euthanasia?

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
There is a major problem with people not paying their health care bills. Mandatory insurance is not the way to solve this problem. I live in MA, am 25, healthy and unemployed. I haven't been to the hospital since i was born. But my states gonna fine my taxes! The gov't can pry that money outta my ass! My aunt got breast cancer, was more insured than any person her doctors have ever seen! They found it late and she got the most amount of radiation given to anyone ever. They figured she didnt have a chance. Her insurance covered shit! Didn't even scratch the surface! She lost everything, her home, car, life savings and dignity. I got fcked by Aetna Ins and my dentist when I was told to have my wisdom teeth removed. I was getting major infections and was told (by my Ins + dentist office) that my ins will cover up to 80% of my bills. Too bad the specialist that did the work wasn't In-Network. My insurance refused to pay it. That was back in 2007. . I can't wait to go to court. Mandatory insurance is bull and only helps our govt steal money out of the pockets of hard working Americans. You either pay to have the insurance or they hit your taxe returnes. Cause ya know the average family has soo much cash to throw around. Well.....that it for my rant.
You realize that this is what this bill is all about?

The basics besides offering plans to people so that they can afford some basic coverage, is to stop the insurance companies from not paying what they are supposed to be paying.

To stop them from screwing over the people that they are supposed to be serving. To stop their profits by the practice of deny deny deny, and force them to do it right like reducing the redundancy in the hospital, or promoting good health.

It is almost fraud what they have been doing, and this bill is the attempt to stop it.
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
You realize that this is what this bill is all about?

The basics besides offering plans to people so that they can afford some basic coverage, is to stop the insurance companies from not paying what they are supposed to be paying.

To stop them from screwing over the people that they are supposed to be serving. To stop their profits by the practice of deny deny deny, and force them to do it right like reducing the redundancy in the hospital, or promoting good health.

It is almost fraud what they have been doing, and this bill is the attempt to stop it.
Oh yes, let's force doctors to associate with insurance companies against their will, great way to enforce the right to contracts and the freedom of association.

Obviously, if a doctor is not in an insurance providers network there are probably good reasons for it. Either the doctor feels that the insurance company does not offer enough compensation for common procedures, or perhaps they had a problem with the insurance company in the past. Forcing doctors to associate with insurance companies against their will is not a viable equitable fair solution but the actions of tyranny.
 

Imlovinit

Well-Known Member
Well I'm confused! I thought that this bill was all about trying to make insurance mandatory. I have to be honest i wasn't about to read the whole thing. However, the fact that insurance companies can screw people is a failure of the justice system and a result of a blind eye of all politicians past and present. We should not need to enact a bill or "restructure" our legal rights to ensure the safety of Americans. If our system was effective and productive this would not even be a concern. I understand what President Obama is doing and i dont like it. How much cheaper could insurance actually get. Doctors and hospitals will not provide their services for cheap money. I'm sure some doctors want to help but most people get into the medical field for money and security. I also feel that this restructuring could come at a better time. Possibly when we wouldnt be forced into further debt. How about when Clinton (no saint) was President. Why didn't our congressmen, (the backbone of the people), deal with this issue at an earlier time? NOOO their concerned with steroids! They jst waste cash for the sake of increasing their budget the next year. It's sad that when I think of America and I relate it to a poorly run business. If there is going to be restructuring it can def start with a re-budgeting of our governments spending and their consumption of Americas livlihood. I'm not trying to be Mr. Anarchy, in all fairness most of the world is fcked. Either way, no matter what, our government will do what it wants. Hell look at the Electoral College. Peace
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Oh yes, let's force doctors to associate with insurance companies against their will, great way to enforce the right to contracts and the freedom of association.

Obviously, if a doctor is not in an insurance providers network there are probably good reasons for it. Either the doctor feels that the insurance company does not offer enough compensation for common procedures, or perhaps they had a problem with the insurance company in the past. Forcing doctors to associate with insurance companies against their will is not a viable equitable fair solution but the actions of tyranny.
As you don't have insurance TBT I will not think too bad that this is how you think.

But Doctors are constantly having their care undermined by the insurance companies. Everytime they turn around the insurance companies are telling them they cannot do what they think is necessary. I really don't think that there is a single doctor in the nation that is not hamstrung by the insurance companies, unless they are dealing with medicaid/care since that is the only insurance plan that doesn't make a practice to deny services.

Well I'm confused! I thought that this bill was all about trying to make insurance mandatory. I have to be honest i wasn't about to read the whole thing. However, the fact that insurance companies can screw people is a failure of the justice system and a result of a blind eye of all politicians past and present. We should not need to enact a bill or "restructure" our legal rights to ensure the safety of Americans.
They want people to get coverage, but are not making it mandatory. But if you chose not to get coverage you will be taxed, since eventually you will need medical care and they want it so that people don't get bankrupted.

They allow the insurance companies to work under the 'free market' and have very little regulations on them aside from how they can invest the money people pay into them. So this bill is about putting those regulations on the companies that should have been there all along.

While at the same time providing insurance to every American so that they can be responsible and get the care they need. Purplekitty even put a part of the bill up that she didn't understand (thought it was a direct look into the checking accounts at the hospital) but I am glad she asked because I learned that it was going to be set up so that you know exactley what you are going to pay before you see the doctor. That way there is no hidden costs.


If our system was effective and productive this would not even be a concern. I understand what President Obama is doing and i dont like it. How much cheaper could insurance actually get. Doctors and hospitals will not provide their services for cheap money. I'm sure some doctors want to help but most people get into the medical field for money and security.
If it worked for the 1/8th of americans we would not need this bill for sure. But it doesn't, and it didn't for your aunt who got screwed by the system in place.

It is not that it will be cheaper for everyone. But if people cannot afford it they will have access to federal grants to help pay for it. So that way just because you have a low paying job you can still benefit from it. Right now that care is still given, but in emergancy rooms. This means that the costs are still there (people still seak treatment, they just don't pay), but they are passed onto the government write-offs, spread over everyones insurance through higher costs, and paid for directly by the people that pay their bills in cash.

So it will essentially be the same costs, but with access to a regular doctor they can hopefully catch issues before they are so big they costs thousands of dollars. Like dental. If you go to the dentist every few months because you have insurance (a couple hundred a visit) they can keep you mostly from needing all the extra work if you only go when you need some serious care (Few thousand or more). It keeps you healthier and the total costs lower.

Not to mention the money saved through bankruptcy. The horrible ordeal that your aunt had to go through was not wiped off the books. We paid for it through taxes. That money lost was paid by the government.


I also feel that this restructuring could come at a better time. Possibly when we wouldnt be forced into further debt. How about when Clinton (no saint) was President. Why didn't our congressmen, (the backbone of the people), deal with this issue at an earlier time?
They Tried Hillary Clinton pushed very hard to pass this while Bill was president, but she kept getting shot down. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_health_care_plan_of_1993 The republicans pulled the same bullcrap they are pulling now.

They jst waste cash for the sake of increasing their budget the next year. It's sad that when I think of America and I relate it to a poorly run business. If there is going to be restructuring it can def start with a re-budgeting of our governments spending and their consumption of Americas livlihood. I'm not trying to be Mr. Anarchy, in all fairness most of the world is fcked. Either way, no matter what, our government will do what it wants. Hell look at the Electoral College. Peace
You are still on point (I swear that I did not get a new account and post this). This is a restructuring. Obama is trying to change the places that we place the money that the government is spending.

He has had a mess on his hands. And everything will not be perfect, but things like most the stimulus package going to education and tax cuts, Healthcare reform that has been directed towards denying care, $90 billion in small business loans, and a lot of money going towards developing new technologies that can become our new industries, is all ways that will help america in the long run, as well as the short run.
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
Well I'm confused! I thought that this bill was all about trying to make insurance mandatory. I have to be honest i wasn't about to read the whole thing. However, the fact that insurance companies can screw people is a failure of the justice system and a result of a blind eye of all politicians past and present. We should not need to enact a bill or "restructure" our legal rights to ensure the safety of Americans. If our system was effective and productive this would not even be a concern. I understand what President Obama is doing and i dont like it. How much cheaper could insurance actually get. Doctors and hospitals will not provide their services for cheap money. I'm sure some doctors want to help but most people get into the medical field for money and security. I also feel that this restructuring could come at a better time. Possibly when we wouldnt be forced into further debt. How about when Clinton (no saint) was President. Why didn't our congressmen, (the backbone of the people), deal with this issue at an earlier time? NOOO their concerned with steroids! They jst waste cash for the sake of increasing their budget the next year. It's sad that when I think of America and I relate it to a poorly run business. If there is going to be restructuring it can def start with a re-budgeting of our governments spending and their consumption of Americas livlihood. I'm not trying to be Mr. Anarchy, in all fairness most of the world is fcked. Either way, no matter what, our government will do what it wants. Hell look at the Electoral College. Peace
One of the provisions in the bill (well actually multiple sections) pertain to mandating that you have insurance. If you do not have insurance the government is going to take an additional 2.5% of your income in fines.

I'm pretty sure that fails when examined against the 8th Amendment prohibiting excessive fines and fees...

Of course, seeing as how according to some the Constitution is just a piece of paper (and not the standard against which all laws of the United States must be tested against prior to even considering implementing them) it can definitely be understood how they would not want to consider the fact that such actions are tyrannical.

Then there's the 4th Amendment Challenge (Right to be secure in one's effects, papers and home from warrantless search) which is another Amendment that this bill violates.

And the 5th Amendment Challenge (Right to not incriminate one's self) which is violated, because the government is going to require that you prove that you have insurance and thus prove you are not violating their tyrannical laws.

But all this is done for your good, so it must be a good thing, no?

:fire:
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
As you don't have insurance TBT I will not think too bad that this is how you think.

But Doctors are constantly having their care undermined by the insurance companies. Everytime they turn around the insurance companies are telling them they cannot do what they think is necessary. I really don't think that there is a single doctor in the nation that is not hamstrung by the insurance companies, unless they are dealing with medicaid/care since that is the only insurance plan that doesn't make a practice to deny services.
I can think of many doctors that have been hamstrung by Federal Regulation as well. So your argument that it is just the insurance companies forcing doctors to abandon some medical procedures is half an argument. Government, bureaucrats and politicians, are no better.



They want people to get coverage, but are not making it mandatory. But if you chose not to get coverage you will be taxed, since eventually you will need medical care and they want it so that people don't get bankrupted.
Let's see, if the government deprives me of the ability to save for my own medical care and then when I actually need medical care I'm not able to afford it because of the taxes and end up going bankrupt how does that accomplish the goals you are purporting them to have?

They allow the insurance companies to work under the 'free market' and have very little regulations on them aside from how they can invest the money people pay into them. So this bill is about putting those regulations on the companies that should have been there all along.
The insurance companies are coated in so much red tape that it's not even funny. This just adds more to the pile, but it is likely going to be the straw that broke the camel's back, but nevermind, as long as that last 10% get coverage who cares what happens to the other 90% that rely upon private insurance for their coverage, or if the 10% that are uninsured even want coverage in the first place.

Stupidity, Tyranny and down right imbecility, of course that is the coin of the realm in D.C.

While at the same time providing insurance to every American so that they can be responsible and get the care they need. Purplekitty even put a part of the bill up that she didn't understand (thought it was a direct look into the checking accounts at the hospital) but I am glad she asked because I learned that it was going to be set up so that you know exactley what you are going to pay before you see the doctor. That way there is no hidden costs.
I know exactly what I'm going to pay for before I see a doctor, medical care. I don't know WTF I'm paying for when I surrender money to the government or an insurance company for that matter.

Nor do I wish to have to waste my time attempting to decipher the all but encrypted legalese that is so prevalent in government and private contracts between individuals and corporations.


If it worked for the 1/8th of americans we would not need this bill for sure. But it doesn't, and it didn't for your aunt who got screwed by the system in place.
Directing that at the wrong person, but based on the kind of person she is, I think it'd serve my aunt right if she got screwed by the system in place.

It is not that it will be cheaper for everyone.
No, just for the lazy, stupid, incompetent and the free riders, because they must be given access to medical care at the expense of the middle class (and make no mistake that is exactly who is going to be stuck paying for this junk legislation.)

But if people cannot afford it they will have access to federal grants to help pay for it.
Yes, more of my stolen money at work providing goods and services to others and thus depriving me of the ability to get ahead through my own actions. But we must not let those whining insignificant cowards that are incapable of standing on their own two feet go with out, that would be cruel and inhumane. Never mind that because of all this feel good legislation millions of Americans are forced to finance purchases that they would otherwise be able to afford and thus the entire economy suffers at a rate exceeding 2 - 3% for every 1% collected in taxes.

Pyrrhic Victory, the costs outweight the fucking benefits.

Where's the Brits that I met when I went camping, they were saying something about the Queen rescinding our independence, at this rate that'd be an improvement.

So that way just because you have a low paying job you can still benefit from it.
If you aspire to remain in a low paying job your entire life, you are either
A. An Imbecile
B. An idiot with no ambition
C. A coward afraid to strive for better

But not suffering to continue to insult those poor bastards who are stuck slaving for stupid fucks like you at fastfood joints, I personally think a better solution, and one that wouldn't so egregariously violate the rights of the citizenry, would be just to cut payroll taxes. $2,000 a year in the pocket of the average fastfood worker. Plenty to pay for their medical needs, and if they don't spend it on medical care, who gives a fuck, because it's their money to do what they want with anyway.

Oh, wait, that would go against your great socialist tyranny where big brother must ensure that everyone does what is good for them. Give me a break...

Right now that care is still given, but in emergancy rooms.
Funny thing is that there was this study done and most people in emergency rooms actually have insurance... oops, your argument fails. No bearing on reality.

This means that the costs are still there (people still seak treatment, they just don't pay), but they are passed onto the government write-offs, spread over everyones insurance through higher costs, and paid for directly by the people that pay their bills in cash.
Not that this purported solution is really going to resolve that because everyone is still stuck paying for those freeloaders, and what if those freeloaders (fucking bums) don't have any income and thus can't afford insurance anyway. No benefit there, everyone is still stuck paying, only now they get it up the ass everytime one of thus fucking bums gets the sniffles and goes into the ER (which they aren't actually doing to begin with.)


So it will essentially be the same costs, but with access to a regular doctor they can hopefully catch issues before they are so big they costs thousands of dollars.
There was another study (I think I even linked to it in another post) that concluded that preventative care would actually end up being more expensive. Oops, 0 - 2, or maybe you've already struck out.


Like dental. If you go to the dentist every few months because you have insurance (a couple hundred a visit) they can keep you mostly from needing all the extra work if you only go when you need some serious care (Few thousand or more). It keeps you healthier and the total costs lower.
Big difference between Dental (fillings) and a MRI, PET, EKG or any other kind of preventitive tests. Not to mention the fact that some of the radiological tests require shipment to an outside lab, which adds onto the costs instead of decreasing costs.

Not to mention the money saved through bankruptcy. The horrible ordeal that your aunt had to go through was not wiped off the books. We paid for it through taxes. That money lost was paid by the government.
Actually it was probably swallowed by the doctor, but I suppose since that wasn't income the doctor got then the government indirectly paid some of that in lost tax revenues.

OMFG, that's what it's all about, tax revenues, oh utterly un-fucking-surprising. Can't let the doctors just write off treatments they aren't going to get payment for, that might reduce their tax bracket and take money away from the bureaucrats...



They Tried Hillary Clinton pushed very hard to pass this while Bill was president, but she kept getting shot down. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_health_care_plan_of_1993 The republicans pulled the same bullcrap they are pulling now.
Thank God, and hopefully we'll defeat this junk-legislation this time around. It is a violation of a various assortment of the Bill of Rights (4th, 5th, 8th, 9th and 10th Amendments) and an imbecilic attempt to monopolize 16% of the economy under the control of a few major government-backed corporations. (Because those major (government-backed) corporations are going to be the one's that get the government contracts to administer this horribly flawed system.)


You are still on point (I swear that I did not get a new account and post this). This is a restructuring. Obama is trying to change the places that we place the money that the government is spending.
He has had a mess on his hands. And everything will not be perfect, but things like most the stimulus package going to education and tax cuts, Healthcare reform that has been directed towards denying care, $90 billion in small business loans, and a lot of money going towards developing new technologies that can become our new industries, is all ways that will help america in the long run, as well as the short run.
Lots of Junk Legislation...

None of it is going to help, because the medical care is going to end up costing more (just the costs are now going to be hidden instead of out in the open, except in the event that some how some one gets out of the system and needs care, which they'll end up paying infinitely more for.)

Then there's the fact that doctors don't want this junk legislation (more paperwork, and their doctors to practice medicine, not doctors to push paperwork.) Though on the bright side (for fucking retarded socialists) just imagine how many fucking bean-counters they are going to have to hire to push around paperwork for Uncle Sam.

Let's not forget that Solar and Wind are less efficient (by a factor of 400 - 600%) than Nuclear, Coal, Oil, Gas and Natural Gas.

Nevermind that despite the billions that continuously get thrown at education there has yet to be any meaningful increase in the quality of the public education system (which continues to slide further and further into failing to achieve its goals.)

Waste of Money
Waste of Effort
Waste of Emotion
Waste of Time

Let us not ignore the fact that the United States has more liabilities (unfunded) than it actually has assets.

And is rapidly approaching a point where the national debt exceeds the GDP (which is a fictional number due to the inclusion of government services, and thus a mask used to hide the fact that the United States probably hasn't emerged from the Great Depression.) Which would certainly explain the less than stellar growth rate and the less than profitable efforts in the imbecilic war on poverty.

Where's the Obama Exit Strategy for that epic failure. One would think that after 40 + years the Government would finally be sick of fighting a losing battle...

Oh, wait, it's not about getting people out of poverty, it's about forcing everyone into poverty, because that's the only way to achieve the absurd egalitarian dream of absolute equality.

Like I said before, NEW DARK AGE.

I wish I could teleport into the future and see how far this insanity lasts before humanity recovers its senses, drops this imbecilic pretense of equality of outcomes and unnatural rights, and realizes again that the only rights there are are those to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness and that the highest distinction a nation can have is the true equality of all before the law, instead of this imbecilic drive to reduce everyone to equal poverty through use of the law.

Democracy truly is a God that failed. How the hell do you dispose of a failed God?
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
I love that you are burying that guys post because it is a perfect look at what this bill really is all about with all this garbage.

I can think of many doctors that have been hamstrung by Federal Regulation as well. So your argument that it is just the insurance companies forcing doctors to abandon some medical procedures is half an argument. Government, bureaucrats and politicians, are no better.
Like what?

Let's see, if the government deprives me of the ability to save for my own medical care and then when I actually need medical care I'm not able to afford it because of the taxes and end up going bankrupt how does that accomplish the goals you are purporting them to have?
You would be able to have insurance which would save you money over time.

The insurance companies are coated in so much red tape that it's not even funny. This just adds more to the pile, but it is likely going to be the straw that broke the camel's back, but nevermind, as long as that last 10% get coverage who cares what happens to the other 90% that rely upon private insurance for their coverage, or if the 10% that are uninsured even want coverage in the first place.

Stupidity, Tyranny and down right imbecility, of course that is the coin of the realm in D.C.
You have nothing to point to on this, it is an old tired argument, because the costs remain the same, people still seek treatment, they just don't pay for them now, or file for bankruptcy, which ends up costing more in the end.

I know exactly what I'm going to pay for before I see a doctor, medical care. I don't know WTF I'm paying for when I surrender money to the government or an insurance company for that matter.

Nor do I wish to have to waste my time attempting to decipher the all but encrypted legalese that is so prevalent in government and private contracts between individuals and corporations.
So I am supposed to feel sorry for your inability to rationalize having insurance, because you cannot understand it?

Yes, more of my stolen money at work providing goods and services to others and thus depriving me of the ability to get ahead through my own actions. But we must not let those whining insignificant cowards that are incapable of standing on their own two feet go with out, that would be cruel and inhumane. Never mind that because of all this feel good legislation millions of Americans are forced to finance purchases that they would otherwise be able to afford and thus the entire economy suffers at a rate exceeding 2 - 3% for every 1% collected in taxes.

Pyrrhic Victory, the costs outweight the fucking benefits.

Where's the Brits that I met when I went camping, they were saying something about the Queen rescinding our independence, at this rate that'd be an improvement.
You have nothing to back this up, but your guesses. You refuse to see (or at least admit) the economic benefits of having a healthy and insured public. You refuse to see anything but your hate for this.

If you aspire to remain in a low paying job your entire life, you are either
A. An Imbecile
B. An idiot with no ambition
C. A coward afraid to strive for better

But not suffering to continue to insult those poor bastards who are stuck slaving for stupid fucks like you at fastfood joints, I personally think a better solution, and one that wouldn't so egregariously violate the rights of the citizenry, would be just to cut payroll taxes. $2,000 a year in the pocket of the average fastfood worker. Plenty to pay for their medical needs, and if they don't spend it on medical care, who gives a fuck, because it's their money to do what they want with anyway.

Oh, wait, that would go against your great socialist tyranny where big brother must ensure that everyone does what is good for them. Give me a break...
You are so angry with anything that is good for the people you sound like a republican plant. Calling people that don't have good jobs make you feel good? You feel better about yourself now?

How about college students, or people that had a horrible upbringing and left home without finishing high school and are working hard to get their diploma to improve their life. Or someone that has been in a loving marriage and got divorced and has to start from scratch with very little education. They fall into that category?

How about if they have to get work on their car and have to decide between that or health insurance for their kids and family?

Funny thing is that there was this study done and most people in emergency rooms actually have insurance... oops, your argument fails. No bearing on reality.
OMG! You mean that there is 80% of people that have insurance is a majority, and the 20% that don't is not! Wow, that falls under stupid statement of the thread. Way to go plant.

Not that this purported solution is really going to resolve that because everyone is still stuck paying for those freeloaders, and what if those freeloaders (fucking bums) don't have any income and thus can't afford insurance anyway. No benefit there, everyone is still stuck paying, only now they get it up the ass everytime one of thus fucking bums gets the sniffles and goes into the ER (which they aren't actually doing to begin with.)
You never worked in a city emergancy room I take it. And you will be one of those bums one day if you get into an accident or say get old and need care.

There was another study (I think I even linked to it in another post) that concluded that preventative care would actually end up being more expensive. Oops, 0 - 2, or maybe you've already struck out.
Short term yeah duh. Long term is when preventative care is cheaper. Getting no care is cheaper than getting a checkup at the dentist shorterm. Findind out you have 3 teeth that need to be pulled years later ends up costing much more than getting those visits and not needing them until far later if at all.

Big difference between Dental (fillings) and a MRI, PET, EKG or any other kind of preventitive tests. Not to mention the fact that some of the radiological tests require shipment to an outside lab, which adds onto the costs instead of decreasing costs.
Finding out you have colon cancer very very early means a much less expensive surgury and treatment, while waiting until it is very advanced means that you will have to have a much more invasive surgury, and longer rehab and treatments. That adds to the costs, all with just getting a cheap test.

Actually it was probably swallowed by the doctor, but I suppose since that wasn't income the doctor got then the government indirectly paid some of that in lost tax revenues.

OMFG, that's what it's all about, tax revenues, oh utterly un-fucking-surprising. Can't let the doctors just write off treatments they aren't going to get payment for, that might reduce their tax bracket and take money away from the bureaucrats...
Again you are full of shit. That doesn't just get swallowed. It gets spread around everyones bill (insurance pays), or is counted as lost revenue at the end of the year and is a right off.

Thank God, and hopefully we'll defeat this junk-legislation this time around. It is a violation of a various assortment of the Bill of Rights (4th, 5th, 8th, 9th and 10th Amendments) and an imbecilic attempt to monopolize 16% of the economy under the control of a few major government-backed corporations. (Because those major (government-backed) corporations are going to be the one's that get the government contracts to administer this horribly flawed system.)
Well with people like you out there (plants) it may just happen. Luckily this time around we have 60 dems in the senate.

The rest is just your usual bullshit, you are a dinosaur, and are a cancer. You refuse to see good in anything, and will end up just being what you are a tool of the right wing. And helping the movement that is in place to help people get what they need, and not what you want.

Why not go play on your stupid conspiracy theory website you set up, and scare the shit out of your new cult members that think your god.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Imlovingit, I am not going to let him bury your post. It is very important.

Quote:
Oh yes, let's force doctors to associate with insurance companies against their will, great way to enforce the right to contracts and the freedom of association.
Obviously, if a doctor is not in an insurance providers network there are probably good reasons for it. Either the doctor feels that the insurance company does not offer enough compensation for common procedures, or perhaps they had a problem with the insurance company in the past. Forcing doctors to associate with insurance companies against their will is not a viable equitable fair solution but the actions of tyranny.
As you don't have insurance TBT I will not think too bad that this is how you think.

But Doctors are constantly having their care undermined by the insurance companies. Everytime they turn around the insurance companies are telling them they cannot do what they think is necessary. I really don't think that there is a single doctor in the nation that is not hamstrung by the insurance companies, unless they are dealing with medicaid/care since that is the only insurance plan that doesn't make a practice to deny services.

Quote:
Well I'm confused! I thought that this bill was all about trying to make insurance mandatory. I have to be honest i wasn't about to read the whole thing. However, the fact that insurance companies can screw people is a failure of the justice system and a result of a blind eye of all politicians past and present. We should not need to enact a bill or "restructure" our legal rights to ensure the safety of Americans.
They want people to get coverage, but are not making it mandatory. But if you chose not to get coverage you will be taxed, since eventually you will need medical care and they want it so that people don't get bankrupted.

They allow the insurance companies to work under the 'free market' and have very little regulations on them aside from how they can invest the money people pay into them. So this bill is about putting those regulations on the companies that should have been there all along.

While at the same time providing insurance to every American so that they can be responsible and get the care they need. Purplekitty even put a part of the bill up that she didn't understand (thought it was a direct look into the checking accounts at the hospital) but I am glad she asked because I learned that it was going to be set up so that you know exactley what you are going to pay before you see the doctor. That way there is no hidden costs.

Quote:
If our system was effective and productive this would not even be a concern. I understand what President Obama is doing and i dont like it. How much cheaper could insurance actually get. Doctors and hospitals will not provide their services for cheap money. I'm sure some doctors want to help but most people get into the medical field for money and security.
If it worked for the 1/8th of americans we would not need this bill for sure. But it doesn't, and it didn't for your aunt who got screwed by the system in place.

It is not that it will be cheaper for everyone. But if people cannot afford it they will have access to federal grants to help pay for it. So that way just because you have a low paying job you can still benefit from it. Right now that care is still given, but in emergancy rooms. This means that the costs are still there (people still seak treatment, they just don't pay), but they are passed onto the government write-offs, spread over everyones insurance through higher costs, and paid for directly by the people that pay their bills in cash.

So it will essentially be the same costs, but with access to a regular doctor they can hopefully catch issues before they are so big they costs thousands of dollars. Like dental. If you go to the dentist every few months because you have insurance (a couple hundred a visit) they can keep you mostly from needing all the extra work if you only go when you need some serious care (Few thousand or more). It keeps you healthier and the total costs lower.

Not to mention the money saved through bankruptcy. The horrible ordeal that your aunt had to go through was not wiped off the books. We paid for it through taxes. That money lost was paid by the government.


Quote:
I also feel that this restructuring could come at a better time. Possibly when we wouldnt be forced into further debt. How about when Clinton (no saint) was President. Why didn't our congressmen, (the backbone of the people), deal with this issue at an earlier time?
They Tried Hillary Clinton pushed very hard to pass this while Bill was president, but she kept getting shot down. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton...e_plan_of_1993 The republicans pulled the same bullcrap they are pulling now.

Quote:
They jst waste cash for the sake of increasing their budget the next year. It's sad that when I think of America and I relate it to a poorly run business. If there is going to be restructuring it can def start with a re-budgeting of our governments spending and their consumption of Americas livlihood. I'm not trying to be Mr. Anarchy, in all fairness most of the world is fcked. Either way, no matter what, our government will do what it wants. Hell look at the Electoral College. Peace
You are still on point (I swear that I did not get a new account and post this). This is a restructuring. Obama is trying to change the places that we place the money that the government is spending.

He has had a mess on his hands. And everything will not be perfect, but things like most the stimulus package going to education and tax cuts, Healthcare reform that has been directed towards denying care, $90 billion in small business loans, and a lot of money going towards developing new technologies that can become our new industries, is all ways that will help america in the long run, as well as the short run.
 

Imlovinit

Well-Known Member
Alright! Ok! Hannimal & TheBrutalTruth you both have made valid comments. I've reread the comments above and deleted and rewritten my own comments in this space atleast 3 times now. Plus I've smoked and had a couple o beers. Now I'm calm! So here it goes. I love America, not the American Gov't! I have no other nationality except that of an American. As an American I have no problems bringing up arms to protect what i feel i have a right to protect. Of course it would be better if i had an army of like minded individuals agreeing with me. However, im sure most would agree that Americans won't do shit unless something greatly effects their way of life. This country is fucted! Anyone can point out how someone is trying to do good, or do bad. Overall it's just a matter of opinion. In my opinion big money controlls everything! Also in my opinion the gov't is slowly taking away our rights. It's not the gov'ts fault, we are allowing this to happen through disinterest in politics and who we allow to run our public offices. How many politicians have been in the spotlight for crimes or general corruption charges? How about their children? Some of Americas greatest criminals were the very people sworn to protect and serve. If something isnt a Mandatory law then what right does a govt have to penalize a tax payer for not following it? I am all done commenting in this forum. It really is a waste of time to argue about politics and religion. No more hot air from this balloon. Peace!
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
One of the provisions in the bill (well actually multiple sections) pertain to mandating that you have insurance. If you do not have insurance the government is going to take an additional 2.5% of your income in fines.

I'm pretty sure that fails when examined against the 8th Amendment prohibiting excessive fines and fees...

Of course, seeing as how according to some the Constitution is just a piece of paper (and not the standard against which all laws of the United States must be tested against prior to even considering implementing them) it can definitely be understood how they would not want to consider the fact that such actions are tyrannical.

Then there's the 4th Amendment Challenge (Right to be secure in one's effects, papers and home from warrantless search) which is another Amendment that this bill violates.

And the 5th Amendment Challenge (Right to not incriminate one's self) which is violated, because the government is going to require that you prove that you have insurance and thus prove you are not violating their tyrannical laws.

But all this is done for your good, so it must be a good thing, no?

:fire:

It will be interesting to see the convoluted arguments against what you state above...nice post and 100% correct.
 

snowmanexpress

Well-Known Member
Well ya, its not like they are gonna ammend it and say:

The 201st amendment. The right for free and universal healthcare for all.

As i get it, the usa pays 3 times more to doctors than canadas doctors. Thats why in my understanding, the best doctors are here.

You ask a canadian if they would give up thier system, for our system, they'll say "Hell NO!" And everyone will erupt with laughter. Thats kinda funny to me.

Thats why Im leary of universal coverage because they will strip the salaries of good doctors in a hope to change the sytem and how payment will be made.

But why do I care? Look at pro athletes and the loot they make, and I look at a teacher, who prepares our people in a way, and the loot they make, take a garbage man, and then take a doctor, ridiculous gaps in salary and status across the board, that in general should be looked at.

So in effect if they pay our healers less, they may go find opportunity elsewhere, but that is none of my concern. Salaries paid will have to be adjusted due to relative circumstance and how how thier salaries will be adjusted will have to do with many aspects of care and how we strip insurance from the funds, or adopt them somehow in light of the industry it is, it cannot be aboloshed completely because Im sure insurance in general will be played with IMMENSELY.

I gather alot of facts and findings will prevail and rear its head, but if we really think coverage is best for all, then we should hold our hopes for health, and not for money, then it comes down to morals bullshit which I dont think morals in health will be considered one bit. Someone has to foot the bill and this is something we need to assert.

I hope I can form a lasting relationship thru this plan if passed that will allow me to choose my own doctor, and build a relationship with not just get herded around like cattle in the hospital.

Also I hold close my own belief that as while we will get treated at the hospital for free.....does that mean our MEDICATIONS will be free as well?

I dont see that happening.
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
Well ya, its not like they are gonna ammend it and say:

The 201st amendment. The right for free and universal healthcare for all.

As i get it, the usa pays 3 times more to doctors than canadas doctors. Thats why in my understanding, the best doctors are here.

You ask a canadian if they would give up thier system, for our system, they'll say "Hell NO!" And everyone will erupt with laughter. Thats kinda funny to me.

Thats why Im leary of universal coverage because they will strip the salaries of good doctors in a hope to change the sytem and how payment will be made.

But why do I care? Look at pro athletes and the loot they make, and I look at a teacher, who prepares our people in a way, and the loot they make, take a garbage man, and then take a doctor, ridiculous gaps in salary and status across the board, that in general should be looked at.

So in effect if they pay our healers less, they may go find opportunity elsewhere, but that is none of my concern. Salaries paid will have to be adjusted due to relative circumstance and how how thier salaries will be adjusted will have to do with many aspects of care and how we strip insurance from the funds, or adopt them somehow in light of the industry it is, it cannot be aboloshed completely because Im sure insurance in general will be played with IMMENSELY.

I gather alot of facts and findings will prevail and rear its head, but if we really think coverage is best for all, then we should hold our hopes for health, and not for money, then it comes down to morals bullshit which I dont think morals in health will be considered one bit. Someone has to foot the bill and this is something we need to assert.

I hope I can form a lasting relationship thru this plan if passed that will allow me to choose my own doctor, and build a relationship with not just get herded around like cattle in the hospital.

Also I hold close my own belief that as while we will get treated at the hospital for free.....does that mean our MEDICATIONS will be free as well?

I dont see that happening.
Insurance is not Health Care, and thus any idea of providing National Insurance (or even National Care) is a shell game. The problem with medicine is that it is a limited commodity, and thus due to its scarcity there is always going to be unfulfilled demand. Of course, under the government's system you are going to pay for it even if you don't use it now. So, where's the motivation not to visit the doctor?

Maybe they'll bring back blood letting, shock therapy, leaching, and exorcism as normal medical procedures while they're at it.

"Release your spirit, give up your manhood, OBAMA COMMANDS IT!"
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
WHAT! How is the stock market a ponzi scheme? Explain yourself.
Because he doesn't understand either one.

It will be interesting to see the convoluted arguments against what you state above...nice post and 100% correct.
As a country we are able to disagree for different reasons. I personally think that what we have done over the last 220 years allows for almost anything to be done as an act of congress (even if it shouldn't be, heard a interesting thing about the 14th amendment that makes basically is used to include corporations in the rights of 'people' since that is how they are classified). But TBT is perfectly right in his opinion about his views to have a more constitutionally centered rule book for the country.

We can disagree, and that is good for the country. I would personally see the people get some of the money spent directed better at us, and he wants to see far less money spent, which unless the wealthy get almost all the benefits of it (which is a big thing that has happened since Regan) works out to be about the same.

What is wrong though is when people outright lie about things that are not in the bill. Saying that there are mandatory vaccines, death panels, checking account invasions, people being forced to have this insurance, and everything else the republicans have fed you. If you are going to debate an issue, resorting to lies means you have no stance except I don't like you.

That is what I take serious issue with.
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
Because he doesn't understand either one.



As a country we are able to disagree for different reasons. I personally think that what we have done over the last 220 years allows for almost anything to be done as an act of congress (even if it shouldn't be, heard a interesting thing about the 14th amendment that makes basically is used to include corporations in the rights of 'people' since that is how they are classified). But TBT is perfectly right in his opinion about his views to have a more constitutionally centered rule book for the country.

We can disagree, and that is good for the country. I would personally see the people get some of the money spent directed better at us, and he wants to see far less money spent, which unless the wealthy get almost all the benefits of it (which is a big thing that has happened since Regan) works out to be about the same.

What is wrong though is when people outright lie about things that are not in the bill. Saying that there are mandatory vaccines, death panels, checking account invasions, people being forced to have this insurance, and everything else the republicans have fed you. If you are going to debate an issue, resorting to lies means you have no stance except I don't like you.

That is what I take serious issue with.
Oh yes, and "Soaking" the rich was such a wonderful idea the first time around that the middle class hasn't since been forced to obligated to pay for the welfare state.

The Socialist propaganda revealed itself to be so much junk. It wasn't the "rich" that got soaked by income taxes, it was the middle and working classes.

Social Security didn't solve any problems, it acted like the shroud of a black hole.

And while I may disagree (with plenty of ad hominem attacks) vociferously with your opinion I do have to respect that you at least appear capable of some thought (just don't let it inflate your ego too much, it'll cause your head to explode, and that'd just be messy. Why burden poor some schmuck with having to clean up that kind of mess.)
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Oh yes, and "Soaking" the rich was such a wonderful idea the first time around that the middle class hasn't since been forced to obligated to pay for the welfare state.
The taxes where over 70%-90% on the top tier much of the years during our 'golden age 1945-1981. Besides the 70's experiment of super low unemployment it was good solid growth, with little inflation, and a huge steady boom of building industries and suburbs.

The Socialist propaganda revealed itself to be so much junk. It wasn't the "rich" that got soaked by income taxes, it was the middle and working classes.
When the top 15% owns 85% of the wealth of the nation, it is hard to say what we have is socialism.

Social Security didn't solve any problems, it acted like the shroud of a black hole.
It would have been nice to have a better educated american public that could invest in their future, but alas that is not the case. We need to make sure that people are not screwed in their retirement years due to bad investing. And since people make bad decisions with their money, that money always ends up filtering to the top. When people are stupid and buy a new TV instead of putting that money into a savings account, big business wins.

And while I may disagree (with plenty of ad hominem attacks) vociferously with your opinion I do have to respect that you at least appear capable of some thought (just don't let it inflate your ego too much, it'll cause your head to explode, and that'd just be messy. Why burden poor some schmuck with having to clean up that kind of mess.)
Right back at you big guy.
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
The taxes where over 70%-90% on the top tier much of the years during our 'golden age 1945-1981. Besides the 70's experiment of super low unemployment it was good solid growth, with little inflation, and a huge steady boom of building industries and suburbs.
I wouldn't call 45 - 81 our golden age, I would call 1817 - 1861 our golden age. Strong economic growth that makes the post war boom look like a fizzle of a pop gun.


When the top 15% owns 85% of the wealth of the nation, it is hard to say what we have is socialism.
And income taxes are going to some how magically change that?

Income is not wealth, and while it does contribute to wealth it does nothing to actually effect redistribution. Government is not the solution, and never will be.

The American Pie is a vast one and any one that desires can get as big (or small) a piece of it as they desire, and are willing to work towards getting. Government on the other hand, resembles the rot that induces maggots to consume it prior to any one getting any, and reprives everyone of the ability to get their own piece.



It would have been nice to have a better educated american public that could invest in their future,
Is that tacit admission that the education system with its focus on foreign languages is inefficient and failing to do the job that so much money is spent trying to make it do?

but alas that is not the case. We need to make sure that people are not screwed in their retirement years due to bad investing.
The only bad investing is not investing... well that and government bonds. Uncle Sam is broke and living on credit, only a fool would extend him any more credit.

And since people make bad decisions with their money, that money always ends up filtering to the top.
Their money, their right to make whatever decision they want to do with it. No one should be forced to do something against their will. If the government wants to make it (SS) voluntary then I'd have no problem with it. Even if they required proof that the person opting out was investing wisely, I'd have no problem with it, but being tied to the carcass of a beached whale that is slowly rotting under the sun is not my idea of fun.

When people are stupid and buy a new TV instead of putting that money into a savings account, big business wins.
So do all the suppliers that produce the circuit boards, plastics, transistors, buttons, leds and other materials that go into producing that new TV. It's ultimately a win-win situation... except the retirement portion, but people should be free to do what they want, and free to pursue their happiness however they see fit.

That was one of the ideals of the founders. Certain inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, who are you to tell people that they must pursue happiness in the way that you, or others like you, want them to?


Right back at you big guy.
I think you just caused a Tropical Cyclone to hit China with that phrase
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
I wouldn't call 45 - 81 our golden age, I would call 1817 - 1861 our golden age. Strong economic growth that makes the post war boom look like a fizzle of a pop gun.
Which led to almost tearing our country apart.

The new technologies where so revolutionary then though that it is good years for the economy for sure. Cotton gin, divisions of labor (Almost like assembly lines where everyone had one job to do) are two of the big examples that helped move the country from sustenance farmers to actually working as an economy.

But under the use of times that were drastically different, I will go even further back. I think the first Americans when they first got here and found a empty land full of large roving animal herds and a very easy climate with little diseases was the biggest expansion of standard of living.

And income taxes are going to some how magically change that?

Income is not wealth, and while it does contribute to wealth it does nothing to actually effect redistribution. Government is not the solution, and never will be.

The American Pie is a vast one and any one that desires can get as big (or small) a piece of it as they desire, and are willing to work towards getting. Government on the other hand, resembles the rot that induces maggots to consume it prior to any one getting any, and reprives everyone of the ability to get their own piece.
No I don't think that we should try to steal anything away from them. I am not saying that they should have their accounts reached into and taken, wealth is theirs. But a better tax system in an economy that pushes all the money upwards as you go up, and the benefits of the taxes spent goes up, then the taxes should fall more on those people as you move up the economic scale.

Is that tacit admission that the education system with its focus on foreign languages is inefficient and failing to do the job that so much money is spent trying to make it do?
Not sure about the foreign languages(which is sad that we are not more well versed in), but yes I think that the educational system is due for MAJOR reform. But alas people will use it as a way to make up more nonsense like they are trying to "Re-educate" our children.

The only bad investing is not investing... well that and government bonds. Uncle Sam is broke and living on credit, only a fool would extend him any more credit.

Their money, their right to make whatever decision they want to do with it. No one should be forced to do something against their will. If the government wants to make it (SS) voluntary then I'd have no problem with it. Even if they required proof that the person opting out was investing wisely, I'd have no problem with it, but being tied to the carcass of a beached whale that is slowly rotting under the sun is not my idea of fun.
We will have to disagree since I don't agree with this at all. We will not be able to just let the elderly sit on the side of the road and slowly die.

So do all the suppliers that produce the circuit boards, plastics, transistors, buttons, leds and other materials that go into producing that new TV. It's ultimately a win-win situation... except the retirement portion, but people should be free to do what they want, and free to pursue their happiness however they see fit.

That was one of the ideals of the founders. Certain inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, who are you to tell people that they must pursue happiness in the way that you, or others like you, want them to?
Capitalism at its finest. Trade is good for everyone, but people have never been able to get how to do it responsibly.

I think you just caused a Tropical Cyclone to hit China with that phrase
lol
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
Which led to almost tearing our country apart.

The new technologies where so revolutionary then though that it is good years for the economy for sure. Cotton gin, divisions of labor (Almost like assembly lines where everyone had one job to do) are two of the big examples that helped move the country from sustenance farmers to actually working as an economy.

But under the use of times that were drastically different, I will go even further back. I think the first Americans when they first got here and found a empty land full of large roving animal herds and a very easy climate with little diseases was the biggest expansion of standard of living.



No I don't think that we should try to steal anything away from them. I am not saying that they should have their accounts reached into and taken, wealth is theirs. But a better tax system in an economy that pushes all the money upwards as you go up, and the benefits of the taxes spent goes up, then the taxes should fall more on those people as you move up the economic scale.
The problem is that taxes are always shoved back down. The corporations don't pay their taxes their customers due, and thus it is the poor, lower and middle classes that are stuck paying those taxes.


Not sure about the foreign languages(which is sad that we are not more well versed in), but yes I think that the educational system is due for MAJOR reform. But alas people will use it as a way to make up more nonsense like they are trying to "Re-educate" our children.
My contempt for contemporary education is a result of seeing how much the public schools I attended neglected. No courses in latin, Ancient History, or Economics. Nothing but the mind numbing disinteresting topics of Grammar (which is a fluid field that whips like a cat of nine through changes), Chemistry (I was hoping to blow shit up, not learn how to make lead yellow), and limited History that offers limited coverage of the motivations and factors that contributed to such mind altering events as the Yorktown Victory that ended the war and culminate with the British playing, "The world turned upside down." Perhaps that should have been a better national anthem, as in truth the American ideal of isonomia (equality before law for all) was a revolutionary concept that was never taken to the level of an entire nation state.


We will have to disagree since I don't agree with this at all. We will not be able to just let the elderly sit on the side of the road and slowly die
Who said anything about letting the elderly sit on the side of the road and slowly die?

I'd be the last one to let my parents see such a fate visit them, but due to the absurd level of taxation I have no recourse but to either strike it rich, or let the state take care of them. Neither of those options appeal to me. My parents deserve better than to have the grim reaper of the state continuously watching them waiting for them to take their last breath.


Capitalism at its finest. Trade is good for everyone, but people have never been able to get how to do it responsibly.
Trade is voluntary, and should be unrestricted. The free trade proposed by NAFTA, GATT and the WTO is not true free trade. Of course the influence of those that can pull credit out of their ass (the Central Banks) and pull money from the same orifice distorts the markets. Credit, while it does have its uses must be limited, otherwise the end result is a nation of debtors, akin to the United States.

Thomas Jefferson had it right when he warned that the central banks would result in the enslavement of the citizenry by the banks and the corporations that grew up around the banks if they were ever allowed control of the money supply.

Who truly owns their own home, besides the old (and even then the government collects rent from them) and the wealthy (and they too pay rent to the government.)

For obvious reasons I oppose Property Taxes except on rent producing properties (residences should not be taxed, but farmland, and apartments should be) and income taxes. Both are akin to enslavement by the government, and deprive people of their ability to actually ever retire.
 
Top