100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Address to the Congress amazing speech | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I was just watching the Republican response to his speech. Obama needs to stop being nice to the Republicans and use his Democratic advantage and get er done as far as I am concerned. He is trying too damn hard to bring a group in that cannot be brought in. Just do it, man. And they talked of their form of healthcare reform and it is basically nothing new. Nothing at all. They do not want to change it. Their only defense is to put a price on life. They are saying that the cost of saving lives is too much. It is actually less than the war in Iraq and that saved how many lives? Is still saving how many lives? Sheesh, just get it worked out and passed already. He doesn't need the Republicans. He is much too nice in my opinion. I am not a liberal, nor am I democrat, nor am I anything they have listed. So keep your rightwing rhetoric that means absolutely nothing because you wouldn't even know a liberal or socialist if you saw one and it bite you in the ***. I'm sorry, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... I guess people need to reclassify this duck then don't they...lol I am unaffilitated. So I am not even an Independent...lol Do me a favor then: Name one, just one economically conservative principle you agree with. And then explain to me why this healthcare plan will not fail. I actually participated in Welfare Reform which made it impossible to lay around and get welfare, economically fiscally conservative ideal done under Clinton. I believe in regulation on all government run programs that limit the clients who can recieve the benefits. I am never prejudice towards them and call them lazy or blame them for the life situation ( which seems to be a republican/conservative thing to do)that got them on benefits. But I believe in the oversight which is fiscally conservative. I can name more but I will leave it at that. As for the healthcare reform bills and suggestions being addressed now. The projections cannot even be close to accurate so the people doing them are being very pessimistic on the costs and results. This health care reform can be done and should be. We may have to adjust it again in the future since it will be new but it will still work. Look back and see how pessimistically they projected the banking collapse, look back at the housing bubble, look at the pessimism on the stock market projections, look at the Y2K fiasco, etc... and so on. They have been pessimistically projecting crap, and it ends up being crap, for the most part, all my life. I think the only things that were not projected correctly were the gas shortage of the 70s and that damn 9/11, which could have been prevented if they would have only examined it and got really pessimistic over the intel. Hell they did more work trying to make Obama some evil figure than they did protecting us before and on 9/11 
any welfare is a socially liberal stance. reform just makes you slightly less liberal. i know you support welfare in many cases. care to try for another? also, are you actually blaming a democratic administration for 9/11? I just want to make sure I'm reading that right. As for reasons this program will fail: 1. Supply shortage. in short, increase demand while supply remains, you get a price increase. artificially limit the price by government intervention (through a "public option" included) and you create a ceiling. price ceiling = supply shortage. 2. Lack of providers. Right now, doctors are loaded. yes, the uninsured still get care, but only at ERs. We're talking a 15% increase in usage of the preventative care system. I'm pretty sure the number of physicians is not going to increase 15% 3. Taxation. I'm told this program will not increase our debt one single dime. i don't believe it. however, in an attempt to make it happen, taxes will naturally rise. there is no other way to do it. taxing those that receive benefits already will lessen household income. that will have all kinds of fun ripple effects across the economy. so will taxing businesses as that cuts their funds as well. kiss a few jobs goodbye there for the low-level corporate employee. hope his buddies enjoy their care. 4. It's been proven time and time again the government has not been able to sustain any kind of program of this nature, even on a small scale, efficiently. Medicare anyone? Social Security? Medicaid? Every government budget for the last several decades has run into the red, moreso than planned. Remember cash for clunkers recently? it was expected to last 2-3 months and instead lasted 2-3 weeks. Then the additional 2 billion was to last until labor day but still ran out a week and a half early. The government accountants are never right. 5. The government does not have to make a profit. Furthermore, the government can't make a profit by it's nature. That means any public option will have a severe unfair advantage over any public plan that needs to make a profit, and even those that do not have to make a profit like Kaiser Permanente. While I'm told the plan will be self-sustaining, I was also told there were WMDs in Iraq and that if we didn't spend this $787B that the unemployment would rise over 8% and the economy would go into a tailspin. They still haven't dished out 15% of it and we're still here. Also, no WMDs. The government has a bad habit of saying what's pretty and it not being true. 6. A lack of reform. There are problems with the system... duh. any idiot with a third grade education can see that. however, we should not be throwing money at the system without taking care of the symptoms that put us in this place to begin with. start with tort reform. you lose an arm when they save your life. So what? Is that arm really worth 10 million dollars? absolutely not. you may lose out in a a couple million in wages over your lifetime and add another 50% for the inconvenience, but you're still far, far less than what juries have made standard practice. fraud and malpractice insurance has made the costs of the system skyrocket. fix the problems that exist now before wasting all this money on a broken system. The end (coverage for all) does not justify the means (billions and billions wasted) there are my brief summaries of my arguments. if you disagree, please explain holes in my logic and post a little more than "that's not true" or "you're wrong" I am getting tired here so briefly I was blaming our government for not acting properly before 9/11, I don't care who the president was or who the rest of the government was at the time. They were lax and it cost us many lives. As for your list, lots of speculation there and personal agenda. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, it can still be done successfully around and through everything you listed there. We are capable of this feat, it is a doable thing. You obviously have no grasp on business or economics and without it, there is no way I can convince you otherwise. There is no way this plan can succeed in providing the same quality of care the majority of our citizens currently enjoy for anywhere near the same cost. If you can see personal agenda in there, I'd like it to be pointed out. All that is is fact. Also, please tell me what is speculation that is not based on experience with our own government. notice there is no reference to any other nation or system in my post (because we cannot compare ourselves to canada, france, or anyone else for that matter as it's all apples to oranges) And thank you drivin  .
No, but you know what I do have? I have the confidence in this government to do what it says it is going to do. No matter what problems arise and no matter how many nay sayers we have, like you, we can do this and should do this. Our government has many faults, yes it does but it also runs this country daily and we are not a third world nation. When we ride or walk down the street, no matter where it is in this country we can see the success of this government and the people it governs. So no matter how many fearmongering points you put out there trying to make it fail before it is ever attempted, I say it can be done regardless and should be done. So I will back it to be done. I wonder if you had the same optimism about Iraq before we entered... I wish i still had blind faith that angels, in the form of kings ran our government... |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Thu 09/10/09 11:11 AM
|
|
Anyhow, i don't think the system needs a complete overhaul. The foundation of our system USED to be the best in the world, before it was tampered with. Our problem, can be summed up by lack of efficiency. In order to get the best possible care, for the best price, the system must be efficient. Perhaps more study should be put into where the inefficiencies are before we go around and dismantle a whole system and spend trillions. ...
Excellent points driver,, I am with the president on this one, I dont expect or want a Complete overhaul, I just want those things that arent working thrown out. I know the doctor doesnt get all the money I pay for a visit , there are plenty of overhead and staffing costs. My brother is a doctor so I am well aware of those things. However, there does seem to be a trend that the patients dont matter, just the diagnosis (which usually has several incentives from the pharmaceutical companies supplying the drugs). I would love to be treated as a person and not a number or a drug consumer. I would love to know why I can pretty much stay in a luxury hotel room for the night for the price of one evening in a hospital. I had my daughter and I didnt even get peaceful rest in my room because solicitors (yes solicitors) were entering my room throughout the day asking me to sign up for this child service, or photographs, or insurance and such. It is a shambles. We have brilliant medical minds but they are becoming the exception. Healthcare has turned far more into a business of profit than of health. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Thu 09/10/09 11:22 AM
|
|
I was just watching the Republican response to his speech. Obama needs to stop being nice to the Republicans and use his Democratic advantage and get er done as far as I am concerned. He is trying too damn hard to bring a group in that cannot be brought in. Just do it, man. And they talked of their form of healthcare reform and it is basically nothing new. Nothing at all. They do not want to change it. Their only defense is to put a price on life. They are saying that the cost of saving lives is too much. It is actually less than the war in Iraq and that saved how many lives? Is still saving how many lives? Sheesh, just get it worked out and passed already. He doesn't need the Republicans. He is much too nice in my opinion. I am not a liberal, nor am I democrat, nor am I anything they have listed. So keep your rightwing rhetoric that means absolutely nothing because you wouldn't even know a liberal or socialist if you saw one and it bite you in the ***. I'm sorry, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... I guess people need to reclassify this duck then don't they...lol I am unaffilitated. So I am not even an Independent...lol Do me a favor then: Name one, just one economically conservative principle you agree with. And then explain to me why this healthcare plan will not fail. I actually participated in Welfare Reform which made it impossible to lay around and get welfare, economically fiscally conservative ideal done under Clinton. I believe in regulation on all government run programs that limit the clients who can recieve the benefits. I am never prejudice towards them and call them lazy or blame them for the life situation ( which seems to be a republican/conservative thing to do)that got them on benefits. But I believe in the oversight which is fiscally conservative. I can name more but I will leave it at that. As for the healthcare reform bills and suggestions being addressed now. The projections cannot even be close to accurate so the people doing them are being very pessimistic on the costs and results. This health care reform can be done and should be. We may have to adjust it again in the future since it will be new but it will still work. Look back and see how pessimistically they projected the banking collapse, look back at the housing bubble, look at the pessimism on the stock market projections, look at the Y2K fiasco, etc... and so on. They have been pessimistically projecting crap, and it ends up being crap, for the most part, all my life. I think the only things that were not projected correctly were the gas shortage of the 70s and that damn 9/11, which could have been prevented if they would have only examined it and got really pessimistic over the intel. Hell they did more work trying to make Obama some evil figure than they did protecting us before and on 9/11
any welfare is a socially liberal stance. reform just makes you slightly less liberal. i know you support welfare in many cases. care to try for another? also, are you actually blaming a democratic administration for 9/11? I just want to make sure I'm reading that right. As for reasons this program will fail: 1. Supply shortage. in short, increase demand while supply remains, you get a price increase. artificially limit the price by government intervention (through a "public option" included) and you create a ceiling. price ceiling = supply shortage. 2. Lack of providers. Right now, doctors are loaded. yes, the uninsured still get care, but only at ERs. We're talking a 15% increase in usage of the preventative care system. I'm pretty sure the number of physicians is not going to increase 15% 3. Taxation. I'm told this program will not increase our debt one single dime. i don't believe it. however, in an attempt to make it happen, taxes will naturally rise. there is no other way to do it. taxing those that receive benefits already will lessen household income. that will have all kinds of fun ripple effects across the economy. so will taxing businesses as that cuts their funds as well. kiss a few jobs goodbye there for the low-level corporate employee. hope his buddies enjoy their care. 4. It's been proven time and time again the government has not been able to sustain any kind of program of this nature, even on a small scale, efficiently. Medicare anyone? Social Security? Medicaid? Every government budget for the last several decades has run into the red, moreso than planned. Remember cash for clunkers recently? it was expected to last 2-3 months and instead lasted 2-3 weeks. Then the additional 2 billion was to last until labor day but still ran out a week and a half early. The government accountants are never right. 5. The government does not have to make a profit. Furthermore, the government can't make a profit by it's nature. That means any public option will have a severe unfair advantage over any public plan that needs to make a profit, and even those that do not have to make a profit like Kaiser Permanente. While I'm told the plan will be self-sustaining, I was also told there were WMDs in Iraq and that if we didn't spend this $787B that the unemployment would rise over 8% and the economy would go into a tailspin. They still haven't dished out 15% of it and we're still here. Also, no WMDs. The government has a bad habit of saying what's pretty and it not being true. 6. A lack of reform. There are problems with the system... duh. any idiot with a third grade education can see that. however, we should not be throwing money at the system without taking care of the symptoms that put us in this place to begin with. start with tort reform. you lose an arm when they save your life. So what? Is that arm really worth 10 million dollars? absolutely not. you may lose out in a a couple million in wages over your lifetime and add another 50% for the inconvenience, but you're still far, far less than what juries have made standard practice. fraud and malpractice insurance has made the costs of the system skyrocket. fix the problems that exist now before wasting all this money on a broken system. The end (coverage for all) does not justify the means (billions and billions wasted) there are my brief summaries of my arguments. if you disagree, please explain holes in my logic and post a little more than "that's not true" or "you're wrong" I am getting tired here so briefly I was blaming our government for not acting properly before 9/11, I don't care who the president was or who the rest of the government was at the time. They were lax and it cost us many lives. As for your list, lots of speculation there and personal agenda. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, it can still be done successfully around and through everything you listed there. We are capable of this feat, it is a doable thing. You obviously have no grasp on business or economics and without it, there is no way I can convince you otherwise. There is no way this plan can succeed in providing the same quality of care the majority of our citizens currently enjoy for anywhere near the same cost. If you can see personal agenda in there, I'd like it to be pointed out. All that is is fact. Also, please tell me what is speculation that is not based on experience with our own government. notice there is no reference to any other nation or system in my post (because we cannot compare ourselves to canada, france, or anyone else for that matter as it's all apples to oranges) And thank you drivin .
No, but you know what I do have? I have the confidence in this government to do what it says it is going to do. No matter what problems arise and no matter how many nay sayers we have, like you, we can do this and should do this. Our government has many faults, yes it does but it also runs this country daily and we are not a third world nation. When we ride or walk down the street, no matter where it is in this country we can see the success of this government and the people it governs. So no matter how many fearmongering points you put out there trying to make it fail before it is ever attempted, I say it can be done regardless and should be done. So I will back it to be done. I wonder if you had the same optimism about Iraq before we entered... I wish i still had blind faith that angels, in the form of kings ran our government... Hell no Iraq was an illegal war and there can be no optimism for illegality and death. It is not blind faith, I don't even know what that concept is. Our government works. It always has and it always will. Why, because of citizens like me that participate and vote and address issues with the legislative branch of the government. Just because I will not call something to failure before it ever gets tried, makes me too optimistic, well I guess I will proudly be that, because I am in the league with the founding fathers of this great nation, who made an attempt at something that had never been done with optimism that it would work, not knowledge that it would work. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was just watching the Republican response to his speech. Obama needs to stop being nice to the Republicans and use his Democratic advantage and get er done as far as I am concerned. He is trying too damn hard to bring a group in that cannot be brought in. Just do it, man. And they talked of their form of healthcare reform and it is basically nothing new. Nothing at all. They do not want to change it. Their only defense is to put a price on life. They are saying that the cost of saving lives is too much. It is actually less than the war in Iraq and that saved how many lives? Is still saving how many lives? Sheesh, just get it worked out and passed already. He doesn't need the Republicans. He is much too nice in my opinion. I am not a liberal, nor am I democrat, nor am I anything they have listed. So keep your rightwing rhetoric that means absolutely nothing because you wouldn't even know a liberal or socialist if you saw one and it bite you in the ***. I'm sorry, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... I guess people need to reclassify this duck then don't they...lol I am unaffilitated. So I am not even an Independent...lol Do me a favor then: Name one, just one economically conservative principle you agree with. And then explain to me why this healthcare plan will not fail. I actually participated in Welfare Reform which made it impossible to lay around and get welfare, economically fiscally conservative ideal done under Clinton. I believe in regulation on all government run programs that limit the clients who can recieve the benefits. I am never prejudice towards them and call them lazy or blame them for the life situation ( which seems to be a republican/conservative thing to do)that got them on benefits. But I believe in the oversight which is fiscally conservative. I can name more but I will leave it at that. As for the healthcare reform bills and suggestions being addressed now. The projections cannot even be close to accurate so the people doing them are being very pessimistic on the costs and results. This health care reform can be done and should be. We may have to adjust it again in the future since it will be new but it will still work. Look back and see how pessimistically they projected the banking collapse, look back at the housing bubble, look at the pessimism on the stock market projections, look at the Y2K fiasco, etc... and so on. They have been pessimistically projecting crap, and it ends up being crap, for the most part, all my life. I think the only things that were not projected correctly were the gas shortage of the 70s and that damn 9/11, which could have been prevented if they would have only examined it and got really pessimistic over the intel. Hell they did more work trying to make Obama some evil figure than they did protecting us before and on 9/11
any welfare is a socially liberal stance. reform just makes you slightly less liberal. i know you support welfare in many cases. care to try for another? also, are you actually blaming a democratic administration for 9/11? I just want to make sure I'm reading that right. As for reasons this program will fail: 1. Supply shortage. in short, increase demand while supply remains, you get a price increase. artificially limit the price by government intervention (through a "public option" included) and you create a ceiling. price ceiling = supply shortage. 2. Lack of providers. Right now, doctors are loaded. yes, the uninsured still get care, but only at ERs. We're talking a 15% increase in usage of the preventative care system. I'm pretty sure the number of physicians is not going to increase 15% 3. Taxation. I'm told this program will not increase our debt one single dime. i don't believe it. however, in an attempt to make it happen, taxes will naturally rise. there is no other way to do it. taxing those that receive benefits already will lessen household income. that will have all kinds of fun ripple effects across the economy. so will taxing businesses as that cuts their funds as well. kiss a few jobs goodbye there for the low-level corporate employee. hope his buddies enjoy their care. 4. It's been proven time and time again the government has not been able to sustain any kind of program of this nature, even on a small scale, efficiently. Medicare anyone? Social Security? Medicaid? Every government budget for the last several decades has run into the red, moreso than planned. Remember cash for clunkers recently? it was expected to last 2-3 months and instead lasted 2-3 weeks. Then the additional 2 billion was to last until labor day but still ran out a week and a half early. The government accountants are never right. 5. The government does not have to make a profit. Furthermore, the government can't make a profit by it's nature. That means any public option will have a severe unfair advantage over any public plan that needs to make a profit, and even those that do not have to make a profit like Kaiser Permanente. While I'm told the plan will be self-sustaining, I was also told there were WMDs in Iraq and that if we didn't spend this $787B that the unemployment would rise over 8% and the economy would go into a tailspin. They still haven't dished out 15% of it and we're still here. Also, no WMDs. The government has a bad habit of saying what's pretty and it not being true. 6. A lack of reform. There are problems with the system... duh. any idiot with a third grade education can see that. however, we should not be throwing money at the system without taking care of the symptoms that put us in this place to begin with. start with tort reform. you lose an arm when they save your life. So what? Is that arm really worth 10 million dollars? absolutely not. you may lose out in a a couple million in wages over your lifetime and add another 50% for the inconvenience, but you're still far, far less than what juries have made standard practice. fraud and malpractice insurance has made the costs of the system skyrocket. fix the problems that exist now before wasting all this money on a broken system. The end (coverage for all) does not justify the means (billions and billions wasted) there are my brief summaries of my arguments. if you disagree, please explain holes in my logic and post a little more than "that's not true" or "you're wrong" I am getting tired here so briefly I was blaming our government for not acting properly before 9/11, I don't care who the president was or who the rest of the government was at the time. They were lax and it cost us many lives. As for your list, lots of speculation there and personal agenda. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, it can still be done successfully around and through everything you listed there. We are capable of this feat, it is a doable thing. You obviously have no grasp on business or economics and without it, there is no way I can convince you otherwise. There is no way this plan can succeed in providing the same quality of care the majority of our citizens currently enjoy for anywhere near the same cost. If you can see personal agenda in there, I'd like it to be pointed out. All that is is fact. Also, please tell me what is speculation that is not based on experience with our own government. notice there is no reference to any other nation or system in my post (because we cannot compare ourselves to canada, france, or anyone else for that matter as it's all apples to oranges) And thank you drivin .
No, but you know what I do have? I have the confidence in this government to do what it says it is going to do. No matter what problems arise and no matter how many nay sayers we have, like you, we can do this and should do this. Our government has many faults, yes it does but it also runs this country daily and we are not a third world nation. When we ride or walk down the street, no matter where it is in this country we can see the success of this government and the people it governs. So no matter how many fearmongering points you put out there trying to make it fail before it is ever attempted, I say it can be done regardless and should be done. So I will back it to be done. I wonder if you had the same optimism about Iraq before we entered... I wish i still had blind faith that angels, in the form of kings ran our government... Hell no Iraq was an illegal war and there can be no optimism for illegality and death. It is not blind faith, I don't even know what they concept is. Our government works. It always has and it always will. Why, because of citizens like me that participate and vote and address issue with the legislative branch of the government. Just because I will not call something to failure before it ever gets tried makes me too optimistic, well I guess I will proudly be that because I am in the league with the founding fathers of this great nation, who made an attempt at something that had never been done with optimism that it would work, not knowledge that it would work. Now that BHO is in power, Iraq is no longer an Illegal war. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Thu 09/10/09 11:53 AM
|
|
Anyhow, i don't think the system needs a complete overhaul. The foundation of our system USED to be the best in the world, before it was tampered with. Our problem, can be summed up by lack of efficiency. In order to get the best possible care, for the best price, the system must be efficient. Perhaps more study should be put into where the inefficiencies are before we go around and dismantle a whole system and spend trillions. ...
This has already been done. They were working on it in the 90s, it did not work. Those who don't want to do anything, like the Republicans, have insurance, have healthcare, haven't had a family member die because they were too poor to be valued enough to be given care. Even they cannot be sure of failure of this but have put every effort into make it so before it can be attempted. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was just watching the Republican response to his speech. Obama needs to stop being nice to the Republicans and use his Democratic advantage and get er done as far as I am concerned. He is trying too damn hard to bring a group in that cannot be brought in. Just do it, man. And they talked of their form of healthcare reform and it is basically nothing new. Nothing at all. They do not want to change it. Their only defense is to put a price on life. They are saying that the cost of saving lives is too much. It is actually less than the war in Iraq and that saved how many lives? Is still saving how many lives? Sheesh, just get it worked out and passed already. He doesn't need the Republicans. He is much too nice in my opinion. I am not a liberal, nor am I democrat, nor am I anything they have listed. So keep your rightwing rhetoric that means absolutely nothing because you wouldn't even know a liberal or socialist if you saw one and it bite you in the ***. I'm sorry, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... I guess people need to reclassify this duck then don't they...lol I am unaffilitated. So I am not even an Independent...lol Do me a favor then: Name one, just one economically conservative principle you agree with. And then explain to me why this healthcare plan will not fail. I actually participated in Welfare Reform which made it impossible to lay around and get welfare, economically fiscally conservative ideal done under Clinton. I believe in regulation on all government run programs that limit the clients who can recieve the benefits. I am never prejudice towards them and call them lazy or blame them for the life situation ( which seems to be a republican/conservative thing to do)that got them on benefits. But I believe in the oversight which is fiscally conservative. I can name more but I will leave it at that. As for the healthcare reform bills and suggestions being addressed now. The projections cannot even be close to accurate so the people doing them are being very pessimistic on the costs and results. This health care reform can be done and should be. We may have to adjust it again in the future since it will be new but it will still work. Look back and see how pessimistically they projected the banking collapse, look back at the housing bubble, look at the pessimism on the stock market projections, look at the Y2K fiasco, etc... and so on. They have been pessimistically projecting crap, and it ends up being crap, for the most part, all my life. I think the only things that were not projected correctly were the gas shortage of the 70s and that damn 9/11, which could have been prevented if they would have only examined it and got really pessimistic over the intel. Hell they did more work trying to make Obama some evil figure than they did protecting us before and on 9/11
any welfare is a socially liberal stance. reform just makes you slightly less liberal. i know you support welfare in many cases. care to try for another? also, are you actually blaming a democratic administration for 9/11? I just want to make sure I'm reading that right. As for reasons this program will fail: 1. Supply shortage. in short, increase demand while supply remains, you get a price increase. artificially limit the price by government intervention (through a "public option" included) and you create a ceiling. price ceiling = supply shortage. 2. Lack of providers. Right now, doctors are loaded. yes, the uninsured still get care, but only at ERs. We're talking a 15% increase in usage of the preventative care system. I'm pretty sure the number of physicians is not going to increase 15% 3. Taxation. I'm told this program will not increase our debt one single dime. i don't believe it. however, in an attempt to make it happen, taxes will naturally rise. there is no other way to do it. taxing those that receive benefits already will lessen household income. that will have all kinds of fun ripple effects across the economy. so will taxing businesses as that cuts their funds as well. kiss a few jobs goodbye there for the low-level corporate employee. hope his buddies enjoy their care. 4. It's been proven time and time again the government has not been able to sustain any kind of program of this nature, even on a small scale, efficiently. Medicare anyone? Social Security? Medicaid? Every government budget for the last several decades has run into the red, moreso than planned. Remember cash for clunkers recently? it was expected to last 2-3 months and instead lasted 2-3 weeks. Then the additional 2 billion was to last until labor day but still ran out a week and a half early. The government accountants are never right. 5. The government does not have to make a profit. Furthermore, the government can't make a profit by it's nature. That means any public option will have a severe unfair advantage over any public plan that needs to make a profit, and even those that do not have to make a profit like Kaiser Permanente. While I'm told the plan will be self-sustaining, I was also told there were WMDs in Iraq and that if we didn't spend this $787B that the unemployment would rise over 8% and the economy would go into a tailspin. They still haven't dished out 15% of it and we're still here. Also, no WMDs. The government has a bad habit of saying what's pretty and it not being true. 6. A lack of reform. There are problems with the system... duh. any idiot with a third grade education can see that. however, we should not be throwing money at the system without taking care of the symptoms that put us in this place to begin with. start with tort reform. you lose an arm when they save your life. So what? Is that arm really worth 10 million dollars? absolutely not. you may lose out in a a couple million in wages over your lifetime and add another 50% for the inconvenience, but you're still far, far less than what juries have made standard practice. fraud and malpractice insurance has made the costs of the system skyrocket. fix the problems that exist now before wasting all this money on a broken system. The end (coverage for all) does not justify the means (billions and billions wasted) there are my brief summaries of my arguments. if you disagree, please explain holes in my logic and post a little more than "that's not true" or "you're wrong" I am getting tired here so briefly I was blaming our government for not acting properly before 9/11, I don't care who the president was or who the rest of the government was at the time. They were lax and it cost us many lives. As for your list, lots of speculation there and personal agenda. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, it can still be done successfully around and through everything you listed there. We are capable of this feat, it is a doable thing. You obviously have no grasp on business or economics and without it, there is no way I can convince you otherwise. There is no way this plan can succeed in providing the same quality of care the majority of our citizens currently enjoy for anywhere near the same cost. If you can see personal agenda in there, I'd like it to be pointed out. All that is is fact. Also, please tell me what is speculation that is not based on experience with our own government. notice there is no reference to any other nation or system in my post (because we cannot compare ourselves to canada, france, or anyone else for that matter as it's all apples to oranges) And thank you drivin .
No, but you know what I do have? I have the confidence in this government to do what it says it is going to do. No matter what problems arise and no matter how many nay sayers we have, like you, we can do this and should do this. Our government has many faults, yes it does but it also runs this country daily and we are not a third world nation. When we ride or walk down the street, no matter where it is in this country we can see the success of this government and the people it governs. So no matter how many fearmongering points you put out there trying to make it fail before it is ever attempted, I say it can be done regardless and should be done. So I will back it to be done. I wonder if you had the same optimism about Iraq before we entered... I wish i still had blind faith that angels, in the form of kings ran our government... Hell no Iraq was an illegal war and there can be no optimism for illegality and death. It is not blind faith, I don't even know what they concept is. Our government works. It always has and it always will. Why, because of citizens like me that participate and vote and address issue with the legislative branch of the government. Just because I will not call something to failure before it ever gets tried makes me too optimistic, well I guess I will proudly be that because I am in the league with the founding fathers of this great nation, who made an attempt at something that had never been done with optimism that it would work, not knowledge that it would work. Now that BHO is in power, Iraq is no longer an Illegal war.
That is not true, it is the now the residual illegal war from a president who did not have our best interests at heart. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americans have the best healthcare in the world. Some of the biggest problems with the system are cost, exclusion, corruption (consumer and provider) and greed.
I'd prefer they address the problems. Leaving it to the government will doom the system to beauracracy, inefficiency, and, I believe, a lower standard of care. Companies will slowly drop health care altogether and leave it in the hands of the government. I prefer the government have as little hand in my personal responsibilities as possible. Address the problems. Lets find a way to provide a minimum of health insurance at a reasonable cost to the individual. I had to pay COBRA for a year for my ex at a cost of over $435/month. And today she can't even GET health insurance. Lets take a bite out of the insane liability insurance that doctors and hospitals pay. Lets find a way to not exclude a pre-existing conditions if someone simply lost their job for a few months. Let's put heat on drug manufacturers that 'create' a market for their drugs. Sure, there are quite a few problems. But it's better than what I believe is in store. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americans have the best healthcare in the world. Some of the biggest problems with the system are cost, exclusion, corruption (consumer and provider) and greed. I'd prefer they address the problems. Leaving it to the government will doom the system to beauracracy, inefficiency, and, I believe, a lower standard of care. Companies will slowly drop health care altogether and leave it in the hands of the government. I prefer the government have as little hand in my personal responsibilities as possible. Address the problems. Lets find a way to provide a minimum of health insurance at a reasonable cost to the individual. I had to pay COBRA for a year for my ex at a cost of over $435/month. And today she can't even GET health insurance. Lets take a bite out of the insane liability insurance that doctors and hospitals pay. Lets find a way to not exclude a pre-existing conditions if someone simply lost their job for a few months. Let's put heat on drug manufacturers that 'create' a market for their drugs. Sure, there are quite a few problems. But it's better than what I believe is in store. The addressing of these problems was done in the 90s. It did nothing. We are worse off now. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americans have the best healthcare in the world. Some of the biggest problems with the system are cost, exclusion, corruption (consumer and provider) and greed. I'd prefer they address the problems. Leaving it to the government will doom the system to beauracracy, inefficiency, and, I believe, a lower standard of care. Companies will slowly drop health care altogether and leave it in the hands of the government. I prefer the government have as little hand in my personal responsibilities as possible. Address the problems. Lets find a way to provide a minimum of health insurance at a reasonable cost to the individual. I had to pay COBRA for a year for my ex at a cost of over $435/month. And today she can't even GET health insurance. Lets take a bite out of the insane liability insurance that doctors and hospitals pay. Lets find a way to not exclude a pre-existing conditions if someone simply lost their job for a few months. Let's put heat on drug manufacturers that 'create' a market for their drugs. Sure, there are quite a few problems. But it's better than what I believe is in store. The addressing of these problems was done in the 90s. It did nothing. We are worse off now. They obviously didn't address them properly. And I have complete faith that the government will make things even worse. I'd prefer a different approach. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americans have the best healthcare in the world. Some of the biggest problems with the system are cost, exclusion, corruption (consumer and provider) and greed. I'd prefer they address the problems. Leaving it to the government will doom the system to beauracracy, inefficiency, and, I believe, a lower standard of care. Companies will slowly drop health care altogether and leave it in the hands of the government. I prefer the government have as little hand in my personal responsibilities as possible. Address the problems. Lets find a way to provide a minimum of health insurance at a reasonable cost to the individual. I had to pay COBRA for a year for my ex at a cost of over $435/month. And today she can't even GET health insurance. Lets take a bite out of the insane liability insurance that doctors and hospitals pay. Lets find a way to not exclude a pre-existing conditions if someone simply lost their job for a few months. Let's put heat on drug manufacturers that 'create' a market for their drugs. Sure, there are quite a few problems. But it's better than what I believe is in store. The addressing of these problems was done in the 90s. It did nothing. We are worse off now. You can expect the same from all government solutions, including ObamaCare. It'll be much like how they "fixed" the recession with stimulus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was just watching the Republican response to his speech. Obama needs to stop being nice to the Republicans and use his Democratic advantage and get er done as far as I am concerned. He is trying too damn hard to bring a group in that cannot be brought in. Just do it, man. And they talked of their form of healthcare reform and it is basically nothing new. Nothing at all. They do not want to change it. Their only defense is to put a price on life. They are saying that the cost of saving lives is too much. It is actually less than the war in Iraq and that saved how many lives? Is still saving how many lives? Sheesh, just get it worked out and passed already. He doesn't need the Republicans. He is much too nice in my opinion. I am not a liberal, nor am I democrat, nor am I anything they have listed. So keep your rightwing rhetoric that means absolutely nothing because you wouldn't even know a liberal or socialist if you saw one and it bite you in the ***. I'm sorry, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... I guess people need to reclassify this duck then don't they...lol I am unaffilitated. So I am not even an Independent...lol Do me a favor then: Name one, just one economically conservative principle you agree with. And then explain to me why this healthcare plan will not fail. I actually participated in Welfare Reform which made it impossible to lay around and get welfare, economically fiscally conservative ideal done under Clinton. I believe in regulation on all government run programs that limit the clients who can recieve the benefits. I am never prejudice towards them and call them lazy or blame them for the life situation ( which seems to be a republican/conservative thing to do)that got them on benefits. But I believe in the oversight which is fiscally conservative. I can name more but I will leave it at that. As for the healthcare reform bills and suggestions being addressed now. The projections cannot even be close to accurate so the people doing them are being very pessimistic on the costs and results. This health care reform can be done and should be. We may have to adjust it again in the future since it will be new but it will still work. Look back and see how pessimistically they projected the banking collapse, look back at the housing bubble, look at the pessimism on the stock market projections, look at the Y2K fiasco, etc... and so on. They have been pessimistically projecting crap, and it ends up being crap, for the most part, all my life. I think the only things that were not projected correctly were the gas shortage of the 70s and that damn 9/11, which could have been prevented if they would have only examined it and got really pessimistic over the intel. Hell they did more work trying to make Obama some evil figure than they did protecting us before and on 9/11
any welfare is a socially liberal stance. reform just makes you slightly less liberal. i know you support welfare in many cases. care to try for another? also, are you actually blaming a democratic administration for 9/11? I just want to make sure I'm reading that right. As for reasons this program will fail: 1. Supply shortage. in short, increase demand while supply remains, you get a price increase. artificially limit the price by government intervention (through a "public option" included) and you create a ceiling. price ceiling = supply shortage. 2. Lack of providers. Right now, doctors are loaded. yes, the uninsured still get care, but only at ERs. We're talking a 15% increase in usage of the preventative care system. I'm pretty sure the number of physicians is not going to increase 15% 3. Taxation. I'm told this program will not increase our debt one single dime. i don't believe it. however, in an attempt to make it happen, taxes will naturally rise. there is no other way to do it. taxing those that receive benefits already will lessen household income. that will have all kinds of fun ripple effects across the economy. so will taxing businesses as that cuts their funds as well. kiss a few jobs goodbye there for the low-level corporate employee. hope his buddies enjoy their care. 4. It's been proven time and time again the government has not been able to sustain any kind of program of this nature, even on a small scale, efficiently. Medicare anyone? Social Security? Medicaid? Every government budget for the last several decades has run into the red, moreso than planned. Remember cash for clunkers recently? it was expected to last 2-3 months and instead lasted 2-3 weeks. Then the additional 2 billion was to last until labor day but still ran out a week and a half early. The government accountants are never right. 5. The government does not have to make a profit. Furthermore, the government can't make a profit by it's nature. That means any public option will have a severe unfair advantage over any public plan that needs to make a profit, and even those that do not have to make a profit like Kaiser Permanente. While I'm told the plan will be self-sustaining, I was also told there were WMDs in Iraq and that if we didn't spend this $787B that the unemployment would rise over 8% and the economy would go into a tailspin. They still haven't dished out 15% of it and we're still here. Also, no WMDs. The government has a bad habit of saying what's pretty and it not being true. 6. A lack of reform. There are problems with the system... duh. any idiot with a third grade education can see that. however, we should not be throwing money at the system without taking care of the symptoms that put us in this place to begin with. start with tort reform. you lose an arm when they save your life. So what? Is that arm really worth 10 million dollars? absolutely not. you may lose out in a a couple million in wages over your lifetime and add another 50% for the inconvenience, but you're still far, far less than what juries have made standard practice. fraud and malpractice insurance has made the costs of the system skyrocket. fix the problems that exist now before wasting all this money on a broken system. The end (coverage for all) does not justify the means (billions and billions wasted) there are my brief summaries of my arguments. if you disagree, please explain holes in my logic and post a little more than "that's not true" or "you're wrong" I am getting tired here so briefly I was blaming our government for not acting properly before 9/11, I don't care who the president was or who the rest of the government was at the time. They were lax and it cost us many lives. As for your list, lots of speculation there and personal agenda. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, it can still be done successfully around and through everything you listed there. We are capable of this feat, it is a doable thing. You obviously have no grasp on business or economics and without it, there is no way I can convince you otherwise. There is no way this plan can succeed in providing the same quality of care the majority of our citizens currently enjoy for anywhere near the same cost. If you can see personal agenda in there, I'd like it to be pointed out. All that is is fact. Also, please tell me what is speculation that is not based on experience with our own government. notice there is no reference to any other nation or system in my post (because we cannot compare ourselves to canada, france, or anyone else for that matter as it's all apples to oranges) And thank you drivin .
No, but you know what I do have? I have the confidence in this government to do what it says it is going to do. No matter what problems arise and no matter how many nay sayers we have, like you, we can do this and should do this. Our government has many faults, yes it does but it also runs this country daily and we are not a third world nation. When we ride or walk down the street, no matter where it is in this country we can see the success of this government and the people it governs. So no matter how many fearmongering points you put out there trying to make it fail before it is ever attempted, I say it can be done regardless and should be done. So I will back it to be done. I wonder if you had the same optimism about Iraq before we entered... I wish i still had blind faith that angels, in the form of kings ran our government... Hell no Iraq was an illegal war and there can be no optimism for illegality and death. It is not blind faith, I don't even know what that concept is. Our government works. It always has and it always will. Why, because of citizens like me that participate and vote and address issues with the legislative branch of the government. Just because I will not call something to failure before it ever gets tried, makes me too optimistic, well I guess I will proudly be that, because I am in the league with the founding fathers of this great nation, who made an attempt at something that had never been done with optimism that it would work, not knowledge that it would work. Honestly i admire your passion dragoness. One thing i think you could learn from, is cause and affect. For everything that passes, that is seemingly good, there is an adverse side affect. Just like in science, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. I think the flaws in our system, or inefficiencies, should be addressed before doing anything drastic, that we the people aren't quite able to concieve. Before the healthcare issue is even addressed, i think we need to have the money first, to avoid economic turmoil. It must be nice to sleep well at night with the knowledge (false or not) that our government will fix the economy, while putting an additional strain on it. Worse off, we have no idea just how much money it will cost. This is where we look at history. The roman empire, for instance. Economic turmoil was first brought from being overextended militarily. Today, right now, the United States is occupying 130 different countries. Imagine what could be done if we merely followed our forefather's advice and minded our own business? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americans have the best healthcare in the world. Some of the biggest problems with the system are cost, exclusion, corruption (consumer and provider) and greed. I'd prefer they address the problems. Leaving it to the government will doom the system to beauracracy, inefficiency, and, I believe, a lower standard of care. Companies will slowly drop health care altogether and leave it in the hands of the government. I prefer the government have as little hand in my personal responsibilities as possible. Address the problems. Lets find a way to provide a minimum of health insurance at a reasonable cost to the individual. I had to pay COBRA for a year for my ex at a cost of over $435/month. And today she can't even GET health insurance. Lets take a bite out of the insane liability insurance that doctors and hospitals pay. Lets find a way to not exclude a pre-existing conditions if someone simply lost their job for a few months. Let's put heat on drug manufacturers that 'create' a market for their drugs. Sure, there are quite a few problems. But it's better than what I believe is in store. The addressing of these problems was done in the 90s. It did nothing. We are worse off now. Interesting... So you are saying that government intervention made things worse? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americans have the best healthcare in the world. Some of the biggest problems with the system are cost, exclusion, corruption (consumer and provider) and greed. I'd prefer they address the problems. Leaving it to the government will doom the system to beauracracy, inefficiency, and, I believe, a lower standard of care. Companies will slowly drop health care altogether and leave it in the hands of the government. I prefer the government have as little hand in my personal responsibilities as possible. Address the problems. Lets find a way to provide a minimum of health insurance at a reasonable cost to the individual. I had to pay COBRA for a year for my ex at a cost of over $435/month. And today she can't even GET health insurance. Lets take a bite out of the insane liability insurance that doctors and hospitals pay. Lets find a way to not exclude a pre-existing conditions if someone simply lost their job for a few months. Let's put heat on drug manufacturers that 'create' a market for their drugs. Sure, there are quite a few problems. But it's better than what I believe is in store. The addressing of these problems was done in the 90s. It did nothing. We are worse off now. Interesting... So you are saying that government intervention made things worse? I don't know what she thinks, but I can say confidently that the government intervention made things worse. (even they admit so in their speeches on occasion) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Any time the president gives a speech to congress I try to listen. This one was the same ol stuff, with too much clapping going on every other sentence.
"hello, I am Obama, and today I pet a kitten!" *thunderous applause* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The government's fundemental problem is the fact that it severly lack's efficiency. When you introduce this inefficiency to anything that has anything to do with money, you have lots and lots of spending, with little results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And are we that special that there is really no other country we can compare ourselves to? wow. absolutely. It's not arrogance either. Our structure, size, and diversity clearly make us different than the other nations. We operate on a clearly different scale and are far larger innovators than any other nation. It does not make us necessarily better, only different. This has to be taken into account when comparing our system to another for either side of the coin. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americans have the best healthcare in the world. Some of the biggest problems with the system are cost, exclusion, corruption (consumer and provider) and greed. I'd prefer they address the problems. Leaving it to the government will doom the system to beauracracy, inefficiency, and, I believe, a lower standard of care. Companies will slowly drop health care altogether and leave it in the hands of the government. I prefer the government have as little hand in my personal responsibilities as possible. Address the problems. Lets find a way to provide a minimum of health insurance at a reasonable cost to the individual. I had to pay COBRA for a year for my ex at a cost of over $435/month. And today she can't even GET health insurance. Lets take a bite out of the insane liability insurance that doctors and hospitals pay. Lets find a way to not exclude a pre-existing conditions if someone simply lost their job for a few months. Let's put heat on drug manufacturers that 'create' a market for their drugs. Sure, there are quite a few problems. But it's better than what I believe is in store. The addressing of these problems was done in the 90s. It did nothing. We are worse off now. Interesting... So you are saying that government intervention made things worse? I don't know what she thinks, but I can say confidently that the government intervention made things worse. (even they admit so in their speeches on occasion) Oh i agree completely. The government is very strict about limiting the number of future doctors for some reason, which is why some can take advantage of the demand and give themselves 7 figure salaries. Supposedly it's almost impossible to start a new hospital as well. Not to mention the red tape added by them, which yes, added jobs, but, also made the cost of healthcare go up dramatically... I agree. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most of the debate has been about the public option and not what could be done to reform health care as it now exists. As usual, a controversial concept prevented real debate and reform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The government's fundemental problem is the fact that it severly lack's efficiency. When you introduce this inefficiency to anything that has anything to do with money, you have lots and lots of spending, with little results. I think the largest issue here is a complete, utter lack of faith in the government. They have not proven themselves capable of such a responsibility. Reform needs to happen first in fixing all the problems we currently have. Do that first to prove they are capable, then they can consider being ambitious. As has been stated by dragoness, the government has tried this before and failed miserably. Being that nothing has changed but a more charasmatic spokeshole at the top, nobody should have any more faith in them now. Again, I don't advocate any intervention, but you don't go to a bank expecting to get a loan when you just had your home and car repossessed. You blow off responsibility, you must earn it back a little at a time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americans have the best healthcare in the world. Some of the biggest problems with the system are cost, exclusion, corruption (consumer and provider) and greed. I'd prefer they address the problems. Leaving it to the government will doom the system to beauracracy, inefficiency, and, I believe, a lower standard of care. Companies will slowly drop health care altogether and leave it in the hands of the government. I prefer the government have as little hand in my personal responsibilities as possible. Address the problems. Lets find a way to provide a minimum of health insurance at a reasonable cost to the individual. I had to pay COBRA for a year for my ex at a cost of over $435/month. And today she can't even GET health insurance. Lets take a bite out of the insane liability insurance that doctors and hospitals pay. Lets find a way to not exclude a pre-existing conditions if someone simply lost their job for a few months. Let's put heat on drug manufacturers that 'create' a market for their drugs. Sure, there are quite a few problems. But it's better than what I believe is in store. The addressing of these problems was done in the 90s. It did nothing. We are worse off now. You can expect the same from all government solutions, including ObamaCare. It'll be much like how they "fixed" the recession with stimulus.
You don't even know if that worked yet, we won't know until possibly the middle of next year so you are not accurate there either. |
|
|
|
|
