curmudgeon's tags:
Who's reading curmudgeon (60):

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090811/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_health_care_overhaul

Apparently the shouters and booers didn't show up to President Obama's latest propaganda dog and pony show - ooops that's town hall meeting. Funny thing - the crowd was carefully screened by the Secret Service beforehand. When the President's personal guard  investigates you, knows your name, your address, your family members, where you work, etc,  when the White House staff has issued a memo seeking information on people critical of its healthcare proposals (that's "fishy emails" to you dems), when Federal security services - led by paranoid liberals - have labeled conservatives, opponents of abortion, gun rights advocates, anti-illegal immigration groups, former members of the military, for crying out loud, as threats to national security,  are you honestly going to rip the President a new one in public? Nah, no possible causal connection there. Great journalism there, AP!

Looking to calm people over the notion that the government option is not a precursor to single-payer (even though Obama has in the past advocated this very thing), Obama likens the "government option" to the Post Office:

"He also disputed the notion that adding a government-run insurance plan into a menu of options from which people could pick would drive private insurers out of business, in effect making the system single-payer by default.

As long as they have a good product and the government plan has to sustain itself through premiums and other non-tax revenue, private insurers should be able to compete with the government plan, Obama said.

"They do it all the time," he said. "UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. ... It's the Post Office that's always having problems."

Gee, Mr. President, if the Post Office is always "having problems," and your government insurance option is like that, do we really really need to invest huge sums of money we don't currently have to fund yet another problematic program? Aren't medicare, medicaid, the veterans administration, the public health service, the DoD healthcare operations, the Congressional healthcare plan and all the other Federal departments of health problematic enough?

Few people die from a postal service with problems. People WILL die untimely deaths if the government option turns out to be an inefficient, corrupt, inequitable operation as bad as some of our public school systems. Your likening the government option to the Post Office really does not inspire me with a whole lot of confidence.

What might change my mind is if you and every other supporter of the government option in Congress and the Senate will make a legally binding promise to be the first enroll yourselves in this program. None of you ever will, though, because though you proclaim that you know what's best for the American People, you well know what is better for yourselves - "Cadillac" insurance policies paid for by our tax dollars.

Somehow I bet your health benefits won't be taxed, either.



del.icio.us Digg reddit StumbleUpon

Comments

  • sheltercrow said on Aug 11, 2009....
    "Apparently the shouters and booers didn't show up..."

  • sheltercrow said on Aug 11, 2009....
    More...

  • Twylarants said on Aug 12, 2009....
    Obama completely miscalculated the intelligence of the American people if, in fact, he ever thought we had any intelligence at all.
    His speech at the town hall meeting was noteworthy only for what it didn't say.  He's slick enough to skate all around a question without really answering it.
    As for the question of single payer health care, the president, whom we all know has touted it since his days in the Senate, gives a non-answer when asked about his support :
    "The transition would be too disruptive."
    Ok...so that's a no? A yes?
  • curmudgeon said on Aug 12, 2009....
    Shelter - thanks. Did Kostric shout or boo at the President? If not, why post this video? I do not watch Chris Matthews, Olbermann or any of the other hacks who seek out the least articulate people and hold them up as representative of the conservative movement. The reporting on what went on inside had it that the crowd was mostly favorable to the Obama position. Obama had to ask for skeptical questions. As if his staffers had nothing to do with that!

    Apparently they were mostly outside. Funny - your second link homes in on conservative loudmouths but shoots the libs from across the street. What point is the camera operator trying to make by skewing his footage?

    Twyla - indeed! Obama undermines himself in front of a home crowd!! Just think of how he would handle someone who could actually make a clear case against his proposals.
  • ALIENated said on Aug 12, 2009....

    Chris Mathews is a mouthpiece for a major corporation, G.E., that is most likely foaming at the mouth when it comes to the federal government taking the burden of healthcare off their plate. Talk about a corporate handout. How can anyone trust a word an MSNBC corporate lapdog has to say? How can anyone trust a word the president has to say when he has a record -- audio and video record -- that contradicts what he is saying today? I appreciate what he is trying to do, but I loathe the way he and his party is trying to do it. On record he says he wants to develop a plan with everyone's involvement, but that just is not happening. He is not even involving Republican congressmen/women, let alone The People. Even if the Democrats / Socialists have the best of intentions, they are trying to take over a large segment of our economy and replace it with federal control. Even if the legislation is written with the best of intentions, it is obvious that every paragraph can be interpreted in more than one way and future politicians and beaurocrats WILL interpret it in the most advantageous way for The System and the most disadvantageous way for The People. That is the history of the other Systems (Medicare, VA, etc.) that you mentioned. If the government built half a dozen airplanes that crashed, why on earth would you step on board a seventh government-built airplane with all your family and neighbors? The founders of this country did spill blood over this sort of thing -- taxation without representation. Democrats presently have control because people like Chris Mathews and his corporate puppetmasters put them there. They DO NOT represent the majority of Americans in spite of the temporary insanity that put them there. Mr. Obama had a unique popularity that he could have used to do good, but he chose instead to do evil -- seize control of a major part of our economy. (Just try to imagine how you (Democrats) would have felt if George Dubya had tried to do something of this scale.) That fits better with the claims of him being a socialist than his claims of CHANGE. The healthcare system will be like the Post Office? I use the Post Office to mail a few bills every month and little else. When do Post Office beaurocrats make any decisions about things that may affect my quality and length of life? This can only end two ways: the legislation will pass or it will not pass. If it passes, The People will immediately rally to throw out those who currently misrepresent us and Republicans will begin the long and arduous task of removing this legislation before it lives up to its monsterous potential. If it fails, the Democrats will go back to the drawing board and pretend to come up with something different, but, most likely, it will be a warmed over dish that is just as poisonous. (I would not support this level of government expansion even if Republican had been involved.) The question will be: do The People have the strength to fight it a second time? God help us if they do not because passing this kind of legislation will only open the door to more and more government control by this Socialist president. If common sense loses on this issue, how can it prevail on future and lesser issues? Mr. Obama came to office with almost no experience. His first major experience as president should guarantee him that fucking over The People is NOT a good thing to do. As I have said before, no matter how well intentioned these saintly Democrats may be, how long before an evil Republican takes office again and uses this well-intentioned legislation to promote his/her evil? That is the primary reason to limit government. You never know who is going to be governing you tomorrow. Democrats went ballistic when the Department of Homeland Security was created to protect us against our evil enemies. Why do they now support a government agency that would even know their bank account number and could make life and death decisions for them? That does not sound like the Post Office to me.

  • secretlife said on Aug 12, 2009....
     
    I'm enjoying the town halls.  I just wish there was less chicago politics and more letting the american people SPEAK UP.
     

     

     
  • Twylarants said on Aug 12, 2009....
    Couldn't Sebeilius manage to look more bored?
  • secretlife said on Aug 12, 2009....
    don't you just wish the water would rise another 2 feet?
  • Twylarants said on Aug 12, 2009....
    I get more annoyed each time I see this video on the news because of that moment when Sebelius makes a side comment to Specter and a smirk appears on her face.
    I saw the same smirk on Obama's face during his town hall when a young girl mentioned the "mean" signs carried by protesters outside the meeting. "I've seen some of those signs", smirk, long pause to let the utter stupidity of the opponents of his grand scheme sink in.
    He's trying to out-slick Slick Willie Clinton.
  • porcelain said on Aug 12, 2009....

    I don't consider the subject matter humorous, but my mother is a postal worker and a HUGE Republican. I wonder if she has heard of this comparison. She has nothing pleasant to say about Obama, the latest healthcare reform or the post office...not that I can blame her. Her salary has gone down every year for the last three years. She is losing three thousand dollars this year alone.

  • noparty said on Aug 12, 2009....
    Most of you are really opposed to the democratic plan.  I don't like the public option because the government cannot manage squat.  11 trillion debt douses that aspect of health care, but I do have some questions for you.  The only one what has given answers to most of my questions is Alien.  How would the rest of you answer these;
     
    Why does the cost of health care go up much higher than the rest of the CPI every year?
     
    What do you tell a person who has cancer  and cannot afford the latest medicine because the insurance calls it experimental, or worse drops them from coverage altogether?
     
    What do you tell someone who can't get insurance because of a pre-existing medical condition?
     
    What do you tell owners of a small business who say they cannot afford health insurance for their employees, so they lay some off?
     
    I had a kidney stone blasted, one night in the hospital.  Bill was 7,000 dollars and that did not include the doctors part.  Why was that so expensive?
     
    Do we need health care reform?  How would you accomplish it? 
     
    I am not being argumentative, I would like to hear your thoughts on these.  My wife and I are currently paying a thousand dollars a month in health care premiums.  We are two years away from Medicare.
     
  • ALIENated said on Aug 12, 2009....

    Insurance has caused the problem. If you go out to dinner, you eat a reasonable amount and keep your costs down. If you go to an all you can eat restaurant, you try your damnest to eat all you can eat (I know I do, which is why I now stay away from those places). Another example. I had a dental procedure that cost around $1400. My insurance paid everything between $100 and $1000, I think it was. So I had to pay $500. The lady that lived next door had the same procedure done with the same dentist except she had no insurance. She paid $500 ... period. So part of the answer about why healthcare costs are going up is because the insurance pays for it. If they had not started this whole insurance deal, there probably would not be a problem. The thing the government should be doing is setting up guidelines for reasonable charges. I think the insurance companies are doing some of that now. They tell doctors they will only pay so and so for such and such a treatment. Of course, I had something done that required anesthesia and the insurance would not cover the last 15 minutes that the anesthesiologist charged. It was not that much so I just paid it. The lesson was not to sign those papers that say you will pay anything the insurance company refuses to pay. I bet you they could appoint a bi-partisan panel that could come up with some good things the government could do, but that is not Obama's intention. He is using this to seize control of various areas of our economy. His goal is Socialism. Pure and simple. Otherwise, why would he be pushing such a horrible process?

  • secretlife said on Aug 12, 2009....
    noparty:  i think there are many ways to improve healthcare as it exists today in our country.  however, i do not agree with coming up with a whole new system of healthcare when 95% of americans have healthcare and it's GOOD healthcare----it just costs too much.
     
    There are lots of smart people in this country and there's been lots of discussion on ways to make healthcare better or to truly reform the system.  what people resent about obama i believe, is that he pushes these ideas at the public---these aren't small changes, they're huge---yet he's always in a hurry.  i don't know about you, but if a lawyer advised me not to bother reading the contract, or rushed me the way this president is ALWAYS in a rush, i'd fire that lawyer's ass and know for sure he was a crook.  what's the rush obama?  afraid the american people WILL READ your bill and be able to read between the lines and ask questions you aren't prepared to answer?  He does not inspire trust.  And i believe nothing he says.
     
    here's one blog that has some interesting ideas that have been discussed on how to make healthcare better.  anyone with a REAL interest in America would be willing to slow down and actually REFORM one thing at a time-  honoring what we have now, and working to make it better for ALL in the future.
     
     
     
     

    Posted on Monday, July 27, 2009 5:36:54 AM by Halfmanhalfamazing

    Change the tax code. Level the playing field by allowing employees to have the same tax deductibility rules as employers, which would make it possible for the employees to buy employee-owned health insurance accounts. People would then make more prudent choices, because it would be their money and not their employer’s money.

    Reduce costly government mandates and regulations. Just look at Medicare and Medicaid. The more the government tries to control costs with mandates and regulations, the more costs go up and the quality of care goes down.

    Allow the purchase of insurance across state lines. This one is more controversial, because the states are vastly different concerning mandated coverage and insurance regulations. But it is worth exploring for the sake of enhanced competition.

    Expand Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). These accounts are available at most banks and allow you to save money tax-free for current and future health care expenses. But as usual, the government has set stupid limitations and regulations that discourage their use. One of the best features of the HSA is that money not spent from the account in a given year can be carried over to accumulate an emergency health care fund that you control. Imagine that. You control the money and not the government!

    Support Retail Health Clinics. Wal-Mart and Target are opening health clinics in many of their stores. They are doing it despite some opposition from state bureaucrats and objections from some health professionals. These clinics are not hospitals, but they provide convenient and affordable basic services to millions of people. The clinics are staffed with medical professionals, and of course these retailers know that most people will fill their prescriptions in their stores and pick up some other items before they leave. So what?

    Implement Tort Reform. When it costs doctors an average of $250,000 for malpractice insurance, something is wrong. This is driving a lot of doctors away from medicine and out of small towns that cannot generate this kind of medical ante. People's legal rights need to be protected, but not to the extent that it eliminates health care in some areas altogether.

    Provide Vouchers for the Working Poor and Chronically Ill. Brilliant! It is the same principle as providing food stamps for the people who need help buying food. Just like we would not ration food to make sure we feed the poor, we should not ration health care to take care of those who do not have it. Fix the "leaks” in the roof.

     

    This is the link to the discussion --->


  • getmeouttahere! said on Aug 12, 2009....

    I find myself in the untenable position to want neither socialized medicine or the health care system that we currently have.

    28 years ago I discovered that I had double inguinal hernias. Terrified at the prospect of being butchered, as my father was 17 years earlier, by incompetent American surgeons, I looked for and found an alternative. The Shouldice Hernia Clinic in Thornhill Ontario is the only hernia specialty hospital in the world and the only hospital that gives its patients a lifetime guarantee. At the time, it also cost one third the price of an operation in the US and was completely painless. Recovery time was an unheard one week and my stay at the clinic felt more like a vacation than a trip to the hospital. Incidentally, one of the 7 Americans doctors who were at Shouldice have their hernias repaired told me that he was scared stiff to have one of his colleagues get their hands on him back home.   

    While I was there, I also learned about the inadequacies of the National Canadian system. One fellow from New Brunswick had waited 5 years for an ok to have his hernia repaired and he was still waiting when he decided to come to Shouldice and pay for the repair himself. I heard several other nightmare stories while I was there that convinced me way-back-when that if socialized medicine didn't work in Canada, it would be a complete disaster when the greedy pigs south of the border got their claws into it.

    In regard to the "free market" system that the brain-washed idiots in the states think is the best thing since apple pie, it is actthe albatross that the average American must bear that keeps him in constant debt.  Let's face it, if a family of 4 is grossing $120,000 a year, and few American families are, then these people are actually netting more like $72,000.

    All one has to do is the math and one can see that the average expenses ( the cost of raising two children, paying off an inflated mortgage, keeping a house in reasonable shape, paying property taxes, buying and maintaining 2 automobiles, purchasing food and clothing, handling insurances for the car and home, utilities, cable tv, entertainment and recreation---little league costs parents over $200 a year) are more than that family can handle without spending $1,000 a month on health insurance. Is it any wonder people are going broke? The only way anyone can handle such a debt load is to borrow, borrow, borrow.

    The problem with "free marketing" is that it is more like a never-ending treadmill that is far from free. I know that the corporatists who run it have usurped the name capitalism, but in my humble opinion, corporatism resembles fascism more than it does capitalism. The only people who believe in this system that are actually free are the dictators on the top, much like Germany after the rise of Hitler.

    In America of 2009, Eisenhower's 1959 military, industrial complex has gained complete control of America's mind by using techniques that it learned from Joseph Goebbels and have convinced the American people that getting screwed is better than being the one doing the screwing.

    So, what's the solution if neither socialism or the free market will work to fix our broken health care system? Sadly, there is none. No matter what these corrupt people propose, whether from the Democratic or Republican party, the result will always be the same, more corruption.

    So, my advice for those of us who are financially able and intellectually gifted? Search the world for adequate healthcare. The truth is, no one country handles every disease better, or worse, than any other. There are many diseases that I would rather farm out to foreign healthcare than rely on the American medical facilities, and my hernias were just one of them.

    Unfortunately In order to do this, one can't rely on nationalized healthcare or private insurance because neither will pay for healthcare that's given outside of the country. And therein lies the problem. To get adequate care, it must be out of pocket. But fear not. Often, such care is much cheaper than in the states, which might not offer it in the first place. Good luck.   

  • sheltercrow said on Aug 13, 2009....
    Re: "Did Kostric shout or boo at the President? If not, why post this video?"

    The sign says it all. I'm from NH of course. There are many of us loonies up here. Open carry for firearms is debatable until it comes to your community. Having seen the nature of the hicks behind the guns here I consider them a problem looking for conflict. Liberty and all that rubbish they spout is pure nonsense once you engage them face to face.
  • sheltercrow said on Aug 13, 2009....
    Re: "Funny - your second link..."

    Just to show that there were protesters. Nothing more. You have to remember that most of NH is hick country.
  • sheltercrow said on Aug 13, 2009....
    Re anal-cyst: "He is not even involving Republican congressmen/women..."

    Probably a good reason.

    From Grassley Endorses "Death Panel" Rumor: "You Have Every Right To Fear"

    One of the three Republican senators working on a bipartisan health care bill perpetuated a particularly outrageous untruth about the legislation on Wednesday.

    Appearing at a town hall in his home state of Iowa, Sen. Chuck Grassley told a crowd of more than 300 that they were correct to fear that the government would "pull the plug on grandma."

    Here's the knucklehead live...

  • curmudgeon said on Aug 13, 2009....
    shelter - in your second video, is it not possible that the pro-healthcare reform folks across the street were just as fat, loud, obnoxious and ignorant as the protestors shot in closeup? That is the problem with skewed footage.

    getmeouttahere: your argument actually favors the real free market - simple fee for service with medical decisions and financial transactions handled between doctor and patient. Third party control only adds to costs and really do little to achieve fairness in the system. Even in the UK and Canada the rich can obtain superior health services than those stuck in the system. What will be the difference here?

    noparty - will respond to your questions shortly.
  • ALIENated said on Aug 13, 2009....

    Food for thought:

    * Why are illegal immigrants covered by Obamacare?

    * Why would anyone want beaurocrats making life and death decisions for them?

    * What has government ever improved (welfare, post office, Medicare, VA) and caused prices to go down?

    * If Republicans under George Bush had proposed this takeover of America's healthcare system, would you want to see it passed?

    You can look at the legislation point by point and spin an answer several ways. The bottom line is, government should not be given this much control over our economy and our lives. Most Democrats / Socialists read it and interpret every point in a positive way, but we have seen that just about everything in it can be interpreted in another way, an evil way. One person's compassionate panel of beaurocrats is another person's death squad. That is the problem with putting government and, consequently, beaurocrats in total control of anything that concerns the well being of our citizens. The government can build bridges, roads, or dams, it can wage war and guard our borders (or I wish it coulld), but it should never be put in charge of any activity that involves humans, compassion, and decisions that have to be made on a case by case basis. We should never put government in charge of anything that cannot be computerized because anything the government does has to be laid out as a list of procedures like a computer program so the over-paid and under-qualified people they get to run it can run it. (Check our the DMV sometime.) When someone is dealing with life and death health issues, they should not have to push 1 for English and 2 for Spanish.

    At best, government should regulate things, not people. If they want to regulate hospitals, so be it. Require that they be non-profit and get the money grubbers out of it. Let government regulate the training and pay of doctors, nurses, and hospital administrators, and set up guidelines for insurance companies. But the government should not become an insurance provider. The government should be a regulator, a rule maker, not a participator. We have to be free to go to someone else if necessary, if the compassion is not there. If the government is the only game in town, we are slaves to that game.

    This concept is so simple. It is amazing that people do not get it, that people keep falling for government control simply because their party is in the driver's seat at the moment. Just remember, that will not always be the case. Evil Republicans will be in charge again very, very soon (all the town hall metings do convince us of that) and who can trust those people?

  • sheltercrow said on Aug 14, 2009....
    Re: "That is the problem with skewed footage."

    Just posted it to show there were protesters and it wasn't as quite as some have said.

    Other news...

    At the bottom of Kostric's sign, viewers were informed that the message was "brought to you by restoretherepublic.com."

    Their featured video is... Restore the Republic's Sponsor a Patriot Program.



    Be sure to donate today. You will receive a copy of the Republic Magazine used for a Mass Awareness Campaign.

    Oh... and they apparently don't like Walter Cronkite...

  • sheltercrow said on Aug 14, 2009....
    Re anal-cyst: "illegal immigrants covered by...

  • sheltercrow said on Aug 14, 2009....
    Re anal-cyst: [bureaucrats] in total control... [bureaucrats] making life and death decisions for them...

    Actually the operative term is "option" as in public option. For the terminally ignorant option is defined as...

    1. The act of choosing; choice.
    2. The power or freedom to choose.
    3. Something chosen or available as a choice.
    4. An item or feature that may be chosen to replace or enhance...
  • sheltercrow said on Aug 14, 2009....
    "The only proper approach to the wretched health care legislation currently working its way through Congress at this point is to kill it and start over. At these "town meeting" staged events, Obama and the Democrats need to hear, in no uncertain terms, that we don't want no stinkin' ObamaCare. We want Medicare for all."

    The Physicians for a National Health Program support the United States National Health Care Act (H.R. 676).
  • sheltercrow said on Aug 14, 2009....
    Re anal-cyst: "should not be given this much control over our economy and our lives."

    Explain this... William W. McGuire gets a $1.1 billion golden parachute after getting caught backdating stock options. Something "highly unethical, if not illegal."

    "William W. McGuire M.D. was the CEO of UnitedHealth Group Inc. from 1992 until 1 December 2006."

    "On 15 October 2006, it was announced that McGuire would step down immediately as chairman and director of United Health, and step down as CEO on 1 December 2006 due to his involvement in the employee stock options scandal."

    "McGuire's exit compensation from UnitedHealth, expected to be around $1.1 billion, would be the largest golden parachute in the history of corporate America."

    "Estimates of McGuire's 2005 compensation range from $59,625,444 to $124.8 million, and the revenue of United Health Care was then $71 billion."
  • ALIENated said on Aug 14, 2009....

    Re skittlecrap: kiss my anal-cyst, whatever that means. If I wanted to read everything ever written, I would Google it. Have you ever had an original thought? I am out of this thread. Too hard to skip over all the crap and propaganda.

  • curmudgeon said on Aug 14, 2009....
    Shelter re: McGuire scandal - what government programs aren't also subject to multi-million dollar scams and fraud? The argument here would be folks ought to do away with insurance altogether and simply adopt the fee for service model, NOT that government bureaucrats can do better.
     
    Noparty
     
    Why does the cost of health care go up much higher than the rest of the CPI every year?
     
    Some would argue that mandated coverage forces insurance companies to raise their rates. Others might also argue that doctors must pass the costs of malpractice insurance on to their clients. Others have argued that third-party payment period increases costs because there is always the perception that someone else is paying for one's treatment. Others might still point to advances in treatments and protocols - combining therapies to treat disease rather than relying on just one. New treatments are expensive. New drugs are expensive. Perhaps it's a combination of all of these
     
    As far as cost is concerned, ask yourself - how much is your life and health worth to you? Are your mortgage, property tax and car payments worth more to you than treatments that can save your life?
     
    What do you tell a person who has cancer  and cannot afford the latest medicine because the insurance calls it experimental, or worse drops them from coverage altogether?
     
    I would tell the dropped insured to sue the insurer and make a huge public stink about it. I would band together with groups of insured dropped by that company  and file a class action lawsuit. That's a terrible thing to tell a sick person, but that is the only legal recourse we have. BTW - There is no guarantee that the government "option" would fund experimental treatments. Chances are because new treatments are vastly more expensive than older ones, patients would be out of luck as far as government is concerned.
     
    The next option would be to raise money privately, so long as the government permits you to seek treatment  outside of their program. There's no guarantee of this, either.
     
    What do you tell someone who can't get insurance because of a pre-existing medical condition?
     
    The term "pre-existing condition" would not exist if employer-based insurance didn't play such a huge role in our lives. We should be able to buy affordable individual health insurance policies the same way we buy auto, home, renters, and all kinds of insurance. We generally set the terms of our auto insurance policies based on what we can afford and how high of a deductible we're willing to pay. Health insurance portability is a huge huge issue. Medicaid already exists for people who are sick and poor enough to not afford insurance. Why do we need a government "option" to care for people when a program already exists?
     
     
    What do you tell owners of a small business who say they cannot afford health insurance for their employees, so they lay some off?
     
    See above. Employers of every size need to get out of the business of offering insurance, period. Government and the insurance industry ought to come up with some way of offering affordable insurance policies to individuals and familes regardless of where they work and who they work for. If employers want to contribute to their employee's personal health insurance plan as an added benefit, hey great. But they ought not be obligated to offer benefits nor should employees lose their insurance when they switch companies.
     
    I had a kidney stone blasted, one night in the hospital.  Bill was 7,000 dollars and that did not include the doctors part.  Why was that so expensive?
     
    Talk to the hospital. Take a look around your hospital room: The oxygen line, the electronic monitors, the butterfly valve in your arm, the IV drip, whatever drugs are in the IV drip, the people present 24/7 to care for you in the event of an emergency - their education, training, salaries, benefits, the sheets that need cleaning and replacing, the meals (and all of those involved in procuring, preparing and delivering them), then there's the stuff you don't actually see - the illegal immigrants and indigents the hospital treats for free, ambulance and EMT personnel, the lawyers dealing with malpractice lawsuits, the myraid administrators sorting out your billing and insurance coverage...how much do you want all that to cost? How much is it worth to you to have people around looking after your every possible medical need 24/7?
     
    Do we need health care reform?  How would you accomplish it? 
     
    There are specific problems which require specific, well-considered, targeted, prioritized solutions, many of which can be handled privately, others may require government intervention. Many of these problems may require government reforming itself (good luck with that!)
     
    As far as I see it, portability is a key issue. People ought to be able to buy affordable private insurance apart from their employer. Clients should be able to determine their own level of risk and what deductibles they can afford. There is no such thing as a pre-existing condition if you've been insured by the same company for twenty years or more.
     
    For those who truly cannot afford insurance (not the folks who could afford it if they simply prioritized their expenses around health insurance  rather than their mortgages and car payments), government programs already exist.
     
    If government wants to lower overall spending, let it first reform itself, as government is one of the nation's biggest spenders on healthcare. Do we really need a VA, a Public Health Service, a DoD healthcare system, Medicare and Medicaid, and others I am sure we don't know about? Wouldn't massive new efficiencies be achieved if all of these separate departments (each with their own budgets and formulae / policies on how heathcare services are reimbursed) were fused into one? Obama is NOT talking about this. He's talking about adding ANOTHER layer of Federal healthcare bureaucracy! What insanity!
     
    Anyway, this is generally why I am against this particular iteration of healthcare "reform."
  • sheltercrow said on Aug 14, 2009....
    Re anal-cyst: I have yet to read anything of yours that wasn't first posted to a dittohead site. You are living proof that original thoughts are things for the thinkers not dittoheads.

    dittohead: "Someone who seeks to make sense of American politics, but delegates the task to a right-wing radio pundit, resulting in a chasm between what is believed to be true and objective reality."
  • sheltercrow said on Aug 14, 2009....
    Why does the cost of health care go up?

    The Congressional Budget Office reported that the bulk of increases in health care spending could be attributed to the development and dissemination of new technologies and medical services. While technological innovation can reduce spending in many fields, the CBO noted, in terms of health care, such advancements also lead to changes in practice, which together tend to increase spending. Consumer demand and increased utilization add to costs. [For additional stats see Causes of Health Spending Increases Alliance for Health Reform]
  • noparty said on Aug 14, 2009....
    Curmudgeon:  Thanks for your answers, I agree with much of what you say.
  • curmudgeon said on Aug 14, 2009....

    Shelter - thanks for your contribution. And there you have it - if you want to cut costs, just cut people off from the fruits of innovation. What better way than to cage the bulk of the population up in a government "option" that pays for cheap old treatments?

    The rich will still have the best of everything while most others will get "end of life counseling" at ever younger ages.

  • sheltercrow said on Aug 14, 2009....
    Curm: The reforms primary goal is to address the problem of how to provide health care for those not covered - with cost containment as an secondary goal. Cost containment, not the primary objective, will never-the-less will have to be addressed to achieve the primary goal.
  • sheltercrow said on Aug 14, 2009....
    Re: "If employers want to contribute to their employee's personal health insurance plan as an added benefit, hey great."

    Interestingly... employers originally offered health insurance to their employees to circumvent price and wage freezes used to control inflation during World War II.

    Thus, having employer-provided health insurance became prevalent not because of economic justification for insurance being linked with employment, but as a way for employers to circumvent the wage freezes imposed by government. [Employee Health Insurance - The History And Economic Theory Of Employer-provided Health Insurance]

  • sheltercrow said on Aug 14, 2009....
    Re: "There is no such thing as a pre-existing condition if you've been insured by the same company for twenty years or more."

    We're speaking of rescission abuse here. I can find nothing that limits rescission simply because you have "been insured by the same company for twenty years or more." That is a myth.

    Interesting reading material?

    The Truth About the Insurance Industry

    Coverage Denied: How the Current Health Insurance System Leaves Millions Behind

    Rescission abuse from Consumer Watchdog.org

    Beware of private fee-for-service plans
  • sheltercrow said on Aug 14, 2009....
    Re: "Obama is NOT talking about this"

    The legislation being put forth is a creation of Senator Baucus not Obama. See Top 20 Contributors to Senator Max Baucus 2005 - 2010 for who actually writes the bill. You make the mistake of assuming that politicians lead. They do not. They follow the instructions of those that place them in office.

    Obama is primarily beholden to Finance, Insurance & Real Estate ($39,480,169); Lawyers & Lobbyists ($43,674,254); and Communications/Electronics ($25,455,691) not with Health ($19,462,986). [Barack Obama (D) Top Industries]
  • curmudgeon said on Aug 15, 2009....
    Shelter - there are other ways to cover the currently uninsured than to implement yet another government program. And if the primary goal is not cost containment, why does Obama keep talking about it? Why does he constantly pair lowering costs with the current proposals?

    Obama is the front man for this iteration of health care reform. Period. If ever he signs off on this monstrosity, it will belong to him.

    Companies that drop paying clients at their greatest time of need should be exposed for their horrid business practices and vigorously pursued by litigators and legislators and public watchdogs. Implementing some new form of government bureaucracy will not guarantee that patients will get the treatment they need - especially if some board deems such treatments too expensive, based on for form of a QALY score. If anything, insurance companies will dump their sickest clients on the government. If cost containment is not the "primary" objective, it will be very quickly.

    Look - even if you trust THIS administration to do it right, what about after this term or the term after? This legislation will affect people for generations. Lives are at stake here. As dysfunctional as people say it is, the current insurance model delivers pretty damn good health care, at least from what I have experienced.

    Why rush this through without considering all perspectives? Why bum-rush this over those who have legitimate criticisms and questions?
  • sheltercrow said on Aug 15, 2009....
    Re: "why does Obama keep talking about it?"

    I assume because it is obvious to most what the primary goal is - full coverage - and the issue being raised by the opposition - it's too expensive - is what he must address.

    Re: "especially if some board"

    My friend what "board" are you speaking of? Have you examined the bill being offered? You are veering into the dittohead-speak. The "services offered" by the reform bill are just that. Services "offered" not "mandated."

    And the "public option," if it survives, is an "option" not a mandate.

    Re: "drop paying clients at their greatest time of need"

    Hardly. The profits are too enormous. The insurance legal departments are too enormous. The fines, if even imposed, are too minuscule.

    One executive said rescission is about "stopping fraud and material misrepresentations that contribute to spiraling healthcare costs." So, for example, when a woman in Texas was diagnosed with aggressive breast cancer, her insurer dropped her coverage because the company found an instance in which she visited a dermatologist for acne, and didn't tell the insurance company about it. This, the insurer said, was an example of "fraud and material misrepresentation."

    Late in the hearing, [Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.)], the committee chairman, put the executives on the spot. Stupak asked each of them whether he would at least commit his company to immediately stop rescissions except where they could show "intentional fraud."

    The answer from all three executives: "No."

    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_06/018667.php

    Re: "the current insurance model delivers pretty damn good health care"

    That is a myth that has been debunked so often I wonder why it still comes up in conversation.

    Re: "Why rush this through without considering all perspectives"

    Again you are veering into dittohead-speak.This issue has been throughly research for years. Harry Truman first addressed it back in 1948.
  • curmudgeon said on Aug 17, 2009....
    Shelter - I love the way you parsed my sentence on the system delivering good health care. You conveniently forgot to include "from what I have experienced."

    My own personal experience with the insurance - healthcare system is NOT myth. Neither is the experience of my family members, all of whom have not had problems with the system as it currently exists. You can choose not to believe it, if it helps you justify your beliefs.

    Keep calling me a dittohead - all that proves is you must resort to name-calling when your biased links and incessant nitpicking stop working for you. From the example above, at best, you argue most dishonestly. I would rather be a dittohead than an outright liar.
  • sheltercrow said on Aug 17, 2009....
    To exclude "from what I have experienced" was done, because I remember doing it, to remove from discussion a lack of caring that is a symptom of the healthcare debate. Although to be honest I believe it is a telling omission. I'm glad you mentioned it.

    All real discussion is in the details my friend. Sweeping generalizations have always been used to obfuscate issues being raised.

    On what have I been dishonest?

    By the way. I did not call you a dittohead. I said you veered into dittohead-speak. The first is a conscious act, the second is not.
  • curmudgeon said on Aug 18, 2009....
    As I understand it, you removed "from my experience" because you think I do not care about those who do not have insurance? On the contrary - I also care about the many millions of people who do have insurance, are generally happy with their situation, and do not want their situation to be adversely affected.

    OK - I jumped to a conclusion about your motive in omitting a pretty important part of my statement. Lets move on, friend! :-)
  • sheltercrow said on Aug 18, 2009....
    As an aside. A lot of people keep saying that Obama is a socialist. Well here is what the socialist community thinks of Obama.

    "Author, journalist, film maker John Pilger speaks at Socialism 2009 www.socialistworker.org; wwwhaymarketbooks.org Filmed by Paul Hubbard at the Womens Building in San Francisco 7-4-09."



    Did you know that Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder used to work for a law firm that represented George W Bush and the Republican National Committee?

    From Legal Schnauzer...

    Monday, August 10, 2009

    Are Holder's GOP Ties Subverting Justice in Political Prosecutions?

    Attorney General Eric Holder has shown little or no inclination to intervene in apparent Bush-era political prosecutions involving Democrats, such as Don Siegelman in Alabama and Paul Minor in Mississippi.

    So far, Holder has intervened in federal prosecutions involving Republicans, most notably the case of former U.S. Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK).

    Why does Holder seem content to let the Siegelman and Minor cases languish? Alabama attorney and Siegelman-case whistleblower Jill Simpson says she might have the answer.

    Simpson, a former opposition researcher for the Republican Party in Alabama, is skilled at tracking down information. She learned that Holder, before being named Barack Obama's attorney general, worked for a Washington, D.C., law firm called Covington & Burling. And what did Simpson discover about that august firm?

    The tip I got was that the firm had a very important client. His name was George W Bush. And they represented a very important organization . . . called the Republican National Committee. I was in shock when I checked it--and it was true.

    My favorite research item I ran across is when they were protecting the RNC from having to turn over Karl Rove's e-mails that were run on the RNC servers. It shocked me. Plus I found it mighty interesting that AG Eric Holder never enlightened anyone about his conflicts of coming from a big Washington, D.C., law firm that represented the National Republic Committee and George W. Bush in the 2000 election contest.

    Tuesday, August 18, 2009

    Holder's Former Law Firm Brags About Its GOP Ties

    We recently learned that Attorney General Eric Holder's old law firm has alarmingly close ties to the Republican National Committee (RNC) and key figures from the George W. Bush administration.
  • sheltercrow said on Aug 26, 2009....
    Curm: Here is a pdf of the 'death book'

    I warn you it's pretty raw stuff so prepare yourself. It called...

    "Your Life, Your Choices: Planning for Future Medical Decisions: How to Prepare a Personalized Living Will"

  • ALIENated said on Sep 02, 2009....

    ... about those who do not have insurance ...

    I heard some author (I cannot remember who it was but I think he has written a recent book about the healthcare situation) the other night saying that a lot of the people counted in those uninsured numbers are young people who can no longer be carried by their parents. People in their early 20s who just do not want to give up their cup of Starbucks every morning or one of their other toys to pay for health insurance. I went out and looked at a policy for my 20-something child. It had a copay about like what I have and a $5000 deductible (mine has $2500 from my wife's company and it was $1500, I think, when I was employed). The cost ... $92 a month. It is obviously disaster insurance, but it takes pretty good care of routine doctor visits (with the copay) and pays a good part of most prescription drugs (we paid $8 at Walmart for two prescriptions recently). This whole healthcare deal is hyped and most of the problems are caused by Medicare. At most, the government should give Medicare patients a voucher to buy private insurance policies and get their beaurocratic noses out of it all. If they did away with all the Medicare administrative costs, they could probably pay every Medicare recipient enough to buy the best private policy available. But that is not the real point of all this. The point it growing government. That is always the point with Democrats / Socialists. However, I believe that is becoming evident to Joe Public. It usually takes a while for people to see that when a Democrat president takes over, but it always becomes obvious to even the most casual observer.

  • sheltercrow said on Sep 02, 2009....
    Re: 'most of the problems are caused by Medicare'... 'The point it growing government.'

    It's a no-brainer.

    The problem is not 'Medicare' or 'growing government' it's the corporate control of health care. Letting the marketplace control health care as a for-profit business is good for the marketplace but utterly bad for your health.

    A simple search on medical fraud and abuse turns up far too many examples, almost exclusively about for-profit corporations, of billions wasted.

    HCA Inc. (formerly known as Columbia/HCA and HCA - The Healthcare Company)

    This settlement marks the conclusion of the most comprehensive health care fraud investigation ever undertaken by the Justice Department, working with the Departments of Health and Human Services and Defense, the Office of Personnel Management and the states. The settlement announced today resolves HCA's civil liability for false claims resulting from a variety of allegedly unlawful practices, including cost report fraud and the payment of kickbacks to physicians.

    Previously, on December 14, 2000, HCA subsidiaries pled guilty to substantial criminal conduct and paid more than $840 million in criminal fines, civil restitution and penalties. Combined with today's separate administrative settlement with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), under which HCA will pay an additional $250 million to resolve overpayment claims arising from certain of its cost reporting practices, the government will have recovered $1.7 billion from HCA, by far the largest recovery ever reached by the government in a health care fraud investigation.

    Tenet Healthcare Corp.

    Tenet Healthcare Corporation, operator of the nation’s second largest hospital chain, has agreed to pay the United States more than $900 million for alleged unlawful billing practices, Assistant Attorney General Peter D. Keisler of the Civil Division and U.S. Attorney Debra Wong Yang of the Central District of California in Los Angeles announced today.

    HealthSouth Corp.

    SEC Charges HealthSouth Corp. CEO Richard Scrushy With $1.4 Billion Accounting Fraud

    DOJ

    HealthSouth Corporation, the nation's largest provider of rehabilitative medicine services, has agreed to pay the United States $325 million to settle allegations that the company defrauded Medicare and other federal healthcare programs, the Department of Justice announced today.

    “Health care fraud impacts every American citizen. When a company defrauds our nation's health care programs, it steals from the American taxpayers,” said Assistant Attorney General Peter Keisler, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “HealthSouth's fraud on Medicare was driven both by longstanding business practices in its outpatient physical therapy business and improprieties in its inpatient rehabilitation business.”

    The allegations involving the outpatient therapy services were the subject of a federal lawsuit in San Antonio, Texas. “Today’s settlement should send a strong message that the government will be persistent in pursuing those who engage in fraud and making sure that they pay a high price for their misdeeds,” stated United States Attorney Johnny Sutton in San Antonio, Texas.

    GAO | Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Program: Results of Review of Annual Reports for Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003

    ...estimated fiscal year 2004 outlays were $297 billion with net improper payments of $20 billion, covering more than 41 million elderly and disabled enrollees.

    The Department of Health and Human Services And The Department of Justice Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Program Annual Report For FY 2006

    Monetary Results

    During FY 2006, the Federal Government won or negotiated approximately $2.2 billion in judgments and settlements, and it attained additional administrative impositions in health care fraud cases and proceedings. The Medicare Trust Fund received transfers of approximately $1.5 billion during this period as a result of these efforts, as well as those of preceding years, in addition to $177.1 million in Federal Medicaid money similarly transferred separately to the Treasury as a result of these efforts. The HCFAC account has returned over $10.4 billion to the Medicare Trust Fund since the inception of the program in 1997.

    Enforcement Actions

    In FY 2006, U.S. Attorneys' Offices opened 836 new criminal health care fraud investigations involving 1,448 potential defendants. Federal prosecutors had 1,677 health care fraud criminal investigations pending, involving 2,713 potential defendants, and filed criminal charges in 355 cases involving 579 defendants. A total of 547 defendants were convicted for health care fraud-related crimes during the year. Also in FY 2006, the Department of Justice (DOJ) opened 915 new civil health care fraud investigations, and had 2,016 civil health care fraud investigations pending at the end of the fiscal year.

Comment on "Obama Undermines Himself on Healthcare"


(Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)

The only human being on the planet that can eject a huge turd, yet somehow dupe the media into thinking it's a golden egg that smells like roses....

Sarah Palin would be a disaster for the Republicans,
in my humble opinion.

...

Do I have to shave my head?

...
The answer is, very little indeed! W. had more global influence than this guy....
'A Democrat needs to go further right--somehow you just knew that would be the advice from the corporate media'...