mudcat.org: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26]


BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?

heric 17 Aug 09 - 11:02 PM
Greg F. 17 Aug 09 - 10:39 PM
GUEST,beardedbruce 17 Aug 09 - 10:33 PM
Bill D 17 Aug 09 - 10:25 PM
heric 17 Aug 09 - 10:10 PM
Peace 17 Aug 09 - 09:44 PM
heric 17 Aug 09 - 09:40 PM
Peace 17 Aug 09 - 09:22 PM
McGrath of Harlow 17 Aug 09 - 09:20 PM
GUEST,beardedbruce 17 Aug 09 - 08:21 PM
Bobert 17 Aug 09 - 07:44 PM
Amos 17 Aug 09 - 07:29 PM
Alice 17 Aug 09 - 07:08 PM
The Barden of England 17 Aug 09 - 07:01 PM
Alice 17 Aug 09 - 06:45 PM
Alice 17 Aug 09 - 06:20 PM
The Barden of England 17 Aug 09 - 06:19 PM
Don Firth 17 Aug 09 - 06:18 PM
McGrath of Harlow 17 Aug 09 - 06:12 PM
McGrath of Harlow 17 Aug 09 - 06:11 PM
GUEST,beardedbruce 17 Aug 09 - 06:09 PM
Alice 17 Aug 09 - 06:03 PM
GUEST,beardedbruce 17 Aug 09 - 05:57 PM
heric 17 Aug 09 - 05:52 PM
Alice 17 Aug 09 - 05:52 PM
Greg F. 17 Aug 09 - 05:46 PM
Greg F. 17 Aug 09 - 05:43 PM
GUEST,beardedbruce 17 Aug 09 - 05:34 PM
Alice 17 Aug 09 - 05:31 PM
GUEST 17 Aug 09 - 05:26 PM
Greg F. 17 Aug 09 - 05:23 PM
Greg F. 17 Aug 09 - 05:14 PM
McGrath of Harlow 17 Aug 09 - 05:14 PM
heric 17 Aug 09 - 05:02 PM
Bill D 17 Aug 09 - 05:00 PM
McGrath of Harlow 17 Aug 09 - 04:30 PM
Amos 17 Aug 09 - 04:03 PM
Alice 17 Aug 09 - 03:43 PM
Donuel 17 Aug 09 - 02:50 PM
McGrath of Harlow 17 Aug 09 - 02:43 PM
Ebbie 17 Aug 09 - 02:31 PM
Bill D 17 Aug 09 - 02:28 PM
Donuel 17 Aug 09 - 02:23 PM
Alice 17 Aug 09 - 02:12 PM
DougR 17 Aug 09 - 01:57 PM
Stringsinger 17 Aug 09 - 01:54 PM
Alice 17 Aug 09 - 01:44 PM
McGrath of Harlow 17 Aug 09 - 01:19 PM
Alice 17 Aug 09 - 01:08 PM
Amos 17 Aug 09 - 01:00 PM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:






Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: heric
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 11:02 PM

They are not going to lower reimbursement rates AND cease reimbursing for "waste" i.e. unnecessary / inefficient care for which the providers have been receiving payments in the past AND fund the same level of *service.* That's easy enough to see.

Health care reform has to be about cost containment. You strive for optimal *results.* There are three apples on the table in front of me. I take away one. How many are left? TWO! How many did I take away? NONE! The third apple had worms inside and wasn't any good anyway!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 10:39 PM

Couldn't we cut out that kind of playground personal stuff?

So, Kevin, when was the last (first?) time you called Douggie to task for much worse? He's the one thinks he's a stand-up comic.

Ta.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 10:33 PM

"Tell a flat lie often enough and you WILL have many believing it. "

One always has to wonder which are the lies, as BOTH sides keep repeating that the other side is lying.


So, you are saying that if Obama repeats the same lie often enough, many will believe it??


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 10:25 PM

"Haven't the Democrats been in control of Congress for the last 2 1/2 years?"

Only on paper, Bruce...the Republicans bragged that they could & would derail any serious attempts to get thru major legislation that tried to undo the Bush legacy. From 07 to 09, that majority was very narrow, and the Republicans did exactly what they said. Now that the majority is larger, the details of the tactics have changed, and funded misinformation and scare mongers are replacing committee foot-dragging.

Tell a flat lie often enough and you WILL have many believing it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: heric
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 10:10 PM

Well haven't you ever wondered what they feed their cows to get all those bubbles in the cheese? There's something very wrong there. Suspicious.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Peace
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 09:44 PM

OK. Are we mad at Switzerland for some reason other than they're Swiss?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: heric
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 09:40 PM

Left good right bad Americans uncivilized ignorant uncharitable self-defeating. Politicans self dealing incompetent. Capitalistic fascist control. Spiralling unworkable unchangeable. Switzerland.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Peace
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 09:22 PM

I've lost track of the argument. Could someone summarize it for me in fewer than fifty words?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 09:20 PM

If the cap fits, bruce, wear it


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 08:21 PM

Amos and Bobert,

Must be nice to be one of the Ubermensch, and be so certain that you are always right and those who disagree with you are always wrong.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Bobert
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 07:44 PM

Comparing the protests during the Mad-Dash-to-Iraq to those we are seeing in these so-called town meetings is a joke that only knothead righties get... There in no comparing the two...

The protests againt the ill-thought-out-invasion was based on logic and intellect...

The protests at these town meetings is based on immature adults showing just how little they understand either the issues or understand that they are showing themselves to nothing but puppets of the corportatists driven by hatred...

BTW, these are children and grandchildren of the folks who also protested back during FDR's days against Social Security...

Tell ya'll what... If you know any of these folks who still ahte Socail Security tell them to not apply for it...

(But, Bobert, they earned it...)

Bullsh*t!!! You look at these folks... They are all lower class people who will collect far greater amounts in Social Security than they put in (including accrued interest) becuase their kids and grandkids are out there working harder than any counterpart in any developed nation to pay into Social Security so that these ignorant people can have what they have... Yet when it comes to reforming a system that might allow their kids and grandkids to have afforable health insurance they are, in essence, telling their kids and grandkids to "Fu*k off", I got mine...

Makes this ol' hillbilly sick...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Amos
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 07:29 PM

Bruce:

The difference is that the Obama administration has worthy goals and tries to be transparent and encourages actual dialogue even if it means the risk of some wing-nut dramatizations being thrown into the mix, whereas the Bush administration had secretive, corporation-driven goals, sought to be as secret as possible and encouraged wing-nut dramatization as a substitute for dialog.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Alice
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 07:08 PM

yes, "there are threads that bind us all together"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: The Barden of England
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 07:01 PM

I can say no more than what George Papavgeris (a Greek Immigrant with such a wonderful understanding of the English language that he makes me feel totally inadequate) has to say in this song:- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKeLD7KvKRM .
That says it all really. Celebrate!! We're all human for ***** sake
John Barden


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Alice
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 06:45 PM


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Alice
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 06:20 PM

Here is more about Medicare Advantage and why it needs reform:

http://www.ncpssm.org/news/archive/vp_medicare_advantage/



"...Overpayments are used to improve insurance industry profits and are not completely passed along to beneficiaries. When Congress approved the system which overpays private plans, policymakers intended that the excess payments be returned to beneficiaries in the form of additional benefits or reduced cost-sharing. It is not at all clear to what extent this is occurring. Private plans are subject to few public reporting requirements, so it has been extremely difficult to determine what percentage of the overpayments has padded the profit margins of the private insurance companies offering the plans, or has been used for marketing, rather than being returned to beneficiaries. In the case of Private Fee-For-Service plans, MedPAC found that only about half of the excess payment is used to deliver extra benefits for enrollees. The remainder of the payment is used to finance the administrative costs, marketing, and profits of private plans..."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: The Barden of England
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 06:19 PM

My God, what a society! Squabbling about right versus left, Democrats versus Republicans - percentages of people for and against in a 'supposed' neutral poll. Why on earth can't the 'so called' protector of the Free World even protect it's own?
Because people like DougR complain that he 'may be' losing something that his countrymen (and of course those wretched Illegal Immigrants - so many of whom he knows are there because he's met them) may neeed! Shame on you for argueing what the rest of the free world already know. Universal health care is right. And it CANNOT be run by mercenaries, for that is what the insurance companies are. Wake up USA, the world doesn't start at New York and end in Los Angeles.
John Barden


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 06:18 PM

"The goal of invading Iraq was to make the US safer- so you (all) were obviously in favour of it, right?"

Wrong!

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 06:12 PM

...plenty silly enopugh BEFORE he got scared.

Couldn't we cut out that kind of playground personal stuff?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 06:11 PM

...plenty silly enopugh BEFORE he got scared.

Couldn't we cut out that kind of playground personal stuff?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 06:09 PM

"the goal of reform is to increase efficiency, not reduce care"

I agree- that is the GOAL.

The goal of invading Iraq was to make the US safer- so you (all) were obviously in favour of it, right?

But the effect ( of noble/desirable goals) is often different, as can be seen from the many complaints here about the last administration.

So far I have yet to see ant protests or demonstrations at the "town hall" meetings that even approaches the ones I saw during the Bush administration.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Alice
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 06:03 PM

See my link to the letter to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), from the Medical Group Management Association regarding Medicare Advantage.

The semantics used can twist this around to the idea that care will be eliminated when actually the goal of reform is to increase efficiency, not reduce care. But, those who want to keep crying wolf will continue, because it fits their partisan political loyalties.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 05:57 PM

Greg F.

I watched the meeting on TV- You are now claiming that the men in black helicopters edited the realtime feed?

I guess I can't believe my own eyes and ears- I better wait until Obama tells me what I am supposed to believe before thinking about it.


If Obama is paying for this with cost savings, who is responsible for the cost overruns that there MUST have been in order to generate "2/3 of the costs" from these savings? Haven't the Democrats been in control of Congress for the last 2 1/2 years??? And nobody thought to try to make those savings before?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: heric
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 05:52 PM

Not an Obama quote, but this:

Q: Would the proposed cuts to Medicare limit access to care and services for seniors?

A: Seniors have been vocal in expressing concern over the impact of the overhaul on their benefits. The fear comes from the fact that as part of the reform, the government intends to cut billions from Medicare.

Obama has stressed repeatedly that the cuts don't translate into reduced benefits for Medicare recipients, but America's Health Insurance Plans, the industry's trade group, disagrees.

"Cuts of that magnitude are going to have a significant impact on seniors," Zirkelbach said. "Seniors are going to pay higher premiums, lose benefits, and in some parts of the country lose access to Medicare Advantage."

The House bill has proposed some $380 billion in cuts over 10 years, with about $150 billion to come out of the pocket of Medicare Advantage plans. These are private plans that offer full Medicare medical coverage.

Critics have argued the federal government has for too long over-subsidized these policies, reimbursing them by as much as 14 percent more for the same services that traditional Medicare provides as a way to encourage seniors to pick a private option.

Another big chunk of the cuts are expected to come from reduced reimbursements for hospitals, nursing homes, home health agencies and imaging services. Reductions in benefits or payments to physicians are not on the table; in fact, the bill would give physicians more money.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/08/17/MNT4198FQ4.DTL&type=politics


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Alice
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 05:52 PM

Eliminating the unnecessary burdens in the Medicare Advantage program does not mean that Doug's quality of care would diminish. Care that is as good as but more EFFICIENT would replace the inefficiencies of Medicare Advantage.

see this link: click here


"In this formal letter to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), the Medical Group Management Association maintains that the variations in the Medicare Advantage program subject medical practices to extraneous administrative burdens, already an immense burden to efficient patient care. MGMA urges CMS to eliminate unnecessary administrative burdens, exacerbated by Medicare Advantage, which add to the cost of treating Medicare beneficiaries."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 05:46 PM

And Alice: he was plenty silly enopugh BEFORE he got scared.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 05:43 PM

Anybody got the text of this supposed Obama statement- and in full, in context? Not manipulated & mutilat4ed to seem to mean something he never said? Or are we supposed to take Honest Douggie's word for it? & if so, why?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 05:34 PM

"President Obama conducted a Town Hall in Alice's home state over the weekend and very clearly stated that he would eliminate Medicare Advantage in order to help pay for the cost of the plan he is proposing. "

"Doug, the plan IS NOT going to take away your health care!"

SO Obama lied??? ( Again)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Alice
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 05:31 PM

Doug, the plan IS NOT going to take away your health care!
Someone has been scaring you silly.

alice


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 05:26 PM

As you are well aware, McGrath, the word treat has many different definitions.

Alice: Let me get this straight! You criticize me because I don't want to lose the health care I have, but feel perfectly justified in supporting the plan because you would get health care that you don't currently have. Is that right? I don't criticize you for supporting Obama's plan. If I did not have coverage, I would probably do the same. Any coverage is better than having none at all!

In reply to Donuel, who questions the fact that I would lose my health care if the Democrat plan becomes law, President Obama conducted a Town Hall in Alice's home state over the weekend and very clearly stated that he would eliminate Medicare Advantage in order to help pay for the cost of the plan he is proposing. He is of the opinion that money spent on Medicare Advantage ONLY benefits the insurance companies that administer the plans for Medicare. Nothing could be further from the truth. The primary beneficiaries of Medicare Advantage are the senior citizens who are enrolled in it!

My wife has only Medicare, and she pays for a supplemental insurance program to pick up care if she exceeds what Medicare provides.

Medicare Advantage provides services that exceeds those provided Medicare alone.

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 05:23 PM

From: McGrath of Harlow - PM
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 10:35 AM
What does "treated" mean in that context?


Dealt with & explained at some length up-thread. See

Bobad 15Aug09 07:44PM
Alice 15Aug09 07:11PM
Maryrrf 15Aug09 04:39PM

et. al.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 05:14 PM

f the Democrats in Congress are successful in adopting Obama's plans for "fixing" our health care program, the one I have now will be abolished.

Since it has been explained at some length to Douggie-Boy over and over that this is complete bullshit, I guess he actually IS as stupid as he appears to be.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 05:14 PM

The point is, there are any number of different ways of organising things so that there is excellent health care available for everyone, and the different ways have various advantages and disadvantages.

There is plenty of room for decent human beings to disagree about the best way to do it in their particular part of the world. But acting in a way that seeks to ensure that millions of people do not have such access - that isn't what any decent human being could do.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: heric
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 05:02 PM

On equality and the pursuit of wealth or happiness: No social benefit is served by allowing people to be financially destroyed or set back or otherwise hindered from reaching their potential by the hand of fate. Society benefits from equalized access - it is not mere charity.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 05:00 PM

The French system sounds like a perfectly reasonable way to go..... but, gee...who expects Congress, in the face of multi-million dollar lobbying and scary ad campaigns, to anything 'reasonable'.?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 04:30 PM

Here's a piece from The Times about the French way of doing this, which seems to work pretty well - Neither of the Above

France has a system of universal healthcare financed by compulsory national insurance. Premiums are charged as a percentage of income and paid to insurers that are non-government, non-profit agencies. The French have a choice of doctor whose fee they usually pay and then claim back 75-80 per cent of the cost. The poor are exempt from payment. All patients, whether exempt from co-payments or not, may go directly to a specialist.

Of course this would go a good bit further than the rather timid steps forward which Obama is pushing for, and which are being treated with such hysteria by opponents. (There's that word "treated" again, Doug - doesn't always mean treated very nicely does it?)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Amos
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 04:03 PM

" It was my job to "promote and defend" the company's reputation and to try to persuade reporters to write positive stories about the industry's ideas on reform. During the last couple of years of my career, however, I became increasingly worried that the high-deductible plans insurers were beginning to push Americans into would force more and more of us into bankruptcy.

The higher I rose in the company, the more I learned about the tactics insurers use to dump policyholders when they get sick, in order to increase profits and to reward their Wall Street investors. I could not in good conscience continue serving as an industry mouthpiece. And I did not want to be part of yet another industry effort to kill meaningful reform.

I explained during the press conference with Rep. Slaughter how the industry funnels millions of its policyholders' premiums to big public relations firms that provide talking points to conservative talk show hosts, business groups and politicians. I also described how the PR firms set up front groups, again using your premium dollars and mine, to scare people away from reform.

What I'm trying to do as I write and speak out against the insurance industry I was a part of for nearly two decades is to inform Americans that when they hear isolated stories of long waiting times to see doctors in Canada and allegations that care in other systems is rationed by "government bureaucrats," someone associated with the insurance industry wrote the original script.

The industry has been engaging in these kinds of tactics for many years, going back to its successful behind-the-scenes campaign to kill the Clinton reform plan.

A story in Friday's New York Times about the origin of the absurdly false rumor that President Obama's health care proposal would create government-sponsored "death panels" bears out what I have been saying.

The story notes that the rumor emanated "from many of the same pundits and conservative media outlets that were central in defeating Bill Clinton's health care proposal 16 years ago, including the editorial board of The Washington Times, the American Spectator magazine and Betsy McCaughey, whose 1994 health care critique made her a star of the conservative movement (and ultimately, the lieutenant governor of New York)."..."

From ALice's link above.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Alice
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 03:43 PM

This article is on CNN.com today.

Editor's note: Wendell Potter has served since May 2009 as senior fellow on health care at the Center for Media and Democracy, a nonprofit organization that says it seeks to expose "corporate spin and government propaganda." After a 20-year career as a corporate public relations executive, Potter left his job last year as head of communications for one of the nation's largest health insurers, CIGNA Corporation.

"What I'm trying to do as I write and speak out against the insurance industry I was a part of for nearly two decades is to inform Americans that when they hear isolated stories of long waiting times to see doctors in Canada and allegations that care in other systems is rationed by "government bureaucrats," someone associated with the insurance industry wrote the original script..."
Click Here


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 02:50 PM

Remember that the whole HMO scheme to charge for but deny claims was presented to Nixon and approved by Nixon after the scam was explained to him. Yep trickey Dick even taped those meeting and can be heard as simply as seeing them in SICKO by M Moore.



;/

Hey what about shutting down gubermint controlled care such as Medicare or goverment controlled military like the US army or all your Social Security food stamps and local Fire Departments which are Socialist financed unless they are Real American Volunteer Fire Departments.

Jeez come to think of it, the goverment is guvermint controlled too

OMG the only politicans who are not Government controlled are; Sarah Palin, Dick Army and Rush Limbaugh. I bet they have private health care ?????????????????? Actually it is a good question if Palin or Dick Army have any remnants of a goverment health plan!!!!!!!!!

IF they do , that would be a story to tell.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 02:43 PM

The trouble is "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" might be classed as "unalienable rights" in your Declaration of Indeoendence, but that never made it through to your Constitution.

Maybe it's time to write the words in as a Constitutional Amendment... That'd set the cat among the pigeons...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Ebbie
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 02:31 PM

I get it: the "pursuit of happiness" in actuality refers to the quest for decent, affordable health care. Some make it to the goal, some never do. Right, DougR? Your happiness is evident.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 02:28 PM

Doug said earlier:

"I think what happened was the members of Congress went home and got an ear full of what their individual party thought about the public option.

Oh, indeed! They went home and found enough folks had been scared silly by lies and distortions to cause waffleing.... The moneyed interests KNOW they they don't have to convince everyone...just enough of the panicky ones.

Eliminating the public option will not help most people at all! It will ONLY keep the pharmas & insurance guys from losing one-thin-dime! Those interests will do a shell game of pretending to offer a little discount here and a 'special deal' there, while making SURE that THEY get any new folks that the govt. pays to enter the system....thus assuring themselves of even higher revenues as they 'pretend' to be cooperating.

Wanna bet on it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 02:23 PM

Who in their right mind would want Goverment controlled health care and be slated for death or have thier treatment rationed by Democrats?

The free market privately owned competitive health care insurance companies do not ration, withhold or exceed real American's ability to pay whatever the free market decides.




Who in their right mind ?...warped right wing minds, (brain washed by private insurance companies in the name of 6 different right wing corporate think tank commercials and Fox Inc) ...thats who!





Obama should simply sell The Congressional Health Care Plan for ALL.
(the same health care plan that Senator Grassly gets.)

We have it and by God its nothing to write home about. For example the dental plan will match $1,000 dental work a year.




PS
The average American has had his employer change health care plans 3 times during their employment.

Private corporate health insurance rations by treating the wealthy and denying the poorer and unemployed. IF you make over a quarter million a year your taxes will go up to cover Medicare for all.


How Doug R could lose his health care plan if Medicare for people under 65 became law is a secret and conundrum known only to his own imagination.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Alice
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 02:12 PM

So, Doug, we all have a "right" to police protection, fire protection, city water testing, and public schools, but we don't all have a right to stay alive if we are in an accident or have an illness. I see your point of view - you've made it clear. You've got yours, to hell with anyone else.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: DougR
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 01:57 PM

McGrath: The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language: "Treat": To give medical aid to.

For another interesting "take" on health care provided in Tennessee: Google today's edition of The Wall Street Journal, page 2, "Tennessee Experiment's High Cost Fuels Health-Care Debate." (I assume if Amos providing Paul Krugman, columnist, at the New York Times is acceptable as a resource, the Wall Street Journal will be acceptable too).

It seems to me this discussion (argument)is moving away from whether nationalized Health Care is good or bad, to "Is Medical Care a 'Right' or a 'privilege'. As far as I know, only citizens in the United States who have reached the age of 65, and have contributed to the Federal Social Security Program during their working years have a guaranteed "Right" to some form of health care.

If the Democrats in Congress are successful in adopting Obama's plans for "fixing" our health care program, the one I have now will be abolished. I have already said in previous posts that I am perfectly satisfied with the one I have. I assume many here on the Mudcat are of the opinion that my concerns are not legitimate. Is correct?

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 01:54 PM

Paul Krugman has offered an impediment to the efficacy of the public option.

Obama has made a deal with Pharma that the government will stop
lowering costs for prescription drugs and the purchasing of generics. It will
still be illegal to buy lower-priced drugs in Canada.

Pharma has interfered with the political process by dictating their policy through
intimidation.

Drug prices will now soar. Do you trust Pharma to give an 80 billion tax break to
consumers? Where is this money coming from?

This deal was made behind close doors with no sunlight.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Alice
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 01:44 PM

The call for going back to "founding fathers" as you saw in the video of the young woman I posted earlier in the thread, is what Tim Wise describes so well. The talk radio shows hammer away at people who are not all that well informed about history or the constitution, but basically condition their listeners to think that there is some ideal, superior white past in the country that must be "returned to". It means going back to segregation, which they will not come right out and say, but instead use coded language that implies the same thing (and of course we had slavery at the time of the founding fathers).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 01:19 PM

The bizarre thing is that it can be demonstrated that, though black or brown people in the States are more likely to on the breadline than white people, since there are a lot more white people than black or brown people, most people on the breadline are white.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Alice
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 01:08 PM

Sad to say, I have a sister who has exactly the attitude Tim Wise describes. She thinks the Social Security and Franklin Roosevelt's presidency was one of the worst things to happen to America (her words, even though she and her husband get social security). She has a brand of conservative Catholic beliefs that are mixed up with her political beliefs. She is very upset about anything being printed in a language other than English in the US, very upset when she saw a Spanish version of the Denver phone book. For decades, she has been very upset about "People" taking jobs away from white, male Americans, etc.

There are many people with these "Us versus THEM" beliefs who are agitated by Limbaugh, Beck, Michael Savage and others to attack universal health care because "they, the other, the not-real-Americans, the not-us" will get something supported by tax payers.

Alice


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Nationalized Healthcare, good? bad?
From: Amos
Date: 17 Aug 09 - 01:00 PM

A fairly clear analsyis of different methods of health care is provided in today's NY Times by writer Paul Krugman who points out that Obama's plan veers closer to the Swiss model than the British one.

All the harumscarum bullshit being flogged by panic-heads and boogey-man pundits is really tiresome, I must say.

KRugman also has, in this earlier piece some intelligent things to say about the public option.

Finally, Barack Obama explains why reform is important in an op-editorial for the New York Times.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
Next Page

 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 14 April 2:19 AM EDT

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.