O/T: Fired Up, Ready To Go

Page 4 of 9  


I will leave you to your illusions and lies while I continue to live a longer and healthier life without fear of not being able to afford health care, and while my compatriots get jobs that move out from the States because employers also can't afford health care.
Luigi
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
: Excellent retort. In sum, we spend more per capita than other countries : BECAUSE WE CAN. Other countries spend less than we for a lot of reasons, : chief among them is they don't have the wealth to do so.
But the problem is, that extra spending on health care does not make us live longer or better lives. Here' a very good video presentation of some of the facts of the matter, comparing US and foreign expenditures to e.g., survival rates for various things:
http://brightcove.newscientist.com/services/player/bcpid2227271001?bctid0583310001
Well worth watching. It discusses, among many other things, the fact that a lot of the cutting-edge expensive tests equipment is owened by the doctors, who need to recoup their investment asap.
    -- Andy Barss
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Andrew Barss wrote:

http://brightcove.newscientist.com/services/player/bcpid2227271001?bctid0583310001
Your points are well taken but they do not negate the choices. Spending more for a Cadillac won't get you to your destination any faster or any safer. It's the consumer's choice. Whether the test equipment is owned by your local doctor or the Chinese is irrelevant as to whether you consent to its use.
The bottom line is that the patient chooses to spend more because he has the funds available - either out of his own pocket or through insurance.
If a patient is told an expensive test is available, but, given the circumstances, the test will only detect a problem in 1% of the time is a choice for the patient. Telling the patient that the test is unavailable or that its use is below the 10% threshold is another matter entirely.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HeyBub wrote:

More than half of personal bankruptcies in America result from medical expenses. Companies move overseas in part because they don't have to pay for employee health coverage, e.g. it costs GM $1,200 less per vehicle to build cars in Canada than in the U.S.--Toyota took note of that when they decided to build a new plant in Canada instead of the U.S. Health insurance companies absorb several times what such administration costs in other industrialized nations--and so on. The notion that America can afford to waste more of its health care budget than other nations would be funny if it weren't so sickening.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Assuming you don't have a pre-existing condition so that other companies won't write you a policy.

If you live long enough to get through the legal system and/or have enough money or enough credit to pay yourself.

This is very true. Most doctors are glad to get cash on the barrel.

Which clause in which proposed bill has the government running health care? Numbers please.
-- Doug
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 09/13/2009 10:59 PM, Mark & Juanita wrote:

I'm not American so the discussion doesn't really impact me. However, I was under the impression that the proposed legislation allowed for a public insurance option in addition to all the private ones.

Around here (Saskatchewan, Canada) basic insurance is provided by the government along with the license plates (at competitive rates relative to the other provinces, and without any subsidization) but you can go to any insurance company you want for additional coverage.

I didn't think that this was actually in the proposed bill.
Chris
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Chris Friesen wrote:

It isn't, but those people who have been gnashing their teeth and tearing their hair ever since last fall's Presidential election like to pretend it is. Death Panelists would be a good name for the members of this particular cult, sufferers of Obama Derangement Syndrome (among other things).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mark & Juanita wrote:

It is always amusing to see someone advise people to look elsewhere if they don't like the way things are now. Where, pray tell, does one find a health insurance company that doesn't care about pre-existing conditions? Where does one find an insurance company that hasn't raised its rates far above inflation in the past 15 years? Where does one go to find an insurance company that doesn't have 20% administrative overhead?

Here we go again, Joe and Mary Mainstreet are supposed to sue some giant corporation with bottomless pockets. Yeah, good luck with that. Hey, here's a radical idea, how about making it illegal for the insurance companies to do slimy things like use flimsy excuses to drop customers when they need treatment? Or does that sound too much like raging communism to you?

Please quote those portions of the current health care reform proposals that would result in "the government runs health care."
And if you don't like the way the DMV works, why not sue the govt.--" nothing stops you from fighting via the legal system."

Since nobody appears to be proposing such a system your continued reference to it is baffling.

How about for the one-in-six Americans who lack health insurance, what's their survival rate? The bright point in American health care is catastrophic medicine like complicated surgery or drug treatment for diseases like cancer. Unfortunately the other side of that coin is many millions of Americans can't afford such treatment. Of course if you take the view that's just their tough luck it makes that grim reality acceptable (unless you're smart enough to realize that a tenth of *your* health insurance premiums are used to cover the cost of treating the uninsured).

Oh, really--so places like Canada and Britain and France and so on have homogeneous populations? It's hilarious to see various right-wing groups currently making the claim that life expectancy and infant mortality are unreliable indicators of how good a nation's health care is. The NCPPR pushes that line--they're the guys who take contributions from Exxon-Mobil and then miraculously decide that man-made climate change is a myth. Not to mention their money-laundering for Jack Abramoff. Yeah, real persuasive source.

VA health care has cleaned up its act in recent years, they're doing a hell of a lot better job than they did back in the 70s and 80s. They even negotiated lower prices with the drug companies, something the last Republican-controlled Congress prohibited Medicare from doing. Besides, you continue to refer to a total takeover of health care by the govt. when nothing in the proposed legislation mandates that; how about keeping the discussion on this planet rather than inventing creeping-socialism horror stories?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

.... blah, blah, bla sniped
what on earth are you saying? ever hear about insurance and pre- existing conditions? know what the major cause of bankruptcy is in the u. s.?

What happened to "If you are going to be dumb you better be tough"? From your posts I figured you must be the toughest guy on the internet.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 21:32:04 -0700, "DGDevin"

I dont need a president, a cigarette smoker himself, telling me what kind of insurance I need. Stopping smoking is an excellent way to prevent disease and reduce health costs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Phisherman wrote:

But apparently you do need insurance companies that can drop your coverage when you get sick on whatever flimsy excuse they can cook up. It is nothing short of astonishing that so many people don't want govt. bureaucrats in charge of their health care but are blissfully happy to have corporate bureaucrats in charge of their health care despite the steadily rising costs and lower standards of care those corporations have managed to create in their pursuit of profit to the exclusion of all else including the health of their customers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think you know, Lew, that there are some Democrats who are a lot farther to the right than some Republicans.
But, I don't understand why so many American towns and cities have fire departments supported by local taxes, whether they have volunteer or professional firemen. And yet, basic health insurance cannot be paid for by some kind of involuntary contributions? I really don't make much difference between the need for me and my family to have fire insurance and health insurance. But then, I used to be even further left than I am now. Now, I think that left is fine, but needs to be financially responsible. Like getting some real oversight over those bankers. After all, I did buy 100 shares Lehman when they were ~$17 and watched that go up in smoke ...
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I don't believe congress is talking about forcing you or me to buy fire insurance on pain of confiscatory fines. (local fire departments don't equate to fire insurance, by the way)
Tom Veatch Wichita, KS USA
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Tom Veatch" wrote:

More IBS (Intellectual Bull Shit).
1) What is being proposed is that everyone must purchase health insurance.
2) If you can not afford to buy health insurance, tax rebates, incentives, etc will be provided to help offset the cost of health insurance.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

Yeah, somebody making minimum wage is going to be paying enough taxes that tax rebates will offset the cost of insurance. Right. Sure they will.
Obama's plan is basically saying "it's more important to have medical insurance than to have food on the table and a roof over your head and be warm in the winter". Just one more way to guarantee that the poor stay poor. People who have never been poor don't quite grasp the concept.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 23:59:52 GMT, "Lew Hodgett"

bullshit. Or do you assert that the bullshit is in the statement about fire departments not being the same as fire insurance. I'd have though that was self evident. Or is the bullshit in taking my comments out of their context. Ah, yes, maybe that's it.

Riiiiiiiight!
Tom Veatch Wichita, KS USA
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Han" wrote:

That's why Obama chose a guy from Chicago to be chief of staff<G>.

Just another red herring from the AM radio crowd.

That position has a lot of support including Obama.

Based on what I'm hearing, they are still running amuck.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

Because they can't even get all their own members of Congress to go along. A bunch of them (especially from the south) are worried about losing their seats to Republicans so they'll resist voting for what many of their constituents have been convinced is rampaging socialism.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"DGDevin" wrote:

Maybe it is time for a visit from Vito<G>.
Sounds like he could limit his time to the senate.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

Ah so you do subscribe to the Chicago style of politics.
As long as there is a (D) after the office holder of course. If it were an (R) trying to force that kind of thing through, you'd be screaming bloody murder.
--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.