http://www.mcclatchydc.com/nation/story/71078.html

~~~~~~~

Ok...now that the liberals have full control of this great country, and thier desire to tax anything and everything is going to take full control of this nation.
My question is...who is going to pay for this new society?

The Tree freaks want everything green...great...who is going to pay for the new green society?
Everything you do that is green, cost a ton of green and that kills the bottom line, so you have to raise your cost, to protect your profit...so who is going to pay for this?

this brilliant idea...who drives the most miles?
The medium income people, the drving force of this nation...tax unfairly AGAIN.

My question is...when do you start to understand that the medium income people, can't afford to pay for your fuched in the head socialistic dream world anymore...then what?

Who is going to pay these taxes, when we don't have jobs?

This term of leaders, is going to be the death of this nation for generations.

"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

"the medium income people, can't afford to pay for your fuched in the head socialistic dream world anymore...

How did those fuched in the head socialists get their filibuster-proof majority murf? Did they stage a coup? Its funny how you act like this was imposed upon the medium income people, when actually they were voted in BY the medium income people.
Its time for us to join the rest of the developed world and take care of our own people. This is a change that is well overdue, and is the right thing top do on a societal level whether one personally "benefits" from it or not. The shift to green technologies is the same deal -- the price of energy is high because of our failure to make hay and develop practical alternatives while the sun was shining. You can thank crooked politicians and lobbyists in the petroleum and auto industries for that. There are periods in the life of every nation when times get a little tougher for the better good. This may be one of those times. The best we can do is try and buffer the blow a bit.

"I think I will try to stick to conversations that don't involve politics." - murf, April 17 2009

I know it's already pretty well established that Murf doesn't have math skills in general, and particularly when it comes to figuring taxes. Nevertheless, I couldn't help but to muse his question.

If a working person drives 15,000 miles a year, and averages 20 miles per gallon, he or she will use 750 gallons of gas a year. If the additional federal gas tax is 20 cents per gallon, that worker is seeing a whopping $150 a year tax increase.

I haven't heard what the actual gas tax is proposed to be, and nothing has been voted on yet. But I suspect those numbers end up being close.

And of course a comprehensive energy plan is going to have tax breaks for energy savings. I'm already getting a big one under the new stimulus package for installing new wondows and a porch door, which I would have done anyway for energy savings alone.

The math-challenged bitched and whined under Clinton for those 1990's tax policies, and yet anyone that was working prospered those eight years. I hope we get another dose of ignorant crying in the next eight years. I'll be able to purchase a separate lake home if we do.

Many of these reforms should have been started back in the 70's after the gas shortage first came about. Too many years of Repub controlled Congress and Presidents unwilling to step up to the plate.

People on the right (and Murf) detest change, even when its in their best long term interest. I cant say I am surprised. Its like trying to explain universal coverage to them (hey, if your kid gets cancer, you wont be wiped out or hey, if your wife gets breast cancer, you wont be wiped out or hey, if you shoot yourself on a hunting trip, you wont be financially wiped out). You dont hear to many people in the military and government complaining about their health care, but those people dont count, right? LOL

Gas should be taxed. As well as booze and smokes (and weed, ect).



"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

I'm sick of being taxed, one of the reasons I couldn't pull the lever on Obama and went Libertarian, right now I am starting to get concerned over how much all these new taxes are going to affect my budget, right now I can already see my budget eating up my income at an alarming rate, I can no longer afford to save money, when gas increases $150 a year and electric increases $700 a year and my health care coverage goes up $1000 a year and etc etc etc I will probably have to file bankruptcy or work 2 jobs, sorry but I want to enjoy my later years in life, not struggle to get by.

I guess the alternative would be to figure out how to abuse the system like the millions on the public dole and get HUD, food stamps, and work under table and side jobs.

------------------------------------------
In Memory of Darren

On healthcare, Obama says that we can't afford the costs now (Medicaid and Medicare)... so how are we going to be able to afford it when it's government run?! Obama is disingenuous on this--we cannot afford health care now, but give the government the authority to insure and we will be able to afford it.

This is a simple question and his economic advisor cannot answer a basic question on their own bill:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXib0ArA3UA

Morons.

If you have one ounce of sense sign the petition:


http://www.freeourhealthcarenow.com/

People on the right (and Murf) detest change, even when its in their best long term interest. I cant say I am surprised. Its like trying to explain universal coverage to them (hey, if your kid gets cancer, you wont be wiped out or hey, if your wife gets breast cancer, you wont be wiped out or hey, if you shoot yourself on a hunting trip, you wont be financially wiped out).
~~~~~~~~~~

Yes, we are being wiped out by the taxes!
I work construction, I drive my own car to the job site, run from job site to job site and drive home everyday in my own car.
That is my job, if I am forced to pay higher taxes based on mileage, then I would not be in position to go to work everyday b/c I could not afford the gas...as the rich, drive to an office, park thier azz in a chair all day and then drive home, and the poor ride the bus...so who is the main source of the new tax?
Do you not understand this.
The medium income households, that work the blue collar jobs are feeding the rich to stay rich and supporting the poor.

When you see the light, you will understand.
Plumbers/Electricians/drywall/roofing/insulation/painters ect...all direclty hit hard by this fuching Mickey Mouse thinking.
As the same people, who leach off of the balls of society, get another break.

I am tired of hearing this new PROGRESSIVE form of gov't.
I am not against change, if it makes sense and works...nothing these clowns have done, will work, and it does not make sense.
Attacking the very backbone of society is not the smartest idea.

The great universal coverage..is a joke and will have to be paid for by someone, and guess who that will be?

Stop attacking the middle guy!

As for the election Barney....the son of b!tch lied his azz off like all scum bags do.
He sucked in stupid people, that was proven several times during the campaign....("HE WILL HELP ME WITH MY BILLS")
He sucked in the idiot college kids, have been brain washed by, washed up hippie idiots leading the liberal agenda.
He sucked a certain percentage fo the troops and thier families by straight out lying to them.
He sucked in the idiots, who fell for the change slogan.

He is failing as a millitary leader, and he is failing as a domestic leader.
The only changes that have been evident, is that he will do anything and everything to attack the middle class "who cling to thier guns and bibles" and he will back the rich, give the poor a hand job from time to time and when it is all said and done, the middle class will have to suffer more to bring us back to normalcy.



"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

Wait till he taxes health care...and people voted for him thinking their tax was not going up unless they make over 250K a year, lol.

BA, kinda avoided the question with your election stats etc...

It occurs to me that health care will be a wash if small business owners and corporations can be trusted (LOL). The money they spend on each employee now for health insurance should be redistributed to employees in the form of salary.

My recent knee surgery (meniscus) has cost me over $2000 out of pocket so far ($1500 deductible and hundreds in co-pays). Needless to say, I am not pleased with my current private coverage.

"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

100's in copays? What kind of law firm do you work for that they do not offer adequate healthcare coverage for its employees? It is in their best interest to offer it....ER copays are typically $50.00 - $100.00, office copays are $10.00-$25.00. Unless you are waltzing into the ER on a regular basis it sounds like you have a big refund check coming or you chose the crappiest, cheapest coverage on your own accord. Why do you have private insurance? Probably because you are a young guy that thought he could save a few bucks by not getting good coverage. Guess what? There are million like you that make that choice and they count those people as the "uninsured". Again, that is by choice not because they cannot afford it.

Just wait til Obama sends you a bill for your other knee. You'll be able to kick him in the ass with your good one.

It occurs to me that health care will be a wash if small business owners and corporations can be trusted (LOL). The money they spend on each employee now for health insurance should be redistributed to employees in the form of salary.

Small business owners will probably have to use that extra money they save from discontinuing health care to pay for extra expenses from taxes to try and survive. The only people that will benefit from universal health care is the poor who won't have to pay for it


------------------------------------------
In Memory of Darren

Its health care through my firm and its not the greatest (happens in a small firm). The co-pays are from the physical therapist (whom I have seen roughly 20 times since the surgery at about $25 a clip).

I understand your concerns about more taxes, but I will pay for it if it covers me and my family and no exclusions for "pre-existing conditions" and no exclusions for mental health, eye exams, dental, ect.

This time will come, we can either delay it or start dealing with it and working on fixing it so our kids dont have to.



"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

...This time will come, we can either delay it or start dealing with it and working on fixing it so our kids dont have to ~ el broncodurski.

Really? Well I reject that idea. We can do something about this out of control train wreck that is about to happen.

Its not about children. That is no surprise you put stock into that idea.

bronco had to pay a couple of hundred bucks out of his own pocket for his own healthcare and he does not think that is right.

I've learned you cannot talk sense to anyone on the far left or far right because politics is their real religion.

I agree with USC.

1) You want socialist healthcare? You want to feel like you are cattle going to the doctor? You see, they will price healthcare so it puts the private practice out of business. Then they will use the 'prices are out of control' theory to reduce costs and people will suffer. What is next-- euthanasia? And before you laugh, there is a lot of talk in Europe about what age can the government stop paying people's health claims...

2) Name one thing that government has taken over that is not amuck with cost overruns, corruption and kickbacks? Please--- you can regulate it to an extent where it is fair. And as far as giving all healthcare-- I personally don't have an issue with it as long as there are stipulations on it such as they must work if possible, there are term limits on the 'free' part and maybe even make it like a loan until they get on their feet. No one ever ever gave me a dime so please fo not tell me that folks are so poor they can NEVER afford healthcare. This is also the way welfare should be setup-- we cannot afford to support 45 million families--most are able to work. Find the folks that are illegal and non-tax paying. Stop telling me I don't do enough.

www.freeourhelathcareNOW.com

Peace

America.... Love it or leave it.....

"Well, it ain't braggin' if it's true
Yes sir, yes sir
It ain't braggin' if it's true
Muhammad Ali said that
Back when he was a young man
Back when he was Cassius Clay
Before he fought too many fights
And left his brain inside the ring"

...."The only people that will benefit from universal health care is the poor who won't have to pay for it."

THe universal health care idea only helps those without coverage. There are a huge number of them. My healthcare coverage costs about 10K per year for my family. Next to my house, its my largest expense. Sucks balls. With many more people covered, the demand for physician services goes up, therefore lines, waiting. The delay in treatment is not going to come from gov't bureucracy as is stated, but simply more people demanding the services cause they can now pay for it.

For the millions w/o coverage it is better than what we got. For everyone else, not so much. What we got now is really a financial drain. Just think, I could take that 10K per year and put it to club seats!!

"bronco had to pay a couple of hundred bucks out of his own pocket for his own healthcare and he does not think that is right."

or $2000.

Whatever you want to believe is fine. Unfortunately, I am the one with the deductible and the co-pays, so I would tend to believe me over you, but whatever...LOL

Personally, I am ok with waiting for the doctor if it means that everyone else has a chance to see the doc as well and not get his/her credit ruined for doing so...

My friend Kyle just went to the emergency room the other night because of nausea and dizzy spells, they think she has vertigo. Anyway, she is a working student with little spare money. She does not have health insurance. She walked out of UMC with a $4000 bill that she can't pay (or will only be able to pay in installments which will wreck her credit).

Its weird how people who are against universal coverage change their tune when a medical catastrophe occurs or if they turn 65. I wonder why that happens? (Sarcasm).

Conversely, I dont know of anyone who is for universal coverage and then changes their mind and says they want to keep the current b.s. system in place with these blood sucking insurance companies denying claims and ruining people's credit over b.s. determinations.

"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

For the record, I think the welfare system requires a complete overhaul (again). Its obvious the problem is getting worse, but I dont necessarily think its because its invovled with "government".

"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

"She walked out of UMC with a $4000 bill that she can't pay (or will only be able to pay in installments which will wreck her credit). "

Bronco, it is ironic because one of the problems is lawyers. If I go to the ER, they run every test under the sun in fear of being sued for missing something. These tests are not cheap and the doctor don't care, he just wants to make sure is arse is covered.

Homey, you have been brainwashed by the tort reformists and insurance companies of the world.

Winning a malpractice case is rare for plaintiff attorneys. In Clark County (Las Vegas) last year, out of the 40 or so med mal cases that went to trial, the doctors prevailed on over 90% of them. My firm only considers med mal cases if they involve death, significant bodily harm or bad baby cases (wrongful diagnose of cancer is also included).

Its a known "fact" (unproveable) that doctors get away with 90% of malpractice. The NTLA (Trial Lawyers Association) estimated that one out of every 10 instances of malpractice ever hits the light of a courtroom.

In Nevada alone, they make you file an affidavit from another medical doctor with your complaint stating malpractice occurred (I believe this is unconsititional as it discriminates against the poor - these affidavits often cost several thousand dollars a pop). Furthermore, in Nevada, the statute of limitations for a medical malpractice action is one year from when the plaintiff knew or should have known malpractice occurred (very doctor friendly).

Anyway, dont give me crap about the lawsuits. It is B.S. and you are being used as a puppet of the health care providers and insurance companies.

"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

"Winning a malpractice case is rare for plaintiff attorneys. In Clark County (Las Vegas) last year, out of the 40 or so med mal cases that went to trial, the doctors prevailed on over 90% of them."

Bronco, you miss the point. It doesn't matter if you win or lose, if you gets sued, you already lost. You are out of a couple grand if you are lucky just to defend yourself.


"The NTLA (Trial Lawyers Association) estimated that one out of every 10 instances of malpractice ever hits the light of a courtroom."

What does this mean, 9 out of 10 get thrown out? 9 out of ten miss the limitations? 9 out of ten don't bother suing?


"In Nevada alone, they make you file an affidavit from another medical doctor with your complaint stating malpractice occurred (I believe this is unconsititional as it discriminates against the poor - these affidavits often cost several thousand dollars a pop). "

agreed, that is high and discriminates. However, I believe the entire legal system is discriminatory against the poor.

"However, I believe the entire legal system is discriminatory against the poor."

I agree, the Government should step in and provide "Universal Legal Coverage" that way we can all get free legal services. If any group needs more regulation it's the lawyers.

"Bronco, you miss the point. It doesn't matter if you win or lose, if you gets sued, you already lost. You are out of a couple grand if you are lucky just to defend yourself."

Not the doctors. Their malpractice insurance pays for the defense.


"What does this mean, 9 out of 10 get thrown out? 9 out of ten miss the limitations? 9 out of ten don't bother suing?"

It means 9 out of 10 go unreported or a claim is not made.


"agreed, that is high and discriminates. However, I believe the entire legal system is discriminatory against the poor."

It is to an extent, but when your access to the legal system is impaired solely by money, then it is unconstitutional. In criminal cases, a poor person automatically has right to counsel even if they cannot afford one. In civil cases, there is no right to an attorney and certainly no right to pay for the expert affidavit which allows you to sue the doctor. That is why it is improper and unconstitutional.

"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

I agree, the Government should step in and provide "Universal Legal Coverage" that way we can all get free legal services. If any group needs more regulation it's the lawyers.

Isn't that what public defenders are? Free legal service for the poor? Although the lawyers may not provide limitless services, at least poor people don't have to defend themselves in court if they can't afford legal representation. The same should apply for healthcare.

"I think I will try to stick to conversations that don't involve politics." - murf, April 17 2009

Right on the money, BA.

"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

I'm wondering how many of the medical malpractice cases that don't get to court are settled out of court? I bet it's a huge percentage. To claim that someone has been brainwashed by the greedy doctors and insurance companies because they think there should be logical limits placed on monetary judgements is outrageous! Think about it... no matter who wins their lawsuit, the lawyer wins. No matter who LOSES their lawsuit, the lawyer wins again. This racket is better protected than ACORN.

And bronco, who do you you suppose is paying for the malpractice insurance premiums that pay these irresponsibly high judgements? It sure as heck isn't the Trial Lawyers Assoc. These guys think pro bono work is when they take 30 percent instead of 33 percent. And maybe, just maybe, if the rest of us weren't being loaded down with the unpaid medical bills of some 12-20 million illegal aliens healthcare wouldn't be such a problem. You guys are about to get everything you want though. You've got your Liberal super-majority, your unfathomably stupid cap and trade tax passed the House, the government owns banks and businesses, ACORN is going to run the Census and now everybody will soon have to pay the medical bills for people who don't even pay taxes in the first place. Toss me that thar vomit bag!

BA - The poor/uninsured get free emergency care, which is equal to free legal defense. I think once Universal Health Care makes it, Universal Legal Coverage is needed. I pay way too much for my Corporate counsel and I want the masses to pay for it. I'd also like to file a few suits, but don't really want to pay for the attoneys myself, the government should take care and regulate this kind of thing.

"I'm wondering how many of the medical malpractice cases that don't get to court are settled out of court? I bet it's a huge percentage. To claim that someone has been brainwashed by the greedy doctors and insurance companies because they think there should be logical limits placed on monetary judgements is outrageous! Think about it... no matter who wins their lawsuit, the lawyer wins. No matter who LOSES their lawsuit, the lawyer wins again. This racket is better protected than ACORN."

Med Mal cases are incredibly difficult to prove, much less settle. The main reason? The people you are trying to sue are in charge of your medical records. How do you prove malpractice? With expert opinion derived from those medical records. When I worked for a med mal defense firm, I personally suspected 2 doctors of changing medical records to help them when their cases. This is fraud and criminal activity. I couldnt prove it. Furthermore, when I told my supervising attorney, he told me not to worry about it, afterall, we are not plaintiff's counsel. That was it for me. Two weeks later I jumped ship and started plaintiff's work. I know the difference between two evils, and the insurance defense evil is one I cant sleep at night knowing I am helping them. Best decision I ever made.

So, as far as settling those cases, I will say the ones that actually get litigated to some extent do get settled, but that was not my point. My point was the number of instances of malpractice that dont even get litigated. that get swept under the carpet or the doctor apologizes his way to no lawsuit.

Why should there be monetary limits on money damages? Sounds kinda strange coming from a conservative. That is "more regulation" kinda talk right there, buddy. Who is to say how much a kid should receive because a doctor severs his spinal cord or screws up a knee surgery so bad a person has a limp for 50 years or screws up a delivery and the baby has cerebal palsy. Don't you think the child's medical bills should be paid for the rest of his/her life? But for the doctor's negligence, the kid wouldnt have a lifetime disability. Its the same thing as when a trucker driving an 18 wheel falls asleep at the wheel and negligently crushes a mini-van. The people's medical bills and pain and suffering should be taken care of. Again, "but for" the negligence of others, they would not be in that situation. Because someone did not act like normally prudent reasonable doctor or driver, someone died or has a lifelong impairment. Whose side are you on? The negligent person or the innocent victim? Tort reform = cutting a break for the blood sucking insurance companies.

And what is your guys fascination with Acorn? So some people signed up Minnie Mouse and Superman for the election. I hate to break this to you but Minnie Mouse and Superman did not vote for Obama. this whole Acorn "outrage" is just strange to me.

"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

Turd, I think you are comparing apples to oranges. To me the comparison can be summed up like this

Basic Universal Health care (keep you alive) is analagous to public defenders (i.e. protection from attacks on your liberty - going to prison)

Civil Litigation Counsel (makes you money but nothing to do with being imprisoned) is analagous to elective surgery, cosmetic surgery, or any care that is not going to directly keep you alive (which is not covered under most universal coverage models)



"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

bronco, I don't see anyone rushing to your aid on this one...

dacow, so after the mortgage, the health of your family is a distant second.

I was at a pharmeceeutical conference in 2006 where the keynote speaker was Ron Paul and this is part of what he had to say:

No one disputes the diagnosis: American health care is in lousy shape. As a practicing physician for more than 30 years, I find the pervasiveness of managed care very troubling.

The problems with our health care system are not the result of too little government intervention, but rather too much. Contrary to the claims of many advocates of increased government regulation of health care, rising costs and red tape do not represent market failure. Rather, they represent the failure of government policies that have destroyed the health care market.

Its time to rethink the whole system of HMOs and managed care. This entire unnecessary level of corporatism rakes off profits and worsens the quality of care. But HMOs did not arise in the free market; they are creatures of government interference in health care dating to the 1970s. These non-market institutions have gained control over medical care through collusion between organized medicine, politicians, and drug companies, in an effort to move America toward free universal health care.

One big problem arises from the 1974 ERISA law, which grants tax benefits to employers for providing health care, while not allowing similar incentives for individuals. This results in the illogical coupling between employment and health insurance. As such, government removed the market incentive for health insurance companies to cater to the actual health-care consumer. As a greater amount of government and corporate money has been used to pay medical bills, costs have risen artificially out of the range of most individuals.

Only true competition assures that the consumer gets the best deal at the best price possible by putting pressure on the providers. Patients are better served by having options and choices, not new federal bureaucracies and limitations on legal remedies. Such choices and options will arrive only when we unravel the HMO web rooted in old laws, and change the tax code to allow individual Americans to fully deduct all healthcare costs from their taxes, as employers can.

As government bureaucracy continues to give preferences and protections to HMOs and trial lawyers, it will be the patients who lose, despite the glowing rhetoric from the special interests in Washington. Patients will pay ever rising prices and receive declining care while doctors continue to leave the profession in droves...


You may think he is a whack job but truer words were never spoken!

The govt will control idiots, as long as the idiots follow with a smile.
When you give the FEDERAL gov't, a chance to control your life, they will.
you will be told what to eat, when to eat, and how to eat.
What to drink, not to smoke and whatever else some crack pot liberal comes up with.
Think that is carzy thinking...do some research on Brittish healthcare system.

Denying smokers healtcare coverage, b/c when money gets tight, things have to be cut off, so start with the smokers and let them die.
Same with fat people and drinkers...they did it to themselves..so why should we pay for that.
The system will only get worst.

Poor people have coverage now.
If you want better coverage, then get a better job and provide your family with better coverage.

The industry needs to be regulated to stop the lawyers and the insr. companies from raping people, but the system is fine.

If the liberals want to save the children, then they must sink all of thier efforts and money into education not these failed useless programs.

The more gov't provides, the more people sit on thier azz.
Generations of people are raised on the gov't tit, and have no shame in doing it.

I am tired of hearing the lies about not having jobs.
Well, if there is not enough jobs in this country, then why do we have an illegal immagration problem?
They are not comming here and standing around, they are working, just like 80% of society can do, but we have unions telling people that they can't afford to work for certain amounts of money.
You have the liberals, who are getting rich off of the union kick backs, telling people that they can't live off of minimum wage, yet the illegals, seem to do it.
You have lazy people that have been raised by the gov't, and believe that they are entitled to something better.

It is flat out amazing to me, how you fail to understand this.


"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

http://www.cahi.org/article.asp?id=941


Just a tiny tid bit of what to expect from your Utopian Healthcare system.
Imagine these stories, but add the United States Federal Gov't to the story and you will start to understand how bad of an idea this is.

They will be killing people left and right.

I was searching for the story from last week that explained the death of a young man in the UK, that was told that he could not have his medication anymore.

Turn off MSNBC, get the love eyes for Obama back in focus, and pay attention to what is about to destroy this country!

Pelosi is stupid, the woman is a complete nut job and ignores the obvious signs of failure to promote her Mickey Mouse dream world.

God help your children if they get sick...thier lives will be negotiated in some office...life or death will be a 2 minute topic based on numbers.



"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman/issues/healthcare/socialized.html

"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

A stranglehold in the house. Filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. The Presidency of the United States. The American people have spoken. Republicans have a protected freedom to whine and complain (in fact, they love nothing better). However, its all for naught. You guys screwed everything up, now the Democrats have to try and set things right.

"I think I will try to stick to conversations that don't involve politics." - murf, April 17 2009

For starters, I am not a republican!
Hate them as much as the liberals.

Now on to your comment...
How are you setting things right?
By destroying the foundation of this nation that has worked for how many years?

You and others like you, fail to understand the liberal hand that cuased the housing crash.
Both sides azz raped the middle class.

Do you believe that the Federal Gov't should be trusted with your childs safety and welfare on the line?
Give your kids to the Feds, I will protect mine at all cost!

"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

Did anyone notice that the medmal awards have been almost the exact same percentage of overall spending on healthcare for the last 50 years?

The insurance companies have done a masterful job in convincing the public that problem is the attorneys, and not that it is inherent to the system.

Ask yourself the question why tort reform becomes such a big issue when the stock market tanks. It is because the insurance companies are not getting the return they planned, and thus need to cut costs. They attempt to do this by creating a perception that litigation has run amok.

Why should there be a cap on damages? If one is hurt to certain degree, they should be compensated. Take issue with the compensation relative to the harm, but do not cap it.

You know what drives up healthcare? It is simple, people use more then they can pay for, and that cost is passed along. Think about Bronco's co-pay situation, it is not unique. But that money has to come from somewhere. You cannot magically shift it to the government - there are real dollars involved. Do you know what most lower income do when they get a cold? They go to the ER because they cannot refuse patients if they are are an indigent care facility. Do you know it costs 15 times to treat a patient at an ER than a Dr.'s office?

And big surprise, poor people have more health problems than middle income families. Look at Bronco's signature. I know he is trying to imply poor people get inferior medical service, but I submit that the same work ethic and world view that makes you poor is also one that likely does not take care of themselves.

Most disease and death in the U.S. is preventable. The two biggest killers (heart disease and cancer) are largely preventable with diet, exercise, and not smoking. I am not in favor of legislating what you should, how much you exercise, or whether you smoke. But on the same side of that coin, I am not in favor of free healthcare either.

There are 10 types of people in this world, those who undertsand binary, and those who do not.

"You and others like you, fail to understand the liberal hand that cuased the housing crash. "

I have got to hear Murf explain this one...

That is pretty simple to explain.

Liberals wanted to give "the victims of society" a chance to own a home.
It started in the 80's with lawsuits from Jesse and AL, claiming blacks had a harder time purchasing a home.
So they changed the standards, so that poor people could own a home.
Now, like everything else gov't touches, you had people taking advantage of stupid people.

When the poor people can't afford the inflated rates, then the housing crash started.
Of course, this could get all detailed with names and such, but why bother, the bottom line is, that liberals wanted the credit lines to be below standards, to give people a chance at middle class.
The same thinking went into the moving of the gov't housing into the suburban areas...that failed too.

Anymore questions?
Next time, have the balls to sign in.

Nobody wants to talk about the issues with Utopian Healthcare?
lol!







"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

That would be a great point if Minorities disproportionally defaulted on loans more than whites
or if upper middle class white people werent also losing their homes.

"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

The housing crash has nothing to do with color of skin.
The standards of earning a loan to purchase a house, was a joke.
White/black/hispanic...whatever, people who did not have the means to purchase a home and keep up with the bills, killed the housing market.

Many middle class families could not afford a home either.



"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

Murf, not to bust your bubble here, but the Community Reinvestment Act started back in Carter's administration (1977).

Also, let's not forget that the CRA worked pretty damn well into this decade. Only after Dubya and his administration began cutting back on CRA, its enforcement and the housing market peaking did the problems arise and the market crashed.

You are not bursting my bubble, I know what happend, and it has liberal finger prints all over it.

The city of Cincy, is a prime example of what went wrong.
Gov't housing was located in 2 areas of town. OTR/West End...English Woods, a few small projects on the West Side like Bracken Woods.
The crime is controled to a certain degree and the housing market on the West Side was an easy purchase and sale.
Now..
You have gov't housing from OTR/West End, all the way to Kings Island.
Crime is out of control and spread all over the city. The Housing market crash and the added problem of not being able to sell your home b/c of the vouacher homes next door or down the street, have destroyed this city.
Mason was farm land not to long ago...Now, Lakota is going to be the biggest school district in the state, and they are going to build a third highschool.
So what does the state gov't do? They try to purchase more homes in that area...got shot down, but they tried.

As I have said many times before...
The liberal mind set is a great idea, if you take away gov't and greed.
Man will find away to cheat the system and make money off of stupid people, and the gov't destroys everything it touches b/c of people behind the scenes trying to make money off of it.
So the Utopian dream is just that..a dream.
The more you try and live this dream, the more you destroy the foundation of this country.

We have plenty of jobs in this country to cut down unemployment, they may not be great jobs, or high dollar jobs, but there is plenty of work, that is why we have the Mexican problem now...too many americans making excuses for not working, so a business hires the illegals and gets his work done.
The further you expand gov't handouts, the more people that will stay on the system and more people will join the system, b/c they get tired of taking care of the "guy behind you".

The topic of healthcare is being ignored...but people should pay attention to what they are about to cheer for.
It is gov't playing God, and when happens, you have lost the very foundation of this nation, and we will fail the generations of children that will follow.

Call it ramblings, or whatever liberal nonsense you can come up with, but it is the truth.
I know some people hate the truth, but it is what it is and somebody has to point out the flaws in this new Utopian system.

"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

"I know some people hate the truth, but it is what it is" - murf

Here's a few more morsels of truth from murf:

"12-4 DIVISION CHAMPS! WHO-DEY!!!!"

"Palin will be the punch to finish the fight!"

"Americans will never elect Obama the Muslim."

"Saddam Hussein had WMDs buried in the desert but the liberal media covered up the story!"

"John Thornton is serviceable."

"its funny how everyone forgets about Rudi now that Chris Perry is THE MAN!"

The list goes on and on. Keep on telling us like it is, murfy.



"I think I will try to stick to conversations that don't involve politics." - murf, April 17 2009

Why is it always White guys that talk like Murf talks? Is that a coincidence?

nm

Defend the topic!
You can't...you claim the healthcare is the greatest thing on earth...I pop up a few stories to show you how pathetic it is going to be and the flaws that will destroy this country.
Yet...you would rather go in the direction of a 3rd grader and try and make debates over past issues.

Typical liberal bullsh!t.



"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

"I know some people hate the truth, but it is what it is" - murf
~~~~
Debate the facts of the case...you can't..you hate the truth, he points out your flaws and you can't blame Bush!

"12-4 DIVISION CHAMPS! WHO-DEY!!!!"
I say that about every other year...lol...glad you pointed out my not so accurate prediction, lets see, that places me in the same company as every other human being trying to make a prediction on a football season....moron!


"Palin will be the punch to finish the fight!"
Palin saved McCain from being destroyed...she kept the slight glimmer of hope alive and yes, I underestimated the stupidity of this nation...well we get to watch the destruction first hand now.

"Americans will never elect Obama the Muslim."
That is not what I said...please, get it right.

"Saddam Hussein had WMDs buried in the desert but the liberal media covered up the story!"
Do some research on the Times story...there is alot of truth to the story.
His weapons were not in working order, but the man explained his tactics of making everyone BELIEVE that he had working WMD's b/c he wanted Iran to believe he had them...once again, you fail to understand real life events.

"John Thornton is serviceable."
He was very servicable, but you would not understand the actual game of football, b/c ESPN does not go into the details of the game enough for you to understand it...Many coaches and players around the league, had the same opion I did...so are you telling me that he was something else, based on your football IQ...lol


"its funny how everyone forgets about Rudi now that Chris Perry is THE MAN!"
Perry when healthy, was 10 times the back of Rudi...when they went 11-5...who was the 3rd leading wideout on the team?
Again, stick to politics and your liberal agenda, atleast being a complete loser fits you, trying to battle me in a football debate, is not your best tactic...I have sh!t turds that know more about football than you can ever know.


You are dismissed.
Since you refuse to debate the topic at hand....

"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

Debating with Murf is like debating with drunks that get busted for OVI. They are inarticulate, unfocused, anti-logical and pathetic.

Unlike those drunks, though, Murf is always funny.

He's never been right about a single football analysis. And Palin saved McCain from some sort of election disaster? I howled when reading that. Murfy's record remains intact. The more he loses on the merits of any agenda, the more he retreats into some sort of sports rage and/or a phony type of conservative victimhood.

Murf, we've just experience an eight-year military, financial and social disaster with that pack of draft-dodging, evangelical idiots that slunk out of DC. And you worry about the future?

Mike Brown has been a consistent failure and a NFL laughingstock. And you still make thinly-veiled attempts to defend him?

Your rage is contrived and disingenuous. Now go find someone to explain those multi-syllable words to you.

Murf Writes:

>http://www.cahi.org/article.asp?id=941

point of order - Daily Mail is a very right wing newspaper (from a british PoV anyway) they recently ran a poll simplifying the following - should itinerant travellers who have no fixed residence get priority in terms of treatment on the NHS given the nature of their lifestyle. The question asked was - should gypsies jump the que for NHS treatment. When the poll hit 97% of people saying yes they pulled it as it didn't conform to their political worldview.

The yorkshire post story

>Just a tiny tid bit of what to expect from your Utopian Healthcare system.
>Imagine these stories, but add the United States Federal Gov't to the story and you will start to >understand how bad of an idea this is.

>They will be killing people left and right.

As a UK resident I'm constantly staggered by the number of people who are murdered by our healthcare system everyday sarcasm yes people die but unless you hadn't figured it out no one gets out of this ride alive. Your point about the federal governemt is valid but flip the argument:

US FED GOV provides national defence - they are inefficient - should all americans pay privately provide their own national defence defence - maybe all americans should have their own foreign policy when china invades they are not going to stop at the city limits of Cincinnati "left wheel comrades we are not at war with Murf - Invade cleveland instead!" Your happy to put up with ineficiencies there as long as the overall result is positive the same applies to national healthcare.

Tough cases make bad law - they get trotted out by each side of the political spectrum when reality is somewhere in the middle.

The Times - its owned by Rupert Murdoch and he sets the agenda along with all his other papers and news channels his bias is towards the free market where he can create a monopoly and be the only one to benefit - consider the source - I have private dental cover - but my dntist is a neighbour of my parents treats me and my family on the NHS - there are emergency dentists in all areas as well.

deletia

deletia

deletia

>God help your children if they get sick...thier lives will be negotiated in some office...life or >death will be a 2 minute topic based on numbers.

Nothing could be further from the truth - their lives will be decided by the Doctors and nurses in accident and emergency (the ER) - if its life or death its an absolute priority this is why there are sometimes treatement delays for non critical patients enough emergency admissions - beds all full - no room for joe average having his ingrowing toenail removed. Which seems to me to be fair fruutrating at times but fair.

One final point - the NHS does not put private practise out of business - Doctors can still treat patients privately and do we have private health cover I pay to cover me my wife and son and it costs about £75 a month with a £400 excess for my wife and I.

Later

"Nothing could be further from the truth - their lives will be decided by the Doctors and nurses in accident and emergency (the ER) - if its life or death its an absolute priority this is why there are sometimes treatement delays for non critical patients enough emergency admissions - beds all full - no room for joe average having his ingrowing toenail removed. Which seems to me to be fair fruutrating at times but fair. "

You are a smart man (or woman), my friend. The issue is the sense of entitlement regarding health care from the Murfs and Homeys of the world. They think they are more important and more deserving of the hospital bed than indigant folks or poor people. How dare you make them wait the same amount of time as everyone else? Don't you know who they are? LMAO...



"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

"I have sh!t turds that know more about football than you can ever know."

Do those turds predit 12-4 every year as well?
You may have a basic knowledge of football strategy from sheer hours spent watching sports (time not spent reading or educating yourself, obviously), but the idea that you, with your atrocious track record with predictions, are some sort of 'fount' of football knowledge is simply ridiculous. You are laughed at on a regular basis, yet fail to learn and change your behavior. Either you enjoy ridicule, or you're incapable of learning from your mistakes.

"I think I will try to stick to conversations that don't involve politics." - murf, April 17 2009

Yeah, Murf is about the worst on the board at accurately predicting season records...

"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

Call me crazy, but I think that people that pay for things should be entitled to them over people who do not.

There are 10 types of people in this world, those who undertsand binary, and those who do not.

"Universal Legal Coverage"


LMAO! what a train wreck that would be

------------------------------------------
In Memory of Darren

"Call me crazy, but I think that people that pay for things should be entitled to them over people who do not."

Not when it comes to life/death or getting/not getting medical care.

WWJD?

"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis."

You may have a basic knowledge of football strategy from sheer hours spent watching sports (time not spent reading or educating yourself, obviously), but the idea that you, with your atrocious track record with predictions, are some sort of 'fount' of football knowledge is simply ridiculous.
~~~~~~~~~~

lol--It is a tad bit more than sheer hours watching sports...
Reading? LMFAO..you are seriously going to go there? Dude, the more you talk, the more your true self appears...GEEK

What in the world of predictions, have to do with knowing football?
It is no secret, that I predict the Begnals to win, every single year...even with Akili Smith being drafted, I predicted a winning season...call it crazy...that is being a fan and hoping for a fun season...stupid me, I should just shoot myself.

You idiots are stuck on stupid with this prediction thing..
Talk to me about football and not some crazy prediction....lol!

I am laughed at? By who?
You and the other liberal idiots on the board, that hate any human being that is not in love with your Mickey Mouse agenda and dream world bullsh!t?
LOL...Trust me, that does not offend me..

As for the health issue....
As I stated, there are obvious flaws in the system that you use in the UK...now add the UNTIED STATES FEDERAL GOV'T.
Yes, I have been reading stories all over the place, where the GOV'T is playing God with healthcare.
If you are going to die, and drugs are giving you a small window of life, there are several stories where, they have refused the drugs, b/c of money.
Yes, as you point out, they are few and far between, and that I understand, but, 1 life being terminated based on some guidlines from the gov't, should be warning enough.
What if your family is that few and far between case?
The Gov't decides that your son is not worthy enough to spend money on b/c he is going to die anyway.

This is the United States, trust me, the federal gov't is run by idiots and criminals.
They don't care about you as a human being, you are a money source to feed thier individual agendas.
They will treat emergency cases, but they do that now. Nobody dies in this country b/c they are denied emergency care.
Even if you have a long term illness and you are poor, you still have better care than any other country in the world.

Bronco--nobody said anything about being more important.
That is the most absurd thing you have ever tried to play out.

Trooper--get a clue....

"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

I'd like to hear a discussion of WHY health care costs have rised so dramatically over the years. I remember when I was still working how every year our health care team would tell us our insurance costs were going up about 20% per year and as such our employee contributions would have to go up accordingly.

My wife works for a major on-line pharmacy, MEDCO. Medco used to be part of Merck. Merck and Medco still spend billions per year donating medicines to impoverished countries. The African AIDS epidemic is the biggest benefactor. I'm suer other pharmaceutical companies are doing similar things. I'm all for helping people like this but are we paying for this indirectly? I think so. I've also been told the research and development costs for new medicines has gone through the roof. Why? Are they paying these lab technicians exorbitant salaries or are the pharmaceutical companies just hiring them by the boatload?

I'd like to hear all your thoughts.

...because there is so much money available for by government subsidies. This is also the same reason why the cost of college in the U.S. rises at three times the rate of cost of living.

When more money is available for something, the price goes up.

There are 10 types of people in this world, those who undertsand binary, and those who do not.

murf thinks reading makes you a "geek". That explains alot about why he has so many idiotic beliefs and opinions.

FYI calling someone "geek" or "nerd" may have been an effective strategy in high school, but doesn't go to far in the world of adults... lol

"I think I will try to stick to conversations that don't involve politics." - murf, April 17 2009

Did you also notice that he thinks the college aged kids voted for Obama because their "hippie-professors" have brainwashed them? LOL

Who/where does he get his information from...

Bronco, I don't know where you get what my reasoning is against gov health care. It is not because I think I am more deserving than indigent or poor folks. I have stated, I do not want gov running anything. Look at SS, Medicare, Medicaid. Do you actually think I like seeing people without coverage or family's fall in debt because of medical bills? There is no happy answer either way, I just feel if gov takes over, it will be worse for everbody down the road.

More evidence the current insurance system "works"...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,530287,00.html?test=latestnews

More evidence Bronco didn't read my post...

I saw it, I read it and I have heard it before.

The old "if the government gets involved, it will get worse" montra is a cop-out in my opinion. as long as Congress sets up the parameters of the coverage and Republicans dont nick pick and try to change it every time they are in power, it should easily work.

You're arguing with the wrong Dickweed. See, Bronco tries to defend his clients that either break rules or are going to have their healthcare cancelled due to having a big-azzed hospital bill. But it's always the Managed Care's System's fault--not the clients.

See Homes, I worked for a Managed Care Company (name I will withhold). They had 500,000 clients in the Greater Cincinnati Area before being bought out by a larger company. Great coverage. Great client service. I heard nothing but great things when I talked to people outside the company. You were covered as long as you didn't break rules. People who broke rules were the only ones that b*tched. Bronco never sees this side of health care. He only sees damaged goods or people with luggage with the last name of Samsonite.

So like I said, you are arguing with the wrong azzhole.





"So he got fired? Big deal. It's happened to the best of us. So he got kicked out of his house by his 400 lb'ed wife?!?!? That's probably better for him anyways."-OldSchooler on ChrisMBHater's absence

The easiest way to reign in some of the costs of Medicare and Medicaid is to computerize everything to include medical records for anyone receiving Govt. sponsored healthcare.

Fact is the massive amount of fraud is due to the fact that there is no way to effectively track what is going on with govt sponsored healthcare so its very easy to abuse the system. Furthermore, doctors have no idea where or how many different doctors a patient that walks into their office has gone to unless the person is honest.

I bet a bunch of Microsoft nerds could write the program that would allow significantly greater tracking and alert agents to possible fraud.

I don't care about the bogus privacy arguement. The system could be set up to only allow access to patient info once the id of the person's card is keyed into secure computers at a doc's office. If you are receiving free healthcare from the government, you have to accept the strings that come with it.

BTW, the poor in this country have the best healthcare in the world. Its called Medicaid.



_____________________________________________
January 6,1991: The last post season victory for the Bengals.

Murf Writes:

>As for the health issue....
>As I stated, there are obvious flaws in the system that you use in the UK...now add the UNTIED >STATES FEDERAL GOV'T.

Lets start with a joke - why would I want to add the Federal Governemnt to the UK's health service its only just getting back on its feet after the 1980's! And who untied them buggers quick lassoe them

OK on with Murf's points:

I would like to state that the flaws are outweighed significantly by the facts that:

1 Even after emergency treatment - all the follow up care etc is free at point of need / use there is a charge for prescriptions but not the full economic cost some regions of the uk even don't charge (see Wales)

2 Employees and Employers pay the majority of the cost via National insurance -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_insurance

>Yes, I have been reading stories all over the place, where the GOV'T is playing God with healthcare.
>If you are going to die, and drugs are giving you a small window of life, there are several stories >where, they have refused the drugs, b/c of money.
>Yes, as you point out, they are few and far between, and that I understand, but, 1 life being >terminated based on some guidlines from the gov't, should be warning enough.
>What if your family is that few and far between case?
>The Gov't decides that your son is not worthy enough to spend money on b/c he is going to die anyway.

OK lets address this - One of my friends daughters is the few and far between case -http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Craniosynostosis/Pages/Symptoms.aspx and in one of those you couldn't make this **** up twists of fate one of my wife friends daughters has exactly the same condition diagnosed a few months later. The diference between the two families is large in terms of income one would be white coller the other blue coller both are being treated in the same hospital a few weeks apart by the same surgeons and nurses. Anyway I digress the point being that its the doctors who decide if a persons life is within the realm of possibility / probabilty to save and then make a clinical decision on the cost / benefit of treatment, if you think a doctor is thinking "Hmm this will cost the taxpayers a large ammount of money better let this one die" then well your so out of touch with reality then I doubt any of my points will have any impact on the debate.

OK sorry to refer you to a report but this:

http://www.nice.org.uk/media/62F/36/How_NICE_clinical_guidelines_are_developed_4th_edn_FIANL_LR.pdf

explains how the National Institute For Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines are developed the key word there being GUIDELINES in Box 1 Key principles underlying NICE clinical guidelines on page 6 of the report thy state upfront that their guidelines:

"are advisory rather than compulsory, but should be taken into account by healthcare
professionals when planning care for individual patients."

The problem is that the hard cases you reference where there exists for example a cancer drug that costs huge ammounts for a course of treatment that drug is almost always experimental and there for not subject to economies of scale plus there is no statistical evidence generated via controlled double blind experiments to say if it has a benefit or not. Individual physicians have to decide if they think its appropriate. If they don't think its appropriate and the patient objects - he who wouldn't you get press coverage. Treatment decisions are based on clinical guidelines generated from clinical trials and studies evaluated by NICE. Run by Doctors and academics not politicians.

>This is the United States, trust me, the federal gov't is run by idiots and criminals.

Cheap shot here - then why don't you do something about that clean up your lobbying system:

http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=c

Quote from:

http://www.healthreformwatch.com/2009/06/27/health-care-reform-lobbyists-and-the-importance-of-being-there/

"The major health interests have spent an average of $1.4 million per day to lobby Congress so far this year and are on track to spend more than half a billion dollars by the end 2009. That comes out to about $2,600 per day per member of the House and Senate. The pharmaceutical lobby alone spent $733,000 per day in the first quarter of 2009. Since 2000, the industries have spent over $3 billion on lobbying, with the total increasing every year and rising more than 142 percent over the course of the decade. In each of the past four years health interests have been the number-one lobbying force in Washington, measured in expenditures, and have averaged over $1 million per day."

Can anyone spell vested interest interested in maintaining the status quo?

Or elect some people who are more honest? Now before you come back yep our MP's are in the midst of an expenses scandal so our lot are no better than yours but at least we ahve ahd some changes to our body politic over the last decade - Scottish and Welsh Devolution resulting in exposure to different voting systems.


>They don't care about you as a human being, you are a money source to feed thier individual agendas.

Why not make them care about you as an individual - agitate for the introduction of proportional represenatation in elections and apply it nationally. This way democratic voters in red states and republican voters in blue states votes count and your politicians can't win by targetting specific sections of voters in specific areas they have to appeal to a broad cros section to get significant support. Plus your president can speak for the majority of voters not just a majority in certain states that get him the magic number in the electoral college. Plus because small sections of the electorate dont have a disproportional effect on the outcome special intyerest groups and PAC's etc are somewhat neutered as are lobbyists they won't waste money on a system they can't influence will they.

>They will treat emergency cases, but they do that now. Nobody dies in this country b/c they are >denied emergency care.

Glad to hear it.

>Even if you have a long term illness and you are poor, you still have better care than any other >country in the world.

I'm not arguing about the quality of available care, I'm arguing about the consequences of that care after acute phase of treatment and its personal and financial consequences for individuals vs society. In my opinion society should be handling it not the individual. However I can acknowledge my bias I've grown up with a national healthcare service so in my perception its better than one based around personal insurance savings and HMO's trying to put profit ahad of clinical needs.

Anyway when do the HBO Hard Knocks show's start? Will have to download them.

Later

I don't have a lot of history agreeing with SF2, but he's absolutely right about the poor and healthcare. That's what is so amazing about listening to laments that we might socialize healthcare.

For the poorest among us, IT'S ALREADY SOCIALIZED. That's not an opinion. It's an observation.

It's the most expensive and inefficient sort of socialized medicine. I took two prisoners to Bethesda North last week. Neither had insurance. Society will pick up their tab.

But it's not just prisoners that go there. Poor mothers bring their kids to emergency rooms for cold and flu symptons. Poor and indigent people go there for every kind of treatment.

But none of them go to doctors for any type of preventative care. That's the crux. Preventative care doesn't eliminate all treatment care, but it will eliminate a sizeable chunk of it, according to most, if not all, doctors.

Our current system, even if you aren't concerned by the moral comparisons with the rest of the industrialized world, is ridiculously expensive. Let's hope Medicaid, as we know it, becomes a historical term in the next couple of years.

I have read all your points and fully understand that side of the debate and the little benefits that go with it.
Yet, I just watched your (excuse me for not getting her title correct) Medical Leader, explain why she feels that if you smoke, you should have to pay for your own healthcare, or be turned away.

It is no secret that the Federal Gov't in the United States, has killed poor peoople in the past, using the medical science tag.
Happend on a large scale here @ UC Hospital in the late 50's-60's...(great Grandmother was one of the patients).
So, we are living in a era, where people want to control your daily life to begin with, then add a healthcare tag to that, and be forced to only eat certain things, only drink certain things and only behave in a certain way, or you will not recieve medical care under the Federal Govt guidlines.

This is so easy to see, it is scary.
The list of people that will be denied care, will be larger than those who are accepted, yet, every single tax payer in this country, will be forced to pay the bills.

We have free medical now, as Barney said, he took a few idiots in for care, they got it and then walked out, not paying a dime, that is free care.
The preventive garbage is overblown.
I have coverage, and never go to see a Doc unless something is wrong, I seldom take Advill or whatever for headache and only take any type of drug after reading up on the damn thing.

I don't think the care needs to be regulated anymore, I think the pills need to be regulated.
That is what is draining the wallet, the medication.

Poor people get the same care as rich people...poor people can't afford the medication.
Plus, we are way over medicated in this country...people don't even read what they are shoving down throat, DOC said it was cure all pill...shove it down...
Plus, do you understand tha Kidney and liver desease is becoming an issue in this country...why?

As I stated, maybe in the UK things are decent.
In this country, you have criminals in control of Gov't, and those criminals are controled by the shadows and the shadows will decide if your little Johny should live or die based on absurd guidelines.
Yes, the medical officials will be making the call, but when the economy is down, so are certain amount of people..

"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

"and be forced to only eat certain things, only drink certain things and only behave in a certain way, or you will not recieve medical care under the Federal Govt guidlines. "

Damn good point. I can see drug companies in bed with politicians. We will be forced to take a crap load of "needed" vaccinations as an example.

I can't believe that this nation is this stupid.
The media is not going to show the negatives with this, they will hide anything and everything that is negative, and when it is too late, then they will act as if they did not have a hand in it.



"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

The cold hard fact is people are told what to do all the time or face sanctions or punishment.

An example is if you want life insurance you best be in good health, not overweight and better not smoke. The rates for a 40 year old smoker in otherwise excellent health is 4 times the non smoker.

Firemen, policemen, soldiers, FBI members etc.. are all expected to meet certain guidelines for physical health or they can be removed.

Murf's point that the government will tell you what to eat is a bit off base but over a period of time, if we went to a nationalized health care system, one thing will quickly stand out and that will be the utilization rate of obese people and smokers. Every competent study will tell you obese people(and smokers/heavy drinkers/hard drug users) use free healthcare (fully sponsored plans like the UAW had and govt plans) at a significantly higher rate than those with a BMI under 30. They also have WAY MORE preventable and costly diseases like diabetes, high blood pressure, sleep apnea, heart disease, gastrointestinal problems, knee/hip/ankle problems etc.. The costs associated with these problems are usually permanent, on going and expensive. Don't ever kid yourself and think that a some point there will not have to be some type of rationing of healthcare due to our fat ass country and aging of the population.

Don't think I am talking about people who get cancer or leukemia out of the blue. I am talking about your typical Walmart shopper.

I can see an instance where individuals are denied costly treatment due to lifestyle. We already make these choices in the area of organ transplant so don't think the next step to contain costs will not be to deny certain services to those who do not take care of themselves. Even if we stay with the current system and nothing changes, these problems will either make healthcare too expensive for many individuals or companies or the insurance companies will demand the ability to deny certain procedures and treatments due to lifestyle choices.(That would be a tough one but they already do it based on age and sex).

In any case our society is driving the cost of healthcare, not the insurance companies. People demand every test, refuse to make the lifestyle changes their doctors prescribe and think every ache and pain can be cured by a pill.

The way this will go down is the Feds will consider a prescription of lose weight, quit smoking and exercise as the basis for denial of further treatment. If the patient refuses to adhere to the prescribed treatment of the government doctor then the Feds can counter with denial of further more expensive treatment due to refusal to follow prescribed treatment. They will be labeled and basically denied options healthy people have until they decide to clean up their act.

BTW, once all the medical records are computerized, that person will not be able to doctor shop either.












_____________________________________________
January 6,1991: The last post season victory for the Bengals.

Murf's point that the government will tell you what to eat is a bit off base but over a period of time, if we went to a nationalized health care system, one thing will quickly stand out and that will be the utilization rate of obese people and smokers.
~~~~~~~~~

That is my point.
In the UK, they are denying medication to people who do not fit the bill.
A young woman on her death bed b/c the gov't decided that she was going to die anyway, so why pay for her medication.
Smokers being tossed away like garbage.
This is in the UK...a smaller nation.
What on earth do you think is going to happen when the idiots that run our federal gov't get a hold of every human being in this country?

You eat read meat, then you deserve heart problems and we are not obligated to treat you.

this is not a scare tactic, this is about as real as it gets.

Watch the Demolition man...stupid movie, but not too far fetched anymore.

This leadership is going to destroy the foundation of this nation...and we have a ton of idiots cheering for it.

Regulate the medication not the healthcare.

Prime example...I hurt my arm at work.
Go to the ER...x-rays, see a specialist, you have a rip in your elbow.
Specialist...x-ray...yes you have a rip, we need to start roids and therapy.
We will call you in several days after this is approved by BWC...untill then, sit there, in pain, no work and no money.
You can be compensated for this, if you follow these exact guidelines...
this is a simple elbow rip, can you imagine if it was severe.



"Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

Came across this on the BBC web site and thought it may be of interest to Murf / anyone interested in the debate:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8198084.stm

Interestingly they have edited their article and removed the I'll use the word "error" about Hawking.

On a personal note the two children that I know who had the same life threatening very rare condition both came through 14 hours of surgery really well and are both running around scaring the crap out of their parents. So sorry for the slow reply into a dead thread but life thankfully got in the way

Later

Annonymouse