If you want to have any choice or rights at all concerning your medical treatment, you first have to know what is really being proposed.Please check out this important video
This is pure "garbage. Mark Levin, is a follower of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck........conservative right wing talk radio who want to see the President fail.
The health care plan has not even been finalized yet. No one knows all the details of it yet but what this woman is saying is PATENTLY FALSE!
THE PRESIDENT IS SPEAKING TONIGHT. LISTEN TO HIS SPEECH AND SEE WHAT HE HAS TO SAY.
You do know that Fox News the very station that help promote these mistrusts is not even airing the President's speech tonight?
She is part of the movement to spread lies and distortions, fear and hate thru out the population. She is part of the "teabagger movement" those who have been "organized" by Dick Armey and his organization Freedom Works to disrupt town hall meetings across the country and the flow of public discourse. His organization is funded by insurance company and big Pharma money . You can read about both Army and Mccaughey below.
It's a shame so many in this country are so gullible and so many who don't take the time to learn the true facts and what's going on in this country.
[ 09-10-2009, 10:41 AM: Message edited by: Abxnomore ]
Posted by Renee K (Member # 21220) on :
Fox news IS airing the speech, the fox entertainment channel is not because it is on Fox news
There are two views on everything and right now we are all being taken for a ride by both sides.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
There are always two sides to every story but what the woman in the video is saying is blatantly false, which ever way you want to spin it.
Posted by daystar1952 (Member # 3255) on :
It is difficult to know how many different factions there are and even whether or not SOME of the different factions are planted to confuse. All I know is that the government is meshed with the corporations and that the world bankers are creating the illusion of two parties in order to divide and confuse. Different groups may have slightly different agendas but what seems to be happening is that those who control the world behind the scenes and who want world government and population control...are making sure that the people they want get into power.
Because the government is meshed with the corporations, it would not be a good idea to have complete government or rather corporate control of our healthcare. I believe Michael Moore is a shill and a tool of these world powers who plant people to led the masses into their solution for their goals. MM doesn't make sense, if you think about it.
He says the corporations are bad...well...he starts with that premise...because for the most part they are bad. This gets everyone to agree and it gets people to believe he is on our side. Because we agree with his premise...then we tend not to analyze his conclusion. This psychological tactic is often used in social control. OK now that we agree that the corporations are "bad" he offers the solution of government taking control of our healthcare.Why is no one questioning or mentioning that the corporations are now our government? It's a setup. So....I'm not even necessarily blaming obama...and even when George Bush was President, I didn't blame him either. They want us to focus on the president so that our attention will not be on the real culprits behind the scenes . The president is only a puppet.
I hope this discussion can stay in the medical section. This is one of the biggest issues that will affect the future treatment of Lyme.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Fox news network will be airing "Dancing with the Stars". while the President will be speaking. This might be a first time in history where all the major networks have not aired a major speech of the President.
That is very disrespectful to the office of the Presidency and doesn't not serve the interests of the American people. It also speaks volumes about the agenda of certain groups in this country.
Posted by Beautiful Disaster (Member # 21882) on :
I'm glad that some people on here have sense. Fox news is soooooo disrespectful to the president. It is unbelievable the LIES that they spew out of their mouths.
It is just false. There are two sides to everything, yes. But give me a break and ppl really need to use their brain and turn off Fox news and stop listening to the crazy conservatives. I used to be a conservative, until I realized how pro war they are and so against helping the sick.
Please, don't spread that garbage here. That's ridiculous.
Posted by Renee K (Member # 21220) on :
AGAIN Fox news is carrying the speech, it is the entertainment division that is not, that is their choice, as it is the choice of the other networks to carry it or not
I for one will not watch, as I am sure many others won't either. I will bet DWTS gets great ratings and the networks have already complained about how much money they lose with each of these speeches.
Tired of hearing the same old same old and then have everyone tell me what I am supposed to think
A government run healthcare system with a panel to make decisions on my care is something I do not want no matter how many times it is presented.
I have a right to my opinion just as much as everyone else does and am tired of one side thinking they have all the answers on this very important issue.
Posted by daystar1952 (Member # 3255) on :
I don't watch Fox news so I don't know what they are saying there.However.. I do think that all major media channels are owned by those in control and all channels have some sort of agenda....many times working together to confuse.I'm sure Fox news is part of all this.
What we have to look at is the issues I addressed. No one has spoken to the fact that the government is meshed with the corporations and that govt. run healthcare seems to be a ploy to gain even more control. I am all for people being healthy and getting care. I am one of those people who will sooner or later lose health insurance. We know that the CDC and other govt health agencies are not friendly towards lyme diagnosis and treatment.
In fact, it appears they are preventing curative treatment. Hilary Johnson wrote Oslwer's Web to expose the CDC's misappropriation of money designated to study CFS...which many of us think is involved with Lyme. So...Why then do we want more govt control and why on earth would we want to give them millions of dollars to study lyme?
I feel the same way about Michael Carroll's book...Lab 257. Carroll contacted me several times while he was writing the book...to see what I knew. I am in the acknowledgements...however, that doesn't stop me from questioning his main conclusions in his book.
He spoke some about biowarfare but mostly he gave examples of how slovenly and lax the caretakers were....those in charge of maintenance and security. His conclusion or solution was to have more govt control of the island. At that point there were private agencies who were hired for maintenance and security and that is who was being blamed for whatever accidental releases there were.
There is no reason why selecting companies to take care of the island could not be competitive if the original companies are not doing a good job.
I could see Carroll's solution coming as I read the book. Sure enough he advocated more govt control of the island. I went to a book signing of his in CT and sat up front. When he reiterated his solution at the book talk I raised my hand and asked him....if you think that the govt had something to do with the modification or field testing of Lyme disease then why on earth would you want such total control of the island by the govt. ("Homeland Security" is now in charge of the island.)
He said..well...that's a good question. His explanation was that the govt probably had more money so they would be able to do a better job.
Our forefathers were very worried about the government getting too much control. We have to stop thinking of our current form of govt as being some friendly loving concerned parent. It has become a big corporate war machine. I'm not saying this to frighten people but we need to look more closely and not be so trusting.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
ReneeK, I don't know how old you are but do you receive medicare if you are over 65 or if you are disabled? That is a government run program, as is the Veteran's administration health-care and what government's workers receive.
From what I hear it's pretty good and people are pretty happy with it. Not perfect, as nothing is Are you going to decline Medicare when you turn 65???
And, if you listen to the issues, no one is talking about a government run health care plan where the government tells you what kind of health care you can and cannot receive. If we get one it's an public option, with emphasis on "OPTION". They are not talking about single payer as they have in some countries in Europe, which IMO is the better way to go.
France seems to be doing pretty go with their health care and we pay the largest percentage per person than any other country and provide the worst level of care. Maybe there is a better way.
If you have private insurance, you have the bureaucrats of the insurance companies dictating what care you can receive. I guess you think that is a better option to be denied a procedure or a medication by a insurance company executive or to be dropped at their whim or if you change jobs or lose a job?
Better to listen to the real facts, many of which are not even known yet, as there are several different plans that have been worked on in the house, senate, etc. and the public has yet to get all the facts.
Hopefully tonight we will have more of them but we are still a long way from having a bill ready that is to be voted on.
I for one see health care as a right for everyone and don't particularly like seeing those without it, see people suffering when health care CEO's are making 23 million a year, actually making record profits this years....yes benefiting by denying their customers treatment and coverage. That is how they make money. That philosophy sounds wrong to me.
Nor do I like to see those who have wealth get better health care than those who have not. Is that what America stands for? I would think any one here on this site has had amble experience with medical insurance companies and not just as it relates to lyme disease.
Don't forget about all those on this site who have no medical coverage at all. That is a national disgrace.
Posted by bettyg (Member # 6147) on :
sent pm to abx asking her to edit her post with the LONG link causing this to go super wide and with instructions on how to use www.tinyurl.com Posted by Beautiful Disaster (Member # 21882) on :
We actually have county insurance where I live (it's like a model and has been for a while(at LEAST 6 years that I know of) to see how it would work all over the country. It works beautifully. My mom has it and she was sent to the top cardiac docs and one of the top neurosurgeon for her neck condition, it is definitely not sub par care. And guess what? You could almost say that between all of the people that live in the county, it costs pennies, I forget exactly where the money comes from, like what tax or whatever, but it's really doesn't impact people's pocketbooks, trust me, and it works great.
I hope they see how good it's working and use it for other people. My mom's experience with them has been great. She kept going to the ER for her arm hurting over and over (no insurance at the time, not even the county insurance, she didn't know about it then) and they kept sending her home with a shot of Valium saying that she probably pulled a muscle.
Well it took the doctors that work at this place that all accept that certain kind of insurance plan (free if you apply for disability or on a sliding scale if you make income, you only have to pay a veryyyy small amount if you haven't applied for disability - and you don't have to HAVE disability to have it for free, just show the paper that you applied...and you can keep doing it over and over even if you get denied, to keep the cost free, like my mom, she had NO money at the time).
Anyway, it took the clinic (we call it the clinic but it's very nice) to right away get concerned because it was her left arm and they did an x ray of her heart and of her neck and found MAJOR life threatening problems with both of them. They did xrays first, then MRI's and u/s of her heart (or something, they went in through her leg to make sure the dark spot they found on the u/s wasn't a shadow of her big breast, but she had a 95% blockage in 1 artery and a 75% blockage in another. Without that insurance that ppl are bashing, I wouldn't have a mom and my son wouldn't have a his grandma that he totally, totally adores.
How could you (not you personally, really, just the whole opposing side) worry so much about your pocketbook when your tax dollars go to wars too but worry about it when it comes to helping people.....to me, by being against it, you are telling me, my whole family, that we are worthless and don't deserve to LIVE.
My son deserves a mom, he didn't do anything wrong. And my mom deserves to be alive to be there to watch her grandson grow up...and finish watching her own children grow up. We are real people and I just can't understand how someone could be FOR letting people be sick, some critically, stay sick, have no hope just because they can't afford health insurance.
Don't forget, it could be you one day. I NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS thought that my mom and dad would divorce (we can't find him now, I haven't seen him in like 5-6 years) and my mom would be without health insurance or that I would be in the position. I have to choose food over doctor appts. Rent over going to serious doc appointments. These aren't regular check ups, I have serious issues that need to be addressed and make sure it's nothing else besides Lyme, but I can't. Can't even afford the copays (It's only $30) but then it's the follow up visits, then they give you referrals to go here (then they want another follow up) and if you add it up, if I went to the doctor 2-3 times a week, that's a car payment....and I'm already 2 weeks behind on my rent. No one should have to be sick and worry how they will get well. Then the trickle down effect is ppl eventually lose their homes because they can't afford them, they are homeless, but I guess the "other side" doesn't care.....because it hasn't happened to them......YET.
I hate the words "always" and "never". You can't say, I'll "always" have health insurance and a great job or I'll "never" be in *that* position. You just never know.
Respectfully, BD
Posted by dmc (Member # 5102) on :
Just got to Activism and read CALDA opinion on Healthcare post.
All diseases will be similar.
BY the way...the VA healthcare isn't very good. Nice enough people, but as the MDs say...hands are tied by bureaucracy.
Yes, I am in the VA healthcare system. Only IDSA guidelines, don't believe in the co-infections or even in the possibility of re-infection. Not the VA PCP but the bureaucracy's guidelines they MUST follow.
There isn't discretionary treatment allowed.
Posted by bettyg (Member # 6147) on :
abx, thx for using the tinyurl.com to get this back to normal width....
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
Healthcare reform (as of the way it looks now) will put the final nail in the coffin for lyme disease treatment.
If you think that government will just pay your lyme treatments with others tax dollars after reform, you are mislead. Ask any LLMD what this will do to us, it will end it.
Think of it this way, the CDC, FDA, and government will all be working closely together. There will be no use for ILADS after it gets passed.
Posted by Renee K (Member # 21220) on :
ABX
I am on private insurance, not that it is any of your business, and I would choose to remain there but am afraid that option will soon be taken out of the mix.
I had an HMO I hated, now in a PPO I am very happy with. It does not pay for everything but I don't expect it to. My husband pays into the plan.
Regular Medicare pays hospitalization only, you need to pay into part B for the other care and I would rather have that be from a private company.
That is what many of you already have if you are on Medicare Advantage, medicare from a private insurance agency.
My husband and I have worked very hard for everything we have, put our kids through college without the government, paid for our house ourselves. I worked 25 Christmases in my career, many weekends and holidays,evenings and nights, missed many family events...now we see everything we have worked for slowly being taken away by the govenment and its mismanagement of anything it touches.
We are not rich by any means but learned the value of a dollar and how to save instead of spend beyond our ability. Now you want us to support more people? We already pay a great amount into Medicare and Medicaid. Our property taxes are off the wall because of this, good ole NY State gives everything to everybody except to those who work.
I would be working to this day and way beyond if it weren't for sets of guidelines missing diseases I had and that should have been caught, twice!!
Two different diseases were just too much for my body to recover from.
The government detemining what treatment I could get for Lyme would be a death sentence for me.
I do have the facts, I read for myself, what is put out there now is propaganda with a different agenda IMHO, and I have a right to that opinion.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
I don't believe I was rude to you? "not that it is any of your business"
You and I see things from entirely different perspectives, so I don't bother to even address the rest of your post but I can assure you that that Option wont be taken out of the mix any time soon.
No one is talking about a government run socialzed medical programs. Based on the President's speech last night it looks like there will be yet additonal opportunities for the insurance companies to make yet more money off of the public.
I've worked hard through my whole life too and surely don't want to go into the poor house because the only way one get help from the government is when you have exhausted all of your assets that you have worked for all your life, unlike every other major industrialized country in the world.
Becoming ill should not lead any U.S. citizen to the poor house. The Government should provide a safety need for all of its citizens when they become ill, as other industrialized nations do.
Posted by grandmother (Member # 19908) on :
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
ABX
The private sector cannot compete with the government due to a some reasons.
The "Government Option" will not be regulated similar to the private companies.
Also, the government option will suck up tax money, right when the deficit is in the $Trillions.
This reform will also force all private healthcare plans to cover *everything*, which means that healthcare prices will increase dramatically, forcing people towards the government option.
Basically, the government option will destroy private healthcare insurance.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Ninjaphire could not disagree more.
The insurance companies are the problem. They should not be in the business of making money off the sick. Heath care should not be a commodity it's a right for all.
They make their money by of denying coverage to sick people and dropping people when they become ill. The behavior of the insurance companies has been despicable.
Should insurance company CEO's be making 23 million a year, while they continue to raise our premiums and get in between my doctor and me to decide what care I should have based on what they will pay for. i don't think so.
I hope they all go out of business. We are the only industrialized nation in the world who does not provide health care for all, we pay the more than any other country and receive the worst care.
We are number 37 on the list. That is a national disgrace. In most countries it is illegal for medical insurance companies to make a profit.
Our medical system is totally broken, excludes far to many, burden industry with additional costs so that they can't be competitive in a global market and it's a national embarrassment.
Remember the issues people face with Lyme disease are different because it's a throw away political illness. We fall into a different category, than normal medical care.
Ninjaphire, please note that the insurance companies are NOT regulated. That is why we have so many problems. They are a for profit monopoly, in effect. If they were, they could not get away with all they have been able to get away up until now causing so much despair and even death to so many.
It is a public option, if it should pass with choices, and the only way people will flock to it is if they find it to serve their needs better than what they currently have. What's wrong with that?
It's not going to suck up any money. It's going to be paid for by reducing costs and waste in the way health care is delivered. Did you listen to the President speak last night? It will not contribute to the deficit.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
Everybody is in this to make money. Doctors, Nurses, Hospitals, Insurance companies.
If the medical industry wasn't profitable, then we would have many many fewer doctors, nurses, hospitals, which I think is not a good thing.
Damn straight the insurance companies are regulated. They're very heavily regulated by the states, this is one of the reasons why there is so little competition.
Btw, the WHO ranking of healthcare is highly political. It includes criteria like "inequalities in health" & "inequalities in responsiveness". By design, it's very biased towards socialized healthcare.
Let's just take Lyme. I bet we have more LLMDs spread out over the country than most other countries. This would not be possible if there was socialized healthcare.
There is not enough money to be saved by "waste" or "reducing costs". It's either going to result in increased taxes, or an increased deficit.
The president is flat out lying if he suggests otherwise.
Posted by seekhelp (Member # 15067) on :
Is this thread in the right section of the forum? Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Good question Seekhelp. I reported it the minute it appeared. I knew it would could be a potential explosive subject. Never heard back from the moderator.
Ninjaphire, you are entitled to your opinion. I completely disagree with you and will not engage in this conversation with you any more.
I'll just add that, of course, everyone should be paid a salary but why are health care CEO's making salaries such as 23 million a year for denying people health care.
Do you really think that represents the American way. Do you think that 14,000 American losing health care a day is not a crisis and that private health insurance is going to help them?
The industry is NOT regulated because if it was they would not be able to deny people due to pre existing conditions, drop people if they become gravely ill or raise their premiums thru the roof if they are using too many services. That is exactly what the President wants to make illegal. There is no regulation in the industry.
Blue Cross/Blue Shield is available in many different states.
Posted by emla999/Lyme (Member # 12606) on :
Ninjaphire, I agree.
Although, I would like to add the Pharmaceutical Companies to the list of those that are in it for the money.
And if I remember correctly, last night, in president Obama's speech he said that under his health care plan the pharmaceutical companies would see an increase in revenue due to the increase of new "customers".
I wonder how big of an increase in profits the pharmaceutical companies would make with millions of new customers????
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
I think we have moved away from the lies that were espoused in the original post that featured the video.
That is what this post was about. Lies, lies and more lies.
Posted by btmb03 (Member # 18394) on :
I'm with y'all in wondering why this post is in the Medical Questions section? Ouch - some heavy bashing going on here - time for Lou/Jenifer to moderate perhaps??
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
emla999
The pharma companies will be thrown under the bus just like everyone else. Edit: That's what happens when you feed the crocodile hoping to be eaten last.
ABX
If nobody could be kicked out due to pre-existing illness, then people would only buy insurance once they got sick. That may be cruel, but perhaps it is necessary.
Yes, the insurance system is broken. The government option will only make it worse. What we need to do is to move towards a more privatized insurance system. Insurance should be for emergencies, just like car insurance. Add a safety net for the poor, and that covers everything, I guess.
[ 09-10-2009, 09:51 PM: Message edited by: ninjaphire ]
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
That's your opinion and I totally disagree with it.
The drug companies have already thrown YOU under the bus.
We pay more for drugs made by American companies than in other countries because they pay huge amounts of money to get members of congress elected. That's why we can't negotiate with them for lower rates, as was done for the VA but was
rejected for Medicare part D, the most ridiculous drug plan passed for our seniors. If Medicare is buying drugs in bulk they should be able to negotiate group/bulk prices and that was written out of the bill because of pressure from lobbyists working for big Pharma.
Big Pharma doesn't give a damn about you, trust me.
Wow, that's some societal view you have. Treat people like cars? Don't give them any preventative care and only when they are too sick their emergency insurance kicks in. That sounds very generous and humane. They have better insurance policies for animals than the one you recommended.
How come no other major industrialized country in the world operates the way you just mentioned? They actually provide health care for everyone. My does that sound horrible!
Maybe if our citizens didn't have to go bankrupt to afford medical care, we wouldn't need a safely net for the poor.
Posted by bettyg (Member # 6147) on :
fyi, loub, moderator is off board until 9-20; report things to jenifer only ...
read lou b's post in SUPPORT ....
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: Wow, that's some societal view you have. Treat people like cars? Don't give them any preventative care and only when they are too sick their emergency insurance kicks in. That sounds very generous and humane. They have better insurance policies for animals than the one you recommended.
How come no other major industrialized country in the world operates the way you just mentioned? They actually provide health care for everyone. My does that sound horrible!
Maybe if our citizens didn't have to go bankrupt to afford medical care, we wouldn't need a safely net for the poor.
Don't you perform oil changes on your car ? Don't you replace the tires on your car when they get worn ? Insurance doesn't pay for it right ?
Why should insurance pay for a yearly checkup which everyone does anyway ? Basically you're giving them money, and they're giving it back to you. That's futile.
Everything should be your responsibility until a certain amount, then insurance will take over. Naturally, your pay should increase by the saved insurance premium. I don't know about you, but it would sure be useful for me to get that money in hand in preference to getting insurance.
Food, and housing are basic needs too. Do we have food insurance ? We have food stamps for the poor instead. Do we have housing insurance ? We have housing assistance instead.
Btw, did you hear about the horror stories coming from the NHS in the UK ? or from Canada? You don't want Government run healthcare in the US
Posted by nellypointis (Member # 1719) on :
quote: Btw, did you hear about the horror stories coming from the NHS in the UK ? or from Canada? You don't want Government run healthcare in the US
I have heard far WORSE horror stories of people in the USA having to choose btwn having Mum operated for her cancer or keeping the house!!!!
quote:Food, and housing are basic needs too. Do we have food insurance ? We have food stamps for the poor instead. Do we have housing insurance ? We have housing assistance instead.
We here in France, have all of this AS WELL AS universal health insurance! and we even have unemployment benefits that give us something like 70% of our previous salary for usually several years if we don't find another job.
America's present (lack of) health and (lack of) social protection system is the major reason why I have always refused to relocate there in spite of higher salaries being offered.
I sincerely hope that our present French government doesn't succeed in dismantling our social system altogether.
Nelly
[ 09-11-2009, 08:09 AM: Message edited by: nellypointis ]
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
If something is a 'Right", then it is free and cost no one else anything.
Read our Constitution. There are other ways to lower costs of healthcare instead of the bills they are writing right now.
If you check the real facts, Government is actually the one responsible for helping drive up healthcare costs and longer wait times.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
"Btw, did you hear about the horror stories coming from the NHS in the UK ? or from Canada? You don't want Government run health care in the US"
Obviously you have never lived in a foreign country and have been fully indoctrinated in the politics of fear and hate promoted by the ultra right wing of this country. Just like every thing in the video that was posted is totally false the lies that the far right has spread to scare people and promote division and hate and false information are equally so.
It's one thing to have a difference of opinion, quite another to be misinformed by the hatemongers of this society, right wing talk radio and some of it's congressional following who have helped spread these lies in an effort not only to bring down the President but to hinder the progress of this nation when we are at such a critical point in our history and so many people urgently need help. America needs to move forward into the 21st century and follow the example of other countries to be competitive in the global market and finally provide affordable health care for all. It's a stain on our moral compass as a society that we don't provide for our citizens as most of the European nations do and many in South American who happen to provide excellent health care at a fraction of the cost that we do.
If you are still under the illusion that American provides the best health care in the world or is the best country in the world think again. Those days are long gone. We lag in every area, health care, education, societal protections and the list goes on. And the reason we can't move ahead is because we have such a polarized nation, some of whom want to take the country backward. Half the population still cannot accept that we have a black President and that hate was evidenced and promoted at those disgusting and shameful town hall meetings where the exchange of ideas was halted by those organized by the Ultra right wing, Dick Armey and his Freedom Works organization, for the specific purpose to shout down public discourse..... yes stop the flow of ideas.
I'm sorry to say that you have your facts wrong. Ninjaphire your view of government and society is far too simplistic. There are no horror stories coming out of Canada or the UK only the lies promoted by the ultra far right and conservative talk radio who want to scare the America public for their own selfish agenda. People surveyed in Canada would not want to trade their insurance for ours.
Most Europeans citizens look at the way our heath care system is run in total dismay that a nation such as ours allows it citizenship to lose every thing they have worked for their entire life because of an illness or the illness of an elderly parent. That does not happen in nations where they have universal coverage, they have social safety nets that protect them and that is duty of a good government, IMO. Sorry we are not living in the wild, wild west any more. It's the 21st century.
Buster your logic doesn't add up.
Posted by daystar1952 (Member # 3255) on :
I am sorry to have caused any stress on the forum here.My intention wasn't to cause arguements. The main point I would like people to look at and try to decipher a bit more...is this.....
I need to do some more research but so far it has come to my attention that past CEOs of health related corporations have been and are appointed to government positions. Drug companies, insurance companies...etc also support presidential campaigns. Again...the corporations are becoming very intertwined with the government. THIS is one of the main points we need to look at.
If we think that having government control of our healthcare will get rid of the corporate influence...well...that would be impossible with the way our governmment has evolved.
Our government currently appears to be a corporate entity.The issue here that I am worried about is not having to pay more to help others but the issue that I am most concerned about is what the quality of care would end up being. Would we have any freedoms or choice left? Would the doctors all be trained under the same umbrella? Would there be any independant thinkers left to treat us?
Would anyone know how to go about researching into government officials and their past and or present affiliations with corporations? I wish there was an easy list somewhere.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Daystar what you are talking about has been going on for over 40 years. probably more. It's called corporate fascism. The corporations control America for their own needs and greed. Why do you thing we had the failure of wall street and the banks. They were not working in the interest of the American public. They were totally unregulated, regulations that were gradually lifted beginning with Regan and things finally crash. That's a simplistic version in a nutshell.
The video you posted is full of lies and represents the view on the ultra right who has been trying to divide this country and promote false information. It's pure rubbish.
That is mostly why the President spoke on Wednesday, to try to correct all that misinformation.
Obama's administration is trying to correct the very thing you are concerned with. It's impossible to fully fix, as corporations have been entrenched in government for decades and part of the reason he has resistance within his own party. Forget about the republicans, the are not on board about anything. They want to see him fail so they can get back in power. They don't care if the country suffers in the meantime. The have already checked out, just want to put obstacles in the way.
The whole idea of the public option is to have choice for the public and bring in some competition because the insurance companies have acted like monopolies and it will bring down costs. Most of the blue dog democrats and congressional leaders, Republicans alike, get huge campaign donations from insurance and drug companies and every industry. It's a big problem and causing huge problems in getting a health the care bill passed because they don't want to risk losing those $$$.
The public option will not be a government run program as is done in Europe. We don't even know all the facts yet. It's still being worked out, there are many bills on the table and the public option may not even pass because many of the blue dog democrats don't want to loss the big donations they get from big pharma and the insurance industry and the Republican won't vote for the health care bill just as not one Republican voted for the stimulus package. They are the party of no. Rather see the country continue to fall apart then comprise.
The only thing that will truly clean up the government is to pass campaign finance reform but at least Obama has made a commitment to try to change the environment in Washington as best as he can given what he has to work with.
If you want to know the answer to your questions, become a informed citizen and follow what is going on in your government, another thing that few Americans do. They only come out to scream, not knowing all the facts, when they hear something they don't like. Such as there will be death panels. Totally ridiculous and false.
[ 09-11-2009, 10:16 AM: Message edited by: Abxnomore ]
Posted by daystar1952 (Member # 3255) on :
I'm trying to become informed...that is why I want to find out more about what is going on in our govt....as you mentioned. We need to research into the corporate government connections. That's my point.
We need to look carefully at what the president proposes and try to discern if he is telling the truth. Everyone knows that politicians can exaggerate or skirt the truth...including the one who did the video above. This isn't to attack Obama...because they are all basically backed by the same world bankers. We need to look at the underlying structure and get to the root of the problem.
One signer of the Declaration of Independence (Dr. Benjamin Rush), who was also George Washington's physician, predicted the following. "Unless we put medical freedom into The Constitution, the time will come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship."
Dr. Rush is speaking of the government. I would like to somehow see medical care transferred to more local control....divided up into smaller units. I'm not sure how that could be accomplished tho. The bigger government gets, the more control it has.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Smaller units might be similar to these coops that are being thrown around. I don't think they will work. The idea behind putting everyone in one pool, such as the VA does or Medicare is that you have lots of people and premiums in one pot and it gives leverage to negotiate, as unions do. That's why the VA can negotiate with the drug companies for lower bulk prices on drugs.
Medicare can't, because it was written out of the bill and Medicare part D is a disaster anyway.
I'm not sure this is the right place to become informed. It's the job of every citizen to pay attention to what the President and your government is doing. If you want to get informed you have to listen to all sides of the issues, and not just listen to what you hear on the local news. Read the blogs, listen to talk radio. Air America progressive talk radio. Listen to Tom Hartman, he digs up all the facts, go on to Huffington Post, and on the bottom there is the list of all the blogs and websites.
In this day and age, you have to dig for the truth, you don't get it by listening to the local news or reading your local newspaper. Also there are many good books that have been written and documentary films.
Government does not always have to be your enemy.
It can do good things and has: it passed social security, Medicare for seniors many good things.
It was Regan who promoted this idea that government is your enemy. "Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem." I disagree and know it doesn't have to be that way.
The founding father's were certainly wise men but we are living in the 21st century now. Ideas and attitudes do change, as do the needs of the country. We need health care reform and a system that covers all Americans, plain an simple.
Posted by Truthfinder (Member # 8512) on :
Wish I could watch online videos.
The lies are coming right out of the White House.... and I might add, this isn't anything entirely new. So, we all have to realize that no 'source' will present you with the whole truth.
For heaven's sake, LISTEN to FOX News. You'll never get the 'rest of the story' on any other network. Beck, O'Reilly, Hannity - sometimes they go overboard with their analyses, but at least they rely on other sources of information other than the bought-and-paid-for mainstream pundits and so-called journalists.
But more importantly, THINK and LISTEN for yourself. For example:
In Obama's speech the other night, he assured everyone that this health care reform Bill would make sure that NO insurance company could ever deny you coverage because you have a pre-existing condition. Of course he got a standing ovation from the Dems in Congress on that one. But note what he DID NOT SAY.
The way it was worded, it did not guarantee that your insurance company had to COVER anything related to that pre-existing condition, only that they couldn't deny you an insurance policy.
Furthermore, I've not heard anything that limits what an insurance company can charge you for premiums if they consider you `high risk' (if you have a pre-existing condition). So, what good does it do to guarantee that you can get a health care policy if you cannot afford the premiums?
Until ALL questions like this are answered, our representatives would be fools to vote `yes'. There are far more questions than answers.
THINK. READ. And most important, LISTEN and ASK QUESTIONS.
And EXCUSE ME, but Social Security (and Medicare is part of that) was intended to be set up as a trust - an account that workers paid into for retirement. It was never intended as a tax - it was a deduction much like for pension funds. This `trust' fund was NEVER to be touched. But the liberals who controlled congress back during Lyndon Johnson's administration decided to rob Social Security and put the money in the `general fund' - taking money that DID NOT belong to them. Had they kept their `spend-now-worry-about-it-later' hands off it, we wouldn't be in this pickle with SS and Medicare.
Please note that there is absolutely NOTHING in the current House Bill that will lower the cost of healthcare, except that the government will try to implement `price fixing' at the consumer level. Great. That should certainly encourage more people to become nurses and docs. It will create absolute chaos in the industry. Why does this plan start at the BOTTOM, instead of at the top? Why haven't we spent a few measly $millions to find out what the real culprits are that drive medical costs into the stratosphere so appropriate legislation can deal with it accordingly?
There's nothing in the current Bill to curb or prevent all the outrageous salaries, `perks', and `marketing costs' and outlandish awards in court cases that are at the root of the problem. Nothing. Remember trickle-down economics.
This medical reform proposal is a huge sham, just like the stimulus package. It cannot fund itself, and we taxpayers cannot afford to fund it. Simple economics, people.
If they want to make healthcare a `right', then the entire industry has to be reconfigured as `non-profit' or `limited profit'. It cannot work otherwise.
And if I hear one more politician refer to the USA as a `wealthy nation', I think I shall start screaming. We are BROKE, people! Doesn't anybody get that? At least 75% of Americans don't own their own homes, their cars, their big toys - the bank does. That's not wealth - that's debt. And the bubble is bursting. We cannot be an economy based on borrowing and consuming.
And as for Lyme treatment? If you think things are bad now, just wait! The IDSA guidelines will be the final word (because it's the cheapest) and that will be that. If you want to see an LLMD, you'll still have to pay for it yourself, and you may have to go to Mexico to do it. I don't know how `outside the box' physicians are going to fare under the new system. (As Buster was saying.)
Oh, I've GOT to stop talking. I wish this dang thread was in General. This is such a personal issue for ALL of us. Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore:
Buster your logic doesn't add up.
Tell me why, I want to know.
Posted by grandmother (Member # 19908) on :
The best way to find the truth is to LISTEN, with an open mind, to the guy who disagrees with you.
You learn nothing by reading only the people who agree with you.
Bashing teaches nothing.
Getting your news from tv or newspapers is one way to learn nothing.
[ 09-12-2009, 05:26 AM: Message edited by: grandmother ]
Posted by lymielauren28 (Member # 13742) on :
First of all, you will never see anything clearly until you get out of the democrat v. republican box. This was created to divide the American people and this is a perfect example of how well it works. In big government there is no such thing. They all work together for the same agenda. The only difference is in how they accomplish it. Like the old expression, "There's more than one way to skin a cat." The "democrats" will skin it one way and the "republicans" will skin it another, but guess what? The cat is skinned just the same. Maybe not the most perfect analogy, but you get the point.
2nd of all, when will people wake up and realize that the government does not have our best interests at heart? Period. They didn't when Clinton was in office, they didn't when Bush sr. was in office, they didn't when Bush jr. was in office and they don't now that Obama is in office. Like Daystar said, they are merely puppets. There is a hidden agenda to destroy this country and we have been on that road for a very long time. Watch the documentory "America Destroyed By Design". There is nothing but corruption in big government and only the most corrupt and morally bankrupt will make it to the top.
I'm not against Obama's healthcare plan because I'm a bad person and I don't want people to have access to healthcare. I'm not against his plan because I'm married to a certain political party that just want allow me to mentally embrace something proposed by "the other party".
I'm against it because the agenda here is total government takeover and control in the name of "helping the American people". It's a sham! I would love nothing more than for every single person in the world to have nothing but the best healthcare. It breaks my heart that people die because they can't afford it. And guess what? This is coming from someone who doesn't have health insurance either. I cannot afford it.
But I don't want it at the cost of my personal choice and freedom. And ultimately that is what this is all about. Same thing with Bush after 9/11. 9/11 was used as a catalyst to strip Americans of their freedoms in the name of national security. Suddenly, it was okay by most Americans to shred the constitution (and it WAS shredded. Read the Patriot Act that Bush signed after 9/11)beacuse, hey, who doesn't want national security? We all do! We all want to feel safe and secure knowing that nothing like 9/11 will ever happen again.
I think the problem now is that a lot of Americans are getting wise to the game. Big government thought that once again they could pull the wool over our eyes and gain even more control in the name of healthcare for everybody, because hey, who doesn't want everyone to have some sort of access to healthcare? Honestly, I think we all do. No one wants others to suffer and die because they can't afford it. But people are waking up and realizing that more government doesn't equate to a better country. It's quite the opposite....
Posted by METALLlC BLUE (Member # 6628) on :
I agree 100% with Obama. I have from the get go. I've looked over the bill and I've checked many of the facts spouted about illegals receiving care, about "government" getting between the doctor and patient etc.
It's all pure propaganda.
quote: It's a shame so many in this country are so gullible and so many who don't take the time to learn the true facts and what's going on in this country.
You said it sister. People fear change. I voted for Obama because I knew -- based on his history and record -- that he "would" change things, just as he said he would. Now the change is happening and people are looking at each other saying "****, I didn't think he really meant it, oh why oh why did I vote for him! I'm going to lose my health care!"
Read the bill, listen to him speak, take the time to check the facts. Take your information from the horses mouth not Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reily and Mr. Wilson. By the way, Mr. Wilson apologized for his psycho behavior during Obama's speech. What he lurched out of his chair yelling about wasn't even true, the bill itself says so in plain writing. Anyone in the country unlawfully will "not" receive coverage of any type.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
This is my last comment on this post, which does not even belong here.
Do you really think that Corporate America has your best interests at heart? The very people who have brought you cancer causing cigarettes and hid the truth for years in their files, Teflon cookware and hid the truth about the health problems associated with it, the ones who have been putting cancer causing chemical in your processed foods and who have changed the way we raise our live stock and produce food?
Take a look at this documentary and tell me how much you trust corporate America to do the right thing. http://www.foodincmovie.com/
The truth is that since Regan government and corporate American have become one and the same resulting in corporate fascism pulling the wool right over the public's eyes. Most of industry has been deregulated to benefit American's corporations to the detriment of the public.
Our current administration was voted in to try and CHANGE the old ways. It's a hard act to change and may never be accomplished but don't think that corporate America has YOUR interests at heart. Their interests are their share holders and CEO's and making profits......bottom line.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: Just like every thing in the video that was posted is totally false the lies that the far right has spread to scare people and promote division and hate and false information are equally so.
... most of the European nations do and many in South American who happen to provide excellent health care at a fraction of the cost that we do.
...We lag in every area, health care, education, societal protections and the list goes on. And the reason we can't move ahead is because we have such a polarized nation, some of whom want to take the country backward.
...disgusting and shameful town hall meetings where the exchange of ideas was halted by those organized by the Ultra right wing, Dick Armey and his Freedom Works organization, for the specific purpose to shout down public discourse..... yes stop the flow of ideas.
Most Europeans citizens look at the way our heath care system is run in total dismay that a nation such as ours allows it citizenship to lose every thing they have worked for their entire life because of an illness or the illness of an elderly parent. That does not happen in nations where they have universal coverage, they have social safety nets that protect them and that is duty of a good government, IMO. Sorry we are not living in the wild, wild west any more. It's the 21st century.
Buster your logic doesn't add up.
They certainly do not provide better healthcare.
The Prognosis for cancer patients in best in the US. The Infant mortality statistics don't compare because babies below a certain weight are not counted as live births. You are wrong. We have the best health care, and we try the hardest.
Here's a horror story, I guarantee will not happen in the US. http://cli.gs/JvmMTM
The town hall meetings are happening because people are noticing that Obama will take them down a road they don't want to go down. This is the only way to stop ObamaCare. Politicians don't listen unless people start shouting.
Who cares what the Europeans think. Or the Canadians. We really don't care about following European standards, ever.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
quote:Originally posted by nellypointis: I have heard far WORSE horror stories of people in the USA having to choose btwn having Mum operated for her cancer or keeping the house!!!!
In the UK, Mum would be too old and not be treated at all. In Canada, she would be low priority on a long list and either wait or come to the US to be treated.
We have social security, and good insurance in the US too. Noone is ever allowed to die in an emergency room for the lack of money in the US.
We just do things differently here in the US. Don't let that stop you from moving here, at least for a little while.
Posted by METALLlC BLUE (Member # 6628) on :
Abx, that's exactly right. Do your homework, because no one is going to feed you the truth. They'll feed you facts, and lies, but remember their facts are usually used to obscure the truth.
They all have an agenda, even the Democrats. This is why we take history courses. If you pay attention, you'll see the process of change and of what it takes to alter things like the current Health Care and Economic situation. Historically, after a recession ends, the job market continues a downward trend in employment. As companies trim the fat and tighten their belts they gradually become "lean and mean." They can provide services with less employees and thus continue to do so to an even higher degree as the economy improves. It's not until the economy has gotten "so" much better that businesses have no choice but to hire more help again to manage the amount of customers that now have the financial resources to buy more product. Hence, a jobless recovery.
Common sense, right? If I can run a business on bare minimum overhead costs and keep even more profit you bet your *** they'll do it.
Yet, who gets blamed still as the economy heals but the jobs continue to be lost? Oh yeah, Obama. The Dow Jones for christ sakes is almost 9,500 again after crashing to almost 6,000.
Just like with your illness, do research and you'll see for yourself that it's in your best interest to support Health Care reform (With....a public option). You can't trust the "private" sector to do what's right without being held to a standard of conduct that respects the rights of the citizens who are paying for products and services from that sector. The private sector must have a motivation to go in that direction else they immediately go off on a tangent to whatever will make the most profit (Within and often without complying with the law).
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: This is my last comment on this post, which does not even belong here.
Do you really think that Corporate America has your best interests at heart? The very people who have brought you cancer causing cigarettes and hid the truth for years in their files, Teflon cookware and hid the truth about the health problems associated with it, the ones who have been putting cancer causing chemical in your processed foods and who have changed the way we raise our live stock and produce food?
Take a look at this documentary and tell me how much you trust corporate America to do the right thing. http://www.foodincmovie.com/
The truth is that since Regan government and corporate American have become one and the same resulting in corporate fascism pulling the wool right over the public's eyes. Most of industry has been deregulated to benefit American's corporations to the detriment of the public.
Our current administration was voted in to try and CHANGE the old ways. It's a hard act to change and may never be accomplished but don't think that corporate America has YOUR interests at heart. Their interests are their share holders and CEO's and making profits......bottom line.
"Who cares what the Europeans think. Or the Canadians. We really don't care about following European standards, ever."
So I guess you speak for everyone on this forum.
Your statement is very telling about your points of view and your way of thinking....very narrow and not serving the greater good of this nation.
I find it very sad. That is why the glory days of America are over and every other industrialized nation is surpassing us for a long time now, China and India included. They are producing the well educated thinkers and inventors of the next generation, not the U.S.
Your stories about Canada and the UK are hog wash. If you want to believe it go ahead. It's your right.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Emla999/Lyme I said that since Regan and his policies of slowly deregulating industry we have have corporate fascism .....the lines of government and corporations have been blurred.
The new administration campaigned to try and change that. Read all of my text, not just the part that will support your point.
I'm familiar with the writings of that author and the issues small farmer face. Corporate agribusiness forcing out small farmers for years and ruining our food supply in the process.
[ 09-11-2009, 02:03 PM: Message edited by: Abxnomore ]
Posted by lymie_in_md (Member # 14197) on :
Its very simple we out spend all countries several times over but we rank 38th in the world as to how healthy our population is. That being said, the score for how healthy our society speaks volumes about the effectiveness of our health care. So, defending our existing health care system is silly!!!
Corporate run health care in this country is corrupt flat out. An insurer will deny coverage simply because they don't want to pay for it. They work within government to lobby indemnity for insuring. So can government be bribed, sure can. Is corporate held insuring for the benefit of the people or for the benefit of self profit.
Companies do not share information, so when you leave an insurer the track of your treatments is lost. Then with the new insurer you have to reregister all over again. Multiple servinging of patients in this manner is very costly. Imagine the IRS being run by 8 different companies. For managing information and using that information for better service can not exist with the current insurance based system.
We have to put public first for health period. In my mind, we are better served for a health care system that is a centrally run utility, answerable to we the people. So during the presidential elections, we vote for the administrators of health. That way we vote in office the people who are in charge of our health.
What's wrong with health in this country: its starts with us, we need to stop defending a bad health care system and start identifying what would make a good health care system.
1. Prevention should be primary in a good health care system. In this country it doesn't exist. 2. Treatment based on evendentiary based science doesn't work and can be corrupted. 3. Need centralized information on all patients. i should have a single number. In other words I should only have to enter my name once. 4. I should be able to login into my account and see every physician who ever treated me and for what reason. I should be able to see every medication I've ever been prescribed. I should be able to see the physcicians notes on my visit with their recommendations. I should be able to print the procedure that says to amputate my left leg with me. In todays medical practice they can screw up and accidently take my right leg. With the corruption of government they will soon indemnify the doctors for making mistakes.
Just my two cents
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Your two cents is worth a million Bob. Some with with both sense and common sense and an ability to see the big picture.
METALLlC BLUE, well said. You would think with so many sick on this site they would be the first to know we need heath care reform and how they have been screwed over by their health care provided time and time again.
Posted by METALLlC BLUE (Member # 6628) on :
I also want to mention one more thing. I have Medicare and Mass Health.
Both have paid for "all" my medications. They only required authorization and gave me a hard time about two medications. Neurontin and Zithromax. They did finally allow me to use it for about 6 months in total before telling me they wouldn't cover it anymore. I wasn't seeing progress on it.
I've been given:
3 months of IM Bicillin 4 years Tetracycline 3 months Dorxy 4 Weeks IV Vancomycin 2 weeks Diflucan 3 years Biaxen and Plaquenil 3 months Malarone 3 months Mepron 2 months Factive 7 years Cortisone 5 years Lamictal 5 years Buproprion 6 months Armour Thyroid 8 years Pentasa 5 years Ativan
I could go on and on. I've been hospitalized numerous times. I've been to the E.R. numerous times. I've had Kidney Stone procedures, I've been to over 150 doctors 50 of which I saw specifically while under Medicare. They never gave me a hard time or made me pay a dime over the basic co-payment of 2-5 dollars for some meds. Eventually they paid even the co-payments for me.
Before Medicare I had Tufts and Unum Provident. Before that I was on Blue Cross Blue Shield.
Tufts fought me on a lot of things, including a procedure I had for Kidney stones (Lithotripsy). They were trying to stick me with a 10K bill because I saw a doctor who they claimed was "Out of Network even though I had the option in my contract to see him if my primary authorized it.
Unum Provident denied me continued long term disability and dropped me, citing that I wasn't really disabled. When I called a lawyer to begin legal action they threatened me by citing passages they'd taken off the internet of things I'd said. The passages were taken out of context. They basically made it appear as though I were lying about being disabled because I had some good days where I was able to go outside. What they didn't note was that I also said it was "once in a blue moon that I was able to go outside." My lawyer eventually told me that it wasn't worth it to continue. He said I was too sick and it would do damage to my health to fight a huge battle with the insurance company. He told me they would get mean and do more than just copy passages from the internet -- they would weave a tail based on my entire life by the time they were done. I dropped the case.
The only problem with Social Security and Medicare is that most people should hire a lawyer from the start to make sure everything is organized and goes thru the very first time.
Medicare > *
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: Yeah and I said that since Regan and his policies of slowly deregulating industry we have have corporate facism .....the lines of government and corporations have been blurred.
The new administration campaigned to try and change that. Read all of my text, not just the part that will support your point.
Corporations rise and fall, naturally. It is government intervention/regulation that keeps Corporations powerful. Government, on the other hand, is almost impossible to shrink.
You're replacing something bad with something worse.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
Question:
Why should healthcare be a 'Right' (or) free?
It seems to me, some people want 'free things' while others want 'freedom'.
It seems if we made healthcare free for everyone and no one had to pay a cent. Then healthcare itself would just go away completely. I know several doctors personally, they had to pay huge costs to go to medical school, all of them had to attend 8-10 years of college and training. We can't just walk in and say, you are going to treat me for free...
It's just illogical and unfair to them.
Posted by emla999/Lyme (Member # 12606) on :
It's interesting that the documentary film Food Inc was mentioned here because an innovative farmer by the name of Joel Salatin is in that film.
And according to Mr. Salatin our government creates rules and regulations that HURT the small farmer but helps the big corporate farms.
Essentially, Mr. Salatin says that government regulations and government programs help big "corporate" farms survive. And that government regulation hurts small farmers.
[ 09-11-2009, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: emla999/Lyme ]
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
It's not free. In some way you pay either thru taxes or a premium but it costs less than thru the private sector if the whole nation is in one pool and everyone had the security of knowing they will not lose it if they change a job or come upon difficult circumstances.
As to what's in congress now, we don't have all the facts, they are still working on it.
Nothing is free! People should not go into medicine to make millions but because they have a passion to help sick people and take care of the sick and they don't work for free.
But our educational systems stinks too. Many countries have free or very low cost high quality universities, so that doctors don't have to pay so much in tuition. As far as the time they put in in training that comes along with the territory of the profession they choose.
Why should it be a right. Because it's the humane thing to do, a moral obligation to our fellow brethren and members of our society. We are not living in the middle ages. It's the 21st century and we are the only major industrialized country in the world that does not provide health care for all.
Why???
Even smaller countries in South American and other areas do so.
How could any one in their right mind not see this as the right and decent thing to do, especially all you family values people?
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: I find it very sad. That is why the glory days of America are over and every other industrialized nation is surpassing us for a long time now, China and India included. They are producing the well educated thinkers and inventors of the next generation, not the U.S.
There's a reason why the US is the largest economy in the world. And it has nothing to do with following Europe's lead on anything.
The glory days are fading because the government is squeezing people dry.
India and China are developing countries. They're developing quickly because they're just grabbing low-hanging fruit. It will be a long long time before they can compete directly with the US. Infact, most Indian and Chinese inventors come to the US for higher education.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
That's you point of view. We are not competitive most of industry weighted down by the cost of health care the auto industry being the prime example. And we don't produce anything any more.
We out source everything abroad. It benefits corporations (cheap wages for their benefit) and that takes good paying jobs away from Americans.
When corporate America is held responsible to the public and the community they are in, only then will we be competitive. When they stop taking jobs abroad and stop going abroad to avoid paying taxes using offshore tax havens things may change.
That's because they have been so unregulated (thank you Regan) that they have abandoned all principles.
Posted by METALLlC BLUE (Member # 6628) on :
quote: METALLlC BLUE, well said. You would think with so many sick on this site they would be the first to know we need heath care reform and how they have been screwed over by their health care provided time and time again.
It blows my mind to hear some of the things coming from people these days. There is such a passionate resistance on this issue all the sudden, yet 6 months ago all I heard from "everyone" was how badly we needed Health Care Reform and how Lyme Patients were being rail roaded by their private carrier who wouldn't cover their child's meds, or they went Bankrupt having to pay out of pocket because the private insurances companies wouldn't work with their LLMD.
Yet ironically, go to any LLMD who accepted Medicare and they don't give you even the slightest difficulty. So much for big bad government standing between me and my medical treatment.
It is my opinion that health care is a right in our country, just as education, public access to information, protection from crime and fire. You can't discriminate against people based on their ability to pay or not pay for medical care. Someone with money lives who has the same illness as someone who doesn't have the money who dies because they couldn't afford continued care of the same quality is wrong.
And as far as people not being turned away from Emergency rooms or dying because they couldn't get access to public assistance - you're kidding right? Haven't you heard that it's difficult for people to get public care for their "STATE" when the poverty lines are skewed. If you have one kid but make so and so amount of money, you can't get covered -- even though the job you have doesn't allow you enough resources to pay for the health insurance. Then if you have 3 kids but make the same amount, if you're married but your partner is disabled, you can't get coverage. Oh and what about if you're single and entirely entitled to coverage but you're so sick that you can't gather the strength to jump all the hoops to get the entitled care because you live alone and have no one to help you?
Millions upon millions live below the poverty line or right at the poverty line and can't afford insurance. These same people, most of them... 47 Million...of them, can't make ends meet nor have access for (whatever reason) to getting help.
Lot's of people are turned away from the Emergency room because a lot of people have problems that the Emergency rooms claim aren't emergencies -- including a lot of cases of Chronic Illness. What is worse is, why should the Hospitals have to privately swallow the costs which reduces their ability to provide the highest quality care when they do accept emergency cases of patients who don't have insurance or money?
The hospitals have to make a profit too and they're often forced to raise costs in an attempt to manage their ability to pay employees, utilities, taxes, machines, and other supplies. Many are turned away because they can't say yes even if they wanted to because of the way the health care system is currently setup.
The public is the one who should be absorbing the costs when it's the general public as a whole who benefits and uses the health care system all through their lives. How the system is setup is a whole other story, but reform is absolutely critical (Even if you don't agree with health care being a right like I do). We must reform the lawsuits, emergency care, mandatory care for preexisting conditions and variety of other things. These all HAVE to change whether you like it or not, else one day you and yours could be on the end of the **** stick if you hit a real bad patch and suddenly have to fend for yourself medically.
And this whole thing about the Government being big bad and evil and how all our lives have gone down the drain is a bunch of bull****. The quality of life of the average human being has increased substantially over the time period humans have been inhabiting the planet Earth because of our ability to "manage" ourselves thru evolving governments. Because of our evolving political government, "most" of the industrialized societies allow most citizens luxuries. Most of us can get a car, a place to live, own a COMPUTER. It might be a ****box car and a shamble shack where you pay 300 rent and a computer out of the library -- but do you know how blessed we are to have those opportunities? Yet, at the end of the day, what about medical insurance? Can't sell your luxuries when those very tools allow you to navigate the world to get to a low paying job.
People have the right to vote against Health Care Reform under Obama. Just make sure you've got all your ducks in a row before you form your conviction.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: It's not free. In some way you pay either thru taxes or a premium but it costs less than thru the private sector if the whole nation is in one pool and everyone had the security of knowing they will not lose it if they change a job or come upon difficult circumstances.
(((What if people just saved up their own money for when something happens to them? I think you as a person could more than likely do a better job of using 'your' money than the government does.)))
As to what's in congress now, we don't have all the facts, they are still working on it.
(((If the plan was so good, if it would help everyone, if it would cut our debt down instead of bring it up, then why is it taking so long? If it was so good and not debatable, it would pass in a very short time.)))
Nothing is free! People should not go into medicine to make millions but because they have a passion to help sick people and take care of the sick and they don't work for free.
(((Then why would people go into medical school if they knew they would not get paid more? Surgeons, doctors, radiologist, techs, ect. are all highly skilled people. People that are highly skilled are paid more because their work it harder. Why do people go to college? Because they want to, or because they want to try to increase their skills to make more money...)))
But our educational systems stinks too. Many countries have free or very low cost high quality universities, so that doctors don't have to pay so much in tuition. As far as the time they put in in training that comes along with the territory of the profession they choose.
(((And government runs our educational system. Where are these free universities that are really high in quality? If a university were free, then there would be no university.)))
Why should it be a right. Because it's the humane thing to do, a moral obligation to our fellow brethren and members of our society. We are not living in the middle ages. It's the 21st century and we are the only major industrialized country in the world that does not provide health care for all.
Why???
(((So if healthcare is a right, then that would make it free of charge to each and everyone. You have already admitted it is not free because peoples tax dollars pay for it... Even if this utopian dream were real, then I guess we should have free healthy food, everyone should have a free and healthy home to live in, everyone should have free clothing to keep them healthy in the winter. Everyone should have a safe car to drive. Where does it stop?)))
Even smaller countries in South American and other areas do so.
How could any one in their right mind not see this as the right and decent thing to do, especially all you family values people?
(((I am against free healthcare and I am in my right mind. Materials(drugs) and labor(care) have costs in any form of business. The problem I have with it is taking money from one group of people and giving it to another group.
Look... I wish there was no sickness, pain, suffering, ect. I wish life was easy and full of nothing but fun everyday. But, that is not a world we live in. We have to approach these problems in an economical, sensible, reasonable, and more efficient way.
What government is doing right now is making a power grab. They want to tax, spend, and regulate, and then do it over again. I am not a democrat or conservative. I am strictly a Constitutionalist.)))
Posted by lymie_in_md (Member # 14197) on :
Many people have lost their logic on this issue. We are sooooo locked into the idea that centralized administration of anything can't work. Imagine we're in the 60's and determine to get to the moon, we decide government intervention would slow the process.
So we turn to corporations to do this. My guess, it would have taken forever because no one could consolidate enough resources with limited budget to do it. What corporations would do, is to keep pleading for money, reducing cost, don't deliver the results then go bankrupt. All the proponents would still get rich. Nasa had to be centralized, we'll say it cost 100 billion to get to the moon. If it took 100 billion and you had 8 companies vying to be first, it would cost 100 billion 8 times. So, in my estimation that is why companies would fail, they don't care about succeeding if they get paid.
Our health care isn't quite the same as NASA, but there are very similar parallels that can be drawn as far as expending resources. Medicare being one of them.
There is a common joke, in this country a corporate company was given a contract to develop a pen that would work in space. All pens are gravity based, 14 million dollars later to a company name Accenture we have a pen that works in space. Of course the Russians worked within their own community and solved the problem with a pencil. The idea is how corporations work, its not that they didn't know about the pencil, they could just bill the government more.
Corporations are about profit not public good. There are times you have to create utilities based on public good, to represent "we the people". You have to centralize your information and resources to save money. You have to create utilities that are answerable to the people and not government. Why I suggest, we the people vote for who is to manage health care and not leave it to government.
Obama is in one of the worst situations, he has all these special interests around him. The only thing he can do is negotiate the best solution for us. I truly believe he is doing the best he can. The issue isn't about what Obama is going to do, it is what we are going to do. We the people need to tell government what we want for health care. It starts by saying everyone is covered.
There is no perfect solution, but the corporate solution is soooooo flawed it has proven to be the worst solution. Why you might ask? It's sole purpose isn't about the public good and never will be!
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: That's you point of view. We are not competitive most of industry weighted down by the cost of health care the auto industry being the prime example. And we don't produce anything any more.
We out source everything abroad. It benefits corporations (cheap wages for their benefit) and that takes good paying jobs away from Americans.
American industry is at a disadvantage due to these reasons:
Unions (GM, etc) Higher cost of labour. Highest Corporate taxes in the world. Environmental restrictions are a problem for industries. Lower standards elsewhere make outsourcing cheaper. Healthcare, but government healthcare won't change anything. what the companies pay for insurance will be paid as tax to the government instead.
So regulation is actually the problem. We need to make it easier for companies, not harder. Increased regulations = driving companies out of the country.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
You're a Republican talking point text book. There is a reason why they have finally been voted out of office.......thank god. They have set us back a good twenty years. Thanks for the deficits, the financial crisis, recession and one needless war.
Buster, maybe you and Ron Paul could take some of your followers and go into the Mohave desert for a few years and when you come back defeated we'll have to tell you that you blew it......there's no safety net for you, sorry.
Bob, how refreshing to hear a voice of reason.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
Ha!
America voted for a centrist. What they got was a leftist. They have stopped trusting Obama, only a few months into his presidency.
Watch for the big swing back, Republicans gaining a lot of seats in 2010.
*Whoops they moved the thread.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Buster said: "(((I am against free healthcare and I am in my right mind. Materials(drugs) and labor(care) have costs in any form of business. The problem I have with it is taking money from one group of people and giving it to another group."
The difference is that a government option is not about the bottom line or profits, therefore more of the money will actually be spent on healthcare.
The only current plans are based soley on profits. We must offer a plan that has an affordable option.
Currently the people who don't have a plan spend far more than they would if they had an affordable option, hence costing us all more money. It's not cost effective to wait until someone is seriously ill before we treat them.
Lyme patients know this all too well. It makes no sense to have people being treated through an ER when they could easily for most things get preventative care.
WE are the only industrialized nation in the world that does not have a plan for all people. Talk about wasting money.
All sides agree that this a major problem and one that needs fixing. We are going broke over this whole mess.
We are losing jobs due to this issue. People are losing their homes and everything they have worked for over this issue.
This does not happen in other modernized Countries that offer a plan for everyone.
it really boils down to a philosophical and moral difference. There are those that believe "ALL" people should have an "Affordable" option and there are those that "Don't" think that "ALL" should have that option.
So it really boils down to which side of the fence you are on.
I personally believe that we are not living in the stone ages. Just like we as a society agree we should have roads, water, electricity etc....those things are regulated.
I believe that at a minimum, that all ppl should have an affordable option. And, quite frankly, I am already being rationed in regards to what I can have and can't have in relation to my Lyme Disease and I have what many would consider good insurance. What a joke.
I think a new option(Note: the word OPTION) will drive competition too, which I would think ppl would like. Currently the Insurance Agency's, Drug Company's, and Medical Community at large charge whatever they want and we are at their mercy.
Of course this new option will not be free, but will be cheaper and save our country from ruin if we sit and do nothing. It may cost us 900Billion dollars to enact, but you have to consider the money you will re-coup and will save by adding this option, which will help significantly reduce the 900Billion we will need to spend.
I personally do not think it will be a complete wash(meaning it may cost us some money, but if we can continue spending millions daily on other things like a war, then I think we can spend some on a plan that is the right thing to do for Americans that don't have an affordable option.
Also, we will be creating healthier people, hence healthier workers, hence better educated people, hence better jobs, hence better position in the world economically. Just my opinion.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
ninjaphire said: posted 09-11-2009 03:31 PM "Ha!
America voted for a centrist. What they got was a leftist. They have stopped trusting Obama, only a few months into his presidency.
Watch for the big swing back, Republicans gaining a lot of seats in 2010."
Ninjaphire,
Don't know where you came up with that one. Apparently President Obama picked up huge kudos after he gave his Congressional speech two days ago! And, also after his speech on Education the day pror.
He dismantled a lot of the lies and fabrications that were out there and pretty much every poll that I have seen shows he picked up major points from people who were wishy-washy after they watched it.
He was able to answer so many questions. Of course we should not base our decision on one speech, but he gave a heck of a speech and his ratings went way up in the last couple days.
i think people were better able to see how many lies were out there regarding his plan. What he said made sense and most who were on the fence are now on board with his plan.
Don't get me wrong, there were many that had already made up their minds that they do not want his plan to pass, but the ones on the fence or that were not sure, are now predominately supporting his plan. So I think your statement may be off base in regards to this issue.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
HA! There is no way Obama is a leftist. If he were he would be demanding a single payer plan. May be too left for you but is far more to the right of center than to the left.
It's a certain group that want to label him a leftist for their own purposes and because many are ignorant of the facts and the distinction between the words socialist, communist and fascist. Yes there are distinctions between those terms and he is non of the above.
Posted by lymie_in_md (Member # 14197) on :
Maybe lymenet should survey its member on what they would like to see in health care. I think the results would be very interesting.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: HA! There is no way Obama is a leftist. If he were he would be demanding a single payer plan. May be too left for you but is far more to the right of center than to the left.
It's a certain group that want to label him a leftist for their own purposes and because many are ignorant of the facts and the distinction between the words socialist, communist and fascist. Yes there are distinctions between those terms and he is non of the above.
He realizes that a single payer plan is politically impossible right now. That's why he's trying to get this plan through, to destroy insurance companies and lead to single payer.
I don't know what he is, but just look at his friends and "czars".
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Regan began appointing "CZARS". Are you implying Obama is a Communist? I thought most these days preferred to depict him as Hitler.
It's truly evil to try to bring insurance reform and affordable health care to all. What is this country coming too. Soon all citizens will demand to be treated with equal respect no matter
what their ethnic background, race or color, can you image?? It's been in the law for years but it might actually become the norm all across this great country.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
I don't know what he is, or believes. You look at the people he has appointed, and tell me what he is.
I'm divided between socialist and empty-suit-with-a-golden-tongue.
I agree, it is truly evil, because it will destroy the current system and it is a mistake that will be impossible to undo.
Believe it or not, most people don't care all that much about race and color anymore. We elected a black man to be president.
What the left wants is to enforce equality of result and therefore mediocrity upon all the people. The implementation of insurance right now is already halfway to socialism. Government health-care or "Public Option" will take it all the way. We need to go in the other direction, towards a real market in healthcare.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
I was being facetious about health care for all being evil. There is nothing evil at all about it.
No, it is not true that the country has accepted the fact that we have a black President and it was well demonstrated by the disgusting behavior displayed at the town hall meetings held during the course of this summer. A little more than half of the country elected him....remember that.
We have already let the the free market system rule and it has given us the mess we have now in all aspects of our economy and the health care crisis. Do you think the health care system we have now is good and serves the best interests of our citizenship?
The public option will not bring us to socialism. It will never happen in this country but it will bring choices, more affordable health care options and put pressure on the private insurance companies to clean up its act. It's called competition.....something the free market system loves.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
You are mistaken. The town hall meetings were not about race. They are about the US spending Trillions of $, and socializing health-care in the middle of a recession.
We have been going away from the free market system for quite a few years now.
The Free Market is not operational in the case of the health-care system. It is already half socialized. I agree with you that the system is broken, but the fix needs to move us in the other direction, towards free markets.
Pardon me, but the government stepping in is *not* competition. It will become a monopoly.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: Buster said: "(((I am against free healthcare and I am in my right mind. Materials(drugs) and labor(care) have costs in any form of business. The problem I have with it is taking money from one group of people and giving it to another group."
The difference is that a government option is not about the bottom line or profits, therefore more of the money will actually be spent on healthcare.
The only current plans are based soley on profits. We must offer a plan that has an affordable option.
Currently the people who don't have a plan spend far more than they would if they had an affordable option, hence costing us all more money. It's not cost effective to wait until someone is seriously ill before we treat them.
Lyme patients know this all too well. It makes no sense to have people being treated through an ER when they could easily for most things get preventative care.
WE are the only industrialized nation in the world that does not have a plan for all people. Talk about wasting money.
All sides agree that this a major problem and one that needs fixing. We are going broke over this whole mess.
We are losing jobs due to this issue. People are losing their homes and everything they have worked for over this issue.
This does not happen in other modernized Countries that offer a plan for everyone.
it really boils down to a philosophical and moral difference. There are those that believe "ALL" people should have an "Affordable" option and there are those that "Don't" think that "ALL" should have that option.
So it really boils down to which side of the fence you are on.
I personally believe that we are not living in the stone ages. Just like we as a society agree we should have roads, water, electricity etc....those things are regulated.
I believe that at a minimum, that all ppl should have an affordable option. And, quite frankly, I am already being rationed in regards to what I can have and can't have in relation to my Lyme Disease and I have what many would consider good insurance. What a joke.
I think a new option(Note: the word OPTION) will drive competition too, which I would think ppl would like. Currently the Insurance Agency's, Drug Company's, and Medical Community at large charge whatever they want and we are at their mercy.
Of course this new option will not be free, but will be cheaper and save our country from ruin if we sit and do nothing. It may cost us 900Billion dollars to enact, but you have to consider the money you will re-coup and will save by adding this option, which will help significantly reduce the 900Billion we will need to spend.
I personally do not think it will be a complete wash(meaning it may cost us some money, but if we can continue spending millions daily on other things like a war, then I think we can spend some on a plan that is the right thing to do for Americans that don't have an affordable option.
Also, we will be creating healthier people, hence healthier workers, hence better educated people, hence better jobs, hence better position in the world economically. Just my opinion.
What we can do about cheaper healthcare is allow people to buy insurance from insurance companies outside of their state. That would make for more competition and competition always drives prices down.
We can also stop people from suing doctors for millions of dollars if they don't like their nose jobs, or if the doctor makes a mistake. I think it is a right to sue, but to sue for multi-million dollars is very wasteful and just giving lawyers fat pockets.
Also, if the government would not pander so much to the FDA, CDC, pharma companies ect. prices would also fall and drugs can come in from other companies... this would increase competition.
Look at the stats, government has created only 3% of the drugs that americans now use all the rest have been produced by private industry. Did thomas edison invent the light bulb under the government? What about all the other inventors? What inventions came out of USSR, North Vietnam, China, North Korea, ect?
I take no sides with parties. I don't vote because when voting, it is like voting for the lesser of the 2 evils for the past 100 years or more. I just don't believe in taking money from one person and giving it to another. I believe in charity, not taking. This is what government is going to do.
Not to mention even longer waiting lines and healthcare will be rationed more so than it is already.
Democracy is when 51% of the people can make laws and tell the other 49% of people what to do. It is not right... That is why we started out as a republic.
Keep the government strong enough to protect the 'natural' rights of citizens but small enough to keep government off the backs of citizens. Why do you think people came here to start a country like that and why did they spend 200 years write a Constitution?
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
If you could read between the lines you would be able to tell that much of the angry and organized mobs at the town halls was about race. It was very obvious to me.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
There's no way I can convince you of this, but It was not about race. It (as well as the tea parties) is very much a grass roots effort, and not organized from above.
Now, some racists may choose to try to hijack the events, but it is not racial.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
I don't need convincing, thank you.
It's not a grass roots movement. It was started by Dick Armey supplied with money from the insurance companies and from big pharma to for the purpose of disrupting public discourse. He has been thoroughly exposed and his movement.
It attracted its followers but it's not a true grass roots movement.
"FreedomWorks, which was one of the lobbying groups involved in orchestrated the anti-Obama "tea parties" on April 15, 2009, in summer of 2009 began pursuing an aggressive strategy to create the image of mass public opposition to health care and clean energy reform at Congressmembers' town-hall meetings in their districts. A leaked memo from Bob MacGuffie, a volunteer with the FreedomWorks website "Tea Party Patriots," describes how members should infiltrate town hall meetings and harass and intimidate Democratic members of Congress:
Spread out in the hall and try to be in the front half. The objective is to put tIle Rep on the defensive with your questions and follow-up ... You need to rock-the-boat early in the Rep's presentation. Watch for an opportunity to yell out and challenge the Rep's statements early. If he blames Bush for something or offers other excuses -- call him on it, yell back and have someone else follow-up with a shout-out ... The goal is to rattle him ..."
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
ABXnomore, what is the problem with organizing and voicing your opinion?
Freedom of speech is a natural right of all people. They have as much a right to voice their opinion as does the Code Pink, PETA, anti-war, ect. All groups use these tactics. I'm not picking sides, just stating that they have the freedom to do it.
Don't suppress anyones voice.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
He's just taking credit for something he didn't organize.
Also, Big Pharma is actually running an ad campaign in favor of ObamaCare.
Yes, disruptive tactics have worked well. The Right has just caught onto tactics which the left has been using for quite a while. Remember the anti-war protestors ?
This Health-Care reform is not a friend to Lymies. The approach they use to cut costs will make things harder for LLMDs, especially the unified database and things like that. Evidence based medicine is also scary on the horizon.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by ninjaphire: He's just taking credit for something he didn't organize.
Also, Big Pharma is actually running an ad campaign in favor of ObamaCare.
Yes, disruptive tactics have worked well. The Right has just caught onto tactics which the left has been using for quite a while. Remember the anti-war protestors ?
This Health-Care reform is not a friend to Lymies. The approach they use to cut costs will make things harder for LLMDs, especially the unified database and things like that. Evidence based medicine is also scary on the horizon.
Bingo! This will hurt our lyme research, LLMDs, and increase our wait times while also rationing our treatment even more than it already is.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
[B"]ABXnomore, what is the problem with organizing and voicing your opinion?"[/B]
It's wrong and interferes with the democratic process to deliberately organize for the sole purpose to be disruptive as out lined in the instructions posted below from Freedom Works to disrupt the flow of public discourse. The town halls were organized for people to voice their
opinions and ask questions in an effort to gather information. Dick Armey and his recruits bused in people to shout down the speaker and stop the flow of information and public discourse. That is wrong and their behavior was despicable. Read the instructions that were given again, below:
Quite different than voicing ones opinion or organizing an anti- war protest that is organized and not interrupting another meeting.
Can you grasp the difference. I would hope so.
"FreedomWorks, which was one of the lobbying groups involved in orchestrated the anti-Obama "tea parties" on April 15, 2009, in summer of 2009 began pursuing an aggressive strategy to create the image of mass public opposition to health care and clean energy reform at Congressmembers' town-hall meetings in their districts. A leaked memo from Bob MacGuffie, a volunteer with the FreedomWorks website "Tea Party Patriots," describes how members should infiltrate town hall meetings and harass and intimidate Democratic members of Congress:
Spread out in the hall and try to be in the front half. The objective is to put tIle Rep on the defensive with your questions and follow-up ... You need to rock-the-boat early in the Rep's presentation. Watch for an opportunity to yell out and challenge the Rep's statements early. If he blames Bush for something or offers other excuses -- call him on it, yell back and have someone else follow-up with a shout-out ... The goal is to rattle him ..."
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: [B"]ABXnomore, what is the problem with organizing and voicing your opinion?"[/B]
It's wrong and interferes with the democratic process to deliberately organize for the sole purpose to be disruptive as out lined in the instructions posted below from Freedom Works to disrupt the flow of public discourse. The town halls were organized for people to voice their
opinions and ask questions in an effort to gather information. Dick Armey and his recruits bused in people to shout down the speaker and stop the flow of information and public discourse. That is wrong and their behavior was despicable. Read the instructions that were given again, below:
Quite different than voicing ones opinion or organizing an anti- war protest that is organized and not interrupting another meeting.
Can you grasp the difference. I would hope so.
"FreedomWorks, which was one of the lobbying groups involved in orchestrated the anti-Obama "tea parties" on April 15, 2009, in summer of 2009 began pursuing an aggressive strategy to create the image of mass public opposition to health care and clean energy reform at Congressmembers' town-hall meetings in their districts. A leaked memo from Bob MacGuffie, a volunteer with the FreedomWorks website "Tea Party Patriots," describes how members should infiltrate town hall meetings and harass and intimidate Democratic members of Congress:
Spread out in the hall and try to be in the front half. The objective is to put tIle Rep on the defensive with your questions and follow-up ... You need to rock-the-boat early in the Rep's presentation. Watch for an opportunity to yell out and challenge the Rep's statements early. If he blames Bush for something or offers other excuses -- call him on it, yell back and have someone else follow-up with a shout-out ... The goal is to rattle him ..."
Yes I saw the instructions. But they had every right to be there, to voice their opinions, when this country was being formed their was plenty of shouting and even physical fighting. These townhall protestors stayed within the law. I like people that have their views and express them, if we all agreed on everything, then we would be living blindly.
Don't try to tear down these people but then say the anti-war protestors were not like this. I can show you video after video of violent and deadly anti-war protests. Being violent and deadly is wrong but yelling, cheering, and expressing opinion.... have at it all you want.
You can disagree with people but don't silence them. Silence is the art of a tyrant.
It's not about democrat vs republicans. It's about control vs. freedom. I side with freedom every time.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
There is a huge difference going to a protest and a town hall meeting. That is not what town hall meetings are for and it's taking the rights of the people who go there to gather information away from them.
It's like if someone shouts fire in a movie theatre, when there's no fire. It's wrong and illegal.
These nut cases go to these town hall meetings solely to disrupt and shut down these informational meetings. If ppl can't see the difference than I fear that we may be in bigger trouble than can ever be helped.
Again, you have the right to say what you want at protests, etc....but Town Hall meetings are not free for anyone to scream, rant, rave etc.... Just like if I host a wedding for my daughter and some nut case comes in and trys to disturb the service, that person has no right to stop the wedding and or disturb the service.
You can spin it however you want, but the law does not allow as much freedom as you believe it does.
You have a right at a town hall meeting to ask questions. You don't have a right to be rude, yell, chant, and purposely stop the town hall meeting from going on by behaving badly.
Again, these are not protests. Disgusting, dispicable displays of behavior have been shown recently at these town halls.
I am all for free speech, but free speech does not mean you have the right to stop the others from their free speech by displaying this type of behavior.
Dick Armey has every right to form a protest/Rally, but no right to disturb a meeting in that manner.
Just like college kids don't have a right to go into a lecture and shout whatever the heck they want because they don't like the professor teaching the course.
Think about it.
How will we ever get anywhere if we have ppl who will use this excuse for poor behavior. What the heck are we becoming. It scares me to death. Pardon the pun.
Ps you are losing no freedoms, by sitting politely and asking questions politely...When you can't control yourself or purposely disturb the peace, that is when your so called freedom, just stole my freedom from me.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
They only showed you on the news channels the people shouting. They were not shouting the whole time if you watched them on CSPAN or the internet leaks. Yeah the shouting can get annoying but what about the people not letting certain people into townhalls? The pro-healthcare side has been busing people in as well (acorn, unions, and activist groups) I have also read about 2 or 3 fights started by union members. Some of Obama's townhalls have had plants out in the crowds.
There is always 2 sides to the story and the media will only cover parts they want to. This is why I watch CSPAN and my local news.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Liesandmorelies , well said. A welcomed voice of reason here and your screen name could not be more appropriate for this topic, as well.
Buster....give it a break. She made the distinction very well. If you can't grasp it fine but stop trying to defend a position that is patently wrong and has been exposed for the entire nation to see.
Posted by Truthfinder (Member # 8512) on :
Unfortunately, many people are confused about what constitutes a `right' to something.
A `right' doesn't cost anyone anything. By its very nature, it is free - for everyone. Read the Bill of Rights.
A legitimate right is something one can have without any action being taken by another. If it is a right, it will not require taking something from one person to give to someone else.
To take something from someone else, in order that you might have something you would not normally have, does not constitute a 'right.'
Yet there are many politicians, who should know better, who are known to misuse the concept of a `right'. John Edwards, for example, said some of the most important basic human rights were healthcare, Internet access, and American citizenship. He failed to mention a single issue delineated in The Bill of Rights. The Clintons, Obama, Senators Dodd, Reid, Kennedy, and Kerry have all said similar things.
All of those things mentioned and including education, food, shelter, etc. are all nice things to have - maybe even essential for life - but guaranteeing them for you would require that someone else provide them.
To claim you have a 'right' to healthcare means that you are depriving someone else of their liberty. They must pay your bill if you cannot afford it. Taxes must be raised on the masses to cover the fact that the care you receive will not be paid for by you.
It is practically and rationally impossible to secure a right by infringing on the rights of others.
So, we may term healthcare a lot of things, but it isn't a `right'.
What may constitute a `right' is that our government insure us a fair and equitable marketplace for pursuit of those things essential for life.
And this, I believe, is where our government has totally and utterly failed us. We cannot `fix' anything with healthcare or energy or education or much of anything else until we route out political and corporate corruption.
Posted by daystar1952 (Member # 3255) on :
Thankyou TruthFinder and Lymie for posting your excellent points.
JUST TRYING TO GET PEOPLE'S ATTENTION WITH THE CAPS
Michael Moore and people on this board are saying how bad the big corporations are. Well this is true BUT the government is MESHED with the corporations....so....more power to the government EQUALS more power to the corporations. Will anyone acknowledge this and agree that we need to investigate how deeply the government is intertwined with corporations before we ever accept more extensive government run healthcare?
Demanding this type of investigation can't be wrong. If people ignore this statement or say something is wrong with it...then it would make me wonder why they thought it was wrong.
Does anyone agree that there should be an investigation? I believe that should be our focus instead of arguing back and forth...which is what they want us to do....Divide and conquer
Posted by daystar1952 (Member # 3255) on :
And one other thing: Our mainstream media is corrupt, as well. Much of the illicit actions on the part of goverment and the private sector would have already been exposed if we had an honest, truly 'free press'.
Posted by nomoremuscles (Member # 9560) on :
quote:Originally posted by ninjaphire: Believe it or not, most people don't care all that much about race and color anymore. We elected a black man to be president.
What planet is this? I would like to move there.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
quote:Originally posted by nomoremuscles: What planet is this? I would like to move there.
There are racial issues. But it's not as much of a problem as you think, If 53% of people voted for Obama.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
"Believe it or not, most people don't care all that much about race and color anymore. We elected a black man to be president."
You are getting your talking points mixed up because 53% is slightly more than half the county. What about the other half. That's a large number.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
The President's Plan for Health Reform
``It will provide more security and stability to those who have health insurance. It will provide insurance to those who don't. And it will lower the cost of health care for our families, our businesses, and our government." - PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA
If You Have Health Insurance, the President's Plan:
* Ends discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions. * Limits premium discrimination based on gender and age. * Prevents insurance companies from dropping coverage when people are sick and need it most. * Caps out-of-pocket expenses so people don't go broke when they get sick. * Eliminates extra charges for preventive care like mammograms, flu shots and diabetes tests to improve health and save money. * Protects Medicare for seniors. * Eliminates the ``donut-hole'' gap in coverage for prescription drugs.
If You Don't Have Insurance, the President's Plan:
* Creates a new insurance marketplace -- the Exchange -- that allows people without insurance and small businesses to compare plans and buy insurance at competitive prices. * Provides new tax credits to help people buy insurance. * Provides small businesses tax credits and affordable options for covering employees. * Offers a public health insurance option to provide the uninsured and those who can't find affordable coverage with a real choice. * Immediately offers new, low-cost coverage through a national ``high risk'' pool to protect people with preexisting conditions from financial ruin until the new Exchange is created.
For All Americans, the President's Plan:
* Won't add a dime to the deficit and is paid for upfront. * Requires additional cuts if savings are not realized. * Implements a number of delivery system reforms that begin to rein in health care costs and align incentives for hospitals, physicians, and others to improve quality. * Creates an independent commission of doctors and medical experts to identify waste, fraud and abuse in the health care system. * Orders immediate medical malpractice reform projects that could help doctors focus on putting their patients first, not on practicing defensive medicine. * Requires large employers to cover their employees and individuals who can afford it to buy insurance so everyone shares in the responsibility of reform.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: You are getting your talking points mixed up because 53% is slightly more than half the county. What about the other half. That's a large number.
Bill Clinton got 49.x% of the vote. So being black didn't hurt Obama at all.
There are quite a few black/colored republicans.
Michael Steele, RNC Chairman Condoleezza rice Colin Powell Martin Luther King was Republican! Bobby Jindal, GOP governor of Louisiana is of Indian origin. Clarence Thomas, was nominated to the supreme court by George HW Bush.
In short, being black is not as much of a disadvantage as you think.
Posted by daystar1952 (Member # 3255) on :
What does race have to do with the points I am making? You are diverting people's attention away from what should be the main focus....investigating the connections between government health agencies and corporations.
Those who want to cloud and skirt around the issues either change the subject or make the issue into something it never was in the first place. Race is not the point
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
quote:Originally posted by daystar1952: Those who want to cloud and skirt around the issues either change the subject or make the issue into something it never was in the first place. Race is not the point
Tell that to ABX who brought up race as an issue. The opposition to Obama has never been racial.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Who said it hurt him? I said the issues on the right that are causing so much hate to be spewed are partly motivated by race. The behavior on the right is hurting the country, not the President.
You can't distinguish between the different issues.
Your list was not necessary. I am very well informed and have also not heard the term "colored" used since the "civil rights" era. I don't think the term "colored" is considered politically correct.
Indians are Indians, not colored. Indigenous Americans are Native Americans, no distinction needed.
Posted by lymie_in_md (Member # 14197) on :
I agree with truthfinder that health care isn't a right. However, healthcare is to important for the well being of the country, to not cover everyone. For those who think it is two expensive to cover everyone, I want you to take a look at 10 people you know well, and in your mind decide who shouldn't be covered. They lost there job and they lose there insurance.
Lets look at one aspect of cost going into to H1N1. We the american citizens are padding the pockets of big pharma with several billion dollars for vaccines that or may not work. Are they necessary and was that a good way to spend money. I think back to a post about homeopathy use in Cuba to prevent leptospirosis another spirokete bacteria. For 2 1/2 million people it was more successful then the vaccines used. The cost difference went from 3 million dollars for the normal vaccine to 100,000 dollars for the homeopathic vials.
Remember my arguement about the multi million dollar pen that defies gravity versus a pencil. To save money you have to practically solve problems, there just isn't enough oversite for this and an enormous amount of waste is created.
The idea of cost is a big issue. And there is way too much greed in the process. We have to get greed out of it.
Posted by daystar1952 (Member # 3255) on :
I agree with you Ninjaphire. I was directing my post to whomever it applied to. Thanks for pointing out who keeps diverting from the topic of investigating alliances between government health agencies and corporations involved with healthcare.
The president can say whatever he wants but if the foundation or identity of the government is corporations they will find a way to mould it all to their benefit. That is why before we get deeper into any system, we should examine it all very carefully.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
Originally posted by Abxnomore: The President's Plan for Health Reform
``It will provide more security and stability to those who have health insurance. It will provide insurance to those who don't. And it will lower the cost of health care for our families, our businesses, and our government." - PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA
If You Have Health Insurance, the President's Plan: ...
These things will make insurance very expensive and basically kill private insurance. After all if you were young and healthy why would you pay lots of money for insurance you may never use ? If You Don't Have Insurance, the President's Plan: ...
In theory it's going to increase competition, but it's not likely to happen if private insurance is regulated out of existence.
For All Americans, the President's Plan:
* Won't add a dime to the deficit and is paid for upfront.
This is a lie, for reasons mentioned below. * Requires additional cuts if savings are not realized.
This will almost certainly happen, cuts will be necessary. * Implements a number of delivery system reforms that begin to rein in health care costs and align incentives for hospitals, physicians, and others to improve quality.
Basically, save money, even if care is compromised. * Creates an independent commission of doctors and medical experts to identify waste, fraud and abuse in the health care system.
Again, save money, even if care is compromised. There isn't enough waste, fraud and abuse in the current system to pay for a larger new system. And even if there is, the waste and fraud is very very hard to remove, or it would already have been removed. * Orders immediate medical malpractice reform projects that could help doctors focus on putting their patients first, not on practicing defensive medicine.
There is no tort reform in the healthcare bill, and there is not going to be. They're just making stuff up now. * Requires large employers to cover their employees and individuals who can afford it to buy insurance so everyone shares in the responsibility of reform. It turns out that the incentives in the bill actually encourage employers to drop employee insurance. The fine they pay will actually be less than the cost of the mandatory insurance, which will skyrocket...
Basically, you're forcing young healthy people to buy insurance to pay for sick people. How is that even remotely fair ?
Posted by daystar1952 (Member # 3255) on :
The problem with this healthcare plan is that there will still be people who are not covered. Let's say someone is 70 years old and they are not working anymore. The ideology that is developing in our country is that the individual doesn't matter and that everything must be for the good of the whole.
Now, take this 70 year old who needs a hip replacement...or maybe 2. If he is not contributing to society anymore and they are at an age where it is deemed by the "experts" that it wouldn't be worth it for society to spend their limited money on this person because of their age...well he will not be getting the healthcare he needs despite what everyone is saying about no one getting left out.
And again BOTH SIDES should want an investigation into the connections between Govt and corporations. This statement has nothing to do with even taking sides. it's just common sense that people would want to know what they are really getting into....before it's too late. Politicians(no matter what side they are on) are not really known for telling the whole truth
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Now, take this 70 year old who needs a hip replacement...or maybe 2. If he is not contributing to society anymore and they are at an age where it is deemed by the "experts" that it wouldn't be worth it for society to spend their limited money on this person because of their age...well he will not be getting the healthcare he needs despite what everyone is saying about no one getting left out.
I believe this statement to be false. Where do you get your data to support this?
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
Guys, you should turn the TV on to one of the news channels, there's a giant protest(2 million people ?) in Washington DC.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
I see a nice orderly crowd awaiting the President's health care rally in Minneapolis.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: Liesandmorelies , well said. A welcomed voice of reason here and your screen name could not be more appropriate for this topic, as well.
Buster....give it a break. She made the distinction very well. If you can't grasp it fine but stop trying to defend a position that is patently wrong and has been exposed for the entire nation to see.
Ok, so do I need to show you pictures of when your favorite antiwar protestors blew up a police station and killed several cops? What is antiwar about that? I can point fingers all day but does it solve anything... no.
You are siding with them because they are in your democratic party that you support. I take no party sides.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
Well, if you switch to FOX, there's a health-care protest in DC. Glenn Beck is covering it live.
I don't know who else is covering it.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
No one else except Fox Noise, also known as Fixed News.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
I guess MSNBC is the only channel covering the Minneapolis event, also known as All-Obama-All-The-Time channe.
Posted by daystar1952 (Member # 3255) on :
Here is just an example of how undefined the whole thing is ..that we would be getting into without investigating more ahead of time.(link below) Also...ABXnomore you again ignored my suggestion that we investigate. Do you think that's a good idea...to investigate?
Thankyou Buster for the excellent video you shared with us. This is what needs to be done. We need to understand the ROOT of the problem. I will post the link again http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFXuGIpsdE0 Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: No one else except Fox Noise, also known as Fixed News.
Looks like the "Fox Noise" channel has more viewers/ratings. Maybe the majority of people like them better...
Prime Time FNC - 3,122,000viewers CNN-- 819,000 viewers MSNBC -1,098,000 viewers CNBC - 202,000 viewers HLN - 675,000viewers
*Taken from tvbythenews.com and huffingtonpost.com
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Buster said: "Ok, so do I need to show you pictures of when your favorite antiwar protestors blew up a police station and killed several cops? What is antiwar about that? I can point fingers all day but does it solve anything... no."
Buster DID YOU READ anything that wrote?????
I wrote specifically about "TOWN HALL MEETINGS" and I specifically stated the difference between why it's not okay or allowed to behave this way at such meetings.
I stated in my post that we were not talking about "protests" and or "rally's" Why do you insist on comparing the two?
There is no comparison.
Do you even acknowledge the difference between the two? Every other person I know understands the difference, regardless of party affiliation?
If you can't even acknowledge that they are different then it is pointless to even discuss this with you.
BTW,I can't speak for Abxnomore, but I have voted both Republican, Independent and Deomocractic since I was able to vote in the 1984 election.
So to say because 99.9% of Americans, comprehend the difference of what is acceptable behavior at a town hall meeting vs. say a protest says a lot about you since you can't seem to grasp the issue.
You do not have to keep pointing any finger, because it's useless.
People understand that Town Hall meetings are well organized meetings, set up for informational purposes to gather info to help you make a better informed choice or decision. They are very, very different then what you keep trying to superimpose them as when you say they are like protests or rally's.
Doses that help you understand? This is very elementary.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
liesandmorelies,
I can't speak for Buster, but disrupting the town hall meetings was/is the only way to stop the healthcare reform.
It would already have passed but for the protests, and this is the only way to actually get the relevant congerssman/senator to listen to people.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Regarding the cost of the new plan if it were to pass. I don't claim that it won't cost a dime, but I do know that much of the 900 billion will be recouped, by collected premiums and savings.
Currently, there are no savings and private insurance just keeps skyrocketing and what is covered is becoming less and less.
We are paying more and more and receiving less and less. This is because private = profit based.
Public = more money goes towards treatment
I would like to see where they are not going to pay for a 70 yr olds hip replacement. Can you show me that????
Again, ppl are turning on the "Fear machine". Please substantiate this kind of claim. This is just not true.
The employers right now today, could if they wanted to, cut every single one of us from receiving benefits. The employers don't and won't if a new plan is implemented, because they know that in order to keep their workforce and attract the best possible workforce for their company, then they have to offer a competitive plan or else the employee will go work for the other guy.
The only way a company could possibly get away with that, would be if they got every other company in their industry to do away with health care too.
In America, that is totally illegal and those CEO's would go to jail. So, we are protected from them doing that.
And, furthermore, if you were to say switch to the new plan, that would only make the private sector become more competitive and offer lower premiums etc....
Keep in mind that they are only predicting that 5% of Americans will use the new plan. So, it's mind boggling that there is so much fear being propagated.
Lets, say that people that already have a plan switch, it will only be because the new option is better right?
Look at how many ppl have had to drop their coverage in the last five years. Look at how many employers can't offer a plan. There has been absolutely no competition.
Why do you think the Insurance company's are spending millions upon millions per day to stop Obama??? THINK ABOUT IT.
Are we just supposed to let these 47 million uninsured ppl not even have a shake at buying an affordable option?
And, I don't want to hear, "I would love everyone to have health care, truly I would" type answers. It's so meaningless. It doesn't mean anything if you don't make something happen for them.
Why do so many people love these private insurance agency's so much????? I guess the multi millions they are spending per day to keep change from happening may actually work.
Sorry folks, you are being hood winked. They are spending our money that we are paying through premiums. Money that could be spent on actual healthcare and wasting it. Believe you me, we are all going to pay for the multi-millions they are spending per day to try to defeat another option.
There will always be competition.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Ninjaphire said: "I can't speak for Buster, but disrupting the town hall meetings was/is the only way to stop the healthcare reform. It would already have passed but for the protests, and this is the only way to actually get the relevant congerssman/senator to listen to people."
Are you telling me that strapping on a gun, disturbing a peaceful mtg. is the only way to stop a healthcare reform?????? Are you saying that it's okay for these ppl to break the law to get attention???
Sounds like fear based threats being pushed on all of us then.
We are in way bigger trouble if this is what we have become as a country.
What is really holding up the process is actually all the lies that are being spewed, the money being spent by the corporate Insurance agency's and ppl believing everything they hear.
Ppl won't even acknowledge when something is factual verses fiction, because they believe anything and everything that the person who they perceive to be on their side says.
Don't get me wrong this happens on all sides. We have got to stop the insanity.
I look for factual information first before I make up my mind.
This country is falling apart before our eyes, but we are going to trust Corporate America's bottom line over the facts??????
We have gotten to a point where we can't even think. We have forgotten how Economics 101 works, because the "other side" may want to do something different then what their side tells them they should do.
We are creating a society that does not think or use logic. We have become a politically ideological nation. It's like our politics have become our ideology or our God for that matter.
Scary times indeed. I mean come on. Now we are even resorting to posting how many viewers who watch a show like The O'reilly Factor or Keith Olbermannn as a predictor as to what people want and what is best for our country.
What's even scarier, is the fact that many, many ppl "DO" base their decisions on these shows that are totally paid for by corporate money. They assume that what these kinds of shows are propagating is truth. How ignorant is that?
We need to take some responsibility and find the truth, search for fact, not rely on what these fear based machines on either side are spewing. We need to do some leg work.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: Buster said: "Ok, so do I need to show you pictures of when your favorite antiwar protestors blew up a police station and killed several cops? What is antiwar about that? I can point fingers all day but does it solve anything... no."
Buster DID YOU READ anything that wrote?????
I wrote specifically about "TOWN HALL MEETINGS" and I specifically stated the difference between why it's not okay or allowed to behave this way at such meetings.
I stated in my post that we were not talking about "protests" and or "rally's" Why do you insist on comparing the two?
There is no comparison.
Do you even acknowledge the difference between the two? Every other person I know understands the difference, regardless of party affiliation?
If you can't even acknowledge that they are different then it is pointless to even discuss this with you.
BTW,I can't speak for Abxnomore, but I have voted both Republican, Independent and Deomocractic since I was able to vote in the 1984 election.
So to say because 99.9% of Americans, comprehend the difference of what is acceptable behavior at a town hall meeting vs. say a protest says a lot about you since you can't seem to grasp the issue.
You do not have to keep pointing any finger, because it's useless.
People understand that Town Hall meetings are well organized meetings, set up for informational purposes to gather info to help you make a better informed choice or decision. They are very, very different then what you keep trying to superimpose them as when you say they are like protests or rally's.
Doses that help you understand? This is very elementary.
I know what a town hall is, my past teacher is now in politics in my city and he hosts them now. I never said anywhere that 100% of these town hall people are correct in what they are doing. But there are no laws against shouting in a public town hall building. I do believe in a fair debate and being gentle in the town hall, but there is no laws telling them the opposite.
The blame can't be put just on the protestors. The left has also bussed people in, they have their own shouters as well, and they have even blocked people entrance to the town halls. Both sides have even started physical fights.
I'm not going to blame one side over the other when it comes to it. Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: Regarding the cost of the new plan if it were to pass. I don't claim that it won't cost a dime, but I do know that much of the 900 billion will be recouped, by collected premiums and savings.
Currently, there are no savings and private insurance just keeps skyrocketing and what is covered is becoming less and less.
We are paying more and more and receiving less and less. This is because private = profit based.
Public = more money goes towards treatment
I would like to see where they are not going to pay for a 70 yr olds hip replacement. Can you show me that????
Again, ppl are turning on the "Fear machine". Please substantiate this kind of claim. This is just not true.
The employers right now today, could if they wanted to, cut every single one of us from receiving benefits. The employers don't and won't if a new plan is implemented, because they know that in order to keep their workforce and attract the best possible workforce for their company, then they have to offer a competitive plan or else the employee will go work for the other guy.
The only way a company could possibly get away with that, would be if they got every other company in their industry to do away with health care too.
In America, that is totally illegal and those CEO's would go to jail. So, we are protected from them doing that.
And, furthermore, if you were to say switch to the new plan, that would only make the private sector become more competitive and offer lower premiums etc....
Keep in mind that they are only predicting that 5% of Americans will use the new plan. So, it's mind boggling that there is so much fear being propagated.
Lets, say that people that already have a plan switch, it will only be because the new option is better right?
Look at how many ppl have had to drop their coverage in the last five years. Look at how many employers can't offer a plan. There has been absolutely no competition.
Why do you think the Insurance company's are spending millions upon millions per day to stop Obama??? THINK ABOUT IT.
Are we just supposed to let these 47 million uninsured ppl not even have a shake at buying an affordable option?
And, I don't want to hear, "I would love everyone to have health care, truly I would" type answers. It's so meaningless. It doesn't mean anything if you don't make something happen for them.
Why do so many people love these private insurance agency's so much????? I guess the multi millions they are spending per day to keep change from happening may actually work.
Sorry folks, you are being hood winked. They are spending our money that we are paying through premiums. Money that could be spent on actual healthcare and wasting it. Believe you me, we are all going to pay for the multi-millions they are spending per day to try to defeat another option.
There will always be competition.
Where are your numbers on believing the 900 billion will be recouped? Obama has already said that 500 billion will come from eliminating medicare. What about from 2020 to 2030, there will be no 500billion to take from then....
My family owns a small business that provides medical insurance, what you have stated about the private industry and giving employees is false.
You're sounding silly when you say that we (anti socialized medicine people) want healthcare for people but then we don't do it. I do it everyday for people, I give to charity in 5 different organizations yearly. I do what I can to help.
It is not about, "Yeah I want to see everyone have healthcare but then don't do anything about it" it is about
"I don't want to see people taking from other people"
Here is Obama talking about giving a pain pill instead of surgery.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-dQfb8WQvo
Just a simple question, "Why do I owe someone healthcare?" It's not a right if you have to take money from one person and give it to another. If my business goes south, can I say "You owe me free labor to keep my business alive"
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by grandmother: I don't understand why anyone would think this is about race.
Sometimes the 'race card' is all people have left when they disagree. It's an easy one to throw.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
There is nothing fair about when a speaker is presenting and ppl come to mtgs with guns packed on their legs and screaming and ranting and raving only to disrupt the meeting to the point of trying to shut the town hall meeting down.
There are laws in that the police can absolutely stop ppl from being disorderly at organized events.
These town hall meetings are set up. Just like if I set up a wedding or if a professor has a lecture.
I never said one iota about the left. I stated it's wrong for anyone to do this at a town hall meeting. So stop putting words and guessing I was making this about one side vs another.
Which brings me back to a point that I have made over and over. This is not about sides. That is the problem. as I said above all sides just believe blindly about what their so called side tells them.
Again, did you even read what I wrote????
You say you are not going to blame one side or the other.... So does that mean you think anyone who behaves this way is wrong? I sure do hope so.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: There is nothing fair about when a speaker is presenting and ppl come to mtgs with guns packed on their legs and screaming and ranting and raving only to disrupt the meeting to the point of trying to shut the town hall meeting down.
There are laws in that the police can absolutely stop ppl from being disorderly at organized events.
These town hall meetings are set up. Just like if I set up a wedding or if a professor has a lecture.
I never said one iota about the left. I stated it's wrong for anyone to do this at a town hall meeting. So stop putting words and guessing I was making this about one side vs another.
Which brings me back to a point that I have made over and over. This is not about sides. That is the problem. as I said above all sides just believe blindly about what their so called side tells them.
Again, did you even read what I wrote????
You say you are not going to blame one side or the other.... So does that mean you think anyone who behaves this way is wrong? I sure do hope so.
yes I read what you wrote.
people have the rights to carry guns in certain states, we have a second amendment, did anyone one of those people shoot anyone? No.
Police can only stop people when they get physical or when people disrupt a 'private' event. A wedding or professor lecture is a 'private' setting. Town hall is a public setting.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
For the most part, I personally don't think this about race, although I do know for a fact that for some people this is part of it.
I like to believe that we have come a long way, but obviously we have not come the whole way. I think most would agree with that.
It's a shame that there is any race discrimination in this day and age.
I have personally never thrown the race card, though I know first hand people who hate Obama because he is half black. Can't imagine how they would feel if he were 100% black.
I believe most of this is about I am in a party and you are in a party, therefore you are wrong type attitudes.
Again very sad indeed. We will never come together with that type mentality.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
So Buster, you think it's safe to pack a gun and walk around a public town hall meeting?
If your not in any danger of needing it or using it, then why bring it??? Seems like scare tactic 101 to me.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: So Buster, you think it's safe to pack a gun and walk around a public town hall meeting?
If your not in any danger of needing it or using it, then why bring it??? Seems like scare tactic 101 to me.
I have a concealed carry permit to protect me and my family. I am not a threat to anyone. I have seen alot of shootings happen at public places, I carry my weapon everywhere I go that I can.
Do people kill people, or does the gun kill people?
Do spoons make people fat, or does the person make one's self fat?
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Buster said:
"Police can only stop people when they get physical or when people disrupt a 'private' event. A wedding or professor lecture is a 'private' setting. Town hall is a public setting."
Actually, that is not true at all. Police are entitled to stop what they perceive to believe as something that may get out of hand before it does. Happens everyday.
If the police believe that people are about to be lets say stampeded, they absolutely have the right to bring calmness, by force if necessary.
You like to think they don't have the right or the legal right, but you are wrong again.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: Buster said:
"Police can only stop people when they get physical or when people disrupt a 'private' event. A wedding or professor lecture is a 'private' setting. Town hall is a public setting."
Actually, that is not true at all. Police are entitled to stop what they perceive to believe as something that may get out of hand before it does. Happens everyday.
If the police believe that people are about to be lets say stampeded, they absolutely have the right to bring calmness, by force if necessary.
You like to think they don't have the right or the legal right, but you are wrong again.
If people are about to be stampeded, that is an act of physical attack. They can and should stop that if they see it coming. Police can stop action but not voice.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Buster said: "I have a concealed carry permit to protect me and my family. I am not a threat to anyone. I have seen alot of shootings happen at public places, I carry my weapon everywhere I go that I can. Do guns kill people, or does the gun kill people? Do spoons make people fat, or does the person make one's self fat?"
Actually the spoon does not make you fat, it's what and how much you put on the spoon that makes you fat! =)
If you want to strap a gun on your leg to protect your family, knock yourself out. I own guns too.
Again, you are twisting the scenario because you do not want to admit how nutty it really is for a person to show up with strapped guns on their legs, shouting, ranting and raving.
If some man lets say was at a meeting that you were at with your family, ranting, raving etc....You know darn well that would upset you to see that gun on his leg.
You know darn well that is why that person bought the gun to the the town hall meeting. It was to scare ppl and to say "I am so darn bad"...
Of course I think you have the right to keep your family safe, but there was absolutely no reason for anyone going to a Town Hall meeting to show up with a gun(especially when they went therer knowing they were going to try to disturb the ppl by ranting and raving) other than for Scare Tactic.
These nut cases were not there to protect their family's for goodness sakes and you know it. I am happy that you want to protect your family, but my goodness these are two different things.
If you can't admit there is a big difference then there is no reason to keep belaboring the point.
Again, you make a lot of assumptions. I never said anything about guns in general. We are discussing town hall meetings.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
The people were within their rights that had guns on them.
You could say they were trying to provoke fear. Someone else could say they were just using their right and did not want to be a victim of a crime if something deadly were to happen at the townhall. I'm not going to tell people what they are thinking.
Many news groups are anti-gun and will go pick out someone in the crowd carrying a gun to interview.
Carrying a gun: Justified Voicing their opinion: Justified
I don't see any laws broken by them and they did not do anything wrong or cause any harm. I don't see what the deal is? Maybe it's because guns are part of my everyday life and I see them as a tool for defense and not a weapon they are going to kill someone with.
Your making the assumption they were going to threaten/kill someone, I just look at it as a right and nothing further.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Buster said:"Police can stop action but not voice."
That is not true Buster. It's called inciting a riot or disturbing the peace. If the police deem you are threatening by shouting, ranting or raving and deem that it can turn into something violent, then they can shut the person down.
The police do this all the time. If you don't like it change the law. But that is the facts Jack.
To take it a step further, under the Patriot Act,
Based on George Bush's Patriot Act, you don't even need probable cause to arrest someone. I am not saying we should do this. That is called "The Patriot Act"...
Again you think you have more rights than you actually do. Right now the federal government can come and take your guns if they think you are a terrorist.
This could theoretically be used against any of us who own guns. They can do this without a court order under the Patriot Act. They don't have to show proof to a judge. They can arrest you, take all your guns and they don't have to show the judge the proof that you are a terrorist first.
Again, you can try to justify these ppl that behave this way at Town Hall Meetings, but I am happy that like I said earlier the vast, vast majority of ppl do not think you have the right to disturb the peace in a Town Hall Meeting or the like.
Ppl are arrested through forcible removing because they are deemed as disturbing the peace. So you are flat out wrong about not being able to shut down someone because they are only using their voice.
Generally speaking if you have a big public protest you need a permit and it has to be orderly or else you can be arrested.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
PS If you are seeing multiple shootings in multiple public places, you might want to go to different public places eh? Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Buster said: "The people were within their rights that had guns on them. "
Be honest, please answer this: What do you believe their intent was?
a) they wear guns all the time b) they thought they would be threatened at the town hall mtg or c) they wanted to make a point
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
The answer is so clear but Buster won't admit it.
C) They wanted to make a point.
Buster I have never owned a gun or ever felt the need for one. Where do you live that you have such fear and a need to protect yourself and your family???? I've lived in big cities and in suburbs and have always felt safe wherever I have lived.
Did you check out the pictures on Huffington Post of the rally today. Why do those protests look so vile and carry such signs displaying hatred. What are the hoods for? Looks like the KKK to me.
Is there not a way to show ones disapproval without being rank and crass?
B)they thought they would be threatened at the town hall mtg
There were cases of SEIU thugs manhandling protesters. That stopped right when the protesters started openly carrying weapons.
Posted by Truthfinder (Member # 8512) on :
A 2-hour repeat of Glenn Beck's coverage of the D.C. protest is on FOX News right now.
C-SPAN will have a repeat of their coverage of the same event tomorrow night - not sure what time.
I'm going to watch some of what I missed this afternoon.
Posted by nomoremuscles (Member # 9560) on :
quote:Originally posted by Buster: Carrying a gun: Justified Voicing their opinion: Justified
Suppose he was brown skinned? Suppose he was wearing a head scarf? Carrying a Koran? Suppose it was at a high school? A university?
Would people have seen this as innocently?
Would the same people still be championing him?
I am as pro-gun as a person can be -- but if anyone cannot see that this is not the issue when someone comes to a townhall meeting with a sidearm, then there really is not much to say.
It was done to make a point. Plain and simple.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Amen nomoremuscles! Excellent points you made and puts it all in perspective.
Exactly my sentiment. I own guns for different reasons then these idiots who use them as scare tactics. No one should own guns for the sake of scaring people or to impose your right to make a scene.
Guns are for hunting or protection, not to impose yourself on others in radical behavior and disturbing the peace.
This thread is very telling and scary at the same time. So sad that ppl justify this kind of behavior.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
So sad, too, that so many can't think for themselves and are being lead by the propaganda of right wing talk radio and Dick Armey and other
organizations for the sole purpose of destroying Obama's Presidency and to promote fear and hate.
I didn't hear them complaining when Bush squandered the surplus he inherited from Clinton and put the deficit thru the roof nor when he was stepping all over the constitution. And Bushes taxes cuts were for a small percentage of the wealthiest American's in the country but they think that was OK. The very people who didn't need a tax cut.
Such sore losers they can't accept they were voted out of power and for good reason, so now the will disrupt like children and be vile and disrespectful of the office of the Presidency in a way that has never been seen.
They won't win thou because thankfully there is progressive radio to expose their under handed tactics and Huffington Post and other blogs and when this health care bill does get passed all these tea baggers will realize that they will be the beneficiaries of it and wonder just what the hell they were protesting about.
You can't take us back in time no matter how you shout, disrupt or pout. The country will move forward with or without you. It's the 21 century not Philadelphia during the days of the founding fathers.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: Buster said:"Police can stop action but not voice."
That is not true Buster. It's called inciting a riot or disturbing the peace. If the police deem you are threatening by shouting, ranting or raving and deem that it can turn into something violent, then they can shut the person down.
The police do this all the time. If you don't like it change the law. But that is the facts Jack.
To take it a step further, under the Patriot Act,
Based on George Bush's Patriot Act, you don't even need probable cause to arrest someone. I am not saying we should do this. That is called "The Patriot Act"...
Again you think you have more rights than you actually do. Right now the federal government can come and take your guns if they think you are a terrorist.
This could theoretically be used against any of us who own guns. They can do this without a court order under the Patriot Act. They don't have to show proof to a judge. They can arrest you, take all your guns and they don't have to show the judge the proof that you are a terrorist first.
Again, you can try to justify these ppl that behave this way at Town Hall Meetings, but I am happy that like I said earlier the vast, vast majority of ppl do not think you have the right to disturb the peace in a Town Hall Meeting or the like.
Ppl are arrested through forcible removing because they are deemed as disturbing the peace. So you are flat out wrong about not being able to shut down someone because they are only using their voice.
Generally speaking if you have a big public protest you need a permit and it has to be orderly or else you can be arrested.
I actually have a friend over right now at my house. He was a cop for 13 years and now does public school duty. His words,
"I can not stop anyone from speaking their thoughts, but if they speak threat to someone and then 'proceed' to make any action they against someone they have made a threat to, then I can stop them."
I also never voted for Bush and didn't like him. The Patriot Act is crap. He bailed out the automakers, he bailed out banks the first time, and he sent out stimulus checks to certain groups of people. He did some very 'liberal' actions.
Obama has done nothing to repeal these things Bush has implemented. He has only taken them to a new level. It is not about presidents and the letter (R) or (D) next to their name. It is about 'control' vs. 'freedom'
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: PS If you are seeing multiple shootings in multiple public places, you might want to go to different public places eh?
I would but it is where my business is... I work in the number 2 crime capital of the country.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: Buster said: "The people were within their rights that had guns on them. "
Be honest, please answer this: What do you believe their intent was?
a) they wear guns all the time b) they thought they would be threatened at the town hall mtg or c) they wanted to make a point
All of the above.
a) yes these people that were carrying guns most likely carry all the time b) there is always a crime waiting to happen c) yes they made a point about their freedom to own a gun, the current president has anti-gun tendencies
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: The answer is so clear but Buster won't admit it.
C) They wanted to make a point.
Buster I have never owned a gun or ever felt the need for one. Where do you live that you have such fear and a need to protect yourself and your family???? I've lived in big cities and in suburbs and have always felt safe wherever I have lived.
Did you check out the pictures on Huffington Post of the rally today. Why do those protests look so vile and carry such signs displaying hatred. What are the hoods for? Looks like the KKK to me.
Is there not a way to show ones disapproval without being rank and crass?
I own a gun because my place of work is in a very dangerous part of town in the number 2 crime capital of the country. My dad has had a gun pointed on him twice and he has been shot in the legs.
I use to be paranoid about getting killed, now that I carry a gun, I am no longer paranoid.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: So sad, too, that so many can't think for themselves and are being lead by the propaganda of right wing talk radio and Dick Armey and other
organizations for the sole purpose of destroying Obama's Presidency and to promote fear and hate.
I didn't hear them complaining when Bush squandered the surplus he inherited from Clinton and put the deficit thru the roof nor when he was stepping all over the constitution. And Bushes taxes cuts were for a small percentage of the wealthiest American's in the country but they think that was OK. The very people who didn't need a tax cut.
Such sore losers they can't accept they were voted out of power and for good reason, so now the will disrupt like children and be vile and disrespectful of the office of the Presidency in a way that has never been seen.
They won't win thou because thankfully there is progressive radio to expose their under handed tactics and Huffington Post and other blogs and when this health care bill does get passed all these tea baggers will realize that they will be the beneficiaries of it and wonder just what the hell they were protesting about.
You can't take us back in time no matter how you shout, disrupt or pout. The country will move forward with or without you. It's the 21 century not Philadelphia during the days of the founding fathers.
and there are no groups whose soul service was to tear down Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, ect? Just Obama?
Why is healthcare a right? No one has answered this in this whole thread yet...
If you want someone to complain about Bush's spending, I will. Bush was no republican... he spent more than any president has in history, Obama has now spent more than every american president in history combined and he is still in his first year... Why are you not mad about that?
I'm not trying to take us back in time... I don't even know what that means... Then only thing that should change with time is things age and technology becomes more advanced. Morals, policy, principle, and law should remain.
I'll ask again, "Why is free healthcare a right?" It is the million dollar question.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Buster,
It does not matter what your friend the cop says. Police officers can and do stop "voice" so he is either lying or you are tying to convince us of laws that do not exist.
Either way, we all know that police can and do stop peopel even when guns, physical attacks etc...are or are not used.
Again, you are either being lied to or are ignorant. I am trying to educate you.
The police have every right to stop anyone they please if they believe they are "inciting a riot" or "disturbing the peace". AM I RIGHT?????? If you think I am wrong, just ask your cop friend about what I just wrote.
I have friends and an ex-brother in law that is a cop and he says otherwise.
I agree with you that the Patriot Act is garbage. It is a racist and unfair piece of legislation that allows power to be used when it's not necessarily warranted. Funny thing is, that it can also be used against anyone depending on who is is in power.
Obama is not for the Patriot Act, so that is another false-hood you are propagating.
Show me where Obama supports the Patriot Act. Don't think you can.
I am sorry you work or live in such a dangerous place, but again, that has absolutely nothing to do with where these particular Town Hall Meetings have taken place. I truly wish you the best and hope you are careful where you work.
But, I will continue to point out that the scenario of where you work is far different than a organized Town Hall Meeting where people gather for educational purposes. True????
So again, you avoid answering whether you think it's appropriate to strap a visible gun on your leg and disturb the peace at a Town Hall meeting and rant, rave etc....
And, in regards to your answer all of the above....How did I know you would answer that way??????
They made a point all right. They made the whole world realize that nut-cases live in America and strap visible guns(not even concealed) to bully people into stopping meetings. They use fear tactics and scare innocent ppl who were there trying to make informed decisions while at Town Hall Meetings. But, you think that stopping that form of democracy is okay?????
Who is ruining our democratic process?????????
You are correct Buster, Healthcare is "NOT A RIGHT", it's something that "CIVILIZED" nations offer to "ALL" their citizens in the Industrialized World.
It is something that is provided in the option of an "affordable" method so that the well being of its citizens might have a shot at being healthy, which ultimately helps the whole overall society, by providing healthier citizens, hence healthier workers and contributers.
Keep your plan if you are happy, but we are not going to keep living in the stone ages.
We live in what many Americans would call a "Moral" country, but your telling me we should not even make sure we have an "Affordable Option"???? Gosh forbid we give ppl the right to have that.
I accept that you don't want all people to at the bare minimum have an affordable option, but you need to accept that eventually they will or it will be the demise of our country.
It's an embarrassment that people do not have some kind of plan like this and in my opinion is morally wrong.
If we decide through the democratic process that it's a "Right" then at that point it will be a right.
I pray for that day. It's called progress and doing the right thing. I see Americans that jump up and down and are happy to help like ppl in other country's, but we allow our own to not have care. Now that is mind boggling to me.
I am not some whack job leftist. I am someone that believes in doing the right thing. It is not always easy doing that, but when I put my head down on my pillow, I feel good at night.
Posted by luvs2ride (Member # 8090) on :
Abx, You must be watching NBC my friend. I am sure you knew nothing about Van Jones until he resigned and then you think he is an innocent victim of a malicious smear campaign and you probably still have not seen the ACORN video. It is pure disgusting as is Van Jones and our President Obama is thick as thieves with this anti-american slimeballs. I don't care what color Obama is. He is corrupt as is the entire govt. Both parties.
If you want to clean up corporate corruption, start by cleaning up govt corruption. The govt enables the corporations.
I don't even want to hear about resolving healthcare or anything else until we clean house of all corrupt politicians.
Giving our healthcare to Uncle Sam is like asking the fox to watch the henhouse. But you wouldn't know anything about that because you are brainwashed.
Posted by luvs2ride (Member # 8090) on :
Why don't you actually go to a tea party and see for yourself what it is about. It sure ain't about color!!!!
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
I don't watch TV my friend and I'm informed of the issues on all sides. The last place I would ever go or want to be associated with is any tea party movement.
There has always been corruption in our government and I'm not saying it's right or that I like it but the eight years of the Bush administration brought about the biggest corruption and disregard for the constitution we have ever seen, yet; I never saw any republican or those on the other side say a thing. It was only the progressives that were appalled and complaining.
Our new administration was voted in to try to change that environment and it's a big task because our government has favored the corporations over it's people for a long time. May be it can't be changed but one has to at least give the administration time, given the mess it inherited from George Bush and what a mess it was along with record deficits when Bush inherited a surplus!!!
However, althought you say your movement is about making government smaller and lowering taxes, etc., how do you explain all the vile signs people are carrying. They are signs of hate and the people in that movement are saying and doing hateful things. A group can protest that they
want lower taxes or smaller government without espousing lies such as the President is a Muslim or making him look like Hitler. And even if he was a Muslim what would be wrong with that?
He is a highly intelligent decent man and his religious affiliation should not matter, despite the fact that it is a lie and he is not a muslin. The people in the tea party movement are acting like a bunch of hooligans, vile and disrespectful toward the public, their fellow man, the office of the Presidency and then you say you want your rights respected. You have to learn how to act in a civilized society first and follow the rules of convention when it comes to protesting and making your voices heard. The behavior you showed at the town halls was despicable and distinction has been explained very clearly on this post several times so I'm not getting into that. Engulfing on a town hall for the very purpose to disrupt the flow of public discourse so that no information can be disseminated is WRONG and vile behavior.
I would not have any part of your movement, the people associated with it and, in fact, the ideas that the majority of you have infringe on my rights. The other half of the country view you as a fringe group of lunatics misinformed and ignorant.
Take a look at the photos from the rally yesterday and tell me that the signs and behavior of your group don't represent hate, racism (KKK hoods) and vile behavior. If you can't see it, then you have been totally brainwashed by your right wing talk radio kooks who only want to see this administration fail and push its narrow, hateful ideas on the rest of society.
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: Buster,
It does not matter what your friend the cop says. Police officers can and do stop "voice" so he is either lying or you are tying to convince us of laws that do not exist.
Either way, we all know that police can and do stop peopel even when guns, physical attacks etc...are or are not used.
Again, you are either being lied to or are ignorant. I am trying to educate you.
The police have every right to stop anyone they please if they believe they are "inciting a riot" or "disturbing the peace". AM I RIGHT?????? If you think I am wrong, just ask your cop friend about what I just wrote.
I have friends and an ex-brother in law that is a cop and he says otherwise.
I agree with you that the Patriot Act is garbage. It is a racist and unfair piece of legislation that allows power to be used when it's not necessarily warranted. Funny thing is, that it can also be used against anyone depending on who is is in power.
Obama is not for the Patriot Act, so that is another false-hood you are propagating.
Show me where Obama supports the Patriot Act. Don't think you can.
I am sorry you work or live in such a dangerous place, but again, that has absolutely nothing to do with where these particular Town Hall Meetings have taken place. I truly wish you the best and hope you are careful where you work.
But, I will continue to point out that the scenario of where you work is far different than a organized Town Hall Meeting where people gather for educational purposes. True????
So again, you avoid answering whether you think it's appropriate to strap a visible gun on your leg and disturb the peace at a Town Hall meeting and rant, rave etc....
And, in regards to your answer all of the above....How did I know you would answer that way??????
They made a point all right. They made the whole world realize that nut-cases live in America and strap visible guns(not even concealed) to bully people into stopping meetings. They use fear tactics and scare innocent ppl who were there trying to make informed decisions while at Town Hall Meetings. But, you think that stopping that form of democracy is okay?????
Who is ruining our democratic process?????????
You are correct Buster, Healthcare is "NOT A RIGHT", it's something that "CIVILIZED" nations offer to "ALL" their citizens in the Industrialized World.
It is something that is provided in the option of an "affordable" method so that the well being of its citizens might have a shot at being healthy, which ultimately helps the whole overall society, by providing healthier citizens, hence healthier workers and contributers.
Keep your plan if you are happy, but we are not going to keep living in the stone ages.
We live in what many Americans would call a "Moral" country, but your telling me we should not even make sure we have an "Affordable Option"???? Gosh forbid we give ppl the right to have that.
I accept that you don't want all people to at the bare minimum have an affordable option, but you need to accept that eventually they will or it will be the demise of our country.
It's an embarrassment that people do not have some kind of plan like this and in my opinion is morally wrong.
If we decide through the democratic process that it's a "Right" then at that point it will be a right.
I pray for that day. It's called progress and doing the right thing. I see Americans that jump up and down and are happy to help like ppl in other country's, but we allow our own to not have care. Now that is mind boggling to me.
I am not some whack job leftist. I am someone that believes in doing the right thing. It is not always easy doing that, but when I put my head down on my pillow, I feel good at night.
I guess you and I are just hearing different stories on cops then... we have both been told differently. The police work for the government and government can not inhibit the first amendment.
What I mean about Obama and the Patriot Act, is why does he not repeal it? I would like him to... It seems like Bush and him are alot of the same.
Do you know about Natural Rights? Just because congress pushes through something doesn't mean it becomes a natural right.
As humans, before any form of government have a "natural" right to:
1st Freedom of religion, of speech, of the press, to assemble, and to petition 2nd The Right to Bear Arms 3rd No quartering of soldiers in private houses during times of peace. In a time of war, Congress can pass a law stating that soldiers should be quartered. 4th Interdiction of unreasonable Searches and seizures; warrants 5th Indictments; Due process; Self-incrimination; Double jeopardy, and rules for Eminent Domain. 6th Right to a fair and speedy public trial, Notice of accusations, Confronting one's accuser, Subpoenas, Right to counsel 7th Right to trial by jury in civil cases 8th No excessive bail & fines or cruel & unusual punishment 9th Unenumerated rights 10th Limits the power of the Federal government 11th Immunity of states from suits from out-of-state citizens and foreigners not living within the state borders. 12th Revision of presidential election procedures 13th Abolition of slavery, except as punishment for a crime. 14th Citizenship, state due process, applies Bill of Rights to the states, revision to apportionment of Representatives, Denies public office to anyone who has rebelled against the United States 15th Suffrage no longer restricted by race 16th Allows federal income tax 17th Direct election to the United States Senate 18th Prohibition of alcohol 19th Women's suffrage 20th Term Commencement for congress (January 3) and president (January 20.) 21st Repeal of Eighteenth Amendment; state and local prohibition no longer required by law. 22nd Limits the president to two terms 23rd Representation of Washington, D.C. 24th Prohibition of the restriction of voting rights due to the non-payment of poll taxes 25th Presidential Succession 26th Voting age nationally established as age 18 27th Variance of congressional compensation
I don't see stealing in there. I don't see any taking from one and giving to another. I don't see anywhere where the government has to give you something that costs money.
Healthcare is always going to be expensive. It is supply/demand. The ratio of doctors to civilians is very low. Prices will keep going up as more and more technology increases and therapies. They will also continue to grow because civilians are reproducing faster than doctors are graduating from college. There has to be a better way to bring prices down, rather than the unmoral way of taking from one and giving to another.
Posted by luvs2ride (Member # 8090) on :
The Huffington Post? Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
I'm sorry but this country cannot be run by far left or far right.
Huffington Post...... Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: I don't watch TV my friend and I'm informed of the issues on all sides. The last place I would ever go or want to be associated with is any tea party movement.
There has always been corruption in our government and I'm not saying it's right or that I like it but the eight years of the Bush administration brought about the biggest corruption and disregard for the constitution we have ever seen, yet; I never saw any republican or those on the other side say a thing. It was only the progressives that were appalled and complaining.
Our new administration was voted in to try to change that environment and it's a big task because our government has favored the corporations over it's people for a long time. May be it can't be changed but one has to at least give the administration time, given the mess it inherited from George Bush and what a mess it was along with record deficits when Bush inherited a surplus!!!
However, althought you say your movement is about making government smaller and lowering taxes, etc., how do you explain all the vile signs people are carrying. They are signs of hate and the people in that movement are saying and doing hateful things. A group can protest that they
want lower taxes or smaller government without espousing lies such as the President is a Muslim or making him look like Hitler. And even if he was a Muslim what would be wrong with that?
He is a highly intelligent decent man and his religious affiliation should not matter, despite the fact that it is a lie and he is not a muslin. The people in the tea party movement are acting like a bunch of hooligans, vile and disrespectful toward the public, their fellow man, the office of the Presidency and then you say you want your rights respected. You have to learn how to act in a civilized society first and follow the rules of convention when it comes to protesting and making your voices heard. The behavior you showed at the town halls was despicable and distinction has been explained very clearly on this post several times so I'm not getting into that. Engulfing on a town hall for the very purpose to disrupt the flow of public discourse so that no information can be disseminated is WRONG and vile behavior.
I would not have any part of your movement, the people associated with it and, in fact, the ideas that the majority of you have infringe on my rights. The other half of the country view you as a fringe group of lunatics misinformed and ignorant.
Take a look at the photos from the rally yesterday and tell me that the signs and behavior of your group don't represent hate, racism (KKK hoods) and vile behavior. If you can't see it, then you have been totally brainwashed by your right wing talk radio kooks who only want to see this administration fail and push its narrow, hateful ideas on the rest of society.
You have already heard what I think about president bush and there were many talk radio and tv show guys that hammered bush for his socialist tendencies. I sometimes wonder why a (D) was not next to his name...
Don't get so caught up in the protests. People can say whatever they want, make any kind of sign they want, ect. Both sides do it and they have the right to do it. Does some of it seem strange or rude, yes... but it is lawful.
If you think obama is going to kick out corporations, lobbyist, ect. you were wrong. He has hired lobbyist (just like every other president) he has bailed out the automakers and government now owns them, he has bailed out the banks (bush did also), he has written $787,000,000,000 in stimulus money to companies, and I can keep going.
What change has he brought? I am trying to find it.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Buster you can post all the junk you want. If you want to see health care as a commodity then it says that you are not a man of compassion and care little for your fellow man.
Any person with half a brain and the ability to have empathy and compassion for all of his brethren knows that everyone should be allowed equal access to health care no matter what their race, gender or economic status. It's a moral issue that we provide for all and no one should unduly suffer because they have less.
And in most cases we are not talking about people who have less but middle class families who lose everything because of the way the current health care system is structured if someone should become seriously ill or if they should lose their job in this recession.
What kind of mind set do you have? Are you living in this century? People should beg, go without and die because you think that if the government provides a safety net for all its citizens it's taking away people's rights. That logic is so twisted it borders on evil.
One day the shoe may be on the other foot and you may be speaking differently may learn some of the sad lessons of life the hard way.
Posted by Truthfinder (Member # 8512) on :
Back on the healthcare reform proposals for a moment.....
I heard some startling numbers last week. I think this was from an independent group, but it may have been from the CBO (Congressional Budget Office).
In any case, the $900 Billion dollar price tag works for about 8 years. But at the 8-year mark, the cost skyrockets to an astonishing $4.2 TRILLION over the next 10 years.
And those are about the most optimistic numbers I've seen yet.
To give you an idea of the real cost, our entire federal budget for Fiscal Year 2010 is $3.6 Trillion. Do you still think this healthcare program is affordable or sustainable?
On other issues......
Ha, ha - ``Fixed News'' [instead of FOX News]. I like that, Abx. It fits and it's kinda catchy. `Hey folks, if your news source is `broken', switch on over to Fixed News for what's really going on!'
Just like Luvs is saying - nobody seemed to know about the planned rally in D.C. yesterday (and other rallies across the nation), or the Van Jones scandal or the ACORN scandal or the National Endowment for the Arts scandal.... unless they'd tuned into Fixed News occasionally over the past 6 months.
When reports of some open-carry protesters hit the news, I never did get the whole story so I decided to withhold judgment. Like Ninja, I'd heard of reports of threats and other acts against protesters. If true, that changes the dynamics entirely.
Liesandmorelies, Abxnomore - seriously now, have either of you ever been to a town hall meeting?
If you expect to go and just sit there and have your questions answered by listening to some speech, forget it. Even specific questions are often met with a bunch of lofty, ideological rhetoric. People are sick of it. That's not going to fly anymore. If it means being a little disruptive to get answers from our reps - people who have the ability to radically change the very fabric of our lives - then so be it.
***''So sad, too, that so many can't think for themselves and are being lead by the propaganda of right wing talk radio and Dick Armey and other....''****
So, the answer is to rely on the propaganda from the Huffington Post? Oh, please. How about demanding some objective reporting from mainstream sources so we have something genuine to work with?
*** ``Why do those protest[er]s look so vile and carry such signs displaying hatred. What are the hoods for? Looks like the KKK to me.''***
What are YOU looking at?! Hoods? You mean because of the RAIN? Sheesh.
*** ``how do you explain all the vile signs people are carrying. They are signs of hate and the people in that movement are saying and doing hateful things.'' ***
It would be easier to accept statement like this from you if you would stop referring to protesters as ``tea baggers''. As I'm sure you know, that term has offensive sexual overtones and amounts to derisive name-calling. And I see no hateful things being done.
*** ``You can't take us back in time no matter how you shout, disrupt or pout. The country will move forward with or without you. It's the 21 century not Philadelphia during the days of the founding fathers.'' ***
And if `moving forward' means making all the same mistakes that other nations have already made, then I'll gladly take old Philly.
*** ``You are correct Buster, Healthcare is "NOT A RIGHT", it's something that "CIVILIZED" nations offer to "ALL" their citizens in the Industrialized World.'' ***
And many of those nations are going broke because of it. The U.K. is in real trouble and we are already broke.....
*** ``PS If you are seeing multiple shootings in multiple public places, you might want to go to different public places eh?'' ***
Oh, you mean like run from the problem and let the criminals have free rein?
*** ``It's an embarrassment that people do not have some kind of plan like this and in my opinion is morally wrong.'' ***
IMO, it would be morally wrong to adopt a program that is doomed to fail and that will bankrupt the nation. You can't save someone from drowning if you are drowning yourself.
*** ``If we decide through the democratic process that it's a "Right" then at that point it will be a right.'' ***
No. It won't. It will just be another `entitlement', like Welfare.
(And Welfare is a prime example of another well-intentioned program that was designed to help people get on their feet, but ended up spawning an entire culture that knows no other way of life other than taking public assistance funds and producing children that other people pay to raise and educate. Those people deserve better than that, and so do the people footing the bill.)
And as Luvs has asked in other terrific posts she has made, why is the focus on health INSURANCE? That just supports a broken system.
I'm just wondering something..... maybe you can tell me Luvs....... what would it cost for car insurance if everybody could file a claim for flat tires, ripped upholstery, internal computer malfunctions, worn tire replacement, alignments, wheel-balancing and tire rotation, etc. (basically every little thing that could go wrong). Wouldn't insurance premiums be sky high?
Seems like that's what we are trying to do with health insurance - get EVERYTHING covered. I'm not sure that's the way to go.
If the government will get busy and honestly do something about lowering costs, more people could pay for minor care needed themselves, and more Americans could afford to have health insurance to cover `the big stuff'.
Posted by luvs2ride (Member # 8090) on :
Oh yeah Buster. You are so right. People are thinking Obama is going to deal with the evil capitalists and the truth is he is in bed so thick with them. Spread the wealth? Yep. Right into his pocket and all the rich corporate giants who helped him get elected.
And I agree with you. Bush was riding the same train.
Take a look at who is investing heavily in Green energy and look at govt mandating we all convert to their energy. The billionnaires get richer and richer and govt helps them get there by forcing us to buy their products.
Bush acted like a dictator, a fascist not a socialist. No way did he have any socialist policies. Learn the difference. He gave the corporations free reign to further get us where we are today.
So you would have preferred that Obama let all the banks and auto industries fail and millions more lose their jobs and assets? Economists have reported that the recession has bottomed out and we moving out of it.
That was because of the actions the President took and the stimulus bill. I guess you would have preferred to see another great depression and have even more people unemployed and suffering than we already do?
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
I went to one town hall meeting but I live in area where the antics of the tea party people wouldn't be tolerated. They tried but didn't get any where.
They were not allowed to disrupt the meeting and turn it into chaos because the people who were attending were hip to their antics.
You guys can rant all you want. We have the President we have and we will see where the chips fall. It looks good that there will be health care reform finally in this country and for that I am PROUD AND HAPPY.
The rest of you can spew your anger and stamp your feet, continue to be lead by the nose by Glenn Beck and Rush and I hope your movement fails so that it does not destroy this country and that common sense and intelligence prevails.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Truthfinder it's too bad you listen to Fixed News and get such a one sided view of things.
The European nations are having a better recovery and less unemployment and hardship than the U.S. because of the health care and safety net they provide for their citizens.
Their citizens are not losing their homes and assets because of rising medical costs, or being uninsured or due to the illness of a sick family member.
It's really said when one can't look at all the facts and have an open mind.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: Buster you can post all the junk you want. If you want to see health care as a commodity then it says that you are not a man of compassion and care little for your fellow man.
Any person with half a brain and the ability to have empathy and compassion for all of his brethren knows that everyone should be allowed equal access to health care no matter what their race, gender or economic status. It's a moral issue that we provide for all and no one should unduly suffer because they have less.
And in most cases we are not talking about people who have less but middle class families who lose everything because of the way the current health care system is structured if someone should become seriously ill or if they should lose their job in this recession.
What kind of mind set do you have? Are you living in this century? People should beg, go without and die because you think that if the government provides a safety net for all its citizens it's taking away people's rights. That logic is so twisted it borders on evil.
One day the shoe may be on the other foot and you may be speaking differently may learn some of the sad lessons of life the hard way.
I am not a man of compassion?
I give to my church, I give and help out for a non profit summer camp for inner city kids in the summers, I coach a kids football team for free of charge and my dad buys the uniforms for the kids. I help others with lyme disease financially and cook meals for them at times as well. I try everyday to put someone infront of myself. I do fail at doing that at times but I try. I'm not perfect.
I have already stated I am 100% for charity, absolutely 100% for it. I am not for taking money from one person and giving it to another. That is stealing.
ABXnomore, I am growing tired of the personal attacks. You are resorting to attacking me as a person instead of the problem at hand of making healthcare more affordable. When have I ever done wrong to you?
Don't come back if you can't hold your tongue against people that have different ideas or opinions than you.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: Bush acted like a dictator, a fascist not a socialist. No way did he have any socialist policies. Learn the difference. He gave the corporations free reign to further get us where we are today.
So you would have preferred that Obama let all the banks and auto industries fail and millions more lose their jobs and assets? Economists have reported that the recession has bottomed out and we moving out of it.
That was because of the actions the President took and the stimulus bill. I guess you would have preferred to see another great depression and have even more people unemployed and suffering than we already do?
Facists and Socialist are not the same thing but they are very close to each other. Hitler was head of the "Nationalist Socialist Party" did you even watch the video I posted on the last page? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFXuGIpsdE0
You are forgetting freedom to achieve in this country also means freedom to fail as well. You say Bush is a facists (which in some ways he was) but then you want bigger government power. That is taking steps towards an oligarchy (where a group of people rule)
There has to be a form of responsibility in the country, if my business crashes will you give me the money to make it recover again?
I am for limited government control. You want government more powerful and that just paves the road for a oligarchy or dictator.
It goes from left to right.
Dictator -> oligarchy -> democracy -> republic -> anarchy. Our founding fathers gave us a Republic. (Limited government power)
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
I think it's wonderful that you give to your church and help kids but I don't think it is the role of the church to provide health care nor can they do it effectively or comprehensively for all.
Not everyone belongs to a church or is religious and some churches don't have the resources to do what other churches can do so it's not a level playing field. People should not have to beg or seek charity the of others for health care.
Your analysis of Bush is too simplistic. You may want to say he had socialist policies because he enlarged the role of government but it was in an effort to help big corporations and his rich corporate friends.....that is moving toward fascism and that is what we got with him corporate fascism, where the corporations were totally unregulated and played Russian roulette at the expense of the people. It was all about greed because the safe guards and regulations that were once there to protect the public were lifted.
There has to be some kind of balance between the corporate sector and government. Government needs to regulate to protect the public, when needed. Look what happened in the banking sector when all those bad loans were made that helped caused in big part the banking and financial crisis. All the old rules that regulated them had systematically been lifted since Regan and it got us in one fine mess and ruined the lives of many Americans and our economy.
And to make it clear to others I read a wide variety of news sources, not just Huffington Post, which happens to do a good job in exposing what the mainstream media does not.
If you think you will get the full picture from just reading mainstream news sources or listening to your local news station you are sadly mistaken. I'm very informed on all the issues. I follow the issues very closely both on the left and the right. I have my own opinions, just as you have yours.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Grandmother I beg to differ with you but I will admit he's not perfect and I'd like to see him move even more left.
Who do you propose would be better?
This is the President that was rightfully elected, unlike Bush who sole the election. May be he should be given a chance to prove himself. He has been in office for roughly seven months and inherited the worst set of circumstances in Presidential history. If he is deemed to have done a bad job, he will be voted out next term.
In the meantime, trying to work with what we have to improve things can go a long way.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: I think it's wonderful that you give to your church and help kids but I don't think it is the role of the church to provide health care nor can they do it effectively or comprehensively for all.
Not everyone belongs to a church or is religious and some churches don't have the resources to do what other churches can do so it's not a level playing field. People should not have to beg or seek charity the of others for health care.
Your analysis of Bush is too simplistic. You may want to say he had socialist policies because he enlarged the role of government but it was in an effort to help big corporations and his rich corporate friends.....that is moving toward fascism and that is what we got with him corporate fascism, where the corporations were totally unregulated and played Russian roulette at the expense of the people. It was all about greed because the safe guards and regulations that were once there to protect the public were lifted.
There has to be some kind of balance between the corporate sector and government. Government needs to regulate to protect the public, when needed. Look what happened in the banking sector when all those bad loans were made that helped caused in big part the banking and financial crisis. All the old rules that regulated them had systematically been lifted since Regan and it got us in one fine mess and ruined the lives of many Americans and our economy.
And to make it clear to others I read a wide variety of news sources, not just Huffington Post, which happens to do a good job in exposing what the mainstream media does not.
If you think you will get the full picture from just reading mainstream news sources or listening to your local news station you are sadly mistaken. I'm very informed on all the issues. I follow the issues very closely both on the left and the right. I have my own opinions, just as you have yours.
Never said healthcare should be provided by the church. I also missed your apology for attacking me and a few other on here but that is fine...
The bad loans were made because government was telling Freddy and Fannie 'to give loans' to people that were not going to pay them off and government was compensating them with tax payer dollars. It was actually several select republicans that tried to stop the bad loans but it was blocked. I can show you video of it if you like straight out of the meetings...?
I don't care what news pages you read, it doesn't make you right. I could say I watch TV and read the newspapers 24/7, then I could say the germans bombed pearl harbor. Would that make me right?
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
Everyone needs to watch this video, the whole thing is good but especially start at 2:58
The bad loans were made because government was telling Freddy and Fannie 'to give loans' to people that were not going to pay them off and government was compensating them with tax payer dollars. It was actually several select republicans that tried to stop the bad loans but it was blocked. I can show you video of it if you like straight out of the meetings...?
This is only one side of the story. If the regulations that used to regulate the banking industry were in place and not gradually lifted that would not have happened and it was not only loans made by Freddie and Fanny that caused the problem. Were they lifted by many who served to benefit from them yes, corporate and government people alike. It's not news that corporations and government have been in bed together for years. But the movement for change was an attempt to change that. Time will tell.
If I offended anyone I apologize but these kinds of issues get very personal because it's clear few will deviate from the positions they hold.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: The bad loans were made because government was telling Freddy and Fannie 'to give loans' to people that were not going to pay them off and government was compensating them with tax payer dollars. It was actually several select republicans that tried to stop the bad loans but it was blocked. I can show you video of it if you like straight out of the meetings...?
This is only one side of the story. If the regulations that used to regulate the banking industry were in place and not gradually lifted that would not have happened and it was not only loans made by Freddie and Fanny that caused the problem. Were they lifted by many who served to benefit from them yes, corporate and government people alike. It's not news that corporations and government have been in bed together for years. But the movement for change was an attempt to change that. Time will tell.
If I offended anyone I apologize but these kinds of issues get very personal because it's clear few will deviate from the positions they hold.
I'm glad you realize now that these massive corporations and government are in bed together. Doesn't matter which party they are in, they all are doing it.
Posted by daystar1952 (Member # 3255) on :
Yes ABXnomore is right in this respect. He or she said that the government has favored corporations over the people and it will take time to change. I am saying that ABX is right in that point and that we shouldn't jump into any solutions yet until the govt/corporation collusion and corruption is thoroughly investigated.Otherwise we will be more entangled in the schemes of the corporations.
THIS IS WHY THEN IF OBAMA IS REALLY FOR THE PEOPLE AND NOT FOR THE MACHINE OF WORLD GOVT. THEN HE SHOULD FIRST LAUNCH AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN GOVT AND CORPORATIONs BEFORE WE PUT EVEN MORE CONTROL INTO THE HANDS OF GOVT/CORP. HE IS NOT SPEAKING TO THE ISSUE OF COLLUSION AND NEITHER IS MICHAEL MOORE. DOES ANYONE SEE THIS?
It sure is amazing how this issue keeps getting sidetracked.People should learn the tactics of diversion so that they can observe when this is happening to a discussion. The way everyone is going back and forth off the topic is taking away from an important issue, an issue that will help get to the root of our problems. Certain people don't want us to get to the root.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by daystar1952: Yes ABXnomore is right in this respect. He or she said that the government has favored corporations over the people and it will take time to change. I am saying that ABX is right in that point and that we shouldn't jump into any solutions yet until the govt/corporation collusion and corruption is thoroughly investigated.Otherwise we will be more entangled in the schemes of the corporations.
THIS IS WHY THEN IF OBAMA IS REALLY FOR THE PEOPLE AND NOT FOR THE MACHINE OF WORLD GOVT. THEN HE SHOULD FIRST LAUNCH AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN GOVT AND CORPORATIONs BEFORE WE PUT EVEN MORE CONTROL INTO THE HANDS OF GOVT/CORP. HE IS NOT SPEAKING TO THE ISSUE OF COLLUSION AND NEITHER IS MICHAEL MOORE. DOES ANYONE SEE THIS?
It sure is amazing how this issue keeps getting sidetracked.People should learn the tactics of diversion so that they can observe when this is happening to a discussion. The way everyone is going back and forth off the topic is taking away from an important issue, an issue that will help get to the root of our problems. Certain people don't want us to get to the root.
Obama has already pandered to the big corporations though... Government now owns the majority of GM and Chrysler... which means they also own dodge, jeep, chevy, saturn, buick, ect. Guess what government bought them with? Our tax payer money.
Obama has given money to banks and now government owns more banks. Bought with our tax dollars.
Why would he launch an investigation on himself?
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Buster said: "I guess you and I are just hearing different stories on cops then... we have both been told differently. The police work for the government and government can not inhibit the first amendment."
Buster, I don't hear stories on Cops, I have talked to cops and understand what they are allowed to do and not. Have you ever heard what I posted for what would be the third time now. "INCITING A RIOT"?????
Again, you seem to not be able to admit anything when you are flat out wrong.
A police officer can and does have the authority to stop "Voice" or physical threat before it happens. Again, you see it daily when officers stop party's, remove people from protest, town hall meetings, concerts even though nothing bad has happened yet.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Buster said: "Do you know about Natural Rights? Just because congress pushes through something doesn't mean it becomes a natural right."
Buster, did you even read what I wrote about healthcare being a right?????
If you are going to get into talking about Natural Rights, then you are getting into religion/philosophy and something totally different than the democratic process of voting things in or out.
For purposes of our discussion we have discussing the democratic process regarding when things are voted upon.
You are getting into semantics, here is exactly what I wrote:
"You are correct Buster, Healthcare is "NOT A RIGHT", it's something that "CIVILIZED" nations offer to "ALL" their citizens in the Industrialized World.
It is something that is provided in the option of an "affordable" method so that the well being of its citizens might have a shot at being healthy, which ultimately helps the whole overall society, by providing healthier citizens, hence healthier workers and contributers.
Keep your plan if you are happy, but we are not going to keep living in the stone ages.
We live in what many Americans would call a "Moral" country, but your telling me we should not even make sure we have an "Affordable Option"???? Gosh forbid we give ppl the right to have that.
I accept that you don't want all people to at the bare minimum have an affordable option, but you need to accept that eventually they will or it will be the demise of our country.
It's an embarrassment that people do not have some kind of plan like this and in my opinion is morally wrong.
If we decide through the democratic process that it's a "Right" then at that point it will be a right.
I pray for that day. It's called progress and doing the right thing. I see Americans that jump up and down and are happy to help like ppl in other country's, but we allow our own to not have care. Now that is mind boggling to me. "
Posted by METALLlC BLUE (Member # 6628) on :
It happened with Iraq, and it's happening again. Propaganda. Fear is being used to motivate the Republican base instead of facts. They're rallying now more around this one issue than they did with trying to get their candidate into the whitehouse. That tells you a lot.
The problem is magnified now because the stakes are higher. Tell them they'll lose their coverage, or illegals will be given care on their dollars, and their family will have a politician dictating the treatment options between them and their doctors and they'll jump out of their pews, recliners and executive offices on wall street to rally in the streets about the "unjust" nature of Obama's ideas.
It's fear, and it's "common ground" now. Just like the race issue. It "is" alive and it is vibrant and clearly present if you've watched the signs and rallies. Listen to speeches and visit websites that are "anti-obama".
Plenty of sites and people are against him. Do a search. Obama + Racisim + N****** + Evil + Satan
Nut job fanatic Christians (The extreme right ones) are especially vulnerable and vocal to inciting this. The KKK has been vocal, Blacks Against Obama etc.
Read the Presidential Election results yourself just to see the average numbers.
This CNN polling was based on: 17,836 Respondents, so it's not exactly a small one.
In the end though, that isn't really the primary (or even secondary issue) about what this Health Care resistance is so strong.
Money is to be lost (Not by the public) but by the private corporations in providing care for people who by law they could previously neglect, deny, and ignore.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Buster said: "I don't see stealing in there. I don't see any taking from one and giving to another. I don't see anywhere where the government has to give you something that costs money.
Healthcare is always going to be expensive. It is supply/demand. The ratio of doctors to civilians is very low. Prices will keep going up as more and more technology increases and therapies. They will also continue to grow because civilians are reproducing faster than doctors are graduating from college. There has to be a better way to bring prices down, rather than the unmoral way of taking from one and giving to another."
Buster, the whole premises of health insurance is that the well/healthy pay for the sick. So your point makes absolutely no sense. Example
If you in your own plan, lets say come down with Cancer and spend far more than what you have put into the plan, then based on your logic, you would be stealing from the the others. So your point is null and void.
People don't like to think of it that way, but that is the reality and the truth. Technically I could say that if you get really sick that you are stealing from me if I live my life basically healthy.
Another example would be that we pay taxes so kids can go to public schools. Is that stealing if you don't have kids????? Some would say yes, but we have voted as a democratic society and the law is that all children have a right to a public education.
We live in a country where we vote and decide on things and then they become a right. Again not talking about natural rights.
Posted by METALLlC BLUE (Member # 6628) on :
Personally I still think healthcare fits neatly into the "discrimination" bracket as it's now structured.
When someone has more resources to deal with a challenging health condition (Chronic, emergency, whatever), those with less financial resources suffer (often dying) while the other with resources who has a much greater chance of receiving care that can either heal them or improve their quality of life in most cases (but obviously not all).
Why should one american citizen live and another die because they're restricted by a variety of conditions that just happen to have them unable to afford that care.
And don't mock me with the whole "Well should we feed and house them too." Yeah, we should do that too, all the while creating a nation where everyone can find employment and is encouraged and pushed to be as self sustaining as they possibily can be -- depending on the circumstance.
The rich become richer when they (alongside everyone else), raise the standard of living through civility and logic of the lower class. If you want to live in a country of brave and free people, you can't allow your countrymen to be "imprisoned" within poverty, without health insurance, unemployed, homeless, Chronically Ill. That's why we have education to train individuals to meet demands of the economy. You deserve to be secure in your person and safe in the privacy of your home, and so we have officers of law and judges and legislators to create these very laws that define how we behave and should behave as a nation.
Are these people not sometimes corrupt too? Of course they are, and of course those in power often are corrupt and try to manipulate the system we have in place in order to make sure that the ideals we strive for actually fill their pockets. You think that AIG happened on Obama and Clinton's watch? You think the collapse of the economy and the constant spending now necessary to repair it is Obama's fault? Now wait a second, who was the real spending coming from? Oh wait, the prior administration, and a poorly led congress and senate.
We deal with one problem at a time. Right now we've got a nation of seriously sick people, a nation with seriously healthy, yet uninsured people, and a huge group of businesses -- usually smaller pop shops, who can't afford to provide care to their already minimum wage making employees because they don't make enough -- and ironically, they also don't make enough to higher a few more workers yet. Obama took an ecomonmy that was heading for a second great depression to an upswing in 9 months.
Do the math. Our economy needs a massive boost from the floor up. What is at the floor? Citizens of all makes and models. How do you keep workers working? Keep them healthy and motivated to do so. Henry Ford was a smart ****in' dude. While he was a prick in many ways, he knew how to restore broken enonomies. You take care of the foundation, and the foundation will be strong when you build your palace.
If you want to avoid corruption, and avoid a **** economy, if you want to avoid abuse of power, and avoid seeing the rich pay for the poor for ever more, then you need to make an investment. Invest in success through the citizens of your country, and watch them produce "more" product for you. The rich actually get richer if they follow this obvious plan.
Most are too greedy and stupid to recognize the simplicity behind a hugely expanding business. The irony of this is that when in-fact they do make more because they were bright enough to care for those on the bottom, they ended up with so much money that they even freely donated it too -- to create hospitals and universites.
quote: Henry Ford was a pioneer of "welfare capitalism" designed to improve the lot of his workers and especially to reduce the heavy turnover that had many departments hiring 300 men per year to fill 100 slots. Efficiency meant hiring and keeping the best workers.
Ford announced his $5-per-day program on January 5, 1914. The revolutionary program called for a raise in minimum daily pay from $2.34 to $5 for qualifying workers. It also set a new, reduced workweek, although the details vary in different accounts. Ford and Crowther in 1922 described it as six 8-hour days, giving a 48-hour week,[15] while in 1926 they described it as five 8-hour days, giving a 40-hour week.[16] (Apparently the program started with Saturdays as workdays and sometime later made them days off.) Ford says that with this voluntary change, labor turnover in his plants went from huge to so small that he stopped bothering to measure it.[17]
When Ford started the 40-hour work week and a minimum wage he was criticized by other industrialists and by Wall Street. He proved, however, that paying people more would enable Ford workers to afford the cars they were producing and be good for the economy. Ford explained the change in part of the "Wages" chapter of My Life and Work.[18] He labeled the increased compensation as profit-sharing rather than wages.
The profit-sharing was offered to employees who had worked at the company for six months or more, and, importantly, conducted their lives in a manner of which Ford's "Social Department" approved. They frowned on heavy drinking, gambling, and what we today would call "deadbeat dads". The Social Department used 50 investigators, plus support staff, to maintain employee standards; a large percentage of workers were able to qualify for this "profit-sharing."
Ford's incursion into his employees' private lives was highly controversial, and he soon backed off from the most intrusive aspects; by the time he wrote his 1922 memoir, he spoke of the Social Department and of the private conditions for profit-sharing in the past tense, and admitted that "paternalism has no place in industry. Welfare work that consists in prying into employees' private concerns is out of date. Men need counsel and men need help, oftentimes special help; and all this ought to be rendered for decency's sake. But the broad workable plan of investment and participation will do more to solidify industry and strengthen organization than will any social work on the outside. Without changing the principle we have changed the method of payment."[19] [20]
It's a beautiful thing this thing called logic. Obama is simply profit sharing. He's using the same technique. Eventually, everyone gets paid well. These ideas aren't socialistic, they're post-era Capitalistic ideals which are perfectly time tested by many through history. And that my friends is my final comment.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: Buster said: "I guess you and I are just hearing different stories on cops then... we have both been told differently. The police work for the government and government can not inhibit the first amendment."
Buster, I don't hear stories on Cops, I have talked to cops and understand what they are allowed to do and not. Have you ever heard what I posted for what would be the third time now. "INCITING A RIOT"?????
Again, you seem to not be able to admit anything when you are flat out wrong.
A police officer can and does have the authority to stop "Voice" or physical threat before it happens. Again, you see it daily when officers stop party's, remove people from protest, town hall meetings, concerts even though nothing bad has happened yet.
I talked with my cop friend at my house last night while he came over. He told me different than what you are telling me. A 'riot' is different from a protest. Riot is physical protest.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: Buster said: "Do you know about Natural Rights? Just because congress pushes through something doesn't mean it becomes a natural right."
Buster, did you even read what I wrote about healthcare being a right?????
If you are going to get into talking about Natural Rights, then you are getting into religion/philosophy and something totally different than the democratic process of voting things in or out.
For purposes of our discussion we have discussing the democratic process regarding when things are voted upon.
You are getting into semantics, here is exactly what I wrote:
"You are correct Buster, Healthcare is "NOT A RIGHT", it's something that "CIVILIZED" nations offer to "ALL" their citizens in the Industrialized World.
It is something that is provided in the option of an "affordable" method so that the well being of its citizens might have a shot at being healthy, which ultimately helps the whole overall society, by providing healthier citizens, hence healthier workers and contributers.
Keep your plan if you are happy, but we are not going to keep living in the stone ages.
We live in what many Americans would call a "Moral" country, but your telling me we should not even make sure we have an "Affordable Option"???? Gosh forbid we give ppl the right to have that.
I accept that you don't want all people to at the bare minimum have an affordable option, but you need to accept that eventually they will or it will be the demise of our country.
It's an embarrassment that people do not have some kind of plan like this and in my opinion is morally wrong.
If we decide through the democratic process that it's a "Right" then at that point it will be a right.
I pray for that day. It's called progress and doing the right thing. I see Americans that jump up and down and are happy to help like ppl in other country's, but we allow our own to not have care. Now that is mind boggling to me. "
So if healthcare is not a right, then government has no reason to take money from others and give it to another group of people.
Case closed.
If congress comes together and make a law saying it is a right to kill all arab people. Is it a right?
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by METALLlC BLUE: It happened with Iraq, and it's happening again. Propaganda. Fear is being used to motivate the Republican base instead of facts. They're rallying now more around this one issue than they did with trying to get their candidate into the whitehouse. That tells you a lot.
The problem is magnified now because the stakes are higher. Tell them they'll lose their coverage, or illegals will be given care on their dollars, and their family will have a politician dictating the treatment options between them and their doctors and they'll jump out of their pews, recliners and executive offices on wall street to rally in the streets about the "unjust" nature of Obama's ideas.
It's fear, and it's "common ground" now. Just like the race issue. It "is" alive and it is vibrant and clearly present if you've watched the signs and rallies. Listen to speeches and visit websites that are "anti-obama".
Plenty of sites and people are against him. Do a search. Obama + Racisim + N****** + Evil + Satan
Nut job fanatic Christians (The extreme right ones) are especially vulnerable and vocal to inciting this. The KKK has been vocal, Blacks Against Obama etc.
Read the Presidential Election results yourself just to see the average numbers.
This CNN polling was based on: 17,836 Respondents, so it's not exactly a small one.
In the end though, that isn't really the primary (or even secondary issue) about what this Health Care resistance is so strong.
Money is to be lost (Not by the public) but by the private corporations in providing care for people who by law they could previously neglect, deny, and ignore.
And the left never did any of this stuff. Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by METALLlC BLUE: Personally I still think healthcare fits neatly into the "discrimination" bracket as it's now structured.
When someone has more resources to deal with a challenging health condition (Chronic, emergency, whatever), those with less financial resources suffer (often dying) while the other with resources who has a much greater chance of receiving care that can either heal them or improve their quality of life in most cases (but obviously not all).
Why should one american citizen live and another die because they're restricted by a variety of conditions that just happen to have them unable to afford that care.
And don't mock me with the whole "Well should we feed and house them too." Yeah, we should do that too, all the while creating a nation where everyone can find employment and is encouraged and pushed to be as self sustaining as they possibily can be -- depending on the circumstance.
The rich become richer when they (alongside everyone else), raise the standard of living through civility and logic of the lower class. If you want to live in a country of brave and free people, you can't allow your countrymen to be "imprisoned" within poverty, without health insurance, unemployed, homeless, Chronically Ill. That's why we have education to train individuals to meet demands of the economy. You deserve to be secure in your person and safe in the privacy of your home, and so we have officers of law and judges and legislators to create these very laws that define how we behave and should behave as a nation.
Are these people not sometimes corrupt too? Of course they are, and of course those in power often are corrupt and try to manipulate the system we have in place in order to make sure that the ideals we strive for actually fill their pockets. You think that AIG happened on Obama and Clinton's watch? You think the collapse of the economy and the constant spending now necessary to repair it is Obama's fault? Now wait a second, who was the real spending coming from? Oh wait, the prior administration, and a poorly led congress and senate.
We deal with one problem at a time. Right now we've got a nation of seriously sick people, a nation with seriously healthy, yet uninsured people, and a huge group of businesses -- usually smaller pop shops, who can't afford to provide care to their already minimum wage making employees because they don't make enough -- and ironically, they also don't make enough to higher a few more workers yet. Obama took an ecomonmy that was heading for a second great depression to an upswing in 9 months.
Do the math. Our economy needs a massive boost from the floor up. What is at the floor? Citizens of all makes and models. How do you keep workers working? Keep them healthy and motivated to do so. Henry Ford was a smart ****in' dude. While he was a prick in many ways, he knew how to restore broken enonomies. You take care of the foundation, and the foundation will be strong when you build your palace.
If you want to avoid corruption, and avoid a **** economy, if you want to avoid abuse of power, and avoid seeing the rich pay for the poor for ever more, then you need to make an investment. Invest in success through the citizens of your country, and watch them produce "more" product for you. The rich actually get richer if they follow this obvious plan.
Most are too greedy and stupid to recognize the simplicity behind a hugely expanding business. The irony of this is that when in-fact they do make more because they were bright enough to care for those on the bottom, they ended up with so much money that they even freely donated it too -- to create hospitals and universites.
quote: Henry Ford was a pioneer of "welfare capitalism" designed to improve the lot of his workers and especially to reduce the heavy turnover that had many departments hiring 300 men per year to fill 100 slots. Efficiency meant hiring and keeping the best workers.
Ford announced his $5-per-day program on January 5, 1914. The revolutionary program called for a raise in minimum daily pay from $2.34 to $5 for qualifying workers. It also set a new, reduced workweek, although the details vary in different accounts. Ford and Crowther in 1922 described it as six 8-hour days, giving a 48-hour week,[15] while in 1926 they described it as five 8-hour days, giving a 40-hour week.[16] (Apparently the program started with Saturdays as workdays and sometime later made them days off.) Ford says that with this voluntary change, labor turnover in his plants went from huge to so small that he stopped bothering to measure it.[17]
When Ford started the 40-hour work week and a minimum wage he was criticized by other industrialists and by Wall Street. He proved, however, that paying people more would enable Ford workers to afford the cars they were producing and be good for the economy. Ford explained the change in part of the "Wages" chapter of My Life and Work.[18] He labeled the increased compensation as profit-sharing rather than wages.
The profit-sharing was offered to employees who had worked at the company for six months or more, and, importantly, conducted their lives in a manner of which Ford's "Social Department" approved. They frowned on heavy drinking, gambling, and what we today would call "deadbeat dads". The Social Department used 50 investigators, plus support staff, to maintain employee standards; a large percentage of workers were able to qualify for this "profit-sharing."
Ford's incursion into his employees' private lives was highly controversial, and he soon backed off from the most intrusive aspects; by the time he wrote his 1922 memoir, he spoke of the Social Department and of the private conditions for profit-sharing in the past tense, and admitted that "paternalism has no place in industry. Welfare work that consists in prying into employees' private concerns is out of date. Men need counsel and men need help, oftentimes special help; and all this ought to be rendered for decency's sake. But the broad workable plan of investment and participation will do more to solidify industry and strengthen organization than will any social work on the outside. Without changing the principle we have changed the method of payment."[19] [20]
It's a beautiful thing this thing called logic. Obama is simply profit sharing. He's using the same technique. Eventually, everyone gets paid well. These ideas aren't socialistic, they're post-era Capitalistic ideals which are perfectly time tested by many through history. And that my friends is my final comment.
How is the recession in an upswing? There is still abour 250,000 jobs being lost every month, stock market is flat, housing crisis is still going, wages are still being cut, debt is at an all time high ect... It's like me being a football coach of a team and I tell the players, "Ok guy, we are winning now... we are only losing 10 yards a down instead of 12"
So under your plan we are going to provide everyone with FREE:
healthcare houses food water clothing jobs
What else would you like?
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Buster:
I'm glad you realize now that these massive corporations and government are in bed together. Doesn't matter which party they are in, they all are doing it.
Honestly, I thought everyone knew that. It's been obvious for years. Thought that was a given and didn't even need to be discussed. I never needed any convincing and in large part it was part of the message of Obama's compaign.
Daystar:
THIS IS WHY THEN IF OBAMA IS REALLY FOR THE PEOPLE AND NOT FOR THE MACHINE OF WORLD GOVT. THEN HE SHOULD FIRST LAUNCH AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN GOVT AND CORPORATIONs BEFORE WE PUT EVEN MORE CONTROL INTO THE HANDS OF GOVT/CORP. HE IS NOT SPEAKING TO THE ISSUE OF COLLUSION AND NEITHER IS MICHAEL MOORE. DOES ANYONE SEE THIS?
One Obama has spoken about this issue but I agree he is not exempt from it. But what would you have him do. Stop the entire governmental process with investigations while the country continued to fall apart, the recession turned into a depression, continue to let people lose their jobs, homes and health care until 3/4 of population became destitute?
I frankly don't see your solution as the way to go. He inherited one heck of a mess. He's chipping away at it and has done more in his first months in office (depite all the obstacles that the Republicans have put in the way as they refuse to work with him and just want to pout and stamp their feet) than most Presidents and has stopped the recession from turning into a depression. The economy is showing signs of recovery earlier than anticipated yet it will still be a long struggle for many. Remember, he inherited this mess, he didn't make it.
There are investigations that are being discussed in congress and Attorney General Holder is looking into some but you won't hear much about that on Fox News as the Republicans don't want any investigations about the fraud and abuses of power that took place under Bush's administration. There is a lot of opposition to it.
You know Rome wasn't built in a day and with the country facing such serious monumental problems obviously fixing those have to take priority. I believe that is what any responsible president would tackle first and not be distracted from his main mission.
Buster:
Obama has already pandered to the big corporations though... Government now owns the majority of GM and Chrysler... which means they also own dodge, jeep, chevy, saturn, buick, ect. Guess what government bought them with? Our tax payer money. Obama has given money to banks and now government owns more banks. Bought with our tax dollars. Why would he launch an investigation on himself?
I'm not sure he had much choice here. This all happened as soon as he took office and the nations credit was frozen and the financial markets were on the verge of collapse and the recession deepened at a rate much faster than expected. The money was not given to them. It was loaned with provisions that when it get's repaid the tax payers will get it back with interest. I'm sure there may have been a better way of doing it but I don't think doing nothing at all was an option, unless you wanted to see the total collapse of this country and see millions of Americans on the street, jobless, homeless and hungry.......many more than we already have now.
Liesandmorelies:
You are getting into semantics, here is exactly what I wrote: "You are correct Buster, Healthcare is "NOT A RIGHT", it's something that "CIVILIZED" nations offer to "ALL" their citizens in the Industrialized World. It is something that is provided in the option of an "affordable" method so that the well being of its citizens might have a shot at being healthy, which ultimately helps the whole overall society, by providing healthier citizens, hence healthier workers and contributers. Keep your plan if you are happy, but we are not going to keep living in the stone ages. We live in what many Americans would call a "Moral" country, but your telling me we should not even make sure we have an "Affordable Option"???? Gosh forbid we give ppl the right to have that. I accept that you don't want all people to at the bare minimum have an affordable option, but you need to accept that eventually they will or it will be the demise of our country. It's an embarrassment that people do not have some kind of plan like this and in my opinion is morally wrong. If we decide through the democratic process that it's a "Right" then at that point it will be a right. I pray for that day. It's called progress and doing the right thing. I see Americans that jump up and down and are happy to help like ppl in other country's, but we allow our own to not have care. Now that is mind boggling to me. "
Well said. My thoughts exactly.
METALLlC BLUE:
Great post. I see the race issue subtly and not so subtly showing up all over the place including the way this President is treated so disrespectfully. I feel embarrassed at times for my country.
And to think as you point out that this is all being done by people who believe themselves to be Christians. It's a distortion of the tenets of the religion.
Money is to be lost (Not by the public) but by the private corporations in providing care for people who by law they could previously neglect, deny, and ignore.
This is positively the truth. It will force the insurance companies to shape up, along with the new reforms the President has asked for to be made into law. If the corporations don't shape up they will lose money and if there is an alternative option for health care instead of the corporate monopoly we now have, costs will be reduced and corporations will no longer be able to pay their CEO's such outrageous salaries. Aetna's Ronald Williams received $24,300,112 last year. That's $467,309.85 per week. http://www.healthreformwatch.com/2009/05/20/health-insurance-ceos-total-compensation-in-2008/
How in the world can that ever be justified when they deny people coverage and actually cause people to die. That is the way they make money and that is how they can pay those kinds of salaries.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Truthfinder,
You like to call it entitlement, I like to call it an option that is affordable.
people throw those buzz words like entitlement around and they think it helps to take the eye off the ball somehow. Do you think kids are entitled to a public education? Do you think you are entitled to the access of utilities?
Seems to me we have decided as a country that these things are entitled....
Bottom line is that 47 million ppl do not have healthcare and it's breaking our country by not giving them preventative care and treating them through ER's.
I feel very sorry for anyone in this day and age that believes that is acceptable treatment of a human being.
But then you take it a step further and tell us in the same post quote: "If the government will get busy and honestly do something about lowering costs, more people could pay for minor care needed themselves, and more Americans could afford to have health insurance to cover `the big stuff."
Huh????? on one hand you tell the government to stay out and let private sector deal with it all and then the next thing everyone is saying to let the government do something about lowering the costs.
Either you want government intervention or you don't. Last time I checked the government does not set prices. That would be Communism.
We blame the government for the mess, when in actuality the problem lies with the greed of corporate America and then when we get to a point where something must be done, we say no government involvement.
You show me where the private sector is offering an affordable option and then I will lay off.
Bottom line is what the truth of the matter is, and I have said this before, people either TRULY believe all should have an affordable option or not!
You and others obviously do not believe they should, because you and I and everyone else know in our hearts that there is absolutely no way possible to dictate to the private sector to make them offer such plan.
We can put into law that the private sector must not discriminate based on pre-existing conditions etc....But, we can't dictate their premium prices. If we do than it would be government involvement and that would be called Communism!!!!!!!!
If we pass a law saying the Private sector must accept pre-existing conditions or cover those that lose their jobs, we have no control over them dictating to us what the premiums will cost, hence our premiums will go up.
By offering another option for those that don't have an option right now or those that are not happy with their current option, and switch would be create competition.
PS the photos of the hooded ppl was not because it was raining. The ppl who wore hoods also were carrying plastic bladed sickles too. So please at least admit these crass ppl were there and do exist. You can spin how you want, but it says a lot about ppl who think this is acceptable.
Who in their right mind would take ppl like that seriously???
I don't care what side behaves this way, it's vile, evil and wrong. PERIOD!
Many Other country's that offer care for all are doing quite well. You can always point the finger at one or two that may be having problems, but by and large the vast majority are doing very well.
Do you want me to post how much money we pay vs. other country's?????? Do you want me to post links showing how we rank in healthcare vs other country's????
Why are Americans so gullible to think we are the best in every category???? That is naive and again, corporate America wants us to stay that way.
PSS yes, I have been to town Hall meetings in NH as I used to live in New England three years ago and have been to town hall meetings in CA, and NY. I have always been a very well informed voter and have voted for different party's as well.
So please stop insinuating something you know nothing of in regards to whether or not I have gone to a town hall meeting.
I have never seen ppl with strapped on guns that were openly visible. If that is the direction this country is going, then we will probably stop having Town Hall meetings. These bullish are ruining our democratic process.
Of course people can groan mildly, but to rant and rave to the point of shutting down meetings and strap on guns that are visible for the sake of bullying ppl into fear is absolutley against the American democratic way.
That would not be good for any party.
If you want to condone that behavior than that says a lot about what you deem acceptable. I find it repulsive and nutty. Again, my opinion.
Thankfully, I believe the vast, vast majority of Americans would agree with me on that point regardless of whether they are a Republican or Democrat .
Bottom line, like it or not, we are not waiting another forty years for the other side to come up with a plan that they just had the last eight years to put together and they came up with nothing, zilch, nada!!!!!
Bush never even worked on this issue one iota, all the while our country was going broke. Why should I even think for one minute that they will if they win the next election????
This has been the Rights tactic for 40 plus years now. They acknowledge there is a problem, but do nothing. I would rather pass something that we can start working with and change it as we go along, than to do nothing for the next 40 years.
It seems to me that ppl lie when they say "oh, but I really do want everyone to have an affordable option".
I say if Americans really mean that, than they would have proved it by now and we already would have a working plan.
The false sentiment must end. We are moving forward. Obama was elected. It's called Democracy.
I respect your opinion, but can see exactly what is going on here. I am proud to stand for justice and helping my brother out in a time of need. I would hope they would do the same for me in my time of need. That is what America goes around bragging about constantly, so lets see it.
It breaks my heart to think that we consider our country a compassionate, loving country and we don't have an affordable option. Show me where the compassion is there.
Again, as I have said in other posts. If you love your insurance agency. Then keep your plan, but don't deny ppl access if you really do believe everyone should have access.
Peace
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Buster said: "So if healthcare is not a right, then government has no reason to take money from others and give it to another group of people.
Case closed.
If congress comes together and makes a law saying it is a right to kill all arab people. Is it a right?"
Buster, You are right it is case closed with you!
You never admit one thing. I gave you point in case regarding public education and utilities, and you did not respond.
I even drew an illustration regarding if you have cancer and have private insurance and spend more than others who remain healthy, that that would mean you are theoretically stealing based on your definition and you did not admit that.
You pick and choose to your own benefit.
The arab analogy has nothing to do with this and says a lot about how you think. I am happy you wrote it.
You have to live with yourself and your choices. I have to live with mine.
I am happy when I put my head on my pillow at night. I will always do what I think is the "Right" thing to do. Regardless of whether it's a quote law or not. It's called morality, ethics and doing the right thing.
You obviously have your opinion that you think ppl should not have an affordable option because they do not have a "RIGHT" so yes your case is closed. Your mind seems to be closed as well, so what is the point of debate?
You better hope what comes around does not go around or you might be changing your tune.
I wish you peace and all good things in your life, but feel very sorry for you.
CASE CLOSED
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: Buster said: "So if healthcare is not a right, then government has no reason to take money from others and give it to another group of people.
Case closed.
If congress comes together and makes a law saying it is a right to kill all arab people. Is it a right?"
Buster, You are right it is case closed with you!
You never admit one thing. I gave you point in case regarding public education and utilities, and you did not respond.
I even drew an illustration regarding if you have cancer and have private insurance and spend more than others who remain healthy, that that would mean you are theoretically stealing based on your definition and you did not admit that.
You pick and choose to your own benefit.
The arab analogy has nothing to do with this and says a lot about how you think. I am happy you wrote it.
You have to live with yourself and your choices. I have to live with mine.
I am happy when I put my head on my pillow at night. I will always do what I think is the "Right" thing to do. Regardless of whether it's a quote law or not. It's called morality, ethics and doing the right thing.
You obviously have your opinion that you think ppl should not have an affordable option because they do not have a "RIGHT" so yes your case is closed. Your mind seems to be closed as well, so what is the point of debate?
You better hope what comes around does not go around or you might be changing your tune.
I wish you peace and all good things in your life, but feel very sorry for you.
CASE CLOSED
If you want to discuss public education, that's fine with me but this is about healthcare reform... I don't know what you mean about utilities... we have to pay for those or the meter gets turned off.
The point I am trying to make with the 'kill the arab' comment is that congress can not just pass a bill and all the sudden it is the right thing to do.
Don't start scolding me, you're acting just like ABXnomore... before she apologized. You're starting to get mad and then take it out on me. Argue the facts not the person.
Do you believe in Freedom or Free Things?
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: Truthfinder,
You like to call it entitlement, I like to call it an option that is affordable.
people throw those buzz words like entitlement around and they think it helps to take the eye off the ball somehow. Do you think kids are entitled to a public education? Do you think you are entitled to the access of utilities?
Seems to me we have decided as a country that these things are entitled....
Bottom line is that 47 million ppl do not have healthcare and it's breaking our country by not giving them preventative care and treating them through ER's.
I feel very sorry for anyone in this day and age that believes that is acceptable treatment of a human being.
But then you take it a step further and tell us in the same post quote: "If the government will get busy and honestly do something about lowering costs, more people could pay for minor care needed themselves, and more Americans could afford to have health insurance to cover `the big stuff."
Huh????? on one hand you tell the government to stay out and let private sector deal with it all and then the next thing everyone is saying to let the government do something about lowering the costs.
Either you want government intervention or you don't. Last time I checked the government does not set prices. That would be Communism.
We blame the government for the mess, when in actuality the problem lies with the greed of corporate America and then when we get to a point where something must be done, we say no government involvement.
You show me where the private sector is offering an affordable option and then I will lay off.
Bottom line is what the truth of the matter is, and I have said this before, people either TRULY believe all should have an affordable option or not!
You and others obviously do not believe they should, because you and I and everyone else know in our hearts that there is absolutely no way possible to dictate to the private sector to make them offer such plan.
We can put into law that the private sector must not discriminate based on pre-existing conditions etc....But, we can't dictate their premium prices. If we do than it would be government involvement and that would be called Communism!!!!!!!!
If we pass a law saying the Private sector must accept pre-existing conditions or cover those that lose their jobs, we have no control over them dictating to us what the premiums will cost, hence our premiums will go up.
By offering another option for those that don't have an option right now or those that are not happy with their current option, and switch would be create competition.
PS the photos of the hooded ppl was not because it was raining. The ppl who wore hoods also were carrying plastic bladed sickles too. So please at least admit these crass ppl were there and do exist. You can spin how you want, but it says a lot about ppl who think this is acceptable.
Who in their right mind would take ppl like that seriously???
I don't care what side behaves this way, it's vile, evil and wrong. PERIOD!
Many Other country's that offer care for all are doing quite well. You can always point the finger at one or two that may be having problems, but by and large the vast majority are doing very well.
Do you want me to post how much money we pay vs. other country's?????? Do you want me to post links showing how we rank in healthcare vs other country's????
Why are Americans so gullible to think we are the best in every category???? That is naive and again, corporate America wants us to stay that way.
PSS yes, I have been to town Hall meetings in NH as I used to live in New England three years ago and have been to town hall meetings in CA, and NY. I have always been a very well informed voter and have voted for different party's as well.
So please stop insinuating something you know nothing of in regards to whether or not I have gone to a town hall meeting.
I have never seen ppl with strapped on guns that were openly visible. If that is the direction this country is going, then we will probably stop having Town Hall meetings. These bullish are ruining our democratic process.
Of course people can groan mildly, but to rant and rave to the point of shutting down meetings and strap on guns that are visible for the sake of bullying ppl into fear is absolutley against the American democratic way.
That would not be good for any party.
If you want to condone that behavior than that says a lot about what you deem acceptable. I find it repulsive and nutty. Again, my opinion.
Thankfully, I believe the vast, vast majority of Americans would agree with me on that point regardless of whether they are a Republican or Democrat .
Bottom line, like it or not, we are not waiting another forty years for the other side to come up with a plan that they just had the last eight years to put together and they came up with nothing, zilch, nada!!!!!
Bush never even worked on this issue one iota, all the while our country was going broke. Why should I even think for one minute that they will if they win the next election????
This has been the Rights tactic for 40 plus years now. They acknowledge there is a problem, but do nothing. I would rather pass something that we can start working with and change it as we go along, than to do nothing for the next 40 years.
It seems to me that ppl lie when they say "oh, but I really do want everyone to have an affordable option".
I say if Americans really mean that, than they would have proved it by now and we already would have a working plan.
The false sentiment must end. We are moving forward. Obama was elected. It's called Democracy.
I respect your opinion, but can see exactly what is going on here. I am proud to stand for justice and helping my brother out in a time of need. I would hope they would do the same for me in my time of need. That is what America goes around bragging about constantly, so lets see it.
It breaks my heart to think that we consider our country a compassionate, loving country and we don't have an affordable option. Show me where the compassion is there.
Again, as I have said in other posts. If you love your insurance agency. Then keep your plan, but don't deny ppl access if you really do believe everyone should have access.
Peace
This is a long post but I think what you are getting at is you want an affordable option.
My answer would be, first. No one is holding a gun to your head forcing you to buy healthcare insurance. You could just save up money for when something bad happens. If you go broke, then go looking for charitable people to help you out or an organization, or church, ect...
The problem is buying insurance is like buying a car kinda. The more you spend, usually you get a better made car, more options, more gadgets, ect. Same with insurance, the more you spend the more you get.
I think people that are wanting an affordable option but also wanting the best is kinda like wanting to spend $10,000 on a car and expect to get a $200,000 ferarri or something.
There are other ways to reduce costs that have already been discussed here.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Buster I think Liesandmorelies has laid out her information pretty well and I have also tried to make certain points, to no avail. There is no reaching you, period.
The President has outlined a way to reduce costs but it seems you don't like it. Can't make everyone happy.
You are impossible to debate with and surely have blinders on given your last statement:
My answer would be, first. No one is holding a gun to your head forcing you to buy healthcare insurance. You could just save up money for when something bad happens. If you go broke, then go looking for charitable people to help you out or an organization, or church, ect... The problem is buying insurance is like buying a car kinda. The more you spend, usually you get a better made car, more options, more gadgets, ect. Same with insurance, the more you spend the more you get. I think people that are wanting an affordable option but also wanting the best is kinda like wanting to spend $10,000 on a car and expect to get a $200,000 ferarri or something. There are other ways to reduce costs that have already been discussed here.
There is no way to try to reach any kind of an understanding with you when you write a statement such as this. Your statement is so devoid of reality and the experiences that real people endure in our society. Even the terrible health care system we now have is not as bad as what you propose. Your ideas are sheer nonsense, not to mention the moral aspect of them.
It's best that we ignore you as your suggestions are totally nonsensical and don't deserve any further thought.
I have been fortunate in life to have never been in financial need but understand the suffering of others. I truly hope that the day does not come when one day you find yourself in a situation where you accumulated astronomical out of pocket hospital and medical bills and lose everything you own and have to beg from charitable societies to save your life. And, I surely hope in that situation your life will not be compared to the value of a car.
Sometimes, it takes situations like those to humble us and truly understand that our past way of thinking has been wrong.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: Buster I think Liesandmorelies has laid out her information pretty well and I have also tried to make certain points, to no avail. There is no reaching you, period.
The President has outlined a way to reduce costs but it seems you don't like it. Can't make everyone happy.
You are impossible to debate with and surely have blinders on given your last statement:
My answer would be, first. No one is holding a gun to your head forcing you to buy healthcare insurance. You could just save up money for when something bad happens. If you go broke, then go looking for charitable people to help you out or an organization, or church, ect... The problem is buying insurance is like buying a car kinda. The more you spend, usually you get a better made car, more options, more gadgets, ect. Same with insurance, the more you spend the more you get. I think people that are wanting an affordable option but also wanting the best is kinda like wanting to spend $10,000 on a car and expect to get a $200,000 ferarri or something. There are other ways to reduce costs that have already been discussed here.
There is no way to try to reach any kind of an understanding with you when you write a statement such as this. Your statement is so devoid of reality and the experiences that real people endure in our society. Even the terrible health care system we now have is not as bad as what you propose. Your ideas are sheer nonsense, not to mention the moral aspect of them.
It's best that we ignore you as your suggestions are totally nonsensical and don't deserve any further thought.
I have been fortunate in life to have never been in financial need but understand the suffering of others. I truly hope that the day does not come when one day you find yourself in a situation where you accumulated astronomical out of pocket hospital and medical bills and lose everything you own and have to beg from charitable societies to save your life. And, I surely hope in that situation your life will not be compared to the value of a car.
Sometimes, it takes situations like those to humble us and truly understand that our past way of thinking has been wrong.
This is going to be my final post in this thread because you are just resorting to attacking me when you don't like something I say or create a diversion. I am not comparing a car to anyone I am comparing buying a car to buying health insurance.
I have no doubt that you guys want to help people. I have no doubt that you care about the sick, poor, weak, ect. I also know that you mean good to society and believe strongly what you believe and I have no problem with that at all.
I believe in helping others just like you do and I have already expressed how I am helping others earlier in this thread.
'THE PROBLEM' is how to go about getting cheaper healthcare. That is where out difference is. It is "HOW"
We have to approach this problem so that it will not cause the country more debt. How to make sure that care is not rationed more than it already is. How to bring costs down and make it more available.
I want to do it in a way that does not steal it out of people's pockets and give it to others. I am trying to give you different ways to solve the problem.
Have you noticed I have not said, "It is hard to get through to you" or "you don't know how to reason" or "you are being hard" or "you are closed minded" BUT, you have?
This is why I am going to stop, I want discussion using the facts, you bring harsh words to people that don't agree with you like you have done to me.
Peace out.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Buster when you become President or at least get elected to congress you can try the ideas you are speaking of. Right now we have to try to work within the frame work of what we have. I mentioned I would like to see the President lean more left and have a single payer plan but I'd be happy enough with a strong public option, if we can even get that. We can make our voices heard thru the usual civil channels and we should all do that. If we don't get what we want, hey that's the way the cookie crumbles in all aspects of life. But at least we know we tried.
If we don't pass some kind of health care reform this year you won't have to worry about the debt because we all going down hill and fast. They are both tied together, health care and the economy, and as big as the debt is now adding some more is not going to matter if giving health care to others gets this economy and country back on it's feet. I don't think you believe that, but I do based on my research and my experience with living abroad.
Plus the President has said it is not going to contribute to the deficit but you just won't believe it either. Doing some thing is better than doing nothing at all in this circumstance. We're moving forward and we'll see what kind of bill gets passed. In truth there is not much any of us can do about it at this point. The tea parties have created enough disruption, division and spectacle but in the end you still have the same President and congress to work with. Let's just all work together and support the President and hope he can pull this country out of this mess.
Those who intentionally want to thwart the efforts of the President are unpatriotic. It's one thing not to like him or agree with his policies but to put obstacles in the way is wrong.
If he does a bad job, he will be voted out when the next election rolls around. But he deserves a fair chance and especially knowing the monumental mess he inherited from Bush and how he has received no cooperation at all from any of the Republicans. How can we expect to make any headway with a situation like that? One thing I know is that he has more integrity than Bush, is far more intelligent, has a 21 century global view of the world and truly wants to do a good job for our country.
Posted by METALLlC BLUE (Member # 6628) on :
quote: We have to approach this problem so that it will not cause the country more debt. How to make sure that care is not rationed more than it already is. How to bring costs down and make it more available.
I want to do it in a way that does not steal it out of people's pockets and give it to others. I am trying to give you different ways to solve the problem.
Have you noticed I have not said, "It is hard to get through to you" or "you don't know how to reason" or "you are being hard" or "you are closed minded" BUT, you have?
This is why I am going to stop, I want discussion using the facts, you bring harsh words to people that don't agree with you like you have done to me.
Peace out.
Where were you guys when we were demonstrating against the Iraq war in the hundreds of thousands around the world? We said "It's a waste of money, lives, and other resources. We need help right here at home" We begged and pleaded and provided a variety of facts demonstrating that Iraq did "not" have weapons of Mass Destruction. We debated our case fervently and we were ignored., and now today, we would be a lot better off had we saved or spent the money on resolving serious inefficient issues at home.
We said this would happen, it was obvious.
We've spent hundreds of billions, in-fact, Trillion.
The Administration had no problem -- zero, problem spending our money to enter a military engagement that we didn't want claiming it was in our best interest, that it was to "protect" us. Protect us from what? At least with healthcare I can see what it's trying to protect me from.
You wanted to avoid stealing from ones pockets, yet you freely gave it to Iraq to rebuild their country.
If you want to solve the problem then you need to reconsider your statements.
As far as providing for people, yeah, I think those who "need" provisions, including public housing, medical care, or clothing, a job -- should be assisted by their state and government to ensure they're being as productive as possible and that we do everything we can to bring them back to independence. We as a society are stronger when we promote well being, productivity, fairness, equality, and more
Should it be given to everyone? You bet your ***, if they need it. It should be an easily available option that everyone knows is available to them should a day come when something painfully unexpected happens that requires they need the support.
If it were your way we'd have no unemployment, Section 8 Housing, Food Stamps, Social Security, Medicare, Welfare, Medicaid, Personal Care Assistance for the Disabled, Rehabilitation Centers, or other services that those truly in need are provided to some degree. Many Lyme patients have had to use at least one of those (if not multiple) at one point and it was painfully difficult for them to do it usually.
We want clean air too and a planet that isn't devastated by pollution and damage from green house emissions. Yeah, we "should" go Green. We tree hugging hippies "deserve" to be protected by our government from disease, damaged environments, and injustice.
You might think I'm off-topic here, but everything I've said ties up neatly into my position. If you want to solve the problem then provide an option. Provide some useful information rather than providing nothing but arguments against "our" position.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
Metallic
This is not about Bush. Bush is no longer the president. Bush never was the ideal president, not for anybody.
Obama has created a *far* larger deficit than Bush, and he didn't even stop the recession.
All these programs already exist and are projected to bankrupt the government within the next few decades or so. And you want to expand these further. This is an unsustainable path.
As for alternate fixes, here's McCain's idea. "McCain's focus is on lowering health care costs to bring down the cost of insurance. His plan for affordable health care includes: allowing families to be in charge of their health care dollars, promoting competition between health care companies, promoting illness prevention, providing health care access to all citizens"
See the primary emphasis on lowering health care costs.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Buster said"
"Don't start scolding me, you're acting just like ABXnomore... before she apologized. You're starting to get mad and then take it out on me. Argue the facts not the person.
Do you believe in Freedom or Free Things?"
Buster, I am not angry or mad, just disappointed. I am taking nothing out on anyone . I have discussed things that are fact and I have discussed things that are opinion.
When I have spoken facts you do not ever acknowledge what I or anyone says that is fact. Even after you know it to be true.
I hope you are happy with your opinions as you are "ENTITLED" to them.
You try to twist what people believe into something that is not true when you throw questions around like "are you for freedom or free things".
The fact of the matter is that for me Buster, I love my freedom's, but I have the ability to understand that nothing is truly free, including healthcare. Private nor an affordable public option will be free. We are already paying for those that don't have an affordable option and it's one of the reasons we are in this problem.
Economy 101 "There are no free lunches in life"
Let me expand that thought for the nth time.
There are many, many people who work for far less than what others work for, so in my opinion we are already stealing as you would put it, by not offering them an affordable option. I am not suggesting that all jobs should be paid the same, but some are ridiculously low.
We steal from them daily by allowing them to work for poverty level jobs. We steal from them when they are laid off and can't find a job in a reasonable time and only continue their coverage for a certain amount of time.
We steal from them when the economy is down and can't find work and don't help them, all the while using them when we did.
Most would never think about it that way, but I do. We know darn well that a single mom making 40k per year can't possibly afford to pay rent, food, utilities, and 1K per month for private insurance and we have not even discussed clothes, spending money and incidentals....So if that is not stealing than what is???
I can see and understand how the cycle works and how good, hardworking people are stolen from each and every day.
So for you to say we would be stealing from some to give to the others. I guess I would say to you. Yes we should take from those that are wealthy to help those that are in need.
It also will help our country economically in the long run too, as we would be producing healthier citizens, that can contribute to the society in a more effective manner.
Those hard workers are the same ones that made the CEO what he is.
The wealthy CEO needs the little man at the bottom, but many times does not care whether that little man has health care.
So from that point of view, in my opinion, I believe the little man already had some rights stolen from him. He was never even paid enough to be able to pay for insurance to begin with. So we stole from him.
It is all how one looks at things and puts it in perspective.
So, I guess to answer your question about freedom and free things.
I say nothing is free including freedom. We have to pay for things we want.
If we decide as a society through the democratic process that we want an affordable plan and or reform, then it will be. And, then it will be a right(again, not talking about natural rights).
As I said a few posts ago. I accept that you don't think ppl should have an affordable option. That is your choice to feel that way.
I hope and pray that most ppl will think your choice is wrong and will do the right thing, both morally and economically.
We will as a country continue to be broke if we don't fix this problem, so for you to ask Do you believe in freedom or free things, is silly.
PS I don't see anyone getting anything free, when you and I and the society as a whole has already benefitted by them.
Peace
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Metallic This is not about Bush. Bush is no longer the president. Bush never was the ideal president, not for anybody. Obama has created a *far* larger deficit than Bush, and he didn't even stop the recession. All these programs already exist and are projected to bankrupt the government within the next few decades or so. And you want to expand these further. This is an unsustainable path. As for alternate fixes, here's McCain's idea. "McCain's focus is on lowering health care costs to bring down the cost of insurance. His plan for affordable health care includes: allowing families to be in charge of their health care dollars, promoting competition between health care companies, promoting illness prevention, providing health care access to all citizens" See the primary emphasis on lowering health care costs.
So where do you get your information? The recession has been declared, by most economists as over, and recently it has been said that they expect new jobs to pick up faster than expected but, of course, we know we still have a rough road ahead of us. Are you trying to say that some one else's policies averted us from disaster?
McCain lost for a reason. One, he was totally out of touch with the electorate and two, he's a war monger. And he lost credibility be picking a totally unqualified VP, another right wing lunatic who spewed hate very similar to the tea party town halls. She was doing a fine job drumming up divisions between people and inserting race thru code words in her speeches.
It sounds like the very things McCain's plan offered is exactly what Obama's health care plan offers. Bringing down costs, creating competition, and providing health care access for all. Maybe you should read Obama's plan. It seems to offer every thing you like.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Ninjaphire said" "As for alternate fixes, here's McCain's idea. "McCain's focus is on lowering health care costs to bring down the cost of insurance. His plan for affordable health care includes: allowing families to be in charge of their health care dollars, promoting competition between health care companies, promoting illness prevention, providing health care access to all citizens"
Ninjaphire, This is exactly what corporarte America wants. Then they won't have to even offer you compensation packages. If we become responsible to pay for everything including insurance, dental etc....do you really think companies are going to give us a permanent raise to take the place for what they are paying right now for their employer portion???? People will be highly foolish to buy into this hogwash.
It's the same thing now how many, many companies do not even offer retirement plans or pension programs. Did all those company's pay their employees more to make sure they could put money away for those things?
Heck no! People are making less on the dollar then they were 30 yrs ago and very few companies have these retirement programs.
The Republican party has also wanted to do away with Social Security. Do you think your employer is going to give you a permanent adjustment in the form of a raise to cover that??? I think not.
So, lets just let the average American pay for all his own benefits and see how great that works out. That would be the biggest failure we will ever endure.
This is exactly what corporate greed america wants us to believe. They love that there are ppl like John McCain out there talking about families being in charge of their own health care. Do you honestly think if you work for a company they are going to give you in your check what they have been paying for you to be covered?
It's called "Cut and Run"
Big mistake!
Posted by METALLlC BLUE (Member # 6628) on :
Could we move this post to Off-topic since it is unrelated to Lyme Disease? It makes more sense I feel if it goes there.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
I agree that would make more sense to move this thread to Off Topic and I am sure some others would appreciate it too.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
I agree too. I asked to have it moved from medical and they put it here. We need to ask one of the moderators to do so.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Buster said: "My answer would be, first. No one is holding a gun to your head forcing you to buy healthcare insurance. You could just save up money for when something bad happens. If you go broke, then go looking for charitable people to help you out or an organization, or church, ect..."
Yes Buster, I see 47 million charitable ppl lining up to help the other 47 million people that need charity. If this was the case we would not be having this discussion. We are quite frankly just not that charitable. Nor could various charities organize this kind of thing.
People are broke and go broke everyday because of healthcare. Look at all the ppl with Lyme disease alone that have gone broke or will go broke.
Buster I do appreciate that you give in your local community and I do likewise, but we have needed this for years to no avail. The charity is just not there the way you like to think it is.
Also, It is not cost effective for someone to go uninsured. It cost us far more to have them seen through ER's and not give preventative treatment. You are wasting my money by not giving them affordable healthcare.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
Abx
Unemployment is still hovering around 9.6%. It's not over yet. You realize that economies want to recover natural. Atleast some economists believe both Bush's (Stimulus I) and Obama's (Stimulus II) economic policies delayed recovery significantly. After all, most of the "shovel-ready" projects haven't even taken off the ground.
This is not about McCain, or his campaign. This is about his health-care plan.
Obama is a used-car salesman. He will promise you everything on earth, while delivering almost nothing. He has promised these things, without an explanation of how it is going to be achieved. McCain on the other hand had a good explanation.
Posted by METALLlC BLUE (Member # 6628) on :
Also, ABX said what I would have said. Jobless recessions are typical. I explained this already a few pages back. I explained how it works and what happens. Historically, it follows a trend. I told all my family members about investing post-recession. I told them in 2007 to get out in August, and I told them in 2008 to be ready to get in around April to May of 2009 in a "secure" plan like an Index fund. Economic turmoil is as predictable as the weather when you read the charts and study up on it. When your neighbor says "Holy **** bro, get into the market man, I'm making a killing, it's doing awesome." then that's the time that you get out your shovel and umbrella, because it's going to pour and you're going to be in deep **** if you listen to him. When they say get in, get out. When they say get out and that the world is ending then you prepare to get back in. Cycles of the markets and world economies are a beautiful thing
As far as programs to support people. It's true, they're expensive. See what happens without them and then it'll get "really" expensive.
The only plan that I've seen Republicans say will save us money -- and it "really" will, is the death sentence. One less mouth to feed really will save on electric bills won't it? Then again, think of all that money being made performing abortions. Ouch, that's a touchy subject though. Can't imagine the amount of mouths to feed that one would produce if abortion were illegal again.
You know what I find kind of ironic? They support the death sentence but can't stand seeing a 14 year old go into an abortion clinic because she was raped.
Now I know that sounds kind of mean, even cruel really, but pointing out the truth and being blunt doesn't make me wrong.
We need efficiency so let me perform some by getting right to the point. I trust the plan Obama has laid out. I did not trust the plan that John McCain laid out.
People can't possibly save the amount of money necessary to deal with over 100 thousand chronically ill individuals in America today. The individual can't possibly -- on average -- raise the amount of funds, even if they saved carefully. Lyme Disease alone as an example costs upwards of over 100K dollars to treat out of pocket for most of us.
Try saving on the dime of your paycheck you made before you became ill (Assuming you weren't sick from the start of childhood or birth, like many of us).
The reality is, we need government support even if we don't agree with all that government does. My government has saved my *** at the expense of many Americans who are healthy enough to work. I collect disability and suckle at your teet to survive. I am fortunate that prior Presidents and Americans were strong enough in their persistence to advocate these changes for national health care for the disabled/seniors etc. It's just a shame that millions who deserve it and who are sick -- if not sicker than me -- can't get it because they don't fit into some neat little box, or they fall through the cracks because their primary says it's "psychosomatic, blah blah."
I'm alive because of government services so you'd be hard pressed to convince me to change my position no matter how much debt it creates. But, as sickening and unbelievable as it may sound, I'm actually a true blue fiscal conservative. I just believe that conservatism preached by neo-conservatives isn't truly conservation. I believe in conserving natural resoures, our planet, our children's futures, our health, our dignity and our money. Our money should be spent on "us." Wait though, it's not really our money though since I'm disabled. What I'm really saying then is "your" money. That's pretty offensive isn't it?
Americans deserve to live, not die -- even if Obamas plan did accumulate a lot more debt. However, his plan doesn't if you put the time into researching it carefully. As presently described the plan does create debt in a sense, since we haven't figured out how to pay for it entirely, however the amount of money if calculated will prevent financial losses that would be seen in other parts of the private sector, thus actually raising a profit. Projections in economics 101.
How was that for a controversial post? Teehee
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
ninjaphire I'm sorry you are so misinformed. The recession has been declared to be over. Unemployment always lags behind. Read what I wrote again. Yes, unemployment is high and that's how it's supposed to be when a country is coming out of a recession but the latest indicators are that unemployment will pick up at a faster pace than expected.
There is no way that Bush's stimulus could have any impact on our recent economic recovery, no way. Dream on.
If anything it added to the financial crisis by giving away money to the wealthy and blowing a huge surplus left by Clinton.
As far as McCain, he never even had a plan to offer. It was vague, lacked detail and was preposterous. He wanted to give a $500 tax credit to families when insurance cost thousands of $$$$$. It was a total farce. There's a reason why he lost the election and his health care proposal was one of them.
Obama is not used car salesman. Sorry that you cannot spot intelligence, integrity and advanced thinking in a leader. We are privileged as a nation to have such a level headed thinker as our President who truly understands the needs of the country.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Metallic Blue said:
"Americans deserve to live, not die -- even if Obamas plan did accumulate a lot more debt. However, his plan doesn't if you put the time into researching it carefully. As presently described the plan does create debt in a sense, since we haven't figured out how to pay for it entirely, however the amount of money if calculated will prevent financial losses that would be seen in other parts of the private sector, thus actually raising a profit. Projections in economics 101. "
I agree whole heartedly and the short sightedness that many have in not being able to see this and how it is not only the right thing to do morally, but also the smart thing to do is mind boggling. Economics 101 + Heart
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
liesandmorelies
Absolutely, companies would pay us more if they remove the healthcare insurance. I believe this will even lead to lower medical costs. Why ?
Because right now, most people have no idea how expensive their care is, insurance pretty much takes care of everything.
If people had to face the real prices and economize, pharma companies and hospitals would be forced to reduce prices. And tort reform would help too.
Cheap health-care is better than Universal Health-Care, do you agree or disagree ?
For me, I would love to take cash for my S.S. benefits. S.S. is quite likely to be bankrupt by the time I retire, so I would prefer not to pay into it.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
ninjaphire said"Absolutely, companies would pay us more if they remove the healthcare insurance. I believe this will even lead to lower medical costs. Why ? Because right now, most people have no idea how expensive their care is, insurance pretty much takes care of everything. If people had to face the real prices and economize, pharma companies and hospitals would be forced to reduce prices. And tort reform would help too. Cheap health-care is better than Universal Health-Care, do you agree or disagree ? For me, I would love to take cash for my S.S. benefits. S.S. is quite likely to be bankrupt by the time I retire, so I would prefer not to pay into it."
Ninjaphire,
That just does not make sense. The employer buys in bulk and gets a reduced rate than lets say if you or I buy privately. The employer pays a lot for these premiums and most employees only pay a small share of the total cost that the employer pays.
Most people don't even understand what the premiums cost. Unless your employer is going to give you supplemental money each month that would pay for your private cost, you will be in big trouble.
Lets just say for the sake of argument that it will be 30% cheaper to do it your way. Then your employer will have to increase your pre-tax paycheck by that amount of money to supplement you so that you can afford your healthcare costs.
Once that your employer takes no responsibility, then you assume all the cost and there is nothing to stop insurance and the cost of things from going up. And, what if you loose your job?
What if you have a serious illness??? An insurance company could care less about losing one little person, but they don't want to loose a company that employs thousands. See my point?
And as far as SS you are not going to be getting any cash from your employer for it. They will cut it and that will be the end of it, just like retirement plans are becoming obsolete. So where do you think that extra money will go????
Most industries will know you have that extra money that is not being put aside for SS and up their prices on things. The markets will fluctuate to capture the extra money that you now have in your paycheck. You will end up with no savings for retirement.
Also,many will squander it away and will not save. Though they should, they won't and we will end up with the elderly living in the streets and living in poverty right before our eyes, which will cost us way more to take care of them.
There also would not be a problem with SS if we did not keep borrowing against it. There should be reform to stop that from happening.
Once company's started deleting retirement plans, did you see any company's offer money to supplement their employees????
I have not seen that done and more and more do not have retirement plan. Once they cut it, it's gone.
I do agree with you in that if people had to pay their own way, than the overall prices may come down some, but I don't think people are going to be supplemented the way you think they might through their paychecks.
Once it's gone, it's gone.
And, who said anything about universal healthcare. I said I want an "affordable option" for those that need it, not universal. There is a huge difference and that is part of the problem. People are confusing this with a plan like the one Hillary Clinton proposed. This plan is far different.
People are making it sound as if everyone will have to use this plan. Just not true.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
They generally replaced retirement plans with 401Ks
401Ks are definitely better, since you have control of your own money. Retirement plans are riskier now, that there's no guarantee that your employer will last forever, either.
SS is actually listed and withdrawn like a tax. So if I stop paying into it, presumably it will come into my paycheck. (Perhaps as savings ...)
Once the companies drop health-care they will be forced to pay employees extra to make up for it.
The only reason companies provide healthcare is because they get a tax benefit from it. Why should companies get a tax benefit, but people buying their own insurance not get the same benefit ?
The point remains. The "affordable option" comes with so many extra rules on private insurance, that it will kill private insurance.
Posted by Truthfinder (Member # 8512) on :
Briefly: ABX, I realized too late that you probably saw photos of the `worst of the worst' at the protests, given your sources for news. Amongst 60,000 to 2 million demonstrators in D.C. (depending on who's estimating the turnout), I suspect there will be a fair contingent of distasteful activities. Feel free to misjudge the general sentiment of the protests any way you wish.
It's been a long time since I've witnessed such blatant hypocrisy at LN. All these hateful posts ranting about hate from the other side, hate at the protests...... but this kind of thing takes the cake:
*** ``Bottom line is what the truth of the matter is, and I have said this before, people either TRULY believe all should have an affordable option or not.... It breaks my heart to think that we consider our country a compassionate, loving country and we don't have an affordable option. Show me where the compassion is there.'' ***
The very IDEA that anyone would attempt to turn this into some kind of moral issue, accusing those in opposition of lacking love and compassion, is the absolute ultimate outrage.
As if somehow belief and sympathy are all that is required to conjure up the necessary funding, or that desire legitimizes taking from one group to give to another.
Buster and daystar are right; it appears that we can't discuss the legitimate obstacles standing in the way of successful reform.
I respectfully withdraw from this discussion.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Truthfinder,
I am very sorry that you feel this way.
I did not point a finger at anyone in particular here. As I said time and time again, that in my opinion( and I have stated this before, that it's my opinion). It's a moral issue and a very serious economical issue too.
I think I have the right to state that it breaks my heart to see people not receive an affordable option.
If it does not break your heart than that is your opinion.
What is an outrage to me is that people have tried for forty plus years to keep people from receiving an affordable option. If this country can spend trillions on a war in Iraq, than I think we can conjure up the necessary funding to give our own an "Affordable option". Which btw would be offset by savings and premiums collected for the most part. Again, this is my opinion, perhaps not yours.
No one was attacking any one here. We are stating that as a society we do not think it's morally correct.
I am Sorry if this touched a sore spot with you, I don't know why it would. And, I never said that you or anyone else here was personally immoral, so why you would jump to that conclusion, I don't know why.
This is a very divided subject and much of how people feel about it is based on their morals and beliefs about what people should and shouldn't receive in the form of health care.
I am sorry if you disagree with my beliefs. Please don't take it personally. I don't take what you write when I disagree with it personally, I might just disagree with it.
Peace
[ 09-14-2009, 12:22 PM: Message edited by: liesandmorelies ]
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
I hold the same beliefs as "Lies". I hope we get a good health care bill passed with a strong public option, so that we can be a nation to feel proud of. I find the situation we have been in for years to be a national disgrace.
Truthfinder, what do you mean by this:
"taking from one group to give to another."
I don't see it like that at all.
Posted by METALLlC BLUE (Member # 6628) on :
My girlfriend who is from Italy says that her, her friends, family and most other people she knows in Europe love President Obama, but they think it's a real shame that Americans don't care enough about others to even take care of their own. They said "Americans throw money at dictators and oppressive leaders by the trillions over the last 20 years, but they have homeless, hungry and dying people -- especially infants -- who aren't receiving proper medical care.
They say it's disgusting the lifestyle of people who can't afford to eat healthful options because the street corner fast food restaurant has a dollar menus that can feed them unrelentingly fattening foods for 1/4th the cost of a meal that is health sustaining or that should be prepared for the dinner table at night.
They say that many americans have too much stress from working too many hours at a job that often pays too little. They say it's sad that we eat dinner in front of our TV sets instead of with family, because mom and dads "both" often have to work long hours to make the payments for insurance premiums -- which still don't often cover many necessary things, especially in people with chronic conditions.
The final nail in the coffin (no pun intended for those who die from lack of healthcare) was they said that while the longevity of the average person in the U.S. is around 75 yrs old, their quality of life really isn't great. They spend much time sitting at desk jobs, don't have enough nice walking areas in every town that are pedestrian friendly and easily accessible to everyone, and people are often depressed and lonely because they spend more time in front of a computer and far less time with people.
The bottomline Erica says is that people would be much healthier, happier and live more productive lives if "Health" was a primary concern of the Government. Easily accessible and affordable health care -- especially preventative care and education on lifestyle, stress management, and eating habits would go a long way to invoking good quality of life. She says that the governments (local especially) should create environments that make it easy for people to walk like they do in Italy.
You know what? I agree with her. Our tax dollars should be helping "The people." That is the whole point of a good government. Ironically, that's what Obama has been doing. She said it's really sad -- even pathetic -- that people are fighting him so much when all he's trying to do is give them back the better lives they have been asking for. They say they want it, but when it comes time to pay the price and to act upon it, the Americans don't care enough about each other to do it, and that they're selfish and afraid of change. The majority voted for President Bush twice, that says it all about your country.
Now why should we care what anyone else outside our borders thinks? Because they can often see things in us that we can't see.
Posted by Need Lots of Help (Member # 18603) on :
I am still in wonder why everyone in America thinks every single commodity is a right to all Americans just because they are Americans.
America was built on the basis that if you work hard enough, you can get as high up the ladder as you choose. Bascially, you get what you work for. The harder you work, yadayada.
No one saved our Local Americal Farmers when the banks were taking all of the farm land from them. But, we are going to rush to the car companies aid (who refuse to negotiate their terms) and the banks aide, now we are going to add Healthcare and Clean Fuel to our deficeit.
We are broke people, no matter who or how many think that Healthcare, Food, utilities are a RIGHT, America is broke!!! The word deficeit means in the negetive. SO, we need to fix that first...or the Chinese will be deciding our healthcare!!
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Need Lots of Help said:
"No one saved our Local Americal Farmers when the banks were taking all of the farm land from them. But, we are going to rush to the car companies aid (who refuse to negotiate their terms) and the banks aide, now we are going to add Healthcare and Clean Fuel to our deficeit."
Needs you are right, perhaps we should be saving or should have saved local farmers. Perhaps we should save or help to save the mom and pop shops and local businesses.
I would venture to guess as I have spent a lot of time talking to Democrats and liberals, that the vast majority agree with you and think that small farms should be saved. Most Democrats have fought for that and voted for that too.
The ppl that I have found that either don't care about local farming are the people who want to get the lowest, cheapest price at the grocery store and therefore do not care if the huge corporate Agricultural and Farming company's come in and take over.
For the most part they are not the ones that support Obama.(at least not the ones that I know that support Obama). All my friends that are liberal support local farming . So, I guess I am not quite understanding what you are saying.
I owned 40 plus acres in prime upstate NY Ag land and had a farmer who farmed my land. He lost his business due to corp. america farming. He now has no insurance. He is exactly the kind of person that needs this and IMHO has a right. He worked hard, did the right thing and is now brushed under the carpet like he does not exist.
He did what you said above, in that he worked hard enough(And still, it wasn't good enough). He worked and had it all taken away from him, just like ppl who are losing their jobs and their health care.
It does not add up. He worked and did the right thing and now we are just going to turn our back on him. This is happening to millions upon millions of hardworking people. It could happen to most of us. And, I know I have been a hard worker and so has my husband.
His whole life was farming and now he has nothing. I agree we should have helped him. It's a shame and not the American way to allow Corporate America to own everything.
I am a firm believer of shopping local and try my best to avoid big box stores whenever I can. I boycott stores like Walmart and the like all the time. All they have done is sent our manufacturing jobs across the sea.
So on that one you are absolutely correct and I would also guess that many that want and believe in an affordable option also think we should save local farming.
I think it all comes down to preconceived ideas of how one chooses to spend ones money. We obviously have the money for war and space programs etc....(I am not implying that we should not use or spend money on those) I am just saying there has to be a balance of where we spend our money.
Also, I don't think we are broke when our upper class and our poorer class are growing. It's a proven fact that our upper class is growing in number. Of course our poorer class should not have to pay for this proposed plan, but the upper is definitely not broke or that class would not be growing in number year by year.
I also agree with you in that I do not like having a deficit. George Bush had a surplus and squandered it away(again in my opinion).
I feel like the wealthy should pay for this through taxes. Not the middle class, but the wealthy. I feel (in my opinion that they owe it to the person who made them what they are as I have stated in other posts).
Most of Obama's plan will be paid for by savings and collected premiums. If we incur any other costs the wealthy should pay it.
Again we should ask ourselves how is it that everyone is suffering this economic problem, but the wealthy are growing in numbers right before our eyes?????
[ 09-14-2009, 03:00 PM: Message edited by: liesandmorelies ]
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
"Tea Party protesters trying to tout the size of their march on Washington last weekend have been passing around a photo of a packed National Mall. But the picture is years old.
Politifact asked Pete Piringer, public affairs officer for the D.C. Fire and Emergency Department, if the rally was big enough to fill that space. Piringer said no -- and moreover, the picture can't be from 2009."
[ 09-14-2009, 10:02 PM: Message edited by: Abxnomore ]
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Abx,
Your last post reminded me about a current event in my town.
We have a large local Medical Center here in my town and there were some doctors who were recently having a symposium/conference and this very subject was talked about very heavily.
The local news came and reported as they were interviewing the doctors about the state of healthcare and whether they supported a public option.
Although there were some opposing opinions. By and large the vast majority of doctors who ranged from Pediatricians to Heart Surgeons agreed that we should and do need an option for the uninsured Americans that don't have one.
They also discussed and we very vocal about how broken our system was and how change was needed ASAP.
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
quote:Originally posted by Abxnomore: "Majority Of Doctors Back Public Option: New England Journal Of Medicine Study"
I don't know about that. I do know that it scares my LLMD, and he's a kuchnich supporter, hardly right wing.
Posted by lymie_in_md (Member # 14197) on :
I'm going to throw a new wrinkle in your debate. I believe if you break arm or have a cold or have strep any class of easily treated malidies should be covered for every citizen in the U.S.. Just like I think every child in the United States must be educated ( that's not covered by the constitution either nor the bill of rights).
I no longer believe cancer should be covered, nor vaccines nor flu shots (they are all ineffective -- homeopathy is better, cheaper and safer).
Instead of covering cancer, divert all the money used in cancer research to improve diet, water, and our environment. Prevent cancer at the beginning not at the end, and improve people's quality of life. If you look at the numbers, cancer treatment is a real failure and that is where all the money is going.
And by the way, cancer treatment isn't in the constitution either, why should it be included in insurance.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
First I'll say that doctors have fought against this for years, so I think it speaks volumes that they are supporting it now.
I like to look at medical coverage for all as the "right thing to do" as opposed to whether or not it's a right that is defined in any of our governing documents. To me that is the issue. Do we, as a society, want to do the right thing; as all of the other industrialized nations have decided to do long before our current debate about it.
Bob I don't think I'll go as far as you and say that cancer, flu shots and vaccines should not be covered but I do agree with your philosophy. If experimenting with something like this proves to be effective and we don't need them, I'd be the first to day yes. I don't get flu shots, will not get any new vaccines but for young children I'm not 100% sure all should be eliminated but don't like the way they are being administered now. We give more than any other country in a very short span of time and the the amounts given and timing has changed greatly since I was young and received my vaccinations. Right now I'm not 100% comfortable in totally doing away with them; I simply don't know enough about whether homeopathy will truly work the same way but do understand the dangers of vaccines.
I believe that improving diet, water, and the environment will likely cut down on cancer greatly and prevent it and hopefully will eliminate the need for such treatment, most of which is often a waste of money and causes undue patient suffering. But it does have be measured against the particular situation. Some people actually do survive cancer, if the circumstances are right and it's caught early, but I for one, would not take mainstream cancer therapy. And some mainstream cancer treatments are not as bad as others. If a cancer could be cut out, that is often a good option but yes, finding a way from preventing cancer is the right emphasis.
I do think we need to address as a society when it is appropriate or not. I have had members of my family die from this illness and it is very clear to me that doctor's use cancer patients as guinea pigs up until the moment of death. My family always knew when enough was enough and to say no. But the sad fact is I've seen cases where people had days left to live and they were still pumping more poison, into them to see the results, when it was very clear that the patient could not survive.
I agree with you that in the vast majority of cases cancer treatment is a failure and the methods we have come up with to combat it are bad. It's just poisons the entire body and the patient suffers terribly. But we can't lump all cancers into one pot. For example thyroid cancer has a very high success rate, treatment is not devastating as in other types and most go on to lead normal lives.
I'd like to see a more healthy balance like they do in other parts of the world using homeopathy and allopathic medicine but certainly I agree with you that so much money is wasted on cancer research because the emphasis is in the wrong place. It needs to be on prevention. If we would clean up our toxic environment, eat better quality food grown without pesticides, antibiotics and all the bad things agri business puts in our food (in fact get rid of agri business), have clean pure drinking water and a better philosophy of how to live life as Metallic Blue discussed in one of his posts, we would have a lot less cancer in this society. Americans fiercely individual stand in some ways serves them ill. Metallic illustrated this well in his post. America is a a very lonely, alienated society. Not so in Europe and other parts of the world despite industrialization. It's just two completely different mindsets but in Europe and most parts of the world there is always a central square where people come to mingle. Having close social relationships with friends and family are just as important, if not more, than a good career. Emphasis in on living life, not fabulous careers, acquired tons of $$$ and material things, certainly not to the extreme like it is in America. So many studies show that those who live lonely isolated lives die younger.
But if we really wanted to talk about prevention and your approach then we would have to get after the muti national corporations and stop them from producing all the bad food stuffs that are on the super market shelves and the toxic substances they use to produce so many consumer products, as well. We would have to have a really educated public and also stop them from marketing to children to buy the unhealthy stuff on the supermarket shelf. We would really need an entirely different approach to life and living in this society and an educated proactive population.
In a nutshell, I believe that emphasis on prevention, a clean environment and better lifestyle, instead of drugs and invasive treatment, when not absolute necessary would serve us all better. So I'll meet you 3/4 of the way on this but would love to see an environment the way you describe it, if I could be convinced it would work.
[ 09-15-2009, 10:43 AM: Message edited by: Abxnomore ]
Posted by coltman (Member # 21272) on :
quote: But if we really wanted to talk about prevention and your approach then we would have to get after the muti national corporations and stop them from producing all the bad food stuffs that are on the super market shelves and the toxic substances they use to produce so many consumer products, as well. We would have to have a really educated public and also stop them from marketing to children to buy the unhealthy stuff on the supermarket shelf. We would really need an entirely different approach to life and living in this society and an educated proactive population.
It would be a way to get out of this mess . And stop destruction of resources and environment. Unfortunately I think it will never happen -humans en mass are not capable of acting logically and productively.
If it was ,say about you and me we could agree on something like this and act on it , but the action needs to be done on national and even planetary scale. At this level population is simply a very dumb sheep easily manipulated by mass media and whose sole interest in life is boundless consumption, 95% of them produce absolutely nothing useful and their only summary contribution is pollution and destruction of resources.
At the top of the food chain (those who make decisions and have power and money) there is no interest in change either,as capitalistic economies ( their source of wealth and power is) is driven by ever increasing consumption, status quo will be kept
We had reached the level of technology necessary for building sustainable and balanced society but we (as a whole) do not have any desire or incentive to do so. Technology is used almost solely for driving the vicious circle -in fact sustainable technologies are driven out of the market because they do not contribute as much to capitalistic economies (which rely on destruction of resources are in public domain - therefore "free")
Alas - at some point the current system will crash (as resources are finite and damage we doing is serious and accumulating), it will end up in disaster for humanity (maybe even wipeout), but maybe more intelligent beings will emerge out of it
Posted by lymie_in_md (Member # 14197) on :
I made the point about cancer, vaccines, flu shots, because how closed the medical thinking truly is. If we are going to fix health care we have to look at health first. It starts with the DNA that forms life and the environment that life lives in. I suspect we spend very little money giving the health care dollars on the first stages of life.
It is true that homeopathy is much cheaper then vaccines. If it is more effective we should study it to see if it works so it saves money. The problem in proving it, it is not going to make big pharma rich. Hence the problem in the structure of health care, and how we approach health. We need to have independent thinkers on how to structure health before we can determine how to pay for it. The Europeans and Asians are way ahead of us in this regard.
Another way of looking at: what should we pay for diseases like cancer, fibromyalgia, CFS, AFS, gulf war syndrome, lyme, mycoplasma. Or do we pay for health so these issues are more difficult to occur. Build a strong immune system to handle a more chemically, electro-magnetically toxic world. Or some combination of both. Right now I'd guess 90% of all money goes to solving some disease. Name a disease identified and solved with all the money we've spent. If you can name one, how much did we spend.
If we spent a trillion dollars on health and took our chances with cancer and the other diseases. Would the money be better spent.
This is just to put a different spin on how we spend money. And how effectively the money is spent.
Posted by Need Lots of Help (Member # 18603) on :
Bob,
I am right there with you in your thoughts on health and eastern medicine. I think that doctors think it is all hogwash. But, we do need medicine for emergencies. I wish as a child my parents had taught me how to eat properly. My parents were young when they had me and our diet consisted of macaroni and cheese and ravoli out of a can.
Later I did begin to like tomato sandwiches, but we never ate carrots, salads or anything like that. It is so hard for me now to stick to a good "eating plan". Even though it is better for me.
I am gaining weight and feeling worse. That should be enough motivation, but it is HARD!! The horrible thing is that I can eat a really healthy lunch, then if someone walks by me with McDonalds french fries, I sometimes feel like I could just snatch the fries from from them. Then, just because I smelled those fries my body is starving, for what...french fries. So, food is my addiction.........and maybe the thing holding me back in treatment.
Sorry so wordy...
Shalome
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Bob,
I agree that mainstream medicine should include alternative medicines that have been used for hundreds if not thousands of years, but alas we know who owns the cards don't we??? Corporate America will never give up their grasp on that one, that's why we have to fight them.
I think there needs to be a balance of spending money on both preventative and then spending money when ppl become ill. We are spending far too little on preventive and education etc.. So on that point I really do agree with you.
Where I think we will get into trouble is that, ppl are very ill with all the disease that you described above. I don't think you would get the support to just stop treating the people who have or come down with these things.
I don't think people would vote to put all the money into what you propose, although I think we should follow the example of what many other country's are doing in this regard. They are way ahead of us.
I do know if my child came down with cancer, I would want to treat him or her and try to save their life. Again, I personally think there needs to be a balance of where the money goes, butt definitely can see your point.
It would be nice to see a lot more money going into homeopathy and environment control i/e reduction of pesticides, poisoning water etc....I would love to see natural and holistic medicine being accepted and offered at the mainstream level.
Our doctors are basically not allowed(based on their oath to what western medicine dictates) to recommend Chiropractors, holistic medicine, etc....
Example, my GP doctor would not tell me who a good Chiro was, but when I pressed the issue and said, okay, tell me who all the doctors in this practice go and see, he told me that. It ticked me off that he wouldn't tell me when I asked because he could not look as if he was prescribing a chiro, but as soon as I said, I know you all go to chiro's who do you all see, he told me.
This is exactly the problem. Same with my Physical Therapist. They poo-poo Chiro's and alternative medicine(they are so afraid it will take away from their business)...Again, it is about greed and they are brainwashed into thinking all these other alternatives are hogwash.
Anyway, I appreciate your way of looking at things and hope we do change our approach to some degree.
Posted by Ann-OH (Member # 2020) on :
What a crock!
I think a little more respect for the office of President is absolutely required. Making a hero out of a proven racist who shouts out during an address to congress calling the President a liar, for saying something that is proven and absolutely true is really unforgivable.
Whatever health plan emerges, it will have to be with a compromise first in the House and then in the Senate.
All this public shouting about losing liberty etc. is really painful to watch.
The rest of the world must think the U.S. is full of uneducated,mis-informed, self-centered, fools, easily duped by racist TV and radio rabble-rousers.
I sure hope wiser minds do what is right and correct the current health coverage situation before none of us can afford care.
Ann - OH
Posted by Snailhead (Member # 18091) on :
Hi, a while back people brought up the guy with the gun at the townhall.
He was outside, not in the meeting. Oh, and he wasn't shouting or being rowdy.
And he was black.
Also, I know the Patriot Act came up. Just a couple of days ago Mr. Obama "re-upped" this act, instead of letting it expire in a couple months as it was set to do.
(I think someone had said "show me where Mr. Obama supports the Patriot Act; I don't think you can.")
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
Study links 45,000 U.S. deaths to lack of insurance
quote:Originally posted by Snailhead: Hi, a while back people brought up the guy with the gun at the townhall.
He was outside, not in the meeting. Oh, and he wasn't shouting or being rowdy.
And he was black.
Not true, Snail. Unless there was a second gun-to-townhall toting incident of which I'm not aware.
I saw the gun guy being interviewed on a political talk show. Now, my Lyme has definitely affected my eyes, and my vision is not as clear as it once was, but I am pretty certain this guy had a creamy pink pigment to his complexion.
Posted by Buster (Member # 19472) on :
quote:Originally posted by nomoremuscles:
quote:Originally posted by Snailhead: Hi, a while back people brought up the guy with the gun at the townhall.
He was outside, not in the meeting. Oh, and he wasn't shouting or being rowdy.
And he was black.
Not true, Snail. Unless there was a second gun-to-townhall toting incident of which I'm not aware.
I saw the gun guy being interviewed on a political talk show. Now, my Lyme has definitely affected my eyes, and my vision is not as clear as it once was, but I am pretty certain this guy had a creamy pink pigment to his complexion.
Thanks for pointing out that fox news leans to the right, I had no idea. No one should watch them because republicans are always evil and democrats are always good. Posted by luvs2ride (Member # 8090) on :
I haven't much regard for people who form opinions about other people they don't watch and spout opinions about group causes they haven't attended or listened to.
But you look foolish slamming Glenn Beck and accusing him of fear mongering and propaganda when the issues he raises bring about resignations, firings, suspension of funding and investigations.
I charge that you are sadly out of touch with the truth and will remain so until you lay down your bias and you begin to listen and learn for yourself.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
More than half the country could say the same about your statement.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
"I charge that you are sadly out of touch with the truth and will remain so until you lay down your bias and you begin to listen and learn for yourself."
So are you saying that Glen Beck is "IN" touch with reality, and does not have a bias???
Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
quote:Originally posted by liesandmorelies: So are you saying that Glen Beck is "IN" touch with reality, and does not have a bias???
You should listen to Beck.
Everybody's, every human being is biased. It's just that some people pretend not to be.
Besides, the Truth is the Truth. No matter how biased the person speaking it.
Try to rebut Glenn Beck on the facts. I think he's very careful to be accurate.
Posted by Abxnomore (Member # 18936) on :
What facts, the ones he continues to twist for his own selfish purposes?
"Try to rebut Glenn Beck on the facts."
Charlatans excel at this.
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Ninjaphire,
If you want to buy into Glen Beck being non-biased then that is your choice. I don't believe in basing my decisions on talk show hosts that lie and change their tune just to sell their show.
I tend to watch very little TV and try to read reliable new resources and publications. Many think that real news is people like Hannity, Beck, O'Reilly, Olberman, Colmes, Rush etc....They all quite frankly profit and are sitting there being paid to "entertain" us.
Most recently Beck was shown saying how great the US healthcare system is and yet only one year ago when he had a very bad run in with the healthcare system, he said quite the opposite.
Don't you find that interesting? Would you like me to show you the clips where he does this? Your Mr. Beck hated the healthcare system that we have. Anything for ratings.
If you notice, I tend to post writings and facts from non-biased sources. I watch little in the way of mainstream media garbage and try to base my thoughts and ideas by making informed decisions from reliable sources.
And yes, the truth is certainly the truth!!!!
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
Ninja,
Could not help myself. It pains me to see people buy into this stuff.
So, was Beck honest and objective back in 2008 when he said the US healthcare system stinks?(and he worked for CNN)
OR, is he honest and objective now working for FOX when he says how great the healthcare system is?
Or did it stink 18 months ago and now it's miraculously better now?
Or.......
Still think he is truthful? As for rebutting him, it isn't really necessary, he rebuts himself. Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
Beck is definitely biased towards liberty and things like that. It's true.
But I also said that All sources are biased. Did you miss this part ?
The problem is that you won't notice the bias if only read certain websites. Like a fish doesn't know what water is, because it's everywhere.
Amazingly enough, he's right on both points.
1. Our healthcare system is terrible and definitely broken. When dogs and cats get better/cheaper healthcare than people, thats one sign. Another sign is how things like Lyme are misdiagnosed and not treated.
2. Our healthcare system is still the best in the world. We have lots of LLMDs in the US compared to Europe. If you get cancer, your prognosis is best in the US. We try the hardest to save premature babies.
There is no contradiction. ObamaCare will push the quality of care in the US down.
[ 09-24-2009, 02:08 AM: Message edited by: ninjaphire ]
Posted by liesandmorelies (Member # 15323) on :
So, let me get this straight.
My dog is treated better than me, yet we have the best healthcare system in the world. Wow, I feel encouraged!!! Posted by ninjaphire (Member # 18234) on :
Hey, "Best" doesn't mean there's no room for improvement.
You know, for certain problems, It would be cheaper to fly to India, get surgery there with a top notch surgeon and hospital, and it will still be cheaper than a hospital in the US.
Why ? There's no Insurance in India. Very few lawsuits.
My friend did it for a spinal problem, and he also visited his parents at the same time. Win-win.
We need to move the US towards a free-market system, not towards the European/Canadian system, which is already broken ...
Posted by luvs2ride (Member # 8090) on :
You know, I have taken a break from all of this. Grandmother, Lies, we know where this is headed.
I have spoken my opinion in the appropriate forums and will be voting my conscience as I am sure you all will be doing.
I'm looking up, building my treasures in heaven and making a point to enjoy my time on earth.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[cussing]](graemlins/cussing.gif)
![[dizzy]](graemlins/dizzy.gif)
![[shake]](graemlins/shake.gif)
![[bonk]](graemlins/bonk.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)