» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «

The Pop Culture Information Society...

Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society

Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.

If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.

Custom Search

Current Politics and Religious Topics 2007 Archive: (December) (November) (October) (September) (August) (July) (June) (May) (April) (March) (February) (January)

This is a topic from the Current Politics and Religious Topics forum on inthe00s.

Check for new replies or respond here...

Subject: Health

Written By: Echo Nomad on 01/08/07 at 1:15 am

Health

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/08/07 at 3:17 am

The big open secret is that nationalized healthcare would cost the U.S. taxpayers less than the current patchwork of crummy private plans bolstered by half-azzed publically-financed programs.

BUT...the right-wing reich of the past 25 years has turned the American character so bitterly mean, Americans will pay dearly just to say, "I'm better off than you!"

:D

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: tokjct on 01/09/07 at 3:43 pm

My first wife of more than 20 years, was born and raised in Montreal...Though we lived in NY, we were up in Quebec at least three or four times each year for the duration of my marriage. There were numerous occasions when I had opportunities to watch the Quebec Medicare system operate. I was impressed.
Under their Quebec "Medicare" system (which is similar to all the provicial medical systems), they have a healthier society, because people don't have to hesitate seeking medical help when they get sick, due to worries about the costs of medical care. Even elective surgery is superior...since it is free...and the waiting periods are really not that long. (My ex's mother got a "hip-replacement" after a wait of less than six months...once she finally got up the courage to request the operation after years of suffering.)

I believe that the US of America could easily develop a national health care system by simply extending the existing Medicare framework to cover everyone. Perhaps we could even find a way to reduce the obscene "defense" budget to pay for such a plan.

Remember...almost every other industrialized country in the world has a national health care program.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: spaceace on 01/09/07 at 3:56 pm

Universal Health Care is being considered in most states. People seem to think that this is the Government taking control of Health Care. News flash the Government already does. Things like Medicare, Medicaid, private medical insurance is monitored by State and Federal Government. The biggest expense for employers is Health Care Insurance, which affects the economy in a negative way. I agree with Max's statements of it's cost effectiveness. Also be aware that most people who file for bankruptcy do so because of medical bills.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: La Roche on 01/09/07 at 10:06 pm

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/09/07 at 11:10 pm

Being the staunch Conservative I am, most would assume I'm against Universal Health-Care. Not true.

Max and Kathie have raised all the same points I will. It would be far cheaper for Joe Public, it would also give an incentive for development of useful drugs, not more anti-depressants. Notice, under private funding drug-development labs will 9 times out of 10 aim to develop a drug they can sell to the pateint for a year or more, not a one off.

Conservatives are starting to back the idea of healthcare reform. One reason is it makes our businesses less competitive. Businesses in the "successful" countries don't have to carry the burden of insuring their workforces.

All but a few neo-nazi types find it morally wrong to turn an indigent person away from an emergency room. Thus, it makes sense to to cover everybody with comprehensive insurance that will allow preventive medical care. It's cheaper for a person with a toothache to go to a dentist and get it fixed, even if the state picks up 90% of the cost, than it is for the same person to end up writhing in pain from a blood infection at the ER. ER medicine is the most expensive at all. Everyone is gets sick. If you don't have the money, the state is going to pay somewhere down the line. It's cheaper to treat a minor pulmonary infection at a GP's office than to treat acute pneumonia at the ER.

And yes, the drug companies are dicking us around. I have less of a problem with pharmaceuticals than with unethical drug companies themselves. Most pharmaceuticals are beneficial when used properly. There are some drugs that prove to be dangerous, such as Vioxx and PhenPhen. We could get those off the market a lot faster if the drug companies didn't have so much lobbying power and hard-sell options to providers.

Conservatives resist change, but I've always known bona-fide conservatives to give a common sense solution the nod. The corporatists talked a good game against "Hillare care" thirteen years ago, but now everybody except the neo-nazis and the lobbyists have come around. Even Mitt Romney and Arnold Schwarzeneggar!
::)

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: La Roche on 01/10/07 at 11:01 am

Conservatives are starting to back the idea of healthcare reform. One reason is it makes our businesses less competitive. Businesses in the "successful" countries don't have to carry the burden of insuring their workforces.

All but a few neo-nazi types find it morally wrong to turn an indigent person away from an emergency room. Thus, it makes sense to to cover everybody with comprehensive insurance that will allow preventive medical care. It's cheaper for a person with a toothache to go to a dentist and get it fixed, even if the state picks up 90% of the cost, than it is for the same person to end up writhing in pain from a blood infection at the ER. ER medicine is the most expensive at all. Everyone is gets sick. If you don't have the money, the state is going to pay somewhere down the line. It's cheaper to treat a minor pulmonary infection at a GP's office than to treat acute pneumonia at the ER.

And yes, the drug companies are dicking us around. I have less of a problem with pharmaceuticals than with unethical drug companies themselves. Most pharmaceuticals are beneficial when used properly. There are some drugs that prove to be dangerous, such as Vioxx and PhenPhen. We could get those off the market a lot faster if the drug companies didn't have so much lobbying power and hard-sell options to providers.

Conservatives resist change, but I've always known bona-fide conservatives to give a common sense solution the nod. The corporatists talked a good game against "Hillare care" thirteen years ago, but now everybody except the neo-nazis and the lobbyists have come around. Even Mitt Romney and Arnold Schwarzeneggar!
::)

I honestly predict that within the next 10 years we will see a serious push towards a comprehensive universal healthcare system in the United States.. and not a damn sight too soon!

I think as soon as a lot of the bigger corporations understand just how many hours, days, weeks of work their employees miss because they don't have access to simple and affordable healthcare, they will throw their weight behind a serious push for change.

Here's the thing as well.

Doctors visit.. hey, $10. Everybody has $10. If you're ill.. you can walk to the bus station and find $10 in change. But think, every single person paying in that little amount, every time they go see the doctor. There's 350,000,000 some of us in the country.. if we all had access we'd all go when we were ill. Half of those cases would result in the doctor saying "You have a cold, go to bed for 3 days, here's a note for your boss." But.. that $10 would still be there, 10 x 350 million is a really big number.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: CatwomanofV on 01/10/07 at 12:21 pm

I am all for national health care. Unfortunately, in this country, we don't have health care-we have "sick care".

Scenario:
Joe doesn't have any health insurance. However, he hasn't been feeling well for a long time so he goes to the emergency room (which costs much more than it would have if he could have gone to a doctor's office). Come to find out that he has advanced liver disease and must have dialyses for the rest of his life. If he was able to go to a doctor early on, it could have been treated.

Yeah, that is just a made-up scenario but I'm sure many things like that happen everyday. I really can't believe that for the so-called richest nation in the world, it does not take care of its people. And why? Pure and simple-GREED!! Greed from the pharmaceutical companies, greed from the insurance companies, greed from the rich people (who don't want to help others), etc. etc. People are so afraid of high taxes, but who do you think will pay for Joe's care in my little scenario? You guessed it, the public. We are paying anyway but if we pay when things are treatable, the cost would be much less than they are now. And I would much rather pay higher taxes if I knew that every man, woman, and child in this country had the health care that they need.

Edited to add: This is not a made-up scenario-this really happened. Several years ago, Carlos went to the doctor because of the some foot pain he had. He had a skiing accident back in 1983 and because of that, he wasn't walking correctly. The doc told him that a shoe insert would help. His insurance company wouldn't pay for the insert. I'm sure most of you know that he underwent back surgery back in June due to two herniated discs. We wonder if the insurance company had paid for that insert, he may not have needed the surgery.

Cat

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: Mushroom on 01/10/07 at 8:40 pm

I think it is a horrible idea.

I am a recipiant of "Government Healthcare", and trust me, it absolutely sucks. I have to wait an average of 3-4 months to see a doctor. And even after that, I have to wait weeks to get a prescription filled for even the most basic of medications (Motrin). And when I make a request for coverage, the paperwork takes months (if not years) to make it's way through the system.

And 85% of the time, the coverage is denied.

This "Government Healthcare" is called the VA. And if anybody thinks that a "Comprehensive Government Health Care" system would be any different from the way the VA operates, they have rocks in their head.

To give an idea, in October of 2004, I requested a copy of my Medical Records from the VA. After 3 letters from me, 2 letters from the Disabled American Veterans and the American Legion, and 2 letters from my Congressman, I finally got the records. In late December of 2006!

And the records I got were so poor, they were almost unreadable.

If that is "Government Health Care", I want absolutely no part of it. They have proven to me that they are incapable of handling the job. And if they do such a poor job with only around 10% of the general population, just imagine how fracked up it would be if it covered 100% of the population.

Veterans know better then to rely on the Government for such things. The average wait for Prostate Surgery is normally 3-6 months. And as anybody can tell you, 3-6 months waiting for Prostate Surgery is basically a death sentence. I had a tooth become abcessed in 1996, and was told that it would be 6 weeks until I could even see a Dentist (and another 2-4 weeks after that until they would actually fix the problem). If I had waited for that, I would have had a raging infection. So I instead paid $250 and had a civilian dentist take care of it.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: La Roche on 01/10/07 at 8:46 pm

People are so afraid of high taxes, but who do you think will pay for Joe's care in my little scenario? You guessed it, the public. We are paying anyway but if we pay when things are treatable, the cost would be much less than they are now. And I would much rather pay higher taxes if I knew that every man, woman, and child in this country had the health care that they need.

The fact of the matter is this. If you a) Use small fee systems. Like I've said before.. $10 to see the Doc. Ya know what.. everybody has $10. The bum on the street has $10.
$5 for a flu shot. Again.. everybody has $5. $15 to not get the flu all winter, hell yeah.
All of a sudden just with everyone paying $10 when they see the doc, you're looking at an injection of billions in the national health kitty. b) Cigarette, Alcohol taxes, stick em in there. At the moment they're just going to purchase yet more weapons. ::)
Somebody needs to wake up and realise that the US is gonna look pretty fu.ckin stupid when we roll in to Somalia or wherever we decide to 'liberate' next with an army full of sickys.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/10/07 at 9:54 pm

I think it is a horrible idea.

I am a recipiant of "Government Healthcare", and trust me, it absolutely sucks.

We can--and we must--do better than the VA.
The Right has controlled the national dialogue for over 25 years. They preach the "can-do" attitude, except for "government," which they say can't do anything well by it's very nature--except give tax cuts to the rich, make war, suppress dissent, and enrich defense contractors.

The Ronald Reagan legacy must die if this country is going to survive in the 21st century.

Of course we can institute a good national health care system and make it work. Of course we can. Unless we hire saboteurs from the American Enterprise Institute or something!

And while we're at it, let's reform the VA so veterans, like the veterans on this board, who have served their country in the armed forces, can get decent healthcare efficiently.

Hire people who say "government can't," and guess what? Government won't.
::)

Doctors visit.. hey, $10. Everybody has $10. If you're ill.. you can walk to the bus station and find $10 in change. But think, every single person paying in that little amount, every time they go see the doctor. There's 350,000,000 some of us in the country.. if we all had access we'd all go when we were ill. Half of those cases would result in the doctor saying "You have a cold, go to bed for 3 days, here's a note for your boss." But.. that $10 would still be there, 10 x 350 million is a really big number.

Once again, right-wing cynicism. The working classes are bums who want hand-outs, who milk the system, who have no work ethic, and can't be trusted to the right thing. Sorry, I see this as just classist bigotry.

BTW, I've known people at my company who take advantage of "sick days," who claim the inability to work for this or that bogus medical reason. My company is leniant as businesses go, but folks who abuse the system get canned by and by.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: Mushroom on 01/10/07 at 11:21 pm

We can--and we must--do better than the VA.

If you can fix the VA, then I might start to believe in the idea. But I simply don't see that happening.

And it has nothing to do with who is in office. It was messed up under Carter, when Democrats controlled both the Executive and Legislative branches. It was messed up under Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton, when you mostly had split Executive and Legislative. It is still messed up under Bush Jr., when you had both a Republican controll of both branches, and in the next 2 years when it will be split.

The issue has nothing to do with who is in control of Government. It basically has to do with the apathy of those in the VA. For the most part, the Doctors are either "slackers" who want to do as little as possible, or Residents, who are simply "doing their time" until they finish their residency, and can move on to doing "real Doctor Work".

I probably went to the VA when I was in LA about 10 times in 10 years. And I never saw the same doctor twice! Most of the time I either got a resident/intern who had to clear everything through another doctor, or I got some old guy in his 60's, who was simply marking time waiting for his/her full pension.

Nobody cared. Not the staff, not the doctors, not the nurses, not the administrators. They simply want to do as little as they can, collect a paycheck, and build up seniority so they get a bigger pension when they retire. It was really sad. Go into a "Canteen" in a VA hospital, and you will find prices that are outrageous. The cafeteria normally costs more to eat in then a cafeteria at an airport. And for any little thing it is wait-wait-wait-wait-wait.

Want an appointment to see a doctor? Call on the phone, and make an appointment for sometime in the next 3-6 months (or longer - depending on what kind of doctor you need to see). Need a perscription? Well, unless it is from a VA doctor, expect to wait 3-5 months for the VA to approve it (even for routine things that the VA has perscribed in the past - like Motrin).

And if the item is not meticuliously described previously, expect it to be rejected the first time through (and the 2nd, and 3rd times). I was discharged for medical reasons in 1993 (knee injury). I also had documented hearing damage and loss on my final discharge physical.

On my first VA evaluation (spring 1993), I was told that my knee problem was "Trivial" (I used both a cane and knee brace at the time), and that my hearing loss was "non-existant". Now by the late 1990's, my knee injury is hardly noticeable, but since 2003 I have suffered from tinnitus (the tinitus started spratically in 1991, but by 2003 was constant - my ears have not stopped ringing in 4 years).

In 2004, I tried to get the VA to check my hearing, and they said there was no reason to, since it was not covered! They claim there is no "documentation" for the injury in my medical records! These are the same medical records it took me over a year to get. In short, they did not even look (and by the way, they have insisted since 1993 that there is nothing wrong with my knee either).

The VA is a classic case of "Government Inaction". It is staffed by people who do not care, and is basically the last resort and only used by Veterans who have no other choice. I have not even bothered to deal with them since 2004. And nothing will ever make that change. The bureaucrat's run the system, and they simply do not care about the people stuck with "the system".

So if somebody can make the VA give a frack about the people stuck in it's system, then I might start to believe that the Government might actually be able to handle such a medical program. But until then, I see the concept of "Government Health Care" as nothing more then a bunch of coprolite. Because everybody will then be stuck with the horrible and deadly service that myself and every other veteran has to suffer with.

And yes, I say "deadly". As horrible and inefficient as the VA is, it should not be a surprise that it has a horrible fatality and injury rate. If not for the fact that they can't be sued for malpractice, you would more then likely hear much more about it. Just do some research on the history of the Balboa and Long Beach VA Hospitals, and you will see what I mean.

And as far as "the right controlling national dialog" for 25 years, was I delusional during the 1970's, when Democrats controlled both branches? Or during the 1980's and early 1990's, when they controlled either Congress (under Tip O'Neil), or Congress and the Presidency?

This has absolutley nothing to do with either party being in or out of controll. It has to do with a horrible Government bureaucracy, that does not give a rat's ass about anything but it's funding and paychecks. If President Clinton really wanted to make me believe in his concept, he should have fixed the VA first. Instead, he closed VA hospitals, and even tried to turn some into "Community Medical Centers". That only made the VA worse then it was before.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: esoxslayer on 01/11/07 at 6:31 am

I haven't used the VA since my discharge back in 1986 and don't plan on starting now. I've watched my father use the VA and get the treatment described by Mushroom.

If the Governments idea of health care follows the standards of the VA, no thanks, I'll pay for my health care needs. You can't blame the mess of the VA on either party, and I seriously doubt that a nationwide health care plan would fare any better....

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: La Roche on 01/11/07 at 7:10 am

Once again, right-wing cynicism. The working classes are bums who want hand-outs, who milk the system, who have no work ethic, and can't be trusted to the right thing. Sorry, I see this as just classist bigotry.

BTW, I've known people at my company who take advantage of "sick days," who claim the inability to work for this or that bogus medical reason. My company is leniant as businesses go, but folks who abuse the system get canned by and by.

What the hell are you talking about?
You're comments have no bearing on what I said.. whatsoever. ???

I was talking about possible ways to fund a National Health Service... but apparently I was talking about working class bums? That statement is a contradiction anyway. The working classes are the hardest working individuals in the country. That's the people who fix your car, the people who work on your roads and the people who fix your roof (Hi Max, don't want your books getting wet? Gimmie a call.).

In the future, please try and tie in your rhetoric to what is actually being discussed.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: esoxslayer on 01/11/07 at 7:23 am

What the hell are you talking about?
You're comments have no bearing on what I said.. whatsoever. ???

I was talking about possible ways to fund a National Health Service... but apparently I was talking about working class bums? That statement is a contradiction anyway. The working classes are the hardest working individuals in the country. That's the people who fix your car, the people who work on your roads and the people who fix your roof (Hi Max, don't want your boks getting wet? Gimmie a call.).

In the future, please try and tie in your rhetoric to what is actually being discussed.

I don't understand this working class bum comment either...to me the ones I am concerned with are the ones who refuse to become "working class bums" and want nothing but a handout in order that they may continue to sit on their fat arses on the couch and not do anything to improve their own lives.

I'd be curious to hear a definition of "right wing cynicism" concerning the 2nd and 3rd generation welfare recepients, I was never aware that laziness was an inherited trait.....guess I'll have to research some medical books and verify......

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: Mushroom on 01/11/07 at 9:30 am

What the hell are you talking about?
You're comments have no bearing on what I said.. whatsoever. ???

I don't understand this working class bum comment either...to me the ones I am concerned with are the ones who refuse to become "working class bums" and want nothing but a handout in order that they may continue to sit on their fat arses on the couch and not do anything to improve their own lives.

I'd be curious to hear a definition of "right wing cynicism" concerning the 2nd and 3rd generation welfare recepients, I was never aware that laziness was an inherited trait.....guess I'll have to research some medical books and verify......

To Maxwell, everything has to do with "Class Struggle", and everything that does not work perfectly in life is the fault of "Right Wingers", "Neocons", "Big Business", or some other "Right Wing Boogieman".

I mostly tune him out when he goes off on such tangents. I do not give a damn about any kind of demagogery, because it is really nothing but hot air for the failings of one group or another. Either the person is trying to make excuses for why they failed, or trying to shift failure (which often is the fault of nobody in particular) onto somebody else who is percieved as "the enemy".

Since I do not view "The Left" as "The Enemy", I have no interest in it from anybody. I do not view Cat, Maxwell, Don Carlos, or any of the "Left Wingers" in here as enemies, nor do I view their parties that way. I simply view them as people, who I sometimes agree with, and sometimes dissagree with. But I do believe that each of us wants what is best for the people in the country. We just often times dissagree with what that is, or how to get there.

***

Now I do believe that the Government should take care of emergency treatment and care for people who do not have insurance. And that is basically already in place. If you cut a gash in your head or break a leg and do not have insurance, then I think the Government should step in and take care of you.

And in most communities there are already clinics, either free or "pay as able". In bigger cities like LA and Chicago, there are "Teaching Hospitals" that give damn near free service if you are low income (or no income). Of course, I also believe that Hospitals should be used only when there is little other choice. The only doctors I have seen since 2002 was one in the VA (which rejected me), and one from the Army when I took the physical so I could apply for my medical waiver to get in the service (which is still pending - the damned VA yet again).

If the Government Health Care was run like the medical in the Military, I would be all for it. I have never seen doctors, nurses, or people that cared so much for their patients. It is no wonder to me that most Congressmen and Presidents (active or retired) go to Bethesda Naval Hospital for care.

Most of the doctors there are either career Military, doctors who had the military pay for schooling (and are doing their residency in metter conditions then any other residents would have to go through), or are working on specialties. There is no worry about how much things cost, and if there is any question, you are sent to see a specialist (because they are all in-house and on-call, with no worries about billing).

But that is unusual, because it is probably the only medical service in the Government that is run right. In fact, I would say it runs better then 95% of civilian hospitals, because for the most part the "politics" is taken out of it. Their first, last, and foremost goal is care of their patients.

But a Government Health Care would not resemble that. It would resemble the system in use by the VA. Or the system in Oregon. Oregon also has a "Government Health Care" system, and it is just as bad as that run by the VA. My grandfather lived in Oregon, and the health care system there killed him. My father lives there now, and it almost killed him twice.

And check into how things work in California. They have the "MediCal" system, which basically gives free medical treatment for those that can't afford it. It is just as bad as the others I mentioned. Good doctors avoid it, because it does not pay enough to cover their expenses. So most of the ones that take it are quacks, or are so old that they should have long-ago retired. Oh, once in a while you get some good doctor, but he or she is normally an immigrant, and is still learning enough English to really understand what you need. These good doctors normally only accept MediCal until their practice gets going, then they dump it once it is no longer needed.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: quirky_cat_girl on 01/11/07 at 11:56 am

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: CatwomanofV on 01/11/07 at 1:32 pm

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/11/07 at 6:01 pm

I spent some time on the state medicaid. What Mushroom describes is eerily familiar. There were some good things. Co-pay for prescriptions was a buck. Under my BC/BS plan, co-pay for scrips is $15.00. Under medicaid, an ER visit was no charge (note I don't call it "free"). Under my BC/BS plan, an ER visit costs you $75.00. Granted, folks on medicaid don't have any money, so it wouldn't make sense to try and charge medicaid recipients high co-pays. However, under medicaid, if you needed a dentist, you better just tie a string to the doorknob like in "Tom Sawyer"!

I just think a society that lionizes the military and military service wouldn't stand for the VA being so horrendous. If they make you fill out enough paperwork, you'll be dead before you finish!

If a nationalized healthcare plan was like state medicaid or the VA, of course it would be a disaster. America not only has to reform social services, but social attitudes.

I could go on for many paragraphs explaining my "working class bums" statements, but I would rather leave it up to ReichStar to examine his own attitudes. If I argue with him, he'll just dig in his heels in order to prove himself right. That's not going to go anywhere.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: esoxslayer on 01/11/07 at 6:14 pm

I could go on for many paragraphs explaining my "working class bums" statements, but I would rather leave it up to ReichStar to examine his own attitudes. If I argue with him, he'll just dig in his heels in order to prove himself right. That's not going to go anywhere.

I wasn't really interested in HIS opinions of working class bums, I was more interested in your views of what you consider them to be, since you made the initial comment and all......

Sadly enough, your comment sounds like backpeddling to me.....

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/11/07 at 6:30 pm

I wasn't really interested in HIS opinions of working class bums, I was more interested in your views of what you consider them to be, since you made the initial comment and all......

Sadly enough, your comment sounds like backpeddling to me.....

Most of us are working class. Most people who call themselves middle class are working class. I found his remarks condescending: People would jump at the opportunity to get out of working for three days if it only cost $10 to go to the doctor and a get a note for a cold. So many people would do this so often it would be a drain on the economy.
He implies here that if Montgomery Burns goes soft, the workers will act like bums. I've heard this as part of the right-wing propaganda package against national healthcare, maternity leave, disability benefits, and labor unions from Rush Limbaugh and his ilk for the past 15 years.

I have already said more than I wanted to. "Backpeddling," fat chance. I happen to know who will and will not concede an argument.
::)

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: esoxslayer on 01/11/07 at 6:47 pm

Once again, right-wing cynicism. The working classes are bums who want hand-outs, who milk the system, who have no work ethic, and can't be trusted to the right thing. Sorry, I see this as just classist bigotry.

Most of us are working class. Most people who call themselves middle class are working class. I found his remarks condescending: People would jump at the opportunity to get out of working for three days if it only cost $10 to go to the doctor and a get a note for a cold. So many people would do this so often it would be a drain on the economy.
He implies here that if Montgomery Burns goes soft, the workers will act like bums. I've heard this as part of the right-wing propaganda package against national healthcare, maternity leave, disability benefits, and labor unions from Rush Limbaugh and his ilk for the past 15 years.

So, based on what you've said about the working class bums, and the other comment you made about most of "us" being WCB's, (I'll take the chance that you just aren't name calling and are including yourself in the WCB category), you must be in some round a bout way saying you have modeled yourself around your description above???

>>I happen to know who will and will not concede an argument.>>

Yes, I believe that birds of a feather can identify like minded individuals pretty easily...

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/11/07 at 7:25 pm

So, based on what you've said about the working class bums, and the other comment you made about most of "us" being WCB's, (I'll take the chance that you just aren't name calling and are including yourself in the WCB category), you must be in some round a bout way saying you have modeled yourself around your description above???

>>I happen to know who will and will not concede an argument.>>

Yes, I believe that birds of a feather can identify like minded individuals pretty easily...

I used the term "working class bum" in a facetious manner. I shouldn't have assumed others would pick up on that. And, yes, I consider myself working class.

"The only way to win an argument is not to have it."
--Dale Carnegie

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: La Roche on 01/11/07 at 7:35 pm

Most of us are working class. Most people who call themselves middle class are working class. I found his remarks condescending: People would jump at the opportunity to get out of working for three days if it only cost $10 to go to the doctor and a get a note for a cold. So many people would do this so often it would be a drain on the economy.
He implies here that if Montgomery Burns goes soft, the workers will act like bums. I've heard this as part of the right-wing propaganda package against national healthcare, maternity leave, disability benefits, and labor unions from Rush Limbaugh and his ilk for the past 15 years.

I have already said more than I wanted to. "Backpeddling," fat chance. I happen to know who will and will not concede an argument.
::)

Ah ha! I see where the confusion is. No.. the reason I mentioned a note was that a lot of the time if one is ill and say's so to the boss.. the options are as follows: A) Come to work or B) Stay home, permanently. This of course only adds to the problem of illness. If you're sick, you need to be at home in bed resting.. not out busting your hump.

I used the term "working class bum" in a facetious manner. I shouldn't have assumed others would pick up on that. And, yes, I consider myself working class.

I know it pains you to accept it... but not only are we in the same tax bracket, but we're as blue collar as each other pal.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/11/07 at 10:06 pm

Ah ha! I see where the confusion is. No.. the reason I mentioned a note was that a lot of the time if one is ill and say's so to the boss.. the options are as follows: A) Come to work or B) Stay home, permanently. This of course only adds to the problem of illness. If you're sick, you need to be at home in bed resting.. not out busting your hump.

I know it pains you to accept it... but not only are we in the same tax bracket, but we're as blue collar as each other pal.

Cool! This is just like the end of a "South Park" episode!
;)

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: La Roche on 01/12/07 at 7:07 am

Cool! This is just like the end of a "South Park" episode!
;)

Which episode?

Glad we could deal with the confusion, not every statement from somebody to the right of Marx is an invitation to kill the poor. ;) ;D

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/12/07 at 10:42 am

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: Rice_Cube on 01/12/07 at 12:59 pm

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/12/07 at 3:36 pm

I think companies should use the "Google" model (I believe the #1 company in the country to work for based on Fortune magazine{I think, can't remember which magazine for sure}). They have unlimited sick leave, great benefits, etc and *SURPRISE* a very high attendance rate.....why? Because people know that if they are sick, they still have a job. Are there people who abuse it? I'm sure there are, but there ALWAYS will be some who take advantage, no matter what. They treat their employees VERY well and are rewarded with hard work and loyalty. Maybe if more companies did this, there'd be less unemployment.....

BTW, Rice, Genentech was #2 ;)

I use the Google search engine all the time. It's a great service.

But...

I'm very skeptical of PR exaulting how wonderful this or that huge corporation treats their employees. I saw what they showed us in the corporate media. I just wonder what they didn't show us.

Remember, for every one pound of beauty in the world there's one hundred pounds of ugliness propping it up. Sounds terribly cynical I know, but it's just what I've observed in my time in this world.
::)

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: esoxslayer on 01/13/07 at 10:11 am

To Maxwell, everything has to do with "Class Struggle", and everything that does not work perfectly in life is the fault of "Right Wingers", "Neocons", "Big Business", or some other "Right Wing Boogieman".

I mostly tune him out when he goes off on such tangents. I do not give a damn about any kind of demagogery, because it is really nothing but hot air for the failings of one group or another. Either the person is trying to make excuses for why they failed, or trying to shift failure (which often is the fault of nobody in particular) onto somebody else who is percieved as "the enemy".

I'm struggling to grasp this notion of "class struggle". Why should I feel sorry for a person who chooses not to try and get ahead in life? I started my business with less than 50 bucks worth of drywall tools and have turned that into a nice tidy construction operation. Did I have to bust my butt to get there?? Absolutely. Do I regret the hours I put in every week in order to build the business?? Not at all. Upstate NY is one of the poorest sections of NYS, if not the poorest and western NY is right there with us.

Should I feel ashamed that I bill my personal time at 37 bucks an hour?? No way!!! Why in the name of all thats holy should I feel sorry for the guy that literally begs me for a job, I hire him and start him at 15 an hour plus his workmans comp., etc and have him show up late the first day?? If he doesn't want the job badly enough to bother setting his alarm clock early enough to show up on time, why should I feel sorry for him?? I've hired (and fired) many more slovenly workers than I've kept on payroll. All I ask out of my employees is to show up on time, and the only tools I expect them to have is a set of nail bags (20 bucks) and a hammer (20 bucks) and chalk box (5 bucks) and a speed square(3 bucks), I supply the 600 dollar sliding compound miter saws, all the 650 dollar per lift scaffolding, the 400 dollar ladders, the 150 dollar circular saws, etc., etc...not to mention all the pneumatic tools, compressors, etc. If they manage to show up on time for a week and they prove to be even somewhat competent as a carpenter, then they come back for week #2. At the end of the month they get a tidy wage increase if they've performed to a standard I set.

I get guys that decide they'll take a smoke break when they want to, fail to realize that there are women/children present at some jobs and not watch their language, etc, and generally have no cares for their on site behaviour.

When the guys use their trucks to bring parts and materials back and forth, they get a tankful of gas even if they only log 20-25 miles on their truck while doing this task. They get a paid lunch break and a paid coffee break in the morning, so it's not like I ask too much of them, or overwork them and pay them dirt, not to mention they fact they only need a few bucks worth of tools.

Now, I've built this business up to the point where I'm pretty darn comfortable in my lifestyle, but it's been done through hard work and a nose to the grindstone attitude. Why should I feel sorry for some slacker that decides he'd rather not work that hard to get ahead in life?? If they choose to be lazy and not ldedicate themselves to hard work and a desire to get ahead, why should I feel bad for them??

Here's where the "left" drivel kicks in...."they didn't get a fair shake out of life".....they were't guided properly and given a chance", "upbringing issues"..."circumstances beyond their control",,,etc., etc.... To that I say Bunk! My divorce 20 years ago cost me everything, my retirement funds, my lifestyle, my house etc., and I was left with nothing, and yet I still managed to never give up and carry on, and now am here and better than ever. If some lackey doesn't have the mental fortitude to work his way through situations in their lives and choose to lay down in the corner and die, why the hell should I feel guilty because I refused to?? Should I go out and make less money so that I mirror their lifestyle?? I think not. Am I going to listen to any sniveling that I caused them to be in the position they're in today?? Nope, and believe me, I won't feel sorry in the least.

I pay for my medical needs, and I pay dearly for that. I pay for my employees medical expenses IF they're hurt on the job. I also pay my employees enough so they can afford health coverage. If they go and break a leg while 4 wheeling, sorry about that. Before they have the 4 wheeler which is not a necessity to live, maybe they should have gone out and purchased a medical plan to cover the event of getting hurt. Life sucks, but I was always of the mind set that you bought what you NEEDED first and then bought what you WANTED with anything remaining.

Some people are not capable of rising up from their situation in life and I feel sorry for them. I DO NOT feel sorry for somebody that refuses to pull themselves out of the muck due to laziness or stupidity brought about by their own ineptitude. If that makes me a snob or a right wing nutjob in the eyes of some on here, fine..but you'll never convince me that the majority of people out there can't make a difference in their lives..it's all a question of whether they choose to or not.

Everybody in this country needs health care, no doubt about it. What I fail to understand is why a business owner like me should have to pay higher taxes in order to make it happen for the slacker who does nothing to make it happen for himself, and then get criticized by lefties for having the attitude I do.....

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/13/07 at 10:53 am

I'm struggling to grasp this notion of "class struggle".
Keep struggling. At your level of understanding (or is it wonton ignorance?) my explanations would be too condescending for a grown man to take. You don't want to hear it from me, and you wouldn't listen. As enterprising as you were starting a business, you can be just as with your self-education. Get thee to a library!

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: esoxslayer on 01/13/07 at 11:02 am

Get thee to a library!

Open thine own eyes before thouest try opening mine........

seriously though....my "wonton ignorance"??

Merriam webster defines wonton as the following:

>>Pronunciation: 'w

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: La Roche on 01/13/07 at 1:26 pm

Open thine own eyes before thouest try opening mine........

seriously though....my "wonton ignorance"??

Merriam webster defines wonton as the following:

>>Pronunciation: 'w

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: esoxslayer on 01/13/07 at 1:31 pm

Don't forget - Providing employment to numerous workers in what is a poorer area of NYS.

I didn't want to list that since I pay myself more than I pay them...didn't want a black mark next to my name for being a capitalist pig who keeps the poor down under my thumb.....

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: CatwomanofV on 01/13/07 at 1:48 pm

When I gave food to the poor, they called me a saint. When I asked why the poor were hungry, they called me a communist.

-Dom Helder Camara

Cat

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: Mushroom on 01/13/07 at 2:12 pm

When I gave food to the poor, they called me a saint. When I asked why the poor were hungry, they called me a communist.

-Dom Helder Camara

I have always loved that quote.

And don't get me wrong. I do believe that it is the responsibility of the Government to step in if somebody is unable to pay for medical services. If somebody has cancer, or a broken leg, or is pregnant, then I fully believe it is the responsibility for the Government to step in and make sure that the person is taken care of.

I also believe in a lot of the aims and goals of both Socialism and Communism.

However, I do not think it is the responsibility of the Government to take over Health Care. Let those who can afford it continue to get whatever health care they can (or choose) to get. But also provide the services needed by those who can't afford to pay for it.

There should be some place in the middle that can make both sides happy.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: CatwomanofV on 01/13/07 at 2:21 pm

I have always loved that quote.

I used to have that quote on my avatar.

And don't get me wrong. I do believe that it is the responsibility of the Government to step in if somebody is unable to pay for medical services. If somebody has cancer, or a broken leg, or is pregnant, then I fully believe it is the responsibility for the Government to step in and make sure that the person is taken care of.

I also believe in a lot of the aims and goals of both Socialism and Communism.

However, I do not think it is the responsibility of the Government to take over Health Care. Let those who can afford it continue to get whatever health care they can (or choose) to get. But also provide the services needed by those who can't afford to pay for it.

There should be some place in the middle that can make both sides happy.

I see your point, however the insurance companies are too greedy. I really don't think that it is up to some admin person at an insurance company to dictate what medical treatment a person can and can not have.

Cat

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: Mushroom on 01/13/07 at 2:40 pm

I see your point, however the insurance companies are too greedy. I really don't think that it is up to some admin person at an insurance company to dictate what medical treatment a person can and can not have.

I agree with you there Cat. The only reason I can see for denying something is if it is still considered to be "experimental". In fact, insurance regulations have frequently driven me crazy.

My ex and I had an entopic pregnancy in 1988, and she was rushed to the hospital because of a miscariage. We had CHAMPUS at the time, which is actually pretty good insurance (provided free to military dependents).

She had to have a Dilation and curettage done, and decided that while she was being put under she would have a tubal ligation done at the same time. However, imagine our surprise when 2 months later, we got a bill for the tubal?

It seems that CHAMPUS (and most other insurance policies) do not allow the "doubling up" of procedures, unless it is required, or pre-approved. They had no problem for paying for the D&C, but would not cover the tubal. We found out that they also will not pay if a tubal is done during a Caesarean section.

Bureau-rats will be Bureau-rats, be they in the service of the Government, or private sector (like banks, insurance companies, etc). And I have a life-long distrust of Bureau-rats, who hide behind regulations and procedures (being a "Grunt" when I was in the Marines, I had a similar distrust of "Admin Weenies"). And I really do not see those of the Government being any better then those in the private sector. My fear is that those who have no care will get the same quality they have always had, and those with the ability to pay for better service will end up with worse service then they had before.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/13/07 at 2:43 pm

Open thine own eyes before thouest try opening mine........

seriously though....my "wonton ignorance"??

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/14/sign10.gif
What a gaff! Classic!

http://www.gourmetstation.com/img/lg_chickenwonton.jpg
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/09/smilejap.gif

When I gave food to the poor, they called me a saint. When I asked why the poor were hungry, they called me a communist.

-Dom Helder Camara

Cat

Amen, Karma +1.

When Mr. Esoxlayer uses a phrase such as "pity for the poor," he shows me he is not interested in understanding class struggle. "Pity for the poor" has nothing to do with it. I am not interested in debating him on the issue because that keeps him in a contrary position and resistant to the idea. If he is interested in class struggle, he will educate himself. If not, he will continue to lecture me on his entrepreneurship and charitable givings.
"Get thee to a library" was a dorky thing to say. As for "wonton ignorance," who could ask for a better setup?
;D

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: spaceace on 01/13/07 at 9:13 pm

I am involved in a bipartisan organization who is trying to get a comprehensive universal health care bill passed through the PA House and Senate. Universal Heath Care's time has come. Everyone knows there is a problem, no one knows fully how to fix it!!! We're working on it though!!!! :)

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: spaceace on 01/13/07 at 9:19 pm

What does the bill entail if I may ask? Just curious.

Here's the link!!!

http://www.pahcsc.org/a70df02c-5d2a-461f-94ad-e2a4699a58dc-1033.html

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: spaceace on 01/13/07 at 9:49 pm

Cliffs notes? :D I see this is a state bill...CA is also pushing forward universal health care courtesy of the Governor. I hope that this works out well and has the right mechanisms in place because a bad health care bill is worse than no health care bill.

Is there a "Silver Bullet"? We have done and redone this bill in hopes it will pass. ARRnold had a Comprehensive Universal Health Bill voted passed by CA's House and Senate, he vetoed it. In my opinion this bill he's pushing now is worse.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: spaceace on 01/13/07 at 10:03 pm

It would help if you explained to me what the current bill in PA does, and why the current CA proposal is so bad compared to the one the Governor vetoed, because I have so much reading of my own that I cannot read the 46 page thingie you just linked me to, much less for CA's. I just want to know what's up, is all.

The PA bill we are trying to run through House and Senate is "Single-Payer" Comprehensive Health Care. The one the Governor of California is proposing is not "Single-Payer". It's more of a Massachusetts system. Some parts are still run by private insurance. Basically states are trying to hash things out to find the perfect solution to a potentially grave problem. The main goal is for everyone to have health insurance coverage. . . no one knows exactly how to do it yet.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: spaceace on 01/13/07 at 10:14 pm

What does "single payer" mean? I think that whether you have a private firm in the mix or not, you're going to encounter an insane amount of bureaucracy when making a claim for health care expenses. Can you elaborate a bit more on this single payer thing?

"Single-payer" is basically the state paying for health insurance. In PA, we have mandatory health insurance for kids provided by the state. This would extend it to adults. As for bureaucracy we have that now. THE STATE would provide coverage, not the private sector. If you're worried about taxes. Healthy worker, healthy economy.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: quirky_cat_girl on 01/13/07 at 10:18 pm

"Single-payer" is basically the state paying for health insurance. In PA, we have mandatory health insurance for kids provided by the state. This would extend it to adults. As for bureaucracy we have that now. THE STATE would provide coverage, not the private sector. If you're worried about taxes. Healthy worker, healthy economy.

sounds like a plan to me. I'm sick of not being able to go to the doctors, when I have tons of problems I would like to address (regarding health issues). My husband doesn't have benefits through his work...and we are in no financial situation that allows us to spend $500/month on healthcare (and that's what it is too...for a decent plan for the 2 of us). When did the CHIP plan start covering ALL children? I heard this announced on TV a bit ago...but I know just a short while ago...they still based it upon the family's income. Thankfully, Vaughn's dad has excellent insurance and he covers Vaughn.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: spaceace on 01/13/07 at 10:23 pm

Ah, sounds good to me. How much of a tax hike are we seeing because of this bill? Or are they reallocating assets to help set up a foundation?

With what employers won't be paying for employees health insurance it would be less than a %2 or %3 tax hike. So, it takes quite a burden off of employers and employees pay less all around. The only people who may loose out are people like "Blue Cross and Blue Shield"

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: spaceace on 01/13/07 at 10:24 pm

sounds like a plan to me. I'm sick of not being able to go to the doctors, when I have tons of problems I would like to address (regarding health issues). My husband doesn't have benefits through his work...and we are in no financial situation that allows us to spend $500/month on healthcare (and that's what it is too...for a decent plan for the 2 of us). When did the CHIP plan start covering ALL children? I heard this announced on TV a bit ago...but I know just a short while ago...they still based it upon the family's income. Thankfully, Vaughn's dad has excellent insurance and he covers Vaughn.

PM me.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: Davester on 01/14/07 at 2:13 am

This is a tough one. Maybe it's the libertarian in me, but if I had my druthers, I would prefer that we never came down this road and healthcare was a completely private enterprise. But I think the point missed here is that we have long ago past the point of no return. As I understand, 65% of all healthcare expenditures in this country are passed through the government. 30% of all private health costs are administrative costs...

What this means to me is that we have defacto nationalized healthcare, the only real distinction being that, although it has the all the tax costs of universal healthcare, it has few of the benefits. In other words, we are already paying more than every other nation in health expenditures, without actually providing the coverage...

It's not a stretch to make an analogy to public schools, many people pay for public schools and send their children to private schools. I think this would be the case with healthcare, the benefit IMO, is that I think we already pay enough for our hybrid clusterfudge system as we would need to pay for a universal system groove ;) on...

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: La Roche on 01/14/07 at 9:15 am

Here's an interesting thought on the debate.

If you are pro - death penalty, would you not be in favor of public health care as well?

After all, if one believes the Government has the right to take life away, wouldn't one also believe that the Government has a duty to make sure life was sustained?

Face it - That's what National Health Care is, a matter of life and death. In the most advanced, richest and powerful country in the world, we still have people dieing from the Flu.. when Flu shots are readily available.
That stinks.

It's got nothing to do with being Liberal or Conservative, that really doesn't play in to it, it's a simple matter of humanitarianism. Face it, if you're gonna support the troops in Iraq, why aren't you gonna support some poor bastard who's on death's door?

I'm no major fan of huge welfare nets, but healthcare isn't welfare, it has nothing to do with money or support, it's a simple matter of If you have access to it, you'll most likely live, if you don't, you'll most likely die.

Didn't both Hitler and Khrushchev look after their citizens?

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/14/07 at 10:15 am

This is a tough one. Maybe it's the libertarian in me, but if I had my druthers, I would prefer that we never came down this road and healthcare was a completely private enterprise.

I cannot think of any successful big business that has ever been completely a private enterprise. The American business credo is "socialize the costs, privatize the profits." When it comes to the health of the population, this is not good business. Illness is high cost and no return on investment. The old saying goes, "In order to get a bank loan, you have to prove you don't need the loan." So with insurance, "In order to buy insurance, you have to prove you'll won't get sick."

Well, that's absurd.

I could not buy health insurance on the open market because of a pre-existing condition, clinical depression. It's low cost as illnesses go. For the most part, it's one or two scrips and a couple of behavioral health consults a month. They treated me like I had plague!

I have insurance now because I get it through my company. When I've worked for companies with health plans, I've been eligable. When I wasn't working and had no money, I could get the state medicaid. In between, I had no insurance at all. Unless your Superman, buying insurance on the open market costs a fortune. You're a family of four paying $1200. Your kid has a bout with leukemia, and your premium goes up to $6000 a month. You lose coverage and go bankrupt. You can't file bankruptcy anymore because of the legislation passed by our fascist government.

If you're middle class (or working class, which is what most people are), all the Right has to offer you is Dickensian lectures on "personal responsibility." Instead of storming the Bastille, my compatriots gaze down at their shoes and feel sh#tty about themselves.

Of course healthcare should be in the public sector. What we need to do is take back our government from the saboteurs. If you want to make money, go sell snake oil. Don't put our health and our children's health at risk trying to make a buck.
::)

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/14/07 at 10:18 am

Face it - That's what National Health Care is, a matter of life and death. In the most advanced, richest and powerful country in the world, we still have people dieing from the Flu.. when Flu shots are readily available.

Buy your own damn flu shot! What do you want me to buy your flu shot? Personal responsiblity! This is a free market, free enterprise society. If you don't like it, go live in some socialist hell-hole like Cuba, where flu shots are....free.

Hrrrumph.
:-\\

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: La Roche on 01/14/07 at 10:48 am

Buy your own damn flu shot! What do you want me to buy your flu shot? Personal responsiblity! This is a free market, free enterprise society. If you don't like it, go live in some socialist hell-hole like Cuba, where flu shots are....free.

Hrrrumph.
:-\\

It's not really even a case of 'They're just mooching off the Government'. I for one am a big proponent of a total overhaul of the welfare system, the transfer payment idea is a flawed concept, but healthcare should have nothing to do with that. It just is. All the great civilisations have looked after the ill, why should we not be great?

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/14/07 at 11:50 am

It's not really even a case of 'They're just mooching off the Government'. I for one am a big proponent of a total overhaul of the welfare system, the transfer payment idea is a flawed concept, but healthcare should have nothing to do with that. It just is. All the great civilisations have looked after the ill, why should we not be great?

"Transfer payment" was better for business than either full-employment or marauding throngs homeless and hungry. Right-wingers should say a prayer at the alter of FDR every night, but instead they demonized him and tried wind the clock back to 1901. Not smart.

Again, that representative airhead libertarian P.J. O'Rourke was on C-SPAN last week when he declared it was the duty of the rich to help the poor, but it must be done voluntarily without government intervention. That's libertarians for you, so idealistic they come full circle back to cynical. Before the welfare state--as flawed as it was--hungry children roamed the streets in gangs, disabled people rotted away on "poor farms," and old people either starved to death before the froze or froze to death before they starved.

Foodstamps versus church donation box:
The foodstamp program allows people to buy their choice of fresh and nourishing food for themselves and their families. The church donation box forces the needy to pick up whatever boxes macaroni, outdated bread, and jars of peanut butter the good citizens drop off.
Conservatives demonize the former and lionize the latter. Again, not smart.

I absolutely agree, and so do all reasonable folks, that our healthcare system is a trainwreck and we need to manage our healthcare like the ret of the civilized world.

Believe it or not, I do not think the Bush family and that top decile of the top 1% of rich people care whether you or I live in a great civilization. They have no civic spirit. None. All they know how to do is steal the wealth of the world from the rest of humanity and prosecute for-profit wars.
::)

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: La Roche on 01/14/07 at 12:08 pm

I absolutely agree, and so do all reasonable folks, that our healthcare system is a trainwreck and we need to manage our healthcare like the ret of the civilized world.

The bastion of Civilisation 'Western Europe' has essentially full-health care for every single citizen. It's a travesty that we don't.
This is the one thing that confuses me. To me it makes sense to keep the citizens of this country healthy, yet the same people who want us to compete for jobs, innovations and general world-domination don't seem to take that view. :-\\

A healthy populace = A healthy nation = A good life.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: CatwomanofV on 01/14/07 at 1:55 pm

The PA bill we are trying to run through House and Senate is "Single-Payer" Comprehensive Health Care. The one the Governor of California is proposing is not "Single-Payer". It's more of a Massachusetts system. Some parts are still run by private insurance. Basically states are trying to hash things out to find the perfect solution to a potentially grave problem. The main goal is for everyone to have health insurance coverage. . . no one knows exactly how to do it yet.

Vermont passed a bill for universal health care last year-not implemented yet. I'm not too sure of the details.

Cat

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/14/07 at 3:46 pm

The bastion of Civilisation 'Western Europe' has essentially full-health care for every single citizen. It's a travesty that we don't.
This is the one thing that confuses me. To me it makes sense to keep the citizens of this country healthy, yet the same people who want us to compete for jobs, innovations and general world-domination don't seem to take that view. :-\\

A healthy populace = A healthy nation = A good life.

It makes sense just from a business cost standpoint. The business owner can have a healthier workforce and not have to worry about whether or not the competition provides health insurance.
Wal-Mart already relies on government healthcare for the majority of its store employees--medicaid!

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: Mushroom on 01/14/07 at 9:16 pm

Here's an interesting thought on the debate.

If you are pro - death penalty, would you not be in favor of public health care as well?

...

It's got nothing to do with being Liberal or Conservative, that really doesn't play in to it, it's a simple matter of humanitarianism. Face it, if you're gonna support the troops in Iraq, why aren't you gonna support some poor bastard who's on death's door?

Actually, I greatly distrust "The Government". And remember, to me the Government is not made up of the puppet Presidents, Congressmen & women, Judges, or members of the JCOS. To me, it is the endless number of Bureau-rats who are the "nuts & bolts" of the Government.

These are the people who are in Government service for 20-40 years, and do everything "by the book". They are the faceless members of the State Department who feed Dr. Rice the facts in the way they want them to be seen, so she can make decisions. These are the people who are immune to political party. They were in their offices when Reagan (or even Carter) was President, through Clinton until modern times.

These are the people who refuse to take chances, and do everything by the book. And if you know where to look, you know exactly which book to look into to find the answer you want. And most of the time, the answer they want is "no".

Then there are the ones that "pass everything upstairs". The ones who are affraid of loosing their jobs or positions, so they make no decisions. They simply kick the decision to somebody else, or "loose the paperwork", so there is never any decisions made. But they occasionally do make yes decisions, if it is in their interest.

You see, I greatly distrust Bureau-rats, and do not want them to have any more power over my life. In fact, I have more trust, faith, and confidence in Nancy Pelosi then I do in 99% of Bureau-rats.

Bureau-rats ruined the VA, the State Department, the Department of Defense, and everything else the Government does. And if you think I want to turn over something else into their control, you are very wrong.

I said it before, and will say it again. A lot of people seem to think the Government can handle this. I say this: let them prove it first. Fix the VA first, as an example of what they can do. But it can't be fixed, because the Bureau-rats already own the VA. And they won't let anybody fix it, because it would mean that most of them would be left without jobs once the mess was cleaned up.

And there are thousands of Bureau-rats just itching to sink their teeth into a "National Health Care" program. Because it means more jobs, and new ways to get promotions (and higher pay - along with more retirement benefits).

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: Foo Bar on 01/14/07 at 10:07 pm

These are the people who are in Government service for 20-40 years, and do everything "by the book". They are the faceless members of the State Department who feed Dr. Rice the facts in the way they want them to be seen, so she can make decisions. These are the people who are immune to political party. They were in their offices when Reagan (or even Carter) was President, through Clinton until modern times.

These are the people who refuse to take chances, and do everything by the book. And if you know where to look, you know exactly which book to look into to find the answer you want. And most of the time, the answer they want is "no".

A riddle: "The Eye in the Pyramid sees all, yet is blind."

The burden of omniscience: Those at the top of the Pyramid are expected to know everything. The only way for them to keep their jobs is to believe everything they're told by their subordinates.

The burden of nescience: Those at the bottom of the Pyramid are expected to know nothing. The only way for them to keep their jobs is to tell their superiors only what they want to hear.

The preceding can be used to predict (and to a limited degree, to manipulate) the behavior of individuals in any hierarchical organizations, from business to government.

(Rest in Peace, Robert Anton Wilson.)

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/15/07 at 2:14 am

A riddle: "The Eye in the Pyramid sees all, yet is blind."

The burden of omniscience: Those at the top of the Pyramid are expected to know everything. The only way for them to keep their jobs is to believe everything they're told by their subordinates.

The burden of nescience: Those at the bottom of the Pyramid are expected to know nothing. The only way for them to keep their jobs is to tell their superiors only what they want to hear.

The preceding can be used to predict (and to a limited degree, to manipulate) the behavior of individuals in any hierarchical organizations, from business to government.

(Rest in Peace, Robert Anton Wilson.)

Nifty! I like that.
:)

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/15/07 at 1:29 pm

I use the Google search engine all the time. It's a great service.

But...

I'm very skeptical of PR exaulting how wonderful this or that huge corporation treats their employees. I saw what they showed us in the corporate media. I just wonder what they didn't show us.

Remember, for every one pound of beauty in the world there's one hundred pounds of ugliness propping it up. Sounds terribly cynical I know, but it's just what I've observed in my time in this world.
::)
It's not just PR touting it in google's case. Maybe you want to look into it before assuming it's just "hype"....obviously it's not as they also have one of the lowest turnover rates in the "corporate world" as well.....on the subject of "healthcare", they have doctors on site that see the employees...

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/15/07 at 1:34 pm

Open thine own eyes before thouest try opening mine........

seriously though....my "wonton ignorance"??

Merriam webster defines wonton as the following:

>>Pronunciation: 'w

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: esoxslayer on 01/15/07 at 1:43 pm

Actually, spellcheck wouldn't have picked that up since it's a valid word ;)haven't you figured out yet that unless you agree 100% with him, you're "uneducated"? Oh, and don't bother posting personal experience because you'll be a "liar" unless you have some way to "back-up" your "story"....and there aren't really "poor who are lazy and refuse to better themselves", it's all "the man keeping them down" ::)

I keep forgetting to post the word "wanton" just as an FYI......

Yeah, I know all about guys like him....they like to talk the big talk, but then when it comes down to actually proving they care beyond the use of words, they fall short, usually because they just are words only and have no real substance......

Can't believe in this day and age of education that there are actually people who have the same amount of feelings for a single mom working 2 jobs to support herself and her 2 kids as there is for the 2nd or 3rd generation welfare bum who's too lazy to get a job and not rely on the Government handouts....I don't see how this has anything to do with "class" or pity..it's merely the pathetic ineptitude of a person who refuses to acknowledge fact versus some sort of blissful existence made possible by a higher power.....

I need to get me to thee library!!!!

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: quirky_cat_girl on 01/15/07 at 2:47 pm

I keep forgetting to post the word "wanton" just as an FYI......

Yeah, I know all about guys like him....they like to talk the big talk, but then when it comes down to actually proving they care beyond the use of words, they fall short, usually because they just are words only and have no real substance......

Can't believe in this day and age of education that there are actually people who have the same amount of feelings for a single mom working 2 jobs to support herself and her 2 kids as there is for the 2nd or 3rd generation welfare bum who's too lazy to get a job and not rely on the Government handouts....I don't see how this has anything to do with "class" or pity..it's merely the pathetic ineptitude of a person who refuses to acknowledge fact versus some sort of blissful existence made possible by a higher power.....

I need to get me to thee library!!!!

I love the way you put things...you're my kinda guy, Paul! ;) ;D

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: spaceace on 01/15/07 at 3:09 pm

Vermont passed a bill for universal health care last year-not implemented yet. I'm not too sure of the details.

Cat

It may take a while for a state to implement such a bill. A lot of changes to a system need to be made that can't happen "over night". It's great to see Vermont has it though!! :)

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/15/07 at 3:54 pm

Illinois currently has "All Kids" insurance for children. Basically, what you pay is based on your income and the number of people in your household.....for example, a family of 4 (2 adults, 2 children) can make up to $30000 and not pay a dime for coverage.....from $30-40K, it's $30/month ($25 for the first child, $5 for each additional up to a max of $40)....$40-60K, it's $80 (which is the max, no matter how many kids there are).....$60-80K, it's $70 (max $140, again no matter how many kids) and so on. It's still not free, but it's a step in the right direction....

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/15/07 at 7:01 pm

It's not just PR touting it in google's case. Maybe you want to look into it before assuming it's just "hype"....obviously it's not as they also have one of the lowest turnover rates in the "corporate world" as well.....on the subject of "healthcare", they have doctors on site that see the employees...

I assumed nothing other than the obvious. I stated I was skeptical. I did not say Google was an evil company. I am not even saying the stories I saw were untrue. I'm saying no company gets to be worth billions by way of altruism and sainthood. We all know that. There's a good side to Google's practices, but I caution there's bound to be a nasty side. Should that side get exposed, I won't be the disillusioned one.

Oh, and don't bother posting personal experience because you'll be a "liar" unless you have some way to "back-up" your "story"....and there aren't really "poor who are lazy and refuse to better themselves", it's all "the man keeping them down" ::)

I have no problem with you blowing off a little steam, so long as you know I never said that. I see the black, the white, the shades of gray, the good, and the bad in all. It makes life more frustrating and answers less elegant.

I keep forgetting to post the word "wanton" just as an FYI......

Yeah, I know all about guys like him....they like to talk the big talk, but then when it comes down to actually proving they care beyond the use of words, they fall short, usually because they just are words only and have no real substance......

Can't believe in this day and age of education that there are actually people who have the same amount of feelings for a single mom working 2 jobs to support herself and her 2 kids as there is for the 2nd or 3rd generation welfare bum who's too lazy to get a job and not rely on the Government handouts....I don't see how this has anything to do with "class" or pity..it's merely the pathetic ineptitude of a person who refuses to acknowledge fact versus some sort of blissful existence made possible by a higher power.....

I need to get me to thee library!!!!

I said myself that last sentence was dorky. Am I the only one man enough to acknowledge dorky statements?

Here is why I did not offer you a treatise on class struggle:
"Can't believe in this day and age of education that there are actually people who have the same amount of feelings for a single mom working 2 jobs to support herself and her 2 kids as there is for the 2nd or 3rd generation welfare bum who's too lazy to get a job and not rely on the Government handouts...."
You cannot deal with the fact that I have liberated myself from our social prejudices about the deserving and the underserving and choose instead a holistic point of view. You might take it upon yourself to understand why I have chosen to look at society's dilemmas the way I do, or you might not. My guess is that you are not interested in seeing the other side and posting some economic/philosophical treatise would be a wast of space. The "Bring it on" attitude won't bring you around.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: Davester on 01/16/07 at 5:05 am

Oh, and don't bother posting personal experience because you'll be a "liar" unless you have some way to "back-up" your "story"

I think that was me, in the death penalty thread...

And Badfinger~Fan administered a sound thrashing about the head and shoulders for it... :)

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: esoxslayer on 01/16/07 at 8:47 am

Here is why I did not offer you a treatise on class struggle:
"Can't believe in this day and age of education that there are actually people who have the same amount of feelings for a single mom working 2 jobs to support herself and her 2 kids as there is for the 2nd or 3rd generation welfare bum who's too lazy to get a job and not rely on the Government handouts...."
You cannot deal with the fact that I have liberated myself from our social prejudices about the deserving and the underserving and choose instead a holistic point of view. You might take it upon yourself to understand why I have chosen to look at society's dilemmas the way I do, or you might not. My guess is that you are not interested in seeing the other side and posting some economic/philosophical treatise would be a wast of space. The "Bring it on" attitude won't bring you around.

Ahhhhh...I'm beginning to see clearly now.....you want everybody to be equal!!

In the Marines, concerning unity, unit cohesiveness, etc...we have an old saying "You never move forward faster than your slowest man"..it means we leave nobody behind and always hit the finish line "together"....

Using that thought process, and your logic, then you are saying that you feel that we as a society should look at all individuals as equals and we need to eliminate class differences. Since you have so blatently stated that you see the 2nd generation welfare bum who is unwilling to do for himself in the same light as a person struggling to make ends meet and not relying on government handouts in order to survive, and a person who has built something for him or herself should all be viewed in the same light, then we should all just kinda "sit on the fence". Does that mean that we should all devolve ourselves to the lowest level of class in the world?? Should a small business owner give away all his assets (because selling the assets wouldn't fit in "your" mind set) merely because he or she by having them is creating a class difference??

You did say you live your life using the "holistic" approach. Merriam Webster defines holistic as the following..

>>relating to or concerned with wholes or with complete systems rather than with the analysis of, treatment of, or dissection into parts <holistic medicine attempts to treat both the mind and the body> <holistic ecology views humans and the environment as a single system>

Thats a wonderful idea, that falls flat on it's face as soon as you bring reality into the picture. Since there should be nobody striving to get ahead in life(because we can't fault the bum who chooses not to, and we must all work at the same level), then it's unfair of a hardworking individual to do so, merely because there is somebody out there not willing to do so. If you have chosen to take the holistic appproach in regard to this, and by definition holistic means "concerned with wholes or complete systems", then how do you propose that mankind survive with more than a euphoric attitude of "all is well, irregardless"?

Now, since we should all be equal, and since there is a segment of society that chooses to not do for themselves, any enterprising individual by his mere existence and setting goals in life is creating a class system. Do we blame the 2nd or 3rd generation bum or do we blame the enterprising individual?? Both are guilty of creating class differences using their mindset, right?? Maybe I'm reading too far into your logic based on your rather limited description you provided, but I get the feeling you believe that society would be better if we all were the same....

Now, if we were all the same and in a hypothetical situation the enterprising people decided to devolve to societies lowest class, then who in the name of God would be paying for the topic of this thread, National health care?? The minute one person decides to pick up a shovel and start making a better life for himself in your world, he is creating a class differentiation unless everybody picked up a shovel at the same time. Unless everybody picked up that shovel, then who would be wrong?? The ones that did, or the ones that didn't?? Obviously you can't sit on the fence on this one and say that neither party is at fault, because if you do then you've created a world where there was no means of paying for such programs as national health care, etc. There would be no prisons, because the sick minded baby killers of the world would be equal to decent human beings and would be allowed to roam freely, because they're a part of the collective, there would be no business to advance technology and provide benefits, because if there were, that would mean there was "class bias" happening, unless we all were doing our share. So, our "society" (if you would even dare call it that) would be nothing greater than our lowest form of existence, because the minute one person wanted to get ahead, he would be creating a class structure and he would be wrong. Since you feel that anybody working hard to make a decent living should not look down on those that choose to be a burden on society, then the fault does not lie with the bum, but rather the persons who feel they want better out of life, right??

We could all hunt for our food, until one person got a better spear than the next guy and then he'd be wrong because he'd be creating a "keeping up with the Jones' attitude" and that is B-A-D. It doesn't matter that his spear may be sharper and has a better chance of killing and providing for his "tribe"..he's still wrong because he made something better than the next guy. Same applies to my cave versus yours, my animal hide clothes versus yours, my campfire is bigger than yours...you get the picture.

I would love to hear the "other side" you mention...in fact I'd love to hear you explain your position as anything more than just sitting on the fence and just yapping at those who choose to degrade society by working hard and trying to get ahead in life. PLease show me how a hard worker is a burden on society while the 2nd a 3rd generation welfare bum is truly in a position approaching sainthood because "the man" has kept him down...

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go burn my house down because my home is bigger than the guy next door...oh wait...that would mean I have a bigger fire than he does........shame on me.......

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: Mushroom on 01/16/07 at 9:32 am

Ahhhhh...I'm beginning to see clearly now.....you want everybody to be equal!!

In the Marines, concerning unity, unit cohesiveness, etc...we have an old saying "You never move forward faster than your slowest man"..it means we leave nobody behind and always hit the finish line "together"....

...

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go burn my house down because my home is bigger than the guy next door...oh wait...that would mean I have a bigger fire than he does........shame on me.......

This is an area where I really feel that most "Socialist" and "Communist" beliefs break down. I fully believe that the State has a responsibility to it's citizens. But at the same time, the Citizens have a responsibility to the State, Each Other, and Themselves. And while I will break my back to help somebody who really wants help, I am not interested in burning one calorie for somebody who does not give a damn about anybody but themselves.

And as you said about the Marines, my experiences are very similar. In fact, the familiar saying "Gung-Ho" was actually lifted from one of the early Chinese Communist Parties. In essence, it translates to "Pull Together". And for the majority of those in the military, it is a good word. Because to accomplish a mission, everybody has to work together.

When I was going through the "Infamous" SOA, part of the instruction is what is known as the "Green Hell". Even going on 20 years later, I can still remember this. Think of the nastiest obstacle course in the world, and triple that. Run through swamp, jungle, and soft sand with a full "combat load" (50 lbs of equipment). Climb up 30 foot cliffs on a cargo net, and run 1 mile carrying one of your fire team members on a stretcher. It is a 5 man course, and everybody has to work together in order to finish it. If one man fails, the entire fire team fails. Just finishing the course shows that the group is a team, and can accomplish anything together.

http://junglefighter.panamanow.net/html/Green%20hell%20and%20back.htm

But even in the Military, you had those who simply did not want to work together. These are the slackers, the malingerers, those who did as little as possible, trying to "skate" their way through their enlistment. These are the ones that never get promoted beyond E-3, and are never given any real responsibility.

To me, there are really only classes based upon the effort you are willing to put out. This to me is what diferentiates people. In this system, I have a lot of respect and admiration for those that work hard, and try to make things better for themselves and others. I have very little respect for those that simply try to survive, or even worse - try to survive by sponging-stealing from others.

To me, the biggest problem with the majority of "Class Struggle" systems is that it punishes those who are successful, and rewards those who work the least. It thrives on little more then petty jealousy, and reinforces an idea that everybody should be equal.

The problem is that the poor fools that believe it think that it means that everybody will be elevated to the ranks of the upper class. In reality, it simply brings everybody down to a horrible level, so all suffer equally. Anybody who has read or seen Boris Pasternak's "Doctor Zhivago" will know what I mean.

I am willing to cut off my arm to give somebody a hand up. But they must be willing to do the rest of the work themselves. The problem with "Class Struggle" is that it basically wants everybody to cut off one of their arms, so all can be equal in misery.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/16/07 at 9:49 am

I think that was me, in the death penalty thread...

And Badfinger~Fan administered a sound thrashing about the head and shoulders for it... :)
No, it's happened multiple times when I've basically been told I'm full of crap when I've offered stories of people I personally know...the most memorable one was my friend who lost the family farm because of the estate tax where I was told that I wouldn't be believed unless I had "proof" of some sort.....in my book, saying you don't believe me is akin to calling me a liar.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: esoxslayer on 01/16/07 at 9:55 am

And as you said about the Marines, my experiences are very similar. In fact, the familiar saying "Gung-Ho" was actually lifted from one of the early Chinese Communist Parties. In essence, it translates to "Pull Together". And for the majority of those in the military, it is a good word. Because to accomplish a mission, everybody has to work together.

Good choice of the words "pull together".

In my opinion that doesn't mean "some of you pull while I sit and let you do the work", it means exactly what it says...we all pull together.

Until everybody pulls together and the slackers get off their lazy butts, then society is never going to be "right". I'd love to have Max or anybody else for that matter try and justify to me and others why some members of society should be allowed a free ride at the expense of others.

I'm like you Mushroom, I'll go so far out of my way to help an individual thats trying and not quite making it that it's pathetic, however, I refuse to help the slovenly individual who chooses to let everybody else give him all his needs in life.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: Mushroom on 01/16/07 at 10:11 am

Until everybody pulls together and the slackers get off their lazy butts, then society is never going to be "right". I'd love to have Max or anybody else for that matter try and justify to me and others why some members of society should be allowed a free ride at the expense of others.

It basically all boils down to a bunch of poop (that is not aimed at Max or his beliefs, but at the "excuses" a lot of people use to justify the belief).

Past injustices, racial inequality, social injustice, Corporate Greed, political corruption, there are 10,000 reasons why some people should be given a free ride. And a lot of it has to do with the actions of my great-great grandfathers (even if they themselves were put down at the time, or if they were not even in this country at the time it all happened).

To me, everybody is equal. And I elevate them or ignore them, depending on the amount of effort they are willing to put out. I have no problem giving help to the Chris Gardner's of the world. But I have no interest in helping the Damian William's of the world.

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/16/07 at 11:07 am

Do we blame the 2nd or 3rd generation bum or do we blame the enterprising individual??
Of course, it's the enterprising individual because they're part of "corporate America", which is EVIL http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/01/baddevil.gif

Subject: Re: National Health Care

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/16/07 at 11:17 am

BTW, I agree with both Mushroom and Exoslayer in the opinion that I'm willing to give a hand to someone who is truly trying to improve their "station" in life (call them "working poor", "lower class", whatever you wish), but those who feel "entitled" ("welfare bums") get nada from me. I'm all for free healthcare for those who are willing to work for it, I'm even for free childcare (and would also be for welfare in the form of food stamps/monetary) for people under a certain income who are working to try and better themselves through work and/or schooling. I think raising the minimum wage is a step in the right direction....But, according to some, the 2nd generation "welfare bums" just don't exist and EVERYONE on welfare is "working poor" ::)

Check for new replies or respond here...

System Stuff

Penguin News

Lend a Wing Up

Pop Culture

Before The 1970's

The 1970's

The 1980's

The 1990's

The 2000's

The 2010's

The 2020's

Celebrity Heaven

Current Politics and Religious Topics

Current Television Shows

More Than a Decade

Sports Zone

Life On Mars

am I right? (Song Parodies and Lyrics)

am I right Website News & Discussion

Song Lyrics

Song Parodies

Song Parody Contests

am I wrong? (Quizzes and Games)

am I wrong Website News & Discussion

Penguin Board Games

Penguin Quizzes

Video Games

General Penguin Related Stuff

Welcome New Users to the Colony

Ask Me, Ask Me, Ask Me

Say Cheese... Photos

Food, Glorious Food

Off-Beat Oddities

Penguin Ratings

Tenacious Tuxedo Talk

Send in the Clownfishes

The Writing On The Walrus

Playful Penguin Place

Retired Sections

Wanted/Selling

On the Record (The Artists and their music)

Places That Are Going, Going, Gone...

The Noble Arts: literature, stage, and related

Paranormal Pursuits