fossg 0 #1 February 11, 2011 More veterans may have been exposed to serious infections such as HIV and hepatitis at VA facilities because of inadequately cleaned equipment. This was the headline that greeted me this morning when I perused the news... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #2 February 11, 2011 This originally came out a couple of years ago. I was a patient at the John Cochran V.A. hospital (the hospital the op is referencing) in St. Louis for 8 years. I would testify to how bad JCVA is. For one thing, it is located on Grand Ave. in the midst of gang territory. Crack dealers will approach you at the stop lights near JCVA. A large number of people who work at JCVA are black. I have no problem at all with that. My problem and the same for others who use the V.A. in St. Louis is that if you are white, the people who are suppose to pull your files and let the doctor know you are there will push you aside in favor of letting other black people go before you. I cannot tell you how many times that I had sat in the waiting room until the end of the day only to be told to come back on another day. I have reported several V.A. employees for incompetence. The people they employ do not get the grade as they seem to care very little about the patients. The hospital goes, it always seemed to be dirty. JCVA seemed to have the most incompetent people available, so it is no wonder that guidelines were not followed."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #3 February 11, 2011 And this is the Government you want to provide your healthcare on a much larger scale? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #4 February 11, 2011 QuoteAnd this is the Government you want to provide your healthcare on a much larger scale? If you had actually read any of the HC proposal you would know that the government would not be providing the healthcare, only setting regulations for the provision of healthcare. Changes are long overdue. The problems at JCVA has been going on for years. If you want to see a real mess, take a look at the Jefferson Barracks VA in St. Louis. It's disgusting."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #5 February 11, 2011 QuoteQuoteAnd this is the Government you want to provide your healthcare on a much larger scale? If you had actually read any of the HC proposal you would know that the government would not be providing the healthcare, only setting regulations for the provision of healthcare. Changes are long overdue. The problems at JCVA has been going on for years. If you want to see a real mess, take a look at the Jefferson Barracks VA in St. Louis. It's disgusting. Yes, I'm sure it will be so much different than the V.A. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,589 #6 February 11, 2011 There is no basic health care option that will be excellent. There is no way that everyone will get access to excellent health care. It's easy to say that they can if they just pay for it, but that's kind of like saying that getting a new Cadillac is easy if you just pay for it. Right now we're delivering health care to people who can't afford to pay for it in just about the least possible efficient way. Do you really think that's optimal? What, besides "work harder" (to those folks, that is), do you suggest? 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) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #7 February 11, 2011 QuoteQuoteAnd this is the Government you want to provide your healthcare on a much larger scale? If you had actually read any of the HC proposal you would know that the government would not be providing the healthcare, only setting regulations for the provision of healthcare. Changes are long overdue. It appears structured to fail, and to give support to the large number of proponents who want to eliminate insurance companies already. Much like amtrack. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #8 February 11, 2011 QuoteThere is no basic health care option that will be excellent. There is no way that everyone will get access to excellent health care. It's easy to say that they can if they just pay for it, but that's kind of like saying that getting a new Cadillac is easy if you just pay for it. Right now we're delivering health care to people who can't afford to pay for it in just about the least possible efficient way. Do you really think that's optimal? What, besides "work harder" (to those folks, that is), do you suggest? Wendy P. Then why not just put those who can't afford healthcare on a welfare-type program and be done with it instead of imposing a huge burden on those who don't want it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dmcoco84 5 #9 February 11, 2011 QuoteAnd this is the Government you want to provide your healthcare on a much larger scale? Its 10x worse for Native Americans. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #10 February 11, 2011 Quote Right now we're delivering health care to people who can't afford to pay for it in just about the least possible efficient way. Do you really think that's optimal? What, besides "work harder" (to those folks, that is), do you suggest? Wendy P. Stop giving it to people who can't afford it."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #11 February 11, 2011 QuoteQuoteAnd this is the Government you want to provide your healthcare on a much larger scale? If you had actually read any of the HC proposal you would know that the government would not be providing the healthcare, only setting regulations for the provision of healthcare. The government couldn't even ensure that its regulations were being followed in a facility it owned. Why do you think they can do better elsewhere?"What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dmcoco84 5 #12 February 11, 2011 Quote If you had actually read any of the HC proposal you would know that the government would not be providing the healthcare, only setting regulations for the provision of healthcare. Changes are long overdue. Oh right? Is that the case? Bush's Medicare Part D... Progressive Stepping Stone. SCHIP - (Paid for by Obama and Boner's Smoking Habits) - Progressive Stepping Stone. Obamacare - Progressive Stepping Stone. And had they gotten a public option: Progressive Stepping Stone... to Single Payer. Public option is Trojan horse for Single Payer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sTfZJBYo1I Starter Home = Stepping Stone http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSfB3Bne2VQ Obama is the reincarnation of Woodrow Wilson... using FDR tactics... what did FDR want? The Second Bill of Rights: (In His Own Words) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EZ5bx9AyI4 Employment Based Health insurance... Progressive Stepping Stone... Started by FDR. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dmcoco84 5 #13 February 11, 2011 QuoteDo you really think that's optimal? Nope... and I've worked in an ER for over 4 years. So I know first hand! Obamacare is not the solution. And the 10 pages worth of mandates that are being used to justify a 2k+ page bill, could all be passed in an afternoon... in single initiatives. This increase of bureaucracy and additional agencies... is like dropping napalm on a forest fire. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #14 February 11, 2011 Quote Quote Do you really think that's optimal? Nope... and I've worked in an ER for over 4 years. So I know first hand! Obamacare is not the solution. And the 10 pages worth of mandates that are being used to justify a 2k+ page bill, could all be passed in an afternoon... in single initiatives. This increase of bureaucracy and additional agencies... is like dropping napalm on a forest fire. But since we are here, perhaps they would understand it more if you said, Av Gas, Jet-A, or jp-5I'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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #15 February 11, 2011 >And the 10 pages worth of mandates that are being used to justify a 2k+ >page bill, could all be passed in an afternoon... in single initiatives. Go for it! Come up with a better solution; I'd support it. >This increase of bureaucracy and additional agencies... is like dropping >napalm on a forest fire. And you have better napalm? Sounds good to me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dmcoco84 5 #16 February 11, 2011 Dude, Paul Ryan already put it all on the table, both behind closed doors, and during the BS talks we saw on TV... Obama flipped him the bird. What we saw was an act, because they had already argued it all behind closed doors. And Pelosi and Reed already knew what they were going to do. Don't play that crap with me. Progressives don't want common sense, free market, constitutional solutions. What Ryan voiced, is the antithesis of Progressive ideas and desires... it doesn't give them control and power. And he has a great plan for Social Security too. But if you really need me to spell it out for you, I can. But first, this evening I'm going to answer the first question I asked you and Quade. What is the definition of... Small and Limited Government. Quote And you have better napalm? Sounds good to me. Noooooooooo... I've got Smokey the Bear. He's a Founder Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #17 February 11, 2011 Quote>And the 10 pages worth of mandates that are being used to justify a 2k+ >page bill, could all be passed in an afternoon... in single initiatives. Go for it! Come up with a better solution; I'd support it. >This increase of bureaucracy and additional agencies... is like dropping >napalm on a forest fire. And you have better napalm? Sounds good to me. Hmmm - sounds suspiciously like a "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" question.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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #18 February 11, 2011 Quote>And the 10 pages worth of mandates that are being used to justify a 2k+ >page bill, could all be passed in an afternoon... in single initiatives. Go for it! Come up with a better solution; I'd support it. >This increase of bureaucracy and additional agencies... is like dropping >napalm on a forest fire. And you have better napalm? Sounds good to me. Put them on welfare and give them free governmet paid healthcare and a V.A. hospital and don't force govt. run healthcare down the rest of our throats. I would think you lefties would be all for a new government program but I guess this solution isn't grand enough. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,589 #19 February 11, 2011 Quotedon't force govt. run healthcare down the rest of our throatsMoney will always be able to buy better health care. It can in the UK and other places with socialized medicine. What on earth makes you think it will be impossible to buy private health care in the US if there is a national health plan? 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) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #20 February 11, 2011 QuoteQuotedon't force govt. run healthcare down the rest of our throatsMoney will always be able to buy better health care. It can in the UK and other places with socialized medicine. What on earth makes you think it will be impossible to buy private health care in the US if there is a national health plan? Wendy P. Because there won't be anyone left to buy it from.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #21 February 11, 2011 QuoteQuotedon't force govt. run healthcare down the rest of our throatsMoney will always be able to buy better health care. It can in the UK and other places with socialized medicine. What on earth makes you think it will be impossible to buy private health care in the US if there is a national health plan? Wendy P. Why are you so worried that someone with money might get better healthcare than you? You still haven't answered my question. Why doesn't the government simply create a welfare program to cover those who can't afford healthcare? They could screen those who claim they can't afford it much like they do for other social services. If someone truely can't afford it, then my tax dollars pay for them. I have no problem with that as long as the govt. cuts something else to pay for it. What's wrong with my plan? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #22 February 11, 2011 Quote You still haven't answered my question. Why doesn't the government simply create a welfare program to cover those who can't afford healthcare? They could screen those who claim they can't afford it much like they do for other social services. If someone truely can't afford it, then my tax dollars pay for them. I have no problem with that as long as the govt. cuts something else to pay for it. What's wrong with my plan? What do you think Medicaid is?"What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,589 #23 February 11, 2011 I'm not the least bit worried that someone will get better healthcare than I will. I'm sure that can happen. We have a plan for indigent people, it's called Medicaid. It's one of those entitlements that people want to get rid of. 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) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #24 February 11, 2011 QuoteI'm not the least bit worried that someone will get better healthcare than I will. I'm sure that can happen. We have a plan for indigent people, it's called Medicaid. It's one of those entitlements that people want to get rid of. Wendy P. Those that want to get rid of Medicaid don't want to replace it with Obamacare. You still haven't answered my question. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #25 February 12, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteAnd this is the Government you want to provide your healthcare on a much larger scale? If you had actually read any of the HC proposal you would know that the government would not be providing the healthcare, only setting regulations for the provision of healthcare. Changes are long overdue. The problems at JCVA has been going on for years. If you want to see a real mess, take a look at the Jefferson Barracks VA in St. Louis. It's disgusting. Yes, I'm sure it will be so much different than the V.A. Would you rather see a complete deregulation of the insurance market? Guidelines are needed and people in place to make sure that the guide is followed. People who are not doing their job waste money. Such is the case at the JCVA. The people who dropped the ball will end up costing the taxpayers thousands of dollars. Dollars that would had been put to a better use. The HC bill is far from perfect, but there are provisions in place to remove what does not work. Over time the bill could be tweaked so that it works for everyone. What we have now is a mess. This bill is, at least, a start towards something good. Would you rather prefer the status quo?"...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites