Something is wrong here (this country)

Search

Rx. Senior
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
5,490
Tokens
I receive the care I need because I work for it. That's how America works. If you don't think that's how America works then I give up.

What about Social Security, Social Security Disability, Medicare, Medicaid, etc? (and that is only Federal, most states have their own socialized medicine plans as well)

If you think an unemployed person should receive the same care as an employed person then I don't agree. How do those two deserve the same care and treatment. One works and one doesn't.

How things should be is so often far different than how things are

Unequel levels of treatment does not have to mean zero treatment
 

New member
Joined
May 26, 2009
Messages
46
Tokens
Once again, I know very little about politics so forgive me here but what if we cut out the middle man. I havent heard of many medical insurance companies going out of business. There shouldnt be a surplus of cash in the medical field so that insurance companies can get fat and happy. Maybe this is an area the government should be more involved with instead of General Motors. Can the government take over the role of the insurance companies?
 

Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
8,811
Tokens
Once again, I know very little about politics so forgive me here but what if we cut out the middle man. I havent heard of many medical insurance companies going out of business. There shouldnt be a surplus of cash in the medical field so that insurance companies can get fat and happy. Maybe this is an area the government should be more involved with instead of General Motors. Can the government take over the role of the insurance companies?

Wutang,

Why not wait to hear what the compromise is? Sounds like it might have ideas that appeal to both sides (yes I know that's sounds like a pipe dream based on what's happened since January). You never know though.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- With Republicans fighting the idea of a government-run health insurance plan, Obama administration officials said Sunday that they are open to a compromise: a cooperative program that would expand coverage with taxpayer money but without direct governmental control.
<!--- Insert the sidebar information -->
<!-- Article Related Media --> Congress begins work this week on putting President Barack Obama's goal of universal health coverage into law. But some lawmakers are expected to introduce specific plans that run counter to Obama's political promises.
The concessions could be the smoothest way to deliver the bipartisan health care legislation the administration seeks by its self-imposed August deadline, officials said.
"There is no one-size-fits-all idea," Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said. "The president has said, 'These are the kinds of goals I'm after: lowering costs, covering all Americans, higher-quality care.' And around those goals, there are lots of ways to get there."
Some of those ways, though, run counter to the White House's earlier positions and those of Obama's political base. While supporters from Obama's left have advocated a government-run option -- championed by an ailing Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., and his surrogate, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn. -- presidential aides and congressional leaders in both parties have sought a speedy compromise.
Leading that pack: the cooperative approach, similar to rural utilities that have government financial support but operate independently. Sen. Kent Conrad, the North Dakota Democrat who chairs the Budget Committee, has offered the co-op idea as a way to avoid a bruising and protracted political wrangle on Capitol Hill.
"This really isn't, to me, a matter of right or wrong," Conrad said. "This is a matter of: Where are the votes in the United States Senate?"
That political situation has guided most of the talks. While Democrats control both chambers of Congress, they have only 59 senators -- one short of the number needed to end a Republican filibuster. Even if Al Franken were seated as Minnesota's second senator, Kennedy and Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., are suffering health problems that could preclude them from casting votes to end the procedural delay.
"I think you are in a 60-vote environment. And that means you have got to attract some Republicans, as well as holding virtually all the Democrats together," Conrad said. "And that, I don't believe, is possible with the pure public option. I don't think the votes are there."
To offset the numeric challenge, Conrad proposed a compromise that drew interest from moderate Republicans, including one who helped Obama pass his economic stimulus plan over GOP objection.
"It's far preferable to the government-run plan that has been discussed by the administration," said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine. "We need to better understand how it would work. But it's certainly better than a Washington-run plan."
Obama's political team at the White House has seen such a compromise as an option, although publicly the administration remains in support of a government competitor to private insurance. But during appearances on Sunday news programs, the support seemed to waver.
Sebelius said, "Having these ideas on the table is exactly where we need to be right now." And Vice President Joe Biden indicated the White House was ready to accept that "a public plan is on a continuum."
Biden tried to reframe the question: "So the question is, what is the public plan?"
The answer for Republicans: Unacceptable.
"I think that, for virtually every Republican, a government plan is a nonstarter," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. "There are a whole lot of other things we can agree to do on a bipartisan basis that will dramatically improve our system."
To reach that bipartisan solution -- something the White House has emphasized -- Democrats were likely to make concessions to find the $1 trillion the plan would cost over the next decade.
One way to get there would be to tax health benefits for families whose coverage costs $15,000 a year or more in premiums paid by employer and employee combined. Obama opposes the move, which is politically unpopular and was one of his top criticisms of his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain, during last year's presidential contest.
"It looks like he's looking at doing similar to what McCain wanted to do, and I think for the benefit of making this bipartisan, presidential leadership in this area would be very good based upon the tune of the last campaign," said Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.
Incumbent lawmakers similarly opposed the tax, which would be panned as a tax hike during coming elections.
"The idea of talking about taxing benefits at a time people are overwhelmed, I think, is a very bad idea," said Dodd, who faces a tough re-election bid next year.
Sebelius appeared on ABC's "This Week" and CNN's "State of the Union." Conrad and Collins also appeared on "State of the Union." Biden appeared on NBC's "Meet the Press" while McConnell appeared on CBS' "Face the Nation." Grassley and Dodd were on "Fox News Sunday."
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
:think2:

I for one am glad you gave up. Not even my friends on the very far left think it's right that people get completely free care.

Not so

See my last post.

If a 65 year old woman is in need of medical attention to allieve her pain and suffering, I for one have no complaint about whatever portion of my current taxes go to facilitate that care.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
Unequel levels of treatment does not have to mean zero treatment

Thank you for a very astute observation.

Enfuego's well-intentioned contributions so far seem to overlook that many of us are supportive of (in the cited example) a 65 year old uninsured woman receiving sufficient medical care to alleviate pain and suffering while at the same time we're not expressing endorsement that she be permitted to have a blank check at any medical facility in the USA
 

Rx. Senior
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
5,490
Tokens
Can the government take over the role of the insurance companies?

But if they did that, there wouldn't be a middle man taking a cut everytime money changed hands without actually offering any help. And the people who take a cut on every transaction desperately do not want to see that happen

Americans want things both ways. They want the government to give handouts to anyone in need and they want to hold everyone to the highest standards of personal responsibility. What we end up with is the government helping out some people, but not everyone. While on the other side, we have people who pay into the system trying to get as much as they possibly can, rather than simply what they need
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
Oh, and in response to a sidebar mention earlier in this Thread, I am not surprisingly a very strong advocate of revising federal law so that the handful of legal domestic drug dealers no longer enjoy a legal monopoly within the US market.
 

Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
8,811
Tokens
Not so

See my last post.

If a 65 year old woman is in need of medical attention to allieve her pain and suffering, I for one have no complaint about whatever portion of my current taxes go to facilitate that care.

But to my point, no far left people I know are looking for people to get completely free care. They look at situations like Wutang's mom as we all would..."exceptions". And that certainly goes on even in our system now. It's the right thing to do. However, on the other hand, we have laws that say illegal aliens are not supposed to be working in our country (just to give an example). We half heartedly go after them, but certainly don't secure our border as well as we should. I personally don't think they should be given a free ride (nor do most of my friends). Of course, I also understand the gripe from farmers (in the situation that the illegal aliens are working in the fields) that you're not going to find Americans to work for the type of wage they accept. My answer to that is pay them more, get them into our tax system, and charge more money for fruits and vegetables. Then Americans can essentially pay a sort of flat tax for fruits and vegetables. If they have a problem with that, then don't bitch about illegals going to emergency rooms and getting free care.
 

Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
8,811
Tokens
Thank you for a very astute observation.

Enfuego's well-intentioned contributions so far seem to overlook that many of us are supportive of (in the cited example) a 65 year old uninsured woman receiving sufficient medical care to alleviate pain and suffering while at the same time we're not expressing endorsement that she be permitted to have a blank check at any medical facility in the USA

Uh, sounds like we're on the same page (read this after responding to your post to me). I'll assume we had a misunderstanding on what I was saying?
 

Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
10,451
Tokens
Speaking for myself personally, I have no problem with the community at large - via federal/state/local taxes (whichever apply in this case) - paying for WUTANG's mother to get whatever level of medical care she needs to save her from needless pain and physical suffering.

I'm personally very thankful to live in a country that tries pretty hard to assure that such medical care is available for those people who need it.

Or provided for those that need it. I agree.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
8,811
Tokens
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodyforlife
"Not even my friends on the very far left think it's right that people get completely free care."

Not so.

See my last post.

I also didn't know you were my friend. But hey, if you want to be friends, I guess a guy can never have too many friends, so I accept your invitation.
 

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2006
Messages
24,884
Tokens
barman's my boy now.

Shoot, ah bin replaced
mad.gif
 

Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2006
Messages
16,073
Tokens
thats the main reason why i voted for obama. if he can get this nationalized health care act through and get us going like europe with superior and free health care, then were set.

You're not old enough to vote clown. I thought you were leaving? Mommy and Daddy I'm sure are tired of supporting your worthless ass.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
Uh, sounds like we're on the same page (read this after responding to your post to me). I'll assume we had a misunderstanding on what I was saying?

Not sure, but my general attitude is that we're (any of us...or you and I at this moment) usually far closer in thinking than we are apart.

Anecdotes such as this honest sharing by WUTANG spark a variety of responses and a common one is the submission that the anecdotal person is in some fashion "getting over" on someone else. And that latter person is often portrayed as someone who themselves would never make such a request (demand?) of the community to assist with some medical/health need of their own.

Now I happen to believe that when that latter person shares this, they're likely being as honest as they can based on their current perception of their life at this moment.

So I tend to let that slide, even though I think it's preposterous for at least 98% of us to be real sure that we would never need help from the community at large.

But I do like to at least make it clear that I have no complaint with the general societal policy in America wherein the vast majority of citizens contribute some portion of their resources into a pool that can be used by those who at the moment have less means to handle their own medical/health care needs.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
CORRECTED my post Quoted by MPLAST, though I think he understood my intended message
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
I also didn't know you were my friend. But hey, if you want to be friends, I guess a guy can never have too many friends, so I accept your invitation.

heh...I think we can agree to be friendly - which should suffice for what we're doing here
 

New member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
9,491
Tokens
If all citizens are due protection from terrorist and other hostile outlaws and if we are all to receive govt funded roads on which to travel why would affordable health care not be a right?

The cost have spun out of control and an individual who is stricken with health problems is looking at bankruptcy.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
Referring back to the post by BFLife where he digresses to make mention of those who complain about some forms of medical services - via taxpayer support - being made available to illegal residents, I'll insert that I personally have little complaint there either, especially in the case of providing general care to intervene on communicable diseases or viral sickness.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,877
Messages
13,574,573
Members
100,879
Latest member
am_sports
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com