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 » H.R. 3200 Has Convinced Me that ObamaCare is a BAAAD Idea

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: H.R. 3200 Has Convinced Me that ObamaCare is a BAAAD Idea
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Stop drinking the kool aid...red elephant dung or blue donkey piss...it's all a batch of lies designed to mobilize the masses to cheerlead for your respective "TEAMS" without actually paying attention to what is really going on.

KE's thread title that I paraphrased to make mine is the perfect mindset our two party charade of a system was designed to foster.

If you are a "liberal" or you are a "conservative," don't focus on what the talking heads on YOUR side OR on THEIR side are saying about Obama care!

Turn off the CNN/CBS/FOX/ABC/NBC/PBS Tell-a-vision.

Read H.R. 3200 for your damn self!

Supporters of ObamaCare...

Please answer the following criticism's of this bill:

Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!

• Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!

• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)

• Page 42: The “Health Choices Commissioner” will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.

• Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.

• Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.

• Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.

• Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)

• Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.

• Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)

• Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens

• Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.

• Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.

• Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No “judicial review” is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.

• Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.

• Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.

• Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.

• Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll

• Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll

• Page 167: Any individual who doesnt’ have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.

• Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).

• Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.

• Page 203: “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax.” Yes, it really says that.• Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected.”

• Page 241: Doctors: no matter what speciality you have, you’ll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)

• Page 253: Government sets value of doctors’ time, their professional judgment, etc.

• Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries.

• Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.

• Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!

• Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions.

• Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.

• Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies!

• Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.

• Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on “community” input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.

• Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.

• Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.

• Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals.

• Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone).

• Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?

• Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.

• Page 425: Goverment provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.

• Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.

• Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient’s health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.

• Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.

• Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.

• Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.

• Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.

• Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.

This is not about "HEALTHCARE."

It's about the Government unconstitutionally expanding it's power and scope into every possible facet of our lives.

[Exploding]

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  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 
On a quick look at what you've said, your accusations of rationing stand out as the most flagrantly misleading, implying that we don't already ration (and on the worst possible metrics, to boot)

I'll trust others to point out the other holes by which your ship here is sinking (though, really, there are so many that it's easier to point out the handful of twigs that you're clinging to and calling a ship here.)

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  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 
A quick look is about all certain politicians wanted this bill be subjected to. Don't see a problem with anybody raising flags about such a huge issue. It looks like current negotiations are addressing a lot of these points, but will probably yield a useless, expensive, compromise.
Posts: 384 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rightleft22
Member
Member # 2832

 - posted      Profile for rightleft22   Email rightleft22   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Control
Big government wants to control you, kill you
No it big business
No it’s the media
No it’s your mother in law, your wife, your kids…
Everyone has an agenda to screw you Everything ‘they’ say is a lie

Posts: 935 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If everything 'they' say is a lie, are you a member of 'they' also? What does it take to not be a member of 'they'?
Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  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 
I think you need to be Daruma, but sadly that post is already filled.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  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 
Some critics of U.S. health care have some stature:
quote:
To what have we come when Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, is moved to write that the pharmaceutical industry has co-opted “every institution that might stand in its way, including the U.S. Congress, the Food and Drug Administration, academic medical centers, and the medical profession itself” (Angell 2004: xviii); “[C]onflicts of interest and biases exist in virtually every field of medicine, particularly those that rely heavily on drugs or devices. It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine” (Angell 2009; emphasis added).
[Marcia Angell, 2004, The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What To Do About It, Random House; 2009, “Drug companies & doctors: a story of corruption”, New York Review of Books, 56 #1, 15 January].


Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I have experienced this first hand for years as I've wrestled with illness, hob. It's pretty messed up out there.

And we have good insurance.

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 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 
Ah. I see now that this is no actually your understanding of the bill, but an email forward that you've passed along.

Here is a point-by-point critique:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/jul/30/e-mail-analysis-health-bill-needs-check-/

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  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 
Yeah, that's what I want to see, and this point-by-point analyses is golden.

Thank You!

Posts: 384 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah...it was an email I posted...but I did read through the relevant pages to most of the questions and did not find them to be that outlandish of an interpretation.

But not to quibble over details, your linked to response, Pyrtolin, is rather disingenuous...some of the claims your "point by point" article basically admit that the criticisms were accurate, but qualified with "BARELY TRUE," especially pertaining to the most pernicious aspects of this bill with regards to personal freedom - i.e. the National ID card, Government access to a Medical Record Database, the Automatic transfer of funds clause...

But I guess "barely true" is good enough if it means we can have "hope and change" we can all believe in...

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That's a good way to put it. Barely true. Kind of like barely pregnant. [Smile]
Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  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 
They didn't say that the criticisms were accurate per se, but that some of them actually did manage to express the truth but either distorted it completely or could barely be qualified as criticisms because they were highlighting essential reforms that are needed (like the Exchange) There are precious few areas where it actually agrees that a legitimate concern is approached.

And pernicious?

Electronic medical records and insurance information so that there's no need to waste time and risk error constantly filling out charts with the same information over and over and so that you can know right away whether or not any given service is covered. It's possible that you might get an insurance card that helps link you to the information. That's not pernicious, it's absurdly overdue, given modern technology.

Similar for adopting the same kind of infrastructure that Paypal, and number of utility companies and online merchants have been using for years to allow people to make electronic payments. The capability to make direct instant payments hardly qualifies as problematic. And that's just assuming a reasonable implementation. All that the section actually requires is that the insurance companies be able to immediately pay the hospitals and doctors by electronic means, so there's no waiting for the claim to process before the doctor gets paid for it.

They haven't made it yet as far as the bit about government access to records, but the whole thing is so disasterously wrong or misleading up to that point (or simply trying to say that good is bad by
sheer assertion in the few places where it is right) that it's easy to see that that's more of the same. The Government will have about the same kind of access to your records that a file clerk at your hospital does right now. Actually a little less, because there's no warning flag that can be fired off if that clerk decides to go nosing through the drawers or to read the file while copying it, but any reasonably secure database would flag such improper access.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pyrt - what can I say...you trust our Government to be benevolent.

I, on the other hand, have no illusions as to the supposedly good-natured, "it's only in our best interest" arguemnt that we amass all of our records into one database linked to a national ID system for which the Government can than use to track, and monitor the citizenry with.

If you think this is all about "efficiency in providing medical care to everybody!," I say you are severely deluding yourself.

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  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 
I trust the government, which we have some measure of oversight over more than I trust any private entity, much less one that easily stands to profit from the misuse of such records (and, for that matter, needs to profit to maintain the system)

Such a system is needed, hands down. There's just too much information to be tracked to trust to boxes and boxes full of paper records scattered across dozens of offices and file rooms.

So the question becomes who should manage it? A private records company, or the public trust?

This is a question of basic infrastructure, so yes, I absolutely trust public management over private in this arena.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
But what drives people, in general, to work against "the common" good - ie to declare their morals, desires, and ideals to trump other people's morals, desires, and ideals?

IMO, there is no difference between government and private institutions in this regard. People of power use their positions to influence society to benefit themselves.

Government and corporations are not some entity out there, apart from people and society. They are made up of people with biases and opinions about what is right, wrong, necessary, and unnecessary.

Therefore, I fail to see how or why people inherently trust one center of power more or less than any other. Power corrupts, so power needs to be limited, monitored, and corralled.

I'll wager Pyrtolin will say yes, but public officials are limited, monitored, and corralled more than private people.

People like D and me will say there's no difference - they all run amok these days with little to no control by the people.

Those at the very top of power in the world rarely answer to anyone but their peers.

For example, we had Congress voting for the TARP, bowing to their Fed masters over the objection of over 90% of the American public.

How are our government officials any more or less answerable to the populace when they can give the finger to 90% of the country with absolutely zero repercussions?

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

So the question becomes who should manage it? A private records company, or the public trust?

What you fail to recognize, Pyrt, is that in fact the "public trust" is composed of Government officials who are paid off by "private companies" to enact the legislation to benefit themselves.

They are one and the same.

I haven't looked into it...but based on understanding exactly how this country works (corpratist fascism), I'd bet my left leg that there is some corporation or conglomerate of companies that stands to gain a lucrative, non-bid contract to implement this system should the bill pass. They will receive millions upon millions in taxpayer dollars to install the infrastructure, compile and store the data and train healthcare workers on how to use the new system...while the Government officials get to put their noses into this centralized database and pull up any citizen's record at any time and snoop where they do not belong.

If you are blind to the potential use for abuse by a Government official having access to every single citizen's medical records and a national ID card associated with that, you really are being played for a useful idiot Pyrt. And I say that without spite or rancor or intent to insult you.

Fact is, the government officials that want this kind of intrusive power COUNT on people like you falling for and promoting this emotional based appeal...THINK OF ALL THOSE POOR< UNINSURED FOLKS!

[ August 06, 2009, 04:06 PM: Message edited by: Daruma28 ]

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
While I agree with D that there are corrupt plug-ins at all levels and all sides of this issue, leaving well enough alone simply won;t work with health care, because the current situation isn;t well enough and by now too many USA citizens know it.

That aside, it matters little whether it's a guv official or a corp official with that database access, or whether that database is as exhaustive as a government's would likely be, or merely humongous, as your average private insurance database is. (They've sold and swapped to/with each other for decades.)

I beg us to remember, though, that a guv official has different motivations/consequences than a private officer. I prefer an officially ordained incestuous merger of the two than the current secret incest. More accountability in the former than the latter, and accountability is the name of the game.

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Au Contraire, ken, the Government official who has access to our records, also has access to the coercive powers of the Government to wield if he or she so chooses.

We are all familiar with the old "power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely."

I think a centralized database of every single person's private medical records combined with a National ID card are in fact iterations of that absolute power that WILL lend itself to many different variations of exercises of corruption by either party that wields the power.

Just as Obama exercises the executive signing statement powers he once excoriated Bush for unconstitutionally wielding, so too would officials who gain the ability to pry into one of the most private areas of our lives would also find it nearly impossible to avoid doing so.

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Our guv officials lack absolute power, Daruma. That's one of the good things about living in America.

You were doing so good, too, until you invoked unfounded hyperbolic bogeymen.

Just because a government is official doesn;t make his power absolute. Even cops and soldiers don;t have absolute power. Hell, even Cheney ran into barrieirs to his megalomania, much to his chagrin. (Chagrin, in this case, is Kenmeerese for 'Cheney smirk of viciousness'.)

Meanwhile, in the private sector, we have seen of ate and throughout our nation's history, myriad examples of virtually absolute power. At his peak, both Rockefeller and Carnegie, for example, wielded as much power as the POTUS in office at such time.

Bureaucracy is bureaucracy, daruma, and organized crime is organized crime, and both guv and corp are forms of bureaucracy and org crime. Both have their respective strengths and weaknesses, and that is that. To consistently cite guv as the greater power/evil while proclaiming private organizations as the lesser is unsubstantiated dogma.

The very collusion so prevalent between guv/corp shows this to be the case. Why should absolute power stoop to cut a deal with a lesser?

Why, even the Constitution yields on a regular basis.

The will to absolute power is widely spread. To corner the market is to achieve absolute power over same. That is a private industry expression, not a government colloquialism.

Show me a legislator who can get a bill passed as written and I'll show you a rarity. For example, the Patriot Act, passed under extremely rare conditions. Even there, I believe some minor tweaks were made.

Power is built from compromise because it is built from collusion.

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ken, you miss my point here...having every single American citizens private medical records on a single, central database, tied to a National ID Card, is in fact a form of absolute power, that lends itself to providing the opportunity of absolute corruption by whatever Government agents have access to that database.

You wanna see the absolute corruption exercised by absolute power? Look no further than the IRS and it's ability to ignore one of the founding principles of the judicial/criminal justice system...the 'innocent until proven guilty.'

The IRS can also freeze your bank accounts, seize your private property and do all sorts of other things to a person...and in some cases, all done upon a mistake some low level clerk made while doing data entry.

Look at what the IRS can and regularly does do...is it really a stretch to visualize the same sort of abuse of citizen's privacy rights based the access to a central database like the one proposed in this bill?

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Geez Louise, Daruma, are you stupid enough to think I'm stupid enough to miss something so blatantly obvious? I already finessed that concept. Your brief period of actually applying your smarts, rather impressive when you do so rather than rant the tirade du jour, was so uplifting, but oh how disappointing when it fades.

The IRS has had its absolute ass chewed in courts a bunch since it started. But opposition exists and often prevails. A similar effect occurs when megabucked corps throw lawsuit after lawsuit at those who stand in their way. They don't always win.

My message to you, as ever, is: stay off the absolutes. They seem to freeze your brain and lock it in dogmatic frenzy.

I'm NOT discounting the potential for abuse you mention; I;m just saying that government is but ONE way of such abuse happening.

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"I, on the other hand, have no illusions as to the supposedly good-natured, "it's only in our best interest" arguemnt that we amass all of our records into one database linked to a national ID system for which the Government can than use to track, and monitor the citizenry with."

Can you see the severe self-aggrandizement of this statement, D? Not to mention that this is not the position Pyrt claims, and worse, YOU KNOW THIS. But the part of your brain that knows this prefers not to communicate with the part of your brain that makes such paranoid and self-aggrandizing statements as ""I, on the other hand, have no illusions as to the supposedly good-natured, "it's only in our best interest" arguemnt that we amass all of our records into one database linked to a national ID system for which the Government can than use to track, and monitor the citizenry with."

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ummmm ken...Pyrt posted a link of a so-called "debunking" of the list I posted. On that list of "debunking" the areas I find most egregious are in fact that nationalizing of our records into a single database, and the proposal for a national "health" ID Card.

The fact that Pyrt's "de-bunking" website minimized the reality of this legislation as "Barely True" is exactly why I'm "absolute" on this.

No government entity that grows into a monstrous leviathan that consumes our civil rights ever started out that way.

No, it' always starts off with some sort of justification for which people can swallow it without critically looking at the big picture.

Sorry...but throwing the economic arguments of this healthcare proposal, I find the creation of a single governmental bureaucracy given the power and mandate to collect everyone's medical records into a single database to be quite indisidious...and it's not based on partisan politics at all. As I said earlier, I fear a right wing radical having that kind of info on the populace as I do any left winger.

This bill is proposing an egregious violation of the average citizen's privacy...and I WILL be absolutist in opposition to such a measure.

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
SO? I *so* tire of 'but the thread started with...' arguments.

America started with legal chattel slavery. So?

Quit pretending to being reasonable when you're on a rampage, D. When you're exercising your critical faculties critically, I'm among the first to applaud. when you're *not*, however...

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Who's on a rampage?

Did I not present a logical explanation as to why I am opposed to at least what I consider to be the worst aspects of this bill?

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Just a little hypothetical example as to why I am vehemently opposed to any kind of "national medical record database" run by the Government...
Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Did I not present a logical explanation as to why I am opposed to at least what I consider to be the worst aspects of this bill?"

Interwoven with other stuff, yes, including this 'au contraire. thing, which translates into 'I'm right; you're wrong', which is silly when discussing hypotheticals.

Not to mention that I am not Pyrt nor is he me, nor did I cite his remarks or sources. I did make a blanket statement about the overall meaning of these, but that was an attempt to uphold some distinction between what Pyrt actually said/cited and your interpretation of them, and I certainly did not conflate them with my assessment of specific issues that you raise/address, D, particularly the idea that guv power is inherently more vile, more prone to corruption, more capable of monopolizing an arena, than other forms of power.

I was talking to you, D. That's why I use your name or initials thereof: to indicate a direct response. I'm hoping you grasp this basic concept. The snark of that remark is intended to vent my severe frustration with such basic pollution of rhetorical hygiene on your part. Just because some words are on a thread to which we post doesn't mean those words apply to a given point-counter-point. Sure, you are welcome to apply them. Obviously. But to cite them after the fact of a very specifically worded and addressed remark is just plain crazy-making, D. Fact is, I have a fairly high regard for you, and it drives me nuts when you seem to prove that regard unwarranted.

That's my stuff and I suppose I should get over it, and let you be as silly as you like as often as you wish without admonishing you for it.

[ August 07, 2009, 10:19 AM: Message edited by: kenmeer livermaile ]

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
BTW, this massive database is being built even as we speak, and its construction is driven by free market forces at least as much as by governmental decree. Data-mining is a private industry term, not a guv term. This data base, already mostly in place, has been built as much by private industry as by government.

These Orwellian aspects are neither public nor private: they're technological. It's happening because the means to do so are here, and because knowledge is power.

EVERYbody's doing it.

Now I WILL directly reference one of Pyrt's Points: government is held to a higher standard than business. Business must only conform to the law which means it must only prevail in lawsuits entered against it. Guv is held also to the 'spirit of the law'. We *expect* government to act in our interests, because that is government's mission. (Government is not a for-profit enterprise, although it is far too often subverted to that end by its appointed stewards and executives.)

The universality of governance, especially in a democracy of, by, and for the people, does allow for more tyrannical structures to be established. But the basis of that universality means that the government can't shrug its shoulders and say, 'That's a shame but our sworn mission and responsibility is to our stockholders, period', for such a statement is meaningless: EVERYONE owns stock in the government in a democracy.

So, ultimately, neither Pyrt nor I are diminishing the potential for over-arching abuse by guv. For you to suggest this makes you sound like a childish ass, since both my and Pyrt's record and current statements on this thread state otherwise.

We are simply weighing them in balance against the private sector's potential for abuse that is equally damaging if not patently universal in construct.

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"If everything 'they' say is a lie, are you a member of 'they' also? What does it take to not be a member of 'they'?"

To be not 'they', one must do not say. The Silent Aristocracy, I call it: those who remember that, even in politics, actions ultimately speak louder than words.

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  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 
1:50PM EST, Obama in Portsmouth, NH, was just asked by a Republican, "How could private insurance compete against the government?" He sloughed that off easily, by saying the government program is supposed to run... like the post office." This is the wrong question! The problem is, employers will be able to pay an 8% tax penalty for not giving their employees coverage. Many will take that option in a heartbeat. That's how private insurance will not be able to compete.

Bottom line is, this current bill will ultimately lead to a single payer system for that reason. Obama denied at the beginning of this meeting, he wanted to impose a single payer system.

Posts: 384 | Registered: May 2001  |  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 
What Will Progressives, Unions Do Now if Public Option Is Dropped?

Update: Former Gov. Howard Dean said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that if he were a member of the Senate, he wouldn’t vote for a final bill without a public option. But he believes the new signal from the White House about dropping the public option is part of a grand strategy to get the bill through the Senate with centrist Democrats on board. Then he sees the option being reinserted from a House version in a House-Senate conference, and attached to the budget bill, allowing for passage with a reconciliation rule — with just 50 Senators votes needed.

So, the feedback from the Town Hall Meetings is really sinking in, eh?

Posts: 384 | Registered: May 2001  |  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 0rnery:
1:50PM EST, Obama in Portsmouth, NH, was just asked by a Republican, "How could private insurance compete against the government?" He sloughed that off easily, by saying the government program is supposed to run... like the post office." This is the wrong question! The problem is, employers will be able to pay an 8% tax penalty for not giving their employees coverage. Many will take that option in a heartbeat. That's how private insurance will not be able to compete.

How so? If the private companies step up and offer similar rates to the public plan, then those companies would do equally well to give their employees the chance to choose from the private plans as well.

We should get off the employer model and give the tax credits directly to people, but as long as that's not politically doable, the next best option is to give people a wide variety of competitive choices through their employers. And the first step to making them competitive by giving them more areas to compete in than "how much profit can they squeeze out for their investors"

The post office is a great example- UPS, FedEx, and other private shipping services have no problem competing with it, but since it's not profit driven (but must play by the market rules) it prevents them from locking the market in favor of their investors.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pyrt - have you read the actual bill you argue so fervently for?

Or are you just running with the basic idea of universal coverage as a desirable outcome, all of the other aspects of this bill don't really matter?

Are you in favor of a national ID card...a centralized database with every person's private medical records made accessible to government personnel?

Are you in favor of the creation of massive layers of bureaucracy that are featured in this bill to implement this scheme?

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LetterRip
Member
Member # 310

 - posted      Profile for LetterRip   Email LetterRip   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Daruma,

quote:
have you read the actual bill you argue so fervently for?
Not who you are addressing, but I've completely read the bill. I can't say I'm particularly for it, and I've drafted my own bill ideas. I wasn't checking your guide as I went through but I can say from offhand recollection that it is wrong on a number of points that it offers as critiques, it might even be wrong on all or almost all of them.

Ie

quote:

• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)

• Page 42: The “Health Choices Commissioner” will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.

The committee determines what the base/minimal benefits package that can be offered is for a particular copay amount.

Insurers can, and will, offer packages that cover stuff in addition to the base package. They just can't leave out the base package stuff, and can't require more than the specified percentage copay for those items. (There are also certain items mandated as not requiring any copay - specific common health maintenance stuff).

There is also an ombudsman position in addition to the commissioner and committee (there are actually a couple of different committees established for different purposes).

quote:

• Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens

Actually 5 percent of US residents do not speak english.

Since the original source of the quotes is not an honest attempt at criticism but instead an attempt to give false distortions (I don't blame you for it, but whatever source you failed to attribute obviously isn't above lying or has severe reading disabilities)

My biggest problem with the bill is that it is in many parts far too micromanaging, has massive amounts of repetitive boiler plating (which makes it tedious and time consuming to slog through), and essentially leaves everything up to comittees to come to decisions on at some later point.

LetterRip

Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001  |  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 
...the next best option is to give people a wide variety of competitive choices through their employers. And the first step to making them competitive by giving them more areas to compete in...

Instead of this huge piece of legislation, how about revisiting this one?:

Bill Would Allow Consumers to Purchase Health Insurance Across State Lines

“Congressman Shadegg’s bill will create a truly nationwide competitive health insurance market,” noted Tarren Bragdon, director of health reform initiatives for the Maine Heritage Policy Center. “It will empower consumers with a multitude of health insurance options so they can make an educated choice of which affordable plan is best for them and their families.

Posts: 384 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
OpsanusTau
Member
Member # 2350

 - posted      Profile for OpsanusTau   Email OpsanusTau   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

• Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens

I just have to say in regards to this - that would be awesome.
If you've never known or loved someone who couldn't get health care because she couldn't see a doctor because she needed a translator and the hassle was too much for the doctor, you're lucky.

Posts: 3791 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Actually LR, I concede the initial email did take the worst case scenario interpretation on all of it's bullet points...but the points I found most concerting were not.

Pyrtolin's link to debunking the email had to even concede this by using weasel-ly, qualifiying statements of "barely true." It is those things I'M much more concerned about than translator's services for illegal immigrants.

By the way, while I did cut and paste the boilerplage right wing-based chain mail for bullet points, the link I provided was to the actual bill in it's entirety.

I have read it.

I don't find much of the right wing rhetoric to be that much of a distortion to be outright dishonest. Rather, I would call it a very pessimistic interpretation of the jargon heavy language used to craft this bill.

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
IrishTD
Member
Member # 2216

 - posted      Profile for IrishTD   Email IrishTD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
We should get off the employer model and give the tax credits directly to people
Please, yes. TODAY. The tied to employment model must disappear.
Posts: 825 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

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