| Author |
Previous Topic | Next Topic |
|
paulsof1
261 Posts |
 Posted - 11/04/2009 : 3:09:29 PM
|
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/04/wilson-proposes-forcing-congress-government-health-insurance-plan/
If the health care bill was that great this shouldn't be a problem |
|
|
|
craigppls
2115 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 3:40:49 PM
|
Hey Joe...stop trying to act like a grade school kid...
We see the games...what we dont see is a GOP heathcare plan.
Wait yes we do...they and their private insurance business partners like the present system just the way it is. Why in god's earth would the private insurance industry spend more than $263,000,000., they like the game they have... |
|
|
paulsof1
261 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 3:43:46 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by craigppls
Hey Joe...stop trying to act like a grade school kid...
We see the games...what we dont see is a GOP heathcare plan.
Wait yes we do...they and their private insurance business partners like the present system just the way it is. Why in god's earth would the private insurance industry spend more than $263,000,000., they like the game they have...
http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare
It won't take two weeks and a translator to figure out like your princess pelosi's joke of a bill |
|
|
assassin17
7838 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 7:52:27 PM
|
This GOP versions appears to stink just as well. I'm not even past the summary yet and I can see the tricks so that it barely changes a thing.
Particularly transparent is the summary part that states;
"Prevents insurers from unjustly cancelling a policy. The GOP plan prohibits an insurer from cancelling a policy unless a person commits fraud or conceals material facts about a health condition."
This is stated after the insistence that you can't be denied health insurance for pre-existing conditions. Well, if you can't be denied for any existing condition, then why is this part even necessary except to cover up the loophole that you CAN and will be dropped later for the exact same thing. "Fraud"? "Concealing facts"?... about what? Obviously it's a pre-existing condition and they'll just accuse you of not revealing it, forcing you into a long legal battle that you can't afford to fight.
If you can't be denied for any pre-existing condition, you shouldn't even be asked about it upon applying and you couldn't commit any fraud or concealment!
Also, the trick is including the word "unjustly", which will be used as the loophole to continue denying coverage and/or payments. Since they get to decide what is "unjust", it's a very simple matter to bend it to whatever they please.
"Let the states decide" has always been a crock. The states have already decided many years ago that they do not want the burden of covering every citizen, because each state has a different amount of resources. This is not a solution. It is a federal issue to cover all citizens, not a "kick them to another state" issue. You already kicked their asses with welfare costs... Every state knows that if they implement full coverage they will immediately be overflooded with people from elsewhere and destroy their own economy.
PS - By the way, I have finally found some coverage for myself, and I am not changing my position... WE NEED A NATIONAL PLAN GUARANTEEING FULL COVERAGE FOR EVERY CITIZEN IN THIS BACKWARD-ASS COUNTRY! NO EXCLUSIONS AND NO EXCEPTIONS! |
|
|
CoolMtgGuy
9067 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 8:02:02 PM
|
Just so you know, if anyone on BO has any chance of swaying my position at any time [although very unlikely], it would be you. I give your posts serious consideration and I appreciate them.
Of course I agree with your final statement in this post.
quote:
Originally posted by assassin17
This GOP versions appears to stink just as well. I'm not even past the summary yet and I can see the tricks so that it barely changes a thing.
Particularly transparent is the summary part that states;
"Prevents insurers from unjustly cancelling a policy. The GOP plan prohibits an insurer from cancelling a policy unless a person commits fraud or conceals material facts about a health condition."
This is stated after the insistence that you can't be denied health insurance for pre-existing conditions. Well, if you can't be denied for any existing condition, then why is this part even necessary except to cover up the loophole that you CAN and will be dropped later for the exact same thing. "Fraud"? "Concealing facts"?... about what? Obviously it's a pre-existing condition and they'll just accuse you of not revealing it, forcing you into a long legal battle that you can't afford to fight.
If you can't be denied for any pre-existing condition, you shouldn't even be asked about it upon applying and you couldn't commit any fraud or concealment!
Also, the trick is including the word "unjustly", which will be used as the loophole to continue denying coverage and/or payments. Since they get to decide what is "unjust", it's a very simple matter to bend it to whatever they please.
"Let the states decide" has always been a crock. The states have already decided many years ago that they do not want the burden of covering every citizen, because each state has a different amount of resources. This is not a solution. It is a federal issue to cover all citizens, not a "kick them to another state" issue. You already kicked their asses with welfare costs... Every state knows that if they implement full coverage they will immediately be overflooded with people from elsewhere and destroy their own economy.
PS - By the way, I have finally found some coverage for myself, and I am not changing my position... WE NEED A NATIONAL PLAN GUARANTEEING FULL COVERAGE FOR EVERY CITIZEN IN THIS BACKWARD-ASS COUNTRY! NO EXCLUSIONS AND NO EXCEPTIONS!
|
|
|
paulsof1
261 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 8:07:17 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by assassin17
This GOP versions appears to stink just as well. I'm not even past the summary yet and I can see the tricks so that it barely changes a thing.
Particularly transparent is the summary part that states;
"Prevents insurers from unjustly cancelling a policy. The GOP plan prohibits an insurer from cancelling a policy unless a person commits fraud or conceals material facts about a health condition."
This is stated after the insistence that you can't be denied health insurance for pre-existing conditions. Well, if you can't be denied for any existing condition, then why is this part even necessary except to cover up the loophole that you CAN and will be dropped later for the exact same thing. "Fraud"? "Concealing facts"?... about what? Obviously it's a pre-existing condition and they'll just accuse you of not revealing it, forcing you into a long legal battle that you can't afford to fight.
If you can't be denied for any pre-existing condition, you shouldn't even be asked about it upon applying and you couldn't commit any fraud or concealment!
Also, the trick is including the word "unjustly", which will be used as the loophole to continue denying coverage and/or payments. Since they get to decide what is "unjust", it's a very simple matter to bend it to whatever they please.
"Let the states decide" has always been a crock. The states have already decided many years ago that they do not want the burden of covering every citizen, because each state has a different amount of resources. This is not a solution. It is a federal issue to cover all citizens, not a "kick them to another state" issue. You already kicked their asses with welfare costs... Every state knows that if they implement full coverage they will immediately be overflooded with people from elsewhere and destroy their own economy.
PS - By the way, I have finally found some coverage for myself, and I am not changing my position... WE NEED A NATIONAL PLAN GUARANTEEING FULL COVERAGE FOR EVERY CITIZEN IN THIS BACKWARD-ASS COUNTRY! NO EXCLUSIONS AND NO EXCEPTIONS!
Guaranteeing insurance for everyone still has a price. Fine if you have a pre-existing condition you will be rated, period. That is the job for the actuaries. Come on, do we need everything given to us on a silver platter? There are costs incurred. Business is business. Look at all of the illegals right now that are not denied treatments because of no coverage. Let's give everything to anyone that asks.
Start originating loans at no cost because people can't afford the costs of the transaction. Are you willing to do that? Na, didn't think so. Use some common sense.
|
|
|
CoolMtgGuy
9067 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 8:07:23 PM
|
Every Congressman and Senator already have the best public option coverage paid for by taxpayers. Joe Wilson is a fool. His dumbazz constituents deserve him as their representatives.
quote:
Originally posted by paulsof1
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/04/wilson-proposes-forcing-congress-government-health-insurance-plan/
If the health care bill was that great this shouldn't be a problem
|
|
|
khoiey
2968 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 8:25:29 PM
|
Is that why are they exempted in their own healthcare bill?
quote:
Originally posted by CoolMtgGuy
Every Congressman and Senator already have the best public option coverage paid for by taxpayers. Joe Wilson is a fool. His dumbazz constituents deserve him as their representatives.
quote:
Originally posted by paulsof1
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/04/wilson-proposes-forcing-congress-government-health-insurance-plan/
If the health care bill was that great this shouldn't be a problem
|
|
|
CoolMtgGuy
9067 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 8:42:04 PM
|
We the people like to take care of our politicians so we give them better healthcare coverage than we are able to get.
Since ballsy Joe is against gvernment-sponsored healthcare, I wonder if he would willingly agree to forgo Medicare coverage when he turns 65. What do you think?
quote:
Originally posted by khoiey
Is that why are they exempted in their own healthcare bill?
quote:
Originally posted by CoolMtgGuy
Every Congressman and Senator already have the best public option coverage paid for by taxpayers. Joe Wilson is a fool. His dumbazz constituents deserve him as their representatives.
quote:
Originally posted by paulsof1
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/04/wilson-proposes-forcing-congress-government-health-insurance-plan/
If the health care bill was that great this shouldn't be a problem
|
|
|
homebroker@sbcgl
7370 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 8:55:48 PM
|
As if any of our opinions matters, if you I are anyone of the people like it or not, the politicians are going to do what they want. What we think is irrelevant!
quote:
Originally posted by CoolMtgGuy
Just so you know, if anyone on BO has any chance of swaying my position at any time [although very unlikely], it would be you. I give your posts serious consideration and I appreciate them.
Of course I agree with your final statement in this post.
|
|
|
assassin17
7838 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 8:57:03 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by paulsof1
Guaranteeing insurance for everyone still has a price. Fine if you have a pre-existing condition you will be rated, period. That is the job for the actuaries. Come on, do we need everything given to us on a silver platter? There are costs incurred. Business is business. Look at all of the illegals right now that are not denied treatments because of no coverage. Let's give everything to anyone that asks.
Start originating loans at no cost because people can't afford the costs of the transaction. Are you willing to do that? Na, didn't think so. Use some common sense.
Common sense is not something I have ever lacked.
1) There isn't a single person on this forum or anywhere else that can ever point out me saying illegal aliens should get anything but a boot up their ass and a swift trip elsewhere. Use some common sense and don't ignore when I use the word CITIZENS.
2) Without healthy people to mine that silver, your platter is made of plastic. And without healthy workers to mold that plastic... well, we can play this game all day long, can't we? If you want a bunch of sick individuals wandering around and passing along all those diseases to you, if you think sick or dead people form a society that can sustain an economy through better production... then I'm going to throw the "use common sense" statement right back in your lap.
3) Costs are incurred. Business is business. I agree... Yet, any business is also bound by legal restrictions to play fair, compete freely, ban price-gouging and collusion to inflate prices, and not discriminate. Every business except healthcare, that is. If your business is robbing it's clients, it shouldn't be allowed to remain in business for any reason. I obviously would not expect the large majority of crooked loan officers and mortgage brokers to ever agree with that, but thats exactly why the government is breathing down your necks also. It's high-time they breathe down Pharma, et al. when an essential private industry breaks beyond repair, it gets governed. That's part of what a government is for... Managing the nation.
4) No, we don't need EVERYTHING given to us, but we damn well need SOME things given to us... It is OUR money, by the way. It's not a GIFT, it's some pencil-pushing clown deciding what to do with OUR forcibly-donated money. What are taxes for, anyway?... A million-dollar movie with Michelle and expensive parties for senators? So it has a price... So what? We have billions of dollars floating around every year, just waiting to be used. It isn't rocket science, it's a simple two-step procedure... (1) Trim out the rampant fraud in healthcare and that "price" is greatly reduced. (2) Pay for necessities like health care and stop paying for BULLSH|T like studying the feces of an owl or paying some guy to paint nude pictures of his mother!
Buy our own overpriced insurance? How about artists buy their own damn materials? They aren't doing a damn thing for society, they are trying to sell a product for profit. We didn't choose their profession, they did. I don't get a government grant when I go to Office Max for paper. And I also fail to see why Barney Frank's plate of chicken has to cost us 1000 bucks.
5) Rating someone? RATING a human being with a number, comrade? This is not a credit check, where you want to see if a person is irresponsible. We are talking about SICK and ELDERLY here... Nobody does that intentionally. These are life circumstances that are just going to happen, not someone who won't pay their rent each month. These citizens FORM YOUR SOCIETY, you cannot have one to govern or anything else without them. You cannot shop for food if the shopkeepers are all dead. A capitalist society must mass-produce and sick people do not produce!
This is another major reason you have a tanking civilization here... You people don't have any clue how to sustain it. This isn't about liberal or conservative, this is about 'stupid'. 50 short years of being a superpower... that isn't jack. That's how fast we blew our load, 50 years, by being a bunch of lazy and selfish nincompoops laying around waiting to entertain ourselves 24/7 while our real workers rot off and die due to our sociopathic apathy towards them.
The years of paying for selfish young punk hippies to sit on the dole and take drugs, have sex, and drink beer have caught up to us extremely fast as their lazy and selfish spawn multiplied and made it even worse. They'll pay for an Uzi, but they won't pay their electric bill, because you don't see electric bills get paid in DVD movies. You tell me how we can afford to pass out money to get knocked up, or for birth control that lets these jerks live an irresponsible life with no repercussions, and then explain to me why they can't have that money removed and be put to work to do their part and help pay for the free healthcare they've enjoyed off the sweaty armpits of others for 50 years while they played video games and smoked weed? Anyone who can possibly argue against national healthcare is also a leech... a leech on this society itself, preventing its success by being stupid, selfish and sociopathic.
And these are the same selfish young leeches that put an incompetent boob over the top during the 2008 election, just to get more promised freebies. Why in the depths of hell should unproductive people be the only people who can get FREE healthcare?... THEY DON'T WORK! It's time to level the playing field for everyone else who deserves it and the only possible solution is not to cut everyone off the ride, it's to let EVERYONE on. WE HAVE THE MONEY FOR HEALTHCARE, we just piss it away on other things! |
|
|
assassin17
7838 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 9:05:41 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by CoolMtgGuy
Just so you know, if anyone on BO has any chance of swaying my position at any time [although very unlikely], it would be you. I give your posts serious consideration and I appreciate them.
Thank you, but I don't speak to sway anyone.
I speak my opinions with confidence and passion, with the goal that someone else sways themselves.
This can bring them towards things that I agree with. With that, there will be strength in numbers, but I'm not trying to coerce anyone to join me. I'm just shooting from the hip. The final decisions will always be yours. |
|
|
Mandyvilla
6395 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 04:05:11 AM
|
I would like to see the politicians have to live with whatever they approved. I see nothing wrong with that, and actually would applaud the initiative.
My first impression when reading paulsof1's post regarding concealing info from the insurer could get you dropped: in this case (no pre-existing condition exclusion) concealing information would serve no other purpose than to commit fraud for the purpose of premiums. In all of the health care discussions, I have never thought the premiums would be one size fits all. I suspect we will see premiums similar to what we see with our auto policies - higher risk pays a higher premium. And, I see no problem with that either. |
|
|
darkstar
26263 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 04:28:15 AM
|
>>>>It's time to level the playing field for everyone else who deserves it and the only possible solution is not to cut everyone off the ride, it's to let EVERYONE on.
Sounds good Greg, but currently a logistical impossibility as the system isn't able to handle everyone, yet and of course dreamland thinking politicians will stop their waste and attempts to buy votes...Without politicians that want to do for us and not to us, we can't get there from here...On top of normal increases, now we have the govt adding theirs increasing all costs for all...
And with crap like this, it can never be level:
"""Other late changes to the bill, such as enhanced status for the government's office of minority health, were intended as sweeteners for supportive lawmakers, including members of the Congressional Black Caucus."""
Any white sweeteners or would those be racist and discriminatory?... |
|
|
assassin17
7838 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 04:39:12 AM
|
If you have to pay more, why have an insurance 'pool' in the first place? The entire concept of 'pooling' is to spread the costs evenly among all participants, not vary it individually. Would you carpool with someone who charges you 5 bucks for gas and only charges everyone else a buck just because you don't have a car? You're getting the exact same ride they are. The difference here is that you'd have the alternative to take a bus for two bucks instead, while in health care you have NO low-cost option.
If you're going to get slammed with individual costs, there's no reason to have group insurance at all. You're better off waiting, filing a bankruptcy and running out on the tab. Better yet, it's time to leave this country and get what everyone else has... a chance. |
|
|
darkstar
26263 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 04:41:50 AM
|
>>>>The difference here is that you'd have the alternative to take a bus for two bucks instead, while in health care you have NO low-cost option.
You still don't, public option will have higher premiums since "they will cover everyone"...Now what? |
|
|
darkstar
26263 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 04:45:30 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by CoolMtgGuy
Just so you know, if anyone on BO has any chance of swaying my position at any time [although very unlikely], it would be you. I give your posts serious consideration and I appreciate them.
Do you consider when he says this is the worst admin in history or only when he agree with a particular position?...LOL |
|
|
assassin17
7838 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 04:46:24 AM
|
| Loaded question. lol |
|
|
djorge44
3699 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 04:57:55 AM
|
Assassin, I think you are not giving supply and demand its due.
This may be cold hearted but there is a set number of doctors in this country. Doctors actually work a lot (except the lefties all feel they barely work and should work far more). There is a set number of house in a year that they can see patients. You can not increase this without increasing the number of doctors which will not happen (even with a national push for more doctors) for years and years.
So insuring everyone in a nationalized plan means there are FAR MORE people in the line. The only outcome for this is rationing (less care for everyone) and doctors who will opt out. These doctors will now serve the people who have the means (rich people, friends of congress etc) and let people buy their way into the office. This will lower supply of care even more.
There is not ONE lefty or politician who can even argue against this happening. The only way to stop this would to legislate against private practitioners and that will never happen.
Government health care will cost a sh***t ton of money and will make all our care far worse than it already is. We are changing a system that works for 83% of Americans. This is not about health care it is a power grab by the left. |
|
|
CoolMtgGuy
9067 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 05:49:58 AM
|
All the time .... when I agree with him and when I don't.
I accept one's right to consider this administration the worst or the best in history. I personally consider the previous one among the worst. So what? It's an opinion. When someone expresses an opposing view but does it in a clear, thoughtful and reasonable way, I appreciate that ... even when I disagree. You might want to try that approach sometime.
quote:
Originally posted by darkstar
quote:
Originally posted by CoolMtgGuy
Just so you know, if anyone on BO has any chance of swaying my position at any time [although very unlikely], it would be you. I give your posts serious consideration and I appreciate them.
Do you consider when he says this is the worst admin in history or only when he agree with a particular position?...LOL
|
|
|
assassin17
7838 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 06:52:19 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by djorge44
Assassin, I think you are not giving supply and demand its due.
I think you are overestimating the skills of many doctors. Every quack will want to open their own private practice, which is fine with me, but no rich person is going to go to a quack for very long. The vast majority of doctors were not the top graduate of their class and they will not make it on their own trying to charge elite prices to elite patients.
Still, for the average physician a good living will be made. I haven't seen any argument to stop paying physicians or labor. It's the administrative padding and material costs which are fraudulent (A person's worth whatever you'll pay them, a bandage is not). If you can afford better care, it'll be out there somewhere. If not, you're happy to have anything you can get. Trust me, I know.
There are a lot of interns and students who are perfectly willing to fill minor non-surgical non-emergency roles in healthcare as part of their schooling for low pay. You don't need to pay someone 200 an hour to take your blood pressure or work the front desk.
The Home Health Care system proves beyond any doubt that there are numerous people with lesser skills that are willing to perform low-skill duties like emptying bedpans and changing sheets. The problem for this industry is not supply, it's that full-time hours are not being approved and the employees cannot make a living via that job alone. Many workers belong to 'pools' and work for multiple agencies to have full-time hours. These workers would be highly attracted to a full-time job that doesn't involve driving or busing all over town for 7 bucks an hour.
There is plenty of supply and the abundance of available jobs will attract a large amount of students and doctors from other countries. It takes mere weeks to train a CNA, not years. We're not starting this in 3 weeks anyway.
It's not like Doctors have anywhere better to go. 100 an hour is not as good as 1000, but it still beats 2 bucks out in the jungle. The government can easily input a competence system to sort out skill levels and promotions, unlike the random unskilled hack the HMOs will stick you with today.
The gravy ride's over. So what? It happened to loan officers, didn't it? Adapt or die.
How does demand grow out of sight? Do you think people are going to fake illness just to sit for hours in a waiting room? Do people with insurance do that now? The whole point of this reform is from the knowledge that demand is going to go sky-high soon, with or without it. The only difference is that you'll either chip in partial costs for the masses or pay the full cost of the uninsured... and there are going to be a lot more uninsured if nothing is done soon. Demand is already a given.
Are we incapable of putting people to work by building more clinics and hospitals? It's a growing industry... What should all our unemployed people do, wait for the next big Playstation game to come out or take one of these new jobs? These places employ lots more than just doctors. Students will always be drawn to the industry that has the jobs. Supply is a given. |
|
|
darkstar
26263 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 07:03:00 AM
|
| Doctors are already pooling together, collecting yrly fees to only serve so many people so they are available to those when they need them...They're called Boutiques and my parents joined one in Baltimore that many of the best Drs in Baltimore are a part of...Those with will always get theirs... |
|
|
cspatmon
5364 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 07:42:48 AM
|
| This Joe "you lie" congressman has been serving almost 9 yrs. in Congress his best ballsy move IMO when he disrespected the POTHUS. Other than that "0" credibility. His statements regarding his view of health care reform is at best idiotic! |
|
|
darkstar
26263 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 07:47:20 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by cspatmon
This Joe "you lie" congressman has been serving almost 9 yrs. in Congress his best ballsy move IMO when he disrespected the POTHUS. Other than that "0" credibility. His statements regarding his view of health care reform is at best idiotic!
Have you forgot who works for whom?...You think those that are suppose to serve us deserve better on our dime?...I don't think they need to go on public option but they can afford to pay for their own private insurance, we pay them enough, but when you make your own payplan, who needs to ask those they serve... |
|
|
paulsof1
261 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 07:52:59 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by CoolMtgGuy
We the people like to take care of our politicians so we give them better healthcare coverage than we are able to get.
Since ballsy Joe is against gvernment-sponsored healthcare, I wonder if he would willingly agree to forgo Medicare coverage when he turns 65. What do you think?
quote:
Originally posted by khoiey
Is that why are they exempted in their own healthcare bill?
quote:
Originally posted by CoolMtgGuy
Every Congressman and Senator already have the best public option coverage paid for by taxpayers. Joe Wilson is a fool. His dumbazz constituents deserve him as their representatives.
quote:
Originally posted by paulsof1
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/04/wilson-proposes-forcing-congress-government-health-insurance-plan/
If the health care bill was that great this shouldn't be a problem
In this wonderfully crafted bill they are cutting meicare by half a billion over the next ten years. If medicare was so great why do we have supplements? |
|
|
| |
Previous Topic | Next Topic |
|
|
|
Search for: 
