Some one is going to pay for it...

2»

Comments

  • Abuskedti
    Abuskedti Posts: 1,917
    OffHeGoes29 wrote:
    and that somebody is you....


    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090803/ap_ ... us_economy

    no, you silly poster.. it not you that has to "pay"

    that is us.

    at least keep that in mind.
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    slightofjeff wrote:

    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.

    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... :lol:
  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    slightofjeff wrote:
    I heart Scout Niblett wrote:


    exceptm now a lot of insurance plans are worthless unless you have a major accident.....

    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.


    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
    don't compete; coexist

    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'
  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    kcherub wrote:
    slightofjeff wrote:
    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.

    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.


    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)
    don't compete; coexist

    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'
  • Dirtie_Frank
    Dirtie_Frank Posts: 1,348
    inmytree wrote:
    slightofjeff wrote:

    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.

    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... :lol:

    You really think Medicare and Medicade are well run, how? :shock:
    96 Randall's Island II
    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
  • _
    _ Posts: 6,657
    slightofjeff wrote:
    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.

    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.)
  • _
    _ Posts: 6,657
    OffHeGoes29 wrote:
    I've been on a government run health care while I was in the military. It would take on average up to three months before I could get seen by a Doc for a couple of serious issues. It took me over a YEAR to get an MRI on my lower back.

    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.

    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.
  • _
    _ Posts: 6,657
    slightofjeff wrote:
    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.

    At least they have only 1/10th the amount of overhead waste as the private insurance companies, and a standardized set of paperwork.
    slightofjeff wrote:
    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.

    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?
  • kcherub
    kcherub Posts: 961
    I heart Scout Niblett wrote:
    kcherub wrote:
    slightofjeff wrote:
    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.

    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.


    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)

    Hey, thanks! It's not in the current proposed plan for non-employers, so I guess it's a moot point now. :)
    I still want you all to "take care"--I am just damn tired of typing it.

    http://www.youtube.com/user/kcherub#p/a/u/0/N-UQprRqSwo
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    Dirtie_Frank wrote:
    You really think Medicare and Medicade are well run, how? :shock:

    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...
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    inmytree wrote:
    Dirtie_Frank wrote:
    You really think Medicare and Medicade are well run, how? :shock:

    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...

    Medicare is projected to run out of money in less than 10 years. It is financially insolvent. Not a good example for the pro-universal health care folks.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    kcherub wrote:
    slightofjeff wrote:
    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.

    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.

    I realize this is a link from Fox News ... but it is an Associated Press article, so you can probably trust it ;)

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07 ... alth-care/
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    slightofjeff wrote:
    inmytree wrote:
    Dirtie_Frank wrote:
    You really think Medicare and Medicade are well run, how? :shock:

    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...

    Medicare is projected to run out of money in less than 10 years. It is financially insolvent. Not a good example for the pro-universal health care folks.

    ok...fine...then lets do away with this program...how about that...? let's go ahead and get rid of that costly program...all those folks can fend for the themselves on the wonderful free market...

    and btw, "projected" does not equal fact...

    seriously, let's do away with that socialist Medicare program...are you ok with that...?

Categories