Edwards health plan - creeps me out the more i think about it.

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: Shivetya

Originally posted by: senseamp
What is scary to me is that Republicans think that the current system is great and that treating uninsured in ERs is just fine.
I don't see Republicans proposing any meaningful reforms at all.

only because you don't bother to read their platforms, you prefer your world of ignorance where you are always right.... must be very lonely in that world.

unlike your democratic puppet masters a Republican candidate actually did implement a plan to the uninsured. go figure, he took action instead of just talking about it.

I don't need to read their platforms to know that in the 6 years they were in complete power, Republicans did absolutely nothing to slow down the growth of the uninsured population. They are only interested in stopping reforms, not pushing any of their own.

Oh yeah, you must be joking if you are talking about Romney. That guy threw up roadblocks and had the legislature had to override his vetoes to push the reforms through. Then he flip flopped and took credit for it.

 

[heartsurgeon]

Republicans did absolutely nothing to slow down the growth of the uninsured population.

that's a lie..they voted to build a wall to keep the uninsured out of the U.S.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
you don't have to join an HMO if you don't want to. thats the difference. you have options. with edwards stalinistic approach, no options.....everyone must be covered, everyone must comply...the government decides...

that should creep anyone out.

Right, if your job only offers an HMO, you don't have to join it if you don't want healthcare at all. Just like you don't have to get a checkup if you don't mind losing your government coverage under Edwards plan. I would set up a sliding scale, if you don't get checkups, your copay goes up if something does go wrong later on.

I think its even more scary that people like you can't see the difference between a private orgainization that is voluntary to join having certain requirements to stay a member and the government requiring you to do something or you lose your freedom.

Where did he say you'll lose your freedom if you don't get a physical?

You've already lost your freedom if it's mandatory.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon

Republicans did absolutely nothing to slow down the growth of the uninsured population.

that's a lie..they voted to build a wall to keep the uninsured out of the U.S.

And still did absolutely nothing.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: palehorse74
-many doctors switch careers or leave the country

-fewer people enter medical school

-the wealthy spend their money outside the US for medical care

-Thousands upon thousands upon thousands of insurance company and pharmacutical company employees lose their jobs.

You see these as cons? 😕

Those of us who are not angry at the entire world for our lot in life are likely to see those as Con's, yes.

Your thirst for revenge against those who are more successful than you clouds your judgement.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
you don't have to join an HMO if you don't want to. thats the difference. you have options. with edwards stalinistic approach, no options.....everyone must be covered, everyone must comply...the government decides...

that should creep anyone out.

Right, if your job only offers an HMO, you don't have to join it if you don't want healthcare at all. Just like you don't have to get a checkup if you don't mind losing your government coverage under Edwards plan. I would set up a sliding scale, if you don't get checkups, your copay goes up if something does go wrong later on.

I think its even more scary that people like you can't see the difference between a private orgainization that is voluntary to join having certain requirements to stay a member and the government requiring you to do something or you lose your freedom.

Where did he say you'll lose your freedom if you don't get a physical?

You've already lost your freedom if it's mandatory.

So what? I lose my freedom by being tied to an employer to retain my health coverage, too. There are patient responsibilities that come with all sorts of health systems.
Not the same as going to jail.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: palehorse74
-Pedro, Tyrone, Bubba, and their 45 million siblings, get free preventative health care.
-----------------------------------
Anyone care to modify my list?
-----------------------------------

You should modify your brain. Can you be any more racist?

lol... reading comprehension FTW...again!

I included hispanics, blacks, and whites in the comment... and given that I'm white, I'm not sure how "racism" comes into play. The prejudicial aspect of my statement had nothing to do with race. Lazy welfare recipiants come in all shapes, sizes, and races.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: palehorse74
-many doctors switch careers or leave the country

-fewer people enter medical school

-the wealthy spend their money outside the US for medical care

-Thousands upon thousands upon thousands of insurance company and pharmacutical company employees lose their jobs.

You see these as cons? 😕

Those of us who are not angry at the entire world for our lot in life are likely to see those as Con's, yes.

Your thirst for revenge against those who are more successful than you clouds your judgement.

It's also complete BS, because the number of people going to medical school is not limited by the number of applicants, but by the number of slots available. So no fewer people will enter medical schools, and if we tell AMA to FOAD and actually decide to build more med schools, that number will even grow.
My heart bleeds for all the insurance company scum and "doctors" who won't have a job overruling my treating physicians decisions. I am sure they'll find some other way to kill Americans.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: palehorse74
-many doctors switch careers or leave the country

-fewer people enter medical school

-the wealthy spend their money outside the US for medical care

-Thousands upon thousands upon thousands of insurance company and pharmacutical company employees lose their jobs.

You see these as cons? 😕

Those of us who are not angry at the entire world for our lot in life are likely to see those as Con's, yes.

Your thirst for revenge against those who are more successful than you clouds your judgement.

It's also complete BS, because the number of people going to medical school is not limited by the number of applicants, but by the number of slots available. So no fewer people will enter medical schools, and if we tell AMA to FOAD and actually decide to build more med schools, that number will even grow.
My heart bleeds for all the insurance company scum and "doctors" who won't have a job overruling my treating physicians decisions. I am sure they'll find some other way to kill Americans.

How many fewer people will choose to become doctors if you essentially convert them to government employees and dramatically decrease their pay?

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: palehorse74
-Pedro, Tyrone, Bubba, and their 45 million siblings, get free preventative health care.
-----------------------------------
Anyone care to modify my list?
-----------------------------------

You should modify your brain. Can you be any more racist?

lol... reading comprehension FTW...again!

I included hispanics, blacks, and whites in the comment... and given that I'm white, I'm not sure how "racism" comes into play. The prejudicial aspect of my statement had nothing to do with race. Lazy welfare recipiants come in all shapes, sizes, and races.

Just because you include racist stereotypes on whites, doesn't make it any less racist.
Do you have proof that there are 45 million welfare recipients? There are hard working people who cannot afford insurance, and there you go calling them welfare recipients. That's why the public doesn't trust Republicans on healthcare. Get off your high horse.

 

[Vic]

I guess I'll join the straw man bandwagon here as well and ask: how is it that receipt checks at the door at Fry's or CompUSA are a gross violation of civil liberties while mandatory health exams (with corresponding database of same) are not?

How does this even add up?

Originally posted by: senseamp
I don't need to read their platforms to know that in the 6 years they were in complete power, Republicans did absolutely nothing to slow down the growth of the uninsured population.

Yaknow, the only place I ever mind myself in the unfortunate position of having to defend the Pubs is to the whackos on P&N. The Pubs passed, and Bush sign, the largest government health care plan in US history. Sure, it covered mostly the old folks while doing relatively little to help the younger working poor, but what do you expect? The old folks actually vote.

 

[heartsurgeon]

VINDICATION

how brilliant am I! I guess I should stop being amazed at how prescient I am!!

In a bid to ease spiralling levels of obesity and other health concerns, a Tory panel said certain treatments should be denied to patients who refuse to co-operate with health professionals and live healthier lifestyles.

See!! this is how a nationalized health care system will evolve. Edwards doesn't think this stuff up in a vacumn, there are people out there thinking up this crap all the time....and here it is..

remember edwards used the words "mandatory"....well, how are you going to enforce something like healthcare, or "healthy behavior" as in preventative care. I already laid out that 99% of preventative healthcare is related to lifestyle issues...

well, there are two ways to "enforce" something that is mandatory (assuming jailtime is out of the question), one is to reduce benefits ("no soup/healthcare for you!!), the other way to increase your taxes (the FATTY SURCHARGEtax as i have outlined above). While the Brits seem to be looking at the Soup Nazis approach, I suspect Democrats would have a natural affinity to the FATTY SURCHARGE tax, as they general find taxes alluring and sexy.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon

If you think it is strange that a doctor can not spell or use the english language properly then you obviously do not work in the health care field. I work on the help desk at a hospital and have been working with doctors and other hospital employess for a job (one way or another) for 10 years and believe me some of them are just as bad as the average 12 year old forum troll when it comes to being able to speak/write.

Thank you..I guess...sort of... (you should see my handwriting! yikes, even I can't read it sometimes).[/1]

There's a difference between handwriting (mine's atrocious) and basic spelling, though. Doctors do have a college education, last I checked.

Combine the basic spelling problems with HIM making attacks on the English of people who are using the language very well, and... it's embarrassing for him.

That's not an entirely unreasonable interpretation. I agree with you that there is a threat involved with his mandatory requirements for the program.

I believe we have reached some common ground on this.

I think we have, too.

The use of the word "mandatory" is disturbing, and yes, open to interpretation. When lawyers and politicians get involved in dteremining the "intent" and "meaning" of ambiguous wording, watch out, and hold on to your wallet.

Or business execs or anyone with power... no need to single out lawyers and politicians, who are often trying to do some good.

(Don't lawsuits frequently have one 'good' side? Don't you support democracy, which lets us elect the politicians as the central activity in our system?)

HIV tests, drug screens, alcohol testing, testing for tobacco usage, the list is endless, of potential "mandatory tests" that this massive program could invoke....where he's headed with this is clear...preventative care is primarily about "lifestyle" changes. It's easy for him to say screen for breast cancer..but heck, that's already being done!! He didn't say madatory screening, he said mandatory "preventative care", and guess what...in real medical practice, preventative care consists 99% of telling fat people to eat less and exercise more, and smokers to stop smoking, and people using drugs or alcohol, to stop or cut back....how about screening for "unhealthy sex practices", or "unhealthy dietary habits"..There is no limit to the abuse potential for something worded like he has.

i agree, that having everyone live a healthy lifestyle, will lower overall health care expenditures in this country... don't disagree with that at all, but at what cost of civil liberties??

you could end up with the Health Care Nazis's telling you what to eat, how much to exercise, when and how you can have sex, mandatory drug or alcohol rehab if you fluck a screening test...you name it....

is that what anyone wants?

That's a lot of slippery slope silliness. You can say it about anything. If we allow the government to put up one camera, say to monitor the public area in front of the White House, then what's to stop the government from putting a camera up in front of every house in America, watching who comes and goes? You can say anything like that, but it doesn't make it reasonable to say. Of course there is some risk to abuse; that's why we have a democracy where the public has some say.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: senseamp
So what? I lose my freedom by being tied to an employer to retain my health coverage, too. There are patient responsibilities that come with all sorts of health systems.
Not the same as going to jail.

And another inaccuracy from you. You don't need an employer to retain health coverage. And don't you live in Northern CA? In that case, you don't even need an employer to get a group rate. Kaiser does individual policies at group rates, and Consumer Reports just rated them the 2nd best insurer in the nation.


It's bad enough that you're going from straw man to straw man trying to defend an indefendable invasion of basic civil rights like Edwards plan, but at least try to keep your straw men factual, eh?
Look, most of the posters, myself included, want to see our current health care system fixed, and we want to find a way to extend coverage to the poor. However, we just don't want to get anally-raped in the process, which is something that in your ideological zeal you seem intent on having happen. Is it then any wonder that the 2 sides can't come to a compromise? And then the partisan labels start getting thrown around and an outsider has to wonder, are you being so unreasonable because you prefer the argument more than working towards a solution?

 

[heartsurgeon]

no need to single out lawyers and politicians, who are often trying to do some good.

if you change the word "often" to "sometimes" or "an unspecified amount of the time" I'm on board with that, but I can't stomach the phrase "often"

That's a lot of slippery slope silliness

Hm....so you agree the Lefties howling about the Patriot Act (recently expanded and re-approved by the Democrat controlled Congress) are engaged in a lot of "slippery slope" silliness?

one person's slippery slope is another person's battle cry....

see my linked article from Britain, home of a function national health service for decades....see how far down the slippery slope they are peering?

FYI: the two systems of national health care that would bear the most attention, are those of Canada, and England, two english speaking countries with many cultural ties and similarities to the U.S. (more than anyother system i can think of).

Several years ago in canada...the goverment began a program of identifying the top 5% of health care "consumers" (those in the top 5% of "usage" of the health care system). They dispatch "councilors" to tell these people how to use the system less....kinda sounds like health nazis approach again.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
see my linked article from Britain, home of a function national health service for decades....see how far down the slippery slope they are peering?

It's gets even worse for Britian and their NHC.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...007/08/26/nbaby126.xml

Looks like they are taking Minority Report from the big screen and putting it into practice.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: palehorse74
-Pedro, Tyrone, Bubba, and their 45 million siblings, get free preventative health care.
-----------------------------------
Anyone care to modify my list?
-----------------------------------

You should modify your brain. Can you be any more racist?

lol... reading comprehension FTW...again!

I included hispanics, blacks, and whites in the comment... and given that I'm white, I'm not sure how "racism" comes into play. The prejudicial aspect of my statement had nothing to do with race. Lazy welfare recipiants come in all shapes, sizes, and races.

Just because you include racist stereotypes on whites, doesn't make it any less racist.
Do you have proof that there are 45 million welfare recipients? There are hard working people who cannot afford insurance, and there you go calling them welfare recipients. That's why the public doesn't trust Republicans on healthcare. Get off your high horse.

I want to see some more detailed statistics.

Of the 45 million people in America who do not have health insurance...
1) How many of them are in the US illegally?
2) How many of them are on welfare?
3) How many of them are disabled?
4) How many of them work 40, or more, hours per week?
5) How many of them choose not to have insurance?
6) How many of them have a high school diploma or GED?
7) How many of them have entered or completed college?
8) How many of them have served in the US Armed Forces?
9) How many of them are below the age of 18?

Get me that information and we'll talk.

 

[heartsurgeon]

I lose my freedom by being tied to an employer to retain my health coverage, too

That's a lie. Health insurance is portable (it's called COBRA), following the health insurance portability act...you may choose not to pay for it, but that's your choice..Health Insurance Portability Act

do you actually work or pay taxes, why aren't you in school right now? I'm calling the truant officer....

 

[piasabird]

When was the last time that a proposed budget for public health care was not too low?

I say multiply that number by at least 10.