Right-Wing Says You'll Die If Health Care Passes

[Facetious]

^ Friday - Have you ever paid one single insurance premium of any kind in your life ? :nono:
It's always nice when somebody else is footin' the bill.

No it isn't ! I pay my fares and I wouldn't have it any other way

:thumbsup:

The profit motive....that's my biggest gripe with the current system (but most certainly not the only one).

"Profit motive" ? I have a profit motive in mind when I go to the office. Is that such a bad thing ? I'm only trying to make an income so that I can help subsidize those individuals; the elderly, the disabled as well as the able bodied - moochin'- lazy - lacky - unemployed by choice flakes who benefit from my income tax payments. I don't make a killing in profit, and I'm not the type whose looking to make a killin', but I'm proud of what I do and there's some nice benefits being self employed.

Now, I was just curious about the percentage of profit that these insurance companies actually make ? and what percentage of profit would you consider to be fair ? All I know is, if there are 10 different companies providing the same quality service, I'm gonna take the cheaper bids. The same logic can be applied to health insurance companies - If we find that one or more of these 10 insurance companies are charging higher rates simply to earn more than their competitors, screw 'em, I'll take my business elsewhere and I'm certain that everybody else would follow along and
the greedy bast#@$s will have no other choice but to lower their costs in order to be competitive.

Now, onto the auto insurance rates -
Why isn't anybody bitching about those rate increases as of late ?
Why would auto insurance rates increase well beyond the rate of inflation for drivers with perfect records ? (me :o)
I've been informed that our insurance rates have skyrocketed because the majority of the third world immigrants coming into this country, most being illegal in status incidentally, generally do not have any assets to secure, therefore, who needs auto insurance right ?

Whenever an illegal alien is involved in and auto accident, their first course of action is to flee the scene i.e. hit and run scum of the earth ! Having said that, we now arrive at this question - Who pays the damages caused by these wholly uninsured 20 - 40 million illegal aliens ? The answer should be obvious, we do through increased ins. rates. Health care costs including insurance, as well as auto insurance rates, not to mention several other insurance sector(s) rates have increased NOT because of greedy self interest doctors or insurance companies necessarily, they have increased because they're attempting to pay down the costs associated with illegal aliens namely, their lacking in insurance coverage.

So why aren't the politiconartists within the ranks of the "d" and / or "r" parties raising hell about this injustice ? Answer :They fear that they will ostracize a potential future voting constituency. i.e. they're essentially pandering.

Do stay tuned for obama's amnesty proposition to make the floor very soon.

 

[titsrock]

Yes you are The other 6,000+ programs are a waste of taxpayer money. And I do agree with your assessment of DHS, it was an over-reaction after 9/11.

Well it's good that you atleast admit there are useful things which the Gov't provides. Now, all that seems to matter is which programs to cut out of your 6,000. I can work with you on that.

As for the Dems "ramming" this through, even if they get it done it will be political suicide. Most people are against it and will be utterly pissed if their elected officials go against their will.

:nono: You are using faulty, selective memory. The Dems were elected in 2006 to stop GOP corruption (which they did by default of being elected basically) AND bringing an END TO THE WAR IN IRAQ, which they did not accomplish because Dubya would've vetoed them. The Dems didn't have the "guts" to stop funding the troops and should've dismissed Dubya's war funding requests, which they did not do. However, with the plunging of events under Dubya's watch from 2006-2008, the Dems were able to widen their majories in Congress mostly due to Dubya and GOP fuckups.

Obama WAS elected to "CHANGE" healthcare, *fix* the economy, and end the war in Iraq (within 18 months). So, however he wants to go about these things, the Majority of Americans want them done and want him to do it. The Majority of Americans will hold him accountable for "the big picture" NOT over Republican "scare tactics." The GOP have no credibility leg to stand on and are merely the part of obstruction and opposition now. The Dems, sadly, don't appear to "see that" yet.

I am here to inform YOU and all the other "reformed fiscal Conservatives" that the Dubya Tax Cuts of 2001 and 2003 are going to be "sunsetted" by Obama and the Dems. You can try to hold more townhalls and go back on Fox News and "CRY OUTRAGE" over "the biggist tax increase in the history of America" but that should be muted and more intellectual dishonesty from the GOP IF the DEMS can actually "address the lies headon" this time, rather than let Joe the Plumber, Sarah Palin, and Newt Gingrich, and Rush Limbaugh get the SCREAM MACHINE going...

As for alternatives, Tort Reform would only be a start. We KNOW that will have a modest impact in the positive column as far as health costs. I just don't understand why they want to completely overhaul the system instead of trying some proven reforms first. Putting the Federal government in charge of ANYTHING should ALWAYS be a last resort...

"Tort reform" seems like a very vague concept to me. Can you provide specific examples?

 

[Friday on my mind]

^ Friday - Have you ever paid one single insurance premium of any kind in your life ? :nono:
It's always nice when somebody else is footin' the bill.

No it isn't ! I pay my fares and I wouldn't have it any other way

You just don't get it,were all paying now.No such thing as free health care it's just how the money is spent,how much is spent and by who is the issue. I have paid plenty and its not about somebody else footing any bills.It's about how much those bills are and what we get for what we pay.Bang for the buck.We spend double per capita but that money is not spent as well as it should be,if it was there would only be the problem of costs which would still be a problem right?

The current system in the US compared to others while maybe superior in some ways falls far short on the bang for the buck category.We can't afford the luxury of a health care system that wastes so much money anymore.

Wait 10-15 years and see what health care is sucking up and costing when boomers hit retirement.Then the most cost effeicent single payer plan with cost controls will cost a bunch but if we have basically same system as we have now it will be astronomical. I fully expect nothing significant is going to change at this point in time.Our political system is obviously incapable and broken.Things will only change when a crisis is undeniable.

 

[Baill Inneraora]

This kinda explains it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jng4TnKqy6A&feature=player_embedded

 

[Friday on my mind]

This kinda explains it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jng4TnKqy6A&feature=player_embedded

Its a very complex subject but the parts he talks about I of course think he is dead on about.

Was watching a relatively civil town hall last night and they talked about how insurance companies look to deny treatments as he mentioned to maximize profits or rationing for profits is another to put that.One of the other issues that is really important that they mentioned was that even though roughly 10 insurance companies provide 90% of all the insurance in the US none of them on their own is big and powerfull enough to negotiate effectively with providers (doctors,hospitals) to force costs down.Thats what the countries with single payer systems can do to control costs since they have huge pool they represent.Right now providers and insurance companies just have a cash cow they are milking.

 

[georges]

none likes paying for social security and free healthcare leechers

 

[titsrock]

Here's another country with a far superior healthcare system than the U.S. HINT: They're really close to us:nanner:

Mexico's health care lures Americans
By Chris Hawley, USA TODAY
MEXICO CITY — It sounds almost too good to be true: a health care plan with no limits, no deductibles, free medicines, tests, X-rays, eyeglasses, even dental work — all for a flat fee of $250 or less a year.
:nanner:
To get it, you just have to move to Mexico.:eek:

As the United States debates an overhaul of its health care system, thousands of American retirees in Mexico have quietly found a solution of their own, signing up for the health care plan run by the Mexican Social Security Institute.

The system has flaws, the facilities aren't cutting-edge, and the deal may not last long because the Mexican government said in a recent report that it is "notorious" for losing money. But for now, retirees say they're getting a bargain.

"It was one of the primary reasons I moved here," said Judy Harvey of Prescott Valley, who now lives in Alamos, Sonora. "I couldn't afford health care in the United States. … To me, this is the best system that there is."

It's unclear how many Americans use IMSS, but with between 40,000 and 80,000 U.S. retirees living in Mexico, the number probably runs "well into the thousands," said David Warner, a public policy professor at the University of Texas.

"They take very good care of us," said Jessica Moyal, 59, of Hollywood, Fla., who now lives in San Miguel de Allende, Mexico, a popular retirement enclave for Americans.

The IMSS plan is primarily designed to support Mexican taxpayers who have been paying into the system for decades, and officials say they don't want to be overrun by bargain-hunting foreigners.

"If they started flooding down here for this, it wouldn't be sustainable," said Javier Lopez Ortiz, IMSS director in San Miguel de Allende.

Pre-existing conditions aren't covered for the first two years, and some newer medicines and implants are not free. IMSS hospitals don't have frills such as televisions or in-room phones, and they often require patients to bring family members to help with bathing and other non-medical tasks. Most doctors and nurses speak only Spanish, and Mexico's overloaded court system doesn't provide much recourse if something goes wrong.

But the medical care doesn't cost a dime after paying the annual fee, and it is usually good, retirees and health experts say. Warner said most American retirees enroll in IMSS as a form of cheap insurance against medical emergencies, while using private doctors or traveling back to the USA for less urgent care. Medicare, the U.S. insurance plan for retirees, cannot be used outside the United States.

Program prompts relocation

The program has helped people such as Ron and Jemmy Miller of Shawano, Wis. They decided to retire early, but knew affording health care was going to be a problem.

Ron was a self-employed contractor, and Jemmy was a loan officer at a bank. At ages 61 and 52, respectively, they were too young to qualify for Medicare, but too old to risk not having health insurance.

"We knew that we couldn't retire without Medicare," Jemmy Miller said. "We're pretty much in Mexico now because we can't afford health care in the States."

For the rest of the article, click here


Without a healthcare system setup like this one, with costs in this ballpark, there will be MANY AMERICANS migrating out of the U.S. to Latin American countries....this article is more like a social "foreshadow".....

 

[Friday on my mind]

Here's another country with a far superior healthcare system than the U.S. HINT: They're really close to us:nanner:

Mexico's health care lures Americans
By Chris Hawley, USA TODAY
MEXICO CITY — It sounds almost too good to be true: a health care plan with no limits, no deductibles, free medicines, tests, X-rays, eyeglasses, even dental work — all for a flat fee of $250 or less a year.
:nanner:
To get it, you just have to move to Mexico.:eek:

As the United States debates an overhaul of its health care system, thousands of American retirees in Mexico have quietly found a solution of their own, signing up for the health care plan run by the Mexican Social Security Institute.

The system has flaws, the facilities aren't cutting-edge, and the deal may not last long because the Mexican government said in a recent report that it is "notorious" for losing money. But for now, retirees say they're getting a bargain.

"It was one of the primary reasons I moved here," said Judy Harvey of Prescott Valley, who now lives in Alamos, Sonora. "I couldn't afford health care in the United States. … To me, this is the best system that there is."

It's unclear how many Americans use IMSS, but with between 40,000 and 80,000 U.S. retirees living in Mexico, the number probably runs "well into the thousands," said David Warner, a public policy professor at the University of Texas.

"They take very good care of us," said Jessica Moyal, 59, of Hollywood, Fla., who now lives in San Miguel de Allende, Mexico, a popular retirement enclave for Americans.

The IMSS plan is primarily designed to support Mexican taxpayers who have been paying into the system for decades, and officials say they don't want to be overrun by bargain-hunting foreigners.

"If they started flooding down here for this, it wouldn't be sustainable," said Javier Lopez Ortiz, IMSS director in San Miguel de Allende.

Pre-existing conditions aren't covered for the first two years, and some newer medicines and implants are not free. IMSS hospitals don't have frills such as televisions or in-room phones, and they often require patients to bring family members to help with bathing and other non-medical tasks. Most doctors and nurses speak only Spanish, and Mexico's overloaded court system doesn't provide much recourse if something goes wrong.

But the medical care doesn't cost a dime after paying the annual fee, and it is usually good, retirees and health experts say. Warner said most American retirees enroll in IMSS as a form of cheap insurance against medical emergencies, while using private doctors or traveling back to the USA for less urgent care. Medicare, the U.S. insurance plan for retirees, cannot be used outside the United States.

Program prompts relocation

The program has helped people such as Ron and Jemmy Miller of Shawano, Wis. They decided to retire early, but knew affording health care was going to be a problem.

Ron was a self-employed contractor, and Jemmy was a loan officer at a bank. At ages 61 and 52, respectively, they were too young to qualify for Medicare, but too old to risk not having health insurance.

"We knew that we couldn't retire without Medicare," Jemmy Miller said. "We're pretty much in Mexico now because we can't afford health care in the States."

For the rest of the article, click here


Without a healthcare system setup like this one, with costs in this ballpark, there will be MANY AMERICANS migrating out of the U.S. to Latin American countries....this article is more like a social "foreshadow".....

They can't afford to cover those freeloading americans,they need a wall lol.

 

[titsrock]

Here's an idea that the Democrats need to grasp...A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE TO PASS HEALTHCARE REFORM.:bowdown:

The headline for this article is amusing...straight from the GOP FEAR the masses playbook...


GOP warns of 'explosion' if Dems use reconciliation to force health reform
By Walter Alarkon - 09/06/09 10:02 AM ET

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) said Sunday that any Democratic attempt to push healthcare reform legislation through the Senate with a simple majority would be mean that Democrats were "thumbing their nose at the American people."

"It would be the same thing as going to war without asking for permission," said Alexander, the third-ranking Senate Republican, echoing critiques once made by Democrats of President George W. Bush's push for the invasion in Iraq. Senior Democrats once slammed Bush for sending U.S. troops to Iraq without broad international support and with only the authorization to use force instead of a more specific vote on the war.

For the rest...clickHere

 

[CunningStunts]

Here's an idea that the Democrats need to grasp...A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE TO PASS HEALTHCARE REFORM.:bowdown:

The headline for this article is amusing...straight from the GOP FEAR the masses playbook...


GOP warns of 'explosion' if Dems use reconciliation to force health reform
By Walter Alarkon - 09/06/09 10:02 AM ET

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) said Sunday that any Democratic attempt to push healthcare reform legislation through the Senate with a simple majority would be mean that Democrats were "thumbing their nose at the American people."

"It would be the same thing as going to war without asking for permission," said Alexander, the third-ranking Senate Republican, echoing critiques once made by Democrats of President George W. Bush's push for the invasion in Iraq. Senior Democrats once slammed Bush for sending U.S. troops to Iraq without broad international support and with only the authorization to use force instead of a more specific vote on the war.

For the rest...clickHere

Actually, I think they are right on this one... that rule has only been used for budgetary legislation. The majority of Americans are against "public" health care, and if the Dems use reconciliation to ram a bill with a public option in it down America's throat, it will be suicide politically...

 

[titsrock]

Actually, I think they are right on this one... that rule has only been used for budgetary legislation. The majority of Americans are against "public" health care, and if the Dems use reconciliation to ram a bill with a public option in it down America's throat, it will be suicide politically...

Let me quote the great Howard Dean (from the article)....

"My experience in politics, if you don't use your majorities, you lose your majorities," he said.

Get it done now...let America appreciate it tomorrow....:dunno::thumbsup:

 

[CunningStunts]

Let me quote the great Howard Dean (from the article)....


Get it done now...let America appreciate it tomorrow....:dunno::thumbsup:

LOL, well taking political advice from Howard "the Mouth" Dean may not be the Democrats best strategy...

 

[Facial_King]

This is a must-read - a follow-up about how Investor's Business Daily said that a national health plan would have tossed Stephen Hawking (a beneficiary of the UK's NHS!) to the ditch:

http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/investors_business_daily_short.php

 

[CunningStunts]

This is a must-read - a follow-up about how Investor's Business Daily said that a national health plan would have tossed Stephen Hawking (a beneficiary of the UK's NHS!) to the ditch:

http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/investors_business_daily_short.php

It's really not going to matter in the end how many argument are made... the people who are for "free" health care are basing it on feelings, not logic. You can't argue rationally with irrational feelings, even when it's for a "noble" purpose.

 

[Friday on my mind]

LOL, well taking political advice from Howard "the Mouth" Dean may not be the Democrats best strategy...

Deans "political advice" (50 state stradegy) as head of the DNC prior to the last election served then pretty well.

It's really not going to matter in the end how many argument are made... the people who are for "free" health care are basing it on feelings, not logic. You can't argue rationally with irrational feelings, even when it's for a "noble" purpose.

No such thing as "free" health care.And as I have said to you before I think POV is at work here again.You think people for a radical change in how we do health care are basing that on feelings and not logic and I would say it's the exact opposite.The people at these town halls are not being logical IMO.They are defending a system that costs us double per capita then the countries with universal systems spend and we don't even cover everyone with some sort of insurance.The system not being universal in the long run costs more and is a major drain on our economy and that will only get much worse in the future.How is defending that logical?

There used to be a commercial for a motor oil (forget which one) that used the slogan "pay me now or pay me later".Meaning changing your oil regularly and maintaining your car was cheaper in the long run.People are like cars in that way as well.Let them see doctors regular or let them wait till they are really broken down and need major repairs,we know which is the cheaper method I think.

The real issue in all this again is cost,even people who think they have good insurance and think they are satisfied with the staus quo (they better hope they don't get real ill though and some profit conscious insurance company gets to decide whether they will pay for the treatments needed) will soon see how just how unaffordable this system is going to get.That will be enough to make a healthy person sick.:eek:

But unfortunately none of the proposals from anyone currently being considered begin to reign in the costs and eliminate the hundreds of seperate costly beaurcracies of the private insurance companies.Maybe when people are paying double or triple what they are now in premiums they will get how illogical that is?:dunno:

 

[busenbust]

All eyes on Obama - and that speech.:bigear:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/200...th-care-address-despite-dimming-hopes-senate/

 

[Mr. Daystar]

Just because I was young when he was in office doesn't mean I don't know how he did as a president. I've been on the high school debate team since I was in the 5th grade. I love my politics.


However, my 'I miss clinton' comment was a joke. I think he's a hella funny guy, buttttttt he had a little trouble keepin his professional life and personal life separate if ya know what I mean

What he did, was give sovereign land to China, just a short distance from one of our largest navel bases, ass fuck the 2nd Amendment, fail miserably at retaliating for the USS Cole, and lie to the American pubic.

 

[Jagger69]

Well, I guess Senator Sellout gets his way. Baucus' committee won't include a public option. If it doesn't, this whole thing becomes a sideshow and the big insurance companies win. What's the point in doing health-care reform when it includes no real reform? This is smoke and mirrors, folks.

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20090929/US.Health.Care.Overhaul/

The more this kind of shit keeps happening the more convinced I become that the existing establishment is not equipped to solve the problem because it IS the fucking problem!!!!

Obama....how can you allow this? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Very disappointed.

 

[jasonk282]

Well, I guess Senator Sellout gets his way. Baucus' committee won't include a public option. If it doesn't, this whole thing becomes a sideshow and the big insurance companies win. What's the point in doing health-care reform when it includes no real reform? This is smoke and mirrors, folks.

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20090929/US.Health.Care.Overhaul/

The more this kind of shit keeps happening the more convinced I become that the existing establishment is not equipped to solve the problem because it IS the fucking problem!!!!

Obama....how can you allow this? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Very disappointed.

Is it true that if passed the health care bill will not go into effect untill 2013?

Great song BTW

 

[HeartBroker]

"Right-Wing Says You'll Die If Health Care Passes"

...and the left says you'll die if it doesn't
Blah blah blah blah blah...