Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board » Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk » This is a pep talk? (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: This is a pep talk?
SeekingFreedom
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for SeekingFreedom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Joe Biden's "Stop Whining" Remark Incites Backlash from the Left

The White House's latest attempts to mobilize liberals ahead of the midterm elections have once again generated a backlash from the left.


Progressive bloggers and activists were up in arms after Vice President Joe Biden said at a Democratic fundraiser yesterday that the party's base should "stop whining." His remarks were echoed by President Obama in a newly-released Rolling Stone interview in which he says his supporters need to "buck up."


The liberal community is pointing to the remarks as the latest examples of the Obama administration's disinterest in listening to its core backers -- and they it's an unwise move so close to the midterm elections.


John Aravosis of Americablog.com charged that belittling the Democratic base is "now clearly a White House strategy."


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20017867-503544.html

--------------------
/weepforthenation

Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Bigfoot
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for The Bigfoot     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It is interesting how the GOP has been grabbing so much attention lately despite its own 'tea party vs. main party' issues while the DNC seems dispirited.

Is this just perception or is it reality?

Can the DNC really be fracturing due to... achievement? Now that the four-decade's long desired health-care bill is passed are they going to lose their momentum because they can't stop talking about how it isn't everything they wanted with a little ribbon tied on top and delivered wearing swaddling cloths by a disneyfied stork?

The elections will be interesting to watch this year, that is for sure. Is the prevailing national attitude really anti-democrat or is it anti-incumbent, anti-war or is it anti-tax, is it anti-anything? Is it Pro-anything? Obama won on Pro-healthcare reform. Can the democrats come up with a solid new 'pro' before D-day that they can rally behind?

--------------------
No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues.

Posts: 5178 | From: Up North | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I do not understand why the Democrat party so eager to push the health care law through as quick as possible are not championing themselves on it. None of the Democrats running in my area even put the donkey on their yard signs anymore.

I think we needed health care reform, but they went about it the wrong way. The whole process stunk from the beginning. Oh, and anything out of Biden's mouth, well hes a real pompous a-hole basically. He is always letting his mouth get him into trouble.

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Bigfoot
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for The Bigfoot     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bill (Hillary) Clinton, Barrack Obama

What does this list of presidents have in common?

Over the past 100 years they have all attempted to champion healthcare reform. They have all either failed or have only been able to get a piece in at a time while the rest fell by the wayside.

FDR got Social Security through and now it is a mainstay of American culture and the single biggest factor in the fight against poverty among the elderly.

LBJ was able to capitalize on the groundwork of JFK and sign in Medicaid and Medicare. Now these programs are so important to Americans that confused citizens actually lobbied against further healthcare reform because they thought they were protecting their Medicare.

You want to know why they wanted to 'push' though healthcare CCM? Cuz they have 100 years of history telling them what happens when they wait. Seriously, what do you think would have happened if they had added another year, or even another six months, of discussion to the year and a half it took to sign in the new healthcare bill?

It would have died on the floor. Along with all the others that already lie there.

--------------------
No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues.

Posts: 5178 | From: Up North | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SeekingFreedom
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for SeekingFreedom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And with all these 'benefits', Big...

...Greece and Belgium await.

[Frown]

--------------------
/weepforthenation

Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
the idea that we might actually do real accounting is what scares people SF...

the "benefits" were already being paid all along anyway.

the sheer ignorance of the general public is overwhelming...

when a kid is "uninsurable"? the taxpayers pay for it because in America we actually believe in taking care of people that are unfortunate.

does that mean scammers get over on the sytem? of course, they do in every system and always have, there is nothing scamproof...

when i lived in SoCali, late 90's? 9 area hospitals closed over 5 year period due to losing money for non-paying customers, primarily illegals...

this problem was not getting better, it is and has been getting worse for a long time...

we've been headed to Greece and Belgium under GOP's and Dems for decades.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SeekingFreedom
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for SeekingFreedom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Here's the rub though, Glass...and this is one of my biggest pet peaves about the Health Care law...

It was written to FORCE the private sector to pay for the people that can't pay for it themselves\aren't insurable.

Make sure you understand that point clearly.

By making 'pre-existing' conditions a non-issue, as far as being able to buy insurance, the law FORCES the insurance companies to eat that (extremely high) cost. Instead of using tax payers money (which a charitable society should be willing to allocate) to care for these 'unfortunates', they are forcing otherwise profitable companies to do so.

Unless loopholes are found to get around this (and I'm sure there are teams of lawyers working on it), that part of the law ALONE will kill the private insurance industry in America.

Forced charity....isn't.

--------------------
/weepforthenation

Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
the goal is to put private insurance out of business Relentless...

the "moral question" becomes this:

should an insurance co be making a profit by only taking the profitable insurance customers anyway?

why have private insurance at all if the loss cases are paid for by tax payers?

waht purpose do they serve?

they are not cutting our costs, they are increasing them... our costs go up every year by leaps and bounds

when people become stistically too old to be profitable insurance customers? we put htem on medicaid/medicare...

when kids (AND AUDLTS) are too costly? we pay for them the same way..

why do we have private insurance again? so soembody else will have a job? OK... but what point does their job serve if they only insure people that will make them a profit?

the law is a POS, but we already had a POS system anyway...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T e x
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for T e x     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
the goal is to put private insurance out of business Relentless...

the "moral question" becomes this:

should an insurance co be making a profit by only taking the profitable insurance customers anyway?

why have private insurance at all if the loss cases are paid for by tax payers?

waht purpose do they serve?

they are not cutting our costs, they are increasing them... our costs go up every year by leaps and bounds

when people become stistically too old to be profitable insurance customers? we put htem on medicaid/medicare...

when kids (AND AUDLTS) are too costly? we pay for them the same way..

why do we have private insurance again? so soembody else will have a job? OK... but what point does their job serve if they only insure people that will make them a profit?

the law is a POS, but we already had a POS system anyway...

Perhaps a look into history?

What's the origination of "insurance"?

For argument's sake, I'll say...

cargo.

Sure, you can dig around and find examples of ancient "political tribute" or, more accurately, tribal politics. From there, you can argue a lil' bit o' sumpin about the value of human life.

But, eventually, you hit a dead end ==> chieftans bigger and lesser arguing over turf, in the shadow of some sort of "king."

Slice and dice away, but insurance began and took off as a means to enhance merchant operations, ie, caravans, shipping, etc.

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

Posts: 21062 | From: Fort Worth | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SeekingFreedom
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for SeekingFreedom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ok, I just want to make sure you didn't mistype, Glass...

quote:
the goal is to put private insurance out of business Relentless...
I'll assume that was meant for me. But do you honestly believe (as I do), that this literally was designed to put an entire sector of the PRIVATE industry out of business? If not, please explain. If so...think about that long and hard.

quote:
the "moral question" becomes this:

should an insurance co be making a profit by only taking the profitable insurance customers anyway?

YES!!! By all that's left of Capitalistism in our Society, YES!!!

Up until now, health insurance has been a CHOICE. A choice of the end user to buy and a choice of the insurance company to ACCEPT the risk of insuring said end user. The buyer accepts the risk that they might never need the product and the company assumes the risk (willingly) that they may pay out more than they take in from said consumer.

IT'S ALL ABOUT CHOICE...

This law is about taking BOTH those choices away. It WILL kill the industry and leave us with no choice but to be part of a single payer, government run system where they control everything.

There is no other logical, alternative end to this if left as is, Glass.

Sorry for the CAPS LOCK stuff, but I don't think some of our fellows that pushed this crap here( and most still do) understand this point. This absolutely will drive all of us onto a future version of Medicare\Medicaid. Everyone. On the taxpayers dime....Hello, Greece.

quote:
why have private insurance at all if the loss cases are paid for by tax payers?

waht purpose do they serve?

they are not cutting our costs, they are increasing them... our costs go up every year by leaps and bounds

when people become stistically too old to be profitable insurance customers? we put htem on medicaid/medicare...

when kids (AND AUDLTS) are too costly? we pay for them the same way..

We have them because they take care of SOME of the people, Glass. They were never intended to take care of ALL the people. They take some of the burden off of the taxpayer through private industry. Whatever part of the country IS covered(some 85%+) isn't on the taxpayers dime. That group is going to be adding to the tax burden when it the insurance co's aren't around anymore because this law ran them out of business. Do you really think we can bear that?

quote:
the law is a POS, but we already had a POS system anyway...

You don't 'fix' a system by destroying it, Glass. This law doesn't address ANY of the cost driving factors in our medical system. Those same costs will be around (and increase) when we're all on the government system. [Frown]

--------------------
/weepforthenation

Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'll assume that was meant for me. But do you honestly believe (as I do), that this literally was designed to put an entire sector of the PRIVATE industry out of business? If not, please explain. If so...think about that long and hard.


(yeah, i was reading differnt threads and Relentless had posted in another one)

i don't need to think long and hard. it's obvious.

Obama? I quoted him plainly he said he was going to institute single payer and he was elected on that platform.

The health insurance business has not served the populace. If you look carefully? You will see that the insurance business has simply created a cash cow for the health care pros to milk.

It's a terribly flawed and outdated system, and i can also go back and dig you out a dozen times where i said that i am not a fan of single payer. So be careful what you accuse ME of... I think we need some sort of hybrid sytem where people get Govt provided basic health care and buy insurance for the choice to go to private practice helth care providers that are competing aginst each other for the business of those who can afford it.

IF the GOP had used their 40 block Senate vote to work with the squabbling Dems? They could have had a huge influence over what came out... They GOP will not (IMO) have the votes to get rid of the whole bill in the next decade, so it's here and now and what we have need to be fixed fast.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You don't 'fix' a system by destroying it, Glass. This law doesn't address ANY of the cost driving factors in our medical system. Those same costs will be around (and increase) when we're all on the government system. [Frown]

first off? you are repeating what i said about the bailouts... we don't fix a system by destroying it.

actually? the US is the only country in the industrialised world that does't have 100% Govt run health care.

China would be th enext biggest economy that doesn't have it.. wanna see how bad things can really be? go to China.

you say the Govt will increase costs? That's not substantiated by facts.. Look a the Japanese system...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We have them because they take care of SOME of the people, Glass. They were never intended to take care of ALL the people.

so we already have death panels right?

morally, we do not have the right to pick and choose..

this whole health care argument really does prove that the moral majority is neither moral nor a majority.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Bigfoot
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for The Bigfoot     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SeekingFreedom:
And with all these 'benefits', Big...

...Greece and Belgium await.

[Frown]

quote:
President Barack Obama today sent to Congress a proposed defense budget of $663.8 billion for fiscal 2010.
We have 650Bil available to kill people half a world away and no one bats an eye. 800 Bil to cover the medical needs of nearly 25% of the most vulnerable in our population (mostly elderly) and make sure they have a monthly income stream once retired gets half the country kicking and screaming. Does this not seem just a tad backwards??

quote:

The Obama budget proposes $11.6 billion for the Social Security Administration, an increase of $1.1 billion above the 2009 level of $10.5 billion.

11 Bil in general funds to administrate over 2.5 Trillion in capital and assure monthly payments to nearly 50 Million Americans. "But Big," you say, "Social Security is equal to 5% of GDP and supposed to grow to 6.2% of GDP by 2035! SS could run into defect spending by then!!!" Yes, but that that isn't because of congress stealing funds or whatever new lie is being told. It is primarily because the baby boomer generation will be retiring soon and they are an abnormally large population group statistically speaking. After SS rises to 6.2% of GDP by 2035 it is predicted to be stable or diminish slightly for at least 50 years.


FY 2010 budget for Medicare at 457 Bil
quote:
Medicare is a Federal health insurance program for the elderly and disabled regardless of income and assets. Medicare (as of 2008) covers approximately 35 million people, of whom about 3 million are disabled and some 150,000 are kidney disease patients.
This is who you want to take healthcare away from? The elderly, the disabled, and the diseased? This is who we cannot afford to support?

FY 2010 budget for Medicaid at 290 Bil
quote:
Medicaid is a medical assistance program jointly financed by the State and Federal governments for eligible low-income individuals. Enacted in 1965, Medicaid has become the backbone of this country's health care safety net, providing health coverage for more than 58 million low-income Americans, including families, people with disabilities, and the elderly. Today, Medicaid provides coverage for almost 29 million children and pays for approximately half of all long-term care costs in the United States.
Why does Medicaid cost so much? Take a look at that last line again. Medicare covers HALF of all long term care costs in the USA. Interpret it another way. 50% of all people needing long-term care either never had or lose the resources needed to maintain private coverage. -> 50% <-

Get yourself into a long-term care situation and you are running a one in two chance that the Medicaid will be the only net that saves you from complete and utter destitution. Wonder what would happen to those people if Medicaid weren't there?......hmmmm.....

--------------------
No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues.

Posts: 5178 | From: Up North | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
those are good points BF... when they sold US the war in Iraq? people at my pool league in Lincoln NE were telling me that 80 billion was not unreasonable to go invade Iraq...

now people (whine and) say that the health care bill will cost US a trillion$.. but they fail to add that is over the next decade... hmmm... killing people is only a little cheaper than saving them?

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T e x
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for T e x     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Exactly--people are not "cargo."

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

Posts: 21062 | From: Fort Worth | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SeekingFreedom
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for SeekingFreedom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
(Sigh)

Big, none of that addresses either of my points.

The actual cost(in dollars) of taking care of the poor is irrelevant here. It could be any amount you want to quote. The questions are why is the cost so high and who should pay for it.

This law doesn't even try to address the first and, by default, concludes that the answer to the second is otherwise profitable companies.

If you, Tex or Glass (or anyone else) would be so kind, answer me two little questions:

1) By forcing these companies (instead of the taxpayers) to pay for those that will cost literally tens of millions of dollars to cover, how will this NOT drive them out of business?

And

2) How is forcing the insurance companies out of business going to lower health care costs?

--------------------
/weepforthenation

Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The questions are why is the cost so high and who should pay for it.

LOL.. why are the costs so high? because docotors have never been reigned in until now.

they say that they have to order "extra tests" to protect themselves from suits? they own the labs the test eqpt and get paid to interpret the results..

and? the Constitution protects everybodies right to sue...

who should pay? the same people that are already paying- why is this so hard for you to grasp? we already pay the bills, it's a question of accounting

the insurance companies would still be viable IF they had stepped up a long time ago and reigned in the doctors. heck, they just passed the cost along until we cannot afford it anymore.

the insurance co's screwed themselves out of job already.

they were doomed with or without the bill, it's only a question of when.

the Japanese Govt sets fees, and somehow they manage to deliver good health care to thier country.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
look here:

Conjoined Twins Separated 7 Years Ago at Childrens Hospital Los Angeles Featured in August 2nd People Magazine

LOS ANGELES--James E. Stein, MD, vice chair, Department of Surgery at Childrens Hospital Los Angeles, is featured in People magazine’s August 2nd issue as the magazine revisits a story from 2003 when Dr. Stein led a 60-member medical and surgical team in a rare, highly complex and historic procedure to separate twin girls, Macey and MacKenzie Garrison. In this issue, on newsstands now, People shares how the girls are living – “A Beautiful Life.�??

Surgeons began the nearly 24-hour operation Wednesday morning September 10, 2003, delicately separating a number of the girls' internal organs. When media originally covered this story, the identity of the babies was confidential and the babies were simply known as Baby A and Baby B.


these operations are done frequently.. they cost millions of dollars, you even hear about people coming here form third world countries to get them, and they say the hospitals "donate" the resources and money to do them...

read between the lines... we pay the hospital, and they take the money and use it how they see fit..

they do it every single day for all kinds of lesser procedures for the poor too...

we are already paying alot SF, there is no evidence that we will pay more or less in the future...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Bigfoot
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for The Bigfoot     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh Seek,

There are so many things wrong with your capitalist viewpoint on this.

Look at your arguments. Calling entitlements like Medicaid the future destruction of America on the one hand and defending insurance companies for dropping problem patients on to Medicaid with the other. You are defending a group for taking advantage of a system that you are saying we should get rid of because it costs too much when the reason it costs too much is because it is getting taken advantage of by the groups you are defending. Huh? What?

Insurance is pooling resources to share risk and thereby average costs. In order for insurance to work correctly a maximum number of people from cross spectrum classifications should be involved.

Our private insurance companies have decided they aren't interested in a working system anymore. Over the past decade private insurance premiums have gone up 131% on average. Over the past decade the top ten private insurance companies have reported profit growth of over 250%. Over the past decade the amount of Americans without insurance has risen from 39 Million to 50 Million. Over the past decade the amount of Americans on Medicaid has risen from 41 Million to 58 Million Americans.

Private Insurance companies do not add value. They do not create anything. They are merely the pool. The metaphorical equivalent to a parking garage for our health-care dollars. There is no reason what-so-ever that can justify the actions that have been taken by this industry over the past decade.

Private Insurance will never die as long as there are those with money who want more than the average bear. Let private companies provide upgraded options, but these massive corps do not have the integrity necessary to be allowed to stay the controllers of our general medical payments system.

--------------------
No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues.

Posts: 5178 | From: Up North | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T e x
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for T e x     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Private Insurance companies do not add value. They do not create anything."

yes and no. That is, they are not in business to create safe policies that benefit people. Insurance "products" are merely a way to gather capital to reinvest, to play the market. Outsize gains result in outsize bonuses to the top players, who shed employees when they most need jobs.

I used this in something I wrote yesterday:

quote:
I spoke to a retired Wall Street executive who got out a few years back and set up a small business where he had to make payroll (sobering), but was freed from the debilitating short-termism of financial institutions that, over his career, had become dominated by traders “who look at economic opportunity rather than economic conditions.”

He said the final straw came in 2002. Top executives at the bank where he worked gathered to discuss their bonuses. The issue before them was whether to maintain those bonuses in a time of economic contraction, which would require firing 5 percent of the workforce, or take a 25 percent bonus cut, which would allow those jobs to be kept.

“The guy running the meeting asked for a show of hands on who would accept a reduced bonus,” he said. “There were 30 of us in the room. Three raised their hands. I was one of them.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/opinion/28iht-edcohen.html?_r=1&th&emc=th

Pretty good column...

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

Posts: 21062 | From: Fort Worth | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jordanreed
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for jordanreed     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
...and thats only a reduction in their bonus!...

--------------------
jordan

Posts: 5812 | From: st paul,mn | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
the "requirement" to get insurance will still have to be scrapped unless SCOTUS is even farther gone than i thought.. they are pretty screwed up IMO, and it's not a conservative V liberal screwed up either. It's Federalist screwed up and the conservatives uphold some stupid crap too...


fining people for not getting insurance just don't fly. you CAN give people a credit for having insurance and if they don't? they don't get the credit...

the problem with that is we give the credit to employers now, which means employers provide it and NOT the actual users..

another way that we allowed the sytem to get BLOATED.

tax protected "savings accounts" for health care? what a joke, i save alot of money and i still cannot save the kind of money i need for health insurance....

if we can supply the People with basic health care and emergency services? we will save one heckofalot of money.

screening like for breast cancer and basic blood tests? we could do that in malls for alot cheaper than we pay now....

i have a friend that became a radiologist, she sat at home in her underwear and (online even in 94) read ten to twleve cases per hour... that was 500$ per hour in her undies back then....

i do not wish to ruin Doctors good livings, but the honest truth is that a general practitioner might actually be happier as a GS15 and not having the headaches of running the business...

99K to 129K for 40 hour weeks? that's not bad esp. if you have staff paid on GS wages too...

http://www.fedjobs.com/pay/pay.html


my current docotor (GP) practices in an 8 doctor medical mall.. there are drug reps prowling the halls every time i go in there, my doctor has a sign up saying no reps about half the time i go...

drug reps cost US a ton of money too.. the doctor has to do alot studying to understand what they are selling to US by way of him. Add to that all the people that saw an ad on TV and come in demanding the new chit... "my pp won't work right" [Frown]


drug ads on TV are training people to have symptoms, this is being studeid carefully, and of couse the big drug co's don't want th results to come public..


there's alot of stuff we can do to fix this mess... unfortunately alot of the fix really is socialism,(with a little S not a big s) and as a capitalist, i have a hard time trying to decide what's moral and what's not.. it will take awhile to fix the health care bill, but there's alot of opportunity there..

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Peaser
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Peaser     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Look a the Japanese system...

Amazing debt to GDP too.

--------------------
Buy Low. Sell High.

Posts: 10755 | From: The Land Of The Giants | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
but the Yen is doing so well....

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SeekingFreedom
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for SeekingFreedom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sorry for the delay, busy week.

Big...look at the posts that you, Tex and Glass wrote in response to my questions...

From Glass:

quote:
LOL.. why are the costs so high? because docotors have never been reigned in until now.

......

we are already paying alot SF, there is no evidence that we will pay more or less in the future...

Nothing in this bill attempts to change this. In fact, the supposed Medicare\Medicaid payment reduction (that is supposed to happen each year by law) gets overridden every year by Congress. It is held over the medical community like a guillotine to keep them in line. Once the insurance companies are gone, do you really think that will change?

From your own post:

quote:
Insurance is pooling resources to share risk and thereby average costs. In order for insurance to work correctly a maximum number of people from cross spectrum classifications should be involved.

Our private insurance companies have decided they aren't interested in a working system anymore

I was going to go into a huge schpiel pointing out the miskate in premise there, but Tex beat me to it.

Tex:

quote:
yes and no. That is, they are not in business to create safe policies that benefit people. Insurance "products" are merely a way to gather capital to reinvest, to play the market.
While perhaps more cynical than I would have put it, I don't dispute his evaluation. The insurance comapnies aren't in the business of providing affordable health care. That's a side effect of their business. Their 'job' is to raise capital to invest in other profitable businesses. If you take that source of capital generation away by imposing artificial limits on premium increases (as this law has done), while increase capital drain via forcing them to pay for pre-exisiting condition folks; it is going to cause these companies to leave the business.

Make sure you understand this point clearly, Big. These companies will NOT sit around and let this law bleed them dry. They WILL pull up stake and move on leaving the American people with only two choices: pay the full cost of health care alone, or go on the government programs (medicare\medicaid or some new 'insurance' program run by Big G).

quote:
Private Insurance will never die as long as there are those with money who want more than the average bear.
That only holds so long as the company has the freedom to set their own inlays to offset their outlays. The law removes that freedom and, quite the opposite, imposes higher costs while forbidding them to offset that increase.

This WILL kill the private health insurance industry, Big. Any belief to the contrary is based on willful suspension of the accepted understanding of how business MUST operate to survive.

Finally, one more except from Glass:

quote:
there's alot of stuff we can do to fix this mess... unfortunately alot of the fix really is socialism,(with a little S not a big s) and as a capitalist, i have a hard time trying to decide what's moral and what's not.. it will take awhile to fix the health care bill, but there's alot of opportunity there..
General rule of thumb...destroying private industry is bad.

Increasing government control (as opposed to establishing necessary oversight) is bad.

Doing both and claiming it is helping the public...is worse. [Frown]

--------------------
/weepforthenation

Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Nothing in this bill attempts to change this. In fact, the supposed Medicare\Medicaid payment reduction (that is supposed to happen each year by law) gets overridden every year by Congress. It is held over the medical community like a guillotine to keep them in line. Once the insurance companies are gone, do you really think that will change?

i think you are not really doing any reading on the bill.. cuz the CBO reports that it will cut costs and add more people..

and if the insurance co's go belly-up or leave? the doctors will have to hire lawyers to get paid, or charge people what they can actually afford....


General rule of thumb...destroying private industry is bad.


they did this to themselves. you still cannot tell me why we the taxpayers should take all their unprofitables off their hands just so they can make buck. if they are "just" investment co's? then let them be investment co's and forget the slogans about health care [Wink] it's all just a scam? Is that your point?


the notion that insuracne co's aren't in the business of providing affordable health care. is quite novel...if they actaully did provide affordable health care insurance? this reform would not be happening, cuz it would not have had any supporters anywhere...... sheesh... i know you can pint to polls that say people don't want it, but i do recall the AMA and the AARP endorsed it because they actually studied it, and the people who were against it were listening to the TV and radio news outlets run bythe propagandists... i distinctly remember a few doctors saying they were leaving the AMA after they endorsed it...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T e x
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for T e x     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bigger thumb: raping and pillaging the middle class is not a sustainable business model.

quote:
the notion that insuracne co's aren't in the business of providing affordable health care. is quite novel...
well, it's certainly not cynical, and I question its novelty: anyone who has worked the back-office at a medical provider is well aware of "insurance" companies' stall-stall-stall, deny-deny-deny tactics. Plus, there's plenty of people who have left the industry after watching them screw over people with up-to-date policies who did nothing wrong other than get sick or get in a bad smash-up.

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

Posts: 21062 | From: Fort Worth | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
i've seen the double billing the doctors and hospitals do too...

they send a bill to the insurance co, who is slow to pay and send duplicates to the patient....

the [patient begins seeing late notices, and pays the bill... the insurance co is off the hook.... unless the dumbfounded patient follows it up... many are "too far gone" to do so..


Obams mother was dumped by the insurance co while she was dying... anybody that ths has happened to might develop a less "capitalist" view toward the insurance co...

i do get tired of fighting with *all* the corporate service providers that screw up my bills at times...

the phone co? the natgas? the electric? the cable? i've had runins with all of 'em and it takes a long time to just get human these days, forget getting one with actual power to make decison or even speak good english anymore...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You all really have it out for the doctors dont you. I asked a doctor about his opinion on this health care bill, he said it is not good news. Maybe I should move to Oakland and pretend everything will be ok if we vote (D).

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CashCowMoo:
You all really have it out for the doctors dont you. I asked a doctor about his opinion on this health care bill, he said it is not good news. Maybe I should move to Oakland and pretend everything will be ok if we vote (D).

"have it in"? you're joking right? i have quite a few friends and relatives that are doctors...
some of 'em came out with 250,000$ in student loans to do it, then they get residency and are treated like slaves for a few years.......
there's no other business i can think of where people just pay what they are told to pay...

is that a "freemarket"?

ever hear of a doctor being taken to court cuz they charged too much? why do you think people sue them for so much money when they screw up? cuz they charge whatever thay want...

vote R... it won't be repealed.. fixed maybe... then you'll start to hear about the good stuff that you are losing when the R's repeal them...

got kids? dependants? i assume you don't by the way you post, wait till you have other people to take care of and worry about...

wmost of us feel pretty much like superman at 25.... at 35 reality sets in...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T e x
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for T e x     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
lol, superman...

Ya, I know hospitals overbill, doublebill, etc.

They'll also send a statement to someone for say, half a million--without explanation of the charges.

Simply...Total due: $503,172.43

Please remit by the tenth.

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

Posts: 21062 | From: Fort Worth | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T e x
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for T e x     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Mike, Mike, Mike...

people are *not* cargo:

http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2010/09/17/huckabee-says-no-to-insurance-for-p eople-with-pre-existing-conditions/

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

Posts: 21062 | From: Fort Worth | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
i'm reminded of the Stepehn King story where the politician holds the little kid in front of him to protect himslef from the assassin.....

if insurance is not there for people who need it? what good is it?

this is turning out like the gay marriage thing for me...

i wasn't for gay marriage, i thought we could create a civil union program for gays to enjoy the rights associated with marriage, and it would be good enough....

i thought we should not have single payer, and that we could have a tiered system that thos eof us that want to can buy into...

but the insurance co's make profits by only insuring the profitable peeps, while we taxpayers pick up the bill for the rest...

why do we have private insurance again? so we can subsidize them? i'd LOL but it's not even funny...

i would still prefer to buy insurance so i don't have to wait in line, but i always seem to wait too long WITH my private insurance anyway...


this isn't funny either, but it's true:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiQJ9Xp0xxU

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Peaser
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Peaser     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 


--------------------
Buy Low. Sell High.

Posts: 10755 | From: The Land Of The Giants | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Allstocks.com Message Board Home

© 1997 - 2021 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2

Share