HC not too far, didn't go far enough.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

The AP poll was conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Overall, 30 percent favored the legislation, while 40 percent opposed it, and another 30 percent remained neutral.

That's a big leap to say 2 - 1 in favor. I wonder if they get dizzy spinning that fast.

I dunno, I guess teh AP is a vast, LW conspiracy, unless they provide data that is complimentary to the RW.

I'm certain that in your liberal world a 30% approval number actually means 66%.

It's not my assertion, it's the AP and yet another conspiracy according to you.

I'm certin you linked to the article because you vehemently disagreed with it's assertions. You need a beeper your backing up so fast.

There you go, oh purveyor of the ad hominem, if you can't refute the article or its substance, attack the O. Poster.

Few on here would bother refuting the basic failings of the math. What else is there to talk about when the premise of the article is 30% approval = 2 to 1 approval? And where do you get the conspiracy thing from? You've been hanging with Rhys too long.

2:1 feel it should go further, what is hard to believe or understand there? They disaprove as it doesn't go far enough.

It's your conspiracy; the media is all left and all out to get you.

[airdvr 210]

Quote

2:1 feel it should go further, what is hard to believe or understand there?

Whatever.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[billvon 3,107]

>yes the cut 500b from medicare

So you're mad as hell that he spent too much, cut too much, didn't spend enough and didn't cut enough.

The GOP position in a nutshell. "We oppose everything he did, no matter what it was!"

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

2:1 feel it should go further, what is hard to believe or understand there?

Whatever.

Now you're saying something intelligent.

[airdvr 210]

Quote

Quote

Quote

2:1 feel it should go further, what is hard to believe or understand there?

Whatever.

Now you're saying something intelligent.

OK Lucky...show me where in that article it shows 2:1. I'm interested to see how math works in your world.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[jgoose71 0]

Quote

Not far enough. And, in some ways too far.

Some aspects of the bill leave a bad taste in my mouth. (requirement to purchase health coverage, 1099 reporting, etc.) Most of those could have been avoided by going to a single payer system, though. They also could have been avoided if the repubes had been willing to come to the table and discuss real reform, instead of simply screaming NO and using everything they could to their political advantage.


Nobody should have to worry about losing everything they and their family have worked for due to an illness or injury. This is a real concern with our current system, which before the various reforms come in to play still allows insurance companies to rescind coverage after an occurrence with no cause.

Simple question: If a stranger was injured in front of your house would you help them? I believe any decent person would answer yes. Health care reform is simply taking this scenario to a national level.

This is all fine and dandy, but do you think he could have done it with out all of the back room hidden deals? He could have passed it with out all the bribes and buy off passed to labor unions, pharmaceutical companies, and insurance companies.

Can you explain the sky rocketing premiums? I thought they were supposed to be under control. I guess we had to line the pockets of his lackeys first to make anything happen.

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[doughboyshred 0]

Quote

Can you explain the sky rocketing premiums?

Lack of price controls, which the right fought tooth and nail, and would not have been an issue with a single payer system.

[futuredivot 0]

Cool, so the Administration lacks both the sense to to the right thing and the balls to do the wrong thing effectively.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Can you explain the sky rocketing premiums?

Lack of price controls, which the right fought tooth and nail, and would not have been an issue with a single payer system.

Price controls???

Not very old are you

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Kennedy 0]

I guess he doesn't realize that price controls are a sign that things are broken, not that things are getting better.

edit: typo - spelling

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[rushmc 23]

Quote

I guess he doesn't realize that price controls are a sign that things are borken, not that things are getting better.

And only makes things worse, not better

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,107]

>I guess he doesn't realize that price controls are a sign that things are broken,
>not that things are getting better.

I think you misread him. He said that price controls were not _needed_ with a single payer system. Your statement above agrees with his.

[Kennedy 0]

Actually, in response to a question about skyrocketing premiums, he said premiums were going up because there weren't any price controls implemented. You need to read all parts, Bill. What's with all the selective responses lately?

And no, I don't agree about the single payer, becuase let's face it, single payer is government run health insurance, and that's the ultimate price control.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Actually, in response to a question about skyrocketing premiums, he said premiums were going up because there weren't any price controls implemented. You need to read all parts, Bill. What's with all the selective responses lately?

And no, I don't agree about the single payer, becuase let's face it, single payer is government run health insurance, and that's the ultimate price control.

Price control through mandated choices is not the same as affordability through competition.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billvon 3,107]

>Price control through mandated choices is not the same as affordability
>through competition.

Agreed. I'd rather have very basic services only covered via a single payer system, with everything else based on a fee-for-service model.

[wmw999 2,584]

Quote

Agreed. I'd rather have very basic services only covered via a single payer system, with everything else based on a fee-for-service model.

And that would offer lots of opportunity for insurance companies, drug companies, etc. to compete for the money of people who actually have some.

Even now, you get better medical care if you have a better insurance plan -- that will never change.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

>Price control through mandated choices is not the same as affordability
>through competition.

Agreed. I'd rather have very basic services only covered via a single payer system, with everything else based on a fee-for-service model.

Exactly how would you define "very basic services" in your suggestion. Because all I can imagine is that definition creeping to include everything.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[wmw999 2,584]

Quote

Because all I can imagine is that definition creeping to include everything.

I can imagine that, too, unfortunately. What we're doing now is really expensive (providing many of those services via emergency rooms and only when problems become critical).

Maybe there isn't an easy answer.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

And that would offer lots of opportunity for insurance companies, drug companies, etc. to compete for the money of people who actually have some.

Even now, you get better medical care if you have a better insurance plan -- that will never change.

Have you talked to anyone who works in a doctor's office lately? (other than as a patient)

I ask because the government likes to pay pennies on the dollar for services. I'm having trouble imagining a system that didn't either bankrupt insurance companies or doctors.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Quote

>Price control through mandated choices is not the same as affordability
>through competition.

Agreed. I'd rather have very basic services only covered via a single payer system, with everything else based on a fee-for-service model.

Exactly how would you define "very basic services" in your suggestion. Because all I can imagine is that definition creeping to include everything.

Eventually it would.

the saving grace here is that the government will only be able to afford the doctors that have the equivalent of their brand new "A" liscense.

But at least the quality of care won't decrease.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[wmw999 2,584]

I know a doctor, does that count? That said, yeah, Medicare and Medicaid pay a whole lot less than most other insurances. I'd expect the same to be true of any truly basic insurance.

I'd expect people who pay for better on-top coverage to get getter services; I think it works that way now with Medicare supplement policies (but I could be wrong there -- I haven't look at that much, because my dad had supremely good insurance).

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[doughboyshred 0]

Quote

>I guess he doesn't realize that price controls are a sign that things are broken,
>not that things are getting better.

I think you misread him. He said that price controls were not _needed_ with a single payer system. Your statement above agrees with his.

Pretty much.

A public option would have forced insurance companies to keep prices in check. Instead they now have a mandate that provides them with a bunch of new customers, while they can essentially raise prices as drastically as they would like (within a loosely regulated framework).

The HCR bill was far from perfect, but doing nothing (as the republicans have proposed) would have been much worse, and still we would see health insurance premiums rising dramatically as they have every year for as long as I can remember.

Do you right wingers actually think that your premiums will go down if the Republicans manage to implement their farcical pledge to america?

btw, I have grey hairs and am a licensed general contractor. So, I'm not young, and I do pay taxes.

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Quote

>I guess he doesn't realize that price controls are a sign that things are broken,
>not that things are getting better.

I think you misread him. He said that price controls were not _needed_ with a single payer system. Your statement above agrees with his.

Pretty much.

A public option would have forced insurance companies to keep prices in check. Instead they now have a mandate that provides them with a bunch of new customers, while they can essentially raise prices as drastically as they would like (within a loosely regulated framework).

The HCR bill was far from perfect, but doing nothing (as the republicans have proposed) would have been much worse, and still we would see health insurance premiums rising dramatically as they have every year for as long as I can remember.

Do you right wingers actually think that your premiums will go down if the Republicans manage to implement their farcical pledge to america?

btw, I have grey hairs and am a licensed general contractor. So, I'm not young, and I do pay taxes.

The rebuclicand didn't want to do nothing. They wanted and STILL WANT to reduce the exposure to law suits and put a large Tort reform in place to lower costs. THAT is where it all needs to start.

Reduce the costs of the services and overhead and then the costs go down for competition.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>I guess he doesn't realize that price controls are a sign that things are broken,
>not that things are getting better.

I think you misread him. He said that price controls were not _needed_ with a single payer system. Your statement above agrees with his.

Pretty much.

A public option would have forced insurance companies to keep prices in check. Instead they now have a mandate that provides them with a bunch of new customers, while they can essentially raise prices as drastically as they would like (within a loosely regulated framework).

The HCR bill was far from perfect, but doing nothing (as the republicans have proposed) would have been much worse, and still we would see health insurance premiums rising dramatically as they have every year for as long as I can remember.

Do you right wingers actually think that your premiums will go down if the Republicans manage to implement their farcical pledge to america?

btw, I have grey hairs and am a licensed general contractor. So, I'm not young, and I do pay taxes.

The rebuclicand didn't want to do nothing. They wanted and STILL WANT to reduce the exposure to law suits and put a large Tort reform in place to lower costs. THAT is where it all needs to start.

Reduce the costs of the services and overhead and then the costs go down for competition.

As well as end mandates and open up states boarders to all insurance companies .

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

A public option would have forced insurance companies to keep prices in check. Instead they now have a mandate that provides them with a bunch of new customers, while they can essentially raise prices as drastically as they would like (within a loosely regulated framework).

And given the claims they're going to have to pay, they'll probably need to.

Letting insurance companies compete across state lines would have been much better for controlling prices and could have possibly resulted in premium decreses in some markets.

Quote

The HCR bill was far from perfect, but doing nothing (as the republicans have proposed) would have been much worse, and still we would see health insurance premiums rising dramatically as they have every year for as long as I can remember.

Yeah, ok

Quote

Do you right wingers actually think that your premiums will go down if the Republicans manage to implement their farcical pledge to america?

Nope - unlike the left wingers, we realize that doctors don't work for free.

Unfortunately, the left-wing logic breaks down when you realize that people will just pay the fine until they *REALLY* need the insurance. Sounds like *JUST* the ticket for making sure the company has the funds available to pay those claims, doesn't it?

Quote

btw, I have grey hairs and am a licensed general contractor. So, I'm not young, and I do pay taxes.

So?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706