Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Healthcare Townhell (Page 7)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 10 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10   
Author Topic: Healthcare Townhell
sfallmann
Member
Member # 2148

 - posted      Profile for sfallmann   Email sfallmann   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by threads:
quote:
Originally posted by sfallmann:
quote:
Originally posted by threads:
quote:
Originally posted by sfallmann:
quote:
Originally posted by PSRT:
quote:
Any position opposing the Agenda of the Left in general or those of Obama or Pelosi in particular get you branded a racist or un-American.
And here I thought you were an intellectually honest poster. I guess not.
Please explain how this is intellectually dishonest.
Because it's a sweeping generalization that's not grounded in reality. Honestly, try to present a case that your claim is true. I guarantee that you'll fail. Do you even realize how extensive your evidence would have to be for your generalization to even warrant consideration?
Hmmm...I didn't make that claim. I think Mariner did.

I just wanted to know why PSRT thought it was intellectually dishonest.

So calm down, sparky.

Whoops, sorry about the confusion.

However, your post didn't come across as a "I just wanted to know" post. It came across as a "I don't believe your claim" post (in which case I lump you in with Mariner as a target of my previous post).

I ask for explanations a lot. I find that I am often wrong when I assume what someone meant. I like when someone clearly explains why they are saying something.

Granted. I don't really agree with the claim. But my request for an explanation was sincere, because there's always a chance the explanation may change my mind.

Posts: 396 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sfallmann:
quote:
Originally posted by threads:
quote:
Originally posted by sfallmann:
quote:
Originally posted by threads:
quote:
Originally posted by sfallmann:
quote:
Originally posted by PSRT:
quote:
Any position opposing the Agenda of the Left in general or those of Obama or Pelosi in particular get you branded a racist or un-American.
And here I thought you were an intellectually honest poster. I guess not.
Please explain how this is intellectually dishonest.
Because it's a sweeping generalization that's not grounded in reality. Honestly, try to present a case that your claim is true. I guarantee that you'll fail. Do you even realize how extensive your evidence would have to be for your generalization to even warrant consideration?
Hmmm...I didn't make that claim. I think Mariner did.

I just wanted to know why PSRT thought it was intellectually dishonest.

So calm down, sparky.

Whoops, sorry about the confusion.

However, your post didn't come across as a "I just wanted to know" post. It came across as a "I don't believe your claim" post (in which case I lump you in with Mariner as a target of my previous post).

I ask for explanations a lot. I find that I am often wrong when I assume what someone meant. I like when someone clearly explains why they are saying something.

Granted. I don't really agree with the claim. But my request for an explanation was sincere, because there's always a chance the explanation may change my mind.

I have nothing of substance to add, I just wanted to add another notch to this quote-orgy.
Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sfallmann
Member
Member # 2148

 - posted      Profile for sfallmann   Email sfallmann   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TommySama:
quote:
Originally posted by sfallmann:
quote:
Originally posted by threads:
quote:
Originally posted by sfallmann:
quote:
Originally posted by threads:
quote:
Originally posted by sfallmann:
quote:
Originally posted by PSRT:
quote:
Any position opposing the Agenda of the Left in general or those of Obama or Pelosi in particular get you branded a racist or un-American.
And here I thought you were an intellectually honest poster. I guess not.
Please explain how this is intellectually dishonest.
Because it's a sweeping generalization that's not grounded in reality. Honestly, try to present a case that your claim is true. I guarantee that you'll fail. Do you even realize how extensive your evidence would have to be for your generalization to even warrant consideration?
Hmmm...I didn't make that claim. I think Mariner did.

I just wanted to know why PSRT thought it was intellectually dishonest.

So calm down, sparky.

Whoops, sorry about the confusion.

However, your post didn't come across as a "I just wanted to know" post. It came across as a "I don't believe your claim" post (in which case I lump you in with Mariner as a target of my previous post).

I ask for explanations a lot. I find that I am often wrong when I assume what someone meant. I like when someone clearly explains why they are saying something.

Granted. I don't really agree with the claim. But my request for an explanation was sincere, because there's always a chance the explanation may change my mind.

I have nothing of substance to add, I just wanted to add another notch to this quote-orgy.
ditto
Posts: 396 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
threads
Member
Member # 5091

 - posted      Profile for threads   Email threads   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sfallmann:
quote:
Originally posted by TommySama:
quote:
Originally posted by sfallmann:
quote:
Originally posted by threads:
quote:
Originally posted by sfallmann:
quote:
Originally posted by threads:
quote:
Originally posted by sfallmann:
quote:
Originally posted by PSRT:
quote:
Any position opposing the Agenda of the Left in general or those of Obama or Pelosi in particular get you branded a racist or un-American.
And here I thought you were an intellectually honest poster. I guess not.
Please explain how this is intellectually dishonest.
Because it's a sweeping generalization that's not grounded in reality. Honestly, try to present a case that your claim is true. I guarantee that you'll fail. Do you even realize how extensive your evidence would have to be for your generalization to even warrant consideration?
Hmmm...I didn't make that claim. I think Mariner did.

I just wanted to know why PSRT thought it was intellectually dishonest.

So calm down, sparky.

Whoops, sorry about the confusion.

However, your post didn't come across as a "I just wanted to know" post. It came across as a "I don't believe your claim" post (in which case I lump you in with Mariner as a target of my previous post).

I ask for explanations a lot. I find that I am often wrong when I assume what someone meant. I like when someone clearly explains why they are saying something.

Granted. I don't really agree with the claim. But my request for an explanation was sincere, because there's always a chance the explanation may change my mind.

I have nothing of substance to add, I just wanted to add another notch to this quote-orgy.
ditto
I would have quoted the post that Tommy had quoted but I couldn't resist breaking the chain. Anyways, thanks for clarifying and sorry if I come across as harsh. This subject has become very frustrating for me as I have seen so many claims thrown around that are just plain factually incorrect (I'm talking in general here, not about you). Unfortunately, these lies and cases of severe negligence in maintaining factual accuracy (ex: Palin's spiel about death panels*) have become the focal point of the healthcare debate so many of the legitimate objections to the healthcare bill (of which there are a ton, a bill that long isn't going to be all sunshine for anyone) are ignored. There isn't a compelling reason to address the legitimate objections when the illegitimate ones are much more widespread.

* In case I wasn't clear, Palin may not have been lying (lying=intentionally false statement) but, at a minimum, she was severely negligent in giving a speech containing such a gross inaccuracy.

Posts: 778 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gina
Member
Member # 6372

 - posted      Profile for Gina   Email Gina   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by threads:
* In case I wasn't clear, Palin may not have been lying (lying=intentionally false statement) but, at a minimum, she was severely negligent in giving a speech containing such a gross inaccuracy.

Whether her statement is an inaccuracy is up for interpretation. Obama himself described having a council of health care experts to determine cost-benefit ratios of treatments particularly at the end of life. One man's "cost effectiveness panel" is another man's death panel.

Daily Beast article on the subject today.

Judging from her comments on the disabled, she is probably also reacting to revelations of the eugenicist statements and writings from some of those in the administration such as Rahm Emmanuel's brother, Dr. Ezekiel Emmanuel, and the "science czar" John Holdren. Don't know about you, but I don't want these ghouls anywhere near my health care planning. I'll take the "godless" insurance companies any day over those who discuss eugenics with a sense of righteous, earth-saving zeal.
John Holdren
Ezekiel Emmanuel
More positive view of Emmanuel.

Posts: 476 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sfallmann
Member
Member # 2148

 - posted      Profile for sfallmann   Email sfallmann   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I wish Palin would just shut up and go away for a while.

No matter what she says or does, she's a hindrance at this point.

edited to add: She's probably good for conservative fundraisers, if she kept a low profile.

[ August 11, 2009, 06:28 PM: Message edited by: sfallmann ]

Posts: 396 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
yossarian22c
Member
Member # 1779

 - posted      Profile for yossarian22c   Email yossarian22c       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I know it's a change of subject but if you want to hear a non political health care debate.

NPR - The State Of Things

Posts: 1121 | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Man Gina, I hope nobody ever compares me to my family members to attack me like you attacked Rahmbo. Guilt by association. Jesus said something about punishing the son for the sins of the father... and other people who are unfortunately related to him, right?
Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
0rnery
Member
Member # 398

 - posted      Profile for 0rnery   Email 0rnery   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
punishing the son for the sins of the father...
Posts: 384 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Nice. Assuming that has anything to do with me, or anything to do with what is being talked about, perhaps you could learn what the justification for that is before talking about it.
Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
0rnery
Member
Member # 398

 - posted      Profile for 0rnery   Email 0rnery   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
How about talking about the justification for Gina's concerns?
Posts: 384 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You all do know that "death panels" exist today at every single health insurance provider? Only there, you can't punish them!

Decisions about how much to fight to extend a terminal patient's life is inevitable, regardless of whether its the government or the holy free market running things. Resources are finite.

Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Gina was describing what she thought might be Sarah Palin's justification for spouting off bull**** about the health care bill because two guys on the board covering it supposedly have some shady beliefs. (I actually didn't realize Rahmbo's brother was actually on the bill until I double checked, which is why I made the comment about guilt by association).

But please, as long as you brought it up, enlighten me about "reparations" and "affirmative action".

Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
0rnery
Member
Member # 398

 - posted      Profile for 0rnery   Email 0rnery   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I agree 100%, but it's this bill under the microscope at this point. Maybe folks are skeptical because of the rush to push it through. No part of it will get the benefit of a doubt because of that.


I linked to more than would fit in this thread. Can't imagine what more I could add to that. Oh, perhaps a quote:

there is no legal foundation for compensating the descendants of slaves for the crime against their ancestors...

The impetus towards affirmative action is... to redress perceived disadvantages due to overt, institutional, or involuntary discrimination.

[ August 11, 2009, 09:15 PM: Message edited by: 0rnery ]

Posts: 384 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Maybe. There is almost a month now before its voted on, so obviously the rush is no longer there.

And the second quote. Not exactly the son paying for the sins of the father if its still happening

Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
0rnery
Member
Member # 398

 - posted      Profile for 0rnery   Email 0rnery   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yes, it will get plenty of scrutiny, and cooler heads should prevail. Obama had a decent Town Hall today in Portsmouth, NH. I'm hoping it continues to get picked over very carefully.


It's folks paying for sins they're not guilty of.

Posts: 384 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm not going to argue why I think you're wrong on this thread, but people paying for sins "they're not guilty of" is not paying for the sins of your father, or being grouped in with the things your brother believes.
Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gina
Member
Member # 6372

 - posted      Profile for Gina   Email Gina   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TommySama:
Man Gina, I hope nobody ever compares me to my family members to attack me like you attacked Rahmbo. Guilt by association. Jesus said something about punishing the son for the sins of the father... and other people who are unfortunately related to him, right?

As you've already noted, Dr. Ezekiel Emmanuel is in the administration as health care advisor, not just the brother of the Chief of Staff. How about reading the links before launching into a sermon?

Re. death panels in insurance companies: It's not the same when you have the federal government doing it. It's just not. The government is too powerful, too corrupt, too subject to cronyism, too non-responsive, and once they price out and squeeze the private insurance companies in a regulatory noose, there will be no choice but Uncle Sam HMO for working-class Americans. That seems to be the whole plan. No private insurance company can use the power of the federal government- tax code, President, legislature, judiciary and criminal code- to create new customers for itself and rout the competition.

[ August 11, 2009, 10:22 PM: Message edited by: Gina ]

Posts: 476 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Can you explain why you think that the government is inherently more corrupt and non-responsive than insurance companies?
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well if you blame a guy for his brother's opinion, yes. And no, I avoid blogs and links that are directly contradicted by the next link, like your two about Ezekial [Wink] (ed to ad: written before Gina deleted half her post).

[ August 11, 2009, 10:29 PM: Message edited by: TommySama ]

Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"reparations" ****ing hilarious!


Just before I read that I watched Glen Beck say that Obama is doing all this for REPARATIONS! Absolutely the stupidest, downright ****ing insane idea I've heard so far. OMFG!

KE

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
threads
Member
Member # 5091

 - posted      Profile for threads   Email threads   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gina:
Daily Beast article on the subject today.

The only part of the article that really deals with the actual bill is:

quote:
The section, on page 425 of the bill, offers to pay once every five years for a voluntary, not mandatory, consultation with a doctor, who will not blatantly tell the patient how to end his or her life sooner, but will explain to the patient the set of options available at the end of life, including living wills, palliative care and hospice, life sustaining treatment, and all aspects of advance care planning, including, presumably, the decision to end one’s life.
The shading in of human particulars is what makes this so unsettling. A doctor guided by a panel of experts who have decided that some treatments are futile will, in subtle ways, advance that point of view. Cass Sunstein calls this “nudging,” which he characterizes as using various types of reinforcement techniques to “nudge” people’s behavior in one direction or another. An elderly or sick person would be especially vulnerable to the sophisticated nudging of an authority figure like a doctor.
Bad enough for such people who are lucky enough to be supported by family and friends. But what about the dying person who is all alone in the world and who has only the “consultant” to turn to and rely on? The heartlessness of such a scene is chilling.

Siegel's complaints are puzzling because they aren't relevant to the actual bill. "Nudging" is a concern with all doctor consultations. That's why you're supposed to consult with multiple doctors before making any major medical decision.

Also, the section of the bill that he takes issue with adds coverage for an existing practice. It doesn't do anything to change the practice so Obama's opinion on the practice are completely irrelevant.

quote:
Originally posted by Gina:
John Holdren

A chapter about "population policies" would be incomplete without a discussion of the pros/cons of compulsory abortions, compulsory sterilization and family size limits. The author of that article makes a mistake common with those who are unfamiliar with technical writing; namely, he assumes that describing a possibility implies support of that possibility.
An article in defense of Holdren

quote:
However, to describe these measures is different from advocating them. And in fact, the Ehrlichs and Holdren concluded by arguing that noncoercive measures were what they suppported: “A far better choice, in our view, is to expand the use of milder methods of influencing family size preferences”—such as birth control and access to abortions. In fairness, their text does read as dated today, ripe for quote mining. They were writing in very different times thirty years ago; but even if they were defending these positions then (and they weren’t), that hardly means that they do today.

Posts: 778 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Re. death panels in insurance companies: It's not the same when you have the federal government doing it. It's just not.

The government is too powerful, too corrupt,"

Right, because insurance companies aren't corrupt. Only with the companies you have little way of even knowing.

"too subject to cronyism,"

Ditto

"too non-responsive,"

Oh this one kills me. At least with the government you have FOIA. You can force them to disclose and answer. The insurance company? Not so much. The insurance company doesn't need your vote, and by the time they've denied your claim, they don't care if you never another premium. They've already swindled you.

"and once they price out and squeeze the private insurance companies in a regulatory noose"

Hey, who needs regulation in a field like health care? Lets carry on like today, when insurance companies can deny you vital surgeries on a technicality at the very last minute, and you have zero recourse but a long costly court battle while your health goes down the drain.

Look, where I live you have four different "health funds" you can choose from. They are all in in fierce competition with one another, the government runs none of them, but funds them all through a mandatory payment that, in my case, is around $25 a month. I go see the doc when I want, get seriously discharged meds if I need them, and the system by and large works. Is it flawless? No. There are fights every year over which drugs get covered and which not. Life ain't perfect, but it's much, much better than what more than 50% of Americans get.

Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gina:
So much heat trying to decipher an offhand, incoherent comment from Nancy. Goodness. Her point, that the protests are not genuine but astroturfed, is so ludicrous that it hardly merits such debate.

I think that mostly boils down to it being the cloeset approximation from existing terms that describes the Tea Party movment. No a politician isn't paying people to be there, but Fox News managed to go one better by fabricating its significance to the point that it became a self fulfilling prophecy. The payment wasn't direct to the participants here, but in the form of free publicity and a heck of a lot of lent political capital that bypassed the grassroots phase, during which it would have withered into obscurity on its own, and dropped into place a fully constructed movement.

Astroturfing isn't right. Sodding would be more accurate.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sfallmann
Member
Member # 2148

 - posted      Profile for sfallmann   Email sfallmann   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There's only one federal government and many insurance companies. If an insurance company is corrupt, people can go to other insurance companies.

I understand it's not as simple as that. Some people don't have choices. But there are ideas out there on how to address this problem.

I'm not so sure about your claim of vital surgeries being denied at the last minute. I'm not saying it never happens. But is it widespread? Is it standard operating procedure or isolated f**kups. Because that makes a huge difference.

My wife got sick at the end of her pregnancy last year and required blood transfusions weeks before the birth. She's had a three operations since then, more blood transfusions and iron infusions.

My son was born premature and had be in a NICU for 10 days after his birth. In the past year he's had hernia surgery, tubes for his ears, hospitalized for RSV, diagnosed with mild CP which has required an MRI and many different doctor visits.

I pay about $450\month (through my employer) for coverage. I have United Health Care. I capped out on Out of Pocket expenses (6K) last year. But the cost of the care we got was close 80K. We are still paying some of that off. The doctors and hospitals allow you pay off over time.

I never had a problem with the insurance company.
Anytime there's been any conflict my wife made one phone call to clear it up. Added all up I paid 10K for care that cost 8 times that amount. And so far this year is amounting up to be the same. I am glad I had the insurance I did. It was expensive, but my family got the care they needed when they needed.

Are there horror stories? Sure. I don't believe they are systematic.

Do some insurance companies suck? Sure. But the answer is to fix our healthcare system to allow people to have more choice not just one.

If health insurance was like car insurance we wouldn't have as much problems. There would be control of your own care, and lots of competition.

For people with preexisting conditions that can't get care - that's where the government can step in. This way insurance companies can operate properly and governments role is limited to helping those who cannot get help any other way.

As for the poor, there should be a sliding scale subsidy to assist with purchasing their own insurance. Being poor doesn't mean you don't know how to take care of yourself and that you can't be responsible.

And as far as comparisons to other countries, they are false. Many countries have smaller populations concentrated in denser areas with a homogeneous population. The US is very different.

Posts: 396 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I go see the doc when I want, get seriously discharged meds if I need them, and the system by and large works.
That sounds like a good system, and pretty much what I have. My former employer pays so much per month, covering major costs, and I get a choice of half a dozen health plans which may require additional premiums or fees depending on how much coverage they offer. But I have no idea what you mean by "seriously discharged meds." Even with Google, the only thing I found was seriously discharged batteries, and you are not RickyB the Robot.
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by KnightEnder:
Just before I read that I watched Glen Beck say that Obama is doing all this for REPARATIONS! Absolutely the stupidest, downright ****ing insane idea I've heard so far. OMFG!

How about this priceless little bit:

"People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in
the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this
brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially
worthless."

The editors eventually caught up with that and removed it from the editorial that it was in, but it stands as a priceless example of the misinformation being pushed.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by sfallmann:
There's only one federal government and many insurance companies. If an insurance company is corrupt, people can go to other insurance companies.

And yet the current government health care system (Medicare) rates 20% higher in customer satisfaction than the best private one.

quote:
I pay about $450\month (through my employer) for coverage.
That's a critical difference- you're not an individual customer. The companies can't play the cames with you because they have to take you as part of the risk pool from the employer.

You are actaully highlighting aone of the problems here. People without an employer based plan don't have any such protection and are milked for every penny because they're basically a risk pool of themselves. One of the key provisions of any of the bills on the table is to make the entire population one risk pool so that the companies can't play such divide and conquer tactics- everyone gets the same gaurantee of service that is now only reserved for those with employer based plans.

quote:
Are there horror stories? Sure. I don't believe they are systematic.
Your evidence is based on personal experience with the end of the system that's almost functional, but even then, you're limited to just the companies that your comany contracts with for choices and if you ever leave them (especially if you're laid off or otherwise facing unemployment) you're in a very tight spot for ongoing coverage.

To counter with another anecdote, a friend of mine with very good coverage recently hurt his ankle. After treating it himself failed, he called his insurance company's nurse hotline to verify his best treatment options.

They told him to go to the ER.

He asked about the Urgent Care clinic across the street from him.

They said that treatment there wouldn't be covered.

At the ER, the nurses and doctor told him that this kind of injury was better suited for an Urgent Care clinic and were pretty appaled that his insurance required him to tie up ER resources at about three times the cost of a clinic visit.

quote:
And as far as comparisons to other countries, they are false. Many countries have smaller populations concentrated in denser areas with a homogeneous population. The US is very different.
While those facts are truem they're completely irrelevant to healthcare. In fact, they're factors that should tend to make US care cheaper, not more expensive- a larger pool of people, less crowding better genetic mixing.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What does better genetic mixing have to do with health care? One of the big problems with the US health care systems is that many people pay zero for their health care. The rest of us get screwed...
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Did you watch Obama's Town Hall? It was staged, even more so than I thought it would be. The second person "randomly" selected to ask a question was a young girl called Julia Hall from Malden MA. Julia read the following question off a piece of paper: "As I was walking in I saw a lot of signs outside saying mean things about reforming healthcare. How do kids know what is true and why do people want a new system that can help more of us". Awww, cute. And all those mean people scaring her - and presumably everyone else.

Julia's mother is Kathleen Hall, she was sitting right next to Julia during the meeting. Kathleen has donated thousands of dollars to Obama - enough so that she had previously met Michelle Obama, the Obama daughters Sasha and Malia and Joe Biden. Kathleen's facebook page lists a cornucopia of Democratic insiders as friends.

Obama said: “I don’t want people saying I just have a bunch of plants in here.” Yeah ... transparency ... hope and change! This was nothing but a staged event, there was nothing even remotely true about it. Using children like this is pretty poor too.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lobo:
What does better genetic mixing have to do with health care? One of the big problems with the US health care systems is that many people pay zero for their health care. The rest of us get screwed...

Lower gene pool diversity links pretty strongly to increased health problems. It's not a big difference in this case, but what difference it does make favours non-homogenous populations.

Your other point is somewhat tangiential, and what grain of truth it contains has been oversimplified to the point of absurdity.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hey, if you say it was staged and you have all that PROOF then it must have been! I definitely take your word over the presidents. Case closed.

Edited to add: But since Bush used to not allow ANYONE that wasn't a Republican into his "Townhall meetings" how did that guy with the gun and the sign saying the blood of tyrants and patriots needs to be spilled get in? I guess the Dems just aren't as good at staging meetings? At least that little girl that you accused of fraud didn't ask "Mr. President Obama, sir, how can we help you? And does it frustrate you that all these Republicans are so mean?"

KE

[ August 12, 2009, 08:56 AM: Message edited by: KnightEnder ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sfallmann
Member
Member # 2148

 - posted      Profile for sfallmann   Email sfallmann   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The notion that having people in closer proximity to any hospitals or healthcare facilities and genetic similarities is irrelevant is absurd.
Your logic is backwards. Genetic diversity increases the types of problems and diseases that can occur across the population. Japan, for example, doesn't have to worry about sickle-cell.


Overcrowding is only a problem if you don't have enough space. How do you make more space? Build another hospital.

As for your friend, why would he call the insurance company's nurse hotline? I would have went to my primary care physician. I can't imagine anyone I know calling the insurance company's nurse hotline. Would anyone else here have called the insurance company first? That sounds odd.

I agree that I am not an individual customer. I'm all for breaking care from being part of your employment package.

I should have been clearer when I said "If health insurance was like car insurance we wouldn't have as much problems. There would be control of your own care, and lots of competition"

The implication there was that you would control it and it wouldn't be tied to employment. I'm sorry I didn't make that clearer. Clarity is something I need to work on before I post.

Posts: 396 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sfallmann
Member
Member # 2148

 - posted      Profile for sfallmann   Email sfallmann   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by KnightEnder:
Hey, if you say it was staged and you have all that PROOF then it must have been! I definitely take your word over the presidents. Case closed.

Edited to add: But since Bush used to not allow ANYONE that wasn't a Republican into his "Townhall meetings" how did that guy with the gun and the sign saying the blood of tyrants and patriots needs to be spilled get in? I guess the Dems just aren't as good at staging meetings? At least that little girl that you accused of fraud didn't ask "Mr. President Obama, sir, how can we help you? And does it frustrate you that all these Republicans are so mean?"

KE

The guy didn't get in. He was outside.
Posts: 396 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vulture
Member
Member # 84

 - posted      Profile for vulture   Email vulture   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
Originally posted by KnightEnder:
Just before I read that I watched Glen Beck say that Obama is doing all this for REPARATIONS! Absolutely the stupidest, downright ****ing insane idea I've heard so far. OMFG!

How about this priceless little bit:

"People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in
the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this
brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially
worthless."

The editors eventually caught up with that and removed it from the editorial that it was in, but it stands as a priceless example of the misinformation being pushed.

Ah, you couldn't make it up, could you.

Just passing to note that in response to the stuff being spouted about the NHS by Americans in the healthcare debate, #welovetheNHS has suddenly sprung up as the #1 topic on twitter [Smile]

Posts: 1768 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh, well good job Dems. [Smile] That proves it.

KE

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Screwing" "Dick size contest" is there something you want to tell us, Lobo?

KE

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah, if you have a bunch of different crops of corn and a blight hits one of the strains and wipes it out it proves that it would have been much better to just have one of the strains that was resistant to that particular bug or whatever. Oh, wait, what if 'that' was the strain that got hit? Then you would have no corn? I'll have to think logically about this.

Whatever the fact I damn sure don't want any of that brown corn mixing with my white corn. Strain Purity is important! Does the white corn ever get Sickle Cell Anemia?

KE

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gina
Member
Member # 6372

 - posted      Profile for Gina   Email Gina   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TommySama:
Well if you blame a guy for his brother's opinion, yes. And no, I avoid blogs and links that are directly contradicted by the next link, like your two about Ezekial [Wink] (ed to ad: written before Gina deleted half her post).

Good grief. I did not delete anything, I added several things, and I put the other link in to give a balanced perspective.

Rahm Emmanuel was never the point. So I'm not "blaming" him for anything, my whole beef is with the eugenicists on Obama's team, Holdren and (perhaps more arguably) Ezekiel Emmanuel.

Posts: 476 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gina
Member
Member # 6372

 - posted      Profile for Gina   Email Gina   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
Originally posted by Gina:
So much heat trying to decipher an offhand, incoherent comment from Nancy. Goodness. Her point, that the protests are not genuine but astroturfed, is so ludicrous that it hardly merits such debate.

I think that mostly boils down to it being the cloeset approximation from existing terms that describes the Tea Party movment. No a politician isn't paying people to be there, but Fox News managed to go one better by fabricating its significance to the point that it became a self fulfilling prophecy. The payment wasn't direct to the participants here, but in the form of free publicity and a heck of a lot of lent political capital that bypassed the grassroots phase, during which it would have withered into obscurity on its own, and dropped into place a fully constructed movement.

Astroturfing isn't right. Sodding would be more accurate.

Oh yes, the President doesn't try to use free publicity to promote his policies. Never. And heaven forbid that the other side should be presented by a few lonely voices.

Liberals are engaging in wishful thinking with all this "fake grassroots" talk. They interpreted the 2008 election results to mean "the end of the right," and are choosing now to ignore the polling that shows a push-back to the President's hard-left lurch. That is what is going on here.

Posts: 476 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 10 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
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 | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1