Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - A health care question...
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedA health care question...
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1112131415 42>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5208 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 23 2010 at 14:45
Originally posted by manofmystery manofmystery wrote:

 
The Democrats have managed to craft this in such a way that the upcoming election will occur after insurance companies will have to begin paying for all "preventative" medicine (colonoscopies, mammograms, etc) that their customers desire but before the resulting massive rate increases will be felt by said customers.  This way they believe they can get by the election by saying, "look at all you are getting already" and then when the rates skyrocket in 2011, if they can retain power, they can say, "hey, look at how greedy these insurance companies are, we might as well just run everything ourselves".  The whole point of this bill is to destroy private insurance so they can get to single-payer and completely control all health related decisions, which would be all decisions made by an individual as it can be easily claimed that eveything you do effects your health.
 
Who is they and what decision do they want to control?
 
To get back to the upcomming election though: The Republicans are going to make gains but it will be interesting to see how large the gains are.  I don't believe the rage over the process used to get this bill through will die down and moreover, I don't think this is the last thing the Democrats will try to jam through using Chicago politics before the upcoming election. 
 
I keep hearing this "dirty politics" thing when in fact both parties have been doing business this way for decades. I'm not saying it's good, but this line of criticism seems a little strange. Especially when the fact that a real vote was forces is getting called "dirty politics." I'm sorry but voting is the way this works folks.
 
To think the American people will be any more receptive to any Cap and Trade or Amnesty bills that will likely be flung upon them would be foolish. 
The true questions next year will be: Do the Republicans have the collective stomach to actually stand up for this nation's founding prinicpals once they are in the majority? And how much will they be able to do anyway with Obama still in office for at least another year?
 
Sadly, I think the behavior of the leadership in Israel and Iran and the response of the combination of a Republican (or near even) Congress with Obama in place will be a huge determining factor for the 2012 election. And I have no idea who that will favor. This is a big deal now, but 2 years is a long time.
 
 
It seems to me that there is still a strong possibility that this bill is stuck down via Judicial Review as it clearly violates the commerce claus of the Constitution.
 
Violating the Constitution didn't stop the Bush administration or many others before them from enacting various policies. I frankly doubt this will happen but we'll see.
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 23 2010 at 18:04
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

[

"Civilization and profit go hand in hand." - Calvin Coolidge



Would you care to develop this empty phrase please? 
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 23 2010 at 21:21
I guess that by itself is really out of context. Its just a line of his that's always stuck out to me. In an age when profits and those who make them are demonized I think its always refreshing to reflect on the importance of profit especially as a means of allocating capital.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 23 2010 at 21:24
Interesting. I'll read it later tonight. Though I'll need de-magnifying glasses (!?) 
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65268 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 23 2010 at 21:34
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

I guess that by itself is really out of context. Its just a line of his that's always stuck out to me. In an age when profits and those who make them are demonized I think its always refreshing to reflect on the importance of profit especially as a means of allocating capital.


good post--  the hard part will be convincing a voting majority that the current disdain for bankers/financiers - or a "tax" increase on those making a certain income - is going to somehow cause start-up investments to go into hibernation (a real recession, not this namby-pamby one).  But presumably people with investment capital want to use it, eventually will want to try new ventures, otherwise the cash sits around waiting for their kids to get their hands on it, or goes for Granny's cancer treatment.  And what a waste that would be. 

Back to Top
Qboyy007 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 21 2009
Location: SoCal
Status: Offline
Points: 186 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 23 2010 at 22:16
Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

Originally posted by manofmystery manofmystery wrote:

 
The Democrats have managed to craft this in such a way that the upcoming election will occur after insurance companies will have to begin paying for all "preventative" medicine (colonoscopies, mammograms, etc) that their customers desire but before the resulting massive rate increases will be felt by said customers.  This way they believe they can get by the election by saying, "look at all you are getting already" and then when the rates skyrocket in 2011, if they can retain power, they can say, "hey, look at how greedy these insurance companies are, we might as well just run everything ourselves".  The whole point of this bill is to destroy private insurance so they can get to single-payer and completely control all health related decisions, which would be all decisions made by an individual as it can be easily claimed that eveything you do effects your health.
 
Who is they and what decision do they want to control?
 
To get back to the upcomming election though: The Republicans are going to make gains but it will be interesting to see how large the gains are.  I don't believe the rage over the process used to get this bill through will die down and moreover, I don't think this is the last thing the Democrats will try to jam through using Chicago politics before the upcoming election. 
 
I keep hearing this "dirty politics" thing when in fact both parties have been doing business this way for decades. I'm not saying it's good, but this line of criticism seems a little strange. Especially when the fact that a real vote was forces is getting called "dirty politics." I'm sorry but voting is the way this works folks.
 
To think the American people will be any more receptive to any Cap and Trade or Amnesty bills that will likely be flung upon them would be foolish. 
The true questions next year will be: Do the Republicans have the collective stomach to actually stand up for this nation's founding prinicpals once they are in the majority? And how much will they be able to do anyway with Obama still in office for at least another year?
 
Sadly, I think the behavior of the leadership in Israel and Iran and the response of the combination of a Republican (or near even) Congress with Obama in place will be a huge determining factor for the 2012 election. And I have no idea who that will favor. This is a big deal now, but 2 years is a long time.
 
 
It seems to me that there is still a strong possibility that this bill is stuck down via Judicial Review as it clearly violates the commerce claus of the Constitution.
 
Violating the Constitution didn't stop the Bush administration or many others before them from enacting various policies. I frankly doubt this will happen but we'll see.

Random Bush hate, I love it when people talk out of their ass. If you want to make bullsh*t excuses at least use something original. 
Back to Top
Easy Money View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10618 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 23 2010 at 23:08
^ there you go, tea bag em.
What's your opinion on all that stupid US census bullsh*t?

Edited by Easy Money - March 23 2010 at 23:12
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2010 at 00:57
Originally posted by Qboyy007 Qboyy007 wrote:


Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

Originally posted by manofmystery manofmystery wrote:

 

The Democrats have managed to craft this in such a way that the upcoming election will occur after insurance companies will have to begin paying for all "preventative" medicine (colonoscopies, mammograms, etc) that their customers desire but before the resulting massive rate increases will be felt by said customers.  This way they believe they can get by the election by saying, "look at all you are getting already" and then when the rates skyrocket in 2011, if they can retain power, they can say, "hey, look at how greedy these insurance companies are, we might as well just run everything ourselves".  The whole point of this bill is to destroy private insurance so they can get to single-payer and completely control all health related decisions, which would be all decisions made by an individual as it can be easily claimed that eveything you do effects your health.

 

Who is they and what decision do they want to control?

 

To get back to the upcomming election though: The Republicans are going to make gains but it will be interesting to see how large the gains are.  I don't believe the rage over the process used to get this bill through will die down and moreover, I don't think this is the last thing the Democrats will try to jam through using Chicago politics before the upcoming election. 

 

I keep hearing this "dirty politics" thing when in fact both parties have been doing business this way for decades. I'm not saying it's good, but this line of criticism seems a little strange. Especially when the fact that a real vote was forces is getting called "dirty politics." I'm sorry but voting is the way this works folks.

 

To think the American people will be any more receptive to any Cap and Trade or Amnesty bills that will likely be flung upon them would be foolish. 

The true questions next year will be: Do the Republicans have the collective stomach to actually stand up for this nation's founding prinicpals once they are in the majority? And how much will they be able to do anyway with Obama still in office for at least another year?

 

Sadly, I think the behavior of the leadership in Israel and Iran and the response of the combination of a Republican (or near even) Congress with Obama in place will be a huge determining factor for the 2012 election. And I have no idea who that will favor. This is a big deal now, but 2 years is a long time.

 

 

It seems to me that there is still a strong possibility that this bill is stuck down via Judicial Review as it clearly violates the commerce claus of the Constitution.

 

Violating the Constitution didn't stop the Bush administration or many others before them from enacting various policies. I frankly doubt this will happen but we'll see.

Random Bush hate, I love it when people talk out of their ass. If you want to make bullsh*t excuses at least use something original. 
And what are you? A random Bush worshipper? Can you at least give any idea or comment more useful than that? Do you have anything to say that is new or at least that you came up with yourself? If you want to make bullsh*t comments, at least, well, Comment
Back to Top
Qboyy007 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 21 2009
Location: SoCal
Status: Offline
Points: 186 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2010 at 01:19
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by Qboyy007 Qboyy007 wrote:


Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

Originally posted by manofmystery manofmystery wrote:

 

The Democrats have managed to craft this in such a way that the upcoming election will occur after insurance companies will have to begin paying for all "preventative" medicine (colonoscopies, mammograms, etc) that their customers desire but before the resulting massive rate increases will be felt by said customers.  This way they believe they can get by the election by saying, "look at all you are getting already" and then when the rates skyrocket in 2011, if they can retain power, they can say, "hey, look at how greedy these insurance companies are, we might as well just run everything ourselves".  The whole point of this bill is to destroy private insurance so they can get to single-payer and completely control all health related decisions, which would be all decisions made by an individual as it can be easily claimed that eveything you do effects your health.

 

Who is they and what decision do they want to control?

 

To get back to the upcomming election though: The Republicans are going to make gains but it will be interesting to see how large the gains are.  I don't believe the rage over the process used to get this bill through will die down and moreover, I don't think this is the last thing the Democrats will try to jam through using Chicago politics before the upcoming election. 

 

I keep hearing this "dirty politics" thing when in fact both parties have been doing business this way for decades. I'm not saying it's good, but this line of criticism seems a little strange. Especially when the fact that a real vote was forces is getting called "dirty politics." I'm sorry but voting is the way this works folks.

 

To think the American people will be any more receptive to any Cap and Trade or Amnesty bills that will likely be flung upon them would be foolish. 

The true questions next year will be: Do the Republicans have the collective stomach to actually stand up for this nation's founding prinicpals once they are in the majority? And how much will they be able to do anyway with Obama still in office for at least another year?

 

Sadly, I think the behavior of the leadership in Israel and Iran and the response of the combination of a Republican (or near even) Congress with Obama in place will be a huge determining factor for the 2012 election. And I have no idea who that will favor. This is a big deal now, but 2 years is a long time.

 

 

It seems to me that there is still a strong possibility that this bill is stuck down via Judicial Review as it clearly violates the commerce claus of the Constitution.

 

Violating the Constitution didn't stop the Bush administration or many others before them from enacting various policies. I frankly doubt this will happen but we'll see.

Random Bush hate, I love it when people talk out of their ass. If you want to make bullsh*t excuses at least use something original. 
And what are you? A random Bush worshipper? Can you at least give any idea or comment more useful than that? Do you have anything to say that is new or at least that you came up with yourself? If you want to make bullsh*t comments, at least, well, Comment

I disagree with you therefore I must LOVE BUSH. You're smart. 
Back to Top
harmonium.ro View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 18 2008
Location: Anna Calvi
Status: Offline
Points: 22989 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2010 at 05:08
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

[

"Civilization and profit go hand in hand." - Calvin Coolidge



Would you care to develop this empty phrase please? 



I think it's pretty self explanatory. And it's true, but only up to a point. It can't be taken as an universal rule, especially when "civilization" refers to health. Check this TED conference for a more nuanced view of the relation between income and health status: http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/620
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2010 at 07:04

Republican Trials

How ironic that GOP state leaders are vowing to challenge the Affordable Health Care for America Act in court. For a party that’s always lambasting trial attorneys and activist judges, Republicans sure are litigious:

Republican Trials (Limerick)
By Madeleine Begun Kane

Republicans constantly boo
Trial lawyers. They do it on cue.
For a party that feels
Such attorneys are heels,
The GOP sure likes to sue.
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2010 at 07:58
Originally posted by harmonium.ro harmonium.ro wrote:

Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

[

"Civilization and profit go hand in hand." - Calvin Coolidge



Would you care to develop this empty phrase please? 



I think it's pretty self explanatory. And it's true, but only up to a point. It can't be taken as an universal rule, especially when "civilization" refers to health. Check this TED conference for a more nuanced view of the relation between income and health status: http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/620


I must reply to what Pat's quote implies to me. Most advances in civilization can be chalked up to competition and innovation from that. But some things that are necessary for a society to be healthy and advance are not good ways of making a profit. Health care seems to be at that point now, no that it ever wasn't. It's intuitive that a person's health not be bargained for in order to skim the most cash off their misfortune.
My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!
Back to Top
Padraic View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2010 at 08:51
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Republican Trials

How ironic that GOP state leaders are vowing to challenge the Affordable Health Care for America Act in court. For a party that’s always lambasting trial attorneys and activist judges, Republicans sure are litigious:



Yeah, this is a big waste of time - these suits will go nowhere.  The Supreme Court will never overturn this legislation.
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2010 at 09:51
Originally posted by Padraic Padraic wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Republican Trials

How ironic that GOP state leaders are vowing to challenge the Affordable Health Care for America Act in court. For a party that’s always lambasting trial attorneys and activist judges, Republicans sure are litigious:



Yeah, this is a big waste of time - these suits will go nowhere.  The Supreme Court will never overturn this legislation.

I predict these suits will make it to the court, be accepted for review, and upheld.
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
Back to Top
Easy Money View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10618 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2010 at 11:33
Originally posted by Qboyy007 Qboyy007 wrote:



Random Bush hate, I love it when people talk out of their ass. If you want to make bullsh*t excuses at least use something original. 
[/QUOTE] - Qboy007 - (2010)

The eloquence of Rush combined with the social graces of Glen Beck, you should be one of those guys who makes his living doing the thinking and talking (lots and lots of talking) for those who can't investigate for themselves or think on their own. I hear there's lots of money in it.

Edited by Easy Money - March 24 2010 at 11:34
Back to Top
Finnforest View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 03 2007
Location: The Heartland
Status: Offline
Points: 16913 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2010 at 11:54
@ John: He's guilty only of speaking harsh as a rightie.  Were he one of the lefties around here who say harsh/edgey/insulting things just as often, nary an eyebrow would be raised by anyone.  I've been watching this phenom for some time now and I should have been documenting.....Some members can be very rude and get away with it.  Others, typically younger and conservative, get called on decorum if they say things of equal edginess.

True, some of the older members are a bit more eloquent in their insults, some are not, but the trend is still there.   And I'm not talking about Admin moderation activity here, but about member to member behaviour.  The way you can act is sometimes about who you are and what you believe. 

You have a nice little slam yourself there John, a generalization that anyone who watches Fox programming can't "investigate or think on their own."   Convenient, but of course, wildly overstated.  


Back to Top
Easy Money View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10618 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2010 at 12:00
Originally posted by Finnforest Finnforest wrote:

@ John: He's guilty only of speaking harsh as a rightie.  Were he one of the lefties around here who say harsh/edgey/insulting things just as often, nary an eyebrow would be raised by anyone.  I've been watching this phenom for some time now and I should have been documenting.....Some members can be very rude and get away with it.  Others, typically younger and conservative, get called on decorum if they say things of equal edginess. True, some of the older members are a bit more eloquent in their insults, some are not, but the trend is still there.   And I'm not talking about Admin moderation activity here, but about member to member behaviour.  The way you can act is sometimes about who you are and what you believe.  You have a nice little slam yourself there John, a generalization that anyone who watches Fox programming can't "investigate or think on their own."   Convenient, but of course, wildly overstated.  



I tend not to split things into leftie/righty, I think for myself and can pull good points from either side. All the same, can you give me an example of anyone else in this thread who has spoken this way.
Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5208 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2010 at 12:16

I get extremely angry with people rendering opinions about healthcare when they just don't understand the issues at all. Trying to patient with people yelling and screaming that the sky is orange when its blue is difficult.

Here is a fact:

Every proposed system of paying for health care involves pooling citizens money and then giving it out to those who need health care.

Here is an opinion:

This is at some level socialism no matter who the person managing the pool of money is.

 

We are arguing about a number of things:

1. Who will manage the pool of money

2. What rules will be placed on that management

3. Who qualifies to get the money for health care and when

 

Right now, the federal government manages the pool for some citizens, state governments manage the pool for some citizens, private organizations manage the pool for some, and some have no legitimized access to a pool but pull on a de facto pool when they receive free care at ERs and during hospitalizations because EMTALA requires that at least life-saving care is required.

My opinions:

1. Saying that increasing the proportion to which the federal government is managing the pool is the end of American freedom or is the equivalent to become the USSR or that it's totalitarianism is just crazy. Saying that you'd rather the balance move in another direction is a legitimate, debatable point.

2. Pretending that the free market will fix this problem is naive. Pretending the government will fix the problem may be just as naive, but we'll see soon I guess.
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
Finnforest View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 03 2007
Location: The Heartland
Status: Offline
Points: 16913 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2010 at 12:53
Originally posted by Easy Money Easy Money wrote:

Originally posted by Finnforest Finnforest wrote:

@ John: He's guilty only of speaking harsh as a rightie.  Were he one of the lefties around here who say harsh/edgey/insulting things just as often, nary an eyebrow would be raised by anyone.  I've been watching this phenom for some time now and I should have been documenting.....Some members can be very rude and get away with it.  Others, typically younger and conservative, get called on decorum if they say things of equal edginess. True, some of the older members are a bit more eloquent in their insults, some are not, but the trend is still there.   And I'm not talking about Admin moderation activity here, but about member to member behaviour.  The way you can act is sometimes about who you are and what you believe.  You have a nice little slam yourself there John, a generalization that anyone who watches Fox programming can't "investigate or think on their own."   Convenient, but of course, wildly overstated.  



I tend not to split things into leftie/righty, I think for myself and can pull good points from either side. All the same, can you give me an example of anyone else in this thread who has spoken this way.



Yes.  I already have in this thread, but this occurs in many threads.  I'm not going to further call out individuals publicly.   As I said, were I documenting over the last many months, I could give you *many* examples.  But that's not the point.  The point is that members should be aware of how they speak to each other-that's what I'm trying to get across.  Because I've been consciously watching this, I've noticed this phenom of some folks being treated differently for essentially similar behavior.  Some members speak quite insultingly, but more carefully and from a certain perspective, and they are fine.  Other guys who are from another perspective perhaps say some things and get complaints lodged against them, or called horrible, evil, ignorant, and unbelievably to me....less than human, poor excuse for human.  All of these things and plenty more have been said right here on good ole PA about certain members.  And I know some of these guys and they are not horrible people.  So I'm getting increasingly tired of this trend. 

It gets off topic so I'll shut down this line of thought for good with this post.  If you have more questions John (or any Admin) and really want my opinion, you are more than welcome to PM me.  But I believe you guys know what I'm talking about.  It's not very complicated. 
Back to Top
Easy Money View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10618 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2010 at 13:11
I thought his behavior was far more rude and uncivil than anyone else and I was using sarcasm to point that out. Likewise the famous people I compared him to, regardless of what their opinions are, are likewise likely to be uncivil and they set a bad example for what positive discourse in this country should be, hence the name dropping.

Edited by Easy Money - March 24 2010 at 13:14
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1112131415 42>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.242 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.