mattp Posted August 13, 2008 Posted August 13, 2008 Yup. Freud bit me. I'm curoius about this idea that Hillary was going to close down or take over all private healthcare services. That is not consistent with what I've recently read. Hmm. Quote
Fairweather Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 Yup. Freud bit me. I'm curoius about this idea that Hillary was going to close down or take over all private healthcare services. That is not consistent with what I've recently read. Hmm. We'll never know for sure, because her plan was formulated behind closed doors--much like Cheney's reviled energy plan seven years ago. I've read that one plan called for the punishment of doctors who provided private services. Quote
mattp Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 Dude you're paranoid. Don't you think that she would have wanted to have the option to see a private doctor herself? Do you think she planned to fly to Monaco for this? I think you've been had by some right wing propagandist Hillary Haters. Quote
kevbone Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 VA Benefits are NOT socialism. They were paid for by service to our country as part of the "benefits package", if you will. This service is NOT a transfer payment. Bullshit. Who pays for the military? You and me brother. Quote
kevbone Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 VA Benefits are NOT socialism. They were paid for by service to our country as part of the "benefits package", if you will. This service is NOT a transfer payment. I shop a lot. That's a service to our country, because I pour money into the economy.And I pay taxes. That's a service. My last impulse purchases at Pottery Barn and Fireworks might have paid for some more bullets and grenades for use in Iraq. That's a service. Where's my free health care, dammit? :tup: Quote
kevbone Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 I like how so many people who aren't currently wealthy ardently defend the interests of the wealthy, presumably on the basis that someday, they too might be wealthy and will want to enjoy all the special privileges. The biggest trick the wealthiest of this country ever pulled, was convincing the public, that what is good for them, is good for you. Quote
billcoe Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 As I understand it, and I think this was one of Hillarys biggest shining moments, she hired a recently retired, sharp, female republican congressional staffer who had a strong interest in health care to help her revamp the Health Care issue which was poorly put forth earlier. The plan was to recind or allow to expire the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% and totally fund it off that. Looked like a good idea from what I saw, and big props to Hillary for going to the mat and trying to do what she believed was the right thing for the country. Had she exhibited this kind of behavior instead of the posing she was doing so poorly with, she'd most likely have been the next president. We waste so Fucking much money on healthcare. You all opposed to any changes need to start by recognizing that you still pay for those poor folks smart enough to work the system to go to emergency rooms to get checked for something as simple as a case of the sniffles while working stiffs just get shit on and impoverished. It's damn efficient as it is right now. The hospitals CANNOT AND WILL NOT turn anyone away from the emergency room. Oregon is a bit different than the rest of the nation with the Oregon Health care plan as Oregons Governor for 8 years, Kitshaber was an ER room doctor, this was in issue he changed vis a vis the federal funding with our state alone, which is working pretty good. Quote
Tokogirl Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 By law the ERs are not allowed to turn someone away based on lack of ability to pay for the treatment. Quote
billcoe Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 By law the ERs are not allowed to turn someone away based on lack of ability to pay for the treatment. Thank yew,... the defense rests. Quote
akhalteke Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 Are you better off now than you were 8 years ago? Did someone fly planes into the twin towers and the pentagon previous to 8 years ago? The world has changed. That our way of life is relatively unchanged is quite remarkable as I see it. Tell me....what does planes flying into buildings have to do with our occupation of Iraq? Last time I checked the 19 highjackers were all from Saudi Arabia. WTF? What does Iraq have to do with what I was talking about kiddo? Quote
akhalteke Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 Matt...I am not saying we will win anything. To win a war, one must be at war. We are occupying this country. Nothing more, nothing less. KKK....STFU Mire yourself in semantics my dear chap. See where it gets you... Quote
kevbone Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 See where is gets me? What are you talking about? Do you think we are at war? Who are we fighting? Did they attack us? Who are they? Quote
mattp Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 It is even more than that, Bill. We are already paying for a lot more than simply emergency rooms and these guys say that if you account for all tax-funded healthcare spending we are already paying more than we might for even a single payor healthcare system. Americans already pay for national health insurance — they just don’t get it. In this 2002 Health Affairs paper, David Himmelstein and Steffie Woolhandler point out that the standard accounting miscategorizes two major public health expenditures as private: the tax credit for private health insurance and the cost of the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program. When these costs are accounted for, it becomes evident that Americans already pay the world’s highest health care taxes. In fact, the amount of public health spending in the U.S. is greater than the combined public and private spending of nations which provide universal comprehensive health insurance. A single-payer system could provide such coverage to all Americans with no need for additional health dollars. PDF file for extended discussion Quote
mattp Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 Of course, even if the government can provide health insurance or even healthcare services cheaper than the private companies and of better quality, and even if their tax burden might actually go down, Fairweather, KK and Canyondweller would still be against it because this would be soclalism. It is a good thing these insane "government is the enemy" ideas weren't so popular when we undertook to wipe out Polio or build the interstate highway system and I, for one, am glad we at least have the medicaid and medicare systems that we presently have. Quote
canyondweller Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 I like how so many people who aren't currently wealthy ardently defend the interests of the wealthy, presumably on the basis that someday, they too might be wealthy and will want to enjoy all the special privileges. The biggest trick the wealthiest of this country ever pulled, was convincing the public, that what is good for them, is good for you. What, pray tell, is wrong with being wealthy, or aspiring to wealth? I do, every day. Pursuing success, prosperity, wealth...when did these become bad things? Quote
billcoe Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 Thanks Matt. Yeah, from the outside looking in Hillary round one on healthcare looked marginal at best, horrendous at worst. 2nd go round, from what I could see, and I didn't look too closely, looked like it was much better thought out and planned. It turned my opinion around 180 degrees on the subject. I know there may have been times I've been less than generous towards her, but I was very impressed with Hillary's choice of advisor's to work on that project. Maybe she'll transfer to over to Obama or McCain. Shes still a sitting senator. Quote
kevbone Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 I like how so many people who aren't currently wealthy ardently defend the interests of the wealthy, presumably on the basis that someday, they too might be wealthy and will want to enjoy all the special privileges. The biggest trick the wealthiest of this country ever pulled, was convincing the public, that what is good for them, is good for you. What, pray tell, is wrong with being wealthy, or aspiring to wealth? I do, every day. Pursuing success, prosperity, wealth...when did these become bad things? You are missing the point. Quote
canyondweller Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 I like how so many people who aren't currently wealthy ardently defend the interests of the wealthy, presumably on the basis that someday, they too might be wealthy and will want to enjoy all the special privileges. The biggest trick the wealthiest of this country ever pulled, was convincing the public, that what is good for them, is good for you. What, pray tell, is wrong with being wealthy, or aspiring to wealth? I do, every day. Pursuing success, prosperity, wealth...when did these become bad things? You are missing the point. Hmm...okay, I'll play dumb (lots of practice). What point am I missing? Quote
kevbone Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 Poor people (the majority of America) constantly vote against there best interest. Republicans (the rich) make it look like what is good for them is good for you. Quote
akhalteke Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 See where is gets me? What are you talking about? Do you think we are at war? Who are we fighting? Did they attack us? Who are they? 1) No. We are battling an insurgency 2) Insurgents; mostly Middle Eastern foreigners 3) Yes, daily. 4) Syrians, Pakistanis, Iranians, ect. Any more questions? Quote
underworld Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 the majority of america is not poor. ever really seen poor people? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.