Thread: Health Insurance in the U.S.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

I like Presidents who do the right thing.

And this asshole is doing the 'right' thing?
You are severely mistaken. Remember, even tho you are living on a generous government pension, you still hold a US passport and this POS will raise yer taxes along with the rest of us.

So far my taxes have went down 65 bucks a month since Obama took over. How about that Medicare Drug Act GWB passed ? Liberals loved it ... never whined a bit. Truth is it's a money maker for the rich drug companies.

Maybe I am mistaken. But the current system is set up to deny as many claims as possible. To deny as much service as possible. The purpose of HMOs is to make the investors rich. Not take care of the citizenry.

Why can't the US government subsidize health care ? Because they're too busy subsidizing to the tune of bilions and billions of dollars the likes of Donald trump, George Steinbrenner, Warren Buffet. These shits have worked out deals with the government to where the taxpayer foots the bill for their ventures and they just stand by and pocket money at virtually no investment. How much of Steinbrenner's own money went into his brand new stadium ?

Cut the subsidies to the rich and there is plenty of money to take care of the middle class working man.

^ Is that your payroll tax?

SK's right. Under the Bush administration the Middle Classes real income/ purchasing power dropped. The only beneficiaries of Bush' policies were the upper 1% of Americans by wealth, and business- mainly, Big business. Even highly paid people earning 150- 200 K only stayed about the same.

Considering that many of the staunchest Republicans here are basically victims of those policies, I'm just amazed at the Con job they have done on you.

don't be against obama....

The House Energy and Commerce Committee approved America’s Affordable Health Choices Act, 31-28, on Friday as liberal and conservative Democrats on the panel reached a hard-fought accord with one another. Five Democrats voted against the measure, and no Republicans supported it.

The Friday night vote is a historic milestone and sets a positive tone for Democrats heading into the extended summer recess.

House Energy and Commerce Committee approves health care bill - Patrick O'Connor - POLITICO.com

and if the fear mongering republicans are able to scare the american people with lies over the next month, he can always get it done via reconcilation.

health care reform is finally coming to america.

It seems that the GOP are determined to be Obstructionist no matter what. It is most certainly the case that the Health Insurance Lobby is totally in opposition to Health care reform. And between them, they are resorting to some of the most dishonest, base tactics imaginable. I even question there legality- I mean, euthanasia FFS?

Obamas attempts at bipartisanship, and compromise, are laudable- but at some stage, you've got to realise who your committed enemies are. You can't negotiate with Al Qaeda, and it would seem neither can you with the more loonie or greedy end of the Right. Frik 'em- he's got the Power, he's got the mandate from the People. I would think there are some more moderate Rep's who will compromise- hey, they answer to the people too and health care reform is so obviously the correct way to go- in fact absolutely stoopid not to.

So they can either be a part of it, or left out in the cold. They can then argue their reasons before their voters at the next elections.

^ Oh yeh, several. Really, Obama just needs to worry about the Blue Dogs now. The GOP'ers can answer to their voters, whichever way they swing.

Thats Politics Baby.

I think it's the Dems who need to answer to their voters, hence, the delay.

lots of fear mongering and lies on this thread, but below are the facts.

three of the absurd claims most common on this thread:

CLAIM: The House bill "may start us down a treacherous path toward government-encouraged euthanasia," House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio said July 23.

Former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey said in a July 17 article: "One troubling provision of the House bill compels seniors to submit to a counseling session every five years ... about alternatives for end-of-life care."

THE FACTS: The bill would require Medicare to pay for advance directive consultations with health care professionals. But it would not require anyone to use the benefit.

Advance directives lay out a patient's wishes for life-extending measures under various scenarios involving terminal illness, severe brain damage and situations. Patients and their families would consult with health professionals, not government agents, if they used the proposed benefit.

************************************************** ***********************

CLAIM: Health care revisions would lead to government-funded abortions.
Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council says in a video, "Unless Congress states otherwise, under a government takeover of health care, taxpayers will be forced to fund abortions for the first time in over three decades."

THE FACTS: The proposed bills would not undo the Hyde Amendment, which bars paying for abortions through Medicaid, the government insurance program for the poor. But a health care overhaul could create a government-run insurance program, or insurance "exchanges," that would not involve Medicaid and whose abortion guidelines are not yet clear.

Obama recently told CBS that the nation should continue a tradition of "not financing abortions as part of government-funded health care."

The House Energy and Commerce Committee amended the House bill Thursday to state that health insurance plans have the option of covering abortion, but no public money can be used to fund abortions. The bill says health plans in a new purchasing exchange would not be required to cover abortion but that each region of the country should have at least one plan that does.

************************************************** ***

CLAIM: The Democrats' plans will lead to rationing, or the government determining which medical procedures a patient can have.
"Expanding government health programs will hasten the day that government rations medical care to seniors," conservative writer Michael Cannon said in the Washington Times.



THE FACTS: Millions of Americans already face rationing, as insurance companies rule on procedures they will cover.
Denying coverage for certain procedures might increase under proposals to have a government-appointed agency identify medicines and procedures best suited for various conditions.


Obama says the goal is to identify the most effective and efficient medical practices, and to steer patients and providers to them. He recently told a forum: "We don't want to ration by dictating to somebody, 'OK, you know what? We don't think that this senior should get a hip replacement.' What we do want to be able to do is to provide information to that senior and to her doctor about, you know, this is the thing that is going to be most helpful to you in dealing with your condition."

FACT CHECK: Distortions rife in health care debate - Yahoo! News

I'm a Republican (I think) and I support Obama on health care. Why ? Because everywhere else in the world the government handles health care just like they do education, the police and things like parks & recreation. This is a major burden on companies that put Americans to work. Our government would be helping companies by helping the people.

Health care should not be a business. It's a right of every civil society it seems except in the US.

I hate his arrogant, know it all attitude ... he's a troll fuckwit and needs do some serious work on his social skills ... but raycarey is right about the Republicans on this particular issue.

And about that Medicaid prescription drug act passed under GWB ... it totally prevents the government from negotiating lower prices and makes damn sure the elderly pay above the market rates for their prescription drugs.

The Democrats sold out on this one for votes ... totally sold out ... Rangel knew what it really was ... Pelosi knew what it really was ... more subsidy to the wealthy few ... courtesy of both parties.

Sorry Boon Mee ... but one reason I voted for Obama was to get people your age out of office.

Originally Posted by raycarey

health care reform is finally coming to america.

In the form of some watered-down anemic thing that may pass towards end of the year. Socialism is still a foreign & evil concept for the majority of Americans...

Heh...Ed Morrissey : Ten leading indicators of American health-care superiority

1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.

2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.

3. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.

4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.

5. Lower-income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians.

6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.

7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed.

8. Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians.

9. Americans have better access to important new technologies such as medical imaging than do patients in Canada or Britain.

10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.

National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) : 10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

Time to revisit the best President America has had in living memory...

^ I'm sure he was well paid for mouthing someone elses words on the subject

Milton Friedman's Question, the Obamunists' Answer

Boon mee, thanks for the clip on Ronald Reagan. Because of the referance to Truman I assume it's from the 1950s.

Originally Posted by Milkman

Boon mee, thanks for the clip on Ronald Reagan. Because of the referance to Truman I assume it's from the 1950s.

In the mid 1950s with his acting career on the wane, he turned to becoming a paid spokesperson for large American corporations and other special interests.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Heh...Ed Morrissey : Ten leading indicators of American health-care superiority

1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.

2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.

3. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.

4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.

5. Lower-income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians.

6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.

7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed.

8. Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians.

9. Americans have better access to important new technologies such as medical imaging than do patients in Canada or Britain.

10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.

National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) : 10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

Why don't you stop yanking our cranks.

You are not talking about "Americans" you are talking about "Americans who have Health Care Insurance paid for by someone else"

Lets take one example:

6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.

you mean:

6. Americans who have Health Care Insurance paid for by someone else spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.

The reason they spend less time waiting is because the people without insurance are excluded ya dumb twat

WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--Democrats will not hesitate to forgo bipartisanship to pass a health overhaul bill if negotiations fail in the next month, U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said Monday.
Schumer, on a conference call with reporters, indicated that Democratic leaders are actively exploring options to pass the health bill that would not require Republican votes. He pointed specifically to budget reconciliation, a parliamentary tactic that would allow passage of a bill with a simple majority, rather than the 60 votes generally required in the Senate.
Reconciliation is "clearly one of the contingencies on the table," Schumer said. "We want to get a bipartisan agreement, but if we don't, it's not going to stop us from moving forward with health care."

Article - WSJ.com

So the naysayers may as well get used to it.

Every major social initiative that I can think of has always had a vocal, if minority opposition. Social welfare, Womens rights, Universal suffrage, Health care- including, in the US, Medicare & Medicaid, you name it. The conservative resistance is typically marshalled and trumpeted by vested interests that benefit fronm the status quo- in this case, the private Health Insurance lobby. But the most important vested interest- the AMA, which represents the Doctors, has already put it's weight behind health care reform. Another important vested interest, big Pharma, has accepted it also. Most importantly of all, most people want it. Well, perhaps even more important than that (outside of Politics)- the bluddy nation needs it.

Health care costs reduce the competitiveness of American industry- and they continue to spiral, seemingly out of control. Meanwhile, too many Americans are not covered by health insurance- and a shocking amount are underinsured with shoddy policies that screw you over if you have the temerity to get, say, diabetes. That is why a hideous 76% of all US bankruptcies are contributed to by health care costs- I sure wouldn't want to have that sceptre hangong over my families heads.

Frankly, I think a lot of the opposition comes from people who don't like having a President with a funny name, who doesn't look like the ones on dollar bills. Unfortunately for them, Obama will be the President who pushed through the most important Social legislation since Medicare. It's pretty much a fait accompli, imo.

Originally Posted by jim1176

you mean:

6. Americans who have Health Care Insurance paid for by someone else spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.

The reason they spend less time waiting is because the people without insurance are excluded ya dumb twat

Shooting yerself in the foot, there, Jimbo. If everyone is on govt care (like those folks on Medicare/Caid, etc, without private insurance) then you'll all be waiting a long time, like we do in Canada or the UK.

OK, the people are waking up and they ain't taking this Obama crap:
Breaking News | Latest News | Current News - FOXNews.com

Maybe Obama should commission an overseas survey, one question-
"Would you swap the Healthcare system you have for the US Healthcare system".

Just ask a few people from some backward nations like, say, Oz, NZ, HK, Singapore, Germany, France, UK, Canada, Ireland, Sweden, Japan, Korea, Italy, Germany, Denmark, Spain and (why not) Cuba.

I wonder what the answer would be?

Originally Posted by sabang

Frankly, I think a lot of the opposition comes from people who don't like having a President with a funny name, who doesn't look like the ones on dollar bills. Unfortunately for them, Obama will be the President who pushed through the most important Social legislation since Medicare. It's pretty much a fait accompli, imo.

I agree with your sentiments, Sabang, however I think you may be too optimistic.

If you listen to reasonable voices, unlike some of the commentary in this forum, you have to conclude that the goal of reforming healthcare is bi-partisan. The real, core opposition to the proposals out there is that they will add dangerously to the national debt. Everyone needs to be concerned with that. If the cost of reforming healthcare is higher taxes, it will fail. As an American, I would like to see the healthcare system reformed but timing is horrible. Businesses and individuals may just have to continue to suffer under mounting costs until this nation finds its economic legs again.

Originally Posted by sabang

Maybe Obama should commission an overseas survey, one question-
"Would you swap the Healthcare system you have for the US Healthcare system".

Just ask a few people from some backward nations like, say, Oz, NZ, HK, Singapore, Germany, France, UK, Canada, Ireland, Sweden, Japan, Korea, Italy, Germany, Denmark, Spain and (why not) Cuba.

I wonder what the answer would be?

Lemmeesee, Singapore: I had national health and paid at the clinic once so I didn't have to wait for a sick leave piece of paper; Japan: paid for my own annual checkups because of the wait time and also paid $5,000 plus airfare for surgery in Canada after the Japs decided I should have parts cut out - the Jap system repaid me about $100; HK: also paid for my own checkups, but got ER free once and the nice doctor told me to schedule a follow-up, which I did and was scheduled for sometime the next year; the UK: 555555555, this I won't forget, three years wait for a bladdy gyno checkup, so paid my own; Canada: well, as I've said before, I got a GP only because he's the fam doc, and hey, my Sis died so there was room for one more. I'm booked for a mammogram (only have to wait til Feb 2010 -- geez, glad I don't have any lumps).
My firm always had mandatory annual physicals, but can't remember if it offered private. Whatever, I never had any. I can get private care (besides the $54/month I pay for FREE healthcare) here in Canada thru my Alumni Assn -- only $100 a month, which includes private room, acute care, some dental. Hek, what a deal.

Please tell us how the other countries fare.

House Democrats are scrambling to come up with tax increases or other means of paying for their $1.2 trillion medical insurance plan. Yet the legislation they're trying to cram through Congress is even costlier than they'd have you believe.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that the House Democrats' legislation would spend $1.2 trillion over the next 10 years. Yet that cost estimate is based on a tried-and-true budget gimmick that members of Congress use to hide how much of your money they want to spend.
In reality, the Democrats' health care bill is at least 50% more expensive than the $1.2 trillion estimate suggests.
President Obama and his fellow partisans want the federal government to guarantee medical insurance coverage to all Americans. According to estimates by the left-leaning Urban Institute, providing health insurance to all of the uninsured would cost just under $2 trillion over the next 10 years.
House Dems Hide Cost Of Health Plan | Michael F. Cannon | Cato Institute: Commentary


Yummy!