![]() |
Senate Health Care Bill Unveiled
From Electoral-Vote.com, a (really excellent) non-partisan political news outlet:
Quote:
I think we've been adequately over the general "pro" and "con" positions about health care reform. I'm interested in specific responses to the specific bullet points above from anti-health-reform people. In particular, ace, I'm curious about your response to the pro-small-business stuff listed above, and dksuddeth, I'm curious your response to the poverty-line-related subsidies and the fine for being uninsured. |
I'll take a crack
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The net effects of this bill will be to at least severely damage, and probably destroy, private-sector health insurance in the United States. Given the past statements by Mr. Obama and his associates and backers, I have a hard time believing that this is anything other than intentional. The combined results of the House and Senate bills will be to nationalize something on the order of 12-15% of our economy, drive healthcare costs through the roof for the average citizen who doesn't take advantage of the Gov't-subsidised public "option," and drive large numbers of physicians into retirement or Thailand. I see nothing good coming from this, nothing at all. The Law of Unintended Consequences always, ALWAYS bites you in the ass, and the bigger the -intended- consequences of something, the bigger the -unintended- consequences as well. Even assuming that this monstrosity -wasn't- created as a backdoor to fully-nationalised healthcare, that will be the likely result. |
Quote:
|
Dunedan are all people who make 133% or less than the federal poverty line drug dealers and meth heads? Are a majority of them? Is there a sizable group of people who make 133% or less that are honest and hard working but just don't have good jobs?
The people you are describing are breaking the law and should be put in jail. However, why should we punish everyone for a few bad apples? If you know your neighbors are selling drugs why don't you send in some anonymous tips and get them out of your neighborhood? |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
1: I do not believe in the legitimacy of drug prohibitions, and 2: Because everyone knows what's going on, and nobody cares. This road has been a source of complaints for years, but since this is Bumfuck Appalachia, the local LEOs went to High School with the meth cooks, and therefore don't give a shit. "Prayer For Judgement" is the standard "punishment" for local-borne lowlifes in this area, for any crime up to and including attempted murder*. Cooking meth and selling pills doesn't even register. We have a Deputy currently serving 10-12yrs in Central because he and several family members were selling drugs from the evidence lockup. *Neighbor stabbed his brother 7 times with a steak-knife, arguing over a dawg. Brother had to be airlifted to Baptist Regional in Winston-Salem, and remained there as the Taxpayer's guest for two weeks before skipping out on approx. $250,000 of medical bills and later being arrested (in Raleigh, not this area) selling his pain meds out of the trunk of his car. Junior (stabber, not stabbee) was arrested on a $1500.00 cash bond and released on a PFJ after a few weeks and a 2-hr trial. |
Quote:
And, I actually don't have a problem helping good, honest, hard working people who need help temporarily to get on their feet. But there is clearly a segment of the population that needs a kick in the pants rather than being allowed to take advantage of a generous health care plan. |
In brief, absolutely not. I already wrote my Congressional reps one letter opposing the House bill. It looks like it's time for another letter.
* A public option will be available on these exchanges. * Anyone below 133% of the federal poverty line will be eligible for Medicaid. * Anyone between 133% and 300% of the poverty line will get subsidies to buy insurance. I as a taxpayer should not be forced to pay for public health care of any form except for those who are disabled and cannot work. * Insurance companies will be required to accept all new customers, even with preexisting conditions. * Annual and lifetime limits on coverage will be prohibited. Which will end up raising insurance companies expenses. If the government is meddling in the insurance market, insurance companies will have a hard time recovering the added expenses. If the insurance companies operate at a loss long enough, they go bankrupt and unemployment goes even higher than 10% Besides which, why should people who have self-induced pre-existing conditions bear no responsibility for their actions? * Insurance companies will not be allowed to charge sick people more than healthy people. Maybe, except again, what about people sick due lifestyle choices? * Employers with more than 50 employees will be fined for not providing health insurance. Another nail in the coffin of marginally profitable businesses. * Small businesses will receive tax credits to help them buy insurance for their employees. As a taxpayer, I shouldn't be subsidizing this either. * Uninsured individuals will be fined $750 per year. So if insurance costs more than $750/year, I just pay the fine. And Obama raises taxes on these people (a tax by any other name is still a tax) Bottom line, why should I be punished because I was successful at supporting myself? I'm looking forward to there being a bunch of unemployed Congressmen in 2010 and an ex-president in 2012. |
oh, not this shit again
|
Do none of you see the benefits of a healthy society especially when it comes to communicable diseases?
Healthy people are able to work and generate tax revenues. Healthy people don't transfer illnesses to others. What happens right now to people who can't afford health insurance and cant afford to see a doctor get a minor infection? They wait it out hoping it will get better, but for some it doesn't and they have to go to the ER (or die). Of course they can't pay for that either and so the hospital just raises all of its rates to cover the loss on those treatments. In return the insurance companies raise their rates. Why is it that these European nations with socialized health care live longer and have better health coverage than us? I have conservative friends (A pastor and his wife) who are from Germany and France, both of them say how much better health care is in Germany and France than here. Now for those of you who don't want to pay for these dead beats, why don't we close down all the prisons that we have to pay for? I mean I'm not using those prisons, why should I have to pay for them? |
I don't want to pay for the military either
|
That's true why do I have to subsidize wars on other countries that I don't believe in? Why do I have to subsidize Walter Reed? Why do I have to subsidize hurricane relief for the south east coasts? Why do I have to subsidize forest fire prevention? Why do I have to subsidize national parks? Why do I have to subsidize NASA?
Here is the big kicker: http://www.taxfoundation.org/UserFil...tsbs-large.jpg West Virgina gets $1.66 for every tax dollar they pay in. That means they make money on taxes. Why should I subsidize West Virgina? Hell red states tend to get more federal tax dollars than blue states. Why are the red states complaining again? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Dunedan will you right your government asking them to stop taking more federal tax dollars than your state pays in? What would happen if someone in congress introduced a bill that would enforce federal dollars to be distributed to states proportional to what they pay in? Such that every state would receive $1 of federal tax dollars for every dollar it pays in? Do you think Republicans would get behind that bill considering it is their states that are benefiting most from taxes?
---------- Post added at 05:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:18 PM ---------- Oh it looks like West Virgina also gets more medicare per capita then any other state: Total Medicare Beneficiaries (per capita) (most recent) by state |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Just one of the stories that has been making the rounds the last few weeks is Medicare waste. Supposedly Obama has found some $70B in savings in Medicare. Why would I trust the government to manage any more boondoggles correctly when they can't even manage the ones they already have? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
BS. at some point in peoples lives, they will have to determine their line in the sand. I've drawn mine on this issue, just like I drew mine with regards to the patriot act. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
dk, I don't get you at all. The current healthcare system has failed you and your wife utterly. Enough so that you're going to have to compromise your principles and get some sort of socialized help. I can really respect that--in my view, the honest man who steals bread to feed his family has made the only move he can make.
But... When asked to put $750 in the pot so the whole thing can work for EVERYONE, no, that's Government Overreaching, and you're willing to be hauled off to prison about it. Actually, prison is the likeliest result, you're WILLING to get yourself shot dead fighting off the people who would come arrest you about it. On the plus side, at least you'll have aceventura's respect for being someone with "convictions"... On the minus side, you're dead... |
Quote:
Quote:
The bottom line, in my mind, is that this 'reform' is wrong headed, and not going to work. Because of that position, I will not comply with it. |
Quote:
The key phrase in your statement is "so the whole thing can work for Everyone". What makes you think this can work. Every government program we have today is a financial failure. Not only will it not work(and it may take time to fail) It will eliminate what good we have in the current system. Once you make this move you can NEVER return. Government run (socialized is the proper term) will not be as good as what we currently have. See Canada , UK the list goes on and on. Bottom line. The points made are the good parts of the bill. If they had put in the points above. ."ALL Government employees will also join this plan", I might have at least given it a chance. I haven't been thru it yet and probably won't, but it isn't the stuff you know that will get you, it's the stuff you don't. The price tag doesn't wash nor does another give away program. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
If you're trying to argue against publicly run healthcare, you'll have an easier time if you find examples that don't rate higher than the US on virtually every metric conceivable. Then again, I get my stats from the WHO, and they're probably just a bunch of commies anyway. |
I worked for a Canadian company for 4 years, and the constant theme was it takes too long to get the health care needed. Most of them came to the US and paid the full fare in order to get treatment. If it's so good why are there so many that choose not to wait and come to the US? to get stomach cancer treatment until they can see the specialist in 6 months (true life adventure from the guy who was my boss).
|
Doesn't Cuba rate higher than the US? And we all know how the US feels about Cuba, that must really burn the US.
EDIT: As I thought, words like 'most of them', how many is most? And even the 'I know a guy'. |
Quote:
If you are so down on the future plans to make the USA provide healthcare to All Citizens, then are you planning to leave the USA for a better place to live and if you do, where will you be moving? Hmmm? :shakehead: Oh and hope YOU stay healthy in the meantime. |
Quote:
... If we're going to trade anecdotes, I think this is a good one. If you want actual facts, this is where most people get them. Wait times in Canada are priority-based. Urgent cases are dealt with first. Elective and/or non-urgent care can sometimes be delayed for a few weeks. Some people choose to pay out of pocket for treatment in the US rather than wait for the care. This says more about the people involved than the state of healthcare in Canada. This is all a tangent anyway, since the proposed bill to my knowledge has nothing to do with universal healthcare. (And as an aside, the correct term is actually 'public healthcare' or 'universal healthcare,' depending on the exact system in question. 'Socialized medicine' is a political trope.) |
And there is always this list, produced in 2000 the last year, because well I imagine it's a pain in the ass.
The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems My bad, Cuba is two spots behind the US, mind you I'm sure they passed them by now. Quote:
|
Quote:
With the exception of the very limited public option components, tHe proposed programs in the House and Senate are NOT government-run, but rather government-administered, with health services provided by the private sector and certainly are NOT socialized medicine. Those screaming socialism or socialized medicine are either ignorant or intentionally being fear-mongers. Personally, for the most part, I think it is ignorance...they hear it from their "reliable sources" and accept it as the truth. The proposed Insurance Exchange, to be administered by the Government is modeled on the Federal Employee Health Benefits (FEHB) program. FEHB is in effect, an Insurance Exchange for the millions of government workers, providing them a choice of private providers (4-5 national and hundreds regionally) with a range of benefit options and pricing. At some point (different in the House and Senate), government employees will have the futrher option of using the Exchange. In terms of theprice tag, or cost to the taxpayers, I prefer the House version. It "washes" well for me because more than half the revenue ($500+ billion) is from a surtax on the top 1/2 of one percent of all taxpayers. An additional $120+ billion is from savings resulting from no-longer over paying the private insurance companies providing Medicare Advantage, companies that agreed to limit cost to 5% above Medicare scheduled, but current charging more than 15%. Neither bill is perfect, but they are significant improvements over the status quo for both the 200+ millions who are insured through employer-bsed programs and the 40+ million uninsured. ---------- Post added at 08:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:41 AM ---------- Quote:
I understand bending your principles to assistance loved-ones. But there are millions who shared a similar love for a spouse who are also unable to fend for themselves, most often as a result of circumstances beyond their control. Should they not have the same opportunities as your loved-one? Spread your wings and share that principle-bending support for assistance to others who cant fend for themselves as a result of circumstances no different than those you love. Unless you are among the top taxpayers, it wont even hurt your wallet very much, if at all. That is what a compassionate and caring country does for its citizens. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
---------- Post added at 10:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:10 AM ---------- Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
You're the one, with no direct experience with SCHIPs, insisted that it is too complicated, inefficient with disincentives to work...blah blah blah. but have a healthy day :thumbsup: |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:24 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project