http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul The Article Via Yahoo.com. WASHINGTON – In a victory for President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled House narrowly passed landmark health care legislation Saturday night to expand coverage to tens of millions who lack it and place tough new restrictions on the insurance industry. Republican opposition was nearly unanimous. The 220-215 vote cleared the way for the Senate to begin debate on the issue that has come to overshadow all others in Congress. A triumphant Speaker Nancy Pelosi likened the legislation to the passage of Social Security in 1935 and Medicare 30 years later "It provides coverage for 96 percent of Americans. It offers everyone, regardless of health or income, the peace of mind that comes from knowing they will have access to affordable health care when they need it," said Rep. John Dingell, the 83-year-old Michigan lawmaker who has introduced national health insurance in every Congress since succeeding his father in 1955. In the run-up to a final vote, conservatives from the two political parties joined forces to impose tough new restrictions on abortion coverage in insurance policies to be sold to many individuals and small groups. They prevailed on a roll call of 240-194. Ironically, that only solidified support for the legislation, clearing the way for conservative Democrats to vote for it. The legislation would require most Americans to carry insurance and provide federal subsidies to those who otherwise could not afford it. Large companies would have to offer coverage to their employees. Both consumers and companies would be slapped with penalties if they defied the government's mandates. Insurance industry practices such as denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions would be banned, and insurers would no longer be able to charge higher premiums on the basis of gender or medical history. In a further slap, the industry would lose its exemption from federal antitrust restrictions on price gouging, bid rigging and market allocation. So what does everyone think? Personally I think the cracking down on the corrupt Insurance companies is a big plus and is something I think will improve the United States. 2009-11-08T23:16:53-05:00 239 2009-11-07T23:43:02-05:00 true 0 96461 false false 44251 1067 1 2009-11-21T01:50:11-05:00 1841 His real name is Hugh Laurie 96461 Post 2009-11-07T23:46:19-05:00 3159391 4171 2009-11-07T23:46:19-05:00 There are a lot of reasons I oppose this, but the main part is that it should not be the responsibility nor business of the american government to mandate healthcare or its private businesses. This last statement is what really pisses me off: The president said Democrats have a 70-year history of creating and defending programs like Social Security and Medicare, Andrews said afterward, adding Obama had said the day's vote "is going to define the difference between the Republican and Democratic parties for decades." First off, if social security was a PRIVATE program, it would have been ruled a pyramid scheme a long time ago. What a freaking joke. Second, the last thing we need is for someone to try to further divide the line between republicans and democrats. Stop trying to create new walls instead of breaking old ones down. Get over your party and do what is right. 96461 Post 2009-11-07T23:49:10-05:00 3159431 44251 2009-11-07T23:58:33-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> There are a lot of reasons I oppose this, but the main part is that it should not be the responsibility nor business of the american government to mandate healthcare or its private businesses. This last statement is what really pisses me off: The president said Democrats have a 70-year history of creating and defending programs like Social Security and Medicare, Andrews said afterward, adding Obama had said the day's vote "is going to define the difference between the Republican and Democratic parties for decades." First off, if social security was a PRIVATE program, it would have been ruled a pyramid scheme a long time ago. What a freaking joke. Second, the last thing we need is for someone to try to further divide the line between republicans and democrats. Stop trying to create new walls instead of breaking old ones down. Get over your party and do what is right.</blockquote> "the main part is that it should not be the responsibility nor business of the american government to mandate healthcare" why? why do you think that? the government mandates a lot of things for instance, schools, the postal service, why should healthcare be any different? why should people who work and pay taxes their entire life be able to be screwed over by insurance companies or dropped from their insurance plans when they get cancer or some other terminal illness that an HMO doesn't want to pay for? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:03:56-05:00 3159531 4933 2009-11-08T00:03:56-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> There are a lot of reasons I oppose this, but the main part is that it should not be the responsibility nor business of the american government to mandate healthcare or its private businesses.</blockquote> im for it, its nice to see the government making steps towards finally serving the interests of the people rather than gluttonous private companies. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:08:30-05:00 3159581 1146 2009-11-08T00:08:30-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> There are a lot of reasons I oppose this, but the main part is that it should not be the responsibility nor business of the american government to mandate healthcare or its private businesses. This last statement is what really pisses me off: The president said Democrats have a 70-year history of creating and defending programs like Social Security and Medicare, Andrews said afterward, adding Obama had said the day's vote "is going to define the difference between the Republican and Democratic parties for decades." First off, if social security was a PRIVATE program, it would have been ruled a pyramid scheme a long time ago. What a freaking joke. Second, the last thing we need is for someone to try to further divide the line between republicans and democrats. Stop trying to create new walls instead of breaking old ones down. Get over your party and do what is right.</blockquote> Its not the democrats that are as party biased as republicans are. To most republicans they only vote what there party votes and not necessarily what is best for the country or even their states. Secondly if the insurance companies weren't so corrupt and abusing power we wouldn't be in this situation. Go watch the movie Sicko and you'll understand a bit more of why the insurance companies need to be monitored. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:09:01-05:00 3159591 1067 2009-11-08T00:09:01-05:00 The American dream! Ambition to succeed! This is what it's all about 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:13:42-05:00 3159661 5678 2009-11-08T00:14:03-05:00 Can I ask a question? If someone gets cancer in America and can't afford treatment - what happens to them? If someone gets in a car accident, gets injured and can't afford the bill what happens? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:15:31-05:00 3159691 3005 2009-11-08T00:16:03-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Ameeee said:</cite> Can I ask a question? If someone gets cancer in America and can't afford treatment - what happens to them?</blockquote> all the people who can now pay for them! It works 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:16:33-05:00 3159701 5678 2009-11-08T00:16:33-05:00 Don't quote a Michael Moore movie as a source. Really, go do your own homework on the subject. This is going to jack up prices of private insurance across the board, which will in return be passed on to any small business that provides insurance to their workers. The overall cost of the entire healthcare system will go up, not down. Free money isn't being handed out for this, they generate it by raising taxes and further pressuring private business. The postal service and the medical industry are so vastly different that such a comparison cannot even be made. And finally, don't even attempt to preach to me about what insurance companies do or do not due. My family has spent MILLIONS in the past 15 years for my sisters medical bills. If anyone would support a better system, it would be me. This system is not it and is going to create a divide between the two parties that is going to cause far more problems than it will solve. Watch this unfold, it is not going to be pretty. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:17:22-05:00 3159711 44251 2009-11-08T00:17:38-05:00 <blockquote><cite>levi:TPM said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Ameeee said:</cite> Can I ask a question? If someone gets cancer in America and can't afford treatment - what happens to them?</blockquote> all the people who can now pay for them! It works</blockquote> I don't understand this sentence..does this mean that the people that can afford it get the treatment...those that can't don't? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:24:09-05:00 3159751 3005 2009-11-08T00:27:19-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Ameeee said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>levi:TPM said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Ameeee said:</cite> Can I ask a question? If someone gets cancer in America and can't afford treatment - what happens to them?</blockquote> all the people who can now pay for them! It works</blockquote> I don't understand this sentence..does this mean that the people that can afford it pay for it...those that can't don't?</blockquote> let me ask you a question. What's the difference between those who can afford it and those who can't? Why can't some afford it? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:27:06-05:00 3159791 5678 2009-11-08T00:27:06-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Ameeee said:</cite> Can I ask a question? If someone gets cancer in America and can't afford treatment - what happens to them? If someone gets in a car accident, gets injured and can't afford the bill what happens?</blockquote> if you get cancer and you don't have health insurance and can't afford treatment, basically you're screwed. you can try to get medicaid/medicare but if you don't meet those requirements you're out of luck. for example there might be someone who is a small business owner and makes not a lot of money, but too much to qualify for medicaid. so they don't have insurance and then they get sick, they could try to buy private insurance once they're sick but most likely no private insurance company will take them if they already have a condition the thing that's happened that has been a big problem is people who do have health insurance, but once they get really sick (usually with cancer) they get dropped for some bullshit reason because the insurance companies don't want to pay if you get into a car accident and you don't have health insurance, you'll go to the hospital and they'll treat you, but then you'll get an insane bill at the end and most likely go into debt. a lot of people are in debt from rising medical bills in the US i think most people in the US have a problem with the health care system to some degree. a lot of people are sick of how private insurance companies run things and are very corrupt and screw people over. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:28:16-05:00 3159801 4933 2009-11-08T00:28:16-05:00 <blockquote><cite>vinnyg said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Ameeee said:</cite> Can I ask a question? If someone gets cancer in America and can't afford treatment - what happens to them? If someone gets in a car accident, gets injured and can't afford the bill what happens?</blockquote> if you get cancer and you don't have health insurance and can't afford treatment, basically you're screwed. you can try to get medicaid/medicare but if you don't meet those requirements you're out of luck. for example there might be someone who is a small business owner and makes not a lot of money, but too much to qualify for medicaid. so they don't have insurance and then they get sick, they could try to buy private insurance once they're sick but most likely no private insurance company will take them if they already have a condition the thing that's happened that has been a big problem is people who do have health insurance, but once they get really sick (usually with cancer) they get dropped for some bullshit reason because the insurance companies don't want to pay if you get into a car accident and you don't have health insurance, you'll go to the hospital and they'll treat you, but then you'll get an insane bill at the end and most likely go into debt. a lot of people are in debt from rising medical bills in the US i think most people in the US have a problem with the health care system to some degree. a lot of people are sick of how private insurance companies run things and are very corrupt and screw people over.</blockquote> Thanks for answering my question sir! 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:30:02-05:00 3159811 3005 2009-11-08T00:30:02-05:00 <blockquote><cite>levi:TPM said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Ameeee said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>levi:TPM said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Ameeee said:</cite> Can I ask a question? If someone gets cancer in America and can't afford treatment - what happens to them?</blockquote> all the people who can now pay for them! It works</blockquote> I don't understand this sentence..does this mean that the people that can afford it pay for it...those that can't don't?</blockquote> let me ask you a question. What's the difference between those who can afford it and those who can't? Why can't some afford it?</blockquote> I am not getting into an argument with you about this, because I am <b>never</b> going to understand your point of view on this topic. I was asking a genuine question and was not trying to engage you in a rhetorical, passive aggressive argument. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:31:54-05:00 3159841 3005 2009-11-08T00:32:16-05:00 I wasn't trying to start a arguement. I was actually curious myself 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:34:15-05:00 3159861 5678 2009-11-08T00:34:15-05:00 it worries me that all the concerns of universal healthcare, of saving someones life, consistantly comes down to money. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:43:12-05:00 3159891 2802 2009-11-08T00:43:12-05:00 i just download my healthcare from piratebay.org. it's pirated, but totally free. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:47:07-05:00 3159901 58171 2009-11-08T00:47:07-05:00 Personally, I dont even know what this plan even does. So I don't really care, unless it affects me. I do believe that someone shouldnt be denied treatment because they can't afford it, it's wrong. <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> Don't quote a Michael Moore movie as a source. Really, go do your own homework on the subject. This is going to jack up prices of private insurance across the board, which will in return be passed on to any small business that provides insurance to their workers. The overall cost of the entire healthcare system will go up, not down. Free money isn't being handed out for this, they generate it by raising taxes and further pressuring private business. The postal service and the medical industry are so vastly different that such a comparison cannot even be made. And finally, don't even attempt to preach to me about what insurance companies do or do not due. My family has spent MILLIONS in the past 15 years for my sisters medical bills. If anyone would support a better system, it would be me. This system is not it and is going to create a divide between the two parties that is going to cause far more problems than it will solve. Watch this unfold, it is not going to be pretty.</blockquote> You sound like every Republican trying to get this to not pass. Also, Sicko was probably the ONLY movie Michael Moore has made that couldn't be shot down because everything is backed with fact. I never liked his movies until Sicko came out. Farenheit 9/11 and Bowling for Columbine were a waste or time. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:49:11-05:00 3159931 9857 2009-11-08T00:49:11-05:00 <blockquote><cite>TherosAlejandro said:</cite> i just download my healthcare from piratebay.org. it's pirated, but totally free.</blockquote> Ha demonoid was my choice. Terrible quality but free 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:49:19-05:00 3159961 5678 2009-11-08T00:49:19-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Godmachine said:</cite> it worries me that all the concerns of universal healthcare, of saving someones life, consistantly comes down to money.</blockquote> money is the root of all evil.....but it buys happiness. happiness=evil 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:50:18-05:00 3159971 9857 2009-11-08T00:50:18-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Godmachine said:</cite> it worries me that all the concerns of universal healthcare, of saving someones life, consistantly comes down to money.</blockquote> It is illegal for emergency centers to deny anyone in immediate need of medical attention service. No, insurance companies cannot randomly drop someone on their service for some "bullshit reason" like getting cancer or being involved in an accident. Instant lawsuit for 7 figures and they know it. It does happen, but saying it happens on a small scale is an understatement. Anyone who does not qualify for government run programs that were already in place have enough money to pay the $100 a month for private insurance. People who are denied service from a private company have a very serious issue that they likely caused to themselves...ie being 200 pounds overweight. My sister is classified as extreme high risk and still qualifies for private insurance, and I assure you the issues involved with that go well beyond what most people say they were denied for. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:50:19-05:00 3159981 44251 2009-11-08T00:50:54-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Godmachine said:</cite> it worries me that all the concerns of universal healthcare, of saving someones life, consistantly comes down to money.</blockquote> It is illegal for emergency centers to deny anyone in immediate need of medical attention service. </blockquote> They'll barely treat someone, then throw them on the streets with no medication or proper dressing for their wounds. It's bullshit Also, there are still hardworking families who live paycheck to paycheck, and STILL cant afford ANY type of health care. This does include my family. So don't say anyone can afford it. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T00:51:38-05:00 3160001 9857 2009-11-08T00:53:00-05:00 I'm not saying the current system is perfect. It is far far from it. I'm just saying that this is going to cause so many problems that could have been averted if they had taken a more moderate approach to the way the plan worked. Wait until idiots like Glenn Beck get ahold of this and spin it. The extremists are going to have a field day and turn people against each other. Also I have a friend who offers unlimited medical care without insurance for $30 a month. Hopefully more people will be like him and offer highly affordable plans to people in need. I cannot see the future so maybe this will work out to be an amazing thing. I really hope it is. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:04:03-05:00 3160071 44251 2009-11-08T01:04:03-05:00 i cant afford it and i have been screwed out of it based on lack of hours i work at my job in the union... 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:04:32-05:00 3160081 2870 2009-11-08T01:04:32-05:00 oh goody. if only this was really for the interest of the people. i firmly believe this whole thing is about control and ruling peoples lives. if it wasn't, the bill wouldn't have so much bullshit in it. yes our healthcare is messed up. no people aren't dying in the streets. yes let's reform healthcare and the overbloated costs that are involved in it. no don't make me get into a govt run program if i don't want to and no don't fine me or send me to jail for not doing so. our country and economy are going to hell, we don't need a 1.2 trillion dollar bill right now. let's see if the dollar even makes it passed 2010 and let's figure out a better healthcare solution, instead of an aggressive breach of civil liberties. fuck you nancy pelosi, leave me alone to either die or live as i wish. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:05:24-05:00 3160091 5570 2009-11-08T01:05:24-05:00 <blockquote><cite>xjoshuabelangerx said:</cite> oh goody. if only this was really for the interest of the people. i firmly believe this whole thing is about control and ruling peoples lives. if it wasn't, the bill wouldn't have so much bullshit in it. yes our healthcare is messed up. no people aren't dying in the streets. yes let's reform healthcare and the overbloated costs that are involved in it. no don't make me get into a govt run program if i don't want to and no don't fine me or send me to jail for not doing so. our country and economy are going to hell, we don't need a 1.2 trillion dollar bill right now. let's see if the dollar even makes it passed 2010 and let's figure out a better healthcare solution, instead of an aggressive breach of civil liberties. fuck you nancy pelosi, leave me alone to either die or live as i wish.</blockquote> damn 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:09:48-05:00 3160111 5678 2009-11-08T01:09:48-05:00 I thought of a better plan than this one in 10 seconds. Legalize marijuana and tax the hell out of it. Use that tax money to provide quality health insurance to those in need. Problem solved, good day. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:14:46-05:00 3160131 44251 2009-11-08T01:14:46-05:00 republicans=money grubbing assholes democrats=preachy hippie idiots both sides are horrible. We need healthcare though, this will do some but not fix everything. I'm stoked cause i don't have healthcare and i cant afford it so hopefully this means the company i work for will help me out. I think everyone should think for themselves rather than falling into one half or the other. registered independent baby. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:15:09-05:00 3160141 12687 2009-11-08T01:15:09-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Cant Draw/Can Write said:</cite> republicans=money grubbing assholes democrats=preachy hippie idiots both sides are horrible. We need healthcare though, this will do some but not fix everything. I'm stoked cause i don't have healthcare and i cant afford it so hopefully this means the company i work for will help me out. I think everyone should think for themselves rather than falling into one half or the other. registered independent baby.</blockquote> Exactly. Each side is so deeply flawed that the whole system has been a joke. I consider myself a constitutionalist. Give the power and freedom of choice back to the people, and take the power back from the government who makes the corruption in the insurance industry look like candyland. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:16:41-05:00 3160161 44251 2009-11-08T01:16:41-05:00 I need healthcare asap, if this bill gives it to me, cool. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:23:57-05:00 3160211 12432 2009-11-08T01:23:57-05:00 <img src="http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/obama-bush-clinton.jpg" /> fuck old white money...except for obama who obviously is not white. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:26:59-05:00 3160231 12687 2009-11-08T01:26:59-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> I thought of a better plan than this one in 10 seconds. Legalize marijuana and tax the hell out of it. Use that tax money to provide quality health insurance to those in need. Problem solved, good day.</blockquote> pretty much. it'll help alot, but not enough. Personally I think the Federal Bank Reserve needs to go. Healthcare next then bud =] 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:42:51-05:00 3160321 9857 2009-11-08T01:42:51-05:00 Congrats, another little step towards a human society, I´m still more than happy to live in Europe though. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:50:14-05:00 3160381 519 2009-11-08T01:50:14-05:00 <blockquote><cite>a_mar_illo said:</cite> Congrats, another little step towards a human society, I´m still more than happy to live in Europe though.</blockquote> and im jealous of you 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:50:36-05:00 3160391 9857 2009-11-08T01:50:36-05:00 this thread is going to get ugly. or as you salute your shorts fans would prefer..... ugg lee 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:55:05-05:00 3160431 65121 2009-11-08T01:55:05-05:00 <blockquote><cite>What The Eff said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>a_mar_illo said:</cite> Congrats, another little step towards a human society, I´m still more than happy to live in Europe though.</blockquote> and im jealous of you</blockquote> why don't you leave then 96461 Post 2009-11-08T01:58:18-05:00 3160451 5678 2009-11-08T01:58:18-05:00 <blockquote><cite>levi:TPM said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>What The Eff said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>a_mar_illo said:</cite> Congrats, another little step towards a human society, I´m still more than happy to live in Europe though.</blockquote> and im jealous of you</blockquote> why don't you leave then</blockquote> i cant. =[ i just wanna visit other places. Europe would be amazing 96461 Post 2009-11-08T02:01:33-05:00 3160501 9857 2009-11-08T02:01:33-05:00 <blockquote><cite>What The Eff said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>levi:TPM said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>What The Eff said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>a_mar_illo said:</cite> Congrats, another little step towards a human society, I´m still more than happy to live in Europe though.</blockquote> and im jealous of you</blockquote> why don't you leave then</blockquote> i cant. =[ i just wanna visit other places. Europe would be amazing</blockquote> i went to bourban street this weekend....it was still in america, but it was wild. visit there 96461 Post 2009-11-08T02:09:35-05:00 3160561 5678 2009-11-08T02:09:35-05:00 This is a step in the right direction, unfortunately our system still has about 1,000 more miles to walk with a broken ankle and a boulder on its back. We will never get ourselves out of the mud until we stop entertaining the interests of big business and start helping out the citizens and taxpayers. Everyone is so concerned with their campaign money that they can't see but 2 years ahead of them. It should never cost me $100 at a doctors office just to "see" what is wrong with me and not even fix the problem. I feel health care should be handled as the rest of the government run jobs of the country are. Do you pay a firefighter for putting out a fire in your house...do you pay a policeman for checking your house if someone broke in? No...they are on a salary (granted an unjustifiably high one), and I don't see why hospitals or doctors offices should be any different. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T02:13:17-05:00 3160611 12825 2009-11-08T02:13:52-05:00 <blockquote><cite>levi:TPM said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>What The Eff said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>levi:TPM said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>What The Eff said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>a_mar_illo said:</cite> Congrats, another little step towards a human society, I´m still more than happy to live in Europe though.</blockquote> and im jealous of you</blockquote> why don't you leave then</blockquote> i cant. =[ i just wanna visit other places. Europe would be amazing</blockquote> i went to bourban street this weekend....it was still in america, but it was wild. visit there</blockquote> i actually have been to bourbon st. =] it was cool, but i was too young to drink. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T02:17:56-05:00 3160651 9857 2009-11-08T02:17:56-05:00 <a href="http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/index-eng.php">http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/index-eng.php</a> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T02:19:26-05:00 3160671 1992 2009-11-08T02:19:26-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Cant Draw/Can Write said:</cite> <img src="http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/obama-bush-clinton.jpg" /> fuck old white money...except for obama who obviously is not white.</blockquote> I wonder if they meant to wear the same outfit. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T06:10:41-05:00 3161671 7069 2009-11-08T06:10:41-05:00 I wonder what the actual facts are of the whole thing. I listen to Fox news and Air America and they both say different things. Fox news see it as an attack on civil liberties and constantly scare monger about money and rights (you would if you were a rich media type) and AA say its really great that some people cane finally afford cover. The truth is no one knows how it will all work- and you shouldnt believe the media who always have an agenda (especially rich media people who have drinking problems and cry on TV). Some of these people say that tapping your phone and taking away your right to a fair trial, suspending your assets, torturing a man to death etc is fine- but up your tax to help a dying man, well thats worthy of a civil war. makes no sense. again- all arguments boil down to money- and you really shouldnt be putting a price on your fellow mans lives. Do you know how many ex-soldiers will now finally get the cover they need. I really dont see it as a big deal- you just have to be weary of who you are listening to as I have noted that your media is quite extreme and dont really care about facts and like to whip people up into an emotional frenzy. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T06:29:23-05:00 3161751 2802 2009-11-08T06:29:23-05:00 I have no idea how the american system works in detail, but to me.. getting a huge bill after visiting the hospital sounds retarded. I can go to the hospital in the UK without any fear of getting a bill of any kind, everyone should have equal opportunity when it comes to healthcare. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T08:01:32-05:00 3162211 35211 2009-11-08T08:01:32-05:00 <blockquote><cite>mistahfred said:</cite> I have no idea how the american system works in detail, but to me.. getting a huge bill after visiting the hospital sounds retarded. I can go to the hospital in the UK without any fear of getting a bill of any kind, everyone should have equal opportunity when it comes to healthcare.</blockquote> mistafred, i am curious...if you need to see a doctor about a pain you have in your elbow, how long does it take for you to see a doctor? Can you just go and see a doctor quickly? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T08:43:13-05:00 3162491 11245 2009-11-08T08:43:13-05:00 I still find it strange that the US is the only Developed Country in the world without Universal Health Care. <a href="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.gadling.com/media/2007/07/healthcareworldbig.jpg">http://www.blogcdn.com/www.gadling.com/media/2007/07/healthcareworldbig.jpg</a> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T08:50:01-05:00 3162541 7093 2009-11-08T08:50:01-05:00 More "feel good" policy. when people argue that this kind of stuff is great because it helps people, I get that feeling. There is nothing wrong with wanting everyone to be happy and helped. However, I don't trust the federal government to be able to effectively do these things. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Secondly, when people make blanket statements about republicans being old white greedy rich people... grow up. You sound like a child. Old, white, greedy, rich... describes people on both sides of the aisle. If anything Republicans in office are getting closer and closer to the other side of the aisle. Third, Michael Moore is more of a sensationalist idiot than Glenn Beck. Fourth, capitalism rocks! Capitalism does not uniformly = greed. Fifth, insurance companies make a 2.2% profit. Get over this OH MY GOD THE EVIL CORRUPT INSURANCE COMPANIES shit. I think a lot of things could be changed, but seriously, they aren't swimming in your money like Scrooge McDuck. My mom spent about $3,600 on her monthly premiums the year she had cancer and that covered $100,000+ in medical bills. I'm happy for that. I'd love if everyone could have that luxury, but I don't think the government should be in charge of it. Sixth, the end! For the record, I'm not a republican. I'm fiscally conservative, socially liberal. Booyah. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T08:59:15-05:00 3162591 3668 2009-11-08T08:59:15-05:00 Why would anyone not want this, have they never had any health related suffering, or hardships in their own lives or families, or at least the lives of co workers or friends? My grandma had so sell her house to pay for the care home bill. She had the alzheimer's and it was a slow decline, very sad to watch her slip away. The point is I'm sure everyone has a similar story involving money and heath. At work once I got to see the graduation ceremony of students from OHSU Oregon Health and Sciences University, It's the next generation of doctors and health care professionals eager to go out into the world and help people. It's a day of proud parents, teachers, and lots of speeches about doing good and ethics and what have you and the greater good that they are all responsible for. I just wished that they were entering a system that would let them do what they trained for. I don't blame the doctors, most of them are well intentioned, but they get stuck with a lot of red tape and paper pushing that is of no help to anyone. My mom was a nurse, and she as all kinds of stories about how messed up it it. I am skeptically optimistic. In this day and age it's just silly to not treat people like people because of something as stupid as money. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T09:01:07-05:00 3162611 506 2009-11-08T09:01:07-05:00 <blockquote><cite>explodingtoes said:</cite> More "feel good" policy. when people argue that this kind of stuff is great because it helps people, I get that feeling. There is nothing wrong with wanting everyone to be happy and helped. However, I don't trust the federal government to be able to effectively do these things. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Secondly, when people make blanket statements about republicans being old white greedy rich people... grow up. You sound like a child. Old, white, greedy, rich... describes people on both sides of the aisle. If anything Republicans in office are getting closer and closer to the other side of the aisle. Third, Michael Moore is more of a sensationalist idiot than Glenn Beck. Fourth, capitalism rocks! Capitalism does not uniformly = greed. Fifth, insurance companies make a 2.2% profit. Get over this OH MY GOD THE EVIL CORRUPT INSURANCE COMPANIES shit. I think a lot of things could be changed, but seriously, they aren't swimming in your money like Scrooge McDuck. My mom spent about $3,600 on her monthly premiums the year she had cancer and that covered $100,000+ in medical bills. I'm happy for that. I'd love if everyone could have that luxury, but I don't think the government should be in charge of it. Sixth, the end! For the record, I'm not a republican. I'm fiscally conservative, socially liberal. Booyah.</blockquote> right on brotha 96461 Post 2009-11-08T09:05:34-05:00 3162701 11245 2009-11-08T09:05:34-05:00 <blockquote><cite>MainframeMedia said:</cite> This is a step in the right direction, unfortunately our system still has about 1,000 more miles to walk with a broken ankle and a boulder on its back. We will never get ourselves out of the mud until we stop entertaining the interests of big business and start helping out the citizens and taxpayers. Everyone is so concerned with their campaign money that they can't see but 2 years ahead of them. It should never cost me $100 at a doctors office just to "see" what is wrong with me and not even fix the problem. I feel health care should be handled as the rest of the government run jobs of the country are. Do you pay a firefighter for putting out a fire in your house...do you pay a policeman for checking your house if someone broke in? No...they are on a salary (granted an unjustifiably high one), and I don't see why hospitals or doctors offices should be any different.</blockquote> I don't disagree with everything you say here. However, to be honest, the required skill set and education for a firefighter and a neurosurgeon (for example) are insanely disparate. The difference is that if I really want to help people, without care for money, I can become a firefighter or policeman fairly quickly. If I want to become a neurosurgeon or an oncologist, I've got 8+ years of school ahead of me, tons of tuition, etc etc. It comes down to incentive. Unfortunately, good will isn't enough for everyone. Certainly the high salary, increased ability to provide for your family, etc are factors that motivate that person to go down that 8+ year long path. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T09:07:53-05:00 3162741 3668 2009-11-08T09:07:53-05:00 Basically, government taking over any part of our lives removes incentive for individuals/businesses in that field. Removing incentive removes competition and competition is what leads to improvements/advances in just about anything. So, stop chalking this entire thing as being about money. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T09:12:28-05:00 3162871 3668 2009-11-08T09:15:04-05:00 <a href="http://quakerninja.bigcartel.com/product/noodelz-and-doodelz-pre-order">In the off chance that there are any Ficsal Liberals around.</a> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T09:39:59-05:00 3163071 506 2009-11-08T09:39:59-05:00 <blockquote><cite>quakerninja said:</cite> <a href="http://quakerninja.bigcartel.com/product/noodelz-and-doodelz-pre-order">In the off chance that there are any Ficsal Liberals around.</a></blockquote> go capitalism!!! 96461 Post 2009-11-08T09:47:38-05:00 3163121 3668 2009-11-08T09:47:38-05:00 <blockquote><cite>vinnyg said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Ameeee said:</cite> Can I ask a question? If someone gets cancer in America and can't afford treatment - what happens to them? If someone gets in a car accident, gets injured and can't afford the bill what happens?</blockquote> if you get into a car accident and you don't have health insurance, you'll go to the hospital and they'll treat you, but then you'll get an insane bill at the end and most likely go into debt. a lot of people are in debt from rising medical bills in the US </blockquote> about 9 yrs ago I had a bike accident and broke my elbow. I had just come back from Japan after being their for 1 yr for school but I was still a US resident. according to the hospital I didn't qualify for medical assistance because I made more than enough money, even though I had only had my job for 1 week when I got back to the US. then I got slammed with a $10k medical bill which damn near caused me to file for bankruptcy -- if I so much as missed a payment they would harrass me and threaten to garnish my wages. Because of this, I couldn't make any payments on my student loans which had accumulated about $15k in interest. It took me about 7 yrs just to pay off my medical bill. In hindsight I should've lied about my name, where I lived and whether or not I had a job. The fire department and police department are social services, but we don't question the services they provide even though they risk their lives. It boggles my mind that some Americans view healthcare as a privelage. I mean, what would you do if your house was on fire and the fire department dropped by and asked, "do you have fire insurance?" 96461 Post 2009-11-08T10:33:44-05:00 3163541 12224 2009-11-08T10:33:44-05:00 dismbodied, your example is a bad one..if you get in a traffic accident and are lying on the ground bleeding to death, you WILL be given treatment. If your house is on fire the fire department will come put the fire out but they dont give you a new house filled with new furniture and personal effects, you have fire insurance for that. The health care system is not perfect but the democratic bill is a step in the wrong diretcion. Many of the problems with current systme are because of TOO MUCH goverment regulation. Did you know that the reason your health insurance is administered through your employer is because of legisklation by a congressman with union ties...it was all political. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T11:22:52-05:00 3163761 11245 2009-11-08T11:22:52-05:00 Let me give a quick background, since I can tell a lot of people who support this simply haven't read the bill, or have no understanding of how the economics behind it works. This system can only survive if people with private insurance pay for all of those on public. This means your private insurance is going to at least double in cost. "Ohh no, you can't put a monetary value on a persons life." What happens when that public system goes bankrupt because it is unsustainable? Expect the stock market to have a major crash monday. Expect jobless rate to jump up at least 2.5% in the next month. What does this mean? Small businesses will either go belly up or be forced to drop all private insurance. Why should you care? This means the cost placed on private insurance will once again increase as the amount of people in need for public insurance will sharply increase. A solution? Increase taxes across the board. Why should you care? Expect both small and large businesses to do more layoffs or drop all insurance coverage. A massive spike increase in people in need of public insurance and once again the private healthcare costs will increase. This system is simply not sustainable, and the US economic model will not support it. What happens when the public system fails and suddenly you have a massive number of people who would have been insured before, with no insurance. If you think it is bad for some people right now, just sit and wait and watch this thing unfold. You're going to witness some real problems in big numbers and it isn't going to be pretty. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T11:51:34-05:00 3163911 44251 2009-11-08T11:51:34-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> Let me give a quick background, since I can tell a lot of people who support this simply haven't read the bill, or have no understanding of how the economics behind it works. This system can only survive if people with private insurance pay for all of those on public. This means your private insurance is going to at least double in cost. "Ohh no, you can't put a monetary value on a persons life." What happens when that public system goes bankrupt because it is unsustainable? Expect the stock market to have a major crash monday. Expect jobless rate to jump up at least 2.5% in the next month. What does this mean? Small businesses will either go belly up or be forced to drop all private insurance. Why should you care? This means the cost placed on private insurance will once again increase as the amount of people in need for public insurance will sharply increase. A solution? Increase taxes across the board. Why should you care? Expect both small and large businesses to do more layoffs or drop all insurance coverage. A massive spike increase in people in need of public insurance and once again the private healthcare costs will increase. This system is simply not sustainable, and the US economic model will not support it. What happens when the public system fails and suddenly you have a massive number of people who would have been insured before, with no insurance. If you think it is bad for some people right now, just sit and wait and watch this thing unfold. You're going to witness some real problems in big numbers and it isn't going to be pretty.</blockquote> This! 96461 Post 2009-11-08T11:53:52-05:00 3163941 3668 2009-11-08T11:53:52-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> Let me give a quick background, since I can tell a lot of people who support this simply haven't read the bill, or have no understanding of how the economics behind it works. This system can only survive if people with private insurance pay for all of those on public. This means your private insurance is going to at least double in cost. "Ohh no, you can't put a monetary value on a persons life." What happens when that public system goes bankrupt because it is unsustainable? Expect the stock market to have a major crash monday. Expect jobless rate to jump up at least 2.5% in the next month. What does this mean? Small businesses will either go belly up or be forced to drop all private insurance. Why should you care? This means the cost placed on private insurance will once again increase as the amount of people in need for public insurance will sharply increase. A solution? Increase taxes across the board. Why should you care? Expect both small and large businesses to do more layoffs or drop all insurance coverage. A massive spike increase in people in need of public insurance and once again the private healthcare costs will increase. This system is simply not sustainable, and the US economic model will not support it. What happens when the public system fails and suddenly you have a massive number of people who would have been insured before, with no insurance. If you think it is bad for some people right now, just sit and wait and watch this thing unfold. You're going to witness some real problems in big numbers and it isn't going to be pretty.</blockquote> 100% absolute truth...excellent post 96461 Post 2009-11-08T11:59:11-05:00 3164051 11245 2009-11-08T11:59:11-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> dismbodied, your example is a bad one..if you get in a traffic accident and are lying on the ground bleeding to death, you WILL be given treatment. If your house is on fire the fire department will come put the fire out but they dont give you a new house filled with new furniture and personal effects, you have fire insurance for that. The health care system is not perfect but the democratic bill is a step in the wrong diretcion. Many of the problems with current systme are because of TOO MUCH goverment regulation. Did you know that the reason your health insurance is administered through your employer is because of legisklation by a congressman with union ties...it was all political.</blockquote> my example wasn't about whether or not you're given treatment, it's more about how our society treats healthcare and that most other industrialized nations have a better system than us. the fire department scenario was meant to illustrate what it would be like if they started charging you for the services they provide. it doesn't matter if you have homeowner's insurance -- if the fire dept started charging you a 'fee' just for showing up or for putting out a fire you'd probably say something about it. I think everyone knows that if something isn't done about our current system, healthcare premiums will continue to skyrocket (even without government intervention). I don't trust our government either, especially after the FEMA debacle in New Orleans, but I don't see a mechanism in place that will lower insurance premiums or cut down on administrative waste. I wish this country were more like Norway -- they have high taxation but they also enjoy universal healthcare & free education. If the US can continue to fund two wars in the middle east that are costing taxpayers billions of dollars, I don't see why the cost of healthcare is even an issue 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:02:25-05:00 3164071 12224 2009-11-08T12:02:56-05:00 disembodeied, I sure as hell dont trust the goverment!!...have you taken time to read any of the bullshit that has nothing to do with health care that is layered into this bill? There is SO MUCH waste that if it were not such a serious issue it would be comical. The problem is BOTH parties are padding the bill to protect thier special interest. This bill has nothing to do with making health care available and affordable to the average american. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:07:54-05:00 3164101 11245 2009-11-08T12:07:54-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Godmachine said:</cite> it worries me that all the concerns of universal healthcare, of saving someones life, consistantly comes down to money.</blockquote> It is illegal for emergency centers to deny anyone in immediate need of medical attention service. No, insurance companies cannot randomly drop someone on their service for some "bullshit reason" like getting cancer or being involved in an accident. Instant lawsuit for 7 figures and they know it. It does happen, but saying it happens on a small scale is an understatement. Anyone who does not qualify for government run programs that were already in place have enough money to pay the $100 a month for private insurance. People who are denied service from a private company have a very serious issue that they likely caused to themselves...ie being 200 pounds overweight. My sister is classified as extreme high risk and still qualifies for private insurance, and I assure you the issues involved with that go well beyond what most people say they were denied for.</blockquote> haha $100 a month my ass! a $100 a month plan with a $2,500 deductible and a co pay of $50 everytime you visit the doctors. I have to pay for a shitty plan through Kaiser through the state of California that I work for and I pay $240 a month. And it is probably one of the lamest plans around. I find it sad that people have to even debate about having to pay a tiny bit more out of their paycheck so everyone can have a chance to live a healthier life and get the help they need. It is also sad that it is the rich republicans that are the ones company how much it is going to get taken out of their wallets even though they get the best tax breaks, write offs and the best hookups from the gov't because they are on top of the "trickle down effect" (fuck you Nixon). If it meant I had to have a 2% tax increase and that meant my fellow people and I would have better lives I wouldn't hesitate to do it and neither should you! 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:26:43-05:00 3164301 1067 2009-11-08T12:26:43-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Godmachine said:</cite> I wonder what the actual facts are of the whole thing. I listen to Fox news and Air America and they both say different things. Fox news see it as an attack on civil liberties and constantly scare monger about money and rights (you would if you were a rich media type) and AA say its really great that some people cane finally afford cover. The truth is no one knows how it will all work- and you shouldnt believe the media who always have an agenda (especially rich media people who have drinking problems and cry on TV). Some of these people say that tapping your phone and taking away your right to a fair trial, suspending your assets, torturing a man to death etc is fine- but up your tax to help a dying man, well thats worthy of a civil war. makes no sense. again- all arguments boil down to money- and you really shouldnt be putting a price on your fellow mans lives. Do you know how many ex-soldiers will now finally get the cover they need. I really dont see it as a big deal- you just have to be weary of who you are listening to as I have noted that your media is quite extreme and dont really care about facts and like to whip people up into an emotional frenzy.</blockquote> First off don't EVER take anything from Fox News as fact or the truth. They run with anything that will bash liberals or democrats. Anyone who isn't crazy right winged nutjob should not ever turn on that channel unless your going for a good laugh or two. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:29:38-05:00 3164351 1067 2009-11-08T12:29:38-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Time Without the E said:</cite> I find it sad that people have to even debate about having to pay a tiny bit more out of their paycheck so everyone can have a chance to live a healthier life and get the help they need. If it meant I had to have a 2% tax increase and that meant my fellow people and I would have better lives I wouldn't hesitate to do it and neither should you!</blockquote> ^ this 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:35:02-05:00 3164391 12224 2009-11-08T12:35:02-05:00 <blockquote><cite>levi:TPM said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Ameeee said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>levi:TPM said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Ameeee said:</cite> Can I ask a question? If someone gets cancer in America and can't afford treatment - what happens to them?</blockquote> all the people who can now pay for them! It works</blockquote> I don't understand this sentence..does this mean that the people that can afford it pay for it...those that can't don't?</blockquote> ca? let me ask you a question. What's the difference between those who can afford it and those who can't? Why can't some afford it?</blockquote> because there just aren't enough good jobs in America 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:38:57-05:00 3164401 33471 2009-11-08T12:50:04-05:00 You really need to understand the true economics behind this system and exactly why it is going to collapse before making posts such as "2% increase in taxes." The kind of strain this is going to put on our entire system is going to cause its own demise. There is no question about it, the US economy CANNOT support this system. Everyone deserves good health care, this plan is not going to provide that. Once again, read exactly what this plan is going to do and all the bullshit that was snuck into it to scratch the backs of private interest groups. It was the only way they could get people to vote for it. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:39:50-05:00 3164431 44251 2009-11-08T12:39:50-05:00 I am 100% positive that nobody who is asking "Have you taken time to read this bill?" has either. I am doing so before I weigh in and crush all of your logic. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:40:34-05:00 3164451 59851 2009-11-08T12:40:54-05:00 This is great news! Insurance companies are profitable, money hungry businesses that insure only those in their best interest. I have Crohns disease and I have not been able to get an individual insurance plan. When I apply, they basically laugh in my face. The only way to get insurance with a pre-existing condition is to work for a company that offers a group insurance plan where no one can be denied. As a full time freelance artist this really puts a damper on things. I was a manager at Hot Topic 2 years ago for insurance. Since then I have been lucky enough to have COBRA...which is basically a government continuation of my insurance at full price. My COBRA insurance costs almost as much as my rent, but it is my only option right now. It will be interesting to see how this develops. It will be nice to have some options! 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:42:53-05:00 3164471 1368 2009-11-08T12:42:53-05:00 We (who live in the US) are screwed! 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:43:00-05:00 3164481 13406 2009-11-08T12:43:00-05:00 <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> I am 100% positive that nobody who is asking "Have you taken time to read this bill?" has either. I am doing so before I weigh in and crush all of your logic.</blockquote> I hope you're joking. The complete length of this bill is 1,990 pages. Do you think all of this has only to do with healthcare? HAH. I've personally went through over a hundred pages of summaries and key points made in this bill. My college minor was in political science and history and I like to know what I am talking about. Wait until tomorrow and see if I was right about how the market is going to take this bill, and you'll see effects immediately. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:45:23-05:00 3164561 44251 2009-11-08T12:45:58-05:00 http://www.factcheck.org/ there's a lot of bullshit being thrown around by both sides. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:51:34-05:00 3164641 12224 2009-11-08T12:51:34-05:00 • Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If that is not available, you will be required to take the government option! • Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure! • Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! • Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process) • Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None. • Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services. • Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard. • Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. • Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) • Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange. • Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans) • Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens • Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan. • Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter. • Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed. • Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages. • Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives. • Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families. • Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll • Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll • Page 167: Any individual who doesn't have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income. • Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them). • Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records. • Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." Yes, it really says that. • Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected." • Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!) • Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional judgment, etc. • Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries. • Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs. • Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing! • Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions. • Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government. • Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies! • Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval. • Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN. • Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing. • Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc. • Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals. • Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone). • Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia? • Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time. • Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death. • Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends. • Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT. • Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life. • Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN. • Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN. • Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage. • Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:52:28-05:00 3164651 44251 2009-11-08T12:52:28-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> I am 100% positive that nobody who is asking "Have you taken time to read this bill?" has either. I am doing so before I weigh in and crush all of your logic.</blockquote> I hope you're joking. The complete length of this bill is 1,990 pages. Do you think all of this has only to do with healthcare? HAH. I've personally went through over a hundred pages of summaries and key points made in this bill. My college minor was in political science and history and I like to know what I am talking about. Wait until tomorrow and see if I was right about how the market is going to take this bill, and you'll see effects immediately.</blockquote> Of course the stock market is going to drop, there are too many nut jobs like yourself who believe that their money is unsafe and will definitely pull theirs out to "keep it safe" while in reality, they're going to be the cause of the drop. Yawn. Give me a break dude, you are perpetuating all of the same tired bullshit rhetoric that all of the self-purportedly "well informed" (note sarcasm) morons who run the conservative movement spew over the radio and television on a daily basis. Your political science minor doesn't give you any more credit in knowing what is going on than any other person who has a computer, the internet, and an opinion. Unless you've actually read the whole thing, you're really not qualified by any means to hand down a <b>well-informed</b> opinion. Because when it comes to this bill, you don't have one. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:54:35-05:00 3164671 59851 2009-11-08T12:54:35-05:00 I wouldn't be surprised to see the market go down... anytime you threaten rich white guys with making them downgrade their 200 ft yacht to a 140 ft yacht you're going to get some 'take my ball home' mentality... I still need to read up, though...not a big fan of the government mandating insurance coverage through private insurers even though I understand the idea is to spread the risk among all people (those healthy and sick)... I also wouldn't be surprised if insurance companies see their stock prices go up considering the new mandated group of customers... there will be a fight in the Senate, I do guarantee that.... 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:55:05-05:00 3164681 33471 2009-11-08T12:55:41-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> • Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If that is not available, you will be required to take the government option! • Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure! • Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! • Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process) • Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None. • Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services. • Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard. • Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. • Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) • Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange. • Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans) • Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens • Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan. • Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter. • Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed. • Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages. • Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives. • Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families. • Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll • Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll • Page 167: Any individual who doesn't have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income. • Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them). • Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records. • Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." Yes, it really says that. • Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected." • Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!) • Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional judgment, etc. • Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries. • Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs. • Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing! • Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions. • Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government. • Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies! • Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval. • Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN. • Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing. • Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc. • Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals. • Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone). • Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia? • Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time. • Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death. • Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends. • Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT. • Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life. • Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN. • Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN. • Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage. • Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.</blockquote> <b>You're an idiot dude. My point is proven, you're forwarding along a bunch of bullshit from some e-mail that is trying to scare people into not supporting the bill. Luckily, there is a guy who has done some of the work for me, and has decided to systematically debug that entire post. Here's his blog: http://awfulbrothers.blogspot.com/2009/08/health-care-reform-and-lies-of-those.html </b> From the email: Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If that is not available, you will be required to take the gov option! Page 16 falls under the Title 1 of the house health care bill. On page 14, you'll find the purpose of Title 1: (a) PURPOSE.--The purpose of this title is to establish standards to ensure that new health insurance coverage and employment-based health plans that are offered meet standards guaranteeing access to affordable coverage, essential benefits, and other consumer protections. (Boldface is mine.) Pretty simple so far, right? Sounds good to me... Page 15 goes on to say that an insurance plan that does not meet the standards for affordable coverage, essential benefits and consumer protections is not a qualified plan under the bill. There is also language that indicates that these requirements will be phased in over a course of several years, so my interpretation is that plans that don't immediately meet those standards won't be scrapped immediately, but will have time to come into compliance. (In fact, I just read a little farther, and page 17 says exactly that -- it's a 5-year period.) It's funny that people are all freaked out that page 16 is going to mean that EVERYONE will be funneled to the public option, when in fact, at the top of page 16 is the name of the section: PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE Then we get to the legalese (and I'm going to put the full text of this page at the bottom of this post -- please feel free to comment respectfully if you have insight to add) but as far as I can tell, this is what it means: If you already have coverage, you get to keep it. Your plan will be grandfathered in, BUT unless it meets the requirements for affordability, essential benefits, and consumer protection, the company can't enroll new individuals into that plan, except new dependents of people who are already enrolled. At the bottom of page 16 is the text that I think the email referred to: (2) LIMITATION ON CHANGES IN TERMS OR CONDITIONS.--Subject to paragraph (3) and except as required by law, the issuer does not change any of its terms or conditions, including benefits and cost-sharing, from those in effect as of the day before the first day of Y1. This doesn't say anything about requiring individuals to take a plan similar to the one they have now, or anything about requiring individuals to take the "government option." What I think it does say is that if an insurance plan has been grandfathered in, meaning it is allowed to exist under the bill even though it doesn't meet requirements for affordability, essential benefits, and consumer protection, that the company can't then change the terms of the plan and call it the same plan. It seems to me that this is actually a great thing, because it doesn't allow the insurance companies to play fast and loose with the grandfathering clause. Here's the complete text of page 16 if you want to read it for yourself: SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE. (a) GRANDFATHERED HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE DEFINED.--Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term ''grandfathered health insurance coverage'' means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met: (1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT.-- (A) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1. (B) DEPENDENT COVERAGE PERMITTED.--Subparagraph (A) shall not affect the subsequent enrollment of a dependent of an individual who is covered as of such first day. (2) LIMITATION ON CHANGES IN TERMS OR CONDITIONS.--Subject to paragraph (3) and except as required by law, the issuer does not change any of its terms or conditions, including benefits and cost-sharing, from those in effect as of the day before the first day of Y1. The email says: Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure! What pages 21-22 actually do is ask the Commissioner, in conjunction with the Secretaries of Health and Human Services and Labor, to conduct a study of the "large group insured and self-insured employer health care markets." It looks to me like the purpose of this study, which is supposed to be completed within 18 months of the date this bill goes into law, is twofold. The first reason for doing the study (I think) is to make sure that the regulations put on the insurance companies by this bill don't put them at a huge disadvantage compared to employers who self-insure. Apparently, self-insurance is not something that the house wants to encourage. You'll have to decide for yourself how you feel about that part of the bill -- I don't know enough to have an opinion. The second reason for doing the study (I think) is to make sure that employers who self-insure are financially solvent and have enough money to pay obligations, and to examine the risks of insolvency. I can see how this could be read as "auditing" but I'm pretty sure this portion of the bill doesn't mandate audits of all employers who self insure, just a representative sample (by employer size) -- enough for the commissioner to get an idea of how risky the whole self-insurance market is. And auditing is not inherently bad, anyway. If your employer says, "Hey, we're not going to participate in the insurance exchange, but instead, we'll insure you ourselves, so don't worry," wouldn't it be nice to know that they actually have the money to pay claims? Here's the full text of page 22. Enjoy! employer health care markets. Such study shall examine the following: (A) The types of employers by key characteristics, including size, that purchase insured products versus those that self-insure. (B) The similarities and differences between typical insured and self-insured health plans. (C) The financial solvency and capital reserve levels of employers that self-insure by employer size. (D) The risk of self-insured employers not being able to pay obligations or otherwise becoming financially insolvent. (E) The extent to which rating rules are likely to cause adverse selection in the large group market or to encourage small and mid size employers to self-insure (2) REPORTS.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commissioner shall submit to Congress and the applicable agencies a report on the study conducted under paragraph (1). Such report shall include any recommendations the Commissioner deems appropriate to ensure that the law does not provide incentives <b> That's just TWO. Now, since you clearly have no clue about what is going on, what you're talking about, or what the bill <b>really</b> says (nor do I at this point) I hereby move for your banishment from this discussion until you're willing to admit said facts, and swear to read the bill in it's entirety before professing to know anything about it's contents. For such a well-educated political science and history minor, you lack the deductive capabilities to assemble a cohesive and enlightened stance on the subject matter. Please do more for your mind than listen to Fox News, otherwise I fear it may turn your brain to sludge.</b> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:57:44-05:00 3164711 59851 2009-11-08T13:04:20-05:00 <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> I am 100% positive that nobody who is asking "Have you taken time to read this bill?" has either. I am doing so before I weigh in and crush all of your logic.</blockquote> I hope you're joking. The complete length of this bill is 1,990 pages. Do you think all of this has only to do with healthcare? HAH. I've personally went through over a hundred pages of summaries and key points made in this bill. My college minor was in political science and history and I like to know what I am talking about. Wait until tomorrow and see if I was right about how the market is going to take this bill, and you'll see effects immediately.</blockquote> Of course the stock market is going to drop, there are too many nut jobs like yourself who believe that their money is unsafe and will definitely pull theirs out to "keep it safe" while in reality, they're going to be the cause of the drop. Yawn. Give me a break dude, you are perpetuating all of the same tired bullshit rhetoric that all of the self-purportedly "well informed" (note sarcasm) morons who run the conservative movement spew over the radio and television on a daily basis. Your political science minor doesn't give you any more credit in knowing what is going on than any other person who has a computer, the internet, and an opinion. Unless you've actually read the whole thing, you're really not qualified by any means to hand down a <b>well-informed</b> opinion. Because when it comes to this bill, you don't have one.</blockquote> You don't even know me nor my views, and you quickly class me as an idiot nut job because my views on the healthcare bill do not mirror yours. Way to go, you stay classy. That is about as accurate as me calling you a racist bigot that hates all non-white people and violently attacks anyone who says they are gay. I don't know you, but let me just say that about you because I'm on the internet and I can talk shit. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T12:58:52-05:00 3164731 44251 2009-11-08T12:58:52-05:00 What is "staying classy"? Using lies and misleading people to believe your side, or calling someone out for being the jackass who is doing it? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:09:10-05:00 3164791 59851 2009-11-08T13:09:10-05:00 I didn't read everyone's arguments throughout this. One reason I disagree with this plan is that I think I should WANT to help others, not be forced to do so because of the law. The fact that this kind of thing is going to be passed proves that we do a bad job of taking care of the needy already. I'm not quite sure how I feel about all of this. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:09:30-05:00 3164801 2961 2009-11-08T13:10:51-05:00 <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> What is "staying classy"? Using lies and misleading people to believe your side, or calling someone out for being the jackass who is doing it?</blockquote> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> What is "staying classy"? Using lies and misleading people to believe your side, or calling someone out for being the jackass who is doing it?</blockquote> Making snap and misinformed judgements on a persons character without having any background on them? Hmm? I vote democratic 75% of the time, but clearly I am part of the evil conservatives who want nothing more than your money and to further my personal wealth. Yes, that I why I make art for a living, pure greed. I am as socially liberal as they come. I want a better system that will actually work and provide those in need of care. This system is going to fail, we cannot sustain it. We need a REAL option that gives people the power over their healthcare choices and options that the people deserve. I am however fiscally conservative because the way money is spent is at best terrible. The hole we have dug is far too deep too get out of, and that hurts everyone. If we didn't have a military budget the size of the pacific ocean we could afford a better healthcare system, but we choose to blow shit up instead. I do not agree with that nor should we support it. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:13:21-05:00 3164851 44251 2009-11-08T13:14:47-05:00 My point is: how are you sure it is going to fail if you don't know what the bill really says, or what it will do? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:15:25-05:00 3164871 59851 2009-11-08T13:15:25-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> What is "staying classy"? Using lies and misleading people to believe your side, or calling someone out for being the jackass who is doing it?</blockquote> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> What is "staying classy"? Using lies and misleading people to believe your side, or calling someone out for being the jackass who is doing it?</blockquote> Making snap and misinformed judgements on a persons character without having any background on them? Hmm? I vote democratic 75% of the time, but clearly I am part of the evil conservatives who want nothing more than your money and to further my personal wealth. Yes, that I why I make art for a living, pure greed. I am as socially liberal as they come. I want a better system that will actually work and provide those in need of care. This system is going to fail, we cannot sustain it. We need a REAL option that gives people the power over their healthcare choices and options that the people deserve.</blockquote> but the insurance industry isn't going to make these changes on their own...so again you would need government intervention...bottom line is these guys are not going to make the compassionate decisions on their own...their 'bond holders' won't allow it... 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:16:20-05:00 3164891 33471 2009-11-08T13:16:20-05:00 doooooooooom and glooooooooooom!!!!!! 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:16:21-05:00 3164901 1146 2009-11-08T13:16:21-05:00 <blockquote><cite>derekdeal said:</cite> doooooooooom and glooooooooooom!!!!!!</blockquote> By e-mail. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:17:22-05:00 3164911 59851 2009-11-08T13:17:22-05:00 I agree that the insurance industry needs a crackdown for some of the terrible things they have done to people. It goes beyond even them though, we need to also punish the drug companies that make 10,000% profit on every pill they sell. A bottle of medicine that I pay $10 for under insurance, costs $140 without it. That is absurd and really the root of a lot of the healthcare evils. Just to step foot into a doctors office will run you $175 or so without insurance. People cannot afford that, and there needs to be regulation, but not government takeovers. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:20:14-05:00 3164921 44251 2009-11-08T13:20:14-05:00 I haven't had a chance to read all of this, but in case no one has posted this yet: A summary can be read <a href="http://edlabor.house.gov/blog/2009/10/affordable-health-care.shtml">here</a> and the full version is <a href="http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf">here</a>. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:22:38-05:00 3164931 1498 2009-11-08T13:23:35-05:00 jimmy, you're usually pretty well read and well spoken on this kind of stuff, but you're being a little catty today. how is banishing someone from a discussion because they haven't read the whole bill at all reasonable? also, it is possible to be against the fundamental concepts at play with this bill WITHOUT having read every line of it. Lighten up. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:36:39-05:00 3165011 3668 2009-11-08T13:36:39-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Time Without the E said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Godmachine said:</cite> I wonder what the actual facts are of the whole thing. I listen to Fox news and Air America and they both say different things. Fox news see it as an attack on civil liberties and constantly scare monger about money and rights (you would if you were a rich media type) and AA say its really great that some people cane finally afford cover. The truth is no one knows how it will all work- and you shouldnt believe the media who always have an agenda (especially rich media people who have drinking problems and cry on TV). Some of these people say that tapping your phone and taking away your right to a fair trial, suspending your assets, torturing a man to death etc is fine- but up your tax to help a dying man, well thats worthy of a civil war. makes no sense. again- all arguments boil down to money- and you really shouldnt be putting a price on your fellow mans lives. Do you know how many ex-soldiers will now finally get the cover they need. I really dont see it as a big deal- you just have to be weary of who you are listening to as I have noted that your media is quite extreme and dont really care about facts and like to whip people up into an emotional frenzy.</blockquote> First off don't EVER take anything from Fox News as fact or the truth. They run with anything that will bash liberals or democrats. Anyone who isn't crazy right winged nutjob should not ever turn on that channel unless your going for a good laugh or two.</blockquote> disagree. that's the commentary, not the news. the NEWS on fox is just as slanted as the other networks, just in the other direction. i flip in between all the news stations and tune into the one that has the hottest commentator, or isn't running the same thing i just saw on another channel. having that mindstate doesn't help anyone or yourself. relax, take into consideration you're being lied to 90% of the time anyway. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:43:16-05:00 3165151 5570 2009-11-08T13:43:16-05:00 Well I don't like arguing over such things and didn't mean for this to get so personal, but alas, political discussions always do. I'll just leave it at I really hope that this bill does everything people hope it will and then some. I would love nothing more than to be shown that this bill will end up as a positive and progressive change from the old and flawed system. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:44:46-05:00 3165161 44251 2009-11-08T13:44:46-05:00 and this bill has nothing to do with compassion. let's hope something good comes from it, i don't think so, but fingers crossed. lifetime politicians don't give a shit about any of you. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:44:55-05:00 3165181 5570 2009-11-08T13:44:55-05:00 <blockquote><cite>xjoshuabelangerx said:</cite> and this bill has nothing to do with compassion. let's hope something good comes from it, i don't think so, but fingers crossed. lifetime politicians don't give a shit about any of you.</blockquote> I totally agree. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be anything between Capitalistic private health care and an irresponsible government run system. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:49:21-05:00 3165221 1368 2009-11-08T13:49:21-05:00 what i am gathering from this thread so far is that jesus hates government run healthcare. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T13:50:55-05:00 3165271 1106 2009-11-08T13:51:07-05:00 <blockquote><cite>skull with hair said:</cite> what i am gathering from this thread so far is that jesus hates government run healthcare.</blockquote> leave it to skull with pubic hair to make a moronic statement throwing jesus into the conversation. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T14:27:33-05:00 3165621 11245 2009-11-08T14:27:33-05:00 What does this have to do with House? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T14:40:22-05:00 3165711 4171 2009-11-08T14:40:22-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Benjamin Lande said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>xjoshuabelangerx said:</cite> and this bill has nothing to do with compassion. let's hope something good comes from it, i don't think so, but fingers crossed. lifetime politicians don't give a shit about any of you.</blockquote> I totally agree. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be anything between Capitalistic private health care and an irresponsible government run system.</blockquote> Well in the UK we have both government run free health care, as well as private health companies. As I believe many other countries have. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T14:42:28-05:00 3165751 7093 2009-11-08T14:43:32-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>skull with hair said:</cite> what i am gathering from this thread so far is that jesus hates government run healthcare.</blockquote> leave it to skull with pubic hair to make a moronic statement throwing jesus into the conversation.</blockquote> ... says the faceless troll who has never contributed anything to this site. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T14:48:47-05:00 3165831 1106 2009-11-08T14:49:01-05:00 deadright, how does that work if you have a medical need? Does the government plan only portion or what? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T14:48:58-05:00 3165841 11245 2009-11-08T14:48:58-05:00 <blockquote><cite>skull with hair said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>skull with hair said:</cite> what i am gathering from this thread so far is that jesus hates government run healthcare.</blockquote> leave it to skull with pubic hair to make a moronic statement throwing jesus into the conversation.</blockquote> ... says the faceless troll who has never contributed anything to this site.</blockquote> says the moronic toad who has the mental wit of a pile of dog feces. Oh wait...need to add lying sack of shit to the description. Didnt you make the promise that you were never going to respond to any of my posting? True to form...open skull with girlie hair mouth...out comes garbage. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T14:51:11-05:00 3165871 11245 2009-11-08T14:54:03-05:00 I predict in the future all decisions will be made by spinning a wheel. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T14:52:45-05:00 3165891 506 2009-11-08T14:53:03-05:00 <blockquote><cite>quakerninja said:</cite> In the future all decisions will be made by spinning a wheel.</blockquote> <img src="http://majorlyenglish.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/thunderdome.jpg" /> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T14:53:35-05:00 3165901 44251 2009-11-08T14:53:35-05:00 im so glad i don't live in the U.S anymore. everything is too complicated 96461 Post 2009-11-08T15:12:11-05:00 3165981 51721 2009-11-08T15:12:28-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Alejandro Prez said:</cite> im so glad i don't live in the U.S anymore. everything is too complicated</blockquote> yeah but you are missing out on some great tv. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T15:16:25-05:00 3166001 4171 2009-11-08T15:16:25-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> deadright, how does that work if you have a medical need? Does the government plan only portion or what?</blockquote> I'm not entirely sure what your question is. But if you have a medical emergency then you would just use the NHS (free care). I don't think Private hospitals over here generally deal with emergencies. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T15:25:48-05:00 3166061 7093 2009-11-08T15:25:48-05:00 <blockquote><cite>explodingtoes said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>MainframeMedia said:</cite> This is a step in the right direction, unfortunately our system still has about 1,000 more miles to walk with a broken ankle and a boulder on its back. We will never get ourselves out of the mud until we stop entertaining the interests of big business and start helping out the citizens and taxpayers. Everyone is so concerned with their campaign money that they can't see but 2 years ahead of them. It should never cost me $100 at a doctors office just to "see" what is wrong with me and not even fix the problem. I feel health care should be handled as the rest of the government run jobs of the country are. Do you pay a firefighter for putting out a fire in your house...do you pay a policeman for checking your house if someone broke in? No...they are on a salary (granted an unjustifiably high one), and I don't see why hospitals or doctors offices should be any different.</blockquote> I don't disagree with everything you say here. However, to be honest, the required skill set and education for a firefighter and a neurosurgeon (for example) are insanely disparate. The difference is that if I really want to help people, without care for money, I can become a firefighter or policeman fairly quickly. If I want to become a neurosurgeon or an oncologist, I've got 8+ years of school ahead of me, tons of tuition, etc etc. It comes down to incentive. Unfortunately, good will isn't enough for everyone. Certainly the high salary, increased ability to provide for your family, etc are factors that motivate that person to go down that 8+ year long path.</blockquote> It's well understood that becoming a doctor or a surgeon requires far more schooling and training than it does to become a firefighter or police officer. However, what about master carpenters that have been working <i>their entire lives</i> to reach that level of professionalism? They don't make even a third of what most practicing doctors make...which I find sad. I find the amount of tuition astounding and appalling as well at most schools...WHY do we have to pay upwards of $40,000 per year, per student for people to go learn something at a decent school? Like does it REALLY take $400,000,000 to keep your school running each year? I feel like our entire system is an endless sea of debt that only a lucky few can ever claw their way out of. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T15:26:41-05:00 3166071 12825 2009-11-08T15:26:41-05:00 O shit HealthCare fight! 96461 Post 2009-11-08T15:30:49-05:00 3166111 10727 2009-11-08T15:30:49-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Danimal! said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Alejandro Prez said:</cite> im so glad i don't live in the U.S anymore. everything is too complicated</blockquote> yeah but you are missing out on some great tv.</blockquote> cable baby. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T15:56:37-05:00 3166251 51721 2009-11-08T15:56:37-05:00 <blockquote><cite>MainframeMedia said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>explodingtoes said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>MainframeMedia said:</cite> This is a step in the right direction, unfortunately our system still has about 1,000 more miles to walk with a broken ankle and a boulder on its back. We will never get ourselves out of the mud until we stop entertaining the interests of big business and start helping out the citizens and taxpayers. Everyone is so concerned with their campaign money that they can't see but 2 years ahead of them. It should never cost me $100 at a doctors office just to "see" what is wrong with me and not even fix the problem. I feel health care should be handled as the rest of the government run jobs of the country are. Do you pay a firefighter for putting out a fire in your house...do you pay a policeman for checking your house if someone broke in? No...they are on a salary (granted an unjustifiably high one), and I don't see why hospitals or doctors offices should be any different.</blockquote> I don't disagree with everything you say here. However, to be honest, the required skill set and education for a firefighter and a neurosurgeon (for example) are insanely disparate. The difference is that if I really want to help people, without care for money, I can become a firefighter or policeman fairly quickly. If I want to become a neurosurgeon or an oncologist, I've got 8+ years of school ahead of me, tons of tuition, etc etc. It comes down to incentive. Unfortunately, good will isn't enough for everyone. Certainly the high salary, increased ability to provide for your family, etc are factors that motivate that person to go down that 8+ year long path.</blockquote> It's well understood that becoming a doctor or a surgeon requires far more schooling and training than it does to become a firefighter or police officer. However, what about master carpenters that have been working <i>their entire lives</i> to reach that level of professionalism? They don't make even a third of what most practicing doctors make...which I find sad. I find the amount of tuition astounding and appalling as well at most schools...WHY do we have to pay upwards of $40,000 per year, per student for people to go learn something at a decent school? Like does it REALLY take $400,000,000 to keep your school running each year? I feel like our entire system is an endless sea of debt that only a lucky few can ever claw their way out of.</blockquote> Tuition costs is a whole different issue, and I agree with you on that one. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T16:01:12-05:00 3166281 3668 2009-11-08T16:01:12-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Alejandro Prez said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Danimal! said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Alejandro Prez said:</cite> im so glad i don't live in the U.S anymore. everything is too complicated</blockquote> yeah but you are missing out on some great tv.</blockquote> cable baby.</blockquote> what about football?! 96461 Post 2009-11-08T16:05:57-05:00 3166321 5678 2009-11-08T16:05:57-05:00 <blockquote><cite>DeadRight said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> deadright, how does that work if you have a medical need? Does the government plan only portion or what?</blockquote> I'm not entirely sure what your question is. But if you have a medical emergency then you would just use the NHS (free care). I don't think Private hospitals over here generally deal with emergencies.</blockquote> Deadright, sorry didnt proof read my post. What does your private insurance pay forthat your public insurance does not? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T16:05:59-05:00 3166331 11245 2009-11-08T16:05:59-05:00 <blockquote><cite>levi:TPM said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Alejandro Prez said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Danimal! said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Alejandro Prez said:</cite> im so glad i don't live in the U.S anymore. everything is too complicated</blockquote> yeah but you are missing out on some great tv.</blockquote> cable baby.</blockquote> what about football?!</blockquote> i hate football, but i do get all the sports channels, im more into basketball. cavs ftw 96461 Post 2009-11-08T16:24:14-05:00 3166491 51721 2009-11-08T16:24:14-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>DeadRight said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> deadright, how does that work if you have a medical need? Does the government plan only portion or what?</blockquote> I'm not entirely sure what your question is. But if you have a medical emergency then you would just use the NHS (free care). I don't think Private hospitals over here generally deal with emergencies.</blockquote> Deadright, sorry didnt proof read my post. What does your private insurance pay forthat your public insurance does not?</blockquote> I don't have much experience with private care. But from what I have seen you're generally paying for a nicer experience (better buildings, your own room, less waiting times etc.) It's just an option for people who can afford it and want to pay to get priority treatment. However they would still be taken to a free health care hospital if it was an emergency. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T16:27:37-05:00 3166511 7093 2009-11-08T16:27:37-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Godmachine said:</cite> I wonder what the actual facts are of the whole thing. I listen to Fox news and Air America and they both say different things. Fox news see it as an attack on civil liberties and constantly scare monger about money and rights (you would if you were a rich media type) and AA say its really great that some people cane finally afford cover. The truth is no one knows how it will all work- and you shouldnt believe the media who always have an agenda (especially rich media people who have drinking problems and cry on TV). Some of these people say that tapping your phone and taking away your right to a fair trial, suspending your assets, torturing a man to death etc is fine- but up your tax to help a dying man, well thats worthy of a civil war. makes no sense. again- all arguments boil down to money- and you really shouldnt be putting a price on your fellow mans lives. Do you know how many ex-soldiers will now finally get the cover they need. I really dont see it as a big deal- you just have to be weary of who you are listening to as I have noted that your media is quite extreme and dont really care about facts and like to whip people up into an emotional frenzy.</blockquote> I just wanted to comment on the ex-soldier's healthcare thing. I have direct experience with this. my younger brother is a great example ... He did two tours in Iraq, lost 50% of his hearing, destroyed his hips and knees from carrying a 90 lb ruck sack and an m-4 everywhere for 8-9 months at a time and minor PTSD (hence the flinging squirrels video). He gets free healthcare the rest of his life and they pay him $500 a month for the rest of his life. It's not terribly hard to get benefits as an ex-soldier that has been overseas in this country, that's one thing I've found in our military. They will try and screw with you though, I've been having a hard time trying to get VA benefits myself as I tore my ACL and Meniscus in my left knee in the line of duty for the army, but as someone who hadn't been overseas they saw fit to discharge me (honorably) as "medical (not a disability)". This means that it's a reoccurring injury due to the location, that can heal on its own completely, but can easily happen again, making me a liability if I was, say, walking 10 miles with 90 lbs of crap on my back, which would compromise the safety of fellow soldiers. However, with that little quotation in my discharge, I'm unable to receive VA benefits for my injury, because it's not considered a lifelong disability like my younger brother's hearing loss, hips, knees and ptsd. I can definitely side with you that this plan will help me out. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T16:36:46-05:00 3166571 1087 2009-11-08T16:36:46-05:00 <blockquote><cite>skull with hair said:</cite> what i am gathering from this thread so far is that jesus hates government run healthcare.</blockquote> Pretty sure Jesus is more of a socialist than people give him credit for. :) 96461 Post 2009-11-08T16:45:02-05:00 3166631 2961 2009-11-08T16:45:02-05:00 My two cents: Show me one instance where Government run programs have been less expensive/more efficient/better than those of private companies. My friend Rich has a dental condition. He and his family moved to the States from the U.K. for the sole reason that he could not (read: WAS NOT ABLE TO) get the treatment necessary. Coming to America he found a good dentist who was able to diagnose and treat his issues within a month. Government-run healthcare will inevitably create lower wages for doctors, and thus less incentive to go into that field. As a consequence, this will most likely result in less stringent requirements for those in the medical field = less qualified doctors. Don't get me wrong, I do believe that every single human being should be offered some sort of healthcare option, but the fact that it is government-run has me shaking in my boots. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T16:46:29-05:00 3166651 57991 2009-11-08T16:46:29-05:00 I thought a tax credit option was being discussed. Where any, and all, medical expenses were included. I'd rather have that. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T16:48:24-05:00 3166671 2961 2009-11-08T16:48:24-05:00 <blockquote><cite>molasses4masses said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>skull with hair said:</cite> what i am gathering from this thread so far is that jesus hates government run healthcare.</blockquote> Pretty sure Jesus is more of a socialist than people give him credit for. :)</blockquote> hah, obviously i was being facetious. i actually agree that jesus would be 100% for socialized medicine, which is why i find it surprising that most conservatives tend to be so against it. why do you think that is? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T17:05:48-05:00 3166851 1106 2009-11-08T17:05:48-05:00 <blockquote><cite>skull with hair said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>molasses4masses said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>skull with hair said:</cite> what i am gathering from this thread so far is that jesus hates government run healthcare.</blockquote> Pretty sure Jesus is more of a socialist than people give him credit for. :)</blockquote> hah, obviously i was being facetious. i actually agree that jesus would be 100% for socialized medicine, which is why i find it surprising that most conservatives tend to be so against it. why do you think that is?</blockquote> Because we are selfish. I figured you were joking. Now go sign on Darius and post something about legalizing weed. Haha. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T17:11:17-05:00 3166971 2961 2009-11-08T17:11:17-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Potter said:</cite> Show me one instance where Government run programs have been less expensive/more efficient/better than those of private companies. </blockquote> http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/In-the-Literature/2009/Nov/A-Survey-of-Primary-Care-Physicians.aspx 96461 Post 2009-11-08T17:15:59-05:00 3167131 7093 2009-11-08T17:15:59-05:00 I'm not going to read all the comments/debates because as Don Draper from Mad Men said "Politics, Sex, Religion, why talk about it?" However, I have to say I am extremely happy about this bill passing because it means my family and my 18 month old son will not be declined health insurance because his dad (me) has a body build that is "too thin", as if my body type was a pre-existing condition. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T17:18:07-05:00 3167211 285 2009-11-08T17:18:50-05:00 <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> I'm not going to read all the comments/debates because as Don Draper from Mad Men said "Politics, Sex, Religion, why talk about it?" However, I have to say I am extremely happy about this bill passing because it means my family and my 18 month old son will not be declined health insurance because his dad (me) has a body build that is "too thin".</blockquote> Simple solution: Gain Weight. /jokes 96461 Post 2009-11-08T17:19:41-05:00 3167251 2961 2009-11-08T17:19:41-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>DeadRight said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> deadright, how does that work if you have a medical need? Does the government plan only portion or what?</blockquote> I'm not entirely sure what your question is. But if you have a medical emergency then you would just use the NHS (free care). I don't think Private hospitals over here generally deal with emergencies.</blockquote> Deadright, sorry didnt proof read my post. What does your private insurance pay forthat your public insurance does not?</blockquote> Posh meals, comfier bed, faster care (non emergency). That is my understanding... correct me if I'm wrong. Also every prescription you get in the UK is £7, regardless of what it is, or free to unemployed & students. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T17:21:30-05:00 3167271 26051 2009-11-08T17:21:30-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Potter said:</cite> My two cents: Show me one instance where Government run programs have been less expensive/more efficient/better than those of private companies. </blockquote> privatized prison and delinquency institutions cost the states more money than their government run counterparts... government run has issues with bureaucracy and kickbacks... privatized has issues with not doing things the right way, just doing them the way that gives them the biggest yacht... as with most things a balance between the two might be the best situation... 96461 Post 2009-11-08T17:22:00-05:00 3167281 33471 2009-11-08T17:22:00-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Potter said:</cite>Government-run healthcare will inevitably create lower wages for doctors, and thus less incentive to go into that field. As a consequence, this will most likely result in less stringent requirements for those in the medical field = less qualified doctors.</blockquote> Not true. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T17:22:52-05:00 3167301 26051 2009-11-08T17:22:52-05:00 <blockquote><cite>molasses4masses said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> I'm not going to read all the comments/debates because as Don Draper from Mad Men said "Politics, Sex, Religion, why talk about it?" However, I have to say I am extremely happy about this bill passing because it means my family and my 18 month old son will not be declined health insurance because his dad (me) has a body build that is "too thin".</blockquote> Simple solution: Gain Weight. /jokes</blockquote> Haha, dude, me gaining weight is probably harder than most people trying to lose weight. I'm perfectly healthy, I'm just thin. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T17:23:39-05:00 3167311 285 2009-11-08T17:23:39-05:00 <blockquote><cite>skull with hair said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>molasses4masses said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>skull with hair said:</cite> what i am gathering from this thread so far is that jesus hates government run healthcare.</blockquote> Pretty sure Jesus is more of a socialist than people give him credit for. :)</blockquote> hah, obviously i was being facetious. i actually agree that jesus would be 100% for socialized medicine, which is why i find it surprising that most conservatives tend to be so against it. why do you think that is?</blockquote> This reminds me of one of the greatest comments I've ever read on Digg today: "Jesus' Health Care Plan Would Include Everyone. Your Health Care Plan Would Only Include Those Who Can Afford It. But I forgive you." <img src="http://dummr.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/hmo-jesus.jpg"> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T17:42:34-05:00 3167761 285 2009-11-08T17:43:40-05:00 "Jesus' Health Care Plan Would Include Everyone. Your Health Care Plan Would Only Include Those Who Can Afford It. But I forgive you." The approved health plan has nothing to do with compassion. Jesus would have voted against what was approved last night. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T17:45:11-05:00 3167811 11245 2009-11-08T17:45:11-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> "Jesus' Health Care Plan Would Include Everyone. Your Health Care Plan Would Only Include Those Who Can Afford It. But I forgive you." The approved health plan has nothing to do with compassion. Jesus would have voted against what was approved last night.</blockquote> Actually, I think Jesus would shake his finger at all of the "Christians" and ask us why we let it get to this. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T17:54:21-05:00 3167921 2961 2009-11-08T17:54:21-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> "Jesus' Health Care Plan Would Include Everyone. Your Health Care Plan Would Only Include Those Who Can Afford It. But I forgive you." The approved health plan has nothing to do with compassion. Jesus would have voted against what was approved last night.</blockquote> You're right, providing health care to everyone is pretty cruel. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, unless you are poor. Even Sri Lanka provides ALL of it's citizens health care. Jesus would totally vote against helping everyone, what was I thinking. It's fucking SAD that most athiests nowadays are better christians than christians. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T17:55:53-05:00 3167961 285 2009-11-08T18:02:34-05:00 LOL my favorite part about this discussion is where people started speaking for Jesus. I think Jesus would send a flood and drown everyone except like a couple of dudes and some animals. No need for health care plans when you nerf the entire population of the planet. I feel like this would successfully lower taxes and the cost of car insurance. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T18:37:18-05:00 3168421 997 2009-11-08T18:37:18-05:00 YOU LIE !!!! :D 96461 Post 2009-11-08T18:41:01-05:00 3168471 10727 2009-11-08T18:41:01-05:00 <blockquote><cite>heavyprints said:</cite> I feel like this would successfully lower taxes and the cost of car insurance.</blockquote> More than Geico? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T18:54:56-05:00 3168591 2961 2009-11-08T18:54:56-05:00 Possibly. I don't think Jesus would have to pay for a CG lizard to sell his insurance, so based on marketing budget alone, there is less overhead. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T19:07:05-05:00 3168721 997 2009-11-08T19:07:05-05:00 <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> "Jesus' Health Care Plan Would Include Everyone. Your Health Care Plan Would Only Include Those Who Can Afford It. But I forgive you." The approved health plan has nothing to do with compassion. Jesus would have voted against what was approved last night.</blockquote> You're right, providing health care to everyone is pretty cruel. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, unless you are poor. Even Sri Lanka provides ALL of it's citizens health care. Jesus would totally vote against helping everyone, what was I thinking. It's fucking SAD that most athiests nowadays are better christians than christians.</blockquote> conor, u are being naive if you think the bill voted on last night has anything to do with being compassionate to fellow humans. It is a charade. I as well as 99% of the population wants everyone who wants health care to have an affordable and meaningful option available. The bill voted on lats night is not that plan..scroll up and read some of the comments from ovenrude, they are FACT and have nothing to do with YOU or anyone else having affordable health care. The way to mkae it work is to get goverment OUT of the process. Do you think 20,000 brand new goverment burueacrats are going to provide you a wonderful health care program? The saying " a fool and his money soon part" applies to those who think this plan will create a positive effect on health care availability 96461 Post 2009-11-08T19:15:53-05:00 3168841 11245 2009-11-08T19:15:53-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Will Petersen said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>DeadRight said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> deadright, how does that work if you have a medical need? Does the government plan only portion or what?</blockquote> I'm not entirely sure what your question is. But if you have a medical emergency then you would just use the NHS (free care). I don't think Private hospitals over here generally deal with emergencies.</blockquote> Deadright, sorry didnt proof read my post. What does your private insurance pay forthat your public insurance does not?</blockquote> Posh meals, comfier bed, faster care (non emergency). That is my understanding... correct me if I'm wrong. Also every prescription you get in the UK is £7, regardless of what it is, or free to unemployed & students.</blockquote> all health care, prescription drugs, and university course is free in wales. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T19:25:26-05:00 3169101 2802 2009-11-08T19:25:26-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Godmachine said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Will Petersen said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>DeadRight said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> deadright, how does that work if you have a medical need? Does the government plan only portion or what?</blockquote> I'm not entirely sure what your question is. But if you have a medical emergency then you would just use the NHS (free care). I don't think Private hospitals over here generally deal with emergencies.</blockquote> Deadright, sorry didnt proof read my post. What does your private insurance pay forthat your public insurance does not?</blockquote> Posh meals, comfier bed, faster care (non emergency). That is my understanding... correct me if I'm wrong. Also every prescription you get in the UK is £7, regardless of what it is, or free to unemployed & students.</blockquote> all health care, prescription drugs, and university course is free in wales.</blockquote> B-limey. I also hear that you can get non repayable small business grants in Wales, up to £20,000 or something! 96461 Post 2009-11-08T19:41:04-05:00 3169241 26051 2009-11-08T19:41:04-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Will Petersen said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Godmachine said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Will Petersen said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>DeadRight said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> deadright, how does that work if you have a medical need? Does the government plan only portion or what?</blockquote> I'm not entirely sure what your question is. But if you have a medical emergency then you would just use the NHS (free care). I don't think Private hospitals over here generally deal with emergencies.</blockquote> Deadright, sorry didnt proof read my post. What does your private insurance pay forthat your public insurance does not?</blockquote> Posh meals, comfier bed, faster care (non emergency). That is my understanding... correct me if I'm wrong. Also every prescription you get in the UK is £7, regardless of what it is, or free to unemployed & students.</blockquote> all health care, prescription drugs, and university course is free in wales.</blockquote> B-limey. I also hear that you can get non repayable small business grants in Wales, up to £20,000 or something!</blockquote> cardiff is also the fastest growing capital in Europe. Socialism is a great form of capitalism when done well. Nothing is perfect- but it helps when there is no rich twats trying to tell poor people what they want/need. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T19:44:16-05:00 3169311 2802 2009-11-08T19:44:16-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> "Jesus' Health Care Plan Would Include Everyone. Your Health Care Plan Would Only Include Those Who Can Afford It. But I forgive you." The approved health plan has nothing to do with compassion. Jesus would have voted against what was approved last night.</blockquote> You're right, providing health care to everyone is pretty cruel. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, unless you are poor. Even Sri Lanka provides ALL of it's citizens health care. Jesus would totally vote against helping everyone, what was I thinking. It's fucking SAD that most athiests nowadays are better christians than christians.</blockquote> conor, u are being naive if you think the bill voted on last night has anything to do with being compassionate to fellow humans. It is a charade. I as well as 99% of the population wants everyone who wants health care to have an affordable and meaningful option available. The bill voted on lats night is not that plan..scroll up and read some of the comments from ovenrude, they are FACT and have nothing to do with YOU or anyone else having affordable health care. The way to mkae it work is to get goverment OUT of the process. Do you think 20,000 brand new goverment burueacrats are going to provide you a wonderful health care program? The saying " a fool and his money soon part" applies to those who think this plan will create a positive effect on health care availability</blockquote> Almost all of the commentary from ovenrude was debunked or at least explained LONG ago by <a href="http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/twenty-six-lies-about-hr-3200/">Factcheck.org</a>. All things being equal, I am more apt to trust Factcheck, who I've followed off and on since 2004 and tend to be relatively nonpartisan, than some email chain letter posted on a tee design site. Of course, I'm sure that even trying to explain or elucidate things that might lean toward favoring one side or the other automatically makes them partisan, because this is America, and it's all a big sports match. Also, surely the plan itself isn't bulky and convoluted from people trying to compromise. It's not perfect by any means from what I've read (and yeah, it's like 2000 pages, I sure as hell haven't read it from back to front), but really, our health care is absolutely unforgivable considering our level of international power. To presume an overhaul will not improve it, especially an overhaul which aims to bring us closer to the far higher standards of every other country we could consider a peer in world power and developed nature, will not improve our lives to some degree, and be worth the expenditure, is ludicrous. Unless, again, we presume every country with a public option (which yeah, we still don't have, but we'll work on that later) is actually worse off, and every study done has lied about America being in the 30s instead of #1. We have public education. We have public transit. We have public libraries. Public parks. Public works. These are all paid for by our taxes, for the betterment of everyone. The government is not hiding in your nearest manhole cover, spying on you. You don't get on your local bus route and have Obama drive you where HE wants you to go. Public health will be the same if we allow it to be. When you're cleaning up a huge mess, it ALWAYS gets messier first. But it's worth the cost when it clears up. Put another way, think of this as payback for that purposeless nonsense in Iraq. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T19:53:58-05:00 3169441 2970 2009-11-08T19:56:57-05:00 well put, thank you sir. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T19:58:41-05:00 3169501 1106 2009-11-08T19:58:57-05:00 public education = financially and intellectually broken public transportation at the national level= broken (can you say amtrak?) Public libraries= financially broken medicare= financially broken social security= financially broken i dont understand your bus reference, i DO know that from the few pages that I HAVE read of the bill that it forces me an everyone else to do as the government says or I can be fined or imprisoned. More government ALWAYS leads to higher taxes with lesser quality..it is aboslutely statistically true 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:06:16-05:00 3169581 11245 2009-11-08T20:06:16-05:00 The government is REAL good at managing the businesses it runs. Post Office (-$7billion, 2009) Amtrak (public transportation)(-$3.3 billion, 2009) You also may have heard that there are a lot of doctors that oppose this bill. Every doctor I've spoken to in person opposes this bill. Why? Because they can currently provide a high quality of care that is reflected in current statistics, and they are worried about that quality of care being diminished. http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20080716/cancer-survival-rates-vary-by-country <img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/SoG4Vv5-y-I/AAAAAAAAK3A/afilDKt_4ks/s400/cancer.bmp" /> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:06:32-05:00 3169591 44251 2009-11-08T20:06:32-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Godmachine said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Will Petersen said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Godmachine said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Will Petersen said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>DeadRight said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> deadright, how does that work if you have a medical need? Does the government plan only portion or what?</blockquote> I'm not entirely sure what your question is. But if you have a medical emergency then you would just use the NHS (free care). I don't think Private hospitals over here generally deal with emergencies.</blockquote> Deadright, sorry didnt proof read my post. What does your private insurance pay forthat your public insurance does not?</blockquote> Posh meals, comfier bed, faster care (non emergency). That is my understanding... correct me if I'm wrong. Also every prescription you get in the UK is £7, regardless of what it is, or free to unemployed & students.</blockquote> all health care, prescription drugs, and university course is free in wales.</blockquote> B-limey. I also hear that you can get non repayable small business grants in Wales, up to £20,000 or something!</blockquote> cardiff is also the fastest growing capital in Europe. Socialism is a great form of capitalism when done well. Nothing is perfect- but it helps when there is no rich twats trying to tell poor people what they want/need.</blockquote> I believe that England will be the only country in the UK to make you pay for prescriptions within the next year or so. I think it'll have to go the same way eventually though. F**k this, i'm moving to Wales lol I've used both national and private health care (BUPA, was refered to private for free as procedure was traumatic and i was a bit younger). Will is pretty much right about private in the uk, it is very nice. It's the fact they go out of their way to make you really comfortable, and it's more like being in a hotel haha Overall, i'm still with GM on this issue. Surely the end goal should always be to value each life equally regardless of wealth and to give every person the same opportunity to have access to health care? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:09:18-05:00 3169611 6884 2009-11-08T20:09:18-05:00 A system that cannot sustain itself cannot provide health care. That is the core issue. Sustainability. Can this plan: a. provide better health care b. not cause its own downfall due to the extreme cost. If it can do a + b we have ourselves a winner. If either fails, then the system will be worse than it was before. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:11:44-05:00 3169661 44251 2009-11-08T20:11:44-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> The government is REAL good at managing the businesses it runs. Post Office (-$7billion, 2009) Amtrak (public transportation)(-$3.3 billion, 2009) You also may have heard that there are a lot of doctors that oppose this bill. Every doctor I've spoken to in person opposes this bill. Why? Because they can currently provide a high quality of care that is reflected in current statistics, and they are worried about that quality of care being diminished. http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20080716/cancer-survival-rates-vary-by-country <img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/SoG4Vv5-y-I/AAAAAAAAK3A/afilDKt_4ks/s400/cancer.bmp" /></blockquote> That still means nothing. 77.5% of 150,000,000 (116,250,000) people is still more than 99.3% of 100,000,000 (99,300,000). That means more people alive, 19,650,000 to be precise. More access will result in more people surviving, you need to accept that. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:14:03-05:00 3169691 6884 2009-11-08T20:16:15-05:00 ^ ahahahahaha. You think 50,000,000 are being ignored by the current system? Please don't speak anymore if you do. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:15:29-05:00 3169731 44251 2009-11-08T20:15:29-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> The government is REAL good at managing the businesses it runs. Post Office (-$7billion, 2009) Amtrak (public transportation)(-$3.3 billion, 2009) You also may have heard that there are a lot of doctors that oppose this bill. Every doctor I've spoken to in person opposes this bill. Why? Because they can currently provide a high quality of care that is reflected in current statistics, and they are worried about that quality of care being diminished. http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20080716/cancer-survival-rates-vary-by-country <img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/SoG4Vv5-y-I/AAAAAAAAK3A/afilDKt_4ks/s400/cancer.bmp" /></blockquote> That's really interesting, because the following organizations SUPPORT the bill: Consumers Union--publisher of Consumer Reports http://www.prescriptionforchange.org/pdf/HR3962CUendorsementsummary.pdf American Medical Association http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/health-system-reform/ama-supports-house-bills.shtml AARP http://bulletin.aarp.org/yourhealth/policy/articles/health_care_reform7.html American Heart Association http://www.heartsforhealthcare.org/default.aspx American Diabetes Association http://main.diabetes.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ADA_health_care_reform_updates American Cancer Society http://www.acscan.org/blog/index.php?/archives/242-ACS-CAN-Throws-Its-Support-Behind-House-Health-Care-Bill.html Oh hey, looks who's on there, The American Cancer Society. I guess they're all idiots than yeah? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:16:59-05:00 3169771 285 2009-11-08T20:20:52-05:00 Welcome to politics. No, I don't think they're all idiots. Talk to any practicing doctor in the US and ask them their opinion. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:18:22-05:00 3169801 44251 2009-11-08T20:18:22-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> public education = financially and intellectually broken public transportation at the national level= broken (can you say amtrak?) Public libraries= financially broken medicare= financially broken social security= financially broken i dont understand your bus reference, i DO know that from the few pages that I HAVE read of the bill that it forces me an everyone else to do as the government says or I can be fined or imprisoned. More government ALWAYS leads to higher taxes with lesser quality..it is aboslutely statistically true</blockquote> And why are these things broken? If I cared to do the research (and god knows I don't) they would probably all lead to some specific legislation which cut funding, or created more bureaucracy, or whatever. I'm sure somewhere along the lines libraries were considered pork, and anyone educated knows that "no child left behind" was bad for anyone to be educated later. Simply put, if public health care doesn't work, it will not be for lack of trying on the part of people who believe in it, but due to its opponents blindly working toward a neanderthal America that, while based in freedom, offers fewer such freedoms than other countries. This is a country that thinks you can "catch" gayness. One that believes the entire country's moral compass should be governed by that of Christianity, despite America being founded on freedom to practice ones own religion without persecution. A country that mocks global warming as partisan hoopla, without thinking "hey, maybe being environmentally friendly is a good idea anyway? what can it honestly hurt?" A country where conservative bloggers see the word "community" in a healthcare bill and immediately call out ACORN, knowing its a buzzword that will make their mindless drones react, but without actually looking for facts about how ACORN is not remotely related to healthcare. Yknow, stuff like that. I put nothing past our government to screw things up. But to say it's better to not have anything is ignorant. Because if public schools are broken, is it better to not educate for free? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:20:15-05:00 3169851 2970 2009-11-08T20:20:15-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> ^ ahahahahaha. You think 50,000,000 are being ignored by the current system? Please don't speak anymore if you do.</blockquote> I will speak about this all i like, and i'm afraid we'll just have different opinions. That's a good thing though, differing opinions are always needed to have a decent debate. Those were random example numbers. What i was trying to say was that yes, the quality of care may go down, but i reckon it would still be easily good enough to save people and would reach many more, thus making it worthwhile. I, for example, know that much of the info you get over in the States about our UK NHS is terribly unfounded and is used to scare people, when in truth our health service is generally very good. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:21:05-05:00 3169881 6884 2009-11-08T20:21:05-05:00 Acorn doesn't have anything to do with healthcare....and yet they are healthcare lobbyists? The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) is a collection of community-based organizations in the United States that advocate for low- and moderate-income families by working on neighborhood safety, voter registration, health care, affordable housing, and other social issues. Also public schools are not free, it is called taxes. You pay them, they provide schooling. Public schools are great. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:23:40-05:00 3169901 44251 2009-11-08T20:23:40-05:00 as ovenrude has pointed out in several post, the key components of the answer are very simple. If our "government" actually undertook the task to work with drug mfg, doctors, hospitals and insurance companies and trial lawyers to make a solution that works for the general public....they could. BUT they are in fact writing a health care plan that takes care of every special interest group that doles out money to them. There have been years of laws written that have perverted the way that health care works. LESS government si the answer...not government takeover. i heard an anaolgy a little while on the television that said a guy goes into his doctor with an infected toe and the doctors idea of treatment is giving him an antibiotic, the governments idea of treatment is to cut his head off to stop the pain....how true... 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:24:19-05:00 3169911 11245 2009-11-08T20:24:19-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Matt Willmott said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> ^ ahahahahaha. You think 50,000,000 are being ignored by the current system? Please don't speak anymore if you do.</blockquote> I will speak about this all i like, and i'm afraid we'll just have different opinions. That's a good thing though, differing opinions are always needed to have a decent debate. Those were random example numbers. What i was trying to say was that yes, the quality of care may go down, but i reckon it would still be easily good enough to save people and would reach many more, thus making it worthwhile. I, for example, know that much of the info you get over in the States about our UK NHS is terribly unfounded and is used to scare people, when in truth our health service is generally very good.</blockquote> I agree that your health care is good, and in countries like france they offer excellent free healthcare. They also, however, operate on very different economic models that are not sustainable in the US. That is the problem, we cannot fiscally sustain this model, and when it crashes the whole system is going to be hopelessly broken. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:26:58-05:00 3169931 44251 2009-11-08T20:26:58-05:00 <blockquote><cite>AdderXYU said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> public education = financially and intellectually broken public transportation at the national level= broken (can you say amtrak?) Public libraries= financially broken medicare= financially broken social security= financially broken i dont understand your bus reference, i DO know that from the few pages that I HAVE read of the bill that it forces me an everyone else to do as the government says or I can be fined or imprisoned. More government ALWAYS leads to higher taxes with lesser quality..it is aboslutely statistically true</blockquote> And why are these things broken? If I cared to do the research (and god knows I don't) they would probably all lead to some specific legislation which cut funding, or created more bureaucracy, or whatever. I'm sure somewhere along the lines libraries were considered pork, and anyone educated knows that "no child left behind" was bad for anyone to be educated later. Simply put, if public health care doesn't work, it will not be for lack of trying on the part of people who believe in it, but due to its opponents blindly working toward a neanderthal America that, while based in freedom, offers fewer such freedoms than other countries. This is a country that thinks you can "catch" gayness. One that believes the entire country's moral compass should be governed by that of Christianity, despite America being founded on freedom to practice ones own religion without persecution. A country that mocks global warming as partisan hoopla, without thinking "hey, maybe being environmentally friendly is a good idea anyway? what can it honestly hurt?" A country where conservative bloggers see the word "community" in a healthcare bill and immediately call out ACORN, knowing its a buzzword that will make their mindless drones react, but without actually looking for facts about how ACORN is not remotely related to healthcare. Yknow, stuff like that. I put nothing past our government to screw things up. But to say it's better to not have anything is ignorant. Because if public schools are broken, is it better to not educate for free?</blockquote> no they are broken because government is the most inefficient entity to accomplish any task. Proven fact. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:28:20-05:00 3169941 11245 2009-11-08T20:28:20-05:00 <blockquote><cite>AdderXYU said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> public education = financially and intellectually broken public transportation at the national level= broken (can you say amtrak?) Public libraries= financially broken medicare= financially broken social security= financially broken i dont understand your bus reference, i DO know that from the few pages that I HAVE read of the bill that it forces me an everyone else to do as the government says or I can be fined or imprisoned. More government ALWAYS leads to higher taxes with lesser quality..it is aboslutely statistically true</blockquote> And why are these things broken? If I cared to do the research (and god knows I don't) they would probably all lead to some specific legislation which cut funding, or created more bureaucracy, or whatever. I'm sure somewhere along the lines libraries were considered pork, and anyone educated knows that "no child left behind" was bad for anyone to be educated later. Simply put, if public health care doesn't work, it will not be for lack of trying on the part of people who believe in it, but due to its opponents blindly working toward a neanderthal America that, while based in freedom, offers fewer such freedoms than other countries. This is a country that thinks you can "catch" gayness. One that believes the entire country's moral compass should be governed by that of Christianity, despite America being founded on freedom to practice ones own religion without persecution. A country that mocks global warming as partisan hoopla, without thinking "hey, maybe being environmentally friendly is a good idea anyway? what can it honestly hurt?" A country where conservative bloggers see the word "community" in a healthcare bill and immediately call out ACORN, knowing its a buzzword that will make their mindless drones react, but without actually looking for facts about how ACORN is not remotely related to healthcare. Yknow, stuff like that. I put nothing past our government to screw things up. But to say it's better to not have anything is ignorant. Because if public schools are broken, is it better to not educate for free?</blockquote> Speak more sir, for your opinion deserves to be heard. Thank you. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:28:41-05:00 3169951 285 2009-11-08T20:28:55-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> Acorn doesn't have anything to do with healthcare....and yet they are healthcare lobbyists? The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) is a collection of community-based organizations in the United States that advocate for low- and moderate-income families by working on neighborhood safety, voter registration, health care, affordable housing, and other social issues. Also public schools are not free, it is called taxes. You pay them, they provide schooling. Public schools are great.</blockquote> ACORN lobbying for public health care is not the same as public health care profiting ACORN, now is it? Basic logic. Any community reform group should want affordable and widespread public health care. It is reform necessary for communities to exist. We all support things that won't necessarily benefit us because we believe in them, don't we? And no, public schools are not free. But they are "free". Just as public health care will cost a crapload of money to be "free". but eventually it will be something we are used to, just like public schools are. People don't complain about education taxes, because it's so ingrained as being what is right for our country. Yet many of us do not need such schools, and even will send kids to private institutions, despite paying taxes which will eventually go to public schools. We will ALL have reason to benefit from public health care. Yet we complain about the eventual raise in taxes for it. Good for us. In a generation, our kids will grow up ecstatic that they don't have to worry about whether their kids can get medical treatment. If I have to take my car in, and there are two engines available... one that is the industry standard for quality, and one that is American Made but doesn't work well... I will go for the industry standard and hope that it saves me money in the long run. That is where I think many of us sit on health care. as to Big Boo, the idea that "drug manufacturers, doctors, hospitals, insurance companies, and trial lawyers" somehow would give any sort of solution which benefits the general public over themselves? Laughable at best. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:38:13-05:00 3170071 2970 2009-11-08T20:38:13-05:00 This is a country that thinks you can "catch" gayness. i have never heard that theory from anyone. If you want to be gay i could care less just donet expect me to become gay becuase you are. One that believes the entire country’s moral compass should be governed by that of Christianity, despite America being founded on freedom to practice ones own religion without persecution Again, i could care less what religion your care to practice or not practice, just dont infringe on my right to worship in a way that does not affect anyone else or denies them the right to worship the way they want. . A country that mocks global warming as partisan hoopla, without thinking "hey, maybe being environmentally friendly is a good idea anyway? what can it honestly hurt?" What can in possibly hurt? are you for real?...you need to do some reading on the green movement by an economist writer. go to youtube and type in swedish economist. The whole green thing is a finanical scam on what is not scientifically proven. A country where conservative bloggers see the word "community" in a healthcare bill and immediately call out ACORN, knowing its a buzzword that will make their mindless drones react, but without actually looking for facts about how ACORN acorn is a scam...do your research is not remotely related to healthcare. Yknow, stuff like that. I put nothing past our government to screw things up. But to say it’s better to not have anything is ignorant. nobody is advocating doing nothing...quite to the contrary....just do stuff that MAKES SENSE. Because if public schools are broken, is it better to not educate for free? no give parenst vouchers that lets them send their children to schools that are not run by the teachers union. To schools that are committed to educating students. Bad schools will go away. Good schools will prosper 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:39:06-05:00 3170081 11245 2009-11-08T20:39:06-05:00 I like american trains 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:40:25-05:00 3170101 2802 2009-11-08T20:40:25-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> i heard an anaolgy a little while on the television that said a guy goes into his doctor with an infected toe and the doctors idea of treatment is giving him an antibiotic, the governments idea of treatment is to cut his head off to stop the pain....how true...</blockquote> you must watch Fox News because that is the most moronic statement i've ever read. honestly, I don't know what's worse, the perpetuation of lies like this or the people that believe in them. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:40:26-05:00 3170111 12224 2009-11-08T20:40:26-05:00 And no, public schools are not free. But they are "free". Just as public health care will cost a crapload of money to be "free". but eventually it will be something we are used to, just like public schools are. oh so that makes it ok...we will get used to it....i suppose we will just get used to being taxed to death too. just do what the government says....you will get used to it 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:42:02-05:00 3170121 11245 2009-11-08T20:42:02-05:00 <blockquote><cite>disembodied head said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> i heard an anaolgy a little while on the television that said a guy goes into his doctor with an infected toe and the doctors idea of treatment is giving him an antibiotic, the governments idea of treatment is to cut his head off to stop the pain....how true...</blockquote> you must watch Fox News because that is the most moronic statement i've ever read. honestly, I don't know what's worse, the perpetuation of lies like this or the people that believe in them.</blockquote> it was an anaolgy 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:44:08-05:00 3170141 11245 2009-11-08T20:44:08-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>AdderXYU said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> public education = financially and intellectually broken public transportation at the national level= broken (can you say amtrak?) Public libraries= financially broken medicare= financially broken social security= financially broken i dont understand your bus reference, i DO know that from the few pages that I HAVE read of the bill that it forces me an everyone else to do as the government says or I can be fined or imprisoned. More government ALWAYS leads to higher taxes with lesser quality..it is aboslutely statistically true</blockquote> And why are these things broken? If I cared to do the research (and god knows I don't) they would probably all lead to some specific legislation which cut funding, or created more bureaucracy, or whatever. I'm sure somewhere along the lines libraries were considered pork, and anyone educated knows that "no child left behind" was bad for anyone to be educated later. Simply put, if public health care doesn't work, it will not be for lack of trying on the part of people who believe in it, but due to its opponents blindly working toward a neanderthal America that, while based in freedom, offers fewer such freedoms than other countries. This is a country that thinks you can "catch" gayness. One that believes the entire country's moral compass should be governed by that of Christianity, despite America being founded on freedom to practice ones own religion without persecution. A country that mocks global warming as partisan hoopla, without thinking "hey, maybe being environmentally friendly is a good idea anyway? what can it honestly hurt?" A country where conservative bloggers see the word "community" in a healthcare bill and immediately call out ACORN, knowing its a buzzword that will make their mindless drones react, but without actually looking for facts about how ACORN is not remotely related to healthcare. Yknow, stuff like that. I put nothing past our government to screw things up. But to say it's better to not have anything is ignorant. Because if public schools are broken, is it better to not educate for free?</blockquote> no they are broken because government is the most inefficient entity to accomplish any task. Proven fact.</blockquote> Do enlighten, good doctor. Government run programs are broken because they are government run. That sounds incredibly circular to me. Please, educate. Source if possible. Until then, my presumption will remain that government programs break because ignorant people stand in the way of what is best for the country at large. That is not the fault of the program, but the people supposedly there to stand up for us. Which is why we should be holding the people holding up healthcare accountable, not damning the people who are trying to give it to us. Healthcare is good. No one with a brain can deny that. So the people trying to keep it institutionalized and at a premium that no one can reasonably afford (except themselves, of course) are somehow the people saving us from ourselves? Does the other side have their own healthcare plan? The status quo is already broken. To block it without having a coherent alternative that will truly cover as many people as possible cannot honestly be done in good conscience. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:46:02-05:00 3170161 2970 2009-11-08T20:46:02-05:00 What is laughable is that you don't think lobbyists make a profit. They fund all of their money into political donations to those who support their agenda. This is politics 101. "The Ohio primary was March 4. According to FEC records, the Obama campaign paid Citizens Services Inc. $832,598.29, from Feb. 25 to May 17. A Trib analysis of campaign finance reports showed Obama paid CSI for services that stood out as unusual. For example, CSI received payments of $63,000 and $75,000 for advance work. Excluding the large payments to CSI, the average amount the Obama campaign spent with other organizations was $558.82 per check on more than 1,200 entries classified as advance work. Citizens Services Inc. is headquartered at the same address as ACORN’s national headquarters in New Orleans. Citizens Services was established in December 2004 to “assist persons and organizations who advance the interests of low- and moderate-income people,” according to paperwork filed in Louisiana. In a 2006 ACORN publication, Citizen Services Inc. is described as “ACORN’s campaign services entity.” Please explain to me why they have no interest in what happens to the issues that head their political agenda? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:46:45-05:00 3170171 44251 2009-11-08T20:47:42-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Godmachine said:</cite> I like american trains</blockquote> Oddly enough, I'm an indian train kinda guy <img src="http://xo.typepad.com/blog/train.jpg" /> Also, AdderXYU: i like your open-mindedness (definitely not a real word). Edit: Turns out i'm wrong, it is a real word. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:50:44-05:00 3170191 6884 2009-11-08T20:52:36-05:00 <blockquote><cite>AdderXYU said:</cite> Which is why we should be holding the people holding up healthcare accountable, not damning the people who are trying to give it to us. Healthcare is good. No one with a brain can deny that. So the people trying to keep it institutionalized and at a premium that no one can reasonably afford (except themselves, of course) are somehow the people saving us from ourselves? Does the other side have their own healthcare plan? The status quo is already broken. To block it without having a coherent alternative that will truly cover as many people as possible cannot honestly be done in good conscience.</blockquote> If this was on a shirt I would love it. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:52:33-05:00 3170211 285 2009-11-08T20:52:33-05:00 ACORN and President Carter ushered in legislation to force banks to make a certain percentage of their loans, high risk. So that people with low incomes can own their own houses. This was brought about because liberals said it was unfair that only the middle class and wealthy can own homes. They fought against what they called slum lords. The laws were made more substantial under Clinton and the number of loans to low income families increased. Because these loans were forced by government law, bankers and wall street had to find creative ways to package these loans and sell them off. After the housing crisis caused one of the deepest recessions since the late 70's, the liberals and liberal media blamed the bankers. Then, so did all the media watching automatons. Health care is going to be exactly the same. The liberals will want to pass this because the current system just isn't fair. Once its passed, it will eventually fail. No one here that is for this health care bill is thinking about history. Every social program that we have is paid for with our tax dollars. Right now we pay 30% to 35% in income tax to state and federal. The more social programs we add the more taxes we pay. The more we pay the less we bring home to take care of our families. Communism was socialism and it corrupted its politicians. then it fell. I personally don't think the government or anyone else is entitled to 30% or 35% of my income. I worked for it. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:53:17-05:00 3170221 10520 2009-11-08T20:57:22-05:00 It is hilarious what people refer to as "facts". 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:55:12-05:00 3170241 59851 2009-11-08T20:55:12-05:00 Still waiting for someone to explain to me the massive payment the Obama campaign made to ACORN, and why ACORN has no interest in what happens with the issues they push. Really, good luck. They are a dirty dirty business and you tried to defend them blindly. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:59:13-05:00 3170251 44251 2009-11-08T20:59:13-05:00 Adder, let me give you an example that we have here in our small town that is a snap shot of what happens with national government agencies. We have a local water utility that is run by the city and is funded by local, state and federal taxes. They next community over has a water utility that is financed by the same taxes but is administered by a private entity. The government agency just last week spent over $100,000.00 on new tools that they dont really need because if they dont spend it this year they will lose those moneys alloctaed in next years budget. They always send five guys out to a repair. They always buy things at the highest price (and get kickbacks for personal use..but it cant be proven). The private company in the next community does almost 20% more units with less than have the budget. The quality is better. The service is better. They have eliminated waste in their operation. Healthcare is in fact good but you are being naive if you think it is the democratic leadership that is "trying to give it to you". Nancy Pelosi couldnt give less of a rats ass about you or the national taxpayer who is footing the bill for this debacle. I also am saying the republican plan is not a whole lot better. The answer is to get government OUT of the healthcare business and put it back into the hands of those who need it. I want you to have the ability to have health care that is affordable if you chose to buy it. The democratic bill does not achieve that goal...it is pure fantasy to beleive that it will 96461 Post 2009-11-08T20:59:27-05:00 3170261 11245 2009-11-08T20:59:27-05:00 <blockquote><cite>block33 said:</cite>I personally don't think the government or anyone else is entitled to 30% or 35% of my income. I worked for it.</blockquote> Next time you're driving on a road, putting your trash out to the curb, hanging out at a public park, getting your house fire put out, calling the police, dropping your kid off at public school, swimming at the beach, flushing your toilet, watching broadcast tv, or watching softcore porn on public access late at night -- take a minute to think about what magical goings on makes all of that wonderful stuff happen. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:01:48-05:00 3170271 59851 2009-11-08T21:01:48-05:00 <blockquote><cite>block33 said:</cite> ACORN and President Carter ushered in legislation to force banks to make a certain percentage of their loans, high risk. So that people with low incomes can own their own houses. This was brought about because liberals said it was unfair that only the middle class and wealthy can own homes. They fought against what they called slum lords. The laws were made more substantial under Clinton and the number of loans to low income families increased. Because these loans were forced by government law, bankers and wall street had to find creative ways to package these loans and sell them off. After the housing crisis caused one of the deepest recessions since the late 70's, the liberals and liberal media blamed the bankers. Then, so did all the media watching automatons. Health care is going to be exactly the same. The liberals will want to pass this because the current system just isn't fair. Once its passed, it will eventually fail. No one here that is for this health care bill is thinking about history. Every social program that we have is paid for with our tax dollars. Right now we pay 30% to 35% in income tax to state and federal. The more social programs we add the more taxes we pay. The more we pay the less we bring home to take care of our families. I personally don't think the government or anyone else is entitled to 30% or 35% of my income. I worked for it.</blockquote> spoken like a true republican! 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:02:51-05:00 3170301 1067 2009-11-08T21:02:51-05:00 <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>block33 said:</cite>I personally don't think the government or anyone else is entitled to 30% or 35% of my income. I worked for it.</blockquote> Next time you're driving on a road, putting your trash out to the curb, hanging out at a public park, getting your house fire put out, calling the police, dropping your kid off at public school, swimming at the beach, flushing your toilet, watching broadcast tv, or watching softcore porn on public access late at night -- take a minute to think about what magical goings on makes all of that wonderful stuff happen.</blockquote> jimmy, when you do your taxes this year...just send them a check for everything you made this year...dont even bother with teh 1040 form 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:03:36-05:00 3170311 11245 2009-11-08T21:03:36-05:00 <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>block33 said:</cite>I personally don't think the government or anyone else is entitled to 30% or 35% of my income. I worked for it.</blockquote> Next time you're driving on a road, putting your trash out to the curb, hanging out at a public park, getting your house fire put out, calling the police, dropping your kid off at public school, swimming at the beach, flushing your toilet, watching broadcast tv, or watching softcore porn on public access late at night -- take a minute to think about what magical goings on makes all of that wonderful stuff happen.</blockquote> While your point is valid, broadcast TV is privately owned and paid for by ads. Public Access TV is paid for by donations. No donations, no public access. You pay a bill to the utility company for water, unless the flushing of that toilet is done at a public park, then yes you are right. You pay for waste disposal, waste disposal is not free. Ohh, and an interesting side tidbit, Waste Management, a major US trash disposal operation, has been linked to organized crime ties. We used to have two options in my town, but once WM moved in....the other mysteriously quit. Maybe he liked his toes intact. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:06:12-05:00 3170321 44251 2009-11-08T21:10:01-05:00 "Next time you’re driving on a road," Sales tax to the state can pay for roads. "putting your trash out to the curb," I pay a Private company to pick it up. "hanging out at a public park," Again sales taxes can pay for this. "getting your house fire put out," State and local SALES TAX! "calling the police," State and local SALES TAX + fines "dropping your kid off at public school," Private schools have been proven to be vastly superior to public schools. "swimming at the beach," LOL...mother nature "flushing your toilet," Municiple water, which I get a bill for at the end of the month, This is not paid for with taxes. "watching broadcast tv," uh..comercials "watching softcore porn on public access late at night" what time is that on? "take a minute to think about what magical goings on makes all of that wonderful stuff happen." All the "wonderful" stuff is brought about by competition in the market place and free trade, not government controlled. How many of you would like the government to take over all private business and provide you with: Food Housing Entertainment job - ( which you don't get paid for because the government provide you with everything they think you need) car clothing healthcare education etc, etc,? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:11:59-05:00 3170361 10520 2009-11-08T21:11:59-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> Still waiting for someone to explain to me the massive payment the Obama campaign made to ACORN, and why ACORN has no interest in what happens with the issues they push. Really, good luck. They are a dirty dirty business and you tried to defend them blindly.</blockquote> Why are they a dirty dirty business? Or at least, why are they dirtier than any other lobbying body that is not working as (or under the guise of as you might argue) an agent for community service? Your offense at them is currently as unfounded as my defense. But I'll be sure to procure a solid defense when I decide it is worth trying to procure facts for someone who posted an entire slew of comments about the healthcare reform bill earlier in this thread which were all debunked or explicated (and in very rare cases, four total, explained why they were true) long ago, trying to wield them as actual facts. Yeah, I'm sure that facts like those would really make a person open to any sort of researched and sited defense of ACORN, wouldn't they? EDIT: Because I am generous, some <a href="http://www.factcheck.org/2009/02/the-stimulus-bill-and-acorn/">Factcheck.org information on ACORN</a> relating to the healthcare bill. There are copious source links, including one to another factcheck article about the overblown nature of last year's ACORN fraud claims. You can, of course, click these links to read the source material and form your own opinions, but I don't really expect anyone to do so. <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>AdderXYU said:</cite> Which is why we should be holding the people holding up healthcare accountable, not damning the people who are trying to give it to us. Healthcare is good. No one with a brain can deny that. So the people trying to keep it institutionalized and at a premium that no one can reasonably afford (except themselves, of course) are somehow the people saving us from ourselves? Does the other side have their own healthcare plan? The status quo is already broken. To block it without having a coherent alternative that will truly cover as many people as possible cannot honestly be done in good conscience.</blockquote> If this was on a shirt I would love it.</blockquote> Find me a client, and I'll even download Helvetica 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:12:03-05:00 3170371 2970 2009-11-08T21:19:40-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>block33 said:</cite>I personally don't think the government or anyone else is entitled to 30% or 35% of my income. I worked for it.</blockquote> Next time you're driving on a road, putting your trash out to the curb, hanging out at a public park, getting your house fire put out, calling the police, dropping your kid off at public school, swimming at the beach, flushing your toilet, watching broadcast tv, or watching softcore porn on public access late at night -- take a minute to think about what magical goings on makes all of that wonderful stuff happen.</blockquote> While your point is valid, broadcast TV is privately owned and paid for by ads. Public Access TV is paid for by donations. No donations, no public access. You pay a bill to the utility company for water, unless the flushing of that toilet is done at a public park, then yes you are right. You pay for waste disposal, waste disposal is not free.</blockquote> In Tampa our public access station is funded by the City of Tampa, and also donations -- we also pay taxes for broadcast tv (lookup TV Tax). The flushing the toilet is in reference to the sewers, water reclamation, and other duties and services provided by the government. Why waste time trying to "check me" on what I was referring to -- don't you have a bill to read? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:14:45-05:00 3170391 59851 2009-11-08T21:14:45-05:00 you keep saying debunked....none of this is debunked...go look at the bill for yourself...I did....just because you use the word debunk doesnt make it so... I am looking at this bill as a citizen of the united staes who pays taxes. I am not looking at it trying to counter the democrats, i am not supporting the republicans.....This is serious stuff that effects everyone of us. If this ever passes the senate (which it wont so this whole arguement quite frankly is an excersice in wanking our dicks for both you and i) it will take generations to undo the damage this bill does to our economy. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:17:22-05:00 3170411 11245 2009-11-08T21:17:22-05:00 Way to completely avoid the fact that the Obama administration paid over $800,000 to ACORN, who created another business name for the checks to be paid to. That's totally legit, right, nothing to hide? Debunk it. All lobbyists are out to gain someones money or vote. They are paid very well to do so. That is why they lobby, to gain support for the goals that their company wants pushed, for their agenda. I am fully against lobbyists and their effect on the political system. They cause harm all around by doing whatever it takes to accomplish their goal. They are the reason cigarette companies were allowed to spew lies and BS ad slogans saying their product was "safer" for so long. They are the reason we don't have a wider amount of electric cars to lower our dependence on oil. They are the reason drug companies can charge $200 a bottle for basic medications. Our whole system would operate a million times smoother if it wasn't for special interest groups using massive bankrolls to push their agendas. It's dirty, it's wrong, it hurts everyone who wants the best option to be the cheapest option. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:18:18-05:00 3170431 44251 2009-11-08T21:19:58-05:00 So you're not a republican, you don't listen to conservative pundits, you don't dislike Obama, and you're not against the democrats? You just generally have a problem with this bill? I don't buy that. Now that I have set the pins up for you, have fun knocking them down. Pretending on the internet is fun, isn't it? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:21:37-05:00 3170491 59851 2009-11-08T21:21:37-05:00 <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> So you're not a republican, you don't listen to conservative pundits, you don't dislike Obama, and you're not against the democrats? You just generally have a problem with this bill? I don't buy that. Now that I have set the pins up for you, have fun knocking them down. Pretending on the internet is fun, isn't it?</blockquote> Who are you talking to? I voted against Obama, he is an idealist. I voted for Ron Paul, look up his election campaign views. I voted for Kerry, not Bush. I voted for Gore, not Bush. I vote democrat 75% of the time. I am pro-choice, anti death penalty. Glenn Beck is a racist bigot, and Rush Limbaugh is a pill popping, alcoholic racist. I just have a problem WITH THIS BILL. Is that so wildly hard to believe? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:25:48-05:00 3170511 44251 2009-11-08T21:29:22-05:00 I find it sad/frustrating as hell that more people are complaining about America getting a healthcare plan then about this pointless "war" we are fighting right now. The war in the middle east has cost us over 900 BILLION dollars since 2001. That 900 billion dollars could have bought everyone in the US the best healthcare and every single person a home to live in. Doesn't make this healthcare plan so bad now huh? How about a vote to stop this so-called "war" and use that money for healthcare! 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:26:12-05:00 3170531 1067 2009-11-08T21:26:12-05:00 Has anybody brought up the anti-abortion provision of this bill? http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091108/hl_nm/us_usa_healthcare_abortion_5 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:26:58-05:00 3170541 2330 2009-11-08T21:26:58-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Time Without the E said:</cite> I find it sad/frustrating as hell that more people are complaining about America getting a healthcare plan then about this pointless "war" we are fighting right now. The war in the middle east has cost us over 900 BILLION dollars since 2001. That 900 billion dollars could have bought everyone in the US the best healthcare and every single person a home to live in. Doesn't make this healthcare plan so bad now huh? How about a vote to stop this so-called "war" and use that money for healthcare!</blockquote> I was out protesting the war in Iraq before we even sent troops there. I had people threatening to kill me saying that I was an anti-american scumbag. I stand up for what I believe in. That is not the issue that I am discussing. The war is pointless, this health care bill is a joke. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:27:37-05:00 3170561 44251 2009-11-08T21:28:14-05:00 <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> So you're not a republican, you don't listen to conservative pundits, you don't dislike Obama, and you're not against the democrats? You just generally have a problem with this bill? I don't buy that. Now that I have set the pins up for you, have fun knocking them down. Pretending on the internet is fun, isn't it?</blockquote> I for one am not a republican or democrat, they both suck ass. I believe in: A womans right to choose Same sex marriage if they want Smaller government free enterprise a cap on federal taxes the fed being dismantled Personal liberties keeping religion out of public place and i'm an atheist. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:29:06-05:00 3170571 10520 2009-11-08T21:29:06-05:00 I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I dont care what you do at your house as long as it does not affect me (social liberal). I also do not want you wasting my money on things that do not benefit me and society as a whole. I want you to be a good custodian of my tax dollars (fiscally conservative) If you feel a necessity for me to label myself, i would be closer to a libertarian who is not opposed to vote democratic (which i have ), republican (which I have) or independent (which I also have) if that person best follows my ideology of good government.....shall we bowl another frame? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:30:03-05:00 3170581 11245 2009-11-08T21:30:03-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> Way to completely avoid the fact that the Obama administration paid over $800,000 to ACORN, who created another business name for the checks to be paid to. That's totally legit, right, nothing to hide? Debunk it. All lobbyists are out to gain someones money or vote. They are paid very well to do so. That is why they lobby, to gain support for the goals that their company wants pushed, for their agenda. I am fully against lobbyists and their effect on the political system. They cause harm all around by doing whatever it takes to accomplish their goal. They are the reason cigarette companies were allowed to spew lies and BS ad slogans saying their product was "safer" for so long. They are the reason we don't have a wider amount of electric cars to lower our dependence on oil. They are the reason drug companies can charge $200 a bottle for basic medications. Our whole system would operate a million times smoother if it wasn't for special interest groups using massive bankrolls to push their agendas. It's dirty, it's wrong, it hurts everyone who wants the best option to be the cheapest option.</blockquote> From Article: http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache%3AvJNftAPOaRsJ%3Awww.factcheck.org%2Fimagefiles%2FJust%2520the%2520Facts%2520Scripts%2FEpisode42_FINAL.pdf+acorn&hl=en&gl=us But now, ACORN is in trouble…Massive voter fraud. And the Obama campaign paid more than $800,000 to an ACORN front for get out the vote efforts. We find no evidence to support the claim that ACORN is guilty of ballot fraud. Workers for ACORN have been accused repeatedly of voter registration fraud. But the largest case to date found that ACORN had actually been cheated by workers who listed fake names instead of canvassing for real, unregistered voters. The Republican prosecuting attorney in the case said, “This scheme was not intended to permit illegal voting. Instead, the defendants cheated their employer to get paid for work they did not actually perform.” As for the Obama campaign’s donations to a front‐group, it’s true the campaign paid Citizens Services Incorporated, which is affiliated with ACORN, $800,000 dollars for a get‐out‐the‐vote effort, which is not to be confused with voter registration. For more on ACORN and Obama’s connections to the organization, which run a little deeper than the candidate lets on be sure to check out our website at www.factcheck.org. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:30:48-05:00 3170601 285 2009-11-08T21:31:59-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Time Without the E said:</cite> I find it sad/frustrating as hell that more people are complaining about America getting a healthcare plan then about this pointless "war" we are fighting right now. The war in the middle east has cost us over 900 BILLION dollars since 2001. That 900 billion dollars could have bought everyone in the US the best healthcare and every single person a home to live in. Doesn't make this healthcare plan so bad now huh? How about a vote to stop this so-called "war" and use that money for healthcare!</blockquote> Or we could just eliminate all welfare programs and pay for health care....the war has nothing to do with health care program. If you dont think the war is justified fine but dont try to roll that ino the healt care debate because they have nothing to do with one another 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:33:10-05:00 3170651 11245 2009-11-08T21:33:10-05:00 That article says that Acorn did not commit massive voter fraud, which I was not accusing them of. Acorn has been lobbying for public health care for over 10 years now. There lies the problem. They accepted a massive amount of money from someone who wanted to push public health care. Strange. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:34:06-05:00 3170681 44251 2009-11-08T21:34:33-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> That article says that Acorn did not commit massive voter fraud, which I was not accusing them of. Acorn has been lobbying for public health care for over 10 years now. There lies the problem. They accepted a massive amount of money from someone who wanted to push public health care. Strange.</blockquote> Where is your source? That source explained the $800,000 you speak of. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:37:09-05:00 3170701 285 2009-11-08T21:37:09-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I dont care what you do at your house as long as it does not affect me (social liberal). I also do not want you wasting my money on things that do not benefit me and society as a whole. I want you to be a good custodian of my tax dollars (fiscally conservative) If you feel a necessity for me to label myself, i would be closer to a libertarian who is not opposed to vote democratic (which i have ), republican (which I have) or independent (which I also have) if that person best follows my ideology of good government.....shall we bowl another frame?</blockquote> So public health care isn't a thing that will benefit society as a whole? I have no clue how much public health care would reasonably cost. I wager most of Washington is equally clueless. And I wager you are right along with the rest of us. But to me, any cost I may incur to push this forward is meaningless to the overall benefit and SOCIAL NECESSITY of public health care. Please list your objections to the bill and, again, cite sources where possible. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:38:52-05:00 3170751 2970 2009-11-08T21:38:52-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> So you're not a republican, you don't listen to conservative pundits, you don't dislike Obama, and you're not against the democrats? You just generally have a problem with this bill? I don't buy that. Now that I have set the pins up for you, have fun knocking them down. Pretending on the internet is fun, isn't it?</blockquote> Who are you talking to? I voted against Obama, he is an idealist. </blockquote> OMG AN IDEALIST? THAT'S HORRIBLE! And you think Ron Paul isn't? And what exactly is wrong with being one? Let's go over the word: i⋅de⋅al⋅ist   /aɪˈdiəlɪst/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ahy-dee-uh-list] –noun 1. a person who cherishes or pursues high or noble principles, purposes, goals, etc. 2. a visionary or impractical person. 3. a person who represents things as they might or should be rather than as they are. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:39:07-05:00 3170761 285 2009-11-08T21:40:23-05:00 <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> That article says that Acorn did not commit massive voter fraud, which I was not accusing them of. Acorn has been lobbying for public health care for over 10 years now. There lies the problem. They accepted a massive amount of money from someone who wanted to push public health care. Strange.</blockquote> Where is your source? That source explained the $800,000 you speak of.</blockquote> It's public domain information as they list themselves as non-profit. They have to report all payments sent and received, no one will question that they were paid. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/10/obama-camp-downplays-ACORN-payments/ 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:39:43-05:00 3170771 44251 2009-11-08T21:40:28-05:00 <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> So you're not a republican, you don't listen to conservative pundits, you don't dislike Obama, and you're not against the democrats? You just generally have a problem with this bill? I don't buy that. Now that I have set the pins up for you, have fun knocking them down. Pretending on the internet is fun, isn't it?</blockquote> Who are you talking to? I voted against Obama, he is an idealist. </blockquote> OMG AN IDEALIST? THAT'S HORRIBLE! And you think Ron Paul isn't? And what exactly is wrong with being one?</blockquote> idealism gets in the way of rational thinking 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:40:42-05:00 3170791 10520 2009-11-08T21:40:42-05:00 <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> So you're not a republican, you don't listen to conservative pundits, you don't dislike Obama, and you're not against the democrats? You just generally have a problem with this bill? I don't buy that. Now that I have set the pins up for you, have fun knocking them down. Pretending on the internet is fun, isn't it?</blockquote> Who are you talking to? I voted against Obama, he is an idealist. </blockquote> OMG AN IDEALIST? THAT'S HORRIBLE! And you think Ron Paul isn't? And what exactly is wrong with being one? Let's go over the word: i⋅de⋅al⋅ist   /aɪˈdiəlɪst/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ahy-dee-uh-list] –noun 1. a person who cherishes or pursues high or noble principles, purposes, goals, etc. 2. a visionary or impractical person. 3. a person who represents things as they might or should be rather than as they are.</blockquote> well, you just answered your own question 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:41:50-05:00 3170811 10520 2009-11-08T21:41:50-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> That article says that Acorn did not commit massive voter fraud, which I was not accusing them of. Acorn has been lobbying for public health care for over 10 years now. There lies the problem. They accepted a massive amount of money from someone who wanted to push public health care. Strange.</blockquote> Where is your source? That source explained the $800,000 you speak of.</blockquote> It's public domain information. They have to report all payments sent and received, no one will question that they were paid. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/10/obama-camp-downplays-ACORN-payments/</blockquote> You just posted a source for the money that was debunked above from Factcheck.org. Try again? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:42:08-05:00 3170831 285 2009-11-08T21:42:08-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Josh Elowsky said:</cite> Has anybody brought up the anti-abortion provision of this bill? http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091108/hl_nm/us_usa_healthcare_abortion_5</blockquote> If I understand it correctly, that part will take away gov't funding from abortion clinics not outlawing abortion itself. Which still sucks ass but isn't banning abortion just the funding for it. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:42:47-05:00 3170851 1067 2009-11-08T21:42:47-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> That article says that Acorn did not commit massive voter fraud, which I was not accusing them of. Acorn has been lobbying for public health care for over 10 years now. There lies the problem. They accepted a massive amount of money from someone who wanted to push public health care. Strange.</blockquote> So if any public interest group wants something, they are wrong. It's not odd at all that people with like goals would help each other out. I'm just wondering in what world public health care is a damnable goal. OH THOSE MEDDLING PUBLIC HEALTH CARE WANTERS!!!! HOW DARE THEY WANT UNDERPRIVILEGED PEOPLE TO HAVE OPTIONS IN HEALTH CARE LIKE THE REST OF THE CIVILIZED WORLD???? FACT: Sometimes, people fight for things because it is what they truly believe in. And sometimes their beliefs are correct. I tend to think ACORN wants public health care for far purer reasons than medical lobbyists want the idea squashed for. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:42:55-05:00 3170861 2970 2009-11-08T21:42:55-05:00 <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> So you're not a republican, you don't listen to conservative pundits, you don't dislike Obama, and you're not against the democrats? You just generally have a problem with this bill? I don't buy that. Now that I have set the pins up for you, have fun knocking them down. Pretending on the internet is fun, isn't it?</blockquote> Who are you talking to? I voted against Obama, he is an idealist. </blockquote> OMG AN IDEALIST? THAT'S HORRIBLE! And you think Ron Paul isn't? And what exactly is wrong with being one? Let's go over the word: i⋅de⋅al⋅ist   /aɪˈdiəlɪst/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ahy-dee-uh-list] –noun 1. a person who cherishes or pursues high or noble principles, purposes, goals, etc. 2. a visionary or impractical person. 3. a person who represents things as they might or should be rather than as they are.</blockquote> Ron Paul is a CONSTITUTIONALIST. He wants us to go back to the principles this country was found upon. The government not having direct control over our lives, and full freedom of choice for the people. If anything he is an extreme conservative. A horrible day if we run this country on the principles it was founded upon. There is a key difference between wanting something that can be achieved and sustained, and wishing upon a star and hoping it all works out. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:42:56-05:00 3170871 44251 2009-11-08T21:45:42-05:00 he likes that word debunk....too bad it doesnt mean what he thinks it does 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:43:44-05:00 3170881 11245 2009-11-08T21:43:44-05:00 <blockquote><cite>block33 said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> So you're not a republican, you don't listen to conservative pundits, you don't dislike Obama, and you're not against the democrats? You just generally have a problem with this bill? I don't buy that. Now that I have set the pins up for you, have fun knocking them down. Pretending on the internet is fun, isn't it?</blockquote> Who are you talking to? I voted against Obama, he is an idealist. </blockquote> OMG AN IDEALIST? THAT'S HORRIBLE! And you think Ron Paul isn't? And what exactly is wrong with being one?</blockquote> idealism gets in the way of rational thinking</blockquote> Since when has idealistic thinking been irrational or illogical in anyway? That is probably the dumbest thing I have heard in awhile. Martin Luther King was an idealist, Jesus, Mother Theresa, all these people are illogical to you? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:45:35-05:00 3170901 285 2009-11-08T21:45:35-05:00 <blockquote><cite>AdderXYU said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> That article says that Acorn did not commit massive voter fraud, which I was not accusing them of. Acorn has been lobbying for public health care for over 10 years now. There lies the problem. They accepted a massive amount of money from someone who wanted to push public health care. Strange.</blockquote> So if any public interest group wants something, they are wrong. It's not odd at all that people with like goals would help each other out. I'm just wondering in what world public health care is a damnable goal. OH THOSE MEDDLING PUBLIC HEALTH CARE WANTERS!!!! HOW DARE THEY WANT UNDERPRIVILEGED PEOPLE TO HAVE OPTIONS IN HEALTH CARE LIKE THE REST OF THE CIVILIZED WORLD???? FACT: Sometimes, people fight for things because it is what they truly believe in. And sometimes their beliefs are correct. I tend to think ACORN wants public health care for far purer reasons than medical lobbyists want the idea squashed for.</blockquote> If you are underprivileged then you can get medicad 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:46:08-05:00 3170921 10520 2009-11-08T21:46:08-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> So you're not a republican, you don't listen to conservative pundits, you don't dislike Obama, and you're not against the democrats? You just generally have a problem with this bill? I don't buy that. Now that I have set the pins up for you, have fun knocking them down. Pretending on the internet is fun, isn't it?</blockquote> Who are you talking to? I voted against Obama, he is an idealist. </blockquote> OMG AN IDEALIST? THAT'S HORRIBLE! And you think Ron Paul isn't? And what exactly is wrong with being one? Let's go over the word: i⋅de⋅al⋅ist   /aɪˈdiəlɪst/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ahy-dee-uh-list] –noun 1. a person who cherishes or pursues high or noble principles, purposes, goals, etc. 2. a visionary or impractical person. 3. a person who represents things as they might or should be rather than as they are.</blockquote> Ron Paul is a CONSTITUTIONALIST. He wants us to go back to the principles this country was found upon. The government not having direct control over our lives, and full freedom of choice for the people. If anything he is an extreme conservative. A horrible day if we run this country on the principles it was founded upon.</blockquote> Guess what, the principles this country were founded on WERE idealistic, from idealists. And Ron Paul is a Libertarian, from his own words. Maybe you are a little confused on the words you are trying to use. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:47:11-05:00 3170931 285 2009-11-08T21:48:29-05:00 <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>block33 said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> So you're not a republican, you don't listen to conservative pundits, you don't dislike Obama, and you're not against the democrats? You just generally have a problem with this bill? I don't buy that. Now that I have set the pins up for you, have fun knocking them down. Pretending on the internet is fun, isn't it?</blockquote> Who are you talking to? I voted against Obama, he is an idealist. </blockquote> OMG AN IDEALIST? THAT'S HORRIBLE! And you think Ron Paul isn't? And what exactly is wrong with being one?</blockquote> idealism gets in the way of rational thinking</blockquote> Since when has idealistic thinking been irrational or illogical in anyway? That is probably the dumbest thing I have heard in awhile. Martin Luther King was an idealist, Jesus, Mother Theresa, all these people are illogical to you?</blockquote> no Martin Luther king was not an idealist, because the future he saw was possible. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:47:42-05:00 3170951 10520 2009-11-08T21:47:42-05:00 It’s not odd at all that people with like goals would help each other out. I’m just wondering in what world public health care is a damnable goal. OH THOSE MEDDLING PUBLIC HEALTH CARE WANTERS!!!! HOW DARE THEY WANT UNDERPRIVILEGED PEOPLE TO HAVE OPTIONS IN HEALTH CARE LIKE THE REST OF THE CIVILIZED WORLD???? wtf .....are you fro real?..this has nothing to do with not wanting underprivelaged people to have access to insurance....its about the government not ruining a working systm that CAN do that very thing with SOME modifications and LESS government involvement 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:48:05-05:00 3170961 11245 2009-11-08T21:48:05-05:00 <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>block33 said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> So you're not a republican, you don't listen to conservative pundits, you don't dislike Obama, and you're not against the democrats? You just generally have a problem with this bill? I don't buy that. Now that I have set the pins up for you, have fun knocking them down. Pretending on the internet is fun, isn't it?</blockquote> Who are you talking to? I voted against Obama, he is an idealist. </blockquote> OMG AN IDEALIST? THAT'S HORRIBLE! And you think Ron Paul isn't? And what exactly is wrong with being one?</blockquote> idealism gets in the way of rational thinking</blockquote> Since when has idealistic thinking been irrational or illogical in anyway? That is probably the dumbest thing I have heard in awhile. Martin Luther King was an idealist, Jesus, Mother Theresa, all these people are illogical to you?</blockquote> Wanting racism to stop is not idealism. You are nuts if you think that is an idealistic dream. Using Jesus as an example? Who? Sorry, I'm not christian and don't believe such madness. Mother Theresa fought poverty, which is also, not idealism. My use of the word was as in: 2. a visionary or impractical person. Try again good sir. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:48:14-05:00 3170971 44251 2009-11-08T21:50:10-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> wtf .....are you fro real?</blockquote> yeah i think he is "fro real" <img src="http://www.nostalgiaholic.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/whitefro1.jpg" /> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:49:39-05:00 3171001 1106 2009-11-08T21:49:39-05:00 A visionary: 1. given to or characterized by fanciful, not presently workable, or unpractical ideas, views, or schemes: a visionary enthusiast. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:51:00-05:00 3171011 44251 2009-11-08T21:51:00-05:00 <blockquote><cite>skull with hair said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> wtf .....are you fro real?</blockquote> yeah i think he is "fro real" <img src="http://www.nostalgiaholic.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/whitefro1.jpg" /></blockquote> thanks for posting your self portrait skull 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:51:01-05:00 3171021 11245 2009-11-08T21:51:01-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> he likes that word debunk....too bad it doesnt mean what he thinks it does</blockquote> To be fair, the word "debunk" has zero meaning to someone who has no reading comprehension. Example: Uri Geller bent spoons with his mind. Except when asked to bend spoons pre-selected not by him or his people, but by someone else, he was unable to do so. There have been plenty of people explaining all the pre-performance work that could have been done on spoons to make them appear normal but have their integrity weakened enough that simple rubbing would make them appear as though they were bending from pure mental force. "BUT!" you exclaim, "I SAW HIM ON TV AND HE BENT THOSE SPOONS!!!" To you, the claim is not debunked. But the amount of evidence you fly in the face of makes you look a fool for stating as much. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:51:39-05:00 3171031 2970 2009-11-08T21:51:39-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>block33 said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>jimmyh said:</cite> So you're not a republican, you don't listen to conservative pundits, you don't dislike Obama, and you're not against the democrats? You just generally have a problem with this bill? I don't buy that. Now that I have set the pins up for you, have fun knocking them down. Pretending on the internet is fun, isn't it?</blockquote> Who are you talking to? I voted against Obama, he is an idealist. </blockquote> OMG AN IDEALIST? THAT'S HORRIBLE! And you think Ron Paul isn't? And what exactly is wrong with being one?</blockquote> idealism gets in the way of rational thinking</blockquote> Since when has idealistic thinking been irrational or illogical in anyway? That is probably the dumbest thing I have heard in awhile. Martin Luther King was an idealist, Jesus, Mother Theresa, all these people are illogical to you?</blockquote> Wanting racism to stop is not idealism. You are nuts if you think that is an idealistic dream. Using Jesus as an example? Who? Sorry, I'm not christian and don't believe such madness. Mother Theresa fought poverty, which is also, not idealism. Try again good sir.</blockquote> Again, you are confused on the words you are trying to use. And by using a mixed definition defense just proves you are as clouded in your judgement as you sound. ANYONE and everyone who makes or wants to make a change for the better, whether it is possible or not is an idealist. Mother Theresa WAS an idealist. Martin Luther King WAS an idealist. "a person who represents things as they might or should be rather than as they are." 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:51:59-05:00 3171051 285 2009-11-08T21:51:59-05:00 This might blow your mind, but a word has more than one use. When I said Obama was an idealist, and therefore I would not vote for him: Idealist: A visionary or impractical person. A visionary: 1. given to or characterized by fanciful, not presently workable, or unpractical ideas, views, or schemes: a visionary enthusiast. Once again, nice try. When I made my statement, I was not speaking about a person who represents things as they might or should be. Then anyone could be labeled an idealist. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:55:07-05:00 3171101 44251 2009-11-08T21:56:14-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> This might blow your mind, but a word has more than one use. When I said Obama was an idealist, and therefore I would not vote for him: Idealist: A visionary or impractical person. A visionary: 1. given to or characterized by fanciful, not presently workable, or unpractical ideas, views, or schemes: a visionary enthusiast. Once again, nice try.</blockquote> However, you did say you would vote for Ron Paul. Who in fact is a Libertarian. Oh look, the Libertarian Party listed on the IDEALIST.ORG website. Funny. http://www.idealist.org/if/i/en/av/Internship/138732-37 Debunked? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:57:11-05:00 3171131 285 2009-11-08T21:57:26-05:00 <blockquote><cite>AdderXYU said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> he likes that word debunk....too bad it doesnt mean what he thinks it does</blockquote> To be fair, the word "debunk" has zero meaning to someone who has no reading comprehension. Example: Uri Geller bent spoons with his mind. Except when asked to bend spoons pre-selected not by him or his people, but by someone else, he was unable to do so. There have been plenty of people explaining all the pre-performance work that could have been done on spoons to make them appear normal but have their integrity weakened enough that simple rubbing would make them appear as though they were bending from pure mental force. "BUT!" you exclaim, "I SAW HIM ON TV AND HE BENT THOSE SPOONS!!!" To you, the claim is not debunked. But the amount of evidence you fly in the face of makes you look a fool for stating as much.</blockquote> Through "statistics" one can "prove" or "debunk" most any point. Data can be ignored or emphasized to reflect most any point of view. Read this information for yourself. It is in black and white (well that not exactly true, it is legal phsycobabble that is intentionally unreadable)...The FACTS are in there for you to read yourself...dont believe me, dont believe MSNBC, dont beleive FOX NEWS. dont listen to the white house talking heads or their conservative counterparts.....READ THE BILL...there are some very dangerous inclusions in this bill that should cause anyone to take issue with it. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:57:29-05:00 3171141 11245 2009-11-08T21:57:29-05:00 <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> This might blow your mind, but a word has more than one use. When I said Obama was an idealist, and therefore I would not vote for him: Idealist: A visionary or impractical person. A visionary: 1. given to or characterized by fanciful, not presently workable, or unpractical ideas, views, or schemes: a visionary enthusiast. Once again, nice try.</blockquote> However, you did say you would vote for Ron Paul. Who in fact is a Libertarian. Oh look, the Libertarian Party listed on the IDEALIST.ORG website. Funny. http://www.idealist.org/if/i/en/av/Internship/138732-37 Debunked?</blockquote> Dude, I could make a neo-nazi website and list you as a supporter. Does that mean anything, fuck no it doesnt. Also, Ron Paul is NO LONGER a liberetarian. He left that party. Good job on your research. A+....ohh I mean, fail. And why are you even caring if I wouldn't vote for obama because of the word choice I use. You have ZERO argument there. I didn't vote for Obama because I thought his goals were impractical or unachievable. Is that better for you? Fuck man, get a grip and argue the point at hand. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T21:59:41-05:00 3171191 44251 2009-11-08T22:00:42-05:00 this bill is never going to get through the senate anyways so our thought provoking banter is just that. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:02:33-05:00 3171231 11245 2009-11-08T22:02:33-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> this bill is never going to get through the senate anyways so our thought provoking banter is just that.</blockquote> fingers crossed 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:03:50-05:00 3171261 3668 2009-11-08T22:03:50-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> This might blow your mind, but a word has more than one use. When I said Obama was an idealist, and therefore I would not vote for him: Idealist: A visionary or impractical person. A visionary: 1. given to or characterized by fanciful, not presently workable, or unpractical ideas, views, or schemes: a visionary enthusiast. Once again, nice try.</blockquote> However, you did say you would vote for Ron Paul. Who in fact is a Libertarian. Oh look, the Libertarian Party listed on the IDEALIST.ORG website. Funny. http://www.idealist.org/if/i/en/av/Internship/138732-37 Debunked?</blockquote> Dude, I could make a neo-nazi website and list you as a supporter. Does that mean anything, fuck no it doesnt. Also, Ron Paul is NO LONGER a liberetarian. He left that party. Good job on your research. A+....ohh I mean, fail. And why are you even caring if I wouldn't vote for obama because of the word choice I use. You have ZERO argument there. I didn't vote for Obama because I thought his goals were impractical or unachievable. Is that better for you? Fuck man, get a grip and argue the point at hand.</blockquote> Sorry, where is the source for that? Also, if you are bring up a point, stand by it. There are 2000 arguments at hand, which all coincide with the same general concern. Btw, check the last paragraph from Ron Paul's government website. It states: "Dr. Paul's consistent voting record prompted one Congressman to comment that "Ron Paul personifies the Founding Fathers' <b>ideal</b> of the citizen-statesman." http://www.house.gov/paul/bio.shtml You said: "Ron Paul is a CONSTITUTIONALIST. He wants us to go back to the principles this country was found upon. The government not having direct control over our lives, and full freedom of choice for the people." Sounds pretty "visionary" to me, yeah? The point I am trying to prove here is that you need to understand the meaning of the words you are trying to use, then decide whether or not they stand for what you think they do so you can use them in your own argument. Because no matter what "word choice" you use, it's that choice that feeds your understanding on the very decision you are trying to justify. How stupid would it be if your whole understanding was misguided because or your own misuse of a word. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:12:29-05:00 3171381 285 2009-11-08T22:12:29-05:00 Conor, move on from this battle over the word idealist. Its all semantics and its distracting from what this thread was about in the first place. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:13:39-05:00 3171401 3668 2009-11-08T22:13:39-05:00 The point I am trying to prove here is that you need to understand the meaning of the words you are trying to use, then decide whether or not they stand for what you think they do so you can use them in your own argument. Because no matter what "word choice" you use, it’s that choice that feeds your understanding on the very decision you are trying to justify. How stupid would it be if your whole understanding was misguided because or your own misuse of a word. Thank you mister dictionary 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:14:21-05:00 3171421 11245 2009-11-08T22:14:21-05:00 <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> this bill is never going to get through the senate anyways so our thought provoking banter is just that.</blockquote> What I personally would find ABSOLUTELY scintillating is what you who are against the public health care bill feel would be best as far as health care. Like, lay out some real ideas. Don't give vague blather talkingpoints such as "TAKE THE GOVERNMENT OUT!" or "NO PORK BARREL SPENDING!" If someone came to you and said "hey, we'll give you a million bucks to write up a plan for universal health care" what would you do? If this bill is so bad, surely you have some specific ideas that would improve it, not just vague talking points, right? I'm just really interested to know who is supposed to reform health care, if it's not the government, and if all PACs and community action groups are nothing but people looking out for their own profit margins. Is Bob the Ophthalmologist on Hayes St. the panacea for our healthcare woes? Would England, Canada, France, Australia, New Zealand, etc, have all turned to Bob for affordable healthcare instead of a government funded public option if only they'd known his power against bureaucracy and insurance company monopolies? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:14:23-05:00 3171431 2970 2009-11-08T22:19:32-05:00 Now wait, you guys can bring up some of us using the word "debunk" as if it was misused, but I can't do the same? How fair is that! I enjoyed the debate, but I'll be afk for awhile. Sorry if I went off topic! Keep up the good work everyone! 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:16:28-05:00 3171461 285 2009-11-08T22:19:04-05:00 <blockquote><cite>conor said:</cite> Now wait, you guys can bring up some of us using the word "debunk" as if it was misused, but I can't do the same? How fair is that!</blockquote> That's just as annoying, but I came back into the thread just a bit ago and now the meaning of the word ideal seems to be on the hot seat. Not attacking your or your views personally, just saying, move on. Really to anyone debating it. We can chest bump if you want. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:18:36-05:00 3171481 3668 2009-11-08T22:18:36-05:00 Specific Ideas? Don't make people on private healthcare pay for public healthcare, that idea in itself is ridiculous. The cost of this public option is absorbed by people on private healthcare, not direct taxes. Keep healthcare private. Private businesses compete to offer the best price possible. Government owned businesses cannot operate at the same value or cost efficiency as private businesses due to inflated vendor costs and political beaurocracy. Some MIT students recently replicated a NASA experiment that cost millions for $215. And I love NASA and what they do, but they have so many levels and chains of command that they have to go through, that the end cost of the product produced is massively inflated. It is just the way the world works. This bill directly conflicts with a women's right to choose whether to get an abortion or not. The public option can decline to support the cost if the girl was not raped or at risk of death due to health defects during birth. Maybe, just maybe some girl will accuse a guy of rape so the public option health care can pay for the abortion. Where does that leave us? Nothing vague about that my friend. The solution is offering stiff penalties to insurance companies that try to fuck someone over from getting the help they need. Expand medicaid for those that are borderline on receiving support. Legalize marijuana and tax the shit out of it. Use the tax money to expand medicaid. Punish drug companies that monopolize their medication, or try to sway doctors to use only their name brand instead of a cheaper alternative. Send those who directly try to monopolize medication and increase costs to jail, or offer billion dollar fines. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:21:57-05:00 3171511 44251 2009-11-08T22:26:13-05:00 <blockquote><cite>AdderXYU said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>hansparker said:</cite> this bill is never going to get through the senate anyways so our thought provoking banter is just that.</blockquote> What I personally would find ABSOLUTELY scintillating is what you who are against the public health care bill feel would be best as far as health care. Like, lay out some real ideas. Don't give vague blather talkingpoints such as "TAKE THE GOVERNMENT OUT!" or "NO PORK BARREL SPENDING!" If someone came to you and said "hey, we'll give you a million bucks to write up a plan for universal health care" what would you do? If this bill is so bad, surely you have some specific ideas that would improve it, not just vague talking points, right?</blockquote> Adder, that is a good question. First item is line item veto. That gives those who had now taken on the task to cut all the horse shot out of it. next go through it from the perspective of how o improve what we already have instead of trying to completely revamp something from scratch..use the current health care system and look at what it takes to make it better. This OFTEN involves REMOVING an antiquated law or provision. If it doesnt make sense look atg options. make true feee compitition available through buying cross stae lines and not tying to employment (antiqauted law form post world war 2) Cover pre-esisting conditions (which will make rates go up) make provisions for low income in form of voucher system limit lawsuits through a pre lawsuit independent review board 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:26:59-05:00 3171611 11245 2009-11-08T22:26:59-05:00 Also Massachusetts has been offering universal healthcare for the last 3 years, and it is now completely BANKRUPT. Now think of that happening on a national scale. What happens to the people who would have previously been on Medicaid and are now found with no option? 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:28:02-05:00 3171651 44251 2009-11-08T22:28:11-05:00 So pretty much I think we are ALL wasting time on this thread. The current plan will not make it through the senate (hints why you haven't heard anything from Obama himself about it) cause the moderate democrats will not approve of this plan and obviously the republicans won't either. I think the plan has some really good things but is most definitely lacking a lot overall. The abortion part of the plan REALLY bothers me. If anything the abortion part should have more funding and more acceptable outlook on abortion and women's rights. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:32:23-05:00 3171761 1067 2009-11-08T22:32:23-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Time Without the E said:</cite> So pretty much I think we are ALL wasting time on this thread. The current plan will not make it through the senate (hints why you haven't heard anything from Obama himself about it) cause the moderate democrats will not approve of this plan and obviously the republicans won't either. I think the plan has some really good things but is most definitely lacking a lot overall. The abortion part of the plan REALLY bothers me. If anything the abortion part should have more funding and more acceptable outlook on abortion and women's rights.</blockquote> not waste of time...healthy discussion for the most part 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:34:03-05:00 3171791 11245 2009-11-08T22:34:03-05:00 There are some great things about a plan like this, we just have to make sure the one that is put into use will have the ability to last a long time, and offer a high level of care and choice of options for all. I'd be more than happy to put $100 into an emptees charity where we can vote for a cause and have all the money sent to it as a donation. Cancer research etc. People DESERVE a better option, I just want to make sure that we really nail it right and move forward in the right direction. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:38:32-05:00 3171871 44251 2009-11-08T22:39:02-05:00 why would we legalize marijuana? That would be a governmental decision! And who is going to punish companies that monopolize things? McGruff the Crime Dog? Besides the fact that people with kids at private schools still pay for public schooling, and people with cars still pay for public transit, etc etc etc... You are being taxed on things you do not use every day. Stop being a baby. Also, do be a dear and show me those competitive, quality, affordable healthcare companies that have been thriving so in our current market. The abortion thing is obviously a matter of opinions. I find that, while abortions should be legal, they are cosmetic in most cases. I would expect my health care to cover a nose reconstruction if I broke it in a car accident. I would not expect them to pay for a nose job because I didn't like my real one. And similarly, an abortion is a choice. It's a choice you should be allowed to make, and one that should be covered when it is for the sake of your health, but I see no problem with making it something which, if you elect to have it because you just want one, you aren't covered for. Part of the point of public health care is so everyone can get NECESSARY health care. Though it's really a moot point anyway, since there would be FAR more abortion rights in the health care bill if it wasn't for, surprise surprise, the opposition to the bill. It's unfair to harp on the abortion right issues since those were last minute add-ons to quell a neo-christian psycho heartland voter base who can't get it through their tiny little brains that the world isn't based on their hardlined, compassionless worldview. As for the NASA thing? Really a frivolous commentary without a source, explanation of what sort of study was done, and comparison of the original study to the MIT replication. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:39:51-05:00 3171901 2970 2009-11-08T22:39:51-05:00 Do you really want to argue with me about the government being a more efficient and cheaper than private options? There was a direct example posted by another member in this thread. Have you ever dealt with the sales of items to government establishments? I have. Let's just say that they didn't get our best price. As for a private option that is far superior to the public healthcare option, I know the guy who runs 3 healthcare centers named advencia medical. He offers FULL medical service with no limit on options for $30 a month per person on his plan. That is $360 a year for full emergency and standard medical care. Not too terrible. Also don't compare abortions to a broken nose. Please. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:45:03-05:00 3171921 44251 2009-11-08T22:49:28-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> There are some great things about a plan like this, we just have to make sure the one that is put into use will have the ability to last a long time, and offer a high level of care and choice of options for all. I'd be more than happy to put $100 into an emptees charity where we can vote for a cause and have all the money sent to it as a donation. Cancer research etc. People DESERVE a better option, I just want to make sure that we really nail it right and move forward in the right direction.</blockquote> This, I do agree with. The bill needs to be better. And if it wasn't for childish bureaucracy, it would be. This isn't the bill's fault. Take it out on your local representatives and senators. It is their fault if they're too busy blocking the bill to really fight instead to edit it for the betterment of our entire country. Right now, I would rather have a flawed bill heading in the right direction than the status quo which IS the wrong direction. It is my hope that the bill would eventually be rectified over time to become something meaningful. I'm sure the second we see another republican president, that will go down the tubes. but right now it is certainly the hope. Simply put, if this doesn't work, it is our own fault as a country. We CAN do this if we start realizing that the benefits outweigh any idiotic con we can come up with. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:47:49-05:00 3171961 2970 2009-11-08T22:47:49-05:00 COULD SOME ONE SUMMARIZE THIS THREAD FOR ME. I don't feel like reading. [: Plus, I'm scared of going back into the past to follow this thread from the beginning, because I might change the order of events forever, causing the end of emptees. ... just saying. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:49:45-05:00 3171991 89261 2009-11-08T22:49:45-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Flux Capacitor said:</cite> COULD SOME ONE SUMMARIZE THIS THREAD FOR ME. I don't feel like reading. [: Plus, I'm scared of going back into the past to follow this thread from the beginning, because I might change the order of events forever, causing the end of emptees. ... just saying.</blockquote> You have the power to travel in time. Thread summary: Arguing back and fourth whether or not this bill is a good idea. Some random insults in the middle, then continuation of arguing. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:51:50-05:00 3172011 44251 2009-11-08T22:51:50-05:00 Thanks so much Over Rude! You just saved emptees, and my brain from doing the reading thing. [: 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:55:15-05:00 3172061 89261 2009-11-08T23:10:04-05:00 <blockquote><cite>Flux Capacitor said:</cite> Thanks so much OverRude! You just saved emptees, and my brain from doing the reading thing. [:</blockquote> hey homie, I'm an Oven Rude. Like, the cooking device, and less than optimal behavior. It is a nonsensical name, so I forgive you. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T22:58:34-05:00 3172131 44251 2009-11-08T22:58:34-05:00 ahem <img src="http://img3.ak.crunchyroll.com/i/spire1/cbde0c08f327e3e7a73c0102ffe2ef501232669278_full.jpg" /> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T23:00:26-05:00 3172151 7945 2009-11-08T23:00:26-05:00 The government can also drop the federal regulation preventing businesses from seeking insurance companies from out of state. Which is just another way for the government to stifle competition. The more competition their is the lower prices become and the better the services. 96461 Post 2009-11-08T23:03:13-05:00 3172241 10520 2009-11-08T23:03:13-05:00 *cough* <img src="http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa66/TravisTj/jonas.jpg" /> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T23:10:31-05:00 3172411 7945 2009-11-08T23:10:41-05:00 <blockquote><cite>OvenRude said:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Flux Capacitor said:</cite> Thanks so much OverRude! You just saved emptees, and my brain from doing the reading thing. [:</blockquote> hey homie, I'm an Oven Rude. Like, the cooking device, and less than optimal behavior. It is a nonsensical name, so I forgive you.</blockquote> That's a cool name Oven. Sorry for my mistake. I went back in time, and fixed it. [: 96461 Post 2009-11-08T23:11:42-05:00 3172421 89261 2009-11-08T23:11:42-05:00 you're missing the point <img src="http://images1.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/the-jonas-brothers-are-GAY-the-jonas-brothers-1253155_378_510.jpg" /> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T23:12:08-05:00 3172431 7945 2009-11-08T23:12:08-05:00 <img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_EliwDy74UoU/SNKFyhvPIaI/AAAAAAAAHEc/-mLoNkC9G8c/s400/village_people.jpg" /> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T23:12:47-05:00 3172451 44251 2009-11-08T23:12:47-05:00 ... <img src="http://roflrazzi.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/celebrity-pictures-jonas-brothers-closet-narnia.jpg" /> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T23:14:55-05:00 3172501 7945 2009-11-08T23:14:55-05:00 <img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1005/965300457_618cf7ffa4.jpg" /> 96461 Post 2009-11-08T23:16:53-05:00 3172561 44251 2009-11-08T23:16:53-05:00