT Ex, is what it says.
Quote from: me on October 13, 2009, 01:42:00 PM
Looks to me like they changed their minds on this.
Of course they changed their minds after the parents went public with the story! :rolleyes:
"A recent situation in which we denied coverage to a heavy, yet healthy, infant brought to our attention a flaw in our underwriting system for approving infants,"
Translated "We tried to squeeze out some extra bucks for the CEO and the shareholders, but we got caught."
A VERY TELLING quote from the bastards who refused care for a baby ...
"We do it because everybody else in the industry does it," says Dr. Doug Speedie, medical director at Rocky Mountain Health Plans, the company that turned down Alex.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 01:46:00 PM
they want to automaticly settle a bill for health care payment......by having access to YOUR account.
THAT Ex, is what it says.
There you go, taking that one sentence out of the context of the section and trying to make it mean what it clearly does not. I understand that neither you nor 'me' has much business experience as it relates to IT and data exchange standardization but that lack of understanding on your part doesn't change what that section of the legislation is addressing and it has nothing to do with payments that are the responsibility of the patient. The title of the section clearly identifies it as addressing
administrative transactions.
Quote from: Olias on October 13, 2009, 01:36:19 PM
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
I am in favor of part of the solution.........it is being ignored.....The Health Care Freedom Plan (http://demint.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=0db98529-0230-3564-0e4b-fe84bdb1971b&Month=6&Year=2009&Type=PressRelease) and The Patients' Choice Act of 2009 (http://www.house.gov/ryan/PCA/)...Both introduced into congress, but is not being reviewed....so don't give me THAT crap....simply because I do not like what is being introduced....does not mean I'm the problem.....
VOTE on the BILL....why have they NOT voted on it.........THEY control the house and the senate.......just do it if it is all THAT great.
Quote from: Exterminator on October 13, 2009, 01:55:09 PM
The title of the section clearly identifies it as addressing administrative transactions.
and I understand, that part of the Administrative transactions are COLLECTING payments on bills....
I'm through...
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 01:59:07 PM
and I understand, that part of the Administrative transactions are COLLECTING payments on bills....
I'm through...
Good because you don't have a clue what the hell you're talking about and I'm tired of banging my head against a wall trying to prevent you from making an ass out of yourself. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 01:59:07 PM
I'm through...
And soon you will be able to say "I lost."
"Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe broke with her party Tuesday and said she will vote for a Democratic health care bill"
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=116&sid=1701389 (http://www.wtop.com/?nid=116&sid=1701389)
Quote from: Exterminator on October 13, 2009, 02:01:06 PM
Good because you don't have a clue what the hell you're talking about and I'm tired of banging my head against a wall trying to prevent you from making an ass out of yourself. :rolleyes:
I don't need you to prevent me from making an ass out of mys........... :spooked:
wait..............
I'm through here, remember..... :yes:
Quote from: Olias on October 13, 2009, 02:03:17 PM
And soon you will be able to say "I lost."
"Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe broke with her party Tuesday and said she will vote for a Democratic health care bill"
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=116&sid=1701389 (http://www.wtop.com/?nid=116&sid=1701389)
I read that.....oh well...........It is STILL America.........and I have faith......sometimes it take's BIG mistakes to finally overcome issues...
Americans are still in control....and the pendulum will swing back the other way, eventually..... :yes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 03:04:10 PM
sometimes it take's BIG mistakes to finally overcome issues...
The last eight years have proven that.
Quote from: Olias on October 13, 2009, 03:21:22 PM
The last eight years have proven that.
I just KNEW that one was coming as I typed it.... :yes: :razz:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on October 13, 2009, 03:53:10 PM
I just KNEW that one was coming as I typed it.... :yes: :razz:
What can I say? You stepped into that pile with both feet!
Quote from: Palehorse on August 20, 2009, 06:56:51 AM
Health insurance premiums for family coverage in Indiana rose an estimated 116 percent from 2000 through 2009, according to a separate report released Wednesday by Families USA, a Washington-based consumer-advocacy group. During that same period, the median earnings of Indiana workers rose by about 15 percent.
Family coverage in Indiana now carries an average annual premium of $14,355, up from about $6,628 in 2000, the group said.
And they are going up yet again next year, with 42% of employers saying they will pass along the increase to their employees. (9%).
http://www.indystar.com/article/20090820/BUSINESS/908200447/Health+insurance+set+to+take+big+jump (http://www.indystar.com/article/20090820/BUSINESS/908200447/Health+insurance+set+to+take+big+jump)
But we don't need this healthcare reform bill right now. . . :rolleyes:
Wellpoint enacts a 38% INCREASE in monthly premiums for health care coverage in ONE year!Like I said back in August, we either rein them in or everyone suffers the consequences of an industry mandating what it can charge and what it will cover. Now even more "fixed income" individuals will be priced right out of the market, more uninsured, more unemployed, higher healthcare costs and unreasonable coverage premiums. This article validates my statement from August.
http://www.indystar.com/article/20100211/BUSINESS03/2110419/Hoosiers-livid-at-WellPoint-rates (http://www.indystar.com/article/20100211/BUSINESS03/2110419/Hoosiers-livid-at-WellPoint-rates)
Read this "anecdotal tale" and live it when you get your paychecks. The head of the snake will be followed by the rest of it, so if you think "its only wellpoint" better think again. . .
But we better stop, start over, and debate it for another year. . . :rolleyes: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant:
How about solutions with LESS bureaucracy that is being imposed?....there are possible solutions that are NOT being heard, or even debated.....
don't blame the "right"...because those on the left can bring it to a vote...they "should" have the votes....but, they don't because even those on the left don't like what is being proposed....or this thing would be passed already.
Obama needs to "lead" ... if he want's this thing as badly as he says he does....imo
While "we" are all busy trying to load up the blame for this cluster funk on each other, they will reap in billions more in profits while denying billions in coverage.
I think all of this is a case of Munchhausen syndrome; exasperated by the cash flow from the insurance industry.
passing ANYTHING, just for the sake of PASSING something, is irresponsible.....I whole heartedily support "healthcare reform"....desperately!....but, IF, government is going to be MORE control over MY healthcare, then I oppose it.....but, frankly, right now, I don't have ANY say, because those with the power to make the decision do NOT represent my views....so, like I said, IF, anything is better than nothing....the democrats can vote this thing in tomorrow, IF they want.
Quote from: Palehorse on February 11, 2010, 12:55:49 PM
While "we" are all busy trying to load up the blame for this cluster funk on each other, they will reap in billions more in profits while denying billions in coverage.
I think all of this is a case of Munchhausen syndrome; exasperated by the cash flow from the insurance industry.
How do you figure that?
Quote from: me on February 11, 2010, 01:04:13 PM
How do you figure that?
In Münchausen syndrome, the affected person exaggerates or creates symptoms of illnesses in themselves in order to gain investigation, treatment, attention, sympathy, and comfort from medical personnel.
In the case in point, I submit that the opposition to health care reform is exaggerating imagined problems, or "illnesses", with the heath care initiative in order to obtain preferential treatment from the medical industry and the sympathy of the sheeple they have created. Actually a hybrid of true Münchausen syndrome and Münchausen syndrome by proxy.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on February 11, 2010, 01:02:35 PM
passing ANYTHING, just for the sake of PASSING something, is irresponsible.....I whole heartedily support "healthcare reform"....desperately!....but, IF, government is going to be MORE control over MY healthcare, then I oppose it.....but, frankly, right now, I don't have ANY say, because those with the power to make the decision do NOT represent my views....so, like I said, IF, anything is better than nothing....the democrats can vote this thing in tomorrow, IF they want.
Sheesh. . . To state it simply the government is only going to regulate the insurance industry, not the medical care you require and receive. . .
Pay attention and analyze the crap you've obviously been listening to and reading, and you will find that the propaganda is being generated by the very industry this reform means to regulate. The health care industry's profit levels are only exceeded by those of the oil industry, yet both continue imposing unreasonable increases for their products with little to no validation for such increases. The puppet masters behind the lion's share of the discord this country is undergoing right now. . .
Quote from: Palehorse on February 11, 2010, 01:11:53 PM
In Münchausen syndrome, the affected person exaggerates or creates symptoms of illnesses in themselves in order to gain investigation, treatment, attention, sympathy, and comfort from medical personnel.
In the case in point, I submit that the opposition to health care reform is exaggerating imagined problems, or "illnesses", with the heath care initiative in order to obtain preferential treatment from the medical industry and the sympathy of the sheeple they have created. Actually a hybrid of true Münchausen syndrome and Münchausen syndrome by proxy.
And you're sure it's not the other parties involved doing this?
Quote from: me on February 11, 2010, 01:30:02 PM
And you're sure it's not the other parties involved doing this?
What "other parties"? I said "opposition" which is inclusive of anyone in opposition to this reform and those undertaking actions to delay it. I don't care if they are jackasses, leopards, or elephants, they're opposition.
(And they're all standing in the insurance industry payroll line thanks to the recent SCOTUS decision, which exacerbated the problem 100 fold).
Quote from: Palehorse on February 11, 2010, 01:22:35 PM
Sheesh. . . To state it simply the government is only going to regulate the insurance industry, not the medical care you require and receive. . .
Pay attention and analyze the crap you've obviously been listening to and reading, and you will find that the propaganda is being generated by the very industry this reform means to regulate. The health care industry's profit levels are only exceeded by those of the oil industry, yet both continue imposing unreasonable increases for their products with little to no validation for such increases. The puppet masters behind the lion's share of the discord this country is undergoing right now. . .
do you have any PROOF of your statements?......can you sit there and tell me, that you have read the Bill and fully understand it...I see it as the propaganda is coming from the left....saying how much money THEY are going to save us....IF they can merely regulate the industry. THEY regulated our energy, and now that is a $29 BILLION a year industry...with 16,000 federal employees'....THEY regulated our Agriculture for $116 Billion a year with 96,000 employees'....THEY regulater our Housing for $65 Billion a year with 9,600 employees' and 3600 pages of regulations...and THAT has went over very well... :rolleyes:
we have gov trasportation ie amtrak...(bankrupt)....VA.. (bankrupt)....Social Security (heading there)...US Post Office (Bankrupt) ..Medicare (bankrupt)
While all of these programs had good intentions.....we cannot PAY for these programs, they lose money EVERY year...and the costs keep rising, and the corruption in these programs huge....protected by our elected officials.
I agree there HAS to be a "certain" amount of federal regulations, but they need to be abided by the private industry....and open up a competitive market in ALL phases of our daily needs....
Quote from: Palehorse on February 11, 2010, 01:22:35 PM
Sheesh. . . To state it simply the government is only going to regulate the insurance industry, not the medical care you require and receive. . .
Pay attention and analyze the crap you've obviously been listening to and reading, and you will find that the propaganda is being generated by the very industry this reform means to regulate. The health care industry's profit levels are only exceeded by those of the oil industry, yet both continue imposing unreasonable increases for their products with little to no validation for such increases. The puppet masters behind the lion's share of the discord this country is undergoing right now. . .
^^
And that's a good case in point as to why that Supreme Court ruling was so terribly wrong. We're only in for more of the propaganda generated by large corporations.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on February 11, 2010, 01:47:26 PM
do you have any PROOF of your statements?......can you sit there and tell me, that you have read the Bill and fully understand it...I see it as the propaganda is coming from the left....saying how much money THEY are going to save us....IF they can merely regulate the industry. THEY regulated our energy, and now that is a $29 BILLION a year industry...with 16,000 federal employees'....THEY regulated our Agriculture for $116 Billion a year with 96,000 employees'....THEY regulater our Housing for $65 Billion a year with 9,600 employees' and 3600 pages of regulations...and THAT has went over very well... :rolleyes:
we have gov trasportation ie amtrak...(bankrupt)....VA.. (bankrupt)....Social Security (heading there)...US Post Office (Bankrupt) ..Medicare (bankrupt)
While all of these programs had good intentions.....we cannot PAY for these programs, they lose money EVERY year...and the costs keep rising, and the corruption in these programs huge....protected by our elected officials.
I agree there HAS to be a "certain" amount of federal regulations, but they need to be abided by the private industry....and open up a competitive market in ALL phases of our daily needs....
Proof: Its out there Henry if you'll just exercise a little initiative and look for it. We've been over this ground so many times it has ruts the size of the grand canyon in it. Some of that information is within this very forum too.
Amtrak, VA, SS, etc., all government run entities,
unlike what is being proposed here.
The government
regulates the medical industry via the FDA/AMA, the airline industry via the FAA, as well as the nuclear industry and many others, and does so with what many would call success. Many of the programs and SOP's created by these same regulations have become the "gold standard" within the private corporations and entities that fall under the jurisdiction of the various regulatory bodies of the federal government.
The DOT (Department of Transportation) regulates the transportation industry, and has nothing to do with Amtrak's day to day operations. The National Railroad Passenger Corporation is responsible for Amtrak.
The FHA is a governmental agency created under the National Housing Act of 1934. It's stated goals are to improve housing standards and conditions, and to provide adequate housing financing through the insuring of mortgage loans in an effort to stabilize the housing market. This government agency is responsible for assisting millions of American families in successfully obtaining a home of their own each and every year.
For the record they had nothing to do with the collapse of the mortgage industry; the banks and private financial institutions who skirted regulatory practices and overlooked qualification requirements own that baby; outright.
What exactly is your problem with the Department of Agriculture? I fail to see how their employees are contributing to the current problem, unless it is the fact we are paying them to do the jobs that need doing. Or maybe you want diseased animals,empty fields, and inferior vegetables and other food-stuffs in our food stream?
Yes, these regulatory bodies create and maintain job opportunities. They have to and what is wrong with that? Especially since historically governmental legislation, treaties, and agreements enacted under previous administrations has driven the textile and manufacturing industries out of the country. Those individuals holding positions within these regulatory bodies are the ones responsible for ensuring that private and publicly held entities that fall within their jurisdiction operate within compliance at all times.
Regulation of the insurance industry is imperative to the future success of this country and its people. Stalling only enables them to increase the choke hold they now have upon us.Expecting perfection out of the gate from our government is like asking the fox to watch over the hen house. Ludicrous and illogical. We have to start somewhere, but apparently the majority within congress feel we don't have to start at all.
The fact is those presently enjoying the fruits of the insurance industry are the very ones espousing the propaganda at the top of their lungs and engaging in the proliferation of lies, half-truths, and stalling; thereby brainwashing the sheeple into their "the sky is falling" campaign. They don't want to see their cash flow interrupted at such a poor economic juncture as is now present, so naturally they're going to do everything they can to prevent it. They look at the passage of any health care reform initiative that is not 100% endorsed and approved by the insurance industry as a direct threat to their way of life, and could not give a rats ass about how it impacts the average American.
And the recent SCOTUS decision only serves to increase the sway of the almighty dollar upon this milestone.
Did I read the original bill? Asked and answered at least a dozen times, but yes, I did. And links to it were also provided as well as futile attempts at putting the verbiage into layman's terms by several on this forum.
As for
what it contains now, in its present form? No, it changes almost daily and as you are so fond of espousing, "is chock full of lots of pork" I am sure. It was the last time I re-read it and I am sure it has only increased. The POTUS says it has and I believe him.
By the way, this is a rhetorical question; Did your pay go up 38% this year? I doubt it, but you'll be shelling out 38% more to keep that health care coverage you have. This increase is unprecedented and even the very best numbers crunchers in the industry projected 100% increases in insurance premiums over the next decade; a forecast they are in all likelihood revisiting since 38% of that projection was just gobbled up in one year! :rolleyes:
Dear RW'ers,
A question. If you are so against societal concepts - doing things for the benefit of the group like health care etc. - why is it you don't just run your children off from the old homestead and let them fend for themselves?
I await your response,
Y (a member of the human race)
Quote from: Y on February 11, 2010, 06:14:38 PM
Dear RW'ers,
A question. If you are so against societal concepts - doing things for the benefit of the group like health care etc. - why is it you don't just run your children off from the old homestead and let them fend for themselves?
I await your response,
Y (a member of the human race)
And that has what to do with anything here? We are not children and the government didn't take us to raise.
Quote from: Y on February 11, 2010, 06:14:38 PM
Dear RW'ers,
A question. If you are so against societal concepts - doing things for the benefit of the group like health care etc. - why is it you don't just run your children off from the old homestead and let them fend for themselves?
I await your response,
Y (a member of the human race)
MY children are MY responsibility......they are MINE to raise as "I" see fit....
The governments main job is to protect and uphold its citizens constitutional Rights....NOT to tell us HOW to live our lives, What we have to eat or drink, Where we live or work, When we go to sleep....
BUT, it seems to me that our government is thinking they DO have the power to tell us HOW to live, What to eat, ...and simply are stepping OUT of their given responsibilities, and butting in or individual rights....that our forefathers NEVER dreamed that would be abused as they are today....imo.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/03/18/health.care.pdf (http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/03/18/health.care.pdf)
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/03/18/section.analysis.pdf (http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/03/18/section.analysis.pdf)
Where does health care reform stand?
Above are links to the text of the current version and a link to an analysis of it section by section.
Anne, there is no healthcare bill yet. It won't be a bill until congress passes it. But the predatory super-rich and corporations don't want healthcare. The have gorged themselves rich on our money and our healthcare. They have brain washed people like ME and Henry to be against socialize medicine. Who in their right mind thinks that health insurance has to be a profit base company. After paying all of their expenses and taking the rest of the money and putting it back into the company. And stop paying one person $200 million a year to run the company, we surly be someone to work cheaper,
The CEO of the largest healthcare insurance company, raked off for himself, $600 million in salary, and bonus, in the last three years. How many people could have the best health policy in the country, if the $600 million were divided equally.
What wrong with this. All of the people in the Senate and House are all college educated. Over half are classified as millionaires or close to it. and over 98% and more, are LAWYERS. Do see why we could possibly, being screwed. :rolleyes: :confused: :'( :(
The Troll :confused: :'( :( :no:
Quote from: The Troll on March 19, 2010, 07:24:27 PM
Anne, there is no healthcare bill yet. It won't be a bill until congress passes it. But the predatory super-rich and corporations don't want healthcare. The have gorged themselves rich on our money and our healthcare. They have brain washed people like ME and Henry to be against socialize medicine. Who in their right mind thinks that health insurance has to be a profit base company. After paying all of their expenses and taking the rest of the money and putting it back into the company. And stop paying one person $200 million a year to run the company, we surly be someone to work cheaper,
The CEO of the largest healthcare insurance company, raked off for himself, $600 million in salary, and bonus, in the last three years. How many people could have the best health policy in the country, if the $600 million were divided equally.
What wrong with this. All of the people in the Senate and House are all college educated. Over half are classified as millionaires or close to it. and over 98% and more, are LAWYERS. Do see why we could possibly, being screwed. :rolleyes: :confused: :'( :(
The Troll :confused: :'( :( :no:
Washington (CNN) - Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, a leader of House Democrats opposed to abortion rights, announced Sunday that he had reached a deal with the White House that will allow him to back the health care reform bill.
He also said the deal will give Democratic leaders more than enough votes to pass the bill.
"We're well past" the 216 votes needed for passage, Stupak said. "This bill is going to go through."
President Barack Obama will issue an executive order "after the passage of the health insurance reform law that will reaffirm its consistency with long-standing restrictions on the use of federal funds for abortion," White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer said in a written statement.
"While the legislation as written maintains current law, the executive order provides additional safeguards to ensure that the status quo is upheld and enforced, and that the health care legislation's restrictions against the public funding of abortions cannot be circumvented."
Under the bill now being considered by the House of Representatives, federally-funded abortion coverage for people purchasing insurance through new insurance exchanges would be banned. Exceptions would be made in cases of rape, incest, or danger to the life of the mother.
Individuals receiving federal assistance who want abortion coverage would have to purchase the coverage using private funds.
Anti-abortion rights Democrats successfully defended a "principle that meant more to us than anything, and that's the sanctity of life," Stupak said.
Stupak said he had been reassured that Obama's order will ensure the health care bill complies with the 32-year-old Hyde Amendment, which sharply restricts federal funding for abortion.. . .
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/21/democrats-reach-abortion-deal-on-health-care-bill/?hpt=T1&fbid=qWQuFzQ04-P (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/21/democrats-reach-abortion-deal-on-health-care-bill/?hpt=T1&fbid=qWQuFzQ04-P)
So in other words the government is forced to kneel down before the religious zealots of this country, yet again! This is EXACTLY why I am so against organized religion. They FORCE everyone else to live within their religious beliefs by holding the entire population hostage in order to get their way.
This is a prime example as to why the founding fathers intended on keeping church and state separate. Now the poor will be forced to have children they cannot afford and be forced to remain reliant upon the government tit in order to survive. Its an inescapable cycle with no fuggin way out. I do not want to hear anything about welfare momma's and baby factories. You friggin zealots are nothing more than enablers for them!
HELIJAH, HELIJAH HELIJAH :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: HALEJAH HALEJAH HALJAH :yes: :yes: :yes:HALIJAH HALIJAH HALIJAH :) ;D :biggrin: :biggrin: 8)HALEJAH HALEJAH HALEJAH THE HEALTHCARE BILL PASSED, THE HEALTHCARE BILL PASSED. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
:smitten: :smitten: :smitten: :smitten: :smitten:
THE TROLL :) ;D :biggrin: :yes:
Now let the mourning begin on the Fox News Channel.
Quote from: Locutus on March 21, 2010, 11:09:55 PM
Now let the mourning begin on the Fox News Channel.
Just for fun, I'm flipping back and forth between all of the major news channels to see how they're covering the bill. Huge contrast. :yes:
shame on you democrats that last night refused to stand up and look at the american people and say yeah or nay,you cowards took the easy way out and voted electronically shame shame,thanks to the 34 democrats that saw the bill for what it is.
shame on you shame on you,to the democrats that didnt listen to the american public,again shame on you,the house is the people"s house and it now has been taken away from we the people,it now says obama,pelosi and reid run our country and we the people dont matter,so again SHAME ON YOU!!!!!!
our Govrnt needs to let US make the decisions that best suite OUR needs. I have many of Glenn Beck's books. That man has "real balls" thats why he is on FOX network now. No other media channels wants to air "the truth". I think the people that agree with Obama should move to Russia, where Communism is the "norm", and take him with them!
You've rank wy too much of the kool aid doc. Tell us just why you are/were against the passing of this bill?
I sincerely hope it's you guy's who are saying "I told you so" instead of those of us who were against it from the start. I was against it because of the cost, the "special deals", the union involvement, forcing people to get insurance or fining and jailing them, the extra tax to people who happen to be lucky enough to afford "Cadillac health care",(except for union members). extra taxes on makers of medical equipment, paying for 3yrs before any of this even takes effect, (except for insurance companies not being able to turn you down for pre-existing conditions), cuts to medicare, a shortage of doctors to cover the newly insured, cuts in what the doctors are going to get reimbursed for care, I'm sure I will think of more reasons later.
You lost, doc; get over it.
OH, MY GOD, "Me" you old plumber, get you head out of the comode. 34 million men, women and children are going to be able to get some insurance, just like the Troll and "ME" has through medicare. Flush those old greedy ideas you got down the water closet. We, at our age are going to have to worry about our funerals, be for we have to worry about higher taxes. :angel: :angel: :yes:
The Troll ;) ;D :biggrin:
Quote from: Exterminator on March 22, 2010, 02:11:31 PM
You lost, doc; get over it.
I KNEW!, it was only a mater of time... :razz: :yes:
The taxation for "cadillac coverage" is upon the company not the individuals. . .The increased individual taxes are on those making 250,000 AGI and above; NOT below. Most of you have nothing to worry about surrounding that.
The Feds are going to SUPPLEMENT medicaid payments to the states 100% for the next few years and at 90% after that.
The extra taxation on life science/biometric/medical device manufacturers . . . (Lets watch you guys blame this health care bill when Roche Diagnostics moves out of the country! :rolleyes: HINT: That has been in the works since 2005, and was going to happen either way).
Companies that administer health care will have to hire more people to help with the increase in work / claims, and expand in size - creating jobs. 35 million more people now will be covered.
Nobody's going to jail unless it is company CEO's (large and small) who refuse to provide the mandated coverage for their employees.
No more exclusionary practices claiming "pre-existing conditions" .
Now comes the bevy of sour grape mash that the opponents will be spewing for the next 3 years. . . :rolleyes:
well, the way I see it, we may have very well ruined the greatest healthcare that MOST Americans have enjoyed for decades...and along the way, will more than likely bankrupt America....THIS was NOT the way to fix a problem for the 10's of thousands (the POTUS's figures) that NEEDED assitance....there was many options that was ignored that could have fixed many problems without bankrupting this nation....and if you think this won't...well, Like I have been saying, TIME will TELL the truth...THIS IS going to change our economy, but I fear it will make it much worse....this is the largest entitlement program EVER, during an extremely bad economy...(near 10% unemployed)...
it is nothing more, than a gov take over of the HC Industry...period....this plan calls for the hiring of 17,000 IRS agents to over see this...it will also be similar to the regulating of our utilities...resulting in HIGHER costs to the taxpayer...the tax increases that are needed to make this work, WILL effect the average middleclass American (Mark my words)....
IF, this plan was IS as great as the democrats believe, then WHY did they have to 'force' this by using legislative tricks and bribing such as Nebraska, Louisiana and the Unions...it IS very corrupt the way this was handled and done...there is NO denying this, it is well proved.....also, Abortion was PROMISED by Obama NOT to be implemented into this bill, yet it was until the eleventh hour, and I have doubts that it will NOT be part of our taxpaying dollars before it is all said and done...
again, time will tell us the truth.....if this is a good thing, then I expect good things to ALL Americans very soon....
I for one, believe this is a very sad day in the history of this Country... :no:
there, I have said about all I'm going to say on this....I'm going to watch and observe over the next few months....and see.
Quote from: Palehorse on March 22, 2010, 05:04:10 PM
. . .
Now comes the bevy of sour grape mash that the opponents will be spewing for the next 3 years. . . :rolleyes:
Like I said. . .
Yep. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Palehorse on March 23, 2010, 12:16:01 PM
Like I said. . .
well, it is not like you are the amazing kreskin with that statement......call it what you want, but my statements are shared by millions across this country....and justifiably so.....
again, PH, lets see this amazing changes and hopes that are promised....there are no repubs to blame what-so-ever.......this is ALL Obama now, not even Bush to blame at this point in time.....this is HIS economy now....I would think that YOU would have a few sour grapes with this admin...because jobs are NOT jumping into the boat for millions of Americans right now...and, many economist do not think this is going to stimulate it, as a mater of fact, I think it is going to make jobs even MORE scarce.....
and before you jump on me, I know it may take a little time, but we do not have a lot of time before this economy takes a toll.....
a for what it is worth, I hope things DO get better, because I have too much at stake right now for things to get worse, so I would much rather eat crow than lose my job.
SHAME ON YOU!!!!!! our Govrnt needs to let US make the decisions that best suite OUR needs. I have many of Glenn Beck's books. That man has "real balls" thats why he is on FOX network now.
Doc, Henry and "ME", All of you people who watch Fox News and watch and read Glen Beck. I want you to read the book. It can be found in libraries in book form and sound recording, free to people who are pressured by to many taxes. Or you can purchase it in a book stores.
It is about a Republican man who raised to being the White House counsel to Richard Nixon. A man who followed the Republican Party to the very end and into prison, his name is John Dean. I dare you to get his book, "Broken Government" and read at least the start to the end of the 3rd chapter. If you got the "REAL BALLS" to read this book, I'll watch Glen Beck show one hour for each one of you, who reads it. Eventho I have an allergy problem with chalk dust.
The Troll ;D :wink: :yes:
The facts. (http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-na-healthcare-passage22-2010mar22-html,0,3934537.htmlstory)
Quote from: Henry Hawk on February 12, 2010, 08:26:50 AM
MY children are MY responsibility......they are MINE to raise as "I" see fit.
Henry if you are a Jehovah Wittiness and you won't give your child a blood transfusion and he died. I would like to be on the jury that tries you for murder. I would convict you.
I am glad you are able to take care of them. In the Taliban Teabagger Republican Party world and one of your kid got sick and you weren't there, one of your old Teabagging friend would tell them to get off their sickly ass and get a job. Just like two of your Teabaggers, told an old man with Parkinson disease to get off his ass and get a job. "Get off you ass and get a job. We don't give healthcare over here." I don't know what they meant by "over here".
DAMN, it's so hard to keep a civil tongue, when you talk to Henry.
The Troll. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :razz: :razz: :laugh: :laugh: :yes:
Well, just like a bad penny, this "debate" just doesn't seem to want to die down or go away; and no one is willing to wait and see the results. Now 14 states have filed suit stating that the health care reform bill is unconstitutional.
Given the historical record of the SCOTUS, which this will surely end up before, one is inclined to strongly believe they will dismiss this (these) suits as invalid. Historical decisions by the wise-fools clearly indicate this would be the case, however; given their recent stance in providing constitutional rights to corporations, one can hardly be sure of anything those people will think these days. . .
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
- Preamble to the Constitution of the United States of America
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein
It is called CHANGE people!! Be okay with it. It won't hurt you anymore than the boogie man of insanity that exists now! :rolleyes:
Exactly, I'm feeling like I'm stuck in a bad and on-going episode of "The Trailer Park Chronicles" Disfunctional families? Ha! We are THE are the disfunctional country!
Seriously, it's discouraging that people can't see past petty politics long enough to give something positive a chance and even further get the facts so that they can actually recognize the positive.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on March 24, 2010, 08:31:27 AM
Seriously, it's discouraging that people can't see past petty politics long enough to give something positive a chance and even further get the facts so that they can actually recognize the positive.
and I think it is discouraging that people can't see the potential damage that this so-called positive "change"...on the surface it DOES seem rosey, but LOOK at the cost of this and how exactly is it going to impact the economy....THAT is my concern, first and foremost.....if the economy does not get better and better REAL soon, we are going to have more than a "heathcare" concern....
Pick up a piece of sky and move along, please :rolleyes:
What piece of sky do you want us to pick up. Over Washington, over a landfill, over an oil refinery, over a recycling center, over wild fires. Please pick your piece of sky you want us to look at.
The Troll, :confused: :confused:
I think Sandy is referring to Henry's chicken little routine.
Quote from: Exterminator on March 24, 2010, 10:19:09 AM
I think Sandy is referring to Henry's chicken little routine.
and you see no concern for economic hardship due to this legislation?
Ex is correct :yes:
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on March 24, 2010, 11:36:38 AM
Ex is correct :yes:
and I ask YOU the same question...
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 24, 2010, 11:31:33 AM
and you see no concern for economic hardship due to this legislation?
Now Henry don't you know since that health care bill passed jobs are gonna suddenly open up and health care costs are gonna go down? The economy should start booming any time now. :rolleyes:
Indoor tanning salons will charge customers a 10 percent tax beginning in July in one of the changes Americans will see as a result of the U.S. health-care overhaul signed into law by President Obama...
and so it begins.............not that I give a rats ass about tanning salons, but it IS the start of "controlling" people...next will it will be a ban on milk shakes or french fries?
and THAT my friends is the base to ALL of this...CONTROL!...
but, as I say, TIME will TELL the truth....I'am going to sit back and point them out to you as they happen...cause IT is going to happen...because of irrational, irresponsible citizens allowed this legislation to happen.
and YEAH, I'm mad as hell.... :mad:
Quote from: me on March 24, 2010, 11:43:19 AM
Now Henry don't you know since that health care bill passed jobs are gonna suddenly open up and health care costs are gonna go down? The economy should start booming any time now. :rolleyes:
that's right me!!...but, Sally Mae unfortunatly doesn't get it, because NOW, they are potentialy in a position where they may terminate 2,500 jobs according to the CBO, because of this FINE peice of legislation that NOBODY knew what exactly was in it until is was signed...(those were words used by Nancy herself btw...)
http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi-we-need-to-pass-health-care-bill-to-find-out-whats-in-it/ (http://www.breitbart.tv/nancy-pelosi-we-need-to-pass-health-care-bill-to-find-out-whats-in-it/) :rolleyes:
http://www.emii.com/Articles/2451690/Capital-Markets/Capital-Markets-Articles/Sallie-Mae-May-Lose-2500-Jobs.aspx (http://www.emii.com/Articles/2451690/Capital-Markets/Capital-Markets-Articles/Sallie-Mae-May-Lose-2500-Jobs.aspx)
:yawn:
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on March 24, 2010, 12:11:09 PM
:yawn:
I'm really glad that you find 2500 people being terminated is boring................
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 24, 2010, 12:32:48 PM
I'm really glad that you find 2500 people being terminated is boring................
First of all, no one is being fired as of this moment. In fact, since Sallie Mae is nationwide that 2,500 will be spread nationwide. They will still be servicing student loans, just not originating them. The impact is not understood at this time surrounding SM and we should wait until it is before throwing rocks.
It is going to save the government millions though. . .
And that 10% tax on tanning beds? Well, let's see - they have been shown to exponentially increase the incidence of melanoma (cancer). We tax the living shit out of tobacco, so why not tanning beds?
See, this is what happens once you start a sin tax and begin imposing it. The arguments against smoking and tobacco use, and booze, are the very same thing. . .
Quote from: Palehorse on March 24, 2010, 12:44:07 PM
First of all, no one is being fired as of this moment. In fact, since Sallie Mae is nationwide that 2,500 will be spread nationwide. They will still be servicing student loans, just not originating them. The impact is not understood at this time surrounding SM and we should wait until it is before throwing rocks.
It is going to save the government millions though. . .
And that 10% tax on tanning beds? Well, let's see - they have been shown to exponentially increase the incidence of melanoma (cancer). We tax the living shit out of tobacco, so why not tanning beds?
See, this is what happens once you start a sin tax and begin imposing it. The arguments against smoking and tobacco use, and booze, are the very same thing. . .
How?
Quote from: me on March 24, 2010, 12:55:48 PM
How?
Loan originating services and fees charged by student loan administrators. Those will be eliminated once the government begins originating them. . .(And before you say it, yes; it includes the cost of hiring headcount to fill the new positions. )
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/22/education/22pell.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/22/education/22pell.html)
Quote
WASHINGTON — Along with the major health care legislation, the House on Sunday approved a major revamping of federal student loan programs that eliminates fees paid to private banks to act as intermediaries.
Related
House Approves Health Overhaul, Sending Landmark Bill to Obama (March 22, 2010)
Instead, the government will expand a direct lending program, a step that the Congressional Budget Office said would save taxpayers $61 billion over 10 years, and use the money to increase Pell grants for students.. .
Quote from: Palehorse on March 24, 2010, 12:59:13 PM
Loan originating services and fees charged by student loan administrators. Those will be eliminated once the government begins originating them. . .(And before you say it, yes; it includes the cost of hiring headcount to fill the new positions. )
Ah, more government jobs and less private sector ones in other words.
Quote from: me on March 24, 2010, 01:02:33 PM
Ah, more government jobs and less private sector ones in other words.
Just an expansion of an already existing program. . .
Quote from: me on March 24, 2010, 01:02:33 PM
Ah, more government jobs and less private sector ones in other words.
And one that will save the American taxpayers 61 BILLION dollars over the next 10 years. Now, I thought one of the main gripes you folks had was cutting costs. . . well, they just cut costs by billions. . .
Quote from: Palehorse on March 24, 2010, 01:22:47 PM
And one that will save the American taxpayers 61 BILLION dollars over the next 10 years. Now, I thought one of the main gripes you folks had was cutting costs. . . well, they just cut costs by billions. . .
How is that going to save billions to the taxpayers? If it's a government job then taxes are going to have to pay the employees. Now of course there will have to be more employees to do the same jobs which means more people will be employed which means that will mean more taxes to pay those employees.....hum....guess the government will have to create more jobs working for the government since the private sector won't be able to support the extra taxes.....Yes, I see a pattern here. Since suppliers of medical equipment have no incentive to produce equipment they will move on so the government will have to take that over and, damn imagine that, more government jobs and less private sector......Yes, I see a definite pattern emerging.
Quote from: me on March 24, 2010, 01:43:45 PM
How is that going to save billions to the taxpayers? If it's a government job then taxes are going to have to pay the employees. Now of course there will have to be more employees to do the same jobs which means more people will be employed which means that will mean more taxes to pay those employees.....hum....guess the government will have to create more jobs working for the government since the private sector won't be able to support the extra taxes.....Yes, I see a pattern here. Since suppliers of medical equipment have no incentive to produce equipment they will move on so the government will have to take that over and, damn imagine that, more government jobs and less private sector......Yes, I see a definite pattern emerging.
All the information is at the CBO site. Do your own homework. .
Sheesh. . . there is just no pleasing you guys. More jobs, a huge reduction in costs, and you still bitch and moan. . .
I don't get the tax increase complaint though. Most of it is going to come from those employers who do not provide insurance plans for their employees, and those small business subsidies I would have thought you guys would have been joyous over those. . . But like I said, there's no pleasing you. . . :rolleyes:
Quote from: Palehorse on March 24, 2010, 01:53:09 PM
All the information is at the CBO site. Do your own homework. .
Sheesh. . . there is just no pleasing you guys. More jobs, a huge reduction in costs, and you still bitch and moan. . .
I don't get the tax increase complaint though. Most of it is going to come from those employers who do not provide insurance plans for their employees, and those small business subsidies I would have thought you guys would have been joyous over those. . . But like I said, there's no pleasing you. . . :rolleyes:
Show me where the reduction in cost comes in at by taking private sector jobs and making them government jobs.
Quote from: me on March 24, 2010, 02:07:27 PM
Show me where the reduction in cost comes in at by taking private sector jobs and making them government jobs.
Number one - the jobs we are talking about in this case are private sector jobs administering and originating government funded student loans. This is a case of the private sector taking on the role for profit, IE they originate and administer the student loan program for fees that are paid by the government.
Number two - As with anything else in this world, if you want to have work performed then you have to be willing to pay the price for the services, or if you want to save money do the work yourself. The government has chosen to do the work themselves and save the fees and charges associated with the private sector doing the work. And we are not just talking about Sallie Mae here, but many other companies as well, like Wells Fargo for instance.
If you review the CBO numbers you will see that even when the cost of adding the necessary headcount is added to the process, the taxpayers will save over 61 billion dollars over the next 10 years by doing this.
Until now, the federal government guaranteed the private lenders that made Stafford and PLUS loans that it would repay 97 cents on the dollar for loans that go into default. Now the government will make all the loans, thus taking on the last 3 percent of the risk, and keep the billions of dollars it used to pay to private companies for making the loans. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that's a good deal for taxpayers, with the net gain to the Treasury totaling more than $60 billion over the next 10 years. Private lenders and banks will no longer get paid by the federal government to make the federally subsidized and guaranteed student loans, but they will still be free to raise private capital from investors and make private loans.
No Henry, people losing jobs is not boring, but people going off on doomsday tangents w/out remotely being in command of the facts...is.
. . . AND these new jobs will be filled by??? You guessed it, those displaced by the financial institutions who formerly originated the loans in the first place. . .
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on March 24, 2010, 02:35:30 PM
No Henry, people losing jobs is not boring, but people going off on doomsday tangents w/out remotely being in command of the facts...is.
I just happened to post this on Facebook yesterday. It certainly applies to what you're talking about.
"Ignorance breeds monsters to fill up the vacancies of the soul that are unoccupied by the verities of knowledge." -- Horace Mann
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on March 24, 2010, 02:35:30 PM
No Henry, people losing jobs is not boring, but people going off on doomsday tangents w/out remotely being in command of the facts...is.
excuussssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
(doing my steve martin impersonation)
but it has been the left screaming at the top of their lungs that the healthcare was collapsing IF this didn't pass........and that we was going into a depression IF the stimulus didn't pass.......it was doomsday squared with the dems.....so, don't get on me for pointing out some potential mistakes that may very well effect our economy because we passed a healthcare bill that nobody knew what exactly was in it until AFTER it passed.......
Health bill lawsuits are going nowhere
By Timothy Stoltzfus Jost, Special to CNN
March 24, 2010 6:57 a.m. EDT
Editor's note: Timothy Stoltzfus Jost is a professor of law at the Washington and Lee University. Jost, a Democrat, blogs about legal issues in health reform at http://www.oneillhealthreformblog.org/
(CNN) -- A state attorney general is almost by definition a candidate for higher office. The filing of lawsuits challenging the health reform law by 14 attorneys general -- all but one of them Republican -- may look good for their next campaigns, but these cases are going nowhere legally.
The case filed by Florida and 12 other states challenges obligations allegedly imposed on the states by the statute as well as the individual insurance purchase mandate imposed by the law. The Virginia case challenges only the individual mandate, setting up against it a new Virginia law purporting to nullify it.
One of the states' claims is based on a simple misreading of the health reform law.
The lawsuit claims that it compels the states to enforce the federal law or to operate exchanges that would make health insurance available to consumers. Section 1321 gives states the choice of doing so or not, and if states elect not to do so, the federal government will enforce the law and operate the exchange in the state.
No state has to do anything, except make its choice known to the federal government. Moreover, section 1333 of the act allows states to apply for a waiver to take a completely different approach to covering their residents if they have a better idea.
The complaint also attacks the provisions of the law that provide Medicaid coverage for all Americans whose income is under 133 percent of the poverty level. These Medicaid expansions are not effective until 2014, and the federal government pays the entire cost until 2017, after which the state's share gradually increases to 10 percent by 2020.
It is hard to understand how the states are harmed in any way by the billions of dollars the Medicaid expansions will pour into their states to cover millions of their residents, many of whom would otherwise be treated by providers without compensation. But in any event, states can simply opt out of Medicaid if they choose not to participate.
The Supreme Court has long upheld spending clause programs that require states that accept federal program funds to comply with federal program requirements, and this law simply follows those precedents.
The challenge to the individual insurance mandate is simply not legally credible. First, it is not clear whether the federal courts even have jurisdiction to hear the claim. Under Article III of the Constitution, courts may not decide hypothetical questions but rather only actual cases and controversies. The states are in no way injured by the mandate that individuals purchase health insurance, and thus should not be able to challenge it.
But the mandate is clearly constitutional. The mandate requires people who have household incomes above the tax filing limit ($18,700 for joint filers) and who are not covered by their employer or a public program to buy health insurance.
Those who earn less than 400 percent of the poverty level will get tax credits to help pay for it. People who are subject to the mandate but choose to remain uninsured will have to pay a tax, which will increase with their income up to the cost of a high-deductible insurance policy.
Under the reform legislation, insurers must take all applicants regardless of pre-existing conditions. The insurance market can only function if healthy people buy insurance, helping to share the cost burden with those who get sick. We cannot simply let people wait until they are sick to purchase it.
But more fundamentally, people who can afford insurance and don't buy it are simply being irresponsible. An auto accident or serious disease can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Why should the taxpayers or health care providers have to finance the care of those who refuse to buy insurance?
The Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate commerce among the states.
The Supreme Court has long held that this authority reaches all economic activity. The court has recognized as legitimate exercises of the Commerce Power the authority of Congress to prohibit the growing of a few marijuana plants on a window sill for personal medical use or to outlaw a doctor's performing of a partial-birth abortion.
Choosing whether to buy insurance or impose your health care costs on others is economic activity subject to that authority.
Virginia has passed a law purporting to nullify the federal law. But the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution provides that federal law is the supreme law of the land. Virginia's law is no more enforceable than were its laws attempting to nullify federal desegregation laws in the 1950s.
I am from Virginia. Like most states, we are in terrible shape financially, lacking money for schools, roads or health care. We cannot afford bankrolling frivolous lawsuits.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/03/24/jost.health.bill.challenges/index.html?hpt=T2 (http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/03/24/jost.health.bill.challenges/index.html?hpt=T2)
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 24, 2010, 02:49:27 PM
. . . we passed a healthcare bill that nobody knew what exactly was in it until AFTER it passed.......
"We" didn't pass anything, congress did. And in case you didn't know it, 99% of the bills passed in congress are subject to this very same statement.
The only bills our congress know everything about are the special interest portions they are sponsoring themselves. . .
Quote from: Palehorse on March 24, 2010, 02:54:58 PM
"We" didn't pass anything, congress did. And in case you didn't know it, 99% of the bills passed in congress are subject to this very same statement.
The only bills our congress know everything about are the special interest portions they are sponsoring themselves. . .
Okay let me rephrase, Congress did NOT know what was in it............Nancy Pelosi herself said exactly that!!....until it is passed SHE did not know WHAT was in the Bill..................her quote not mine....I posted a link earlier that proved this.
THAT is what is gripping my ass...the corruption that is so blatantly obvious and the left is saying NOTHING, because it benefits THEM and THEIR causes....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 24, 2010, 03:17:11 PM
Okay let me rephrase, Congress did NOT know what was in it............Nancy Pelosi herself said exactly that!!....until it is passed SHE did not know WHAT was in the Bill..................her quote not mine....I posted a link earlier that proved this.
THAT is what is gripping my ass...the corruption that is so blatantly obvious and the left is saying NOTHING, because it benefits THEM and THEIR causes....
And it is the case with the overwhelming majority of legislation passed through congress. They read the executive summary, if anything, and then listen to what those who fund their re-election stash want done with it. . . Business as usual.
Quote from: Palehorse on March 24, 2010, 01:53:09 PM
Sheesh. . . there is just no pleasing you guys. More jobs, a huge reduction in costs, and you still bitch and moan.
And yet you persist.
Quote from: Exterminator on March 24, 2010, 04:20:46 PM
And yet you persist.
Well, somebody has to. . . Apparently this shit is getting so out of hand that 10 members of congress have had to hire security details for themselves and their families in order to address "incidents of civil disobedience and threats of violence" that have been directed toward them by teabaggers and others. . .
Quote from: Palehorse on March 24, 2010, 04:23:09 PM
Well, somebody has to. . . Apparently this shit is getting so out of hand that 10 members of congress have had to hire security details for themselves and their families in order to address "incidents of civil disobedience and threats of violence" that have been directed toward them by teabaggers and others. . .
SEIU people no doubt. :rolleyes: The "teabaggers" are not the ones doing it. It is the extreme right just like the exteme left is always doing dumb stuff. They can't miss a chance to blame it on the "teabaggers" though.
Health Care Reform: We're Being Fooled Again
By Sheldon Richman
View all 31 articles by Sheldon Richman (http://theunknownzone.us/smf/article.php?author=89)
Published 03/24/10
(http://s7.addthis.com/button0-share.gif) (http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php) (http://theunknownzone.us/smf/img/subscribe.gif) (http://theunknownzone.us/smf/subscribe.php?article=714) Printer-friendly version (http://theunknownzone.us/smf/functions/printfriendly.php?article=714)
The medical system does need reforming -- radical reforming. It's more expensive than it ought to be, and powerful interests prosper at the expense of the rest of us. The status quo has little about it to be admired, and we shouldn't tolerate it.
Thus, the American people should be fed up with Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid for insulting our intelligence with their so-called heath-care reform. It is nothing of the sort. What they call progressive reform is little more than reinforcement of the exploitative system we suffer today.
Whether intentionally or not, Obama & Co. have misdiagnosed the problem with the current system and therefore have issued a toxic prescription as an alleged cure. They essentially say that the problem is too free a market in medical care and insurance; thus for them the solution is a less-free market, that is, more government direction of our health-care-related activities.
Yet if the diagnosis is wrong -- which it is -- the prescription will also be wrong.
Note that the attention of nearly all the "reformers" is on the insurance industry. What ostensibly started out as "health-care reform" quickly became health-insurance regulation. A common theme of all of the leading proposals is that insurance companies have too few restrictions on them. So under Obamacare, government will issue more commands: preexisting conditions must be covered; policy renewal must be guaranteed; premiums may not reflect the health status or sex of policyholders; the difference between premiums charged young and old must be within government specs; lifetime caps on benefits are prohibited, et cetera.
In return for these new federal rules, insurance companies are to have a guaranteed market through a mandate that will require every person to have insurance. So what looks like onerous new regulations on the insurance companies turns out to be a bargain they are happy to accept. Instead of having to innovatively and competitively attract young healthy people to buy their products, the companies will count on the government to compel them to do so. Playing the populist role, Obama & Co. bash the insurance companies, but in fact the "reform" compels everyone to do business with them.
What about this would the insurance companies dislike? Health insurance is not the most profitable business you can be in; the profit margin is 3-4 cents on the dollar. So a guaranteed clientele is an attractive prospect. The people who will be forced to buy policies are the healthy, who will pay premiums and make few claims. The only thing the companies don't like is that that penalty for not complying with the mandate is too small. Many young people may choose to pay the penalty rather than buy the insurance because it will be cheaper. But that presents a problem: when the uninsured get sick and apply for coverage, they won't be turned down because that would be against the law. So look for harsher penalties in the future to prevent this gaming of the system. The insurance companies win again.
What's missed is that the "reformers" leave untouched every aspect of the uncompetitive medical and insurance cartels that exists entirely by virtue of government privilege. Most of this privilege is extended by state governments through monopolistic licensing, but Congress could repeal the prohibition on interstate insurance sales and the tax favoritism for employer-provided medical coverage. The ruling party has refused to consider those sensible moves.
The upshot is that this reform is a fraud. It leaves in place the government-created cartels and throws a few crumbs to people who are struggling -- but mostly by bolstering the insurance monopoly.
Two myths must be shattered. First, the choice is not between this phony reform and the status quo. The "reform" merely puts makeup on the status quo. The free market is the real alternative.
Second, the free market couldn't have created the medical mess because there has been no free market in medicine. For generations government has colluded with the medical profession and the insurance industry to force-feed us the system we have today.
The Who's prayers weren't answered: We are being fooled again.
Quote from: me on March 24, 2010, 04:32:13 PM
SEIU people no doubt. :rolleyes: The "teabaggers" are not the ones doing it. It is the extreme right just like the exteme left is always doing dumb stuff. They can't miss a chance to blame it on the "teabaggers" though.
According to the reports I watched it was indeed teabaggers demonstrating on the eve of the passing of the health care reform package that initiated several of the incidents; which include racial slurs and threats of violence. . . This came from the individuals that were subjected to the treatment in a live statement.
Quote from: Palehorse on March 24, 2010, 04:39:47 PM
According to the reports I watched it was indeed teabaggers demonstrating on the eve of the passing of the health care reform package that initiated several of the incidents; which include racial slurs and threats of violence. . . This came from the individuals that were subjected to the treatment in a live statement.
And they are 100% sure it was a "teabagger" and not just someone who happened to be in the crowd. Strange no film has shown up of those incidents, well, none that I've been able to find. Do you have or have you seen any?
teabaggers maybe, but not the teaparty attendee's....say what you want, but these guys are your everyday, hard working, blue collar workers, businessmen, doctors, lawyers, farmers and military....
there are ALWAY's going to be assholes..........and it would NOT surprise me to find that these guys were planted there by democrat congress, because they are the most corrupt group of individuals that has ever been in washington...and you can take THAT to the bank... :yes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 24, 2010, 04:34:28 PM
Health Care Reform: We're Being Fooled Again
By Sheldon Richman
View all 31 articles by Sheldon Richman (http://theunknownzone.us/smf/article.php?author=89)
Published 03/24/10
(http://s7.addthis.com/button0-share.gif) (http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php) (http://theunknownzone.us/smf/img/subscribe.gif) (http://theunknownzone.us/smf/subscribe.php?article=714) Printer-friendly version (http://theunknownzone.us/smf/functions/printfriendly.php?article=714)
The medical system does need reforming -- radical reforming. It's more expensive than it ought to be, and powerful interests prosper at the expense of the rest of us. The status quo has little about it to be admired, and we shouldn't tolerate it.
Thus, the American people should be fed up with Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid for insulting our intelligence with their so-called heath-care reform. It is nothing of the sort. What they call progressive reform is little more than reinforcement of the exploitative system we suffer today.
Whether intentionally or not, Obama & Co. have misdiagnosed the problem with the current system and therefore have issued a toxic prescription as an alleged cure. They essentially say that the problem is too free a market in medical care and insurance; thus for them the solution is a less-free market, that is, more government direction of our health-care-related activities.
Yet if the diagnosis is wrong -- which it is -- the prescription will also be wrong.
Note that the attention of nearly all the "reformers" is on the insurance industry. What ostensibly started out as "health-care reform" quickly became health-insurance regulation. A common theme of all of the leading proposals is that insurance companies have too few restrictions on them. So under Obamacare, government will issue more commands: preexisting conditions must be covered; policy renewal must be guaranteed; premiums may not reflect the health status or sex of policyholders; the difference between premiums charged young and old must be within government specs; lifetime caps on benefits are prohibited, et cetera.
In return for these new federal rules, insurance companies are to have a guaranteed market through a mandate that will require every person to have insurance. So what looks like onerous new regulations on the insurance companies turns out to be a bargain they are happy to accept. Instead of having to innovatively and competitively attract young healthy people to buy their products, the companies will count on the government to compel them to do so. Playing the populist role, Obama & Co. bash the insurance companies, but in fact the "reform" compels everyone to do business with them.
What about this would the insurance companies dislike? Health insurance is not the most profitable business you can be in; the profit margin is 3-4 cents on the dollar. So a guaranteed clientele is an attractive prospect. The people who will be forced to buy policies are the healthy, who will pay premiums and make few claims. The only thing the companies don't like is that that penalty for not complying with the mandate is too small. Many young people may choose to pay the penalty rather than buy the insurance because it will be cheaper. But that presents a problem: when the uninsured get sick and apply for coverage, they won't be turned down because that would be against the law. So look for harsher penalties in the future to prevent this gaming of the system. The insurance companies win again.
What's missed is that the "reformers" leave untouched every aspect of the uncompetitive medical and insurance cartels that exists entirely by virtue of government privilege. Most of this privilege is extended by state governments through monopolistic licensing, but Congress could repeal the prohibition on interstate insurance sales and the tax favoritism for employer-provided medical coverage. The ruling party has refused to consider those sensible moves.
The upshot is that this reform is a fraud. It leaves in place the government-created cartels and throws a few crumbs to people who are struggling -- but mostly by bolstering the insurance monopoly.
Two myths must be shattered. First, the choice is not between this phony reform and the status quo. The "reform" merely puts makeup on the status quo. The free market is the real alternative.
Second, the free market couldn't have created the medical mess because there has been no free market in medicine. For generations government has colluded with the medical profession and the insurance industry to force-feed us the system we have today.
The Who's prayers weren't answered: We are being fooled again.
Now who is trying to tell the future? Amazingly the bill has only been passed this very week and already this individual calls it a failure. . . No data, no histograms, nothing. Another say it and its so believer. . . :rolleyes:
Quote from: me on March 24, 2010, 04:49:32 PM
And they are 100% sure it was a "teabagger" and not just someone who happened to be in the crowd. Strange no film has shown up of those incidents, well, none that I've been able to find. Do you have or have you seen any?
They were in the massive crowd outside of the capital during the vote; a self described group of teabaggers protesting the passage of the healthcare reform bill. They were chanting the "N" word and using profanity, and screaming threats against those individuals who were making public statements in favor of the bill. (Congressmen/women). Of the 10 threatened 9 were democrats and 1 was republican. (And no I have not seen film or anything other than the live statement speaking to the subject fro 2 members of congress that was carried live on CNN).
The point of this is these actions and statements by the opposition are doing nothing more than inciting people toward civil unrest. They are threatening the lives of congress and their families and we're so okay with that? How long before they threaten one of us or our family? How long before this propaganda effort incites someone to kill or carry out these threats? (As has been shown to happen with the abortion issue).
And why are so many so eager to endorse these actions / statements when part of a larger group, if what they are saying and doing is NOT a part of the intended message of the group? Silence is agreement.
Hoyer Estimates Over 10 Lawmakers Have Been Threatened Since Health Care Vote (VIDEO)
Eric Lach | March 24, 2010, 3:49PM
14
Share
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC)
Read More
Health care, James Clyburn, Sarah Palin, Steny Hoyer
Share
Digg This
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) told reporters he believed over 10 lawmakers have been threatened since they voted for the health care bill on Sunday.
Appearing before reporters alongside House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC), Hoyer expressed concern about the recent spat of incidents targeting lawmakers, and blamed the violent rhetoric surrounding the health care debate for creating a potentially dangerous atmosphere.
"When people start talking in the rhetoric of putting people on firing lines, that if they don't do something they will have physical harm done to them... or they put a target on their faces, with cross-hairs -- that activity aught to be unacceptable in our democracy," Hoyer said, making reference to a Sarah Palin Facebook post that uses cross-hairs to identify members of Congress who voted for health care reform.
Hoyer said "enough" members had complained of incidents to raise concerns, and stated that "Democracy cannot survive unless we have a civil society."
When a reporter asked if Hoyer felt members were really at risk, he responded: "Yes. We've had very serious incidents that have occurred over the last 48-72 hours."
Clyburn, for his part, added: "Many of us have very vivid lessons of history... I think all of us learned some great lessons in the sixties and seventies, and they're lessons none of us want to repeat."
Watch:
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/hoyer-violent-rhetoric-surrounding-health-debate-is-unacceptable.php (http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/hoyer-violent-rhetoric-surrounding-health-debate-is-unacceptable.php)
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer is warning that some of his Democratic colleagues are being threatened with violence when they go back to their districts — and he wants Republicans to stand up and condemn the threats.
The Maryland Democrat said more than 10 House Democrats have reported incidents of threats or other forms of harassment about their support of the highly divisive health insurance overhaul vote. Hoyer emphasized that he didn't have a specific number of threats and that was just an estimate.
TheFederal Bureau of Investigation, Capitol Police and sergeant at arms briefed Democrats behind closed doors today about the incidents of violence — the most high profile of which have been toward Democratic Reps. Thomas Perriello of Virginia, Steve Driehaus of Ohio and Louise Slaughter of New York.
Hoyer hinted that Republicans should do more to condemn these threats of violence.
"I would hope that we would join together jointly and make it very clear that none of us condone this kind of activity," Hoyer told reporters. "And when we see it, we speak out strongly in opposition to it. And I would hope that we would do that going forward."
Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), the majority whip, said Democrats and Republicans should continue to speak out on these threats. "Silence gives consent," Clyburn said.
But Minority Leader John Boehner already has condemned threats of violence — and sought to explain why people are so angry.
"I know many Americans are angry over this health care bill, and that Washington Democrats just aren't listening," Boehner said. "But, as I've said, violence and threats are unacceptable. That's not the American way. We need to take that anger and channel it into positive change. Call your congressman, go out and register people to vote, go volunteer on a political campaign, make your voice heard — but let's do it the right way."
A Republican aide also pointed out that over the years Republican members of Congress received their fair share of death threats during volatile times. Newt Gingrich after the 1994 Republican revolution and the late Henry Hyde during the Clinton impeachment in 1998 both received numerous death threats. And just last month, Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) received death threats after his filibuster of unemployment benefits, according to a report in Roll Call.
Hoyer said steps are being taken to protect members of Congress. Most lawmakers do not have formal security protection, but if any member feels threatened, they will be getting "attention from the proper authorities."
On Wednesday, the FBI began a preliminary investigation into fuel lines cut at the Virginia home of Perriello's brother, whose address was posted online — the poster thought it was the lawmaker's address.
Driehaus said his address was posted Wednesday on a right-leaning blog.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34953.html (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34953.html)
Oh, Henry and "ME", both of you have your hands wrapped around your throats and you're turning red. Now, I wouldn't mine if both of you throttled yourselves. But as the song goes "The Party Is Over." The Healthcare Bill has been passed. 100% by the Democrats. The Republicans walked in Nazi goose stepping, lockstep, 100% against it and they did it because they loved us and they really care.
Now the the Republicans don't want the common people to be able to sue. But "you guys" sue and think your going to repeal this bill. Ha, Ha, Ha. Making everybody buy health insurance and stopping the deadbeats from getting healthcare free, is over.
Anyone who thinks making people buy insurance is unconstitutional is wrong. Making them buy it, is a tax. The government has the right to tax the people who live in this country.
Obama said what he meant and meant what he said, he passed the healthcare bill, 100%
The Troll :) ;) :wink: :biggrin: :laugh: :laugh: Henry, you last piece of information you put out, did it come from the Fox News Network.
Saying: Liars figure and figures lie. I would believe any thing the Republicans say, even if they had their tongue notarizes.
Quote from: Palehorse on March 24, 2010, 05:08:12 PM
Hoyer Estimates Over 10 Lawmakers Have Been Threatened Since Health Care Vote (VIDEO)
Eric Lach | March 24, 2010, 3:49PM
14
Share
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC)
Read More
Health care, James Clyburn, Sarah Palin, Steny Hoyer
Share
Digg This
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) told reporters he believed over 10 lawmakers have been threatened since they voted for the health care bill on Sunday.
Appearing before reporters alongside House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC), Hoyer expressed concern about the recent spat of incidents targeting lawmakers, and blamed the violent rhetoric surrounding the health care debate for creating a potentially dangerous atmosphere.
"When people start talking in the rhetoric of putting people on firing lines, that if they don't do something they will have physical harm done to them... or they put a target on their faces, with cross-hairs -- that activity aught to be unacceptable in our democracy," Hoyer said, making reference to a Sarah Palin Facebook post that uses cross-hairs to identify members of Congress who voted for health care reform.
Hoyer said "enough" members had complained of incidents to raise concerns, and stated that "Democracy cannot survive unless we have a civil society."
When a reporter asked if Hoyer felt members were really at risk, he responded: "Yes. We've had very serious incidents that have occurred over the last 48-72 hours."
Clyburn, for his part, added: "Many of us have very vivid lessons of history... I think all of us learned some great lessons in the sixties and seventies, and they're lessons none of us want to repeat."
Watch:
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/hoyer-violent-rhetoric-surrounding-health-debate-is-unacceptable.php (http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/hoyer-violent-rhetoric-surrounding-health-debate-is-unacceptable.php)
That is soooo funny. Some of the very ones that were causing the unrest in the 60's and 70's are in the White House advising the president and were some of his roll models. Isn't that just too strange?
Democrats express safety concerns after protests
By JIM ABRAMS, AP
1 hour ago
Must Read?Yes 87
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif. acknowledges applause from House member...
Share|
Email Story
Discuss
Print
WASHINGTON — House Democratic leaders on Wednesday said they are concerned about the personal safety of lawmakers because of threats linked to intense opposition to the health care overhaul law.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said the FBI and Capitol Police briefed Democrats on how to handle perceived security threats and that those who feel they are at risk will be "getting attention from the proper authorities."
Hoyer said more than 10 Democratic lawmakers have reported incidents, but he did not whether any are now receiving added security. Normally only those in leadership positions have personal security guards.
Protests swirled around the Capitol during debate on the health care overhaul last weekend. Protesters hurled racial slurs at several black lawmakers and one protester spat at a black lawmaker.
Rep. Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, the Democratic whip and a senior member of the Congressional Black Caucus, said he has vivid memories of history and that the scene on the street Saturday was "very reminiscent of our history."
Bricks were thrown through windows at two Democratic Party offices in western New York, including a district office of Rep. Louise Slaughter, who played a key role in getting the health care bill through the House.
The Tucson, Ariz., congressional office of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was also vandalized a few hours after the House vote.
Hoyer said there were incidents such as people yelling that Democratic lawmakers should be put on firing lines and posters with the faces of lawmakers in the crosshairs of a target.
While not directly criticizing Republicans, Hoyer said that "any show of appreciation for such actions encourages such action."
Several Republicans stood on the second-floor Speaker's Balcony overlooking the West Front of the Capitol cheering on the protesters and waving signs such as "Kill the bill."
Hoyer said Democrats were talking to the Republican leadership and hoped to come up with a united front on the security issue.
House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio said in a statement that while many Americans are angry over passage of the health care bill, "violence and threats are unacceptable.
"That's not the American way," Boehner said. "We need to take that anger and channel it into positive change."
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20100324/US.Health.Overhaul.Threats/ (http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20100324/US.Health.Overhaul.Threats/)
Washington (CNN) - House Democrats are concerned about their security due to increased threats since Sunday's vote to pass the health care bill, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Wednesday.
Hoyer told a news conference that "a significant number, meaning over 10," had reported either threats, vandalism or other incidents.Capitol police officials have briefed House Democrats on reporting suspicious or threatening activity and taking precautions to avoid "subjecting themselves or their families to physical harm," said Hoyer, D-Maryland.
Earlier Wednesday, the Albemarle County Fire Marshal's Office in Virginia confirmed the FBI was investigating a suspicious incident at the home of Virginia Democratic Rep. Tom Perriello's brother, days after the brother's home address was posted online by a Tea Party activist.
An aide to Perriello told CNN that a line to the propane tank on his brother's gas grill had been severed.
"While officials are not willing to characterize the exact nature of the incident because of the ongoing investigation, it did not involve an immediate threat to occupants of the residence," said Lee Catlin, Community Relations Director for the Fire Marshal.
"However officials are taking the incident very seriously and conducting a vigorous investigation."
Catlin said the county joined the investigation late Tuesday after a request from the FBI.
In addition, Democratic offices in at least three states have reported instances of vandalism that party members say possibly were tied to Sunday's historic vote on health care reform.
Democracy "is not about violence," Hoyer said at the news conference joined by House Majority Whip James Clyburn of South Carolina. "It is about making sure everybody in America feels free to express their opinion and to take such actions as they deem to be necessary without subjecting themselves, their families or others to behavior, and frankly criminal behavior in some respect, that undermines democracy and undermines the safety of individuals."
Referring to Clyburn, Hoyer said "both us believe that to remain silent in the face of such activity gives the impression of either condoning or sanctioning such action."
The top Republican in the House, Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio, said Wednesday that opponents of health care reform should protest legally.
" ... Violence and threats are unacceptable," Boehner said. "That's not the American way. We need to take that anger and channel it into positive change. Call your congressman, go out and register people to vote, go volunteer on a political campaign, make your voice heard - but let's do it the right way."
The Tea Party movement that has protested health care reform held demonstrations outside Congress last weekend as the House debated and voted on the health care measure. Three African American House Democrats, including civil rights leader Rep. John Lewis of Georgia, reported protesters shouted
racial slurs at them and spit at one of them, while Rep. Barney Frank, D-Massachusetts, an openly gay House member, had anti-gay slurs yelled at him.
During the demonstration, Republican House members encouraged protesters outside and inside the House gallery. On Tuesday, Hoyer said it was not fitting with regular order in the Capitol for members to cheer on protesters inside the House chamber or to hang signs from windows in the Capitol, or for Republican
members to stand on the balcony just outside the House floor waving signs to protesters below.
"We ought to all be careful as leaders in this country to conduct ourselves in a way that demonstrates to the public how we ought to act," Hoyer said.
An Alabama-based blog, called "Sipsey Street Irregulars," says it has launched a so-called "window war" against Democrats and has kept a tally of the recent incidents of damage, including ones in New York and Kansas.
Blogger Michael B. Vanderboegh of Pinson, Alabama, told CNN on Monday that in a Friday blog, he called for people to break windows at Democratic headquarters at the city and county level. He said he didn't call for the damages to congressional offices because, "I didn't want to be responsible for anybody breaking a federal law."
However, "I can understand how someone can be frustrated enough to throw a brick through a congresswoman's window," Vanderboegh said. He said he feels the health care bill is "unconstitutional and tyrannical."
"My answer is violence, by getting their attention," he said, adding, "If we can get across to the other side, that they are within inches of provoking a civil war in this country, then that's a good thing."
Updated: 5:17 p.m.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/24/house-members-report-increased-threats-since-health-care-vote/?hpt=T1&fbid=qWQuFzQ04-P (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/24/house-members-report-increased-threats-since-health-care-vote/?hpt=T1&fbid=qWQuFzQ04-P)
QuoteDemocracy "is not about violence," Hoyer said at the news conference joined by House Majority Whip James Clyburn of South Carolina. "It is about making sure everybody in America feels free to express their opinion and to take such actions as they deem to be necessary without subjecting themselves, their families or others to behavior, and frankly criminal behavior in some respect, that undermines democracy and undermines the safety of individuals."
[/b] They didn't seem to have a problem with guy's from the SEIU beating the crap out of people or threatening those who didn't want to join unions.
Quote from: me on March 24, 2010, 06:27:35 PM
[/b] They didn't seem to have a problem with guy's from the SEIU beating the crap out of people or threatening those who didn't want to join unions.
You are surprised at union members endorsing and undertaking violence? :rolleyes:
Quote from: Palehorse on March 24, 2010, 06:29:36 PM
You are surprised at union members endorsing and undertaking violence? :rolleyes:
Not really just surprised at what little attention is given news wise when the violence comes from the other side is all. Well, I guess I really can't say I'm surprised at that either.
At any rate it is not the tea party people that are doing this it is the far right idiots which are just as bad as the far left loonies.
Silence is endorsement - they stood amongst them and carried their signs and nobody disagreed with their words of hate and threats of violence. In fact many joined in, so they must have agreed. And they were all teabaggers; many of which were incited to attend said "rally" at the urging of Sara Palin herself. You can read about it on her FB page. . . of which I am sure you are a member/fan. . . :rolleyes:
QuotePlease stay involved throughout the weekend on the Obamacare debate. There will be another very important rally in D.C. at noon on Saturday. If you are anywhere near the Beltway or can travel there this weekend, I urge you to participate. Jon Voight and Rep. Michele Bachmann and many others will be there.
Click here for details. (Michelle Malkin has a link here to grassroots organizers setting up transportation to D.C.). . .
and this reply from a tea bagging person
Quote
Margie Shaw It's high time hardworking people of the USA stand up & riot for justice. Nancy Walker, you haven't seen anything yet. People like you & Obama etc. are the real joke.
And Sara's endorsement of this organization, calling a "code red"
http://www.nrcc.org/CodeRed/main.php (http://www.nrcc.org/CodeRed/main.php)
Naw, they weren't teabaqggers. . . :rolleyes: And there's a reason she called her book "Going Rogue". . . :spooked:
what's peculiar about this to me is that hank et al have always been loud about "not all muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists..."
hmmm... so maybe not all teabaggers are... but all...
Oh my, oh my, I thought I knew what teabagging was. A friend gave me a web site to go to and see teabagging was, it was a Porn site. Wow, if this is what the teabaggers do in private. That might feel real good. But I'll still not join the Teabagger Party. :no: :no: :no:
The Troll ;) :)
Quote from: The Troll on March 24, 2010, 10:45:06 PM
Oh my, oh my, I thought I knew what teabagging was. A friend gave me a web site to go to and see teabagging was, it was a Porn site. Wow, if this is what the teabaggers do in private. That might feel real good. But I'll still not join the Teabagger Party. :no: :no: :no:
The Troll ;) :)
It was never about tea, either way :wink:
An MSNBC interview with a "teabagger".
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xcpb5a_ythe-big-black-liey-author-debates_news
And now one senator has had to shut down his office due to a package being received with white powder in it.
Some of the congressional members have released copies of the voicemail messages and threats they and their families are receiving.
You can deny it being teabag party members, but when the republican leadership actively participates in the inciting these types of reactions from tea baggers, they are encouraging and endorsing said actions.
DOMESTIC TERRORISM is what this is!
Whatever you say. Just go right on and keep slurping the kool aide. Where was all this righteous indignation when all the violence was going on during the Bush administration from the right?
Quote from: me on March 25, 2010, 06:49:45 PM
... violence was going on during the Bush administration from the right?
Source?
shame on you democrats, shame on you shame on you,to the democrats, I have many of Glenn Beck's books. That man has "real balls" thats why he is on FOX network now. No other media channels wants to air "the truth".
DOC, did you see the new topic, "What books have you read?" We're waiting. I hope it is more then Glen Beck, I hope. :rolleyes: :confused: :confused:
The Troll ;) :wink: :smile:
Quote from: LOsborne on March 25, 2010, 07:30:55 PM
Source?
Have you seen anything even close to this about Obama? I don't think so...
http://www.binscorner.com/pages/d/death-threats-against-bush-at-protests-i.html
I've seen just as bad if not worse surrounding the current POTUS, and IIRC there were arrests made in many of those case surrounding the Shrub, and one of them was right here in Indianapolis.
In the present case we are talking about several members of congress; verbal and recorded threats left on their home and office voicemail, offices ransacked, windows broken, firearms discharged into office spaces, letters with white powder delivered to their offices. And all of this incited by opposition Republican members of congress who use phrases like "armed and loaded" and "riot for justice" and "rise up to forcibly remove them" in addressing crowds, or holding dolls/drawings representing certain members of congress and performing the "cut-throat" gesture to crowds from the balcony above them. All actions that could be interpreted as being intended to incite a mob mentality to act on their suggestions of invoking actions of domestic terrorism.
All of this and very little if anything surrounding attempts to publicly make statements that do not support such actions being undertaken by their party members and supporters. It's almost as if they hope to inflame the whole deal to the point where someone grabs a weapon and kills. . .
Do you know what a code red is in military jargon? Sure you do. . . It's fairly common knowledge, yet here we have Sarah Palin endorsing a group calling the weekend of the approval vote a "code red" and encouraging people to show up and "do something" about it.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know what it is they are trying to achieve with this kind of message. . .
Quote from: me on March 25, 2010, 06:49:45 PM
Whatever you say. Just go right on and keep slurping the kool aide. Where was all this righteous indignation when all the violence was going on during the Bush administration from the right?
Not really sure about what you are trying to say, here. But, there were global peace protests regarding the bush admin and their violence from the right (illegal invasion, torture, ect), but Faux News never carried a single minute of one. So, you just never heard about the indignation.
Right Henry, you read every page of the frigging health care bill. :wink: That's Bullshit. You can't stop watching Fox News and reading you bible, where Jesus says, you are to take care of the ill and poor, long enough to read anything else.
Talk about drinking the Kool-Aid. A Republican goes on CNN and says he thought the Party was wrong on the stand they took on Healthcare bill, the dumbasses fired him.
That like NASA fired the engineer who say not to fire off the rocket, because the "O" would let the hot gas out. They fired him and the rocket blew up. Keep it up, Republicans, you can throw your right leg over your right shoulder and you can trow your left leg over your left shoulder and kiss your ass good by in 2010. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :yes:
The Troll :razz: :razz: :razz: :biggrin:
Where?, did I say I read the 'friggen' bill?...........WHERE?
Troll, maybe you need to up you dose of prune juice because you seemed to be getting a little backed up.... :razz:
Henry - I thought you said that too...a while back before all of the most recent changes.
Sooooo you just hate it b/c that's what Faux said all good lil' conservatives are supposed to do. I guess it would be too much to expect you to actually read something before hating it. ;D
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on March 26, 2010, 10:52:37 AM
Henry - I thought you said that too...a while back before all of the most recent changes.
Sooooo you just hate it b/c that's what Faux said all good lil' conservatives are supposed to do. I guess it would be too much to expect you to actually read something before hating it. ;D
tell me who has read it....NOT Pelosi!....or at least she said she did not or would not know what was in it until it passed...........and THAT never really made much news...but I find that OUTRAGEOUS!!!...that the SOH would say or do such a thing...
I hate the corruption of this congress and the arrogance of doing things that MOST Americans clearly are against....
and don't blame fox........you should be blaiming MSNBC, NBC, CNN and such for NOT telling the truths and YOU guys are buying it....acting like spending trillions is a GOOD thing.....
I know Bush and the repubs did their share of spending and contributing to the mess...........but it is now be catapulted into space and so many folks act like this is such a good thing...it amazes me, it really does.....but HATE is to strong a word.
So exactly how is it that you are privy to the "truth" that the rest of us are not? :rolleyes:
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on March 26, 2010, 12:34:19 PM
So exactly how is it that you are privy to the "truth" that the rest of us are not? :rolleyes:
I have asked myself that same question several time about you guys...
:rolleyes:
besides that ... don't you know silly girl..........I'm right and YOU are wrong!!. :yes: ;D
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 26, 2010, 11:23:35 AM
she said she did not or would not know what was in it until it passed...........
:rolleyes:
That little phrase which you guys use over and over just shows your ignorance of the legislative process. Congress takes bills, changes them, amends them, tweaks them right up until they are passed. Therefore NOBODY knows what's in any bill UNTIL IT IS PASSED in its final form.
Henry, I'm sure there must be a diagnosis that fits your symptoms. ;D
Sandy, I don't think there is much hope. I think he has Borderline Personality Disorder.
Most Doctors say that it one of the hardest disorders that a person can have. To help the person, he has to admit that he has a problem, these people think everybody else is crazy. :yes: :yes: Goggle in Personality Disorder. I don't think you find, what is wrong with Henry until he gets help.
Also I want you members to go and get a copy of John Dean's "Broken Government." In it he's says that after 8 years of the Clinton presidencies there were around 1,200 ear marks. After 8 years of the Conservative George W. Bush presidencies there over 15,000 ear marks, costing the American taxpayers, Billions of dollars and old Henry bows and kisses their ring. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :yes:
The Troll
Quote from: Olias on March 26, 2010, 01:21:07 PM
:rolleyes:
That little phrase which you guys use over and over just shows your ignorance of the legislative process. Congress takes bills, changes them, amends them, tweaks them right up until they are passed. Therefore NOBODY knows what's in any bill UNTIL IT IS PASSED in its final form.
yeah, go with that... :rolleyes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on March 26, 2010, 03:30:22 PM
yeah, go with that... :rolleyes:
Translation: Olias is right, you don't have a clue. ;D
You would think at least one of them knew what was in the bill though since one of them had to have, or should have, written the original and introduced it not to mention those who made changed know what changes they made, or should. No one seems to even know what was in the bill as it was introduced though for some reason.
Aren't we really arguing semantics here? I think what the person meant was what is in the proposed bill, not the final bill. Ms. Pelosi was just being snarky, avoiding the question.
Quote from: Anne on March 26, 2010, 11:46:16 PM
Aren't we really arguing semantics here? I think what the person meant was what is in the proposed bill, not the final bill. Ms. Pelosi was just being snarky, avoiding the question.
Which is par for the course for her.
Hey, I like Pelosi. I like good looking, 70 year old women. I like smart women, I don't like dumbass broads. :yes: :yes: :yes: :wink: :smile:
If god (for you Henry) was to make women with "BALLS", she would have a big, big set of "BALLS". Being in congress with all of those fornicating Republicans, she surly has to wear a iron petticoat. :) ;) :smile:
The Troll :laugh: :laugh: :biggrin: :biggrin:
Quote from: The Troll on March 27, 2010, 08:26:16 AM
Hey, I like Pelosi. I like good looking, 70 year old women. I like smart women, I don't like dumbass broads. :yes: :yes: :yes: :wink: :smile:
If god (for you Henry) was to make women with "BALLS", she would have a big, big set of "BALLS". Being in congress with all of those fornicating Republicans, she surly has to wear a iron petticoat. :) ;) :smile:
The Troll :laugh: :laugh: :biggrin: :biggrin:
Some how I really doubt that. She probably isn't John Edwards type and Kennedy's gone now soooo....Heck, who knows maybe it's her and Hillary all the way........ I'm sure Mr. Nancy Pelosi would love that. :icon_twisted:
Quote from: me on March 27, 2010, 09:19:44 AM
Heck, who knows maybe it's her and Hillary all the way........ I'm sure Mr. Nancy Pelosi would love that. :icon_twisted:
"ME", are you a BULL DIKE, maybe you are, after a bad divorce, you seem to know a lot a bout the "GAY" live style. :yes: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
The Troll :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :yes:
Quote from: The Troll on March 27, 2010, 01:41:09 PM
"ME", are you a BULL DIKE, maybe you are, after a bad divorce, you seem to know a lot a bout the "GAY" live style. :yes: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
The Troll :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :yes:
You sure are good at picking things out of thin air I will have to say that. And who said I had a "bad" divorce anyway? I'm not bitter, shit happens and if it had been meant for us to be together we still would be. I'm not the type to whine and cry over spilled milk, that's not productive, you pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and go on with life and make the best of it.
Me, did you try to get into his benefits, his pension, I'LL BET YOU DID and are you gay, like you said Polise was. Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
The Troll :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :biggrin:
Quote from: The Troll on March 27, 2010, 04:09:24 PM
Me, did you try to get into his benefits, his pension, I'LL BET YOU DID and are you gay, like you said Polise was. Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
The Troll :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :biggrin:
That is none of your business, has nothing to do with the topic or my opinion of anything.
Quote from: me on March 27, 2010, 04:15:41 PM
That is none of your business, has nothing to do with the topic or my opinion of anything.
He only asks because he has a little bitty one. A woman can always tell. A man with anything to brag about, doesn't bother.
Quote from: LOsborne on March 27, 2010, 05:16:08 PM
He only asks because he has a little bitty one. A woman can always tell. A man with anything to brag about, doesn't bother.
:biggrin:
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: The Troll will be back to rebutt, these Yacky, Yacky, Yacky Yack women. Little yappy dogs yapping at the big dog's feet, will get you bit. So girlie's get your big girl panties on or get back on the porch. This old ***** whipped man wants to go to bed with the boss. My wife.
The Troll, the guy who knows what side his bread is buttered on. :yes: :yes: :biggrin: :biggrin:
Golly...another one of those nasty rumors that may not have been just a rumor after all.
http://visiontoamerica.org/story/obamas-war-on-americas-seniors.html
Quote from: me on September 15, 2010, 04:39:43 PM
Golly...another one of those nasty rumors that may not have been just a rumor after all.
http://visiontoamerica.org/story/obamas-war-on-americas-seniors.html
:blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: Bullshit :bullshit Bullshit bullshit. Republican Bullshit!
Oh relax. All he has to do is eliminate the fraud in one state (Florida) to bring all the numbers back in line.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/07/13/1729391/mental-health-rehab-services-on.html
Relax, I don't think so with the people he has as advisers.
Quote from: me on September 15, 2010, 08:34:01 PM
Relax, I don't think so with the people he has as advisers.
Health food czar, health-care rationing czar, a homosexual activist, safe schools czar, green jobs czar and on and on he goes making government so big that we'll go broke trying to support it. :mad:
Quote from: LOsborne on September 15, 2010, 06:47:19 PM
Oh relax. All he has to do is eliminate the fraud in one state (Florida) to bring all the numbers back in line.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/07/13/1729391/mental-health-rehab-services-on.html
I wish they would make the crime of Medicare fraud as serious as bank robbery. A Federal crime with 20 year prison sentence with no parole and confiscation of all property. Ouch, I think it would really slow it down.
Quote from: Doc on September 15, 2010, 09:28:13 PM
Health food czar, health-care rationing czar, a homosexual activist, safe schools czar, green jobs czar and on and on he goes making government so big that we'll go broke trying to support it. :mad:
Just where in hell do you get all of czar shit. After 8 years of George W., Prick Cheney who was the president and Carl Rove (Turd Blossom) who did all the dirty work. Obama is pure as the driven snow. Let us :bow: :pray: :pope: and don't forget the holy ghost. :ghost:
Czar - a term utilized by the Tea Party delusional to scare the sheep!
Quote from: Palehorse on September 16, 2010, 11:35:05 AM
Czar - a term utilized by the Tea Party delusional to scare the sheep!
Cut taxes :bliss: Obama was not a citizen :bliss: Too many Czars :bliss: Obama destroying the country :bliss:
Obama taking our freedom :bliss: Democrats never cut taxes :bliss: Stop taxing the rich, let's have the
"Fair Tax :bliss: Bullshit :bliss: Bullshit: :bliss: The cry of the Republican Party. :bliss:
Quote from: Doc on September 15, 2010, 09:28:13 PM
Health food czar, health-care rationing czar, a homosexual activist, safe schools czar, green jobs czar and on and on he goes making government so big that we'll go broke trying to support it. :mad:
Well, dipshit, bush created more czars than anyone. I don't know why you guys have such a hard on for obama. He is just carrying out the work reagan started; continuing the transfer of wealth from the middle class to the ultra rich/corp entities. You should be proud of the work being done. It is no different than shrub, I or II and very much in keeping with the distribution of wealth you fk's so decry (if it were from the rich back to the middle class, which it is not) that reagan started, clinton sustained, and the the shrubs, and now obama, ensure continues.
Wrong thread oops.
Quote from: me on May 15, 2011, 12:20:46 AM
Wrong thread oops.
Off course as usual. Lover Baby :kiss: :love:
Bend over people.
MY healthcare costs are going to go up by 70% next year, thanks to the jackasses who refused to leave the teeth in the healthcare reform act.
Thanks a lot fools. I can only hope that you too will share in this "wondrous thing" your racist initiative has created. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
And if the information I saw this week is correct, most of you are going to be squalling when you see the bullshit your employers are going to be rolling out for 2012 around healthcare.
Seems to me like HH and I tried to say something to that effect and were poo pooed and scoffed at. Seems to me that most of the conservatives who were against this healthcare bill also said insurance rates would go up for those who had insurance too and that's one of the things they were against. The cost for the employer's is going up and that is why yours is going up. Next year your other choice will be to go on government sponsored healthcare.
Quote from: me on September 15, 2011, 08:04:26 AM
Seems to me like HH and I tried to say something to that effect and were poo pooed and scoffed at. Seems to me that most of the conservatives who were against this healthcare bill also said insurance rates would go up for those who had insurance too and that's one of the things they were against. The cost for the employer's is going up and that is why yours is going up. Next year your other choice will be to go on government sponsored healthcare.
Tell me something "ME", just why can't the insurance companies be nonprofit companies. When they work of the profit system every dollar they make in profit is less medical help for their customers. They still can pay good wages to the CEO and the employees. It would just stop the multimillion's in dollars in pay they pay their CEOs now.
And why is it Obama fault for the raising healthcare cost. Why don't you ask the drug companies, Hospital administrators and the doctors why the bills are so high.
It seem to me that you are beating the wrong horse which is like beating a dead horse. :deadhorse:
Quote from: The Troll on September 15, 2011, 10:12:25 AM
Tell me something "ME", just why can't the insurance companies be nonprofit companies.
I work with a few non-profit organizations. It has been my experience that they are inefficient and waste a lot of money.
Quote from: Olias on September 15, 2011, 10:48:16 AM
I work with a few non-profit organizations. It has been my experience that they are inefficient and waste a lot of money.
Please tell how and why they are inefficient since you worked for them while they were wasting a lot of money. :confused:
Quote from: The Troll on September 15, 2011, 11:37:40 AM
Please tell how and why they are inefficient since you worked for them while they were wasting a lot of money. :confused:
I didn't say I worked FOR them. I work WITH them on an IT consultancy basis.
They have no incentive to watch the bottom line. The executive positions are grossly overpaid in the ones that I am familiar with. They depend on contributions and since they are lobbyists, they have PLENTY of money to throw around. They pay an exorbitant amount for rent because they want to be on K street. And they have the most lavish offices you have ever seen.
Quote from: me on September 15, 2011, 08:04:26 AM
Seems to me like HH and I tried to say something to that effect and were poo pooed and scoffed at. Seems to me that most of the conservatives who were against this healthcare bill also said insurance rates would go up for those who had insurance too and that's one of the things they were against. The cost for the employer's is going up and that is why yours is going up. Next year your other choice will be to go on government sponsored healthcare.
This happened because of the removal of the teeth from the original bill, which resulted in an insurance carrier friendly bill that enabled these jackasses instead of regulating them as was intended.
Seems to me if anyone was warning about the resulting increases it was
this poster!
WHO PASSED THE BILL?.............WHO?
:rant:
THEY PASSED A BILL WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING WHAT WAS IN IT!!!........NOW, THAT THEY PASSED IT.........THE SHIT IS ALL SOMEBODY ELSES FAULT BUT THE ASSHOLES WHO PASSED IT!!!! PERIOD THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO SAID THIS WAS BAD WAS THOSE WHO TRIED TO STOP IT.......THIS POTUS IS RESPONSIBLE...NO ONE ELSE..........HE ASKED FOR IT, HE GOT IT....IF THERE WAS SHIT IN IT HE DIDN'T LIKE, HE SHOULD NOT HAVE PASSED IT.............PASSING THE BUCK IS SOMETHING HE IS AN EXPERT AT!!!!
THIS IS THE POOREST LEADERSHIP THIS NATION HAS EVER, EVER HAD........... :rant:
THEY WAS GREAT WITH GIVING A HALF A BILLION TO A SOLAR COMPANY WHO NOW IS BANKRUPT!!!........HE IS SELLING HIS NEW BILL WITH A GREAT DEAL OF SCARE TACTICS........WHINING THAT THERE ARE 153 BRIDGES ON THE VERGE OF COLLAPES IF WE DON'T PASS THIS BILL........IF THEY ARE THIS BAD, WHY DID HE NOT FIX THEM ON HIS LAST TRILLION DOLLAR STIMULUS BILL?.....WHY ARE THEY STILL OPEN IF THEY ARE ON THE VERGE OF COLLAPES?......HE IS SO FULL OF SHIT, YET THE SHEEP KEEP ON FOLLOWING HIM... :rant:
Quote from: Olias on September 15, 2011, 11:50:59 AM
I didn't say I worked FOR them. I work WITH them on an IT consultancy basis.
They have no incentive to watch the bottom line. The executive positions are grossly overpaid in the ones that I am familiar with. They depend on contributions and since they are lobbyists, they have PLENTY of money to throw around. They pay an exorbitant amount for rent because they want to be on K street. And they have the most lavish offices you have ever seen.
What you said sound like the American Heart Fund. My sister worked for them in an Indiana office. She said they had lavish dinners, parties and lavish trips for for only the top officials and paid minimum wage to all of their workers.
Surly there could be regulations on the people and they have to account for their spending. It seem like were there is a lot of money, there are always the crooks taking advantage of everybody. :wink: :smile:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 15, 2011, 01:11:49 PM
WHO PASSED THE BILL?.............WHO?
:rant:
THEY PASSED A BILL WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING WHAT WAS IN IT!!!........NOW, THAT THEY PASSED IT.........THE SHIT IS ALL SOMEBODY ELSES FAULT BUT THE ASSHOLES WHO PASSED IT!!!! PERIOD THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO SAID THIS WAS BAD WAS THOSE WHO TRIED TO STOP IT.......THIS POTUS IS RESPONSIBLE...NO ONE ELSE..........HE ASKED FOR IT, HE GOT IT....IF THERE WAS SHIT IN IT HE DIDN'T LIKE, HE SHOULD NOT HAVE PASSED IT.............PASSING THE BUCK IS SOMETHING HE IS AN EXPERT AT!!!!
THIS IS THE POOREST LEADERSHIP THIS NATION HAS EVER, EVER HAD........... :rant:
THEY WAS GREAT WITH GIVING A HALF A BILLION TO A SOLAR COMPANY WHO NOW IS BANKRUPT!!!........HE IS SELLING HIS NEW BILL WITH A GREAT DEAL OF SCARE TACTICS........WHINING THAT THERE ARE 153 BRIDGES ON THE VERGE OF COLLAPES IF WE DON'T PASS THIS BILL........IF THEY ARE THIS BAD, WHY DID HE NOT FIX THEM ON HIS LAST TRILLION DOLLAR STIMULUS BILL?.....WHY ARE THEY STILL OPEN IF THEY ARE ON THE VERGE OF COLLAPES?......HE IS SO FULL OF SHIT, YET THE SHEEP KEEP ON FOLLOWING HIM... :rant:
All of your miss placed hatred and ill thinking. When are you going to smarten up. :chick: and quit watching Fox News, you sure didn't come up with this crap on your own. You're not that smart. Talk about brain washed. You sure are. :yes: :yes:
When I have some time, I will link to the posts on THIS forum that PROVE that the changes made during the debate of the HCRA led to what everyone who works and is reading this is going to get bitch slapped with.
The original bill had provisions to prevent increases to deductibles and premiums, it prevented companies from applying diagnostic testing toward deductibles, and a lot of other things that did NOT get through the bill as passed by congress. They took the teeth out of it because they are paid by those same companies!
NOW, they are applying everything toward deductibles that are DOUBLE; including prescription drugs!
That is NOT the fault of the POTUS, but of congress!
IIRC, wasn't there a Universal option in the original plan?
Quote from: Y on September 15, 2011, 11:23:42 PM
IIRC, wasn't there a Universal option in the original plan?
Yup, there was. . . funny how all that goes right out the window isn't it?
who passed the bill?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2011, 06:11:15 AM
who passed the bill?
The Democrats passed the bill hoping to make it better at a later time.
But your Ass Hole Tea/Republican Party want to kill it and make it so nobody get health care. Naturally old save the health insurance companies Hawk is crying :cry: the blues. Grow up Hawk. :cry: :cry: :cry:
I still don't see how someone who comes from a blue collar UAW family and a so called Christian can be for the Super Rich and the corporations. :jester: :jester: :knife:
Quote from: The Troll on September 16, 2011, 10:35:14 AM
I still don't see how someone who comes from a blue collar UAW family and a so called Christian can be for the Super Rich and the corporations.
Abject stupidity.
Quote from: The Troll on September 16, 2011, 10:35:14 AM
I still don't see how someone who comes from a blue collar UAW family and a so called Christian can be for the Super Rich and the corporations.
because you are so "blinded" by your life that the UAW "gave" you, you don't know how the rest of the world really feels....I do not feel anybody owes me anything......I am happy with living my life as it is.....
Troll, do you want corporations to go away?.....good luck with your retirment THEN!!.........don't forget, it was a strong corporation that FED you and gave you work ALL of your life. Don't forget it took some "super rich" people to make that corporpation possible.
I seriously do not understand WHY, you HATE those who employ the workers of America?....the UAW did NOT employ ONE damn person....all the did was ruin a good thing for everyone....I know this p!sses you off, but it is a FACT. They (UAW) got TOO greedy!......I am proud of what they once did...and found some common ground between the owners and the workers........but the THUGS took over and here we are now...unemployement near 10%. It is that simple.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2011, 11:15:40 AM
because you are so "blinded" by your life that the UAW "gave" you, you don't know how the rest of the world really feels....I do not feel anybody owes me anything......I am happy with living my life as it is.....
Troll, do you want corporations to go away?.....good luck with your retirment THEN!!.........don't forget, it was a strong corporation that FED you and gave you work ALL of your life. Don't forget it took some "super rich" people to make that corporpation possible.
I seriously do not understand WHY, you HATE those who employ the workers of America?....the UAW did NOT employ ONE damn person....all the did was ruin a good thing for everyone....I know this p!sses you off, but it is a FACT. They (UAW) got TOO greedy!......I am proud of what they once did...and found some common ground between the owners and the workers........but the THUGS took over and here we are now...unemployement near 10%. It is that simple.
Yes the UAW did good for me and your dad. Who paying for his hospital care. Medicare a Democrat plan that you want killed.
You say that you don't want anything from anyone, but Hawk you don't want anyone else to have anything. You think you got yours. Don't count you eggs before they hatch. All that need to happen is if your company goes out of business or bought out by the Chinese. Life can change very quickly.
How would you like to go out in the job market at 51 and try to find a job with your specialize job experience, Good Luck in this Republican depression. What a joker :jester: you are Hawk. :chick: All I have to say to you Hawk is get smart. :doh:
Quote from: The Troll on September 16, 2011, 11:33:27 AM
Yes the UAW did good for me and your dad. Who paying for his hospital care. Medicare a Democrat plan that you want killed.
You say that you don't want anything from anyone, but Hawk you don't want anyone else to have anything. You think you got yours. Don't count you eggs before they hatch. All that need to happen is if your company goes out of business or bought out by the Chinese. Life can change very quickly.
How would you like to go out in the job market at 51 and try to find a job with your specialize job experience, Good Luck in this Republican depression. What a joker :jester: you are Hawk. :chick: All I have to say to you Hawk is get smart. :doh:
so you want the government to mandate nobody buys out my company?........I'm not following you troll. There are always risks....it seems as if YOU think there should be some guarantees with everybody's jobs.......the UAW didn't save peoples jobs......they forced Companies to go to other countries......
Stop and think....IF, the UAW had their way and force, let's say GM to stay here and build cars, parts and everything, at Union wages......how much do you think it would cost to buy a GM car? How many do you think they would sell? How long do you think GM would be profitable and stay in business?.....do you think they could continue to pay top notch Healthcare as you and my Dad have?
There has got to be a happy medium......from what I have read...GM pays about $75 per worker (because of the UAW)............Honda pays about $40 per worker.....I know there are plenty of happy folks working at Honda right now, and there are millions of unemployed that would LOVE to be part of that work force.
talk to me....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2011, 12:05:42 PM
...the UAW didn't save peoples jobs......they forced Companies to go to other countries......
Nope; Wall St. and investors demands for ever higher demand for their investments did and trade agreements like NAFTA of Bush granting permanent favored trade status to China enabled them. Unfortunately for our country and our economy, the people who got put out of work in the process also bought the majority of the products those companies were making so they pretty much shot themselves in the foot.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2011, 11:15:40 AM
Don't forget it took some "super rich" people to make that corporpation possible.
Wrong again. Rich people don't own corporations; people like me who invest do. You sure don't seem to know much about this for someone who's "studied" it...lol...
Quote from: Exterminator on September 16, 2011, 12:12:13 PM
Nope; Wall St. and investors demands for ever higher demand for their investments did and trade agreements like NAFTA of Bush granting permanent favored trade status to China enabled them. Unfortunately for our country and our economy, the people who got put out of work in the process also bought the majority of the products those companies were making so they pretty much shot themselves in the foot.
Hawk, Ex said it all. But right now in this country China is buying small business, empty manufacturing plants and hotels like they are doing right now in Cleveland Ohio and in many other cities. Hell, who knows your business might be next and they believe in low wages. :rotfl: :rotfl: Live it up Hawk while you can. China likes small profitable companies. :wink: :biggrin:
Are your company's electricians non-union, Henry?
For Sale: Chinese Eye Kits
Cheap
Pretty sure they work
Almost guaranteed to make you look Chinese in case of evasion.
Work best on short people.
Quote from: Exterminator on September 16, 2011, 12:15:27 PM
Wrong again. Rich people don't own corporations; people like me who invest do. You sure don't seem to know much about this for someone who's "studied" it...lol...
Rich people invest in stocks.......middle class folks work, pay their bills, raise families, if they have some left over they consevatively put it away.
I am not against those who do sink large portions of their money into Corporations....I am thankful for them........I do not want them punished.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2011, 12:05:42 PM
so you want the government to mandate nobody buys out my company?........I'm not following you troll. There are always risks....it seems as if YOU think there should be some guarantees with everybody's jobs.......the UAW didn't save peoples jobs......they forced Companies to go to other countries......
Stop and think....IF, the UAW had their way and force, let's say GM to stay here and build cars, parts and everything, at Union wages......how much do you think it would cost to buy a GM car? How many do you think they would sell? How long do you think GM would be profitable and stay in business?.....do you think they could continue to pay top notch Healthcare as you and my Dad have?
There has got to be a happy medium......from what I have read...GM pays about $75 per worker (because of the UAW)............Honda pays about $40 per worker.....I know there are plenty of happy folks working at Honda right now, and there are millions of unemployed that would LOVE to be part of that work force.
talk to me....
Troll?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2011, 12:32:15 PM
Rich people invest in stocks.......middle class folks work, pay their bills, raise families, if they have some left over they consevatively put it away.
I am not against those who do sink large portions of their money into Corporations....I am thankful for them........I do not want them punished.
Rich people harbor the majority of their money in safe investments like property and bonds and precious metals. Middle class people, via our 401K's, IRA's, etc., invest in corporations.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2011, 12:33:40 PM
No
Have you told those union electricians, without whom there would be no company, by the way, what scum-sucking bottom-feeders you think they are and how they are responsible for the downfall of our country?
Here is a sample list of employers moving to this very same healthcare model this coming year. If you know anyone working for them, or their subsidiaries then you can expect them to be bitching about this very thing real soon:
Aetna
AT&T
American Express
Bank of America
Boeing
Cummins, Inc
Deere & Co
Eastman Chemical
Gap Inc
General Electric
General Motors
Georgia Pacific
Hess
IBM
International Paper
Johnson Controls
Lockheed Martin
Newell Rubbermaid
Northrup Grumman
Prudential
Raytheon
7-Eleven Inc
S/C. Johnson
Siemans
Starwood Hotels & Resorts
3M
Target
Textron, Inc.
United Technologies Corporation
Wendy's
Whirlpool
Xcel Energy
How well do you think the average workers in these companies are going to be able to absorb 7k+ a year in out of pocket expenses BEFORE their insurance pays a red cent toward their family's healthcare? How well do you think they are going to be able to absorb a 70% increase in medical expenses when they are working for Target or Wendy's?
This shit is DIRECTLY the fault of our useless congressional members! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
And for many of these companies,(bolded), it is the ONLY option being offered - take it or leave it. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
And they took our avatars, too!
Quote from: Exterminator on September 16, 2011, 12:42:37 PM
Have you told those union electricians, without whom there would be no company, by the way, what scum-sucking bottom-feeders you think they are and how they are responsible for the downfall of our country?
No, I have defended the IBEW on several occassions.......I think it is an excellent union. It is the UAW that I find to be corrupt and caused the auto industry to fold here in the USA.
Our electricians are highly trained and we market our company as such....you get what you pay for. They are excellent electricians, and our customers are willing to pay for them.
The UAW on the other hand were over-paid, with many, many un-skilled laborers being compensated way more than they were worth....hence the problem and WHY we could not compete in this industry.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2011, 01:06:28 PM
No, I have defended the IBEW on several occassions.......I think it is an excellent union. It is the UAW that I find to be corrupt and caused the auto industry to fold here in the USA.
Our electricians are highly trained and we market our company as such....you get what you pay for. They are excellent electricians, and our customers are willing to pay for them.
The UAW on the other hand were over-paid, with many, many un-skilled laborers being compensated way more than they were worth....hence the problem and WHY we could not compete in this industry.
Are your electricians IBEW or are they scab. Can you answer that. :confused:
Quote from: The Troll on September 16, 2011, 01:13:42 PM
Are your electricians IBEW or are they scab. Can you answer that. :confused:
They are 100% IBEW
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2011, 01:06:28 PM
The UAW on the other hand were over-paid, with many, many un-skilled laborers being compensated way more than they were worth....hence the problem and WHY we could not compete in this industry.
If you consider most of the workers in an automotive plant unskilled, you clearly have never spent any time in one seeing what goes on. That notwithstanding, we not only competed in that industry, we led the world in it...for decades...with union workers.
I think it's sort of funny how you pick and choose which unions are ok and which aren't.
Quote from: Exterminator on September 16, 2011, 01:29:37 PM
If you consider most of the workers in an automotive plant unskilled, you clearly have never spent any time in one seeing what goes on. That notwithstanding, we not only competed in that industry, we led the world in it...for decades...with union workers.
I think it's sort of funny how you pick and choose which unions are ok and which aren't.
I saw first hand some of the riff raff from GM...and I have first hand witnessed the abuse by union members..... a realitive who took pride and "screwed" the management eveytime he could...he and his union offical buddies laughed and carried on about how they could screw them over.....
with that being said, I know there are some great people, such as troll, my dad and many others.......this is not meant to be an insult upon them.........but, tell me that Hoffa and the teamsters where not crooked. The UAW had many, many workers who got paid immensley to do a job that was WAY over paid...........like I said, they had a great thing going and they blew it....the went to the well too many times and it dried up.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2011, 01:35:42 PM
The UAW had many, many workers who got paid immensley to do a job that was WAY over paid...
Some might say the same thing about electricians...it isn't like what they do is rocket science for what they charge. In fact, I'm no electrician but I have rewired an entire house...I bought a book, read up on it and set to work...it was pretty straightforward. I'll be putting in a couple of outlets this weekend.
Quote...like I said, they had a great thing going and they blew it....the went to the well too many times and it dried up.
I tried to explain to you what happened to the auto industry in this country from a business perspective but you won't listen, insisting instead on blaming the union when it was the industry who did themselves in, not the people who worked for them. If you'd like a poignant case history, learn about how International Harvester screwed themselves in the 80's.
Quote from: Exterminator on September 16, 2011, 12:15:27 PM
Wrong again. Rich people don't own corporations; people like me who invest do. You sure don't seem to know much about this for someone who's "studied" it...lol...
But they started out with an owner who got lucky and was able to get investors to take a chance the business would grow and, of course they incorporated for tax and ins purposes, If the "owner" is lucky he can retain 51% or more of the stock and remain the owner. Investors don't "own" the corporation they just have a piece of it and if they happen to be lucky enough to own a certain % of the stock they have a right to a voice on the BOD's. With an IRA or a 401K a person will never own enough of a certain stock to do that. If the "real" investors quit investing due to being punished with excessive taxes the corporation loses a source of money to expand or, in some cases, stay in business which causes the tiny investors to lose out.
Quote from: Exterminator on September 16, 2011, 01:48:14 PM
Some might say the same thing about electricians...it isn't like what they do is rocket science for what they charge. In fact, I'm no electrician but I have rewired an entire house...I bought a book, read up on it and set to work...it was pretty straightforward. I'll be putting in a couple of outlets this weekend.
I tried to explain to you what happened to the auto industry in this country from a business perspective but you won't listen, insisting instead on blaming the union when it was the industry who did themselves in, not the people who worked for them. If you'd like a poignant case history, learn about how International Harvester screwed themselves in the 80's.
I'm sure you are not ready to dive into High Voltage or transformers....
But, I am going to spend some time sitting with my dad this weekend and I will take you up, and read about Int Harvestor....there may be cases, but to say the UAW did not have ANYTHING to do with there demise is hard for me to accept, when I have seen many reasons why to think likewise.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2011, 03:26:05 PM
I'm sure you are not ready to dive into High Voltage or transformers....
But, I am going to spend some time sitting with my dad this weekend and I will take you up, and read about Int Harvester....there may be cases, but to say the UAW did not have ANYTHING to do with there demise is hard for me to accept, when I have seen many reasons why to think likewise.
Ford at Indianapolis at one time had the biggest bolt making plant under one roof in America. They told us we were not making enough per square foot to keep the bolt makers unless we did some changes. All of the men and the union went for it.
We would put of the big bolt makers so one man could operate two. Not a good idea, but they did it. We in the Rehab rebuilt about eight of the big monsters a added all of the up dates on them. They were like new and better.
After doing all the work Ford wanted us to do. They moved them to Taiwan. We were making one of the larges bolt and Ford in Detroit made us sell to them for $4.00 each. One year later Taiwan was charging FORD $14.00 a bolt and Ford was tell us that we weren't making enough money in the bolt making area.
The engineer that was over it was really mad and while he was talking to a man from Ford World Headquarters said, you didn't know that they inked a contract to move them out two years ago. The bastard lied to us.
Two years after they shut down the bolt making operations they came be to us and ask our engineers how long would take to set up a bolt making operation. The engineers told that as soon as they got the machines back we would put them to work. But we don't have the bolt heat treat furnace any more. They was a OSHA man setting in on the meeting and he said that there would not be any more heat treats in Marion County because there was to much pollution now. No bolt making.
When I was working Ford in Indy we had around 4500 workers. They sold the plant to Visteon to break the union which they didn't get done. Visteon went under and it was bought by some investers and they have gutted most of the machines and over head pipes.
There is around 200 people there now making about $9.00 to $7.75 an hour. They are about to shut the plant down.
From 1957 to 2000 the Ford plant at Indy made all of the steering gears for all of the cars, light truck, and RV gears with around 4500 people, it all gone. :cry: Free Trade? :azz:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2011, 03:26:05 PM
I'm sure you are not ready to dive into High Voltage or transformers....
Neither are apprentice and most journeyman electricians but they have to join the union as well.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on September 16, 2011, 03:26:05 PM
I'm sure you are not ready to dive into High Voltage or transformers....
But, I am going to spend some time sitting with my dad this weekend and I will take you up, and read about Int Harvestor....there may be cases, but to say the UAW did not have ANYTHING to do with there demise is hard for me to accept, when I have seen many reasons why to think likewise.
Why not, if you make sure the power is turned off. I have done a lot of wiring in my 130 house. It wasn't wire for the modern times. When I worked on it, I made sure the power was off with a set of wiggies. :yes: :biggrin:
You know, this whole union debate is of no concern to me surrounding healthcare. Union shops are also adopting the exact same healthcare model I am bitching about right now.
I guess some of you overlooked the fact that General Motors is included in my previously posted list of companies going to this model in 2012.
Quote from: Palehorse on September 20, 2011, 12:07:46 PM
You know, this whole union debate is of no concern to me surrounding healthcare. Union shops are also adopting the exact same healthcare model I am bitching about right now.
I guess some of you overlooked the fact that General Motors is included in my previously posted list of companies going to this model in 2012.
Let's face it, General Motors has gone a lot of stupid things and in some ways it hasn't got better. They still need to clean house and get the dumb ass out. :biggrin: