PDA

View Full Version : Healthcare in the US...



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

meshpig
07-04-2009, 02:57 AM
Hi

I was awoken this morning as usual by the BBC, 5 am on the dot... to a rather astounding report about Obama and the latest attempt to create a "public option" in the richest nation on the planet.

- That 50 000 000 people in the US ( twice the population of Australia... here) have absolutely no health cover.
- A larger proportion have it dependent on being employed.
- It rates 37th in the world in terms of "Health" outcomes.
- %70 of the population want a universal/health care fro all system like we have here in li'l old OZ.

We've just had ten years of a conservative .gov which also insisted private insurance is the answer and the only answer.

Here that's an outright joke because the private system is %30 funded by the taxpayer and the "nationalized" system, ( which is pretty good) is where most of the private work is done anyway.

It's also a fact here that what the government takes in tobacco excise
is on a par with what it spends on universal healthcare to begin with before the scaled levies kick-in; you're forced to buy private insurance only when your income gets up around $130 000 USD because the levies become disproportional to the basic hospital cover from the private insurers.

I'm no epidemiologist but surely the US should lead the world in terms of what Capitalism can do in that respect?


M

IMI
07-04-2009, 03:45 AM
I have my snakebite kit, some duct tape, and a bottle of Jack Daniels.
Why would I possibly need health care? :D

meshpig
07-04-2009, 03:49 AM
Yes, the funny twist is without Communism, Fascism would never have arisen historically speaking. Active and reactive forces?

meshpig
07-04-2009, 04:01 AM
I have my snakebite kit, some duct tape, and a bottle of Jack Daniels.
Why would I possibly need health care? :D

Trench-foot?

meshpig
07-04-2009, 04:12 AM
I'll just say I'm happy to live in a country with free medical care. Even though we have high taxation. I manage to make a happy existence even with the taxes. But then again, I don't need million dollar cars or 3456 buildings or all the other things people most afraid of taxes seem to covet above all other things.

Me too! I think Taxation is a very misunderstood concept. It pertains first to the ancient idea of the state itself.

- Funny how those who want more police and more defense spending on the one hand are also those who bemoan paying Tax in the first place?

IMI
07-04-2009, 05:12 AM
Trench-foot?

I have plenty of clean socks, too.

meshpig
07-04-2009, 05:58 AM
I have plenty of clean socks, too.

Carry on soldier, as you were. Acute appendicitis then?

IMI
07-04-2009, 06:10 AM
Acute appendicitis then?

I do appreciate the offer, but I have to respectfully decline. :D

RebelHill
07-04-2009, 06:19 AM
with the kind of riches and technology available to modern man, it seems ludicous to me that any developed nation can fail to provide a complete package of BASIC care to ensure the minimum standard of wellbeing for all its citizens, namely, imo, ample social housing, and universal healthcare.

The problem as we proud socialist nationals keep running into over the past couple decades (and which most lovers of a social system seem to try and ignore) is that these systems are always open to abuse.

In the UK the benefits system has led to a not too miniscule benefits society, where folks will just learn to get by on their handouts, and not even bother looking for work, even when they're able or capable.

Similarly with healthcare, the system becomes open for exploitation by manufacturers of healthcare tachnology... High tech drug treatments for instance can cost tens of thousands per patient per year, and so long as the main source of income for the manufacturers is a multi billion health system, they get very lil in the way of incentive for finding more efficient production methods, opening/licensing patents... which would ultimately drive costs down.

I think the catch 22 is that citizens of the richer nations SHOULD have utterly unimpeded access to such basic things as healthcare, provided for them by the state... but only by kepping that healthcare system somehow tied to market forces, and cold hard capitalist competition can such a system ever be affordable.

Matt
07-04-2009, 06:38 AM
Lee Stanahan, yes, that Lee Stranahan has done a series of YouTube videos about the need for a public health option. They're very funny, but have a great message, been subscribed to his videos for a while now, check 'em out!

http://www.youtube.com/user/Stranahan

meshpig
07-04-2009, 07:10 AM
I think the catch 22 is that citizens of the richer nations SHOULD have utterly unimpeded access to such basic things as healthcare, provided for them by the state... but only by kepping that healthcare system somehow tied to market forces, and cold hard capitalist competition can such a system ever be affordable.

Yes but what is the "state" and what is "capitalism" these days?

hrgiger
07-04-2009, 09:52 AM
The only people that argue against a universal health care coverage are those that either A) are lucky enough to have an employee based health care option B) well to do enough that they can afford a private health care option or C) have no sympathy for those who have neither. Their universal answer is well get a better job because they did. Apparently 50 million people in this country didn't get that memo.

dweinkauf
07-04-2009, 11:19 AM
As a person with what many would see as a very good health care plan, I am a strong advocate of a universal, single-payer health care system where everyone is in and noone is left out. I'd be the first to pay higher taxes, if necessary, to eliminate the cancer of the for-profit health care insurance system that is killing us in favor of a system that we as citizens own and run for the benefit of everyone.

Danic101
07-04-2009, 11:26 AM
I totally disagree, I do not believe that access to Health Care paid for by someone else is a right. Guess what, Health Care is a business. The Government should stay the hell out of it.

If people want to pay for the health care of others thats fine, donate to charities that do so. It should not be forced on us that work hard to pay for others.

RebelHill
07-04-2009, 11:33 AM
TBH I think it probs all evens out in the end...

For all the wonderful sevices available, and all the people helped, who under a private ownership system would never have been able to afford the care they needed... there have still been some shocking cases of underfunding, neglect, and basic duty of care failings happen within the nhs.

So I imagine that the percentage of the population left out, and made to suffer, either because of a lack of insurance, or because of the failings inherent to pretty much all public sevices, is likely somewhere around equal.

Verlon
07-04-2009, 11:38 AM
I totally disagree, I do not believe that access to Health Care paid for by someone else is a right. Guess what, Health Care is a business. The Government should stay the hell out of it.

If people want to pay for the health care of others thats fine, donate to charities that do so. It should not be forced on us that work hard to pay for others.

Guess what...ever hear of mercenaries? Fighting wars is a business. Look into some history, and I believe you'll find police protection is a business. You want the government out of those.

Yes, health care is a business. A BIG business. Who watches out for those of us who don't just happen to be worth a billion dollars or more.

I have health care through my employer, and I still think this is a travesty. If Canada and France and all those other countries 'we're so much better than here in the greatest nation on earth....' can afford to provide care for their citizens and still function, what are we doing wrong in this country? It must be something.

shrox
07-04-2009, 01:25 PM
I don't have health care. A few weeks ago I went to a storefront urgent care center, and I saw a competent doctor and got a prescription for $99.

crashnburn
07-04-2009, 01:41 PM
Out of interest, how do you guys in the USA cope with something like Swine Flu? Here in the UK if we were to catch something like that then there is health care available, as part of the NHS. Is it a case of cough up or die over there. Because to me, if that's the case, what chance would you have of monitoring it's spread or controlling it.

Stooch
07-04-2009, 01:56 PM
yeah americans seem to be all about innovation instead of duplication :) to a fault.

I think its time to look outside for superior examples, because as long as there are superior examples then we sure as hell can improve ours.

worlds richest country in the world with sub par healthcare for the majority of the population? something must be wrong here. Personally for me this isnt even about raising taxes. ITs rather sad that people only consider taxes, thats why we are in this situation. The "evil" socialists enjoy longer life and happy lives. hmm.

Consider this, health care is a TAX. you are paying this TAX ON TOP of the current taxes! and even then you arent guaranteed anything, if the insurance company decides that you are a liability.
hmm.

seems to me that if you want to pay LESS to live and have more money to spend, maybe it makes sense to pay more taxes but get rid of the traditional health care insurance industry.

also as a form of "COST CUTTING". FIRE ALL DMV EMPLOYEES! and automate it.

make it super cheap and super efficient, let the antisocial pricks that run the places work at mcdonalds.

so many government functions should just be automated, paper filing and paperwork in general is just definition of waste.

doctors still use papers to communicate with each other... wtf.

pills cost .0001 of a cent to manufacture. americans pay more because they can afford higher pricing! (well the most profitable majority does).

its all about profitable markets. SURE you price out some people out your product but you still make more money! yay! money!

*Pete*
07-04-2009, 01:59 PM
what is the difference between insurance and taxes?

in both cases it is money out from your pocket, in both cases you are secured healthservices if needed.

Insurance money funds insurance companies, it funds commercial for insurance, it funds insurance salesmen, it funds a whole lot that has nothing to do with health....

tax money funds your goverment, just as the taxes you pay today...the difference of paying 15 or 30 percent tax means nothing in terms of workforce needed to collect the taxes.


if your healthcare is run by insurance, it will seek to profit.

if your healthcare is run by taxes, it will seek to keep budgets.

if the expenses are higher that the profit, the insurance company will raise the sum you need to pay for insurance.

if the budget is broken, the goverment will look for increasing the budget by lowering costs for, example the military, school system, public baths..roads, what ever is done it will not affect the amount of money you will pay for the healthcare.


and....some insurance companies will always try to stop you from getting treatment..oh, you knew you had heartproblems before signing the insurance? good luck...

i just cant see why anyone would prefer insurance based healthcare.



IMI...tell me more about your miracle cure, does it kill the swineflu?

*Pete*
07-04-2009, 02:01 PM
yeah americans seem to be all about innovation instead of duplication :) to a fault.

Winston Churchill said. "the Americans will always make the right decision, after they tried all other options" ;)

crashnburn
07-04-2009, 02:10 PM
The NHS here in the UK does have it's weaknesses, such as the case of a lady with cancer whose life could be saved with a particular drug but was refused it by the NHS due to it's cost. So there are parallel's to the insurance system. But I think that a national health system gives you more peace of mind than insurance driven health care.

dweinkauf
07-04-2009, 02:14 PM
posted by Danic....
If people want to pay for the health care of others thats fine, donate to charities that do so. It should not be forced on us that work hard to pay for others.
With 47 million unisured and another 50 million underinsured citizens, the United States is about the only industrialized country without a universal health care system for all its citizens. The irony is that we, as taxpayers, pay more for a health care system that has been "forced on us" than do taxpayers in those countries with universal health care for all citizens. According to a World Health report, U.S. health care spending is about 15.2 percent of GDP compared to those countries with universal health care (11.1 percent for Germany, 9.9 percent for Canada, 8 percent for England). So, I can only conclude that for many countries, universal health care for all citizens is less costly and less of a burden on taxpayers than is our privatized health care system that leaves so many of our brothers and sisters uninsured or underinsured.

IMI
07-04-2009, 02:20 PM
also as a form of "COST CUTTING". FIRE ALL DMV EMPLOYEES! and automate it.


You have no idea how much I agree with that idea. :thumbsup:

And to save even more money, instead of using newer computers for the automation, they could refurbish PCs from the early 90's running Windows 3.1 and OS/2.
The computers might be slow, inefficient, rude, belligerent, and cranky but that would still definitely be a step up from the current system. :D

IMI
07-04-2009, 02:25 PM
IMI...tell me more about your miracle cure, does it kill the swineflu?

I don't know. Maybe, maybe not, and we don't have any swine flu here for me to experiment with.
But I can tell you with 100% certainty that enough Jack Daniels in anyone's system can make you really not care if you have swine flu or not. ;)

Jim_C
07-04-2009, 02:41 PM
Heh, I see another heated dicussion coming up. I see people getting called communists and inevitable comparisons to Hitler will be strewn about in abundance.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWHyNM93kxE

Step Two at :44.

IMI
07-04-2009, 03:15 PM
WooHoo!

American Holiday Weekend at the Newtek Forums!
No mods around to lock down threads - total anarchy in LightWave Land, just like the good old days!

Party on! :jam:

hrgiger
07-04-2009, 08:32 PM
I totally disagree, I do not believe that access to Health Care paid for by someone else is a right. Guess what, Health Care is a business. The Government should stay the hell out of it.

If people want to pay for the health care of others thats fine, donate to charities that do so. It should not be forced on us that work hard to pay for others.

Yeah we know all that tired conservative philosophy. Where does that leave those that cannot afford health care?

JMCarrigan
07-04-2009, 09:16 PM
I'm 60 and don't have insurance or any healthcare. If I am in such pain that I have to see the doctor, I have to pay cash to see her.

I've decided that I'll be okay until I die, or appear to to everyone around me.

Since I am not a victim of the world I see, I believe I have what I have asked for. (I just forgot I asked for it somewhere back there....)

Nicolas Jordan
07-04-2009, 10:58 PM
Even our free health care system in Canada isn't perfect with long wait lists for urgent tests and surgeries and overcrowded emergency waiting rooms. There are plenty of problems that plague our system but overall it is pretty good still compared to many other countries around the world.

People are so used to free health care here I am told that many people assume that their pets are also covered under the health care system and become upset at the vet clinic when they are told they will have to actually pay for their pets medical treatment. :stumped:

aidenvfx
07-04-2009, 11:01 PM
I totally disagree, I do not believe that access to Health Care paid for by someone else is a right. Guess what, Health Care is a business. The Government should stay the hell out of it.

If people want to pay for the health care of others thats fine, donate to charities that do so. It should not be forced on us that work hard to pay for others.

You might change your mind if you ever need a lung transplant. In the U.S. you either raise the money or you die. Oh and that money you will need is around 125k.

No one is saying the healthcare system should be free. Right now the U.S. government which means taxpayers spend more on healthcare then most countries that have universal systems. I live in Canada and have universal health coverage. You don't but yet more of your tax dollars go to healthcare then mine. Are you starting to see the problem.

Also there is a major misconception that everything is free and that is not true. Yes if I break my leg and need surgery that is covered but I pay a fee for the cast if I need it to be recast for some reason. I still have to pay for my prescription drugs, eye care etc. Universal healthcare does not mean everything is free. However as I mentioned before if I need cancer treatment, or an organ transplant then I am covered. Do you really think people should have to pay to be treated for cancer? or a organ transplant?

meshpig
07-05-2009, 01:19 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWHyNM93kxE

Step Two at :44.

Seems pretty civilized to me...

BTW. What does a person without insurance in the US pay for a simple consultation with a GP for say a repeat prescription?

waverguy
07-05-2009, 02:31 AM
Yeah we know all that tired conservative philosophy. Where does that leave those that cannot afford health care?


It seems the "liberal/socialized" philosophy is to cover everyone and then deny or ration care to cut costs.

Chris S. (Fez)
07-05-2009, 02:40 AM
You think this "free healthcare" sytem should stress some personal responsibility and force obese smokers to pay more?

*Pete*
07-05-2009, 03:12 AM
many people assume that their pets are also covered under the health care system and become upset at the vet clinic when they are told they will have to actually pay for their pets medical treatment. :stumped:

ahem....our pets health is based on insurance over here, just like the US has for its citizens.
you can opt not to insure your pets, but you cant opt out from taking part of funding a hearthtransplantation to your neighbour...forced humanity, but the positive of it is that your neighbours will pay for your stay at the hospital when or if you may need it.

meshpig
07-05-2009, 03:17 AM
You think this "free healthcare" sytem should stress some personal responsibility and force obese smokers to pay more?

Well, we have a good part free/part pay universal system here and although as I said at the outset what governments have traditionally taken as tobacco revenue more or less covered the "free" aspect, that's changing this week where a packet of cigarettes will now cost $16 USD.

As for obesity. That's what you get when you leave it up to "market forces". I mean you can only shove so much food down the confused gob of the average consumer before it starts to backfire.

*Pete*
07-05-2009, 03:23 AM
Yes.

no.


altough, i do agree with you in a way since it pisses me off to see junkies, alcoholics and smokers burden our healthcare by choosing a lifestyle that ruins their health, but starting to go down that route will in the end open up for a selective healthcare that goes further than that...

oh, you have asthma?..move away from roads and other areas of pollution or lose your rights for free healthcare.

old and with weak bones? stay at home if that trip to the shop can cause you to fall and break your bones, selfinflicted damages arent covered.

fat?, risk for heartproblems becouse you eat to much and move to little, forget about our help...and no, we will not pay for special transports if you do not fit inside an ambulance.


so, no....despite me hating those junkies and alike for destroying their lifes and costing us so much money, we cant really open up for selective healthcare.

if you, as an american tourist come to Oslo and break your leg...our Norwegian healthcare will fix you up for no cost, even if you never paid a cent for funding our healthcare system....its a wonderfull feeling of security to have something like that to take care of you.

jin choung
07-05-2009, 04:57 AM
I totally disagree, I do not believe that access to Health Care paid for by someone else is a right. Guess what, Health Care is a business. The Government should stay the hell out of it.

If people want to pay for the health care of others thats fine, donate to charities that do so. It should not be forced on us that work hard to pay for others.

great neither is school. why should I pay for your kid. if you can't pay your kid can't read. also fire fighters. the absence of immolation is not a right. if you can't pay, you burn. you deserve to burn.

and the same with police. if you can't pay for protection, your family deserves to be victimized. if you can't pay, what good are you?

and social security for seniors? f all that. old people have been riding ony dime long enough. life is not a right, it is a privelege. and if they can't pay, they should do the American thing and die instead of cling to life like a gdam socialist.

and I swear, if someone shows up at an emergency room, first thing we do is pat him down for a credit card. even if their bleeding from the jugular, no money no honey.

this is America gdamit not a fing charity.

Jin

ps - again for all the ridiculously short sighted privatization freaks - PAY NOW OR PAY LATER PAY SMALL OR PAY BIG - YOU ALWAYS PAY.

unless you are willing to execute and not imprison for all offenses, unless you are willing to turn people away at ers cuz they don't have money there is NO AVOIDING IT. you WILL PAY. and you'll pay more because you were thoughtless and unable to see more than one move intothe future.

sigh. this lack of comprehension of the system of the world is truly disgusting.

jin choung
07-05-2009, 05:10 AM
It seems the "liberal/socialized" philosophy is to cover everyone and then deny or ration care to cut costs.

right!

because in our current privatized healthcare system, insurNce companies never deny treatment because of cost!

srsly....

WTF....

jin

jin choung
07-05-2009, 05:19 AM
You think this "free healthcare" sytem should stress some personal responsibility and force obese smokers to pay more?

haha,

here I would give conservatives what they want - personal responsibilty.

if you are obese and smoking and you want the liberty to live like that and refuse treaemt and programs to help you change and won't make a good faith effort to change, you are sit down at a little desk and get to sign a waiver.

you will no longer be taxed for universal healthcare and you will not be covered.

should you turn up at an er with complications from your exercise of liberty, we will let you die.

those would be the words in the waiver and you'd be forced to sign your name under that.

can't imagine lot of folks would.

but everybody gets what they want.

Jin

jin choung
07-05-2009, 05:24 AM
Seems pretty civilized to me...

BTW. What does a person without insurance in the US pay for a simple consultation with a GP for say a repeat prescription?

neighborhood clinics (cheapest option) are about $50.

not bad for someone like myself but can be rough on fixed income folks or a single mom with a minimum wage job.

Jin

meshpig
07-05-2009, 06:09 AM
Good going Jin... firing on all cylinders!

- The Government here has just finished handing out about $700 US to every tax payer who earned under $80 000 US and who paid tax last FY, as a one- off grant to stimulate the economy.

Seems to have worked, we're technically not in recession here albeit a relatively small economy.

meshpig
07-05-2009, 06:38 AM
neighborhood clinics (cheapest option) are about $50.

not bad for someone like myself but can be rough on fixed income folks or a single mom with a minimum wage job.

Jin

Ouch! We pay about $10 US on subsidy in a private practice and about $30 full-fee until you earn $130 000 US p.a. and upwards. Cheapest option $0 up front and %1.5 of taxable income.

The irony is your average GP is just another functionary. Private or public, yet there is this magnification of their status to the nth degree?

RebelHill
07-05-2009, 07:00 AM
You might change your mind if you ever need a lung transplant. In the U.S. you either raise the money or you die. Oh and that money you will need is around 125k.

LOL... this sorta sitch always confused the hell outta me...

Having to pay vast amounts of money for such a procedure, thats all fine... but as soon as anyone mentions any kind of financial reimbursment system for the donation of the organs themselves... well thats just unethical.

COBRASoft
07-05-2009, 08:15 AM
Healthcare? Come to Belgium, it's a paradise, certainly for those who don't have money or no legal papers. We have a complete safety net on all levels. And if those nets should fail, we have an extra safety net for everybody falling through. That net will even give you an apartment/house to live in if needed. And if you've worked 1 year and lose your job, Belgium is the only country in the world that will pay you something each month for as long as you don't have a job. Most countries stop this service after 6 months.

Who pays this all, less than 40% of the people of Belgium, so it costs a lot to us. For that price, we get top hospitals, doctors and a lot of lazy people not willing to work anymore because they get enough from safety nets, child money, ...

hrgiger
07-05-2009, 08:29 AM
Healthcare? Come to Belgium, it's a paradise, certainly for those who don't have money or no legal papers. We have a complete safety net on all levels. And if those nets should fail, we have an extra safety net for everybody falling through. That net will even give you an apartment/house to live in if needed. And if you've worked 1 year and lose your job, Belgium is the only country in the world that will pay you something each month for as long as you don't have a job. Most countries stop this service after 6 months.

Who pays this all, less than 40% of the people of Belgium, so it costs a lot to us. For that price, we get top hospitals, doctors and a lot of lazy people not willing to work anymore because they get enough from safety nets, child money, ...

That's the extreme on one end. Then we have the other end like we do here where everything is for profit and they can deny coverage for the dumbest of reasons and millions of people go uninsured because they can't afford insurance. Surely we can find a good middle ground?
Personally, I think there should be both private insurers and government providers to allow for a little healthy competition between the two.

*Pete*
07-05-2009, 10:12 AM
Belgium is the only country in the world that will pay you something each month for as long as you don't have a job. Most countries stop this service after 6 months.


ill get 66% of my salary each month im without job for 2 years...

*Pete*
07-05-2009, 10:18 AM
and, if im sick and cant work...ill receive 100% of my salary for 12 months, and after that my emplyer can legally fire me and then ill get 66% of my salary untill im well again, and then starts the 2 year period when ill still get 66% of my salary if im unemployed...and only after that, ill end up into social care which will pay for an apapartment for me and livingcosts for as long as i will be needing the service.

some of you might think that this system will crash a nation, but we still have higher employment rates than most other nations, our salaries are among the highest in the world...who said socialism sucks? ;)

hrgiger
07-05-2009, 11:26 AM
...who said socialism sucks? ;)

Not me. But a lot of America villifies socialism like it's satanism. The same part that is apparently ok with millions of uninsured people and insurance companies giving bonuses for denying enough claims.

IMI
07-05-2009, 12:12 PM
As long as nobody takes away any of my stuff or taxes me unreasonably, I really don't care anymore.

Although I do have to say I'm amazed at the arrogance displayed by some of the people who condone "Universal Health Care".

I want to see you go to some planet in Andromeda and tell the doctor "It's OK for you to treat me for free, for I have Universal Health Care."

I'm sure they'll get a good laugh out of that one. :D

Titus
07-05-2009, 12:56 PM
I don't know why I feel a déjà vu and is 2008 again.

COBRASoft
07-05-2009, 01:16 PM
and, if im sick and cant work...ill receive 100% of my salary for 12 months, and after that my emplyer can legally fire me and then ill get 66% of my salary untill im well again, and then starts the 2 year period when ill still get 66% of my salary if im unemployed...and only after that, ill end up into social care which will pay for an apapartment for me and livingcosts for as long as i will be needing the service.

some of you might think that this system will crash a nation, but we still have higher employment rates than most other nations, our salaries are among the highest in the world...who said socialism sucks? ;)

Hehe, you guys have natural resources in Norway, we don't. we have to import everything, improve it and export it again (chocolate is just 1 example).

Belgium has the highest debt in the world, we have such a 'outstanding' healthcare system, superb schools (among the best in the world) and many people are without a job in the south half of the country. And yet, Belgium is still very high ranked economically. Try to understand that :)

dweinkauf
07-05-2009, 02:27 PM
Let's see what a great health care system we have in this country.....

According to the World Health Organization, the United States health care system is ranked 37th, meaning there are 36 countries with better health care systems than ours. Do you suppose some of them are universal health care systems? The statistics aren't too great for us in infant mortality (26 countries better than us), Male mortality (21 better than us), and female mortality (23 better than us). Do you suppose there's something broken in our health care system?

jin choung
07-05-2009, 02:46 PM
to re-iterate:

health care is a RIGHT. not a privelege. the fact hat we do not turn anyone away at ers shows that everyone believes this is true. even conservatives can't wriggle away from that without getting booted for being heartless.

it IS A RIGHT.

but the conservative delusion that it's not means we pay for it in the most expensive way possible - at the er when it's probably critical.

universal healthcare or ers. social justice and programs or prisons.

one way or another you ALWAYS PAY. but conservatives are hellbent on paying the most at the latest.

jin

Tom Wood
07-05-2009, 03:27 PM
As long as nobody takes away any of my stuff or taxes me unreasonably, I really don't care anymore.

Oh, we're gonna get your stuff, no doubt about it.

Hey, look over there, that's an odd place for a piano...

IMI
07-05-2009, 03:29 PM
I don't think it can be whittled down to the basic simplicity of liberals/socialists like and care about people, therefore they are for health care, or conservatives/fascists love money and don't care about the poor, therefore they are opposed to it.

It's a pretty complex issue, really, and I don't think it's fair to say that people who are opposed to the idea are simply heartless.

There is one major problem with the whole idea thusfar, and has *alot* to do with much of the opposition to it: proponents of "universal" (snicker) health care love to stand up there and promise this, proclaim that, denounce this and that, and point their fingers at the opposition, while the whole time playing politics with the issue - using it to get votes...

And yet, we still haven't seen an actual plan, an actual rundown of how it can be implemented, used, and monitored for fraud and abuse. Really, I would think having an actual plan to show to the People would be a step in the right direction, along with all the pertinent data.

As it is, all that's ever said about it is, "we need this", yet nobody has shown how it would work. Billary tried to outline a plan way back in '92, but ever since then it's all been just a bunch of politics.

And you can't even blame the republicans entirely for its failure so far, because every politician, democrat and republican alike, wants to use it to his own personal advantage in any number of ways. Just like everything else they do, politics, campaigns, contributions, pork, and re-election is what's really important, and it always stands in the way of getting anything done.

There really shouldn't even be any argument about it in Congress and the administration, considering the majority of Dems in all levels. Yet there is, and they have yet neither a plan, nor a bill to get it going.

gatz
07-05-2009, 03:33 PM
The instructive numbers the keep coming up in the US health "debate" are:

50 million people are uninsured. The cost of the single payer program is projected as upwards of $1,000 million.

Would you be willing to go uninsured if you only had 20 mil in the bank to cover any health emergencies?;)

Of course we all know that government programs don't offer a dollar for dollar return. Surplus breeds innovation. Unchecked, governments consume surplus.

IMI
07-05-2009, 03:33 PM
Anyone want to take a guess at what time on Monday this thread will get locked?
I wish there was some way to make a betting pool. ;)

IMI
07-05-2009, 03:47 PM
Smokers should WITHOUT A DOUBT pay more for healthcare. It's a choice (plain and simple) and if they choose to do so, then they pay more for related healthcare.



Smokers DO pay more for health care. Private insurance companies charge more if you smoke, if you want something better than the basic PPO or HMO.

But unless the gub'ment were planning on implementing it as an insurance policy, I don't know how they'd determine who's a smoker and who isn't. I mean, if the idea is to just have walk-in clinics and no "policy" other than, say, an ID, there would be no way of knowing who's a smoker. And of course, it would be silly to charge a smoker more for something like a broken arm. Unless he broke it somehow trying to light a cigarette. ;)

But alot of states are beginning to tax the hell out of cigarettes now, and I guess that's how they're gonna do it. In Florida, they've added nearly $1.80 (or thereabouts) tax to every pack of cigarettes just in the last few months. And other sates are following suit.

Personally I feel cigarettes ought to be illegalized already. The FDA would never approve such a product, for one, but for another, it's such a huge contradiction: you can get cigarettes at any store, any time, but need a prescription for, say, penicillin.
It's just plain silly that cigarettes are legal and widely available, while there are a whole lot of actual helpful substances you can't get unless you also want to spend money to get a prescription.

Edit-
Penicillin is probably a bad example, because it's not a good idea to take antibiotics for every runny nose, or else screw with your immunity.
How about Viagra or Cyalis though... if I can buy a pack of smokes at the local corner store, I should be able to get Viagra there too. :D

Larry_g1s
07-05-2009, 04:50 PM
“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." - Thomas Jefferson (the third President of the United States (1801–1809), the principal author of the Declaration of Independence (1776), and one of the most influential Founding Fathers for his promotion of the ideals of republicanism in the United States.)

jin choung
07-05-2009, 06:25 PM
As it is, all that's ever said about it is, "we need this", yet nobody has shown how it would work.

you're not paying attention.

norway, canada, france, germany, england, japan.

americans can be like a willful and belligerent child who cries and moans that something is impossible while his classmates are running around doing the very thing he says is impossible. just look around! not only is america NOT God's chosen land, it's not so unique as to be impervious to solutions that work for everyone else!

and it IS fair to say that conservatives are heartless - because they see the need and yet THEIR SOLUTION is to let people twist in the wind- ala that great humanitarian, zane.

seriously, WHAT is the conservatives solution except to just let people get sick and die?

and as i've said before, they are not only heartless but BRAINLESS because YOU ALWAYS PAY.

unless they put zane's words to action and turn people away from ers without a credit card swipe, you STILL END UP PAYING and PAYING MUCH MORE and endangering the very existence of ERs! (actually MY solution would be to start busing poor people from their ers to the neighborhood ers of much more affluent areas... until that er can't take the strain of it and collapses and endangers the lives and health of the affluent. show them first hand why this should matter to them. it would either get momentum behind universal health care or chrystalize the situation and spark class war. either way, i'm happy)

and further, because the burden falls on EMPLOYERS now instead of the state, it makes US businesses less competitive than foreign ones where the state picks up the tab.

make no mistake, not only does it cost us NOW, it's bleeding us dry.

we literally CANNOT AFFORD NOT to have universal health care.

jin

jin choung
07-05-2009, 06:34 PM
“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have."

that's as imprecise as you can get.

doesn't FREEDOM count as something that you want? hmm?

again, health care is NOT A PRIVELEGE or an EXTRAVAGANCE.

it is a RIGHT! for rich and poor alike. even though conservatives would just love to let the poor sicken and die out so they don't have to look at them.

it is a right. as fundamental as freedom and the pursuit of happiness.

also:


Thomas Jefferson (the third President of the United States (1801–1809), the principal author of the Declaration of Independence (1776), and one of the most influential Founding Fathers for his promotion of the ideals of republicanism in the United States.)

and slave owner. don't deify those who are fallible.

jin choung
07-05-2009, 06:38 PM
But alot of states are beginning to tax the hell out of cigarettes now, and I guess that's how they're gonna do it. In Florida, they've added nearly $1.80 (or thereabouts) tax to every pack of cigarettes just in the last few months. And other sates are following suit.

Personally I feel cigarettes ought to be illegalized already.

first part is good and effective.

last part will make everything worse.

illegalizing things takes things out of control of government regulations and taxes.

PROHIBITION DOES NOT WORK. in any form. better to tax it into control.

jin

jin choung
07-05-2009, 07:08 PM
Of course we all know that government programs don't offer a dollar for dollar return. Surplus breeds innovation. Unchecked, governments consume surplus.

don't know where you've been but the private sector just plunged us into an economic crisis because they were UNCHECKED and consumed all the surplus and then some.

surplus doesn't breed innovation! are you kidding?!

SURPLUS BREEDS WASTE AND CORRUPTION! remember the quote? it's not "PLENTY is the mother of invention" - it's NECESSITY.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

besides, iraq will cost much much more than any proposed national health care plan.

if we can find a way to pay for that, we can pay for ANYTHING. iraq nullifies any and all conservative qualms about cost.

WE *CAN* PAY FOR IT... we *CAN* find a way. and we MUST.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
speaking of iraq - it's funny that peeps who have such a problem with government waste and big government just love the idea of a government run military - and not only that but a military that is far larger (in terms of spending) than any other military in the world.

or have no problem with a public fire department. or police. or schools. or libraries. or social security.

as i've said before, socialized systems are NOT NEW in america. they tend to be prefixed with "PUBLIC" or "SOCIAL".

and again, through ers, we ALREADY PAY. just the MOST at the latest point in time.

this is NOT AN ISSUE OF PAY OR NO PAY.

WE ALWAYS PAY.

jin

gatz
07-05-2009, 09:08 PM
So, we can't use Government failure as an rational to avoid the installation of programs, but the corruption of individuals in the private sector forever casts a pall over the market.

The simple existence of a NEED doesn't magically conjured up invention. There has to be SURPLUS capital and manpower to be applied to the problem at hand. The boom of the nineties was a confluence of and idea - the internet - stoked with idle capital in all those 401Ks.

Bureaucrats cannot administer simple services, never-mind innovation. We will not get the smartest or most efficient solutions. Only the solutions with the best lobbyists.

jin choung
07-05-2009, 09:41 PM
So, we can't use Government failure as an rational to avoid the installation of programs, but the corruption of individuals in the private sector forever casts a pall over the market.



NO.

that's not it.

BOTH ARE EXTREMELY FALLIBLE AND SUBJECT TO CORRUPTION, WASTE AND SCANDAL.

we are NOT saying one is corrupt and ineffective and the other is not. YOU GUYS are trying to say that.

we are saying BOTH are flawed.

but given that, just as the private sector cannot execute the duties of a nation's military or utilities or schools or libraries or police or firefighting, neither is the private sector best suited to meet the needs of the needy.

the government IS FLAWED.

the market IS FLAWED.

human systems are AT BEST IMPERFECT.

but GIVEN THAT, GOVERNMENT HAS A ROLE.

jin

p.s. corruption of "individuals" and not systemic in the private sector but with govt, it's systemic not individuals? HAHA!!! and as for the "pall", i say since it almost TOOK DOWN THE ENTIRE ECONOMIC SYSTEM... i say it's a bit more than a mere "pall" buddy. the system that drove wall street has proved itself to absolutely need the IRON HAND OF REGULATION and shown that any claims to be able to "regulate itself" is complete and total blind man's BS.

you're corrupt. i'm corrupt. we're all corrupt. and we would all slit each other's throat as to look at each other. that's why intelligent liberals say F "TRUST". and idiot bush and cheney say, "c'moooooon... you can trust us!" i don't trust you. you don't trust me. but it's a MEXICAN STAND OFF. it's M.A.D. and that's what makes everyone play nice.

in other words, we believe in CHECKS AND BALANCES!

jin choung
07-05-2009, 09:44 PM
The simple existence of a NEED doesn't magically conjured up invention.

it does in norway. it does in japan. it does in england. it does in germany. it does in france. and it does in canada.

WHERE THE F DID WE GET THE MONEY FOR IRAQ?!

if we say WE NEED SOMETHING, WE FIND A WAY TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.

JUST LIKE IRAQ.

as i said, because the republicans executed iraq, all the whining and pleading of "ohhhhh... we don't have the money.... blah blah blah...."
... yeah, that gets thrown out.

also, what part of "WE ALREADY PAY" don't you understand? uninsured people showing up at ERs when their condition is probably exacerbated to the MOST EXPENSIVE POINT - who do you think pays for that? the TOOTH FAIRY?

WE

ALREADY

PAY

!

we just pay STUPIDLY now.

our system is the embodiment of an idiotic human nature... an inability to plan ahead and instead dealing with catastrophes when we're FORCED to when it's probably too late! tsk tsk tsk.

jin

ted
07-05-2009, 10:14 PM
Already the priming of America has begun. Just a year ago we were all told that we aren't getting enough tests for disease and afflictions.
Now the propaganda has started saying Americans are getting too many tests and we need to reduce the testing?
All this so when the government limits the care you get we are conditioned to being cut off.

One example of Government health care we have is Veteran's care which is heavily criticized for being crappy.
Then there is Medicare and Medical, the doctors are already bailing on those customers because of paperwork, regulation and lousy pay.
The government can't run the health care they have now. And there is no argument on that!
They already limit doctors more than the crappiest HMO that they love to demonize.

Sure there is room for improvement, but any intelligent person would start improving one part at a time rather than destroy what's working and give total control to an entity that has never managed anything worth bragging about.
They can't handle what they are screwing up now.

jin choung
07-05-2009, 10:28 PM
One example of Government health care we have is Veteran's care which is heavily criticized for being crappy.

and another - which we ALREADY mentioned in order to REFUTE YOUR WILLFUL BLINDLESS - is the health care program that the president, congressman and other federal workers get.

your argument is specious and disingenuous because you will not acknowledge facts as they are made available to you... you just recycle the one sided talking points that are being spoon fed to you.

jin

Tom Wood
07-05-2009, 10:35 PM
Oh, I don't know...the gubmint did a pretty good job with...

the mail system
interstate highways
public schools and universities
NASA
FDA
national defense
NOAA
and black helicopters

Really let us down on the aliens with their anal probes though... :D

jin choung
07-05-2009, 11:32 PM
And this surprises you?

ted is the poster boy for all Republican talking points and he won't be changing anytime soon. You make one argument, he starts talking about another rather than addressing PRECISELY what you pointed out. But... that's ted. :) He's about as objective as Prospector. :eek:

not surprised as much as it's just clouding an already complex issue.

so i'm just throwing a red card for the record.

jin

Dexter2999
07-05-2009, 11:32 PM
I think we should get rid of the current system of VA Hospitals and reinvent the system.
Instead of driving hours for care at a VA facility, it might be a better idea to have a VA Wing at more local hospitals. If there are extra beds in the VA wing the hospital could use them for others and bill tohelp offest funding/cost overuns of VA needs. Also VA wings having Pharmacies.

I think the government is being used as a pipline to subsidise the pharmacutical industry. The eldery use the vast majority of drugs and the lions share of that is being paid by the government already. Drug companies freely aknowledge that they charge more in the States to offset selling at lower prices elsewhere to "remain competitive" in the market.

One might think it a better idea for the government to buy in bulk and administer their own system of Pharmacies for the elderly.

Drug compaines also spend fortunes on TV advertising and on "training" trips for medical professionals to resort destinations. Where do you think that money is coming from? Insurance companies are private and greedy so they aren't afraid to say "NO" (even when they shouldn't) but the government doesn't appear to have any such mechanism.

A sliding scale of subsidised health care might be worth considering as well. The more you make the less you get subsidised for general care.

I also heard on the radio where a growing trend in medicine is to charge an annual fee of $5,000 and upwards to be kept on as a patient of medical practitioners. Don't know where this path will lead.

jin choung
07-05-2009, 11:41 PM
I think we should get rid of the current system of VA Hospitals and reinvent the system.
Instead of driving hours for care at a VA facility, it might be a better idea to have a VA Wing at more local hospitals. If there are extra beds in the VA wing the hospital could use them for others and bill tohelp offest funding/cost overuns of VA needs. Also VA wings having Pharmacies

totally agree.

vet treatment is a SINGULARLY BAD EXAMPLE because it is part and parcel of bush's shameful execution of war and the cover ups involved.

the nature of vet treatment was part of the brushing off war costs UNDER THE RUG. and keeping the real costs of war unknowable by the general public, just like forbidding the photographs of the coffins of the honorable war dead coming back to american soil.

ABSOLUTELY SHAMEFUL.

anyway, much of the VA system must be revised now at tax payer expense because of the real toll these wars are taking. revised and updated as you suggest and have this all play very much in the public eye.

how dare they send american soldiers to fight and then seek to bury the consequences?

seriously outrageous.

jin

IMI
07-05-2009, 11:41 PM
you're not paying attention.

norway, canada, france, germany, england, japan.


<snip>

make no mistake, not only does it cost us NOW, it's bleeding us dry.

we literally CANNOT AFFORD NOT to have universal health care.

jin


Well that's all well and good, but it doesn't answer the other part of what I wrote, how it still doesn't seem to be happening in spite of a democrat administration and a Congress who *want* universal health care.

Why is that? It's not the heartless conservatives holding it back now, so they can't be entirely blamed. As it turns out, holding health care back has been a joint effort of both parties all along.

So all I'm saying is I don't think it's entirely accurate to continue blaming the lack of health care on the conservatives. I guess time will tell, but I honestly would have expected the Congress to have had a health care bill for Obama to sign, by now.

IMI
07-05-2009, 11:47 PM
and another - which we ALREADY mentioned in order to REFUTE YOUR WILLFUL BLINDLESS - is the health care program that the president, congressman and other federal workers get.





Well then why don't they just go ahead and do it already? All they have to do is just pretend as if they just hired 250 million new senators and push the paperwork through. ;)

jin choung
07-05-2009, 11:50 PM
Well that's all well and good, but it doesn't answer the other part of what I wrote, how it still doesn't seem to be happening in spite of a democrat administration and a Congress who *want* universal health care.

Why is that? It's not the heartless conservatives holding it back now, so they can't be entirely blamed. As it turns out, holding health care back has been a joint effort of both parties all along.

So all I'm saying is I don't think it's entirely accurate to continue blaming the lack of health care on the conservatives. I guess time will tell, but I honestly would have expected the Congress to have had a health care bill for Obama to sign, by now.

they will. these things don't happen over night. it's less than 200 days since this president has taken office. it will happen but it takes time.

and it IS the heartless conservatives that are indeed still fanning the flames of opposition. the entire boring schtick is available on cspan and covered daily/weekly in the news.

and powerful lobbies are fighting real reform. that is why despite the cogent arguments of scholars and those in the know, a single payer system isn't even being talked about.

there WILL BE REFORM. this time, there is a real shot at it.

but the democrats are just as susceptible to corruption as repubs. that is not in contention nor is it being argued against. and they are also held sway by narrow minded but powerful members of their own state.

that's why we need a robust, healthy, educated electorate as well as press to HOLD THEM TO ACCOUNT.

again - i am NOT saying we should TRUST ANYONE.

i want a mexican standoff so that they everyone is more or less coerced to do the right thing.

jin

IMI
07-05-2009, 11:50 PM
Not to call you insane, but are you insane? Why would you think that there would be a health care bill ready to sign so soon?

I guess I did have a moment there. I forgot I was talking about Congress, I guess. ;)

But supposedly some of these people have been working on this idea for years. I guess I'm not surprised they don't actually have a bill ready yet, but they don't even seem to have a *plan* ready yet, which leads me to believe it's still the same old infighting going on as they've always had.

jin choung
07-05-2009, 11:52 PM
Well then why don't they just go ahead and do it already? All they have to do is just pretend as if they just hired 250 million new senators and push the paperwork through. ;)

i'll take that as being facetious.

but the nonetheless i'll answer - something on this (MASSIVE) scale doesn't just happen. the president has been in office less than 1 measly year and you are expecting him to pull all of this out of his butt?

and i thought WE were guilty of making him out to be the messiah. : )

jin

jin choung
07-05-2009, 11:55 PM
I guess I did have a moment there. I forgot I was talking about Congress, I guess. ;)

But supposedly some of these people have been working on this idea for years. I guess I'm not surprised they don't actually have a bill ready yet, but they don't even seem to have a *plan* ready yet, which leads me to believe it's still the same old infighting going on as they've always had.

there's a difference between not having a plan and not sharing a plan.

if obama has shown anything, it's that he's not an idiot. unlike bush.

he's going to present the plan when the momentum, zeitgeist, heck, when the WEATHER is right.

he is NOT going to present his pearls to the swine and let them smear feces all over it.

it is early yet. believe me, it is. i don't know what kind of time table YOU are operating off of but it is early by ANYONE'S standards.

it will happen. and be ready to be swept off your feet when it does.

jin

p.s. supposedly, doctors and scientists have been working for years to cure cancer. so what's the hold up there? why don't they just DO IT?

answer: no matter how long anyone has been working on anything, not all details of a complex system can be known and not all parts are necessarily in place. and no matter how long anyone has been working on anything, no one is going to sabotage the deal by going off half-cocked. waiting for the FULLNESS OF TIME is wise.

everything good takes time. and rest easy - they are not playing ping pong behind closed doors. like in the campaign, they are formulating strategy, developing counters to the inevitable moronic oppositions and basically prepping for d-day so that when the assault comes, their small minded, special interest funded opposition will be crushed.

IMI
07-06-2009, 12:01 AM
i'll take that as being facetious.

but the nonetheless i'll answer - something on this (MASSIVE) scale doesn't just happen. the president has been in office less than 1 measly year and you are expecting him to pull all of this out of his butt?

and i thought WE were guilty of making him out to be the messiah. : )

jin


Well yeah, it was pretty facetious. ;)

But our last Congress got together over a very short period of time and got organized and tried to sneak through the comprehensive immigration reform bill, which was nothing minor, either.
And then more recently they had all those emergency and late night sessions over how best to give away hundreds of billions of dollars to the auto manufacturers.

So, of it's important enough to them, they manage it. Like you said a few pages back.

The health care thing is somewhat different. Lots and lots of our politicians have constituents who have a good reason to not want it, and alot of money that might be spent on the campaigns of those who oppose it or hold it back, instead of they who support it.

But I guess we'll see what happens. Personally, I'm predicting either no universal health care at all, or a greatly watered-down version of it, within the next few years, not the end of this year.

IMI
07-06-2009, 12:05 AM
everything good takes time. and they are not playing ping pong behind closed doors. like in the campaign, they are formulating strategy, developing counters to the inevitable moronic oppositions and basically prepping for d-day.

I think you give them too much credit.
Not Obama - he, I believe has integrity and does care about people. but he's just the prez, not anywhere near as powerful as Congress as a whole.

The rest of them are just career politicians. I think you are giving them far too much credit. I think what' they're *really* hashing out is how to get the health care while also making it pay off for each and every one of them without affecting their campaign supporters too badly. Doctors, Insurance lobbies, people with big money who don't like the idea.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 12:07 AM
But our last Congress got together over a very short period of time and got organized and tried to sneak through the comprehensive immigration reform bill, which was nothing minor, either.

i rest my case.

what did it get them?

where did it go?

again, efficacy in terms of acts of congress take time. nothing happens overnight and nothing SHOULD happen overnight.

but it's not because people are twiddling their thumbs.

there IS infighting. there IS negotiating. there IS constituent opposition.

there are MANY ENEMIES to any large expenditure of money.

and so if they don't want to get shot to pieces the moment they stick their toe out, they must prepare.

and there is INDEED a tremendous, GREAT RISK that the health care reform will be greatly watered down.

another reason why the waters and the zeitgeist must be carefully prepared before just barging out there to be a target.

jin

IMI
07-06-2009, 12:08 AM
Incidentally, I've actually become a big fan of Obama. I'd like to see him succeed, I think he deserves to succeed.
I'm not opposed to the universal health care thing either, just highly skeptical about where Congress' priorities are, and their ability to work it out, with or without Obama.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 12:10 AM
I think you give them too much credit.
Not Obama - he, I believe has integrity and does care about people. but he's just the prez, not anywhere near as powerful as Congress as a whole.

The rest of them are just career politicians. I think you are giving them far too much credit. I think what' they're *really* hashing out is how to get the health care while also making it pay off for each and every one of them without affecting their campaign supporters too badly. Doctors, Insurance lobbies, people with big money who don't like the idea.

i'm not even opposed to putting obama in that category. heck, he puts HIMSELF in that category.

before he took office, he told all the people pushing for change to NOT REST now that he's in office!

HE NEEDS TO BE PUSHED! *HE* said that. because he realizes that he IS a politician and must contend with the same forces that all politicians must deal with.

even with the don't ask don't tell thing - i can see the political forces in play that keep him from really coming out and taking a strong stand on that. and issues like that as well as for health care, he needs the public momentum to do what many of us think he wants to do.

in so many words, he has appealed to us, "FORCE ME TO DO THE RIGHT THING"!

he has asked for the people to HOLD HIM TO ACCOUNT.

to FORCE HIS HAND.

and that's what many are doing. to really stir up the grassroots mindshare so that the immovable force of political mediocrity is confronted by an implacable public will.

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 12:12 AM
I'm not opposed to the universal health care thing either, just highly skeptical about where Congress' priorities are, and their ability to work it out, with or without Obama.

and you're good and right to be. we ALL ARE. we all MUST BE. again, i'm the person that says "F trust" - i want "mutually assured destruction"!

and that's why this is a moment history where the mexican standoff has to be engineered just so. and that's what i think is being tackled behind the scenes now. again, not ping pong.

jin

IMI
07-06-2009, 12:21 AM
and you're good and right to be. we ALL ARE. we all MUST BE. again, i'm the person that says "F trust" - i want "mutually assured destruction"!

and that's why this is a moment history where the mexican standoff has to be engineered just so. and that's what i think is being tackled behind the scenes now. again, not ping pong.

jin

As you said, the public as a whole needs to force them into it, to collectively outweigh whatever the special interest groups want.
How to do that, I have no idea, but I think it would suit the proponents of the idea well to step up the health care public awareness a few notches.
I think Obama needs to come up with a massive campaign-like promotion and get it out there, in everyone's faces.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 12:23 AM
As you said, the public as a whole needs to force them into it, to collectively outweigh whatever the special interest groups want.
How to do that, I have no idea, but I think it would suit the proponents of the idea well to step up the health care public awareness a few notches.
I think Obama needs to come up with a massive campaign-like promotion and get it out there, in everyone's faces.

i agree. but he's already started. last week he had a big ABC town hall kind of thing on health care during prime time.

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 12:26 AM
These dealing should ALL be made out in the open and everyone should have internet access to all things Congress - no behind-the-scenes dealmaking allowed. That would be interesting.

totally agree.

then you have the special interests and the pull of money being balanced out by the threat of EXPOSURE.

THAT would really be a tremendous coup.

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 12:32 AM
Apparently (according to recent polls) 75% of Americans want a public health care plan. It's not the constituents of our Congressional leaders that doesn't want this reform - it is the lobbies from those against it.

No **** ... everyone is for "free" stuff ... if Obama were to come out and announce that from now on everybody gets to make 100K , I bet 90% of Americans would be for it as well.

Frankly, I don't care anymore ... this country is already bankrupt so who gives a **** ... a trillion here or there ... it is all worthless paper anyway.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 12:35 AM
a trillion here or there ... it is all worthless paper anyway.

and in bitterness, you discover the truth of it.

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 12:48 AM
Where do you get free? It's not and it won't be for ANYONE. As Jin has said time and time again... we either pay for it now or pay ALOT more later. Which approach would you choose? The cheaper and more effective method - i.e. Universal Healthcare. Or the more expensive/ineffective method - i.e. what we've got now. Seems like only fools would choose the latter.

It would only be cheaper because it would be rationed (unless you believe in free lunches, that is)

waverguy
07-06-2009, 12:54 AM
Where do you get free? It's not and it won't be for ANYONE. As Jin has said time and time again... we either pay for it now or pay ALOT more later. Which approach would you choose? The cheaper and more effective method - i.e. Universal Healthcare. Or the more expensive/ineffective method - i.e. what we've got now. Seems like only fools would choose the latter.

With government in control it will always be expensive and ineffective. Look at Amtrak.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 12:57 AM
With government in control it will always be expensive and ineffective. Look at Amtrak.

Hehe ... yeah, they are going to run it cheaper ... just like their existings programs like Medicare ,which is what now ... like 32 trillion in debt ?

gatz
07-06-2009, 01:10 AM
Jin-

Where the F*&# do you get this WE and YOU GUYS crap? I'm not coming from some partisan position. I happen to be a registered Democrat. Modale and Ferraro were the first presidential candidates I voted for, followed by the Dukakis and Clinton's first term.* I simply don't believe what the Democratic party currently espouses will work.

The fact that you have to pitch IRAQ, Bush bashing, Wall Street malfeasance and the founding fathers connection to the masons** in a conversation about healthcare reform shows how desperate you are to support anything as long as it has the correct party imprimatur.

So in short you've won. You have achieved such a breathtaking level of stupidity that MY brain has shut down. Here's hoping you notice when history bears out many of us fear.


* while I resent having to disgorge my voting history to establish some kind of bona fide. I'm actually more ashamed BECAUSE I WAS WRONG!

**A joke. But it will surface if the tread goes on long enough.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:23 AM
Where the F*&# do you get this WE and YOU GUYS crap?

+++

* while I resent having to disgorge my voting history to establish some kind of bona fide. I'm actually more ashamed BECAUSE I WAS WRONG!


where the [email protected]#$? where the [email protected]#[email protected]?

hmmmmm....

where would i get that? hmmmmm....

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:25 AM
The fact that you have to pitch IRAQ, Bush bashing, Wall Street malfeasance and the founding fathers connection to the masons** in a conversation about healthcare reform shows how desperate you are to support anything as long as it has the correct party imprimatur.

i do nothing by labels. that's why your party affiliation doesn't buy you any traction.

you can be a dem and be dead wrong. you can be liberal and be dead wrong.

don't see a lot of good arguments coming from the conservative side but hey, it's possible.

if you're a dem, then take the "you guys" to mean "you guys" who are on the wrong side of an issue.

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:27 AM
Hehe ... yeah, they are going to run it cheaper ... just like their existings programs like Medicare ,which is what now ... like 32 trillion in debt ?

or better like the private markets which almost plunged us into economic oblivion and required GOVERNMENT WELFARE FOR THE WEALTHY to not doom us all?

pfffffffffft.

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 01:28 AM
if you're a dem, then take the "you guys" to mean "you guys" who are on the wrong side of an issue.

jin

As defined by you , of course ...

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:29 AM
It would only be cheaper because it would be rationed (unless you believe in free lunches, that is)

unlike the glorious privatized health care now where it's just between you and your doctor and an insurance company would NEVER step in to RATION according to how much it would cost.

why is everything you say so pfffffffffffffffffffft worthy?

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 01:30 AM
or better like the private markets which almost plunged us into economic oblivion and required GOVERNMENT WELFARE FOR THE WEALTHY to not doom us all?

pfffffffffft.

jin

Man you really hate private markets .. it is common among people who haven't seen or experienced anything else.

Be glad you haven't.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:30 AM
As defined by you , of course ...

: )

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:33 AM
Man you really hate private markets .. it is common among people who haven't seen or experienced anything else.

Be glad you haven't.

man, you're like a tourist visiting hollywood and i'm like the resident. all you see is the facade but i see the grit and dirt and the REALITY right underneath. your "new eyes" doesn't mean you have it right. rather, you're just blinded by the novelty. you're subject to the ole "grass is always greener". well guess what bub, there are plenty of weeds and turds on this side of the fence. so please, take off your tourist's hat and join us in the realm of reality.

i don't hate them. but everyone is right to DISTRUST THEM.

and i place them on the SAME FOOTING as govt. neither is to be entrusted. each is best when played against the other. and both must be regulated.

unlike you with your kowtowing, no holds barred, WORSHIP of private markets and outright demonization of all things "public" and "social" (love to see what you do when your house is on fire... get the garden hose and fight it yourself just to spite the socialists?).

pffffft...

yeah, i see canada, i see france, i see england, i see germany, i see the netherlands.

they're all doing soooo much worse than us.

>sniff<

your arguments are bankrupt because there are plenty of democratic, free societies that can care for their people. so why don't you guys put your heads together and try to come up with something that sounds sensible and sane?

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 01:34 AM
unlike the glorious privatized health care now where it's just between you and your doctor and an insurance company would NEVER step in to RATION according to how much it would cost.

why is everything you say so pfffffffffffffffffffft worthy?

jin

You know what .. .you want to have government run health care... be my guest.
Let them start an insurance company just like any other and you can then drop your current insurance and sign on with them.
I see nothing wrong with that.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 01:36 AM
man, you're like a tourist visiting hollywood and i'm like the resident. all you see is the facade but i see the grit and dirt right underneath.

i don't hate them. but everyone is right to DISTRUST THEM.

and i place them on the SAME FOOTING as govt. neither is to be entrusted. each is best when played against the other. and both must be regulated.

unlike you with your kowtowing, no holds barred, WORSHIP of private markets.

pffffft...

yeah, i see canada, i see france, i see england, i see germany, i see the netherlands.

they're all doing soooo much worse than us.

>sniff<

jin

Yeah, they do.
Of course, they were hit just as bad or even worse by the crisis ... so perhaps having tight government oversight doesn't do **** - sure didn't do much for them.
In other words, they pay the price in terms of high regulations and taxes without getting anything in return.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:42 AM
Yeah, they do.
Of course, they were hit just as bad or even worse by the crisis ... so perhaps having tight government oversight doesn't do **** - sure didn't do much for them.
In other words, they pay the price in terms of high regulations and taxes without getting anything in return.

???

sigh.

lol.

just because everyone got burned because one as$hole decided to pour gasoline on himself and light himself on fire DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT'S NOT A GOOD IDEA TO TAKE AWAY THE MATCHES AND GASOLINE FROM THE CHILDREN.

are you fing kidding?

lol.

and fwiw, they get a nice universal health care system for their troubles.

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:43 AM
and FYI,

i keep bringing the other prosperous first world nations because they prove what you say is a lie.

that you can't have a socially responsible universal health care system.

you CAN. and all you have to do is look to the left and right, up and down to see it.

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 01:51 AM
???

sigh.

lol.

just because everyone got burned because one as$hole decided to pour gasoline on himself and light himself on fire DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT'S NOT A GOOD IDEA TO TAKE AWAY THE MATCHES AND GASOLINE FROM THE CHILDREN.

are you fing kidding?

lol.

and fwiw, they get a nice universal health care system for their troubles.

jin


Yeah, this pretty much sums it up ... take way the matches and gasoline from the children.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 01:52 AM
and FYI,

i keep bringing the other prosperous first world nations because they prove what you say is a lie.

that you can't have a socially responsible universal health care system.

you CAN. and all you have to do is look to the left and right, up and down to see it.

jin

I already told you ...



You know what .. .you want to have government run health care... be my guest.
Let them start an insurance company just like any other and you can then drop your current insurance and sign on with them.
I see nothing wrong with that.


Again, I see nothing wrong with that ...

aidenvfx
07-06-2009, 01:54 AM
Yeah, they do.
Of course, they were hit just as bad or even worse by the crisis ... so perhaps having tight government oversight doesn't do **** - sure didn't do much for them.
In other words, they pay the price in terms of high regulations and taxes without getting anything in return.

Actually Canada did well in the crisis overall. Also as others have said the U.S. government is already spending more on healthcare then Canada and other countries that have universal health care systems.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:05 AM
Also as others have said the U.S. government is already spending more on healthcare then Canada and other countries that have universal health care systems.

Yeah, I know ... and they get what they pay for.

Of course, when things get real bad ... they head south.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070914/belinda_Stronach_070914/20070914

http://cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20090626/090626_BABY_PASSPORTS/20090626/?hub=CP24Home

jin choung
07-06-2009, 02:08 AM
Yeah, I know ... and they get what they pay for.

Of course, when things get real bad ... they head south.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070914/belinda_Stronach_070914/20070914

http://cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20090626/090626_BABY_PASSPORTS/20090626/?hub=CP24Home

and many in the u.s. go to INDIA to get their surgeries because they can't afford them here.

and AGAIN, yours is a hollow argument because rationing happens NOW.

not by the government but by the insurance company.

your premise when you bring up the spectre of rationing is just wrong headed and false.

WE HAVE RATIONING NOW!

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:19 AM
Well let's see now... do we have insurance companies that say you CAN'T have "this treatment" or "that treatment" because it either costs too much or they don't cover it? Hhmmm... oh yeah, that DOES happen now, doesn't it?


Of course it does.
Yeah ...so let's get rid of having multiple options and just settle on one big insurance company.

One hell of an improvement.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:24 AM
Why not include in your list fire departments, police, social security, medicare, etc. And please don't tell me that SS and MC are deep in debt. It happens that people are living ALOT longer now and collecting more benefits, etc. Yeah... let's blame the government for that.

Why not take it further then ... do we really need Microsoft and Apple and Sun and Newtek and god only knows how many more companies , all of them essentially duplicating efforts and wasting money having their own marketing departments, sales etc ...

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:31 AM
I am not against a government run health care plan or insurance or whatever you want to call it.

If you think they can run things more efficiently and save you tons of money while providing superior care, sign on with them and leave people like me alone.

Sounds like a deal ?

jin choung
07-06-2009, 02:38 AM
Why not take it further then ... do we really need Microsoft and Apple and Sun and Newtek and god only knows how many more companies , all of them essentially duplicating efforts and wasting money having their own marketing departments, sales etc ...

great, and then after we're done with that, we will try to prove YOUR position by having army, navy, air force all become separate privatized corporations and see how well that works out.

pffffffft....

"markets can rule themselves" is a myth. if you think that the multiple insurance companies have created a playing field so that even the poor can afford competition driven policies, you are dead wrong.

why must ALL your arguments be so hollow and without substance?

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 02:39 AM
I am not against a government run health care plan or insurance or whatever you want to call it.

If you think they can run things more efficiently and save you tons of money while providing superior care, sign on with them and leave people like me alone.

Sounds like a deal ?

that IS what obama is offering you.

YOU can opt out.

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:46 AM
Where did you get THAT idea? Another piece of BS propganda from the far Right? The public option will be JUST ONE MORE OPTION to choose from. If it's cheaper, you can sign up for it - if it's not, you don't have to. Trying to muddy the waters with lies is not very productive.

Really... do you have ANY idea what is being suggested or do you just bring up BS crap?



Well DUH. Isn't that what they have said will happen? So why are you F'ing arguing?

Why am I F'ing arguing ?

Let me tell you why ...

How are they going to pay for it ?
If they are going to pay for it by taxing everybody more or simply taxing existing insurance benefits then this is not what I am talking about.

Have them set up a separate company financed by additional taxes from people who signed up for their service and have them account for every expense they way private companies do ... unless they do that, everything else is just pure BS.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:51 AM
Because it is obvious from what he has said in these last few posts that he has NO understanding of what is being offered AT ALL.

What the hell do you know about their plan ?

******* politicians, the very people who are supposed to be voting on it are refusing to even discuss it at this point, because there is no provision in there how this is all going to be paid for and you are accusing me of ignorance ?

hrgiger
07-06-2009, 03:30 AM
Sure there is room for improvement, but any intelligent person would start improving one part at a time rather than destroy what's working and give total control to an entity that has never managed anything worth bragging about.
They can't handle what they are screwing up now.

What's working? Well, you sound like you're one of the lucky ones who has health care. Good for you. It's currently not working for me. In fact, I'd like to leave space at the end of my post to put everyones name it's not working for either (will the forum allow 50 million blank spaces?) But then, I know you don't care about them and they must be the lazy shiftless ones.

meshpig
07-06-2009, 05:41 AM
“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." - Thomas Jefferson (the third President of the United States (1801–1809), the principal author of the Declaration of Independence (1776), and one of the most influential Founding Fathers for his promotion of the ideals of republicanism in the United States.)

Founding Fathers? Remember that "Republicanism" means rule by the people. We all know that's a joke;

The "Declaration of Independence" freed the colonies from the clutches of the British Empire; hence the United States of America just as Louis XIV sold-off what is now Louisiana.

Whether that makes Thomas Jefferson a progenitor thereafter is conjecture since "Republicanism" in the 18C was also what gave rise to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) for example.

- “A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." is easily con-temporized if you ask yourself now who you would rather owe money to?

A bank or the tax office?

Banks are ( were ) big enough to give you everything and take all when you default. The tax office at least gives you options.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 06:56 AM
A bank or the tax office?

Banks are ( were ) big enough to give you everything and take all when you default. The tax office at least gives you options.

Yeah that's brilliant , except you don't have to go to a bank or do any business with them ... if you try to skip doing business with your local tax office, people with guns will make sure you don't make the same mistake again.

Beyond that, yeah, there is no difference.

meshpig
07-06-2009, 08:09 AM
Yeah that's brilliant , except you don't have to go to a bank or do any business with them ... if you try to skip doing business with your local tax office, people with guns will make sure you don't make the same mistake again.

Beyond that, yeah, there is no difference.

True, seen that but Banks foreclose mortgages on paper. Ever had any queries with American Express? They go you on paper too and the pen is more powerful than the sword.

Relentless and unreasonable crap since they sell debt onto cheap local companies and it takes a few years of effort and about a 1000 pieces of paper to get them off your back.

Amex don't give a s*** whether the debt was legitimate in the first place , they're not contactable... they just sell it on anyway.

Anyone who wants to argue that there's any difference between Government bureaucracy and the bureaucracy of the "Free Market" only has to look in the waste paper bin at home, let alone the filing cabinet.





:D

Andyjaggy
07-06-2009, 09:40 AM
Maybe if we had national healthcare the government and doctors would start focusing on preventative care instead of treatment, as it is right now doctors and drug companies stand to benefit a lot from a sick population, as soon as it cost us more maybe we would actually start taking care of ourselves.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 09:47 AM
Anyone who wants to argue that there's any difference between Government bureaucracy and the bureaucracy of the "Free Market" only has to look in the waste paper bin at home, let alone the filing cabinet.

:D

There is a huge difference ... in the free market economy, companies which are inefficient will eventually die out (unless they enter a permanent government sponsored zombie state where taxpayers essentially cover their inneficiencies - Chrysler/GM) and their place will be taken by others who are more efficient.

When a government agency gets inefficient, they simply raise your taxes and call it a day.

But .... the most crucial difference is that if I don't like what Microsoft or McDonald is doing I am free to stop contributing to their bottom line - once something gets incorporated into government it becomes almost impossible to kill the Beast.

adamredwoods
07-06-2009, 12:25 PM
There is a huge difference ... in the free market economy, companies which are inefficient will eventually die out (unless they enter a permanent government sponsored zombie state where taxpayers essentially cover their inneficiencies - Chrysler/GM) and their place will be taken by others who are more efficient.

When a government agency gets inefficient, they simply raise your taxes and call it a day.

But .... the most crucial difference is that if I don't like what Microsoft or McDonald is doing I am free to stop contributing to their bottom line - once something gets incorporated into government it becomes almost impossible to kill the Beast.

Can't compare for-profit business to health insurance. The whole point of insurance is to spread out risk among a population, so it's cheaper for that population as a whole.

For-profit is to make money, so with insurance, eventually as they attempt to make more money year-after-year, they need to start cutting somewhere. Cutting back usually starts with the sick.

How can the sick make a choice using their dollars (free-market), versus their voice (government)? By using dollars over voice, lobbyists will ALWAYS have a bigger influence than the minority sick.

US Health care is a lop-sided problem which needs some major change.

ted
07-06-2009, 12:28 PM
vet treatment is a SINGULARLY BAD EXAMPLE because it is part and parcel of bush's shameful execution of war and the cover ups involved.
jin

Pathetic Vet care is Bushes fault? :D That's the kind of answer I expected.
So who gets blamed for the DMV, IRS, Rail system and all the other stuff the government is screwing up?

jin choung
07-06-2009, 12:30 PM
Maybe if we had national healthcare the government and doctors would start focusing on preventative care instead of treatment, as it is right now doctors and drug companies stand to benefit a lot from a sick population, as soon as it cost us more maybe we would actually start taking care of ourselves.

and that is an excellent articulation why a free market, for profit system can be a problem BY ITS VERY NATURE and contribute to the problem rather than strive toward a solution.

jin

ted
07-06-2009, 12:35 PM
Maybe if we had national healthcare the government and doctors would start focusing on preventative care instead of treatment.

As I said earlier, the Government is already saying we are wasting money on too many screening tests for diseases.
Doesn't sound like they are concerned with preventative care. They fear if we catch cancer early too many people will need treatment. I guess they think it's cheaper to burry people.
Just wait till the Government actually gets control. Then the bait and switch really starts.

It's like giving a drug addict control of the medicine cabinet. But the addict is the Gov and the drug is money and control.
Just say no!

Andyjaggy
07-06-2009, 12:38 PM
and that is an excellent articulation why a free market, for profit system can be a problem BY ITS VERY NATURE and contribute to the problem rather than strive toward a solution.

jin

Don't get me wrong I'm all for a free market. Yes I'm one of those guys. ;) But when it comes to health care I'm a bit on the fence, I'm still mulling it over in my head as to what I think the best solution is.

I'm not sure if I am a republican or democrat. I don't think I am either, I think I'm for the common sense party...... oh wait we don't have that one anymore. :)

jin choung
07-06-2009, 12:44 PM
But .... the most crucial difference is that if I don't like what Microsoft or McDonald is doing I am free to stop contributing to their bottom line - once something gets incorporated into government it becomes almost impossible to kill the Beast.

your essential position is rote and inaccurate and flawed but i'll only point out your final statement is wrong.

the USA is not a closed society. you can "opt out" by leaving. you can stop "patronizing the establishment"...

jin

ted
07-06-2009, 12:46 PM
and many in the u.s. go to INDIA to get their surgeries because they can't afford them here.

and AGAIN, yours is a hollow argument because rationing happens NOW.

not by the government but by the insurance company...WE HAVE RATIONING NOW!

jin

I don't think large numbers are going to India for surgeries compared to the numbers coming to America. :D
And some of those "numbers" going elsewhere is because it's illegal to get those treatments here.

And while the Government demonizes insurance for that rationing you speak of, they have proven to be guiltier themselves.
Have you tried to get treatment at the monopoly called Veterans care? Take a number and we'll bounce you around for months only to reject the treatment you need. Yeh, that's what I want.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 12:47 PM
Don't get me wrong I'm all for a free market. Yes I'm one of those guys. ;) But when it comes to health care I'm a bit on the fence, I'm still mulling it over in my head as to what I think the best solution is.

I'm not sure if I am a republican or democrat. I don't think I am either, I think I'm for the common sense party...... oh wait we don't have that one anymore. :)

it doesn't matter what you label yourself. but as i said, you articulated an excellent example of a problem of the free markets.

as i said previously, i think that ALL HUMAN SYSTEMS are corrupt and problematic.

this goes for the free market itself NO LESS than the government. and it boggles my mind how government critics will bend over backwards and prostrate themselves at the foot of A DIFFERENT HUMAN INSTITUTION.

i am about checks and balances and "f trust". nobody will do the right thing unless you put a gun to the base of their skull.

jin

ted
07-06-2009, 12:48 PM
I'm not sure if I am a republican or democrat. I don't think I am either, I think I'm for the common sense party...... oh wait we don't have that one anymore. :)

Well said my friend! I totally agree! :thumbsup:

adamredwoods
07-06-2009, 12:49 PM
As I said earlier, the Government is already saying we are wasting money on too many screening tests for diseases.
Doesn't sound like they are concerned with preventative care. They fear if we catch cancer early too many people will need treatment. I guess they think it's cheaper to burry people.


I'll agree with this first part, but not the part about the government.

Here' sthe famous New Yorker Magazine article by Atul Gawande:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_gawande?currentPage=1

adamredwoods
07-06-2009, 12:51 PM
Have you tried to get treatment at the monopoly called Veterans care? Take a number and we'll bounce you around for months only to reject the treatment you need. Yeh, that's what I want.

Have you tried to get costly treatment w/o health insurance and ended up bankrupt? I'll take a number...

jin choung
07-06-2009, 12:51 PM
Just say no!

we do say no. we resoundingly said no to you and your ilk when we voted obama into office in a landslide.

your side and your arguments lost.

people want change haven't you heard? he has our mandate don't you know?

and while you guys are busy being pawns for the wealthy, the rest of us are thinking about radical ideas like social justice and health care for the poor.

yeah, we're evil fs.

jin

*Pete*
07-06-2009, 12:55 PM
Don't get me wrong I'm all for a free market. Yes I'm one of those guys. ;) But when it comes to health care I'm a bit on the fence, I'm still mulling it over in my head as to what I think the best solution is.

In Norway we have universal healthcare AND private clinics...

if you feel for it, you can even sign a healthinsurance so that the insurance companies will get you to the private clinics, but i cant imagine why anyone would prefer that...

i have been treated in the same hospital as the Norwegian king was a few years ago, same hospital where the princess gave birth to her children...the rich and the poor alike use the universal healthcare since its the better option....its cheaper, better organised and better equipped.

ted
07-06-2009, 12:55 PM
Where do you get freeWhich approach would you choose? The cheaper and more effective method - i.e. Universal Healthcare. Or the more expensive/ineffective method - i.e. what we've got now. Seems like only fools would choose the latter.

From the figures I have seen the governments plan will cost more per person than private insurance. So why would you think this is better?
But of course they have proven over and over that they can't run anything cheaper than the private sector, and it's usually more screwed up and harder to utilize.

JML
07-06-2009, 12:56 PM
Wow , another fight between democrates and republicans, what a surprise !
F*cking tired of this **** and I don't come to this newtek website to read more about it.

so shut the f* up , especially jin that's reponsable for 80% of the replies
of that thread.

adamredwoods
07-06-2009, 12:58 PM
From the figures I have seen the governments plan will cost more per person than private insurance. So why would you think this is better?
But of course they have proven over and over that they can't run anything cheaper than the private sector, and it's usually more screwed up and harder to utilize.

THIS IS BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT WOULD INCLUDE EVERYONE, instead of only the employed, wealthy, and perfectly healthy.

ted
07-06-2009, 12:58 PM
Have you tried to get costly treatment w/o health insurance and ended up bankrupt? I'll take a number...

There is NOT one single person in the country, even illegal aliens that can't get life saving treatment right now.

adamredwoods
07-06-2009, 12:58 PM
Wow , another fight between democrates and republicans, what a surprise !
F*cking tired of this **** and I don't come to this newtek website to read more about it.

so shut the f* up , especially jin that's reponsable for 80% of the replies
of that thread.

But yet you add to it? At least we're constructive.

JML
07-06-2009, 01:01 PM
But yet you add to it?

I did not show sign of supports of either. so no, I did not add to it

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:01 PM
I don't think large numbers are going to India for surgeries compared to the numbers coming to America. :D
And some of those "numbers" going elsewhere is because it's illegal to get those treatments here.

And while the Government demonizes insurance for that rationing you speak of, they have proven to be guiltier themselves.
Have you tried to get treatment at the monopoly called Veterans care? Take a number and we'll bounce you around for months only to reject the treatment you need. Yeh, that's what I want.

i suppose bush is not to blame for the katrina response either huh?

that the policy of denying care to vets was not an attempt by the previous administration to sweep the ugly real world cost (which they VASTLY UNDERESTIMATED) of an elective war under the rug?

such willfull blindness boggles the mind.

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:03 PM
so shut the f* up , especially jin that's reponsable for 80% of the replies
of that thread.

no.

jin

JML
07-06-2009, 01:03 PM
But yet you add to it? At least we're constructive.

constructive ? more like self-destructive.
Anyway, this is newtek's website, not a news website.

JML
07-06-2009, 01:03 PM
no.

jin

I know, but you really should

ted
07-06-2009, 01:04 PM
i have been treated in the same hospital as the Norwegian king was a few years ago, same hospital where the princess gave birth to her children...the rich and the poor alike use the universal healthcare since its the better option....its cheaper, better organised and better equipped.

And yet our congress and President won't join the plan they will give you, they will still keep the "KINGS" health care plan they reserved for them!
That should tell you the level of care they have planned for you. :D

Perfect note to leave on. I gotta get to work to pay for all the taxes you guys want. :help:
Have GREAT day!

adamredwoods
07-06-2009, 01:07 PM
constructive ? more like self-destructive.
Anyway, this is newtek's website, not a news website.

I have an idea, if you want to be righteous, convince everyone to stop this thread w/o it being locked.

I'll help by stopping myself, since I already know how these threads play out. :)

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:07 PM
There is NOT one single person in the country, even illegal aliens that can't get life saving treatment right now.

unlike canada, england, japan, norway, germany, france, etc etc etc that let their people die and rot all over the street.

yawn

in terms of the KIND OF EMERGENCY CARE that you are talking about when you say what you say, there would be NO DIFFERENCE between now and under government care.

you are muddying the issue by using vague terms and applying different standards in different cases.

watch a lot of fox news do you?

jin

Andyjaggy
07-06-2009, 01:08 PM
I guess it all comes down to if you think healthcare is

1) A privilege
2) A basic human right.

That's really what we should be arguing about. Because if you agree that it is a basic human right, then you classify it right up there with all the other basic human rights, and if that is the case then I think, yes, it is the governments responsibility to help everyone achieve it.

I am lucky enough to have a job that gives me health insurance. however before this job I had to get it and pay for it myself (which was actually cheaper then my insurance now, though the coverage wasn't quite as good).

However it was pain in the ***** for me to get coverage on my own. I have a preexisting condition (only 1 kidney) and freak, they sure don't want to insure you if you have anything even remotely wrong with you. With some companies I tried they wouldn't even insure me because I had been to the doctor in the past year. WTF. If we are only going to insure the perfectly healthy people what is the point? Eventually I found someone who would insure me, thankfully.

That said from where I am standing, the government needs to at LEAST make it possible for EVERYONE to get insurance, regardless of their current health, they might have to pay more for it (a reasonable extra, probably regulated by government) but at least EVERYONE will have the option for coverage, it won't be a free ride but if they want it it will be in their power to get it.

Seems logical to me. I don't see why everything has to be so freaking black and white. Absolutely no socialist/national programs, or let's totally ditch the free market. Compromise people.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:09 PM
I know, but you really should

no.

jin

ted
07-06-2009, 01:09 PM
i suppose bush is not to blame for the katrina response either huh?

that the policy of denying care to vets was not an attempt by the previous administration to sweep the ugly real world cost (which they VASTLY UNDERESTIMATED) of an elective war under the rug?

such willfull blindness boggles the mind.

jin

Sorry Jin, the local leaders and residents were responsible for the lack of preparedness and poor handling for the first 3 days. It's the law in case you didn't know. But as usual, it's always Bush’s fault. Who and where was the mayor and Governor?

And my Grandfather died from crappy veterans health care long before Bush. But again, it's Bush’s fault to you.

Such willful blindness really does boggle the mind! :D:D:D

Andyjaggy
07-06-2009, 01:11 PM
i suppose bush is not to blame for the katrina response either huh?

that the policy of denying care to vets was not an attempt by the previous administration to sweep the ugly real world cost (which they VASTLY UNDERESTIMATED) of an elective war under the rug?

such willfull blindness boggles the mind.

jin

Oh please. Just because we don't subscribe to your ideas or the democratic party doesn't mean we are Bush lovers. I hate Bush as much as the next guy, but that doesn't mean I voted for Obama.

Bush was just a lousy leader. It was more a fault of person then of ideas.

Just my opinion.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:12 PM
And yet our congress and President won't join the plan they will give you, they will still keep the "KINGS" health care plan they reserved for them!
That should tell you the level of care they have planned for you. :D

Perfect note to leave on. I gotta get to work to pay for all the taxes you guys want. :help:
Have GREAT day!

you liked what andy said before, read what he just wrote.

you think health care is a right or a privelege for those who can afford it?

if you think it is a privelege, you are beneath my contempt.

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 01:12 PM
your essential position is rote and inaccurate and flawed but i'll only point out your final statement is wrong.

the USA is not a closed society. you can "opt out" by leaving. you can stop "patronizing the establishment"...

jin


No, you are wrong .. this nation was founded by people who wanted to get away from various "one size fits all" ," I know what is best for you" type of messianic figures ...
We are not all in this together you know .. the whole point of having a country like the US was to avoid this sort of ******** groupthink.

Couple of years back there was a discussion on Slashdot regarding guns and gun laws in the United States.

Somebody wrote something along the lines
"I wish all these fckign right win gun nuts would simply go somewhere, find an island and start their own country …”

There was an anonymous reply …

“We did. What the fck are you doing here ?”

I think this sums it up pretty well.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:14 PM
Sorry Jin, the local leaders and residents were responsible for the lack of preparedness and poor handling for the first 3 days. It's the law in case you didn't know. But as usual, it's always Bush’s fault. Who and where was the mayor and Governor?

Such willful blindness really does boggle the mind! :D:D:D

it's funny that you guys always talk about personal responsibility but never assign it to your own.

that's really funny.

and that is why you guys don't have a leg to stand on. and why when you're wrong, you're not just wrong, you're a hypocrite.

jin

Andyjaggy
07-06-2009, 01:16 PM
No, you are wrong .. this nation was founded by people who wanted to get away from various "one size fits all" ," I know what is best for you" type of messianic figures ...
We are not all in this together you know .. the whole point of having a country like the US was to avoid this sort of ******** groupthink.

Couple of years back there was a discussion on Slashdot regarding guns and gun laws in the United States.

Somebody wrote something along the lines
"I wish all these fckign right win gun nuts would simply go somewhere, find an island and start their own country …”

There was an anonymous reply …

“We did. What the fck are you doing here ?”

I think this sums it up pretty well.

Let's not bring guns into this debate. :) That's a whole nother can of worms.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:16 PM
No, you are wrong .. this nation was founded by people who wanted to get away from various "one size fits all" ," I know what is best for you" type of messianic figures ...
We are not all in this together you know .. the whole point of having a country like the US was to avoid this sort of ******** groupthink.

Couple of years back there was a discussion on Slashdot regarding guns and gun laws in the United States.

Somebody wrote something along the lines
"I wish all these fckign right win gun nuts would simply go somewhere, find an island and start their own country …”

There was an anonymous reply …

“We did. What the fck are you doing here ?”

I think this sums it up pretty well.

nobody's telling you to leave.

i'm saying that you're wrong about having to pay for government program you don't like.

you don't have to.

you can leave.

jin

AdamAvenali
07-06-2009, 01:18 PM
how about we all just go and talk to our state representatives? because i'm pretty sure newtek is not relaying all of this to the appropriate personnel.

http://www.house.gov/
http://www.senate.gov/

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:19 PM
And my Grandfather died from crappy veterans health care long before Bush. But again, it's Bush’s fault.

no.

but isn't it yours then? or at least HIS OWN?

you're the believer of personal responsibility. you're believer of private funding.

so where were you ted?

if you saw he was getting crap care, why didn't you get him better care?

why don't you practice what you preach?

instead of blaming government for everything in sight?

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 01:21 PM
nobody's telling you to leave.

i'm saying that you're wrong about having to pay for government program you don't like.

you don't have to.

you can leave.

jin

Well, then lets have 300 000 000 people vote on what's for dinner tonight ... if you don't like the results .. well, you can leave.

We are moving in that direction and my point is that some decisions are best left to an individual or a family.

Larry_g1s
07-06-2009, 01:22 PM
and many in the u.s. go to INDIA to get their surgeries because they can't afford them here.Many? ha ha But those same people can afford the flight and time off to go to India? :ohmy:

Come on Jin, that's a stretch.

Stooch
07-06-2009, 01:27 PM
Many? ha ha But those same people can afford the flight and time off to go to India? :ohmy:

Come on Jin, that's a stretch.

actually its not, India, CUBA!, Malaysia, Europe, Canada.

mexico????!??!!?!?!? (yeah for dental procedures)

when you consider the cost of these procedures, paying a flight ticket and the time off is a bargain.

dirt cheap actually.

Lightwolf
07-06-2009, 01:28 PM
We are moving in that direction and my point is that some decisions are best left to an individual or a family.
And some aren't. D'oh - now start drawing the lines... ;)

Cheers,
Mike

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:31 PM
Many? ha ha But those same people can afford the flight and time off to go to India? :ohmy:

Come on Jin, that's a stretch.

you laugh but LOOK IT UP.

i'm not MAKING THIS UP.

throw in the flight and the stay in india and it's STILL CHEAPER.

THAT is how expensive health care in america is.

again, I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP. do a google search and see for yourself. 'medical tourism'

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 01:33 PM
Well, then lets have 300 000 000 people vote on what's for dinner tonight ... if you don't like the results .. well, you can leave.

We are moving in that direction and my point is that some decisions are best left to an individual or a family.

in your example, the alternative would be NOT voting on what's for dinner and letting those who can't afford dinner on their own starve.

this is the your position. and the unspoken (because it is politically unpalatable) position of the republicans.

and it is shameful.

jin

Lightwolf
07-06-2009, 01:46 PM
throw in the flight and the stay in india and it's STILL CHEAPER.
Well, money isn't the only reason in a lot of cases though. Time is another one (i.e. waiting lists for donor organs from iffy background that can be had with enough cash).
Having said that, we also have tourism into different parts of Europe (mostly to the East) for certain treatments, and that is because of money (after all, some things aren't covered, or only to a minimum, and most insurances insist on a certain amount being paid out of your own pockets... which can make other solutions cheaper in the end).

Cheers,
Mike

warmiak
07-06-2009, 01:46 PM
in your example, the alternative would be NOT voting on what's for dinner and letting those who can't afford dinner on their own starve.

this is the your position. and the unspoken (because it is politically unpalatable) position of the republicans.

and it is shameful.

jin

Why is it shameful ? Why should it be my business how well people take care of their own damn business ?
How often do you invite random people for lunch and end up paying for them ?

danielkaiser
07-06-2009, 01:47 PM
Jin

I never thought I would agree with you.

Ted

I have Medicare and have no problem getting treatment, I spend about $30.00 a month on meds without it it would be 20 times that, I have $35,000.00 worth of Titanium and synthetic bone in my back, it took me 4 years to get disability, without it I'd still be homeless. With socialized medicine it would never have reached the point where I could not work, so what do you want more people like me or a healthy work force, seams I'm costing you a lot more money, as Jin said pay now or later.

Dexter2999
07-06-2009, 01:58 PM
you laugh but LOOK IT UP.

i'm not MAKING THIS UP.

throw in the flight and the stay in india and it's STILL CHEAPER.

THAT is how expensive health care in america is.

again, I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP. do a google search and see for yourself. 'medical tourism'

jin

I wish I could find it again. Two years ago I was on a page with a banner that read "Take advantage of the political unrest in Hatie for a bargain in your next cosmetic proceedure". I swear I laughed so hard. I thought it was hoax...but it wasn't!

And yes, surgery is cheaper in India for those in the know. My understanding is dentistry in particular is HUGE there. Because not everyone trusts India for invasive proceedures but are more tolerant of dentistry.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:02 PM
Once again, you don't know what you're talking about. A person goes to an emergency room and it is discoverred they have cancer. They don't have insurance. They are NOT treated. Or haven't you heard? Perhaps if they had had insurance, they would have found out sooner and they may have lived. or hadn't you heard.

Speaking of which ... how many times do I have to point out that you are wrong.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article2296368.ece



Europe’s survival rates are lower than in the US, where 66.3 per cent of men and 62.9 per cent of women survive for five years, compared with 47.3 per cent of European men and 55.8 per cent of women. These figures may represent earlier diagnosis.


Can you explain to me how in the world socialized medicine bent on prevention (according to you ) can actually lag in terms of early diagnosis compared to what we have here ?

I am not trying to be facetious or anything … you claim that socialized medicine will allow people to be diagnosed early and thus save loads of money and here they claim otherwise so either you are wrong or they are wrong …. there is no other possibility.

Lightwolf
07-06-2009, 02:05 PM
Speaking of which ... how many times do I have to point out that you are wrong.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article2296368.ece

How many times do I need to debunk that link? It would be the third time now, and you still keep bringing it up. *yawn*

Cheers,
Mike

Andyjaggy
07-06-2009, 02:06 PM
And I THANK GOD every day that McCain/Palin did not win! He would barely be able to tackle anything BUT the economy and they would be pushing tax cuts left and right. Love McCains responses to North Korea and Iran. Heck... by now we'd be in ANOTHER war. :2guns:

So I said I didn't vote for Obama. That means I voted for McCain? Nope, I didn't vote for him either. :)

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:07 PM
How many times do I need to debunk that link? It would be the third time now, and you still keep bringing it up. *yawn*
Cheers,
Mike

You never did.
Your personal claims don't count.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:08 PM
And for those who cannot afford ANY health care.... it doesn't matter one bit - THEY DIE ANYWAY.

And as we have said COUNTLESS TIMES.... if YOU don't want to buy into the public option, YOU DON'T HAVE TO. You keep what you got and enjoy it.

Of course I don't have to ... but I will end up paying for it anyway.

Lightwolf
07-06-2009, 02:14 PM
You never did.
Your personal claims don't count.
Oh, I thought you did your research when I posted a bunch of links the first time...

Sorry for that, try this then:
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13899647
Then again, you might just not trust them, as everybody knows that the Economist is a left liberal communist rag opposed to the free market (as the red background of their logo clearly shows). :p

Cheers,
Mike

Edit: P.S. It also covers your story if you read it carefully, with the same arguments that I linked to ages ago.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 02:22 PM
Why is it shameful ? Why should it be my business how well people take care of their own damn business ?
How often do you invite random people for lunch and end up paying for them ?

first, it is shameful because in context of our discussion, it is about the poor being unable get medical treatment because they don't have money and you are fine with that.

how is that NOT shameful in your book?

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:27 PM
So rather than HELP people by paying your taxes and it going to a public option for EVERYONE, YOU would rather things stay the same and F the people who can't get health insurance?

I am not f-ing anyone ... if you think that's what's happening , why don't you hang out in front of your local hospital and offer to pay for others.
You don't need my cooperation for that , do you ?

The whole thing is not about not helping other people but rather about being forced to do so.

If I have to pay for my own insurance and then contribute to the public fund then you know what ... I am going to ditch my own insurance and just stick with the "free" option – Obama claims he wants to stimulate competition, yeah, this sort of policy will surely “stimulate” private insurance companies right out of the market and that's what I think is their plan in the first place.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 02:28 PM
You never did.
Your personal claims don't count.

your citation is ridiculous. it is so vague as to make any assertion completely meaningless.

you know what ELSE could account for the discrepancy? that more people in england are actually diagnosed and entered into the statistics because EVERYONE IS COVERED.

you know what the study COULD BE SAYING? it could be saying that people are dropping left right and center in america from cancer and most of them are never even entered into the system until they're dead.

BUT

the ones that ARE entered into the system are much fewer, much wealthier and could afford better care.

THAT is what that study can be saying. and you can't disprove it from that measly article.

and neither can you assert anything on YOUR position according to that measly article.

jin

Dexter2999
07-06-2009, 02:29 PM
Of course I don't have to ... but I will end up paying for it anyway.

There are people who feel the same way about schools and the military.

If it makes you feel better pretend all your money is going to the military or all of your taxes are going to the 11% of administration pay or whatever. It isn't like they literaly take a percentage of YOUR money and devide it between every expence the government incurrs.

I think most people's money goes to paying intrest on the national debt and military anyway.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 02:31 PM
The whole thing is not about not helping other people but rather about being forced to do so.

so then - let's get at the core. you are not a politician so at least have the balls to answer this truthfully:

it is your position then that people who cannot afford health care should go off, rot and die?

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:33 PM
Oh, I thought you did your research when I posted a bunch of links the first time...

Sorry for that, try this then:
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13899647
Then again, you might just not trust them, as everybody knows that the Economist is a left liberal communist rag opposed to the free market (as the red background of their logo clearly shows). :p

Cheers,
Mike

Edit: P.S. It also covers your story if you read it carefully, with the same arguments that I linked to ages ago.



In a recent study economists at the OECD found that America does indeed do well on some measures, such as breast-cancer survival rates and cervical-cancer screening, compared with other rich countries. However, it does worse in other areas.


That's debunking ?

Larry_g1s
07-06-2009, 02:35 PM
you laugh but LOOK IT UP.

i'm not MAKING THIS UP.

throw in the flight and the stay in india and it's STILL CHEAPER.

THAT is how expensive health care in America is.

again, I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP. do a google search and see for yourself. 'medical tourism'

jinI did look it up and I found articles of Canadians coming to America to get treatment because they couldn't in their home country.

http://www.projo.com/opinion/contributors/content/CT_holmes19_07-19-08_AFART5K_v9.4119004.html

EDIT: I did also find articles stating what you mentioned. I just wanted to point out the other view that gets over looked. It seems like they are more extreme types of surgery.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 02:37 PM
warniak's system if implemented as he would imagine it would be a wonderful paradise where you only get what you could afford.

no money, no honey.

- no health care
- no fire department
- no police department
- no military
- no schools
- no libraries
- no public works (roads, street maintenance, etc)

unless you have your credit card ready.

if you can't afford it, you should go and die. you are worthless.

and he believes this is ok because unlike popular wisdom, he believes that LIFE IS FAIR:

that those who are rich are rich because they deserve to be and those who are poor are lazy fers.

isn't that right warniak?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

and that ladies and gentleman is the problem with the conservative position in a nutshell.

so deceptively simple and so completely simplistic.

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 02:37 PM
I did look it up and I found articles of Canadians coming to America to get treatment because they couldn't in their home country.

http://www.projo.com/opinion/contributors/content/CT_holmes19_07-19-08_AFART5K_v9.4119004.html

and that's all you found huh? couldn't even cite the first thing that comes up when you look it up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_tourism

just wanted to hunt and peck for something that suited your position?

tsk tsk.

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:38 PM
Would you PLEASE do a little bit of research and LISTEN to a news channel other than Fox?



You know what ... you have a nasty habit of projecting your own stereotypes on others ... others you know **** about ...so please, drop it . It doesn't matter where I get my information from ... you have no fing clue in the first place so why insinuate stuff with Limbaugh or Fox ?

Unless of course you get a kick out of it .. then sure … be my guest – I am not that selfish to deny people cheap pleasures.

Dexter2999
07-06-2009, 02:41 PM
I have seen on TV that we pick up a lot of elective proceedures from Canadians or from people who don't want to wait or feel they can't wait because other people are prioritized over them.

These people are examples of people whith money who can afford healthcare. And for those who can afford it there will be options (be it here or India or wherever). But for those who can't afford it, there is no option.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:44 PM
warniak's system if implemented as he would imagine it would be a wonderful paradise where you only get what you could afford.


and he believes this is ok because unlike popular wisdom, he believes that LIFE IS FAIR:

that those who are rich are rich because they deserve to be and those who are poor are lazy fers.

isn't that right warniak?

jin

Yeah, for the most part you got it pretty much correct.
95% of people are able to shape their own future and for the rest there is certainly enough money in the system already.

Then again .. when was the last time you gave a random person 30% of your salary because LIFE ISN"T FAIR ?

jin choung
07-06-2009, 02:44 PM
But for those who can't afford it, there is no option.

and that's the group of people that warniak and his ilk have no solutions for.

come on warniak. speak up. if you've got any solutions for them besides "f off and rot", now's your chance.

jin

Lightwolf
07-06-2009, 02:47 PM
That's debunking ?
If one of the most expensive medical systems on this planet only does well in a few areas, then it is, yes.

If you look at the chart, the US are already spending more government money than the OECD average, plus all the private insurance - but doesn't perform any better on average.

And of course you have health tourism of the rich to the US, which seems to mainly cater the rich and ill. You also have health tourism from the US to countries that are affordable to the average US citizen. That doesn't make the system very efficient for your average Joe in my eyes.

Cheers,
Mike

jin choung
07-06-2009, 02:50 PM
Yeah, for the most part you got it pretty much correct.

then you are deluded beyond help and your positions are indeed shameful.

and thank goodness that even the right is hypocritical enough to publically give lip service to the denunciation of such positions.

and now to practice the strategy of divide and conquer: WWJD?

: )

jin

Lightwolf
07-06-2009, 02:50 PM
Then again .. when was the last time you gave a random person 30% of your salary because LIFE ISN"T FAIR ?
I heard that the fact that life isn't fair made people leave their homes to found new countries ;)

And then it's not fair again? Man, they could've stayed at home ;)

Cheers,
Mike

Glendalough
07-06-2009, 02:50 PM
Noble Prize in Economics says universal healthcare is eminently affordable:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/06/opinion/06krugman.html?em

jin choung
07-06-2009, 02:51 PM
when was the last time you gave a random person 30% of your salary because LIFE ISN"T FAIR ?

every april.

it's called progressive taxation.

and i'm glad to pay it.

jin

AdamAvenali
07-06-2009, 02:56 PM
so then - let's get at the core.

glad to see we are back on to lightwave talk :D

warmiak
07-06-2009, 02:57 PM
and that's the group of people that warniak and his ilk have no solutions for.

come on warniak. speak up. if you've got any solutions for them besides "f off and rot", now's your chance.

jin

Sure I do ... we are already spending hundreds of billons of dollars on ******** ... take for instance this so called stimulus bill ... one trillion fing dollars down the drain .. we were told we need to spend that money right now or face 9% unemployment rates and if we do it fast enough, then we should be able to stay at 8.5%.
Now , three months later, here we are one trillion more in debt and guess what ...with 9.6% unemployment rates! What do they have to say ? "Opps .. I guess we misread how bad the economy was "
In other words, we just wasted one trillion dollars we didnt have in the first place on what ? Nobody seems to know ...

So I guess this is your answer ... these ******** are already spending so much money then don't even know what they are spending on ... and now they are asking for more ... a $1 trillion health-care bill needs to be done right now or we will all die - now , right now or we will all DIE !!!!

jin choung
07-06-2009, 02:59 PM
I did also find articles stating what you mentioned. I just wanted to point out the other view that gets over looked.

but that wasn't the point of you looking it up.

the point was you were not even aware of it to the point where you laughed.

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 03:03 PM
Sure I do ... we are already spending hundreds of billons of dollars on ******** ... take for instance this so called stimulus bill ... one trillion fing dollars down the drain .. we were told we need to spend that money right now or face 9% unemployment rates and if we do it fast enough, then we should be able to stay at 8.5%.
Now , three months later, here we are one trillion more in debt and guess what ...with 9.6% unemployment rates! What do they have to say ? "Opps .. I guess we misread how bad the economy was "
In other words, we just wasted one trillion dollars we didnt have in the first place on what ? Nobody seems to know ...

So I guess this is your answer ... these ******** are already spending so much money then don't even know what they are spending on ... and now they are asking for more ... a $1 trillion health-care bill needs to be done right now or we will all die - now , right now or we will all DIE !!!!

educate yourself.

read the economist article that lightwolf posted. you'd like them. you know what the philosophy of "the economist" is? "follow the money" and you will find the truth.

that's something you understand right?

as for the stimulus bill, just so i could spite you and your ilk, i would LOOOOOooooove to have seen you get your way.

i wanted to see it all burn. i really did.

i wanted the entire system to come tumbling down around our ankles and have wall street brokers jumping out of windows.

and at the end of it all, i'd be smiling brightly and giving the finger to the right and saying,

"i told you so".

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 03:23 PM
educate yourself.

read the economist article that lightwolf posted. you'd like them. you know what the philosophy of "the economist" is? "follow the money" and you will find the truth.

that's something you understand right?

as for the stimulus bill, just so i could spite you and your ilk, i would LOOOOOooooove to have seen you get your way.

i wanted to see it all burn. i really did.

i wanted the entire system to come tumbling down around our ankles and have wall street brokers jumping out of windows.

and at the end of it all, i'd be smiling brightly and giving the finger to the right and saying,

"i told you so".

jin

My ilk ?
I was against TARP and all that crap in the first place ...and you know what ... there is a good chance you will get to see everything tumbling down because they way Obama and his people are spending money (they don't have ) would put wall street brokers to shame.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 03:27 PM
Obama and his people are spending money (they don't have ) would put wall street brokers to shame.

duh.

it costs more money to build a house than to BLOW ONE UP.

seriously, are you impervious to ALL SENSE?

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 03:33 PM
duh.

it costs more money to build a house than to BLOW ONE UP.

seriously, are you impervious to ALL SENSE?

jin

To your definition of such ... always.

Your style is largely based on using the web equivalent of screaming and insulting anyone who doesn't appreciate your point of view, regardless of the subject at hand ...so yeah . .. count me in.

Larry_g1s
07-06-2009, 03:35 PM
and that's all you found huh? couldn't even cite the first thing that comes up when you look it up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_tourism

just wanted to hunt and peck for something that suited your position?

tsk tsk.

jinDon't be a soar loser...I gave you credit on your comment too. You ignored the fact that I brought up.


And just to throw a some actual figure in here to spice things up, out of the 100% population that could pay federal tax (money that would go in to this system) only 60% actually pay in to. ;)

AdamAvenali
07-06-2009, 03:39 PM
remember the good ol' days when the local doctor was also the local veterinarian? i mean i don't because i'm only 25, but things looked simpler in the old movies.

Morba
07-06-2009, 03:42 PM
Great Topic, and the diverse opinoins are valid. What is important are to examine the two existing health care options in America.

The first example is Lasic eye surgery. The Lasic eye surgery is an elective procedure not covered by any health insurance plan. Lasic eye surgery has developed more inovative procedures, and the cost per procedure dropped in price almost 50% inthe last 15 years.

Another example would be elective plastic surgery. specifically breast augmentation. After a partial or radical masectomy it will cost more for reconstructive surgery under a heath insurance plan, verses having the same surgery performed by a Beverly Hills plastic surgeon.

Insurance companies are a part of the problem. Hospital care will continue to increase as long as insurance companies are pressured by share holders to make up the cost for those uninsured individuals that use the most expensive health care (i.e emergency room visits) to take care of the common cold.

The market is the best controller of health care cost, as in the example of Lasic eye surgery.

The Obama plan will not work? The Obama plan demands people provide the government with too much private personel information, while demanding individuals to provide subsidies to others who chose a risky life style. Which is very similar to what we have now without government intervention.

One solution would is to tier Health insurance premiums similar to Life insurance premiums. If an individual choses risky behaviors they pay more, if your younger you pay less. Then grouping the tiers would allow for affordable health insurance premiums.

The roll of the government is to provide for the things the individual cannot (not Will NOT) provide for themselves, i.e. National Defence. The U.S. Constitution is a document that restricts the role and size of government, and protects the government from intruding into our lives. The U.S. constitution now has become a hinderance to the very same liberals that swore to uphold it (U.S constiution).

What ever happened to "...ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your contry..."

Socialist solutions are not the answer.

Stooch
07-06-2009, 03:44 PM
You know what ... you have a nasty habit of projecting your own stereotypes on others ... others you know **** about ...so please, drop it . It doesn't matter where I get my information from ... you have no fing clue in the first place so why insinuate stuff with Limbaugh or Fox ?

Unless of course you get a kick out of it .. then sure … be my guest – I am not that selfish to deny people cheap pleasures.

you know what. im just looking at the arguments as a third party, and i see alot of sense and facts from jin being replied by whining from yourself.

its odd. but not unexpected. you really dont have any facts so you have to resort to making it personal??? tsk tsk. sounds like a republican tactic. lol.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 03:53 PM
you know what. im just looking at the arguments set forth and i see alot of sense and facts from jin being replied by whining from yourself.

its odd. but not unexpected.

At this point it is not about facts or sense but rather about his style ... being an ******* and constantly insulting people who disagree with him is what he does best - and that's regardless of what he is actually trying to convey ( he could learn a lot from Lightwoolf who loves to throw little insults but he does it much more artfully)


And you know what ..what you call whining could also be viewed as an attempt at being civil.

Trust me .. it is not that hard to come up with a catchy insult or a smart *** remark ... in fact it is quite tempting.

PS.
And you Stooch are anything but a third party ... so please , don't try to pass as one.

pming
07-06-2009, 03:58 PM
Hiya.

I live in Canada. I'm Canadian. I was born in Crescent City, California. I'm American. (yes, both...)

That said, I love my health care (Yukon, Canada for the last 30+ years of my life...most of it). I had a kidney stone 8 years ago. Cost me nothing to fix; including pills. My wife was diagnosed with MS a year after that. Some very effective drugs she took to lessen or mitigate it...$1400/month...cost us about $25/month. She gets two MRI's done a year. Cost's nothing. Even the 1700km (one way) flight is free. Wife had a gall bladder attack and had it removed; surgery plus 2 days in hospital. Cost us nothing.

Paying a few hours worth of work a month so *anyone* can take advantage of that kind of medical help when they need it? Priceless.

For all of those in the US who think the current for-profit health care is a good idea? Drop all your medical insurance for, oh, the rest of your life. I dare you. I double-dog dare you. If you balk at that idea, it's probably because it scares you s#!tless thinking that, at any moment, things out of your control can completely and utterly ruin you, your family, and your childrens lives *forever*. Now you know what 97-million other americans can feel on a daily basis. If you think "better them then me", all I have to say is...well, nothing. There's no point in arguing or even talking with people like that. Waste of time.

PS: For all those who think "socialism" is a bad idea...have you ever even lived in one of these evil countries (re: Canada, Australia, England, France, etc.)? Of is it simply a matter of "Well, that's what they tell me on TV..."?

^_^

Paul L. Ming

jin choung
07-06-2009, 03:59 PM
To your definition of such ... always.

Your style is largely based on using the web equivalent of screaming and insulting anyone who doesn't appreciate your point of view, regardless of the subject at hand ...so yeah . .. count me in.

great, i'll pencil you in. will you be bringing a guest?

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 04:02 PM
Socialist solutions are not the answer.

they are for schools and for libraries and for public works and for fire departments and police and the FDA and nasa.

but yeah, all that is socialism. booooo.

: |

jin

SBowie
07-06-2009, 04:04 PM
You also have health tourism from the US to countries that are affordable to the average US citizen.It's been some years now since the security features of our health care cards in Ontario were upgraded to be at least a little more effective at deterring fraud. (At one time, the de facto policy was that policing it was more expensive than ignoring it - but in due course, reality set in.) One of the reasons given for the security upgrade was to cut down on the number of people crossing into Canada from the US (and elsewhere) for 'free' (if fraudulent) health care. Here's a link to an article in the NYT from that period:

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/12/20/world/americans-filching-free-health-care-in-canada.html?pagewanted=all

What y'all do with your health care system is up to you - but for the record, a recent survey of well-educated Americans living in Canada showed comparable approval rates for both systems (within a few percentage points). I always perk up when people criticize the system here, because in my personal experience such claims are generally politically motivated. I've been benefiting from our system all my life, and even adding in those in my large circle of friends and family (including my parents, who both lived to nearly 90), I have never seen any unusual delays or limitations on treatment.

Oh, sure - if you show up at Emerg with a sniffle or something, you might sit there for an hour or two and you hear a lot of whining about that - but if you've got chest pain you'll be getting an EKG while whoever drove you is telling them your name. And yes, some few might go to the US and 'buy' treatment (I don't personally know a single soul who has done so) but I'd lay odds that more go to Mexico. This doesn't mean they are getting better treatment - it often simply means they think they are getting better treatment ... sometimes something not practiced here because its viewed as unsafe or unproven. Sure, there are likely cases where someone who can afford it chooses to go south for an elective treatment they wanted sooner than might have happened here, but at least no-one here ever gets turned away even if they do have to endure a little reasonable triage regardless of their bank balance.

I'm completely neutral about US health care, do what you like - but afaics (and I'm a lot closer to it than many here) most of the criticisms of our local system are just smoke and mirrors.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 04:04 PM
There's no point in arguing or even talking with people like that. Waste of time.

Then don't.
After all, you are a happy man and nobody is trying to come over to Canada to uproot your way of life so why bother ?

jin choung
07-06-2009, 04:05 PM
Don't be a soar loser...

who's losing?

i haven't seen a SINGLE conservative solution to the poor and sick yet.

besides f em and let them rot that is.

i'm winning on logic, facts AND morality to boot.

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 04:13 PM
who's losing?

i haven't seen a SINGLE conservative solution to the poor and sick yet.

besides f em and let them rot that is.

i'm winning on logic, facts AND morality to boot.

jin

Too bad your morality is deeply rooted in other people's pockets.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 04:18 PM
Then don't.
After all, you are a happy man and nobody is trying to come over to Canada to uproot your way of life so why bother ?

but the thing is, he has eyes in his head and a nose with which he can smell your self centered, heartless, classist and downright inhumane attitude.

here's the thing -

you people are DANGEROUS. because people are stupid, someone might actually hear your baseless yammering and think that there's something to it.

free speech is absolutely a right.

but that DOES NOT mean that everyone SHOULD BE HEEDED. and that does not mean FREEDOM FROM CRITICISM.

that is why when i see it first hand, i respond the way i do. to absolutely crush, extirpate and marginalize it.

LIES AND IGNORANCE ARE DANGEROUS - especially in the age of the internet - and imo it is the duty of a genuine press and the citizenry to call bullsh1t when it is uttered.

i have no doubt that you are earnest in your beliefs. but just like your poster boy bush, you can be earnestly wrong.

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 04:30 PM
Would you PLEASE research this new healthcare issue BEFORE you speak? The VAST majority of the cost is already IN the system. The money is ALREADY out of your pocket. GET IT? Not to mention that preventative care COST LESS than care "after the fact." PLEASE... TRY to understand.

And warmiak... do you have kids? Why am I helping to pay for THEIR education when I don't have any? What about police, fire fighters, etc?

No, he claims that he can do it without significantly increasing tax burden on other people.

To quote msnbc article :


The president said $200 billion to $300 billion should be cut from the programs over the next decade through such measures as better managing chronic diseases and avoiding unnecessary tests and hospitals readmissions. Savings from such measures are uncertain.


I mean for God's sake .. measures as better managing chronic diseases and avoiding unnecessary tests and hospitals readmissions ?

Whoo .. we can recover money by simply being better at what we do and he will show us how to do it ... all these people who were running these things for decades were just missing it and it is all there , ripe for the taking !

In other words, that's not a plan ... that's just wishful thinking.

I mean .. .when was the last time any projected savings in a government run program turned out to be anything but a fantasy ?

warmiak
07-06-2009, 04:36 PM
but the thing is, he has eyes in his head and a nose with which he can smell your self centered, heartless, classist and downright inhumane attitude.

here's the thing -

you people are DANGEROUS. because people are stupid, someone might actually hear your baseless yammering and think that there's something to it.

free speech is absolutely a right.

but that DOES NOT mean that everyone SHOULD BE HEEDED. and that does not mean FREEDOM FROM CRITICISM.

that is why when i see it first hand, i respond the way i do. to absolutely crush, extirpate and marginalize it.

LIES AND IGNORANCE ARE DANGEROUS - especially in the age of the internet - and imo it is the duty of a genuine press and the citizenry to call bullsh1t when it is uttered.

i have no doubt that you are earnest in your beliefs. but just like your poster boy bush, you can be earnestly wrong.

jin


Oh ok .. then I am sorry ..... go ahead, marginalize and crush it. A man of passion is a rare sight.

Just don't bring up Fox, Bush, Limbaug etc ... cause, given that you know nothing about me, if you do that then you just end up marginalizing yourself.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 04:39 PM
Too bad your morality is deeply rooted in other people's pockets.

dam right.

because i see reality for what it ACTUALLY IS.

- i see that LIFE IS *NOT* FAIR.
- i see that wealth or poverty has less to do with merit but rather is a reflection of the presence or denial of opportunity (go tell someone in rwanda they deserve their plight k?)
- i see that the human beings have PRECIOUS LITTLE CONTROL over the substance of their lives and are subject to their birth, upbringing, surroundings, the status of the economy and whether they get sick or hit by a bus.
- i see that ALL HUMAN SYSTEMS ARE IMPERFECT AND CORRUPT and *NONE* are worthy of SELF DETERMINATION much less TRUST. this goes for government. this goes for FREE MARKETS. you misunderstand us i think. you think we oppose free markets and love governments. no. false. we DISTRUST ALL THINGS. and THAT is the great lesson of the founding fathers and our system of government. democracy? it's been done. capitalism? been there done that. CHECKS AND BALANCES - now that's a revelation.
- i see (like alan greenspan) that the rampant disparity between rich and poor to be a SINGULARLY DESTABILIZING ASPECT OF OUR SOCIETY and to ignore the plight of the poor and disenfranchised will be to invite the visitation of trouble onto YOUR DOORSTEP sooner or later. ever hear of the french revolution?

so while you go around spouting "let them eat cake" torches are being lit and pitchforks are being sharpened. probably never so much so than in today's post crash world.

as in all conservatives positions, you're hellbent on shutting your eyes and not dealing with issues till you're waiting in line for the guillotine or in cardiac arrest for a lifetime of neglect.

alas.

well there's a good lot of us that won't have that. that won't buy into the lies that allow wealth to be hoarded at the top while the middle class disintegrates and our prison population starts looking like the numbers of a small country.

dam right we're coming for 'other people's money'. and we will be right and just in the claiming of it.

jin

warmiak
07-06-2009, 04:50 PM
dam right we're coming for 'other people's money'. and we will be right and just in the claiming of it.

jin

Hehe .. that's called stealing and it rarely ends well.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 04:54 PM
Hehe .. that's called stealing and it rarely ends well.

now who's being naive.

it's called whatever we call it. it can and IS called (progressive) tax.

and it can end fairly well when the heads with crowns are rolling around in a basket. wanna know what they call that?

jin

*Pete*
07-06-2009, 05:14 PM
I guess it all comes down to if you think healthcare is

1) A privilege
2) A basic human right.

That's really what we should be arguing about. Because if you agree that it is a basic human right, then you classify it right up there with all the other basic human rights, and if that is the case then I think, yes, it is the governments responsibility to help everyone achieve it.


exactly.

i think it is 2, others think it is 1...the same reasoning can be used for police protection and schooling system, among other things...
since we all think differently, we will be arguing about it for ever.




I am lucky enough to have a job that gives me health insurance. however before this job I had to get it and pay for it myself (which was actually cheaper then my insurance now, though the coverage wasn't quite as good).

However it was pain in the ***** for me to get coverage on my own. I have a preexisting condition (only 1 kidney) and freak, they sure don't want to insure you if you have anything even remotely wrong with you. With some companies I tried they wouldn't even insure me because I had been to the doctor in the past year. WTF. If we are only going to insure the perfectly healthy people what is the point? Eventually I found someone who would insure me, thankfully.

That said from where I am standing, the government needs to at LEAST make it possible for EVERYONE to get insurance, regardless of their current health, they might have to pay more for it (a reasonable extra, probably regulated by government) but at least EVERYONE will have the option for coverage, it won't be a free ride but if they want it it will be in their power to get it.

Seems logical to me. I don't see why everything has to be so freaking black and white. Absolutely no socialist/national programs, or let's totally ditch the free market.

considering that you Americans already have an existing system and replacing it into a European style system is too much work, your idea sounds perfect.


Compromise people.

noooo...on a NT forum?, forget about it, wont happen.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 05:23 PM
Really? Avoiding this:

And warmiak... do you have kids? Why am I helping to pay for THEIR education when I don't have any? What about police, fire fighters, etc?

I guess YOU'RE stealing too.

You are not helping ... if anything their education is being paid for using my local property taxes.

I am not an anti-tax anarchist .. there are legit reason to pay taxes ... a national single-payer mandatory universal health care is just not one of them.

Morba
07-06-2009, 05:24 PM
they are for schools and for libraries and for public works and for fire departments and police and the FDA and nasa.

but yeah, all that is socialism. booooo.

: |

jin

There was a time when police & fire department and education was not under the domain of the federal government. During that time the US education system was first class. After federalizing Education the U.S education system has dropped in overall world ranking. In San Diego only fourty high school graduates out of 1,040 could pass a basic exit exam.

The Questions on the exam:
1. First President of the U.S?
2. What are the first 10 ammendments of the U.S constitution called?
3. How many Supreme court Justices are there?
4. what are the two Legislative branches of government called?

In LA a student that took the exam was heard on a popular radio station stating.."I tooken the exam, and it was easy".

In LA, the Highest paid teachers in the nation, also have the highest drop out rate. California pays the highest cost per inmate in our prison system.
Recently the CA supreme ruled against the broke state to build club Med type housing & hospitals for prisoners.

CA pays 46% of it's budget in education followed by 37% of it's budget in welfare costs. Californians pay the highest gas tax, LA city sales tax is now at 9.75% and will increase to 11.25% at the end of the year. The problem with LA county is there is no tax base, so the LA city council continues to tax the very people they are intent on helping.

All this in the name of funding unfunded Fedral mandates.

What about States rights, protect the U.S Constitution. Our rights are not determined by Federal mandates, they come from the creator.

*Pete*
07-06-2009, 05:30 PM
Too bad your morality is deeply rooted in other people's pockets.

but, you have no problem with other peoples money paying for your security, for the road you travel on, for your childrens schooling and so forth?

to add healthcare to the list of things others pay for you and you pay for others makes not much difference to your pocket, but it sure helps millions of your fellow Americans who are without any insurance at the moment...


but its ok to disagree...we will not see on this the same way, we are brought up differently.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 05:32 PM
but its ok to disagree...we will not see on this the same way, we are brought up differently.

I don't think we were but .. whatever.

IMI
07-06-2009, 05:39 PM
And YOU keep ignoring the question - what does your Thomas Jefferson quote have to do with the healthcare issue?

I'll take a stab at answering that.
A government that *supplies* everything, *controls* everything.
Not that I think that particularly applies to the health care issue, and I think Jefferson was simply emphasizing the need to keep government small and unobtrusive.
C'mon, you can't tell me you didn't understand the Jefferson quote. :D

*Pete*
07-06-2009, 05:39 PM
I don't think we were but .. whatever.

heh...no, Warmiak...i remember you being from east-germany, but it was extreme socialism.

we scandinavians never hated our goverment, you did (and with reason too), and our govement never supressed the people as did the eastgerman one...

*Pete*
07-06-2009, 05:47 PM
And THAT is where his views cannot be reconciled. Essentially he is being a hypocrit - "I like what I get from you, but you won't get what you like from me."

i wouldnt call him a hypocrit...he just draws the line at healthcare, just like i would not accept that the goverment would be handing out free cars to the people with my tax-money.

but im certain that would he be in a position where he could not get or afford an insurance, his opposition towards universal healthcare would change...


personally, the lack of security in form of health, is the main reason i do not want to consider to move to US...im in top health and all that, but you never know what can happen tomorow and i like to have the certain knowledge that what ever happens, my goverment will do what is needed to get me back on my feet and that i can walk out of the hospital without being economically ruined.

Morba
07-06-2009, 05:50 PM
Please leave the religious crap out of this discussion. We're discussing healthcare, not religion.

The religious crap, as you call it, is the foundation upon which the U.S constitution was built upon. Without this foundation the U.S constitution is no more than a worthless piece of paper.

Morba
07-06-2009, 06:00 PM
Bull. We've already gone through this "religious crap" in another thread last year. Go find it and start your argument there again. You will find it tiring and useless to maintain that position. But that's the last I'm going to say about religion in THIS thread. Again... we're discussing HEALTHCARE in the US. :bangwall:

Are you also maintaining the position, that the U.S constitution is also crap because of the foundation it is built upon.

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 06:05 PM
The religious crap, as you call it, is the foundation upon which the U.S constitution was built upon. Without this foundation the U.S constitution is no more than a worthless piece of paper.

and WITH WHICH the founding fathers happily owned slaves.

great religion there buddy.

jin

dbigers
07-06-2009, 06:06 PM
Please tell the Native Americans (who we kicked off their land) and the slaves that were brought over by our ancestors about the pursuit of happiness. Contrary to the constitution, all men were evidently not created equal. Of course that is open to their interpretation that Native Americans and slaves were not men, which ironically was highly hypocritical of them.

But that really has nothing to do with the healthcare system, but it does point out that following the constitution blindly is a slippery slope. Hypocrites existed then and today, even when the constitution was framed.

EDIT:Jin addressed it already

jin choung
07-06-2009, 06:15 PM
Our rights are not determined by Federal mandates, they come from the creator.

you're trying to extoll and NULLIFY the constitution simultaneously??? our RIGHTS (legal term) do INDEED come from federal mandates (i.e. the constitution). that's why a good chunk of it is called the "bill of RIGHTS".

jin

p.s. ever hear of the jeffersonian bible? look it up. it'll make you scream heretic.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 06:16 PM
Please tell the Native Americans (who we kicked off their land) and the slaves that were brought over by our ancestors about the pursuit of happiness. Contrary to the constitution, all men were evidently not created equal. Of course that is open to their interpretation that Native Americans and slaves were not men, which ironically was highly hypocritical of them.

But that really has nothing to do with the healthcare system, but it does point out that following the constitution blindly is a slippery slope. Hypocrites existed then and today, even when the constitution was framed.

EDIT:Jin addressed it already

ah but you articulated the position very well.

>terrorist fist bump<

jin

Morba
07-06-2009, 06:21 PM
That same piece of paper was responsible for the Civil Rights Act of the 60's.

The point I was attempting to convey was the Governmet is over reaching, based on the tenants in the Constitution.

Free markets determine goods and services, not the government. I am not one for conspiracies, but I see the take over of GM, along with CAP and Trade as a means for the government to dictate what cars we can buy and drive.

In the same instance Health care reform is a means for the Fedral government to take control of the private sector healthcare.

Where Private Companies build and maintain hospitals, they must be allowed to do so.

This Government take over means the desruction of the free market system. The Bond holders of GM had their money stolen from them, as will the investors that built these hospitals. Eventually, no one will invest in anything, for fear the government will take their money.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 06:23 PM
Are you also maintaining the position, that the U.S constitution is also crap because of the foundation it is built upon.

it is not CRAP. but as i have said about EVERY HUMAN ENDEAVOR AND INSTITUTION - it is at its core (see, again i relate it to lw) FALLIBLE, IMPERFECT and subject to CORRUPTION.

EVEN THE FOUNDING FATHERS recognized this about the document and THEMSELVES. even THEY were loathe to deify their own works and their own selves because they recognized their fallibility.

THAT was their genius.

a genius that you peeps keep trying to nullify by not only making the constitution a DIVINE AND INERRANT REVELATION but the founding fathers as SAINTS.

THEY knew that was not true. and they did not put in the mechanisms for revision and reform (ammendments) because it was perfect and immutable.

this nation is an IMPERFECT NATION built on genocide subjugation slavery and racism.

forget that at your nation's peril.

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 06:25 PM
The point I was attempting to convey was the Governmet is over reaching, based on the tenants in the Constitution.

says you.

evidently you're fine with schools and libraries and public works and the military etc etc etc.

why is it that the right cannot have a COHERENT and SELF CONSISTENT POSITION on anything?

the best they can do is IGNORE THE PROBLEM and just pay for it on the back end.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

i put it to you mr. christian - what is YOUR solution then for the plight of the millions of poor and uninsured in this country?

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 06:33 PM
Free markets determine goods and services, not the government.

and free markets are a HUMAN INSTITUTION subject to corruption which, if you have been paying attention in the last couple of years, should have become ABUNDANTLY CLEAR.

again, i want you guys to have your way just so i can say, "i told you so" as the world crumbles around our ears.

it would be worth it to stare you in the face as the world goes up in flames and smile and say, "i told you so".

i would LOOOOOOOOOOVE to see GM and all american car companies get NOT ONE DIME from the federal govt. would LOOOOOOOOOOOVE it. i'd camp in the smoking crater of their remains.

but guess what, THE CAR COMPANIES CAME BEGGING FOR MONEY DIDN'T THEY?

funny that. they being the captains of industry and all. and that's the funniest thing OF ALL of all you CAPITALIST FREE MARKETEERS... when you're makin' money, "it's our money, hands off!". but when you FAIL... oh.... that's when you come arunnin'.

GOVT WELFARE FOR THE WEALTHY. gotta love it.

read my siggie to find the wisdom and rightness and justice of government take overs in these situations.

you can't say "gimme" with the right hand and then say "hands off" with your left.

so go preach it on the mountain. that stuff just don't fly round here.

jin

Morba
07-06-2009, 06:47 PM
Jin choung, though I am a concervative, I agree with you.

This house of cards should have fallen. The heads of the SEC, FINRA, Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd, the House finance commity should all be in prison, just like Bernie Madoff.

When you have a system where the foxes are gaurding the hen house, we should expect to loose our chickens.

The people and systems that were put in charge to protect US, failed misserably. The system cannot be fixed by giving more power to the corrupt and inept.

You are correct, Rome was burning and the SEC, FINRA, and congress was passing out fiddles.

This is not a fault of the Constitution, but the fault of those persons that were suppose to protect us.. If the laws therein had been inforced we would not find ourselves in this predicament.

The history of this Country is ugly, but it still remains a becon to the reast of the world.

jin choung
07-06-2009, 06:49 PM
Well... not REALLY worth it. I'd hate to see this country - or the world - if we'd allowed everything to crumble. Not that they (the owners) didn't deserve it, but the rest of us didn't. THEY would still have had enough cash to live decently while too many (of the "little people") around them would have perished. :(

nonono,

at the end of the world, they wouldn't last a day. we'd go all madmax on their a$s.

i got my assless chaps and mohawk gel right next to my torch and pitchfork.

jin

jin choung
07-06-2009, 06:52 PM
Jin choung, though I am a concervative, I agree with you.

This house of cards should have fallen. The heads of the SEC, FINRA, Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd, the House finance commity should all be in prison, just like Bernie Madoff.

When you have a system where the foxes are gaurding the hen house, we should expect to loose our chickens.

The people and systems that were put in charge to protect US, failed misserably. The system cannot be fixed by giving more power to the corrupt and inept.

You are correct, Rome was burning and the SEC, FINRA, and congress was passing out fiddles.

This is not a fault of the Constitution, but the fault of those persons that were suppose to protect us.. If the laws therein had been inforced we would not find ourselves in this predicament.

you guys crack me up. you CAN'T say what we say. you DON'T agree with me.

that EVERYTHING - INCLUDING THE FREE MARKETS are fallible.

it's always just the government.

in words you will understand:

that sounds like mammon worshipping idolatory in my book.

come on, say it with me christian - ALL HUMAN ENDEAVORS AND INSTITUTIONS ARE IMPERFECT AND SUBJECT TO CORRUPTION, *INCLUDING* your precious free market.

cuz i promise you this, it was not God who created capitalism. all this, all the money crap - this is all a RESULT OF OUR FALLEN NATURES. make no mistake. this is the "the world" that Bible warns you about. this is all of the part that's going to hell in a handbasket.

your confidence and idolization of the MARKETS is gravely misplaced.


The history of this Country is ugly, but it still remains a becon to the reast of the world.

great, if we serve that up with bacon, maybe we can get a beacon.

jin

JML
07-06-2009, 06:53 PM
This thread is clearly labeled.
Why don't you move to another thread and STFU. :)

So what, you think a subject like this has a place on a 3D website ?
Don't you have some other place to talk about this stuff ?

And if the moderators allows that kind of discusions, why do they remove
porn or other spam threads ?
They ban a great artist like oddity and they allow that kind of discusion, WTF ?!

jin choung
07-06-2009, 07:02 PM
The history of this Country is ugly, but it still remains a becon to the reast of the world.

also, this is just hilarious.

"yeah, you know all that stuff about genocide and slavery and racism and the kukluxklan and all that small stuff, yeah, well if you LEAVE THAT stuff out, we're just great!"

fyi, the USA is a human institution as well and when the time you are looking forward to comes, it will burn no less than the rest of the world.

jin

JML
07-06-2009, 07:04 PM
It's in the General Discussion area and NO ONE is asking YOU to participate. If you don't want to read/write here - GO AWAY and leave us to it. I Suppose YOU are the only one here that should be allowed to have THEIR way? Get a life.

Don't you have another place to be and complain?

Get a life ? Funny coming from somebody that spent the whole day in here.

Amhras
07-06-2009, 07:07 PM
Hi

I was awoken this morning as usual by the BBC, 5 am on the dot... to a rather astounding report about Obama and the latest attempt to create a "public option" in the richest nation on the planet.

- That 50 000 000 people in the US ( twice the population of Australia... here) have absolutely no health cover.
- A larger proportion have it dependent on being employed.
- It rates 37th in the world in terms of "Health" outcomes.
- %70 of the population want a universal/health care fro all system like we have here in li'l old OZ.

We've just had ten years of a conservative .gov which also insisted private insurance is the answer and the only answer.

Here that's an outright joke because the private system is %30 funded by the taxpayer and the "nationalized" system, ( which is pretty good) is where most of the private work is done anyway.

It's also a fact here that what the government takes in tobacco excise
is on a par with what it spends on universal healthcare to begin with before the scaled levies kick-in; you're forced to buy private insurance only when your income gets up around $130 000 USD because the levies become disproportional to the basic hospital cover from the private insurers.

I'm no epidemiologist but surely the US should lead the world in terms of what Capitalism can do in that respect?


M

The only problem is that the US is broke, and adding further tax burdens onto a population that has an increasing unemployment rate does nothing but increase poverty, increase layoffs, and actually lowers the amount of tax money the gov rakes in.

That, and the sheer fact that the US government is simply inept at public services and having the federal health plan will likely be just as good or worse than having no coverage at all....

JML
07-06-2009, 07:15 PM
I'm not the one complaining about a certain thread. Am I?
I'm also posting in between renderings and since I work at home... I can do that quite easily. :)

I'm mostly complaining about the moderators for allowing a pointless thread like this and you that seems to have no friends to talk to about that stuff.

It's like a stupid mac-pc war, but at least it has a point since it relates to lightwave.

warmiak
07-06-2009, 07:23 PM
I'm mostly complaining about the moderators for allowing a pointless thread like this and you that seems to have no friends to talk to about that stuff.

It's like a stupid mac-pc war, but at least it has a point since it relates to lightwave.

Man you just got drawn into it - it is addictive, telling you.

Anyway, I am done with it as well ... jin choung is in full revolutionary mode ,threatening to start robing people and rolling heads ... this cannot end well, not to mention being a complete waste of time with him being an animator (or an artist) with most likely a comfortable place to live and a bank acount full of cash.
People like that don't start revolutions ... they just don't.

JML
07-06-2009, 07:24 PM
Yer gonna get real far complaining here about that. :cursin::bangwall:

Yes.... I have no friends to talk about this stuff to. I guess most of the people here are in the same boat. Now why don't you go back to your friends and have a good chat about me around a nice cup of tea? :D

Mostly against you.

Most people in here did not post 600 messages in that thread.

JML
07-06-2009, 07:29 PM
I think you better go back and take another talley. ;D

Oh you very funny guy, another teenager's joke coming up ?

jin choung
07-06-2009, 07:34 PM
It's like a stupid mac-pc war, but at least it has a point since it relates to lightwave.

well if the bar is set so low that a mac pc fight passes muster, then let's appease your unreasonable inability to avoid a thread you dislike:

lw is a professional 3d app.

most 3d app workers these days are independent contractors or "freelance".

that being the case, most of these people get absolutely no health insurance from their "employers" and even though they might make ok money while they are employed, employment can be intermittent and you're still [email protected]#$ out of luck if you have a pre-existing condition (where the market drives the industry to simply NOT take anyone cuz where's the money in that?).

oh and hollywood is in the us of a.

there.

happy now?

jin