Some one is going to pay for it...
OffHeGoes29
Posts: 1,240
BRING BACK THE WHALE
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
OffHeGoes29
Posts: 1,240
Comments
-- Barack Obama
"Read my lips, no new taxes."
-- George Bush the First
Of course, you had to be a fool not to see this coming.
for the least they could possibly do
That would have been a hell of a sales pitch for Barack during the campaign. Instead, he made promises anyone with a brain -- including himself -- knew he couldn't possibly keep.
"No, no ... we'll make the rich pay for ALL of it. You won't have to pay a dime."
If it sounds too good to be true ...
for the least they could possibly do
If we're all going to pay for the heathcare out of our own pockets anyway - ie higher taxes - then WHY DO WE NEED THE GOVERNMENT INVOLVED?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
makes sense to me...what's the big deal...?
Well there really isn't a big deal if you don't mind paying for it. The problem I have is that we are going to pay a lot more for substandard health care. Some health care is better than no health care if you can't afford it, but for the ones who can pay for good health care, they should have an option to buy into gov. run health care or private, not pay for both.
I know we can't have the option to choose where our tax money goes all the time, but somethings I feel we should have a choice. Education and healthcare should be a choice based system. These are two important programs that I feel the government doesn't need to force people to take its substandard version of. If the money was there for good health care and education from the government, then I say thats fine. But we all know that our goverment has a horrible track record of providing and managing social servicies... i.e. Social Security and Education
Just my 2 cents
I hear you, but you are operating under the assumption that Health Care will be "substandard"...I'm not, so I don't mind chipping in...I guess I'm a glass-half-full sort of fella...
Ralph Nader's plan to pay for a universal health care system taxed speculitve trades something like 1 or 1.5%, which between '03-'08 their markets profits increased by 2,300%. i think that sounds reasonable
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
The big deal, or at least part of it, is that when asked on the campaign trail if he'd have to raise taxes to pay for this plan, Barack was adamant they would not. "Your taxes will not raise one dime. Not one dime." The middle class was actually going to get a tax CUT. Remember that?
Eight months in, it's, "Psyche. Your taxes are probably going to go up." At least George Bush took years before reneging on his "no new taxes" pledge. Obama's done it in eight freaking months.
It's easy to say, "All politicians lie," and that's true. I'd be much more willing to give Barack a pass on this one of he hadn't run on a platform of "change" and anti-politics-as-usual.
for the least they could possibly do
Name one government program that ISN'T substandard.
I don't think there is any doubt whatsoever that, if you currently have medical insurance through your employer or what not, the medical care the government is going to offer you is going to be not as good. I don't think anybody could even argue that.
Longer lines. Longer waiting lists. Fewer choices. More government red tape.
If you have no insurance now, it's better than nothing. If you already have insurance, you're getting screwed.
for the least they could possibly do
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/04/us/po ... .html?_r=1
August 4, 2009
Obama Renews Vow of No Middle-Class Tax Increase
By PETER BAKER
WASHINGTON — The White House tried Monday to douse speculation that it might raise taxes on the middle class in violation of President Obama’s campaign promise, just a day after two of his top economic advisers left the door open to such a move to rein in spiraling deficits.
Mr. Obama told his economic team in a meeting at the White House that he intended to stand by his promise not to increase taxes on families making less than $250,000, aides said. He then sent his spokesman out to repeat that message in front of the television cameras.
“The president made a commitment in the campaign. He’s clear about that commitment, and he’s going to keep it,” said Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary.
The renewal of the promise came a day after Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner and Lawrence H. Summers, director of the National Economic Council, both refused to rule out tax increases on the middle class while discussing ways to pare the deficit. The two were speaking on separate Sunday morning talk shows, venues where administration officials are usually well prepared on the official line before appearing.
“It’s never a good idea to absolutely rule things out no matter what,” Mr. Summers said on “Face the Nation” on CBS. Mr. Geithner, on ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos,” said, “We can’t make these judgments yet about exactly what it’s going to take” to tame the deficit.
Conservative critics interpreted those comments as laying the groundwork for trying to wriggle out of Mr. Obama’s campaign pledge.
“Obama should fire Geithner and Summers,” said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, a group that opposes tax increases. They “went on national television and implied the president lied his way into office and that he is open to raising taxes.”
The developments come at a time when the White House and Congressional Democrats, trying to figure out how to pay for expanding health care coverage, are considering proposals to increase taxes on the wealthiest Americans. Some critics from the left have suggested that Mr. Obama should not limit tax increases to the rich so that a broader cross section of Americans would be invested in the new health care system, as they are in Social Security and Medicare.
But the White House is trying to fend off attacks portraying Mr. Obama as a tax-and-spend liberal. Mr. Gibbs said that he had read the transcripts from Sunday’s shows “a few times” to study what had been said and that the president had made a point of reminding Mr. Geithner and Mr. Summers of his position, but was not scolding them.
“We talked about it as an issue,” Mr. Gibbs said, but added, “This wasn’t a, you know, like ‘school is in’ type of thing.”
Mr. Gibbs seemed exasperated at repeated questions on the matter at his daily briefing.
“If you don’t trust what I’m going to tell you, I don’t know why we do this,” he said finally.
Asked why Mr. Geithner and Mr. Summers did not repeat the president’s campaign promise, he said, “They left it to me.”
I'll name two: Medicare and Medicaid...
I know we've had this sort of conversation before...you seem to know some facts that others don't...or it could be you're assuming...I'm guessing the latter....
and you act as if private, for-profit, insurance is giving more choices and that they have no waiting lists...
exceptm now a lot of insurance plans are worthless unless you have a major accident.....
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
Now the military is out sourcing its health care to the civilian side, which if you ask me is a smart idea. They still have a lot to iron out, but the health care for military isn't near what you would get in the civilian world.
Not really. Do you know how much a routine dental exam costs if you don't have insurance? An eye exam? A Z-Pac prescription?
It would be cost prohibitive, for most people, to do even these routine things without insurance.
for the least they could possibly do
You think Medicare and Medicaid are well run? Seriously? Again, they fall into the "better than nothing" category. Ask any retired senior if they'd rather have the health plan they had when they were working, and see what they say.
As for choices ... I'll give you one example ... As it stands now, I have the choice NOT to enroll in a medical program if I don't want to. Under the Obama plan, I'm forced to enroll in one, basically at gunpoint. They want to fine people for not having medical insurance, kind of like they fine drivers who don't have car insurance.
for the least they could possibly do
Hey! Just curious slightofjeff...where did you see that you would have to enroll or be fined? Are you an employer? The only thing I can find with regard to a tax/fine being imposed it for employers who self-insure and if they are not meeting certain standards of care/insurance. I just finished reading the whole damn 1017 pages this weekend, and I didn't see that for anyone other than employers who self-insure. I am not sure if I am for it or against it yet, so I am not taking sides.
http://www.youtube.com/user/kcherub#p/a/u/0/N-UQprRqSwo
Rod Laver Arena - Nov 13, 2006
Adelaide Oval - Nov 17, 2009
Etihad Stadium - Nov 20, 2009
BDO Melbourne - Jan 24, 2014
New York - May 02 - 2016
Powered by Pearl Jam
no, you silly poster.. it not you that has to "pay"
that is us.
at least keep that in mind.
seriously, yes I do think so...sorry I don't agree with your opinion that you attempting to pass off as fact...
and your choice example is lame...
how about this, let's just do away with Medicare and Medicaid, you know, since it's so poorly run according to you and the seniors you've allegedly polled....I'm sure the old folks will be more that happy to jump into private, for-profit health insurance...this way the have a choice to enroll or not enroll...
but now most health insurances do not cover any of these things. my past few jobs all 3 of those were separate. there was health, dental and vision, all separate
i'm not sure how much an eye exam would cost but i know for a new patient the total cost for a dental exam would be roughly $300 including x-rays
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
Obama said it in a presidential debate, forgot which one....Hillary brought it up saying under Obama's plan if you did not buy insurance you would be fined and Obama admitted that was true (and then lied by saying the chair of his election campaign in that state wasn't a pharmaceutical lobbyist when in fact he was)
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
You really think Medicare and Medicade are well run, how? :shock:
98 CAA
00 Virginia Beach;Camden I; Jones Beach III
05 Borgata Night I; Wachovia Center
06 Letterman Show; Webcast (guy in blue shirt), Camden I; DC
08 Camden I; Camden II; DC
09 Phillie III
10 MSG II
13 Wrigley Field
16 Phillie II
I think plenty of people will argue that healthcare wouldn't become sub-standard compared to the care they receive through the current medical insurance system. What you seem to be missing is the fact that it's the same people/organizations providing the care - it's just the insurance that will change. My insurance has changed plenty since I've been an adult - sometimes paid through private insurance and sometimes through public funds - and yet my care hasn't changed at all - I just pay more for it now that I have private insurance. Personally, I preferred the public coverage.
I really don't think there will be longer lines or wait lists, particularly compared to the long lines & wait lists we currently have. And I think we'll have MORE choices - of doctors, for instance - and LESS red tape if only dealing with one payer source. (Don't even get me started on that one right now, because I just wasted my entire morning dealing will all this insurance/billing bullshit.)
I think this post exemplifies the primary misunderstanding about government-funded healthcare. The government wouldn't RUN the healthcare delivery system, like they do in the military. This is comparing apples to oranges. It would be more like you're saying it is now. Your care would be provided by the private sector and only PAID FOR by the government.
At least they have only 1/10th the amount of overhead waste as the private insurance companies, and a standardized set of paperwork.
I seriously don't believe some of you actually think it's reasonable or fair for you to not have health insurance. For all the talk about how others shouldn't have to pay for the uninsured.... who do you think will have to pay for your care if you're suddenly in an accident you can't afford and aren't covered?
Hey, thanks! It's not in the current proposed plan for non-employers, so I guess it's a moot point now.
http://www.youtube.com/user/kcherub#p/a/u/0/N-UQprRqSwo
overhead is about 2 to 3%...not to bad, imo...
when someone goes to the doctor, they give them their #, see the doctor, doctor submits request for payment, receives payment...