This source I used was Sean Hannity...yes, he has his opinions but he did play a recording of the speech Obama gave that was his platfoprm for the no taxes for..

So  I would take his word on the Obama statements.
Hope to include my sources when I 'hear' something and throw it out for talk.





Sean Hannity isn't a source, he's a joke and a half.



Cat

I never believed Obama's promise he would only raise taxes on the very wealthy.  Our country is falling apart.  We will simply need more revenue AND we need to spend it on infrastructure and the health of the populace, rather than flushing it down the military-industrial toilet. 

I wouldn't mind paying more taxes if I knew I was going to get something out of it.

It ain't Obama's fault corporate America got too greedy for its own good.  Maybe he SHOULD let the American automobile industry go down the drain.  I hear cranks like Glenn Beck say "let the strong survive."  Well, what do you do when corporations as large as GM and Chrysler refuse to be strong?  Furthermore, if Obama was out there saying no money for GM, no money for CitiGroup, etc., the conservatives would say he's trying to destroy private enterprise to put in place his communist agenda.  Right now they're saying he's trying to force government takeover of private enterprise to put in place his communist agenda.  Obama wasn't even old enough to run for office when the Reagan Administration teamed up with corporate management against organized labor and, it turns out, the health of the very free market system Reagan claimed to champion. 

Obama can certainly join in trying to fix our private insurance system, but he's flogging a dead horse.  The problem is, this is a dead horse with a zillion maggot lobbyists telling everybody its a live horse. 

And, uh, Saver, your last sentence makes no sense and ellipsis has three dots...
::)

Correct, Purview

isn't this unemployment still fallout from the crapfest of an economy bush #2 created?  ???

isn't this unemployment still fallout from the crapfest of an economy bush #2 created?  ???


Haven't looked back at that, but then it may have been creeping up and OBama said whathe said about keeping it down at the lower %.

isnt this thread supposed to be about illegal immigrants?

isnt this thread supposed to be about illegal immigrants?


Or more than likely, female illegal immigrants who wear low cut jeans and thongs with their evil tattoos showing while draining the welfare system by having a ton of kids.

Or more than likely, female illegal immigrants who wear low cut jeans and thongs with their evil tattoos showing while draining the welfare system by having a ton of kids.
that sounds kinda hot, actually. i believe i will encourage this sort of behavior.

that sounds kinda hot, actually. i believe i will encourage this sort of behavior.


;D

that sounds kinda hot, actually. i believe i will encourage this sort of behavior.


It's how you came in to being pal.

Or more than likely, female illegal immigrants who wear low cut jeans and thongs with their evil tattoos showing while draining the welfare system by having a ton of kids.


Not every state can aspire to be Arizona.

Or more than likely, female illegal immigrants who wear low cut jeans and thongs with their evil tattoos showing while draining the welfare system by having a ton of kids.


Don't forget swine flu too!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/icon_porc.gif

Not every state can aspire to be Arizona.


Apparently I need to use more smilies in my replies....

Apparently I need to use more smilies in my replies....


To clarify, I was making a joke as well...  ;)

isn't this unemployment still fallout from the crapfest of an economy bush #2 created?  ???


But President Obama promised that if we passed his stimulus package, unemployment would not go above 9%.

So no matter who you may place the blame on, it is still worsening.

Myself, I blame it on the global economic slump.  Every nation is hurting at the moment, not just the US.

OK YOU OBAMA supporters-

I seem to remember a set of campaign promises or stand on which the campaign was based that had to do with:
'No Earmarks', 'A ban on Lobbyists' AND 'NO RAISED TAXES ON ANYONE MAKING LESS THAN $250,000 a year'..


Oh, but he is not raising taxes.  He is simply making new taxes.  You see, that does not count as a "tax increase".

Between "Cap-And-Trade" and the proposal to tax pre-existing health insurance, he is going to cost the middle class tens of billions of dollars.

Of course, he is also the first president I have heard of that placed the upper limit of "Middle Class" at $250k.  I guess that makes me lower class yet again.  ;)

Of course, he is also the first president I have heard of that placed the upper limit of "Middle Class" at $250k.  I guess that makes me lower class yet again.   ;)


Odd isn't it how no one in the US wants to be called anything except Middle Class? I have friends that meet that $250K threshold and will see a tax increase, and they whine about how hard it will be to make ends meet with a couple thousand less every year.  In their words, making less than $250K means you're poor.  Personally I think if you're making that much a 1% increase shouldn't be a hardship and if it is, you're spending too much.

Of course it also depends on where you live.  I imagine $250K in a part of the country where the median house price is $100K instead of $500K would go a hell of a lot further.

Not every state can aspire to be Arizona.
i'm not sure ANY state is aspiring to be arizona...  :P

i'm not sure ANY state is aspiring to be arizona...  :P


Arizona is pretty. 

Odd isn't it how no one in the US wants to be called anything except Middle Class?


"Middle Class" is one of those campy ideas left over from the 20th century, like lunar landings and UHF.  Better get with the times, pal, poor or rich?

:P

Yes Obama is pulling George H.W Bush with his no new taxes pledge that he made in the campaign against John McCain.

I will say this I don;t mind taxing health care benefits but the cap and trade bill is terrible. What is the use for cap and trade? I mean your gonna charge more people on their electric bills in the middle of a reccession thats as worse as the early 80's recession?

At least if Obama decides to tax health care benefits at least it helps our health care business in that more people will get health care. I mean the people who don;t have health care we have to pay for anyway currently. At least too if illegal immigrants want health care they have too pay into it rather than other people who are here legally pay for them as we do now.

I will say this I don;t mind taxing health care benefits but the cap and trade bill is terrible. What is the use for cap and trade? I mean your gonna charge more people on their electric bills in the middle of a reccession thats as worse as the early 80's recession?


Why should health care be taxed?  You might as well tax every benefit you get from an employer.  Tax the travel, vehicle, clothing, meals, and education benefits while you are at it.

And is there an exemption for Federal Employees in this?  As a member of the military, my family and myself recieve free Government Funded health care.  Is this going to be taxed also?

Why should health care be taxed?  You might as well tax every benefit you get from an employer.  Tax the travel, vehicle, clothing, meals, and education benefits while you are at it.

And is there an exemption for Federal Employees in this?  As a member of the military, my family and myself recieve free Government Funded health care.  Is this going to be taxed also?
Did you read the paragraph below the paragragh of why I don;t mind the taxing of health care benefits?

Did you read the paragraph below the paragragh of why I don;t mind the taxing of health care benefits?



At least if Obama decides to tax health care benefits at least it helps our health care business in that more people will get health care. I mean the people who don;t have health care we have to pay for anyway currently. At least too if illegal immigrants want health care they have too pay into it rather than other people who are here legally pay for them as we do now.


But most illegal immigrants work "under the counter".  Either that or they fradulently use the SSN of other people (often claiming enough dependents so no tax is withheld.

So should this "free health care" then only be provided to people who work and pay into the system?  What is the health care is provided by another source?  If you pay for your own without employeer involvement, is that taxed also?  If it comes from your union, is it taxed then?

What I see is an ugly blackmail attempt.  "Either you take what we give you, or we are gonna tax you more."

I do not pay for my "Health Insurance" out of pocket.  But most estimates value it at between $4 and $16k a year.  Will I have to dump it and be forced to go to ObamaCare?  Or am I going to get a huge bite taken out of my paycheck?

One of my biggest wories about "Managed Healthcare" is what I have seen in other federal and state programs.  Ask Nurses in California what happened to their pay last year.  Or ask any Veteran that has had to deal with the VA what their health care is like.

Those are examples of how it is done, and I don't want it.  Nor do I want it for anybody else.

But most illegal immigrants work "under the counter".  Either that or they fradulently use the SSN of other people (often claiming enough dependents so no tax is withheld.

So should this "free health care" then only be provided to people who work and pay into the system?  What is the health care is provided by another source?  If you pay for your own without employeer involvement, is that taxed also?  If it comes from your union, is it taxed then?

What I see is an ugly blackmail attempt.  "Either you take what we give you, or we are gonna tax you more."

I do not pay for my "Health Insurance" out of pocket.  But most estimates value it at between $4 and $16k a year.  Will I have to dump it and be forced to go to ObamaCare?  Or am I going to get a huge bite taken out of my paycheck?

One of my biggest wories about "Managed Healthcare" is what I have seen in other federal and state programs.  Ask Nurses in California what happened to their pay last year.  Or ask any Veteran that has had to deal with the VA what their health care is like.

Those are examples of how it is done, and I don't want it.  Nor do I want it for anybody else.


Well that's fine for you.  Me I have to go in public and interact with other people occasionally.  I personally don't want to share an elevator or a plane trip with someone who has no medical care access and is a potential carrier of swine flu or TB or some other infectious disease.  If you only provide health care for those who can afford it, it's only marginally effective because it's not going to help control outbreaks.  You think someone has a bad cold and no health insurance they are going to the emergency room?  They're probably going to continue to go to work and cough on the food they serve you.

The system where employers are mandated to pay for it if they employ over X amount of employees (usually a dozen or so) and the gov't picks up the tab on the poorer ones works best for me.  If an employer isn't able to pay for my health care, I know to ask for more money or look elsewhere.  Is it a perfect system?  Hell no. 

We already pay more per person in health care costs than any other developed country, and frankly the service provided is not better than other countries.  If you think it is, I suggest spending some time being taken care of by it.  The "horror stories" being circulated about 20 year wait times, etc are just that.  Stories.  Spread by the people with the most to lose, the CEO's of the health care companies.  You can find plenty of horror stories in the current US system, like people denied coverage because they didn't mention they had acne when they signed up for coverage when they needed cancer treatment.

Here's my idea for a right-wing bumper sticker:

I'd rather die of TB than see 'em get it for free!

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/glasses10.gif

Well that's fine for you.  Me I have to go in public and interact with other people occasionally.  I personally don't want to share an elevator or a plane trip with someone who has no medical care access and is a potential carrier of swine flu or TB or some other infectious disease.   If you only provide health care for those who can afford it, it's only marginally effective because it's not going to help control outbreaks.  You think someone has a bad cold and no health insurance they are going to the emergency room?  They're probably going to continue to go to work and cough on the food they serve you.

The system where employers are mandated to pay for it if they employ over X amount of employees (usually a dozen or so) and the gov't picks up the tab on the poorer ones works best for me.  If an employer isn't able to pay for my health care, I know to ask for more money or look elsewhere.  Is it a perfect system?  Hell no. 

We already pay more per person in health care costs than any other developed country, and frankly the service provided is not better than other countries.  If you think it is, I suggest spending some time being taken care of by it.  The "horror stories" being circulated about 20 year wait times, etc are just that.  Stories.  Spread by the people with the most to lose, the CEO's of the health care companies.  You can find plenty of horror stories in the current US system, like people denied coverage because they didn't mention they had acne when they signed up for coverage when they needed cancer treatment.


Karma for this.

Interesting article from CNN about the Canadian health system...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/06/canadian.health.care.system/index.html

I believe my aunt and uncle have employer subsidized/paid health plans so they don't use the government plan, but it's good to know that every citizen has coverage.  I guess they either need more doctors or more money to keep the wait periods down...ick.

I'd like to add something to what Chucky said:

He mentioned that Americans pay more per person than any other developed country.  This is in direct relation to the fact that the poor, and illegal immigrants DON'T have any healthcare.  We're paying for them to go to the emergency room when they finally get so sick that they keel over.  If they had access to a regular doctor, and could go and get treatment at the begining of an illness, it would save us all thousands in the long run.  But because people don't have this option, they often don't recieve treatment until it's way too late.  If everyone in America had some kind of health insurance, we would ALL be better off.

My husband and I both work, and we pay over $400.00 a month just in premiums.  This doesn't include co-pays or prescriptions, which aren't covered.  My migraine medication is almost $200.00 a month alone, and we pay for it out of pocket.  And that's one medication that I have to have in order to function.  So yeah...I'd be open to being taxed on my health insurance if I could get decent coverage and premium amounts.  I'm pretty sure it might save me some money.

I'd like to add something to what Chucky said:

He mentioned that Americans pay more per person than any other developed country.  This is in direct relation to the fact that the poor, and illegal immigrants DON'T have any healthcare.  We're paying for them to go to the emergency room when they finally get so sick that they keel over.  If they had access to a regular doctor, and could go and get treatment at the begining of an illness, it would save us all thousands in the long run.  But because people don't have this option, they often don't recieve treatment until it's way too late.  If everyone in America had some kind of health insurance, we would ALL be better off.

My husband and I both work, and we pay over $400.00 a month just in premiums.  This doesn't include co-pays or prescriptions, which aren't covered.  My migraine medication is almost $200.00 a month alone, and we pay for it out of pocket.  And that's one medication that I have to have in order to function.  So yeah...I'd be open to being taxed on my health insurance if I could get decent coverage and premium amounts.  I'm pretty sure it might save me some money.


The premium gives the illusion of "choice."  Tax sounds like coercion. 

If you're getting soaked with an outrageous premium, the Republicans will tell you to find a new insurance company.  If you say you cannot find cheaper insurance in your state, the Republicans will argue for more deregulation so private insurance companies can "compete across state lines."  There is a naive assumption we're all supposed to make that competition always reduces costs to the consumer.  This is not true in medicine. 
::)

Karma for this.
hope you washed your hands first.

Well that's fine for you.  Me I have to go in public and interact with other people occasionally.  I personally don't want to share an elevator or a plane trip with someone who has no medical care access and is a potential carrier of swine flu or TB or some other infectious disease.   If you only provide health care for those who can afford it, it's only marginally effective because it's not going to help control outbreaks. 


Most outbreaks like this have no bearing on if the person has health care or not.  They tend to be more on living situation, general health, cleanliness, and other factors.

And it was not all that long ago that the lawyer flew from Europe to Canada and tried to sneak in the country because he had TB and was told not to fly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Speaker

Most diseases like this spread not from lack of health care, but from ignorance, or apathy for other people.

Most outbreaks like this have no bearing on if the person has health care or not.  They tend to be more on living situation, general health, cleanliness, and other factors.

And it was not all that long ago that the lawyer flew from Europe to Canada and tried to sneak in the country because he had TB and was told not to fly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Speaker

Most diseases like this spread not from lack of health care, but from ignorance, or apathy for other people.
might as well eliminate health care entirely then, i suppose. this is a truly extraordinary claim.

might as well eliminate health care entirely then, i suppose. this is a truly extraordinary claim.


How many infectious diseases are spread every year by people that simply don't give a damn?

Heck, this could be said about 99% of people with a venereal disease.  The cause is well known, the prevention is simple, and inexpensive.  But we continue to have a problem.  Why?

People simply don't care.

Heck, our government spends money every year giving away condoms.  In my unit they give away condoms.  There is a box full of them at the Barracks NCO desk.  And everybody passes it when they came in or out of the barracks back in Texas.

And we still had an out of control VD rate.

The clap has generally been cureable for 60 years now.  But it is not dead.  The cause of AIDS is well known, and has been for over 25 years now.  But people still get it every year.

And we have had free or low cost clinics for the treatment of them for decades.  And what good have they done?  Obviously not much.

Oh, but he is not raising taxes.  He is simply making new taxes.  You see, that does not count as a "tax increase".


George Bush I: "No New Taxes" (I'll just raise the existing ones.)
Barack Obama: "I will not raise your taxes" (I'll just impose new ones.)

http://cs.wlu.edu/~levy/subgenius_big.jpg

Unfortunately, there weren't enough of Us, and They took Our place as pickpockets. 

Either that, or the Rupture did occur on July 5, 1998 as prophesied, and despite annual parties, the rest of us are just stuck here in a World Without Slack.

(Hey, even if I didn't get eternal salvation, at least I get triple my money back.  All I asked for was A Working Religion...)

George Bush I: "No New Taxes" (I'll just raise the existing ones.)
Barack Obama: "I will not raise your taxes" (I'll just impose new ones.)

http://cs.wlu.edu/~levy/subgenius_big.jpg

Unfortunately, there weren't enough of Us, and They took Our place as pickpockets. 

Either that, or the Rupture did occur on July 5, 1998 as prophesied, and despite annual parties, the rest of us are just stuck here in a World Without Slack.

(Hey, even if I didn't get eternal salvation, at least I get triple my money back.  All I asked for was A Working Religion...)


Those liberal like welfare so much they added an extra L!
:P

Those liberal like welfare so much they added an extra L!
:P


LOL, OK, so I'm willing to cut the original artist a little Slack.  The book from which that image was scanned was printed in 1983 (the 'zine, 1982ish), not only before Photoshop, but before the Macintosh.  The layout of that book - even in 1983 and in black-and-white - made dot-com-bubble-era Wired Magazine's typography and typesetting look positively mundane by comparison.

^ It got the point across well 8)

How many infectious diseases are spread every year by people that simply don't give a damn?

Heck, this could be said about 99% of people with a venereal disease.  The cause is well known, the prevention is simple, and inexpensive.  But we continue to have a problem.  Why?

People simply don't care.

Heck, our government spends money every year giving away condoms.  In my unit they give away condoms.  There is a box full of them at the Barracks NCO desk.  And everybody passes it when they came in or out of the barracks back in Texas.

And we still had an out of control VD rate.

The clap has generally been cureable for 60 years now.  But it is not dead.  The cause of AIDS is well known, and has been for over 25 years now.  But people still get it every year.

And we have had free or low cost clinics for the treatment of them for decades.  And what good have they done?  Obviously not much.
i agree with this for the most part, actually, but certainly don't see it as any reason not to remedy our dysfunctional healthcare system.

i agree with this for the most part, actually, but certainly don't see it as any reason not to remedy our dysfunctional healthcare system.


And I have no problem with a remedy either.  I have no problem with expanding Medicare to cover those with no access to insurance.

What I do not want is to see our entire system thrown away and another one put in it's place.  I do not want my choice taken away (or taxed), just to make somebody else happy.

I think the entire idea is stupid.  "To many people do not have health care.  So we are going to punish everybody that does have it, to give substandard health care to everybody else."

This is what I hear.  I look at "Managed Health Care" provided by our Government, and it is an absolute mess.  People die in it all the time from lack of care, apathetic beaurocrats, and all I hear is "Oh, we will do it better this time."

Bah.  Tell you what.  President Obama & Company, how about giving us a trial run.  Fix the horrible abortion known as the VA.  If you can fix that, I may consider letting you have a chance at everybody else's health care.  Or fix California or Oregon, which have Managed Health Care.

But unless you can show me this will not be just another VA Mark 2, I have no faith that it can be done.  All I see is power hungry politicians wanting to take over another segment of my life, and take away more of my free will in support of "the people".

And I have no problem with a remedy either.  I have no problem with expanding Medicare to cover those with no access to insurance.

What I do not want is to see our entire system thrown away and another one put in it's place.  I do not want my choice taken away (or taxed), just to make somebody else happy.

I think the entire idea is stupid.  "To many people do not have health care.  So we are going to punish everybody that does have it, to give substandard health care to everybody else."

This is what I hear.  I look at "Managed Health Care" provided by our Government, and it is an absolute mess.  People die in it all the time from lack of care, apathetic beaurocrats, and all I hear is "Oh, we will do it better this time."

Bah.  Tell you what.  President Obama & Company, how about giving us a trial run.  Fix the horrible abortion known as the VA.  If you can fix that, I may consider letting you have a chance at everybody else's health care.  Or fix California or Oregon, which have Managed Health Care.

But unless you can show me this will not be just another VA Mark 2, I have no faith that it can be done.  All I see is power hungry politicians wanting to take over another segment of my life, and take away more of my free will in support of "the people".
well, of course, the flip side of that is the status quo, which is private insurers insuring people until they need it, then dropping them. it's great for the companies since it's just all profit for them, bet for regular workaday folks, it's a disaster. and frankly, until i hear a genuine, substantive proposal from the other side, i see no reason to take all the genuflectinc about socialized medicine seriously. it's well and good to say "let's expand medicare" bet how are you going to do it? the current system is broken and what i seem to hear from the other side is, let's do nothing. maybe it will fix itself. well guess what? it's not going to. and until i hear something constructive from conservsatives i say let's go with the obama people. at least they're bringing Something to the table besides Cigna lobbyists delighted with the status quo.

and if the VA is dysfenctional, fine. let's not use it as a model. our health care system is ranked 37th in the world, which means there are 36 systems better than ours. let's use THEM as a model.

eventually we gotta start making things better, man, not just complain about how they could be worse.

well, of course, the flip side of that is the status quo, which is private insurers insuring people until they need it, then dropping them. it's great for the companies since it's just all profit for them, bet for regular workaday folks, it's a disaster. and frankly, until i hear a genuine, substantive proposal from the other side, i see no reason to take all the genuflectinc about socialized medicine seriously. it's well and good to say "let's expand medicare" bet how are you going to do it? the current system is broken and what i seem to hear from the other side is, let's do nothing. maybe it will fix itself. well guess what? it's not going to. and until i hear something constructive from conservsatives i say let's go with the obama people. at least they're bringing Something to the table besides Cigna lobbyists delighted with the status quo.

and if the VA is dysfenctional, fine. let's not use it as a model. our health care system is ranked 37th in the world, which means there are 36 systems better than ours. let's use THEM as a model.

eventually we gotta start making things better, man, not just complain about how they could be worse.


Right on!

well, of course, the flip side of that is the status quo, which is private insurers insuring people until they need it, then dropping them. it's great for the companies since it's just all profit for them, bet for regular workaday folks, it's a disaster. and frankly, until i hear a genuine, substantive proposal from the other side, i see no reason to take all the genuflectinc about socialized medicine seriously. it's well and good to say "let's expand medicare" bet how are you going to do it? the current system is broken and what i seem to hear from the other side is, let's do nothing. maybe it will fix itself. well guess what? it's not going to. and until i hear something constructive from conservsatives i say let's go with the obama people. at least they're bringing Something to the table besides Cigna lobbyists delighted with the status quo.

and if the VA is dysfenctional, fine. let's not use it as a model. our health care system is ranked 37th in the world, which means there are 36 systems better than ours. let's use THEM as a model.

eventually we gotta start making things better, man, not just complain about how they could be worse.


Got a list handy, and also why they're better?  I'm just curious.

My friend also made a point about demographics and size of the nation (in terms of both land mass and population) having an effect on how well a medical care system will work...

Got a list handy, and also why they're better?  I'm just curious.

My friend also made a point about demographics and size of the nation (in terms of both land mass and population) having an effect on how well a medical care system will work...
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=US+Health+care+ranking

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=US+Health+care+ranking


It's so much easier when you do it for me though :\'(

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=US+Health+care+ranking


I've been to a Greek hospital, an English hospital and an American hospital.

I know where I'd rather go.

No, I didn't have health insurance last time I went, I have only joined the ranks of the insured in the past few months.

I suppose a lot of it depends on which state you're in.. but.. I live in Missouri, our state motto is - "Taxation... wtf?"

I've been to a Greek hospital, an English hospital and an American hospital.

I know where I'd rather go.

No, I didn't have health insurance last time I went, I have only joined the ranks of the insured in the past few months.

I suppose a lot of it depends on which state you're in.. but.. I live in Missouri, our state motto is - "Taxation... wtf?"


I don't mind paying taxes as long as it enhances my living standard...for the time being though I am in the fortunate position of having no tax liability.  This could also be seen as unfortunate, in that I don't have enough income to actually be taxed :P

well, of course, the flip side of that is the status quo, which is private insurers insuring people until they need it, then dropping them. it's great for the companies since it's just all profit for them, bet for regular workaday folks, it's a disaster. and frankly, until i hear a genuine, substantive proposal from the other side, i see no reason to take all the genuflectinc about socialized medicine seriously. it's well and good to say "let's expand medicare" bet how are you going to do it? the current system is broken and what i seem to hear from the other side is, let's do nothing. maybe it will fix itself. well guess what? it's not going to. and until i hear something constructive from conservsatives i say let's go with the obama people. at least they're bringing Something to the table besides Cigna lobbyists delighted with the status quo.

and if the VA is dysfenctional, fine. let's not use it as a model. our health care system is ranked 37th in the world, which means there are 36 systems better than ours. let's use THEM as a model.

eventually we gotta start making things better, man, not just complain about how they could be worse.



Awesome.  Karma.

I don't mind paying taxes as long as it enhances my living standard...for the time being though I am in the fortunate position of having no tax liability.  This could also be seen as unfortunate, in that I don't have enough income to actually be taxed :P


My point wasn't necessarily about taxation, merely that my state contributes the minimum possible amount to public funded projects and yet the hospital I went to when I didn't have insurance was a damned sight better than any I ever went to in europe.

My point wasn't necessarily about taxation, merely that my state contributes the minimum possible amount to public funded projects and yet the hospital I went to when I didn't have insurance was a damned sight better than any I ever went to in europe.


Perhaps they are more fiscally responsible than other states then...you'd know better than I.

Perhaps they are more fiscally responsible than other states then...you'd know better than I.
anecdotal evidence is hard to refute. at the same time my experience with private tospitals is that they ARE the best in the world. that's because tons of unearned premium cash has been poured into them. if the hospital andy went to was a public hospital, it'll probably get shut down eventually. the private companies aren't real crazy about public hospitals, particularly if they're well run, and because these lobbyists  basically guide government health care policy through aeffective lobbying, theyre working to phase public hospitals out.

once that's done, your hospital experience is guaranteed to be AWESOME. you're gonna need to be able to afford it though. hope you got a hundred thou in the bank; if you do, you can look forward to truly sterling service. please, i'd like an IV of grey poupon.

anecdotal evidence is hard to refute. at the same time my experience with private tospitals is that they ARE the best in the world. that's because tons of unearned premium cash has been poured into them. if the hospital andy went to was a public hospital, it'll probably get shut down eventually. the private companies aren't real crazy about public hospitals, particularly if they're well run, and because these lobbyists  basically guide government health care policy through aeffective lobbying, theyre working to phase public hospitals out.

once that's done, your hospital experience is guaranteed to be AWESOME. you're gonna need to be able to afford it though. hope you got a hundred thou in the bank; if you do, you can look forward to truly sterling service. please, i'd like an IV of grey poupon.


"Private" nursing homes are some of the most hellish in the country.  Corporations started running chains of nursing homes and once they got big enough not to worry about the competition, they started cutting corners to maximize profits.  Thus, staff was poorly trained, poorly paid, and kept at a minimum per shift, facility hygiene was allowed to deteriorate, nutritional programs were administrated on the cheap. 

Hospitals can fall prey to the same corporate malfeasance in the private sector.

This is not to say either public or private is inherently better, but private is not necessarily superior. 

and if the VA is dysfenctional, fine. let's not use it as a model. our health care system is ranked 37th in the world, which means there are 36 systems better than ours. let's use THEM as a model.


But that is the problem.  You see, the VA is "Government Health Care".  To me, it is an example of everything wrong with this proposal.  It is atrocious, and a disgrace.  And you yourself say it is dysfunctional.

So why not fix it instead of trying to pass the same truckload of broken goods onto everybody else?  In fact, I find it ironic that earlier this year, our President proposed that Veterans use their own private insurance instead of useing the VA.

This is the irony I find most troubling.  You have the administration saying "This Government Health Care system is broken, use private care".  And at the same time, he is saying "The private health care system is broken, move to Government Care".

To me, you can't have it both ways.  If you can show me the VA can be fixed, and give good care to the 10% of the population that is eligable to use it, then I might accept a trial program to cover others.  But if they can't even fix that, I have no trust that they can give care to the other 90% that are not covered by the VA.

Saying things should be better is one thing.  But myself and a lot of others want more.  Prove it.

But that is the problem.  You see, the VA is "Government Health Care".  To me, it is an example of everything wrong with this proposal.  It is atrocious, and a disgrace.  And you yourself say it is dysfunctional.

So why not fix it instead of trying to pass the same truckload of broken goods onto everybody else?  In fact, I find it ironic that earlier this year, our President proposed that Veterans use their own private insurance instead of useing the VA.

This is the irony I find most troubling.  You have the administration saying "This Government Health Care system is broken, use private care".  And at the same time, he is saying "The private health care system is broken, move to Government Care".

To me, you can't have it both ways.  If you can show me the VA can be fixed, and give good care to the 10% of the population that is eligable to use it, then I might accept a trial program to cover others.  But if they can't even fix that, I have no trust that they can give care to the other 90% that are not covered by the VA.

Saying things should be better is one thing.  But myself and a lot of others want more.  Prove it.


What would happen if we turned all the Iraq veterans out to our wonderful private health insurance companies?  PTSD, amputation, neurological problems...who's going to sell them a policy at an affordable rate? 

But that is the problem.  You see, the VA is "Government Health Care".  To me, it is an example of everything wrong with this proposal.  It is atrocious, and a disgrace.  And you yourself say it is dysfunctional.

So why not fix it instead of trying to pass the same truckload of broken goods onto everybody else?  In fact, I find it ironic that earlier this year, our President proposed that Veterans use their own private insurance instead of useing the VA.

This is the irony I find most troubling.  You have the administration saying "This Government Health Care system is broken, use private care".  And at the same time, he is saying "The private health care system is broken, move to Government Care".

To me, you can't have it both ways.  If you can show me the VA can be fixed, and give good care to the 10% of the population that is eligable to use it, then I might accept a trial program to cover others.  But if they can't even fix that, I have no trust that they can give care to the other 90% that are not covered by the VA.

Saying things should be better is one thing.  But myself and a lot of others want more.  Prove it.
well, maybe we will. obama's working on actually implementing something, and then we'll see whether it works. as far as i can see, the other side is just sour grapes. and there's nothing in this post to demonstrate anything different.

so i put it to you: what's YOUR answer? do you have any proposals? or just the observation that nothing works, so we might as well leave things the way they are?

What would happen if we turned all the Iraq veterans out to our wonderful private health insurance companies?  PTSD, amputation, neurological problems...who's going to sell them a policy at an affordable rate? 


Well, that is exactly what President Obama wants to do:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/17/obama.veterans/

We talked about this earlier.  And it leaves me confused.  First he wants us to go to Government Care, then he wants them to not use Government Care and get private insurance to cover it.  Even though it is for injuries they are responsible for.

And this is exactly the kind BS that I expect from the Government.  And would expect from any other program.  And once again, this is what I have learned to expect from them, so why should I trust them with even more?  To see even more people killed because of this kind of nonsense?

Or maybe they intend to just consider veterans to expensive to treat, and let them all die?  Because that is pretty much what you get from the VA already.

^ and yet the veterans are objetinf to this, yes? doesn't that mean they think theyre getting better care from the government than they'd expect to get frem the yrivate sector?

this stuff about whether obama wants everyone to go to government care and then he wants them to go to private care, as though he were having trouble picking a lane, has a "gotcha" feel to it. Obviou\sly the best solution, for vets as well as the rest of us, is going to involve public and private compononts, and the real challenge is to pick the prper balance of the two, not to decide whichis going yo be used for everything.

and as for the "government always equals bad" stuff ... i dunno. seems like a gross generaldzation to me. the government is a pretty sizeable entity, somehow i doubt every last person who works for it is incompetent bit that's the impression your post would leave us with.

Maybe it would be fun to come up with our own health plan that actually works?  I'd be interested to hear ideas.  Everything I've thought of either results in lots of administrators getting laid off or requires buttloads of fake money that we just don't have :P

Maybe it would be fun to come up with our own health plan that actually works?  I'd be interested to hear ideas.  Everything I've thought of either results in lots of administrators getting laid off or requires buttloads of fake money that we just don't have :P


But according to the ranking Tia posted we rank 37 in quality but if you go to the spread sheet you will see that we rank #1 in expenditure so the "buttloads of money are already there, we just aren't getting the bang for the buck.  Mostly this has to do with the way care is allocated in the for profit system, and admin overhead.

But according to the ranking Tia posted we rank 37 in quality but if you go to the spread sheet you will see that we rank #1 in expenditure so the "buttloads of money are already there, we just aren't getting the bang for the buck.  Mostly this has to do with the way care is allocated in the for profit system, and admin overhead.


I assume this is expenditure per capita and not overall.

Maybe it would be fun to come up with our own health plan that actually works?  I'd be interested to hear ideas.  Everything I've thought of either results in lots of administrators getting laid off or requires buttloads of fake money that we just don't have :P
I'm not sure laying off administrators is bad for anyone except the administrators, no?

I'd see a solution having a few basic compnents: I think the role of profit needs to be reduced. health care is a bassic human necessity and any time necessities are distributed or withheld for profit it seems to lead to trouble. For R&D, elective procedures, etc., fine, but for essential and preventive care, i think there should be a nonprofit option and private comanies, if they want, can compete with it. if they can provide better service at a lower price, more power to them.

I think doctor salarie need to be moderated. i understand they deserve high salaries but as it is they get paid so mich that it prices health care out of reach for just abeit anyone who can't get employer subsidies.

gotta reduce the bureaucracy. desyite what mushroom sez I actually think a public option would reduce bureaucracy. The private companies seem to devote a lot of money to finding ways NOT to treat people and determining financial laibility for each and every procedure. shifting thay stuff to public funding would fix that problem overnight and would incentivize private firms to streamline their operations to compete.

I assume this is expenditure per capita and not overall.


Not sure, but I think it is overall.  The spread sheet wasn't that clear.

Not sure, but I think it is overall.  The spread sheet wasn't that clear.


The more telling stat is "per capita" because if it is overall, that doesn't say anything because the US of A is the fourth most populous country in the world.

I'm not sure laying off administrators is bad for anyone except the administrators, no?

I'd see a solution having a few basic compnents: I think the role of profit needs to be reduced. health care is a bassic human necessity and any time necessities are distributed or withheld for profit it seems to lead to trouble. For R&D, elective procedures, etc., fine, but for essential and preventive care, i think there should be a nonprofit option and private comanies, if they want, can compete with it. if they can provide better service at a lower price, more power to them.

I think doctor salarie need to be moderated. i understand they deserve high salaries but as it is they get paid so mich that it prices health care out of reach for just abeit anyone who can't get employer subsidies.

gotta reduce the bureaucracy. desyite what mushroom sez I actually think a public option would reduce bureaucracy. The private companies seem to devote a lot of money to finding ways NOT to treat people and determining financial laibility for each and every procedure. shifting thay stuff to public funding would fix that problem overnight and would incentivize private firms to streamline their operations to compete.


If you're going to temper doctors' salaries, then you also have to either subsidize medical school or reduce tuition overall. 

If you reduce administrators, then you also have to provide a system where these so-called "useless" people can get useful job training in other fields.

Otherwise I'm down with your proposal 8)

^ and yet the veterans are objetinf to this, yes? doesn't that mean they think theyre getting better care from the government than they'd expect to get frem the yrivate sector?


The argument has nothing to do with quality of care, it has to do with responsibility.

Veterans covered by the VA are mostly disabled vets, with service connected disabilities.  And as can be imagined, a lot of them require expensive procedures, prosthetics, and other care.  Imagine if you are injured at work.  But instead of the company that injured you having to take care of your disability, they tried to pass you off onto your spouse's insurance.

And for many people, VA is the only place to go because of family caps.  Not to mention the restrictions many have of "pre-existing conditions".  If a vet has an amputation, an annual bill of $100k is not to unusual.  Imagine what would happen to your rates if you tagged that on your private insurance.  Or how much would be left if your spouse got cancer.  Why should private corporations or individuals be paid for something that is unquestionably the Government's responsibility?

In the 14 years I was a Civilian, I was actually able to get care from the VA 1 time.  Even though they are supposed to provide care to vets that are out of work or homeless, they generally do not.  They are also supposed to run a rehab program for those that are disabled, but I applied 5 different times and was denied every time.  I also tried to go to them for a cracked wisdom tooth when I was a full time student (another time they are supposed to provide 100% care), but was again denied.

But to be honest, they denied me 9 months later, once I was either back at work, or out of school.  They would drag their feet for so long in processing the claim, that it was no longer valid by the time they finally got around to doing anything about it.  And the President now wants them to not even cover legitimate claims by those disabled for their disability.

The one time I was able to get care, it was also a joke.  I had to wait 4 months to see a doctor, and the guy was in his 80's and senile.  I had to keep reminding him it was my right knee that was injured, not my left knee.  And all I got was a prescription for Motrin, good for 3 months.  Even if I made an appointment that day, I would have run out before I could get it renewed.

My wife did her internship at a VA Hospital.  She has told me she will do anything in her power to avoid seeing me in one of them.  People on waiting lists for 6 months for cancer surgery, bodies laying in rooms for hours until they were picked up, outragously high rates of staph infections, doctors routinely botching prescriptions, and misdiagnosis were routine there.  And because it is the Federal Government, it is pretty much impossible to sue them for malpractice.

as I recall obama has since backed off on that. it seems like originally it was little more than a thial balloon in the first place but his detractors want to keep resurrecting it to score political points.

I think doctor salarie need to be moderated. i understand they deserve high salaries but as it is they get paid so mich that it prices health care out of reach for just abeit anyone who can't get employer subsidies.


But the problem is that the doctors are not the ones that get the pay cuts.  Most often it is the nurses.

Until late last year, my wife was a nurse in California.  That is one of the states that has a state run managed care program (Medical).  When the state was having budget problems, they announced they would reduce the amount they would pay to the contract health care providers.

Now my wife is an LVN, and she specialized in home care of chronic and terminal patients.  For the last 2 years, her sole patient was a 4 year old boy at home on a ventilator.  He required 24 hour care, and everything went in and out of his body through tubes.  She worked 5 days a week, 12 hour shifts (6pm-6am).

When the cuts the state would pay were announced, her company informed her they would be cutting her pay by 10% (the amount the state reduced it's payments).  We were already in the process of reconciliation, and that helped make her decision to pack up and move back in with me.

Nurses are an easy way to cut expenses, because there are normally 5+ for every doctor.  So cutting their pay 10% each saves more money then cutting the pay of one doctor.  And even if the doctor is cut also, they feel the pinch a lot less then a nurse at the same persentage.

so what do you propose?

so what do you propose?


I asked you first!  :D  Actually, I think you answered, sorta.

as I recall obama has since backed off on that. it seems like originally it was little more than a thial balloon in the first place but his detractors want to keep resurrecting it to score political points.


He did.  But just the fact that he brought it up in the first place was a slap in the face to all veterans, especially those that are disabled.

And considering the idea that he wants to go to a national system, why would he suggest switching from government care to private?  It is an oxymoron and makes no sense at all.

He did.  But just the fact that he brought it up in the first place was a slap in the face to all veterans, especially those that are disabled.

And considering the idea that he wants to go to a national system, why would he suggest switching from government care to private?  It is an oxymoron and makes no sense at all.
he was suggesting a composite of public and private, i believe, otherwise I imagine he'd be proposing esiminating the VA altogether. And that's consustent with what he's proposing natuonally, which is ADDING a public option to compete with the private plans. so i fail to see the point of your objection.

and anyway, the same question can be asked the other way: if private systems are so much better and the VA is so bad, why would people mind switching to private plans? the indictment of private coverage implicit in the Veterans' reaction is hard to miss. I also believe that a part of the original proposal was an attempt to address private companies trying ta take ahvantage af VA by pressuring vets to use it for nono-service-related issues. that practice burdens VA and might have a lot to do with why they're having so much trouble baking ends meet and providing decent service. so yes, obama's a bad bad man and he hates soldiers and all that, but if uon't like dis udea for citting the burden to the VA it's on you to come up with another idea.

funny thung is the people complaining about this -- I know it was a cause celebre on FOX for a long time -- largely supported the wars that have left so many americans disabled, bit when it comes to ideas for how to fix the problem they helped cause they don't seem to have any ideas except to mutter about obama's birht certificate and whatnot. when the republicans bring an alternative proposal i'll listen but for now the "obama sucks so let's do nothing" position leaves me completely indifferent.

I would be in favor of an actual plan 8)

The argument has nothing to do with quality of care, it has to do with responsibility.

Veterans covered by the VA are mostly disabled vets, with service connected disabilities.  And as can be imagined, a lot of them require expensive procedures, prosthetics, and other care.  Imagine if you are injured at work.  But instead of the company that injured you having to take care of your disability, they tried to pass you off onto your spouse's insurance.

And for many people, VA is the only place to go because of family caps.  Not to mention the restrictions many have of "pre-existing conditions".  If a vet has an amputation, an annual bill of $100k is not to unusual.  Imagine what would happen to your rates if you tagged that on your private insurance.  Or how much would be left if your spouse got cancer.  Why should private corporations or individuals be paid for something that is unquestionably the Government's responsibility?

In the 14 years I was a Civilian, I was actually able to get care from the VA 1 time.  Even though they are supposed to provide care to vets that are out of work or homeless, they generally do not.  They are also supposed to run a rehab program for those that are disabled, but I applied 5 different times and was denied every time.  I also tried to go to them for a cracked wisdom tooth when I was a full time student (another time they are supposed to provide 100% care), but was again denied.

But to be honest, they denied me 9 months later, once I was either back at work, or out of school.  They would drag their feet for so long in processing the claim, that it was no longer valid by the time they finally got around to doing anything about it.  And the President now wants them to not even cover legitimate claims by those disabled for their disability.

The one time I was able to get care, it was also a joke.  I had to wait 4 months to see a doctor, and the guy was in his 80's and senile.  I had to keep reminding him it was my right knee that was injured, not my left knee.  And all I got was a prescription for Motrin, good for 3 months.  Even if I made an appointment that day, I would have run out before I could get it renewed.

My wife did her internship at a VA Hospital.  She has told me she will do anything in her power to avoid seeing me in one of them.  People on waiting lists for 6 months for cancer surgery, bodies laying in rooms for hours until they were picked up, outragously high rates of staph infections, doctors routinely botching prescriptions, and misdiagnosis were routine there.  And because it is the Federal Government, it is pretty much impossible to sue them for malpractice.



The majority of my health care is through the VA and while there are some issues that I have had with them, I would have to say that for the most part, the quality of care I have received has been good. But it could be better. It is the "starve the beast" syndrome. The government doesn't give the VA enough to sustain it and then cries, "See, it doesn't work so therefore it should be dismantled." With these kids coming home from Iraq & Afghanistan, the government has the obligation to take care of these kids. To do anything less is an insult to these men & women who put their lives on the line for a lie (but that is another issue).


It seems like Congress is doing more for the VA (as they should).


http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?parm1=5&docID=cqmidday-000003163324



Cat

so what do you propose?


Personally, I have no problem if the Government provided health care at an "Ability To Pay" for those without insurance.  I simply see no reason to make a radical change in our system to cover a minority of people.  Especially when a lot of them simply opt-out of paying for health insurance.

For example, in California a lot that have insurance available instead choose to use MediCal.  It is an "Ability To Pay" system, so you do not have to pay anything unless you need it.  And because most young people are in pretty good health, they would rather save the money and spend it on things like a car or the like.

I know that when I was younger, I did chose not to use the insurance offered by my employers.  I simply saw no reason to spend the money since it was not likely I would need it.  And if I was in an accident or got a serious disease, there was MediCal.  The state of Oregon has a similar system.

I asked you first!  :D  Actually, I think you answered, sorta.
i can't single-handedly solve the whole problem, i was just throwing a few things out there.

Personally, I have no problem if the Government provided health care at an "Ability To Pay" for those without insurance.  I simply see no reason to make a radical change in our system to cover a minority of people.  Especially when a lot of them simply opt-out of paying for health insurance.

For example, in California a lot that have insurance available instead choose to use MediCal.  It is an "Ability To Pay" system, so you do not have to pay anything unless you need it.  And because most young people are in pretty good health, they would rather save the money and spend it on things like a car or the like.

I know that when I was younger, I did chose not to use the insurance offered by my employers.  I simply saw no reason to spend the money since it was not likely I would need it.  And if I was in an accident or got a serious disease, there was MediCal.  The state of Oregon has a similar system.
I was sorta like that too but i really coulin't afford it. probably technically i could but health insurance is so colosally expensive i would have had no quality of life. every spare cent would dave gone into paying premiums. so technically i guess i was an "opt-outer" but really my choice was either risk getting sick and going bankrupt or live as a slave to the insurance companies.  I think that's true of just about everyone who isn't independently wealthy aand doesn't have employer subsidy. and those emyloyers who DO provide subsidies find it an incredibsle burien. sounds like your proposal would do nothing to change any of this, yes?

i think that's a sheeshty system and it does need radical change.

I was sorta like that too but i really coulin't afford it. probably technically i could but health insurance is so colosally expensive i would have had no quality of life. every spare cent would dave gone into paying premiums. so technically i guess i was an "opt-outer" but really my choice was either risk getting sick and going bankrupt or live as a slave to the insurance companies.  I think that's true of just about everyone who isn't independently wealthy aand doesn't have employer subsidy. and those emyloyers who DO provide subsidies find it an incredibsle burien. sounds like your proposal would do nothing to change any of this, yes?

i think that's a crappy system and it does need radical change.


I'd rather just pay taxes so everybody could get healthcare regardless.  None of this fist-clenching and teeth-gnashing about whether Joe Schmoe bought a Corvette while he was on Medicaid.  That's the kind of penny ante bullsh*t the right-wing radio talkers thrive on.
::)

The government doesn't give the VA enough to sustain it and then cries, "See, it doesn't work so therefore it should be dismantled." With these kids coming home from Iraq & Afghanistan, the government has the obligation to take care of these kids. To do anything less is an insult to these men & women who put their lives on the line for a lie (but that is another issue).


I have to admit, I have never heard that.  And it actually seems that every president since President Reagan has promised to "Fix the VA".  After all, that was part of his reasoning for elevating it to a Cabinet level position.  And Presidents Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama have all promised to fix things.  And nothing has really changed.

Heck, I can't even get a straight answer from them if I am eligable for the Post 9/11 GI Bill.  Their own "Education Experts" admit that the way it is written, I am not eligable for it.  Not because I do not meet the qualifications, but because of what Education program was in existance when I first entered the militry in 1983.

When I entered the service, the program was VEAP.  This was a program that ran from 1977-1985.  Basically you put in $1, and the VA matches it 2-1 for education.  But it was designed on the economics of the 1970's, and by the time it ended a fully funded college fund might be enough to pay for an AA degree.  It was replaced by the Montgomery GI Bill, which still is in effect.

The problem is, it seems that the Post 9/11 bill was written as an addition to the Montgomery Bill.  In other words, if you are not in Montgomery, you don't get Post 9/11.  I wrote a letter to the Author of the bill (Senator James Webb), but have not gotten anything back but a "Thank you for your input" message back.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DII7v8yeRjs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DII7v8yeRjs


YEAH! My main man Dennis! 
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/icon_thumleft.gif

That Mortimer Snerd from the Manhattan Institute oughta stick to scripted appearances on Neil Cavuto!