Bend over america,here comes obama care! [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Bend over america,here comes obama care!


Peace Officer
06-28-2012, 20:08
Once again the joke is on the American people! There is nothing we can do except bend over and grab our ankles. America sucks! Can't wait to see what the next 4 years brings once this ass&$#% is re-elected.:rofl:

TangoFoxtrot
06-29-2012, 02:19
:violin::violin:whine baby whine but the fact is...a "REPUBLICAN" federal judge appointed by Bush was the deciding vote. I love it!:rofl::rofl:

Baba Louie
06-29-2012, 03:25
Roberts is crazy like a fox. :whistling:

If one has an open mind, he showed everyone the path, or a path at least, by naming a Tax by any other name, a TAX, no matter what the present resident at 1600 Penn calls it.

Taxes, as I understand, can be "reworked" via the ballot box, if anyone cares too. Of course that might mean, actually voting and holding the elected or newly elected majority (hint hint) to a sole issue to resolve to the satisfaction of a majority of voters.

The largest tax increase on a population in the HISTORY of the WORLD? That oughta be great for a down economy eh?

Politics sure can be interesting.

ricklee4570
06-29-2012, 03:28
The problem is the idiots voting for Obama want hand outs and that is exactly what he will give them.

There are more irresponsible people in the U.S. than there are responsible.

MoparMan1991
06-29-2012, 04:10
You folks could always move to another country. . .

Narkcop
06-29-2012, 04:24
You folks could always move to another country. . .

Wow, thats an intelligent comment.:upeyes:

MoparMan1991
06-29-2012, 04:27
Wow, thats an intelligent comment.:upeyes:

Im just saying, it is what it is. Its done, its over. Like it or leave it.

JFrame
06-29-2012, 05:18
Im just saying, it is what it is. Its done, its over. Like it or leave it.


Changing the way things are is not an option? What are you -- some kind of reactionary?


.

Peace Officer
06-29-2012, 05:53
TangoFoxTrot: You know you are right about the Bush apointee. It just goes to show you that this "once" great country of ours stinks like s#$@ from the top down! See ya-liberal!!!!

lethal tupperwa
06-29-2012, 06:23
having paid into medicare for more than 40 years with no choice not to

I don't appreciate the 500 BILLION taken from medicare to pay for it!

aircarver
06-29-2012, 06:31
having paid into medicare for more than 40 years with no choice not to

I don't appreciate the 500 BILLION taken from medicare to pay for it!

Ahhhh... Socialism !

Taking other people's money at gunpoint, and spreading it around to those who didn't earn it !

.

lethal tupperwa
06-29-2012, 10:22
and won't work for it.

MoparMan1991
06-30-2012, 02:04
Changing the way things are is not an option? What are you -- some kind of reactionary?


.

Nope. Just an American who realizes that we have no real control in our government.

rdpG19
06-30-2012, 05:47
Roberts is crazy like a fox. :whistling:

If one has an open mind, he showed everyone the path, or a path at least, by naming a Tax by any other name, a TAX, no matter what the present resident at 1600 Penn calls it.

Taxes, as I understand, can be "reworked" via the ballot box, if anyone cares too. Of course that might mean, actually voting and holding the elected or newly elected majority (hint hint) to a sole issue to resolve to the satisfaction of a majority of voters.

The largest tax increase on a population in the HISTORY of the WORLD? That oughta be great for a down economy eh?

Politics sure can be interesting.

If we want to fight back against ObamaTAX, we have to VOTE, thats all we can do. If you vote for Obama your part of the problem, If you don't vote at all, you are the problem.

alwaysshootin
06-30-2012, 06:00
Im just saying, it is what it is. Its done, its over. Like it or leave it.

Not so, if you read all, of what Justice Roberts had to say, you will find the Govt, does not have the right, constitutionally, to mandate, the states to get in. On that point, all justices, agreed, overwhelmingly! Off the top of my head, I can think of 26 states, that will say, no thanks!:wavey::rofl::rofl:

JFrame
06-30-2012, 08:57
Nope. Just an American who realizes that we have no real control in our government.


Always with the negative waves, Moriarty...


.

ColdSteelNail
06-30-2012, 09:17
For three years now I have listen to those on the right complain about the healthcare plan put forth and passed by the left. During this time the right have never formulated a plan of their own. They have only voiced opposition. The fact is that the Affordable Healthcare Act does subsidize healthcare in America. But healthcare was already being subsidized by people like me and you who pay their Doctor and Hospital bills. When the uninsured have an accident or get ill and run up a hundred thousand dollar bill and skip out on it you and I are paying with higher bills and premiums. Instead of just griping please tell us what you would to solve this huge problem.

lethal tupperwa
07-01-2012, 06:56
what they are doing is taking 500 BILLION out of medicare

that you and I were forced to contribute to.

JFrame
07-01-2012, 09:07
what they are doing is taking 500 BILLION out of medicare

that you and I were forced to contribute to.


Not to worry -- remember the death panels?

The Leftists have it all factored in...


.

lethal tupperwa
07-01-2012, 09:47
the new senior care this way to your ice flow.

jakebrake
07-01-2012, 09:50
. If you vote for Obama your part of the problem, If you don't vote at all, you are the problem.

and, don't forget the "i'm going to do a write in for my guy, even though he got blown out of the water in the primary" crowd.

Dbltapglock
07-01-2012, 10:46
deleted

Kingarthurhk
07-01-2012, 10:53
Video response - I don't want to live on this planet anymore - YouTube

RDW
07-01-2012, 15:01
The problem is the idiots voting for Obama want hand outs and that is exactly what he will give them.

There are more irresponsible people in the U.S. than there are responsible.




http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q32/dppnerd/Facebook/Wall%20Photos/149336_442402422440188_18236793_n.jpg

certifiedfunds
07-01-2012, 15:17
having paid into medicare for more than 40 years with no choice not to

I don't appreciate the 500 BILLION taken from medicare to pay for it!

You didn't pay into anything. You were taxed.

They aren't taking anything from Medicare, there isn't some pot of money sitting there. They're simply redefining the entitlement.

You were going to draw out much more than you were ever taxed anyway.

MoparMan1991
07-01-2012, 16:23
You didn't pay into anything. You were taxed.

They aren't taking anything from Medicare, there isn't some pot of money sitting there. They're simply redefining the entitlement.

You were going to draw out much more than you were ever taxed anyway.

Sounds about right.
+1

Electrikkoolaid
07-01-2012, 16:46
You know, with what it costs for even people with insurance to get sick in this country, I don't understand why the ACA is so unpopular.

It almost seems like starving people protesting against food.

certifiedfunds
07-01-2012, 16:50
You know, with what it costs for even people with insurance to get sick in this country, I don't understand why the ACA is so unpopular.

It almost seems like starving people protesting against food.

Because government involvement in healthcare is what made it so expensive in the first place




Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Cavalry Doc
07-01-2012, 17:07
You know, with what it costs for even people with insurance to get sick in this country, I don't understand why the ACA is so unpopular.

It almost seems like starving people protesting against food.

Maybe you don't know the situation we are in.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

LASTRESORT20
07-01-2012, 17:11
:violin::violin:whine baby whine but the fact is...a "REPUBLICAN" federal judge appointed by Bush was the deciding vote. I love it!:rofl::rofl:




Will see who will whine soon....I got a feeling I`m gonna love it:yawn:

Revvv
07-01-2012, 17:19
Let me see if I understand this; The Supreme Court, the highest court in our Nation said that forcing people to pay a penalty for not purchasing something is unconstitutional. The court says in order for Obama's law to be constitutional it must collect the penalty as a tax.

Does Obama accept this and claim a victory? Absolutly not. In order to defend his plan he realizes that a promise was made claiming no additional taxes. The White House stands against the ruling of the Supreme Court and proclaims that the uninsured will be fined, not taxed.

As I see it the Health Care Bill Obama is pushing is NOT CONSTITUTIONAL with a penalty in place. This makes Obamacare illegal. The Bill/Law should be null and void.

Electrikkoolaid
07-01-2012, 20:24
Maybe you don't know the situation we are in.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Well, maybe we need to stop spending so much.

Would bringing home our troops from all over the globe, stop the wasteful spending on Social Security, cut all pork, and end the "earned income tax credit" that has many people receiving refunds that exceed what they have paid in taxes?

Why is healthcare, a basic issue like food or shelter, the only place we should be so careful with our money?

G17Jake
07-01-2012, 20:28
Let me see if I understand this; The Supreme Court, the highest court in our Nation said that forcing people to pay a penalty for not purchasing something is unconstitutional. The court says in order for Obama's law to be constitutional it must collect the penalty as a tax.

Does Obama accept this and claim a victory? Absolutly not. In order to defend his plan he realizes that a promise was made claiming no additional taxes. The White House stands against the ruling of the Supreme Court and proclaims that the uninsured will be fined, not taxed.

As I see it the Health Care Bill Obama is pushing is NOT CONSTITUTIONAL with a penalty in place. This makes Obamacare illegal. The Bill/Law should be null and void.

Watch this.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=HyKGPqc5u3w

Ruble Noon
07-01-2012, 20:34
Maybe you don't know the situation we are in.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

That is only part of the problem. The Fed's bailing out of European countries and banks is not factored into that and in case you haven't looked lately, those countries are not doing so hot.

Ruble Noon
07-01-2012, 20:35
Well, maybe we need to stop spending so much.

Would bringing home our troops from all over the globe, stop the wasteful spending on Social Security, cut all pork, and end the "earned income tax credit" that has many people receiving refunds that exceed what they have paid in taxes?

Why is healthcare, a basic issue like food or shelter, the only place we should be so careful with our money?

Yes we do. Obamacare is another $2 trillion entitlement program.

Electrikkoolaid
07-01-2012, 21:25
Yes we do. Obamacare is another $2 trillion entitlement program.

OK, isn't Social Security far more expensive than that? Wasn't the Medicare drug benefit that much? Wouldn't "means testing" help claw back some of those expenditures?

What about all our military and "nation building" spending all around the globe?

What about federal pensions? Isn't the trendy thing to do these days is dump all your unfunded pensions costs?

Everyone wants "Free Market" business principals, so shouldn't we be making these simple cost/benefit calculations?

certifiedfunds
07-01-2012, 21:29
Well, maybe we need to stop spending so much.

Would bringing home our troops from all over the globe, stop the wasteful spending on Social Security, cut all pork, and end the "earned income tax credit" that has many people receiving refunds that exceed what they have paid in taxes?

Why is healthcare, a basic issue like food or shelter, the only place we should be so careful with our money?

It isn't enough. You still haven't balanced the checkbook.

Entitlements consume every dollar of federal revenue.

Read that again:

Entitlements consume every dollar of federal revenue.

You could cut the DOD back to $0 and you're still in the red.

certifiedfunds
07-01-2012, 21:30
OK, isn't Social Security far more expensive than that? Wasn't the Medicare drug benefit that much? Wouldn't "means testing" help claw back some of those expenditures?

What about all our military and "nation building" spending all around the globe?

What about federal pensions? Isn't the trendy thing to do these days is dump all your unfunded pensions costs?

Everyone wants "Free Market" business principals, so shouldn't we be making these simple cost/benefit calculations?

Cool. Cut all that.

And don't add on a $2T healthcare entitlement.

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 04:35
Well, maybe we need to stop spending so much.

Would bringing home our troops from all over the globe, stop the wasteful spending on Social Security, cut all pork, and end the "earned income tax credit" that has many people receiving refunds that exceed what they have paid in taxes?

Why is healthcare, a basic issue like food or shelter, the only place we should be so careful with our money?

We should cut everywhere. Defense could be a lot cheaper, but is of those things that gets a lot more expensive if you don't spend enough. Total defense is only 24% of the budget.


Even Eliminating Defense Spending Completely Would Not Balance the Budget (http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/defense-spending-entitlement-spending-problem)

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/charts/2012/defense-spending-entitlement-spending-problem-680.jpg


The fact is we can not feed, clothe and care for everyone. The biggest issues here are that health care is a commodity, not a right, poor people need to be allowed to be poor, all forms of welfare should require drug testing, and a 30 hour a week part time minimum wage job should give a person a better quality of living (at today's rates) than welfare.

Electrikkoolaid
07-02-2012, 05:00
I'm not sure how Obamacare is a "Two Trillion dollar entitlement".

Most people already have some form of insurance.

35 million people gain access to either Medicaid or receive some subsidy to help pay for insurance. How does this cost 2 trillion dollars?

I hear all this "end of the world" dogma about it, but what exactly causes the world to end? People not going bankrupt if they get sick?

Electrikkoolaid
07-02-2012, 05:08
The fact is we can not feed, clothe and care for everyone.

While no one believes a society is strengthened by creating dependency, without SOME social safety net we will end up with most people living in abject poverty while a very few will live in gated mansions.

Just picture your favorite third-world banana republic or feudal society. This is what a "Free Market" without any government intervention looks like.

Ruble Noon
07-02-2012, 05:13
I'm not sure how Obamacare is a "Two Trillion dollar entitlement".

Most people already have some form of insurance.

35 million people gain access to either Medicaid or receive some subsidy to help pay for insurance. How does this cost 2 trillion dollars?

I hear all this "end of the world" dogma about it, but what exactly causes the world to end? People not going bankrupt if they get sick?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/sessions-obamacare-costs-2.6-trillion-in-ten-years/article/2500877

Also 800,000 jobs are at risk due to this law according to the CBO

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/02/cbo_obamacare_will_cost_800000.html

pilsbury
07-02-2012, 05:17
Socialism at its finest.

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 05:36
While no one believes a society is strengthened by creating dependency, without SOME social safety net we will end up with most people living in abject poverty while a very few will live in gated mansions.

Just picture your favorite third-world banana republic or feudal society. This is what a "Free Market" without any government intervention looks like.

Take a good look around, and see what poor means today. It means you get cell phones, late model cars with fancy after market rims, matching clothes without patches, jewelry, flat screen TV's, game consoles, cable TV and internet, and in a lot of cases, plenty left over for alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs.

I'm for a safety net. But the net would be soup kitchens or even meals on wheels for the disabled, and apartments with am/fm radio, a local news paper and a bed.


We have the richest poor people in the world, and the debt to prove it.

Electrikkoolaid
07-02-2012, 05:42
http://washingtonexaminer.com/sessions-obamacare-costs-2.6-trillion-in-ten-years/article/2500877

Also 800,000 jobs are at risk due to this law according to the CBO

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/02/cbo_obamacare_will_cost_800000.html

Both of these sources are conservative-bias. Other than all the talk-radio shills spouting off against the Affordable Care Act, I still haven't seen anything unbiased about how this is the end of the world...

Don't want government in your healthcare? As a healthcare worker I can only laugh at that. Most hospital revenue already comes from a government source, and the monitoring and compliance administrative costs are HUGE. There are more people NOT in direct patient care than ARE in patient care.

Death panels? Call your insurance company today and ask them to pay for a heart valve replacement for your 65 year old mother who also has a cancer diagnosis < 5 years old. (Again, ugly "Free Market" forces at work.)

Call your doctor and ask him why he will take $75 per office visit from an insurance company 6 months from now, but if you don't have insurance and pay in cash TODAY, the bill is $300. Seems bass ackwards.

Call your local diagnostic laboratory and ask them why if your doctor is billed for your blood test, it is $35, but if you pay for it directly it is $275.

Ask the corner pharmacy why Colchicine, a medicine which is over 1000 years old (used to treat gout) and used to literally cost pennies per day, now costs $4/pill (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2047934/Price-ancient-remedy-Colchicine-goes-2-600-FDA-gives-approval.html) -- even though the company granted a "patent" did not develop it, and it is available in generic form all over the world, EXCEPT the U.S.

See, the providers of all this over-priced sickcare are funding all this apocalyptic hoopla and linking it to Obama, but if you actually investigate what the ACA means to you, very few will find much to disagree with.

The providers see controlling costs and adding transparency to the system as the end of the gravy train, and remember, I work in this field.

And no, I'm not some pinko commie tree-hugger. All this "socialist" labeling about this issue is the same as using "racist" to try and end reasonable discussion about racial issues.

Electrikkoolaid
07-02-2012, 05:52
Take a good look around, and see what poor means today. It means you get cell phones, late model cars with fancy after market rims, matching clothes without patches, jewelry, flat screen TV's, game consoles, cable TV and internet, and in a lot of cases, plenty left over for alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs.

I've seen all that. Been there in line at Walmart while some brood mare checks out her cart of fancy food and pays with EBT.

I also don't agree with the cellphone subsidy.

However, the rest of that is not the "Safety Net". It is people fraudulently receiving benefits they do not need. So rather than enforce the existing laws (popular comment on gun forums) and add common sense to the system, we should just shut everyone off?

"F" people who less well-off, they deserve it anyway? My brain-injured neighbor receives SS, EBT, and Medicare/Caid. He is in his 30s and suffered a closed-head injury in his 20s that left him unable to do much of anything. He lives at home with his parents who are both nearly 70. Cut him off too?

However, the abuse of the public welfare system is not the topic: Healthcare is.

Right now most people fear paying for being sick more than being sick. The ACA is an attempt to correct this, but the vested interests have brainwashed the public into thinking this is the end of the world. Why?

lethal tupperwa
07-02-2012, 06:20
Neal Katyal, the former acting solicitor general who argued the Obama administration's side in the health care cases in several appeals courts, said that Roberts' majority opinion opened the door to potentially important changes in the law that could restrict federal power as it has been understood since the New Deal.

Ilya Somin, a George Mason University law professor, said on the Volokh Conspiracy legal blog that the health care case "gives supporters of limits on federal power some useful ammunition, despite also dealing us a painful defeat."

In addition, Roberts' ruling has helped refocus the public debate over the law and gave Republican opponents ammunition for calling it a big tax increase they would try to repeal.

certifiedfunds
07-02-2012, 06:21
I'm not sure how Obamacare is a "Two Trillion dollar entitlement".

Most people already have some form of insurance.

35 million people gain access to either Medicaid or receive some subsidy to help pay for insurance. How does this cost 2 trillion dollars?

I hear all this "end of the world" dogma about it, but what exactly causes the world to end? People not going bankrupt if they get sick?

Give it time. When you give stuff away it starts to get real expensive.

certifiedfunds
07-02-2012, 06:23
I've seen all that. Been there in line at Walmart while some brood mare checks out her cart of fancy food and pays with EBT.

I also don't agree with the cellphone subsidy.

However, the rest of that is not the "Safety Net". It is people fraudulently receiving benefits they do not need. So rather than enforce the existing laws (popular comment on gun forums) and add common sense to the system, we should just shut everyone off?

"F" people who less well-off, they deserve it anyway? My brain-injured neighbor receives SS, EBT, and Medicare/Caid. He is in his 30s and suffered a closed-head injury in his 20s that left him unable to do much of anything. He lives at home with his parents who are both nearly 70. Cut him off too?

However, the abuse of the public welfare system is not the topic: Healthcare is.

Right now most people fear paying for being sick more than being sick. The ACA is an attempt to correct this, but the vested interests have brainwashed the public into thinking this is the end of the world. Why?

You folks just turned healthcare into the public welfare system.

There will always be rampant fraud in any government program. The government wants as many people as possible on the program and, other than the occasional presser to make you think they're policing it, they really don't care. Government can't possibly be a good steward of your money.

certifiedfunds
07-02-2012, 06:26
Both of these sources are conservative-bias. Other than all the talk-radio shills spouting off against the Affordable Care Act, I still haven't seen anything unbiased about how this is the end of the world...

Don't want government in your healthcare? As a healthcare worker I can only laugh at that. Most hospital revenue already comes from a government source, and the monitoring and compliance administrative costs are HUGE. There are more people NOT in direct patient care than ARE in patient care.

Death panels? Call your insurance company today and ask them to pay for a heart valve replacement for your 65 year old mother who also has a cancer diagnosis < 5 years old. (Again, ugly "Free Market" forces at work.)

Call your doctor and ask him why he will take $75 per office visit from an insurance company 6 months from now, but if you don't have insurance and pay in cash TODAY, the bill is $300. Seems bass ackwards.

Call your local diagnostic laboratory and ask them why if your doctor is billed for your blood test, it is $35, but if you pay for it directly it is $275.

Ask the corner pharmacy why Colchicine, a medicine which is over 1000 years old (used to treat gout) and used to literally cost pennies per day, now costs $4/pill (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2047934/Price-ancient-remedy-Colchicine-goes-2-600-FDA-gives-approval.html) -- even though the company granted a "patent" did not develop it, and it is available in generic form all over the world, EXCEPT the U.S.

See, the providers of all this over-priced sickcare are funding all this apocalyptic hoopla and linking it to Obama, but if you actually investigate what the ACA means to you, very few will find much to disagree with.

The providers see controlling costs and adding transparency to the system as the end of the gravy train, and remember, I work in this field.

And no, I'm not some pinko commie tree-hugger. All this "socialist" labeling about this issue is the same as using "racist" to try and end reasonable discussion about racial issues.

I could call all of those people and ask the questions but they probably won't understand the root cause any better than you. The reason for the cost discrepancies you list: Government interference in the market.

Its very simple really.

JFrame
07-02-2012, 06:39
You folks just turned healthcare into the public welfare system.

There will always be rampant fraud in any government program. The government wants as many people as possible on the program and, other than the occasional presser to make you think they're policing it, they really don't care. Government can't possibly be a good steward of your money.


Indeed -- one need look no further than the antics of the General Services Administration (GSA), the agency tasked with regulating the spending habits of the other federal agencies.


.

Electrikkoolaid
07-02-2012, 06:49
I could call all of those people and ask the questions but they probably won't understand the root cause any better than you. The reason for the cost discrepancies you list: Government interference in the market.

Its very simple really.

If it is so simple, why hasn't it been solved since Clinton's first term?

The blind adherence to "Free Market" ideology overlooks that the healthcare market is:


Not understood by the consumer. Most people have no idea what they are buying, and why they should buy it. Doctor says you need this, and the trans-rectal wallet biopsy begins.
Competitors are prevented from entering the market, both by protective guilds, and government limitations on every phase of the business.
There is no transparency of charges. Trying to elicit this information is almost impossible.
Third parties pay the bill. Therefore in many cases the consumer has no idea what they are being charged, or what is actually being paid, for what they consumed. Most don't care either.
Consumers are prevented from investigating alternatives due to limited technical understanding, and a "closed door" code of silence in the medical community.


Not every dogma is one-size fits all.

Electrikkoolaid
07-02-2012, 07:07
You folks just turned healthcare into the public welfare system.

There will always be rampant fraud in any government program.

Is this by "adding government to the World's finest healthcare system"?

Please, go to your local hospital on Christmas day an look at the employee parking lot. That is what is needed to run the hospital.

Come back on a normal weekday and look at the same parking lot. Even making allowances for VITAL administrative staff and non-essential departments, there will be 5-10 times the number of cars in the lot.

The "800,000 jobs lost" will probably be paper-pushers in the current system.

All that fluff is represents a huge waste of money. Most of those people dance with insurance companies or have jobs that exist for no other reason than to comply with government regulations.

This isn't the camel's nose in the tent. The camel OWNS the tent already.

So again, because the healthcare system has retained the private aspects (versus single-payer), how will this cause A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF THE ECONOMY OHMYGODWEAREALLGOINGTODIE!!!? All those well-run, lean insurance companies will suddenly turn slovenly and corrupt?

We should not improve the system because the government doesn't perform very well at some things? The private for-profit entities will be pure as driven snow and motivated by altruism?

I'm still asking WHAT in the ACA, which has been used to attack Obama (but is modeled after the system ROMNEY started in Mass.) is so terrible that it represents the "End of America"?

I know Rush and Hannity don't like it, but have you actually looked at what it means to you for yourself?

certifiedfunds
07-02-2012, 07:09
If it is so simple, why hasn't it been solved since Clinton's first term?

The blind adherence to "Free Market" ideology overlooks that the healthcare market is:


Not understood by the consumer. Most people have no idea what they are buying, and why they should buy it. Doctor says you need this, and the trans-rectal wallet biopsy begins.
Competitors are prevented from entering the market, both by protective guilds, and government limitations on every phase of the business.
There is no transparency of charges. Trying to elicit this information is almost impossible.
Third parties pay the bill. Therefore in many cases the consumer has no idea what they are being charged, or what is actually being paid, for what they consumed. Most don't care either.
Consumers are prevented from investigating alternatives due to limited technical understanding, and a "closed door" code of silence in the medical community.


Not every dogma is one-size fits all.

Everything you've listed here, is the result of government regulation. Yes, even the convoluted private insurance issues.

certifiedfunds
07-02-2012, 07:11
Is this by "adding government to the World's finest healthcare system"?

Please, go to your local hospital on Christmas day an look at the employee parking lot. That is what is needed to run the hospital.

Come back on a normal weekday and look at the same parking lot. Even making allowances for VITAL administrative staff and non-essential departments, there will be 5-10 times the number of cars in the lot.

The "800,000 jobs lost" will probably be paper-pushers in the current system.

All that fluff is represents a huge waste of money. Most of those people dance with insurance companies or have jobs that exist for no other reason than to comply with government regulations.

This isn't the camel's nose in the tent. The camel OWNS the tent already.

So again, because the healthcare system has retained the private aspects (versus single-payer), how will this cause A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF THE ECONOMY OHMYGODWEAREALLGOINGTODIE!!!? All those well-run, lean insurance companies will suddenly turn slovenly and corrupt?

We should not improve the system because the government doesn't perform very well at some things? The private for-profit entities will be pure as driven snow and motivated by altruism?

I'm still asking WHAT in the ACA, which has been used to attack Obama (but is modeled after the system ROMNEY started in Mass.) is so terrible that it represents the "End of America"?

I know Rush and Hannity don't like it, but have you actually looked at what it means to you for yourself?

The 800,000 jobs aren't in the system. They're employers like us who find employees too expensive.

Everything you point to, once again, is the result of government in the marketplace. What is absurdly funny is that you think more government will fix it.

Can you point to one area where government has inserted itself and made things cheaper?

Electrikkoolaid
07-02-2012, 07:21
Everything you point to, once again, is the result of government in the marketplace. What is absurdly funny is that you think more government will fix it.

You feel government is going to take over healthcare. I'm telling you they are already in it BIG TIME.

How does an attempt to reform the costs of the system constitute destroying it?

I'm not a big Obama fan either. But I hate that this universal issue has become the key conservative/liberal battle issue for the coming election.

Anyone can see the system is broken, but all the paid-for propaganda is leading people away from their best interests without even a cursory investigation of the facts.

Most aren't thinking, they are simply repeating what some hack on TV or the radio told them.

Our society has reached a point where we would rather be entertained than informed. The republic is more at risk from this than the ACA.

certifiedfunds
07-02-2012, 08:02
You feel government is going to take over healthcare. I'm telling you they are already in it BIG TIME.

How does an attempt to reform the costs of the system constitute destroying it?

I'm not a big Obama fan either. But I hate that this universal issue has become the key conservative/liberal battle issue for the coming election.

Anyone can see the system is broken, but all the paid-for propaganda is leading people away from their best interests without even a cursory investigation of the facts.

Most aren't thinking, they are simply repeating what some hack on TV or the radio told them.

Our society has reached a point where we would rather be entertained than informed. The republic is more at risk from this than the ACA.

Can you read English?

Government involvement (Medicare) has FUBAR'd the healthcare system. More government will not fix it but cause costs to skyrocket. Any attempt to artificially cap costs will yield shortages. (these being the administrative death panels).

This is basic basic stuff.

I asked you a question: can you point to any other area where government involvement has lowered costs?

I can point to several where the opposite has happened.

JGlockman
07-02-2012, 08:40
Is this by "adding government to the World's finest healthcare system"?

Please, go to your local hospital on Christmas day an look at the employee parking lot. That is what is needed to run the hospital.

Come back on a normal weekday and look at the same parking lot. Even making allowances for VITAL administrative staff and non-essential departments, there will be 5-10 times the number of cars in the lot.

The "800,000 jobs lost" will probably be paper-pushers in the current system.

All that fluff is represents a huge waste of money. Most of those people dance with insurance companies or have jobs that exist for no other reason than to comply with government regulations.

This isn't the camel's nose in the tent. The camel OWNS the tent already.

So again, because the healthcare system has retained the private aspects (versus single-payer), how will this cause A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF THE ECONOMY OHMYGODWEAREALLGOINGTODIE!!!? All those well-run, lean insurance companies will suddenly turn slovenly and corrupt?

We should not improve the system because the government doesn't perform very well at some things? The private for-profit entities will be pure as driven snow and motivated by altruism?

I'm still asking WHAT in the ACA, which has been used to attack Obama (but is modeled after the system ROMNEY started in Mass.) is so terrible that it represents the "End of America"?

I know Rush and Hannity don't like it, but have you actually looked at what it means to you for yourself?

While I do agree that something does need to be done to control healthcare costs, the ACA is not the way. Do I have a solution - nope.

I believe the "End of America" mantra is stemming from the fact that the SCOTUS in all of its infinite wisdom has taken us down a very dangerous path. It is now OK for Obummer or any administration to penalize... er "tax" the Citizens for not doing what it commands us to do. If the White House commands we all drive a GM or face a penalty - they could. Now I'm not saying it'll happen.... But the SCOTUS has laid the groundwork. Very troubling times.

If it weren't the ACA being shoved down our throats and something else - it would be just as big an issue. It boils down to HOW its being done.

My wife is an insulin dependant diabetic - I own a small business and by most standards I am quite well off. I still have to pay out the wazoo for healthcare insurance. Not to mention her insulin and testing supplies. In theory, affordable healthcare is a good idea and something does need to be done to cut costs.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

Ruble Noon
07-02-2012, 10:45
Both of these sources are conservative-bias. Other than all the talk-radio shills spouting off against the Affordable Care Act, I still haven't seen anything unbiased about how this is the end of the world...

Don't want government in your healthcare? As a healthcare worker I can only laugh at that. Most hospital revenue already comes from a government source, and the monitoring and compliance administrative costs are HUGE. There are more people NOT in direct patient care than ARE in patient care.

Death panels? Call your insurance company today and ask them to pay for a heart valve replacement for your 65 year old mother who also has a cancer diagnosis < 5 years old. (Again, ugly "Free Market" forces at work.)

Call your doctor and ask him why he will take $75 per office visit from an insurance company 6 months from now, but if you don't have insurance and pay in cash TODAY, the bill is $300. Seems bass ackwards.

Call your local diagnostic laboratory and ask them why if your doctor is billed for your blood test, it is $35, but if you pay for it directly it is $275.

Ask the corner pharmacy why Colchicine, a medicine which is over 1000 years old (used to treat gout) and used to literally cost pennies per day, now costs $4/pill (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2047934/Price-ancient-remedy-Colchicine-goes-2-600-FDA-gives-approval.html) -- even though the company granted a "patent" did not develop it, and it is available in generic form all over the world, EXCEPT the U.S.

See, the providers of all this over-priced sickcare are funding all this apocalyptic hoopla and linking it to Obama, but if you actually investigate what the ACA means to you, very few will find much to disagree with.

The providers see controlling costs and adding transparency to the system as the end of the gravy train, and remember, I work in this field.

And no, I'm not some pinko commie tree-hugger. All this "socialist" labeling about this issue is the same as using "racist" to try and end reasonable discussion about racial issues.

There is nothing affordable about it. Look it up. All the cost issues in your rant will not be fixed by government bureaucrats. Tell me which government program is on budget? Medicare? Social Security?
They flat out lied about the cost when they were passing this.

Ruble Noon
07-02-2012, 10:47
Can you read English?

Government involvement (Medicare) has FUBAR'd the healthcare system. More government will not fix it but cause costs to skyrocket. Any attempt to artificially cap costs will yield shortages. (these being the administrative death panels).

This is basic basic stuff.

I asked you a question: can you point to any other area where government involvement has lowered costs?

I can point to several where the opposite has happened.

Notice that he keeps referring to it as the Affordable Care Act? I think we are all wasting our time.

Toyman
07-02-2012, 10:57
I'm not sure how Obamacare is a "Two Trillion dollar entitlement".

Government Bureaucracy, administration costs.

JFrame
07-02-2012, 11:13
Notice that he keeps referring to it as the Affordable Care Act? I think we are all wasting our time.


:rofl::rofl:

...And the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act...

Well -- the Leftists sure do make it SOUND good! :supergrin:


.

Electrikkoolaid
07-02-2012, 11:16
Notice that he keeps referring to it as the Affordable Care Act? I think we are all wasting our time.

Why is the current healthcare system "the greatest the world has ever seen" one minute, and "a total government-FUBAR" the next?

The term "Obamacare" has been used to cause a reflex reaction of automatic derision in some people.

The delicious irony is that "ObamaCare" is strongly patterned after "RomneyCare", so the finger-pointing is very, very dangerous on both sides this time around.

Government rarely lowers cost. I expect it will add costs. Will it provide a path to healthcare for those who can not get it now? Why can "private industry", supposedly so efficient at delivery not control costs?

Ruble Noon
07-02-2012, 14:06
Why is the current healthcare system "the greatest the world has ever seen" one minute, and "a total government-FUBAR" the next?

The term "Obamacare" has been used to cause a reflex reaction of automatic derision in some people.

The delicious irony is that "ObamaCare" is strongly patterned after "RomneyCare", so the finger-pointing is very, very dangerous on both sides this time around.

Government rarely lowers cost. I expect it will add costs. Will it provide a path to healthcare for those who can not get it now? Why can "private industry", supposedly so efficient at delivery not control costs?


Government takeover.

Yes it will cost more. $303 million for IRS enforcers. My insurance premiums took a big jump this year, the reason given, obamacare.
Obamacare still leaves millions without coverage, many current plans will not meet new government requirements.
Care will be less accessible. This is already happening. A local medical center closed because the doctors all left to form a concierge type service in an affluent retirement community. Good healthcare will still be available to those who can afford it while the rest of the people will get less for more cost.

Lethaltxn
07-02-2012, 14:11
How much will the 15 member panel make?

certifiedfunds
07-02-2012, 17:28
How much will the 15 member panel make?

You mean the death panel?

BLACKMAGICK
07-02-2012, 17:37
Going to just throw this in the mix...Isn't it an absurdity that someone who can actually afford their healthcare costs and does pay their healthcare bills now has to have insurance anyway or pay a fine? A fine that increases with each year that passes that you don't have insurance, despite your ability to pay any medical bill?

That's just ridiculous.

Ruble Noon
07-02-2012, 17:43
Going to just throw this in the mix...Isn't it an absurdity that someone who can actually afford their healthcare costs and does pay their healthcare bills now has to have insurance anyway or pay a fine? A fine that increases with each year that passes that you don't have insurance, despite your ability to pay any medical bill?

That's just ridiculous.

As is this, all thanks to obamacare.

1. Retiree Reserve Trust Fund (Section 111(d), p. 61)
2. Grant program for wellness programs to small employers (Section 112, p. 62)
3. Grant program for State health access programs (Section 114, p. 72)
4. Program of administrative simplification (Section 115, p. 76)
5. Health Benefits Advisory Committee (Section 223, p. 111)
6. Health Choices Administration (Section 241, p. 131)
7. Qualified Health Benefits Plan Ombudsman (Section 244, p. 138)
8. Health Insurance Exchange (Section 201, p. 155)
9. Program for technical assistance to employees of small businesses buying Exchange coverage (Section 305(h), p. 191)
10. Mechanism for insurance risk pooling to be established by Health Choices Commissioner (Section 306(b), p. 194)
11. Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund (Section 307, p. 195)
12. State-based Health Insurance Exchanges (Section 308, p. 197)
13. Grant program for health insurance cooperatives (Section 310, p. 206)
14. “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 321, p. 211)
15. Ombudsman for “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 321(d), p. 213)
16. Account for receipts and disbursements for “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 322(b), p. 215)
17. Telehealth Advisory Committee (Section 1191 (b), p. 589)
18. Demonstration program providing reimbursement for “culturally and linguistically appropriate services” (Section 1222, p. 617)
19. Demonstration program for shared decision making using patient decision aids (Section 1236, p. 648)
20. Accountable Care Organization pilot program under Medicare (Section 1301, p. 653)
21. Independent patient-centered medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section 1302, p. 672)
22. Community-based medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section 1302(d), p. 681)
23. Independence at home demonstration program (Section 1312, p. 718)
24. Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research (Section 1401(a), p. 734)
25. Comparative Effectiveness Research Commission (Section 1401(a), p. 738)
26. Patient ombudsman for comparative effectiveness research (Section 1401(a), p. 753)
27. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 1412(b)(1), p. 784)
28. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for nursing facilities (Section 1412 (b)(2), p. 786)
29. Special focus facility program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 1413(a)(3), p. 796)
30. Special focus facility program for nursing facilities (Section 1413(b)(3), p. 804)
31. National independent monitor pilot program for skilled nursing facilities and nursing facilities (Section 1422, p. 859)
32. Demonstration program for approved teaching health centers with respect to Medicare GME (Section 1502(d), p. 933)
33. Pilot program to develop anti-fraud compliance systems for Medicare providers (Section 1635, p. 978)
34. Special Inspector General for the Health Insurance Exchange (Section 1647, p. 1000)
35. Medical home pilot program under Medicaid (Section 1722, p. 1058)
36. Accountable Care Organization pilot program under Medicaid (Section 1730A, p. 1073)
37. Nursing facility supplemental payment program (Section 1745, p. 1106)
38. Demonstration program for Medicaid coverage to stabilize emergency medical conditions in institutions for mental diseases (Section 1787, p. 1149)
39. Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund (Section 1802, p. 1162)
40. “Identifiable office or program” within CMS to “provide for improved coordination between Medicare and Medicaid in the case of dual eligibles” (Section 1905, p. 1191)
41. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Section 1907, p. 1198)
42. Public Health Investment Fund (Section 2002, p. 1214)
43. Scholarships for service in health professional needs areas (Section 2211, p. 1224)
44. Program for training medical residents in community-based settings (Section 2214, p. 1236)
45. Grant program for training in dentistry programs (Section 2215, p. 1240)
46. Public Health Workforce Corps (Section 2231, p. 1253)
47. Public health workforce scholarship program (Section 2231, p. 1254)
48. Public health workforce loan forgiveness program (Section 2231, p. 1258)
49. Grant program for innovations in interdisciplinary care (Section 2252, p. 1272)
50. Advisory Committee on Health Workforce Evaluation and Assessment (Section 2261, p. 1275)
51. Prevention and Wellness Trust (Section 2301, p. 1286)
52. Clinical Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 1295)
53. Community Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 1301)
54. Grant program for community prevention and wellness research (Section 2301, p. 1305)
55. Grant program for research and demonstration projects related to wellness incentives (Section 2301, p. 1305)
56. Grant program for community prevention and wellness services (Section 2301, p. 1308)
57. Grant program for public health infrastructure (Section 2301, p. 1313)
58. Center for Quality Improvement (Section 2401, p. 1322)
59. Assistant Secretary for Health Information (Section 2402, p. 1330)
60. Grant program to support the operation of school-based health clinics (Section 2511, p. 1352)
61. Grant program for nurse-managed health centers (Section 2512, p. 1361)
62. Grants for labor-management programs for nursing training (Section 2521, p. 1372)
63. Grant program for interdisciplinary mental and behavioral health training (Section 2522, p. 1382)
64. “No Child Left Unimmunized Against Influenza” demonstration grant program (Section 2524, p. 1391)
65. Healthy Teen Initiative grant program regarding teen pregnancy (Section 2526, p. 1398)
66. Grant program for interdisciplinary training, education, and services for individuals with autism (Section 2527(a), p. 1402)
67. University centers for excellence in developmental disabilities education (Section 2527(b), p. 1410)
68. Grant program to implement medication therapy management services (Section 2528, p. 1412)
69. Grant program to promote positive health behaviors in underserved communities (Section 2530, p. 1422)
70. Grant program for State alternative medical liability laws (Section 2531, p. 1431)
71. Grant program to develop infant mortality programs (Section 2532, p. 1433)
72. Grant program to prepare secondary school students for careers in health professions (Section 2533, p. 1437)
73. Grant program for community-based collaborative care (Section 2534, p. 1440)
74. Grant program for community-based overweight and obesity prevention (Section 2535, p. 1457)
75. Grant program for reducing the student-to-school nurse ratio in primary and secondary schools (Section 2536, p. 1462)
76. Demonstration project of grants to medical-legal partnerships (Section 2537, p. 1464)
77. Center for Emergency Care under the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (Section 2552, p. 1478)
78. Council for Emergency Care (Section 2552, p 1479)
79. Grant program to support demonstration programs that design and implement regionalized emergency care systems (Section 2553, p. 1480)
80. Grant program to assist veterans who wish to become emergency medical technicians upon discharge (Section 2554, p. 1487)
81. Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (Section 2562, p. 1494)
82. National Medical Device Registry (Section 2571, p. 1501)
83. CLASS Independence Fund (Section 2581, p. 1597)
84. CLASS Independence Fund Board of Trustees (Section 2581, p. 1598)
85. CLASS Independence Advisory Council (Section 2581, p. 1602)
86. Health and Human Services Coordinating Committee on Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1610)
87. National Women’s Health Information Center (Section 2588, p. 1611)
88. Centers for Disease Control Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1614)
89. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Women’s Health and Gender-Based Research (Section 2588, p. 1617)
90. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1618)
91. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1621)
92. Personal Care Attendant Workforce Advisory Panel (Section 2589(a)(2), p. 1624)
93. Grant program for national health workforce online training (Section 2591, p. 1629)
94. Grant program to disseminate best practices on implementing health workforce investment programs (Section 2591, p. 1632)
95. Demonstration program for chronic shortages of health professionals (Section 3101, p. 1717)
96. Demonstration program for substance abuse counselor educational curricula (Section 3101, p. 1719)
97. Program of Indian community education on mental illness (Section 3101, p. 1722)
98. Intergovernmental Task Force on Indian environmental and nuclear hazards (Section 3101, p. 1754)
99. Office of Indian Men’s Health (Section 3101, p. 1765)
100. Indian Health facilities appropriation advisory board (Section 3101, p. 1774)
101. Indian Health facilities needs assessment workgroup (Section 3101, p. 1775)
102. Indian Health Service tribal facilities joint venture demonstration projects (Section 3101, p. 1809)
103. Urban youth treatment center demonstration project (Section 3101, p. 1873)
104. Grants to Urban Indian Organizations for diabetes prevention (Section 3101, p. 1874)
105. Grants to Urban Indian Organizations for health IT adoption (Section 3101, p. 1877)
106. Mental health technician training program (Section 3101, p. 1898)
107. Indian youth telemental health demonstration project (Section 3101, p. 1909)
108. Program for treatment of child sexual abuse victims and perpetrators (Section 3101, p. 1925)
109. Program for treatment of domestic violence and sexual abuse (Section 3101, p. 1927)
110. Native American Health and Wellness Foundation (Section 3103, p. 1966)
111. Committee for the Establishment of the Native American Health and Wellness Foundation (Section 3103, p. 1968)

Lethaltxn
07-02-2012, 17:47
You mean the death panel?

How dare you sir?! That's racist! Obama said there was no such thing! :whistling:

Electrikkoolaid
07-02-2012, 17:55
I work in healthcare, on the front lines, and know exactly what the issues are.

I used to be against the ACA too, (like most of my peers) especially because my employer has gone into high gear laying half-truths and propaganda all over the campus.

I actually looked at it, and found it was not half bad for most people, especially those who are currently uninsured. Costs must be contained and gross inefficiencies eliminated if we are to consider ourselves a first-world country.

It is sad that so many people have bought the anti-obama sizzle but know nothing of the steak. Nothing based in compromise ever satisfies all, but selfishness and "blame the victim" seems to be especially prevalent here.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain as he pulls the levers of public discourse. Click your heels together and tell yourself "it's those parasites" who are destroying the system. Resist any thoughts of taking actions to fix a decades long problem.

But above all, hope and pray it isn't YOU that gets labeled "a parasite" in your time of need.

10-8

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 18:11
I work in healthcare, on the front lines, and know exactly what the issues are.

I used to be against the ACA too, (like most of my peers) especially because my employer has gone into high gear laying half-truths and propaganda all over the campus.

I actually looked at it, and found it was not half bad for most people, especially those who are currently uninsured. Costs must be contained and gross inefficiencies eliminated if we are to consider ourselves a first-world country.

It is sad that so many people have bought the anti-obama sizzle but know nothing of the steak. Nothing based in compromise ever satisfies all, but selfishness and "blame the victim" seems to be especially prevalent here.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain as he pulls the levers of public discourse. Click your heels together and tell yourself "it's those parasites" who are destroying the system. Resist any thoughts of taking actions to fix a decades long problem.

But above all, hope and pray it isn't YOU that gets labeled "a parasite" in your time of need.

10-8

Whew, for a second there, I thought you were going to go on about a sick girlfriend.

The concept is compassionate. It sounds like a good idea, but the implementation will fork up a lot of things, including the national debt. We simply cannot afford it. Medical care is a commodity, not a right. We all die at least once. Every one of my patients will die too. It is inevitable.

Anyone getting something for nothing is a leach, if they had the ability to get it for themselves. There was a time when people paid for necessities first, then luxuries.

Add an amendment that anyone not buying their own health insurance that has a flat screen TV, Cable, a game console, a car less than 3 years old, smart phones, after market stereos or rims in/on their car, a house bigger than 1400 square feet, a boat, a camper, or any other luxury has to downsize their life before being given anything, and I'd be a bit closer to your position. Oh, and if they have that stuff and didn't buy healthcare for their kids, child neglect charges. Better yet, just replace Obamacare with that amendment, problem solved.

Other than that, I have seen government performance based medicine corrupted more than you think would be possible. It is a bad idea.

BLACKMAGICK
07-02-2012, 18:33
Whew, for a second there, I thought you were going to go on about a sick girlfriend :rofl::rofl::rofl:

BLACKMAGICK
07-02-2012, 19:18
I work in healthcare, on the front lines, and know exactly what the issues are.

Me too.

I used to be against the ACA too, (like most of my peers) especially because my employer has gone into high gear laying half-truths and propaganda all over the campus.

I actually looked at it, and found it was not half bad for most people, especially those who are currently uninsured. Costs must be contained and gross inefficiencies eliminated if we are to consider ourselves a first-world country.

I looked at it too and came to a different conclusion. Namely, it sucks and it is CLEARLY unconstitutional. I'm not insured and I pay my healthcare bills directly. Now, I have to pay for insurance I will rarely use (most likely because I don't drink more than 16oz of soda at a time) or pay a fine. The cost of that insurance is going to skyrocket as well.

It is sad that so many people have bought the anti-obama sizzle but know nothing of the steak. Nothing based in compromise ever satisfies all, but selfishness and "blame the victim" seems to be especially prevalent here.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain as he pulls the levers of public discourse. Click your heels together and tell yourself "it's those parasites" who are destroying the system. Resist any thoughts of taking actions to fix a decades long problem.

Compromise? What compromise? How is forcing healthy people to purchase something they otherwise wouldn't a compromise? A compromise on what? We were already paying into healthcare were we not? Yep, there it is right on my check stub. And how is it fair with some getting waivers? Not to mention In 2010 alone, Medicare provided health insurance to 48 million Americans—40 million people age 65 and older and eight million younger people with disabilities. What? That wasn't enough? They could of doubled that tax and expanded the service and most wouldn't of batted an eye but this is not only the largest tax ever passed, it is unconstitutional and opens the door to other "You didn't buy this...here's you tax."

But above all, hope and pray it isn't YOU that gets labeled "a parasite" in your time of need.

Ah, there it is...There but for the grace of God...go I. As I said, there were already mechanisms in place for those without means. We were already paying into them. If it wasn't enough, they could of increased it. Everyone here knows damn well why they did this and it's to take over the industry period.

certifiedfunds
07-02-2012, 20:55
I work in healthcare, on the front lines, and know exactly what the issues are.

I used to be against the ACA too, (like most of my peers) especially because my employer has gone into high gear laying half-truths and propaganda all over the campus.

I actually looked at it, and found it was not half bad for most people, especially those who are currently uninsured. Costs must be contained and gross inefficiencies eliminated if we are to consider ourselves a first-world country.

It is sad that so many people have bought the anti-obama sizzle but know nothing of the steak. Nothing based in compromise ever satisfies all, but selfishness and "blame the victim" seems to be especially prevalent here.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain as he pulls the levers of public discourse. Click your heels together and tell yourself "it's those parasites" who are destroying the system. Resist any thoughts of taking actions to fix a decades long problem.

But above all, hope and pray it isn't YOU that gets labeled "a parasite" in your time of need.

10-8

Working in healthcare doesn't lend one any credibility. This is a macroeconomic issue. The commodity matters not.




Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

muzzledown42
07-02-2012, 21:11
Once again the joke is on the American people! There is nothing we can do except bend over and grab our ankles. America sucks! Can't wait to see what the next 4 years brings once this ass&$#% is re-elected.:rofl:

Here's what you will have poked up your rear:
1) Insurance companies will no longer be able to disqualify you if you get sick and begin making large insurance claims
2) Insurance companies will no longer be able to deny you coverage for a pre-existing condition
3) You can keep your children under coverage on your insurance policy till they reach age 26
4) Insurance companies will have to spend 85% of what they collect in premiums on actual medical costs

Of course, if you can afford insurance and elect not to buy it, you will pay a tax (or penalty, however you want to look at it). Consequently, it will be much more difficult to "game the system", not paying for insurance while you are in your 20s, 30s and 40s and then jumping on the insurance bandwagon when you reach your 50s. A conservative idea until it was made part of the Health Care Bill and declared the worst thing that ever happened by the GOP. But, if you are still unalterably opposed to the AHCB, perhaps you can pay the tax/penalty and still save tens of thousands of dollars during your 20s,30s and 40s by not buying insurance. Of course, if you get sick earlier than you think, the rest of us will graciously pick up your bills because we will have that liability shoved up our rectums.

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 22:03
Here's what you will have poked up your rear:
1) Insurance companies will no longer be able to disqualify you if you get sick and begin making large insurance claims
2) Insurance companies will no longer be able to deny you coverage for a pre-existing condition
3) You can keep your children under coverage on your insurance policy till they reach age 26
4) Insurance companies will have to spend 85% of what they collect in premiums on actual medical costs

Of course, if you can afford insurance and elect not to buy it, you will pay a tax (or penalty, however you want to look at it). Consequently, it will be much more difficult to "game the system", not paying for insurance while you are in your 20s, 30s and 40s and then jumping on the insurance bandwagon when you reach your 50s. A conservative idea until it was made part of the Health Care Bill and declared the worst thing that ever happened by the GOP. But, if you are still unalterably opposed to the AHCB, perhaps you can pay the tax/penalty and still save tens of thousands of dollars during your 20s,30s and 40s by not buying insurance. Of course, if you get sick earlier than you think, the rest of us will graciously pick up your bills because we will have that liability shoved up our rectums.

What happens when companies are no longer profitable. They decline, and eventually fail. Turn on the headlights, and look a bit farther down the road. Many companies are dropping their insurance plans. Insurance companies will get out of the healthcare insurance when it's not profitable.

Barry has already told us what he wants, and his plan will achieve it. The pretty glitter on this pile of crap won't make it any better than it is.

Obama on single payer health insurance - YouTube

Take a gander at Britain's NHS. Coming to a country near you soon.

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 22:08
Working in healthcare doesn't lend one any credibility. This is a macroeconomic issue. The commodity matters not.




Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


It does if you have experience in a civilian government run healthcare system. The corruption is rampant, and very hard to stomp out. What do you do when even the OIG won't consider a marked delay in the diagnosis of cancer as a patient injury?

Take a look at Britain's NHS, that's what we are heading for. Performance Measure based medicine is BAD. Mainly because they have bean counting imbeciles drawing up the measures with loopholes that beg administrators to cheat, then pay them extra when they do.

Profit motivated business' have an vital need to avoid liability, and are therefore careful. Not so much with people playing with other people's money.

certifiedfunds
07-02-2012, 22:22
Insurance companies aren't the problem. Tort isn't the problem. Fraud isn't the problem. Waste isn't the problem.

All of those are problems but solving all 4 won't solve the real problem of rampant inflation. Government money inflates prices which creates an environment where the middle class needs someone (employer/government) to subsidize their day to day healthcare needs.

No matter what the government tries to do or who or what it tries to vilianize, nothing will change until or unless government gets out of the market and allows the market (you and me) to self-regulate.

certifiedfunds
07-02-2012, 22:23
It does if you have experience in a civilian government run healthcare system. The corruption is rampant, and very hard to stomp out. What do you do when even the OIG won't consider a marked delay in the diagnosis of cancer as a patient injury?

Take a look at Britain's NHS, that's what we are heading for. Performance Measure based medicine is BAD. Mainly because they have bean counting imbeciles drawing up the measures with loopholes that beg administrators to cheat, then pay them extra when they do.

Profit motivated business' have an vital need to avoid liability, and are therefore careful. Not so much with people playing with other people's money.

Pretty much sums it up right there.

BLACKMAGICK
07-03-2012, 01:03
One has to wonder though, why create a a tax/fine that isn't enforceable?


"By 2016, about 4 million people will pay the penalty, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated. They would pay $695 for each uninsured adult or 2.5 percent of family income, up to $12,500 a year. The IRS can't prosecute violators or place liens against them, however. Its only enforcement option may be withholding money from refunds."

Cavalry Doc
07-03-2012, 04:27
Insurance companies aren't the problem. Tort isn't the problem. Fraud isn't the problem. Waste isn't the problem.

All of those are problems but solving all 4 won't solve the real problem of rampant inflation. Government money inflates prices which creates an environment where the middle class needs someone (employer/government) to subsidize their day to day healthcare needs.

No matter what the government tries to do or who or what it tries to vilianize, nothing will change until or unless government gets out of the market and allows the market (you and me) to self-regulate.

The problems there are that we already have Millions of leaches on the system. The largest problem is that an emergency room can't say no. If the guy is looking for a cold remedy, send him packing. ER's are used as primary care by people with no intention of ever paying. Docs get about 30 cents on the dollar of what is billed in private practice.

Please name another successful industry where you are required to give your product away to those rude enough to ask, and your most skilled people that choose to run their own business get 30% of what they billed for after the customer has received the nonreturnable product.


In many countries, you must pay up front to get any care. That sounds bad, but it's better than not having a place to go even if you could pay. Health care is a product, a commodity, not a right.

MoparMan1991
07-03-2012, 04:56
The problems there are that we already have Millions of leaches on the system. The largest problem is that an emergency room can't say no. If the guy is looking for a cold remedy, send him packing. ER's are used as primary care by people with no intention of ever paying. Docs get about 30 cents on the dollar of what is billed in private practice.

Please name another successful industry where you are required to give your product away to those rude enough to ask, and your most skilled people that choose to run their own business get 30% of what they billed for after the customer has received the nonreturnable product.


In many countries, you must pay up front to get any care. That sounds bad, but it's better than not having a place to go even if you could pay. Health care is a product, a commodity, not a right.

I can see it now - Hospital ER turns away man with fatal injuries, man sues for $X million dollars.

series1811
07-03-2012, 05:33
Why is the current healthcare system "the greatest the world has ever seen" one minute, and "a total government-FUBAR" the next?

Because, if you participate in it, make rational choices, and prioritize your health care, over your fun care, and make decisions based on the fact that you are ultimately responsible for your own self, it is a good system. But, if you decide that you would rather not work, or spend your funds on something else, in the hopes that you will never get sick, or that someone else will take care of your problems, it can be a cruel system.

The term "Obamacare" has been used to cause a reflex reaction of automatic derision in some people.

The delicious irony is that "ObamaCare" is strongly patterned after "RomneyCare", so the finger-pointing is very, very dangerous on both sides this time around.

Delicious? You have not been paying attention if you have not figured out that the one thing that bothers most conservatives on this board about Romney, is that very thing.

Government rarely lowers cost. I expect it will add costs. Will it provide a path to healthcare for those who can not get it now? Why can "private industry", supposedly so efficient at delivery not control costs?

Rarely lowers costs? A path to healthcare for those who can not get it? Describe the average person who can not get healthcare now, who has not made conscious, though not rational, decisions about their priorities in life. Those disabled, already get cradle to grave medical care. Admit that the ones that need help, are basically the people who wish to be carried by others their whole life.

That's a bigger question. Are we going, as a country, to just accept the fact that those who want to work, and make rational life decisions, are going to have to be held responsible for those who don't and won't? You know the problem. The people who don't want to be responsible definitely want someone to take care of them. The people who are responsible, don't want to do it. That's a pretty big difference, and pretty much the basis or our poltical polarization right now.

Most of us have figured out that most Democrats really don't care about these people. They just need their support to stay in power to help themselves and the people they do care about, and will bankrupt the rest of us to get that suppport (either that or liberal democrats like you, just really don't get the whole enabling thing).

evlbruce
07-03-2012, 07:04
The irony was that US public spending rivaled and exceeded many of the "fair" European systems and accounted for the majority of spending overall, and most here were not upset.

stopatrain
07-03-2012, 07:24
We will be debating this until the end of time.

certifiedfunds
07-03-2012, 07:27
I can see it now - Hospital ER turns away man with fatal injuries, man sues for $X million dollars.

Triage first, then turn away.

muzzledown42
07-03-2012, 10:31
What happens when companies are no longer profitable. They decline, and eventually fail. Turn on the headlights, and look a bit farther down the road. Many companies are dropping their insurance plans. Insurance companies will get out of the healthcare insurance when it's not profitable.

Barry has already told us what he wants, and his plan will achieve it. The pretty glitter on this pile of crap won't make it any better than it is.

Obama on single payer health insurance - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpAyan1fXCE&feature=player_embedded)

Take a gander at Britain's NHS. Coming to a country near you soon.

Insurance companies can remain profitable because more people will be paying premiums. That, of course, is why the individual mandate is a necessary part of the legislation.

Ruble Noon
07-03-2012, 10:36
Insurance companies can remain profitable because more people will be paying premiums. That, of course, is why the individual mandate is a necessary part of the legislation.

On 20%?

Remember ins. company's are required to spend 80%of premiums on coverage. So out of the 20% that is left comes overhead and a cash reserve that they must also keep.

ColdSteelNail
08-10-2012, 10:48
Once again the joke is on the American people! There is nothing we can do except bend over and grab our ankles. America sucks! Can't wait to see what the next 4 years brings once this ass&$#% is re-elected.:rofl:

I would never ever say or write "America Sucks. You have other options if you want to live somewhere else.

Paul7
08-10-2012, 10:50
:violin::violin:whine baby whine but the fact is...a "REPUBLICAN" federal judge appointed by Bush was the deciding vote. I love it!:rofl::rofl:

And who appointed the other four who opposed it and the other four who supported it?

ColdSteelNail
08-10-2012, 15:14
Here's what you will have poked up your rear:
1) Insurance companies will no longer be able to disqualify you if you get sick and begin making large insurance claims
2) Insurance companies will no longer be able to deny you coverage for a pre-existing condition
3) You can keep your children under coverage on your insurance policy till they reach age 26
4) Insurance companies will have to spend 85% of what they collect in premiums on actual medical costs

Of course, if you can afford insurance and elect not to buy it, you will pay a tax (or penalty, however you want to look at it). Consequently, it will be much more difficult to "game the system", not paying for insurance while you are in your 20s, 30s and 40s and then jumping on the insurance bandwagon when you reach your 50s. A conservative idea until it was made part of the Health Care Bill and declared the worst thing that ever happened by the GOP. But, if you are still unalterably opposed to the AHCB, perhaps you can pay the tax/penalty and still save tens of thousands of dollars during your 20s,30s and 40s by not buying insurance. Of course, if you get sick earlier than you think, the rest of us will graciously pick up your bills because we will have that liability shoved up our rectums.


Thanks for the post muzzledown. I'm glad someone on this forum understands The Affordable Healthcare Act.

I wonder how many of our members are without health insurance. And I wonder how many of them could cover a $200,000 emergency hospital stay.

MoparMan1991
08-10-2012, 16:34
Thanks for the post muzzledown. I'm glad someone on this forum understands The Affordable Healthcare Act.

I wonder how many of our members are without health insurance. And I wonder how many of them could cover a $200,000 emergency hospital stay.

I'm 21 and have no insurance at all. I know I couldn't even foot a $50,000 emergency medical bill.