Obama finally called them out

[VT-Chicklit]

Blue Skys said I have to point out that the constitution states it will promote the general welfare, not provide for it. I don't understand why it is ok to just disregard the document that this country was born from. America is unique in the fact that is was built on the premise of freedom from oppression and a government that was too big for it's britches. Look what is happening, the same thing our founding fathers were fleeing from is happening in this country. Don't tread on me!

I don't understand why a more simple solution might not be reached instead of going to the single payer government run healthcare. An all or nothing type of solution does not seem to be the way to go. The system is so flawed, why not chip away at the problems slowly. Work on collecting money owed by those who have not paid for services rendered (retail companies would call that stealing and would prosecute to the fullest extent of the law). Insurance companies receive discounts before paying for covered procedures, why would a self pay customer? I am not an expert in the medical field, but I have some common sense, and the single pay government run option is not the common sense solution to this gargantuine problem.

Regulate costs, demand payment for services rendered - set up reasonable payment plans. There will always be the exception with outrageous medical costs for a dibilitating deasease, but that is not the norm, well, not yet anyway.

Educate people on how they treat their bodies, what they eat, what they do during the day - get out and move and excercise. It's not rocket science.

I pay my bills, why do I need to pay everyone else's bills too?

You are a person who I believe gets the big picture.

 

[Blue Skys]

Blue Skys said I have to point out that the constitution states it will promote the general welfare, not provide for it. I don't understand why it is ok to just disregard the document that this country was born from. America is unique in the fact that is was built on the premise of freedom from oppression and a government that was too big for it's britches. Look what is happening, the same thing our founding fathers were fleeing from is happening in this country. Don't tread on me!

I don't understand why a more simple solution might not be reached instead of going to the single payer government run healthcare. An all or nothing type of solution does not seem to be the way to go. The system is so flawed, why not chip away at the problems slowly. Work on collecting money owed by those who have not paid for services rendered (retail companies would call that stealing and would prosecute to the fullest extent of the law). Insurance companies receive discounts before paying for covered procedures, why would a self pay customer? I am not an expert in the medical field, but I have some common sense, and the single pay government run option is not the common sense solution to this gargantuine problem.

Regulate costs, demand payment for services rendered - set up reasonable payment plans. There will always be the exception with outrageous medical costs for a dibilitating deasease, but that is not the norm, well, not yet anyway.

Educate people on how they treat their bodies, what they eat, what they do during the day - get out and move and excercise. It's not rocket science.

I pay my bills, why do I need to pay everyone else's bills too?

You are a person who I believe gets the big picture.

Thanks! I try.

 

[Wifezilla]

You don't see Canada going into major debt because of their healthcare.

Hummm...according this this, there is a deficit problem in Canada...

"The centralization of administration, already well underway, will cut costs, says Duckett, to help deal with the $1.1-billion deficit left by the former health regions. For instance, Duckett hopes to save $200 million by using a central payroll system for all Alberta Health Services employees to replace almost a dozen separate systems."
http://www.vancouversun.com/health/health+hotseat/1898527/story.html

 

[FarmerChick]

don't understand why a more simple solution might not be reached instead of going to the single payer government run healthcare. An all or nothing type of solution does not seem to be the way to go. The system is so flawed, why not chip away at the problems slowly.

__________

The U.S. does not have a single payer plan on the table at this time. So trying to "combat" this issue is useless. There is no single payer system being drawn up at this time.

And the second part---it will not be all or nothing. they are working on a way to get everyone insured, without going to single payer system and at the same time----all those "why don't we chip away" at the problems-----well it sure hasn't worked over the last 20 years of anyone in office now has it? No move forward...stagnant. Nope, doesn't work..it's been proven to be useless....big changes are needed. And change hurts, but we grow through it.

 

[FarmerChick]

Nothing has been truly changed over years and years and now the system is severely broken. Many like it that way and want no changes.....well, too bad for those that don't because all those little chips to fix the problems, if realized, might not have made this future....but it did. So now the problem needs real tackling and I hope the govt. does it for everyone!

****don't tread on me. Yea while your fellow countrymen are denied coverage. many do not have a basic right to healthcare....and I am not talking constitution, I am talking basic humanitarian rights. A wealthy country taking no action to ensure the strength of its citizens.

I for one want that help from the govt if that is what it takes. Everyone needs insurance. Everyone needs healthcare. And to me, it is a right. A right that has grown from need and humanitarian reasons...not from a piece of paper long ago that had all of a small population, no current up to date medical coverage that was on their front doorstep to be had.
If the founding fathers knew that medical technology of today was "going to be available"---don't you think they would consider it reasonable for all citizens to have some form of care? Even if provided thru the govt?

You base logic of today on people from the past.

While I agree with the constitution on the freedom of the country and more---I never agree that just because the govt. itself wants to help the citizens of its country in current times...is truly a violoation of the constitution.

all in how you interpret the founding fathers and what you think they may do today vs. 200/more years ago.

I interpret it to mean that freedom when times progress....should be taken in to account. New rights for citizens when the future is sought. Changes to keep the country alive and healthy and vibrant. Not to become a third world country because we have the solution to give our citizens care, yet refuse. Cause of money or anything else.

The old "don't tread on me" is MAINLY about other countries treading in our lands. It mainly refers to outsiders taking our freedoms. While yes it somewhat applies to the govt of course, from taking total control, it does not apply to leaving your fellow countrymen to be with sickness throughtout most of their lives, when medical technology is right in their face. Shameful to me.

It has been shameful what we have done in this country to our fellow citizens......from the money corrupt to the way we treat our poor and those who need help.
(And believe me I hate the fraud and waste of money in the each system with every breathe I have....)---but you can't deny coverage to everyone...not when it is right there for everyone to have. Growing pains with a new healthcare system...so what...we will all adjust.

Nature changes constantly. Minute to minute. You can't stop her. Well our country is stagnant. It is not vibrant, it is not changing. It will die. And we are very close to death now in this country for millions. And times are not good at all --still many to lose homes and all acquired wealth because of medical problems.

Our country was vibrant, changing minute to minute. Now we are stuck, stagnant, still, and with our citizens in peril. Every one of us on this board, thru small grace, could lose it all from an illness. I don't want for anyone.

Yes there is going to be big money spent to handle these changes---yes maybe more money from the citizens as the changes take effect....what else is new? If we do nothing we pay dearly and many exist without basic medical care that still costs us millions---we do something and it costs us but everyone has healthcare to some degree. Money spent is money spent...might as well have it buy something worthy.


(just rambling out some thoughts)

 

[patandchickens]

You say this is fearmongering. . . it is not. This is what will happen over time because of this bill.

Sorry, I'm sticking with fearmongering ("the use of fear to influence the opinions and actions of others towards some specific end. The feared object or subject is sometimes exaggerated, and the pattern of fear mongering is usually one of repetition, in order to continuously reinforce the intended effects of this tactic" to quote a Wikipedia definition).

Most of that list is stuff ALREADY HAPPENING RIGHT NOW ANYWAY, UNDER THE CURRENT SYSTEM (e.g. do you seriously think there is no functional rationing of healthcare *now*???); the rest is *possible* but not written-into-the-bill inevitable. But it is certainly written in a way that makes it sound new and scary.

It is the policy that we disagree with.

I would have believed that of the author of that piece, *up to* the point where he talks about the bill being a transfer of power to *the Obama* administration. That kind of blows the jig

Like I said. I am sure some people do disagree purely on policy grounds, and that is fair enough, and I am willing to listen to rational fact-based and logic-based arguments.

I do not find that essay, however, to be a convincing attempt to be evenhanded and levelheaded about the argument

Pat

 

[Wifezilla]

No comments on the 1 billion debt in Alberta over health care?
Or 87% of employers saying they will cut health benefits if this passes?
Anybody?

 

[FarmerChick]

You don't see Canada going into major debt because of their healthcare.

Hummm...according this this, there is a deficit problem in Canada...

"The centralization of administration, already well underway, will cut costs, says Duckett, to help deal with the $1.1-billion deficit left by the former health regions. For instance, Duckett hopes to save $200 million by using a central payroll system for all Alberta Health Services employees to replace almost a dozen separate systems."
http://www.vancouversun.com/health/health+hotseat/1898527/story.html

and their debt COVERS every single citizen---every single on has access to good healthcare.

we are in debt up to our eyeballs with a crap healthcare system...and 46 million people are not covered....and more to be in that group from losing their homes and wealth to medical bills. And more babies to be born into families with no coverage, so no early healthcare which means more money in the end for all.

And Canada is working on fixing their debt. Bit by bit, piece by piece, just the example of combining billing from separate systems into one universal system can save $200 mil. Hmm...if they impliment those small changes now and can easily save that debt and reduce that debt.

All those little changes they are going to tackle, hmm...seems smart to do NOW like they are. Take control before it gets out of control like the U.S.

Every system is imperfect to some level. People are imperfect. BUT key is they have all healthcare for all citizens while in some debt---U.S. in tons of debt also and not everyone covered.

 

[FarmerChick]

No comments on the 1 billion debt in Alberta over health care?
Or 87% of employers saying they will cut health benefits if this passes?
Anybody?

LOL

yea I just did...be patient..HA HA

----

Oh the employers. Any company over X amt. of employees can not cut coverage...that is targeted at small business and 95% of those will be exempt and given tax credits etc. to entice them to keep their coverages on their employees.

 

[Blue Skys]

And the second part---it will not be all or nothing. they are working on a way to get everyone insured, without going to single payer system and at the same time----all those "why don't we chip away" at the problems-----well it sure hasn't worked over the last 20 years of anyone in office now has it? No move forward...stagnant. Nope, doesn't work..it's been proven to be useless....big changes are needed. And change hurts, but we grow through it.

What steps have been taken over the last 20 years to make any sort of improvement?

I'm not scared of change, change is good, but the change this administration wants to make is not in the best intrest of the entire country.