Guest guest Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 This bill will most likely cut my medical insurance premiers by much more than half so with a very narrow short term view, this helps me tremendously. However, the incentive to make medical progress will go down, the benefits offered by the insurance companies will go down by law, the costs of supplying those benefits will be regulated up up up so that ultimately, the amount of health care I will get for my insurance dollar will be far less than it is now. Steve On 1/11/2010 10:16 AM, wrote: > Nancie, your argument is flawed. Medicare and social security benefit > me greatly. I seriously question whether either of them are good FOR > THE COUNTRY long term. And it is FOR THE GOOD OF ALL CITIZENS OF THE > COUNTRY that I present my arguments; _not_ for what I think will benefit > me or some other individual. I paid into those systems for 37 years to > whatever extent that was required to earn the benefits I receive. No > hypocrisy here. > > Where is the " RIGHT " to have medical insurance written??? What other > RIGHTS do we have to access the results of the work of others? Food? > Clothing? Shelter? A new car every year? What is the basis of the > RIGHTS you quote??? If I choose to sit on my @$$ while you spend your > life in productive labor what RIGHT do I have to demand that you provide > me what I would like to have? > > Okay; so you're a liberal which means you will have a different answer > to that question that I will give. As a conservative I suggest I have > NO RIGHTS to the results of your labor. If I am destitute and in need > your efforts to help me are not because I have some RIGHT to your > resources/money/help; but rather because you see it as > moral/religious/other imperative. But NEVER because I have the RIGHT to > demand such from you. > > > . > . > >> >> Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@... >> <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> >> aspenfairy1<aspenfairy1> >> >> >> Sun Jan 10, 2010 1:04 pm (PST) >> >> >> >> that is YOUR OPINION. NOT MINE at all. I have professional colleagues >> who have personally worked on the bills in both houses and thus I know >> what is REALLY going on. Since they are medical providers with >> political connections they were asked to help create the Bills. To do >> nothing is stupid and incomprehensible and amoral and unethical. >> 1000's of people die every year from lack of health insurance. how can >> you deny them the RIGHT to have health insurance and the RIGHT to be >> able to get medical care when they are sick. >> The insurance companies have to be reigned in on their daily abuses to >> people who have coverage and to those who can't get coverage. >> If you don't Governmental health care then you better not use any >> Medicare benefits otherwise you would be a hypocrite. >> >> From: >> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:17 AM >> hypothyroidism >> <mailto:hypothyroidism%40> >> Subject: Re: Rationing >> >> The bottom line is you're going to face massive rationing IN SOME MANNER >> or massive increases in taxes; whether you call it a " death panel " or >> something else won't really matter to the person suffering or dying due >> to lack of treatment. >> >> -- Steve - dudescholar4@... " The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher " Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism " Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 Medicare is a GOVERNMENT run healthcare program ergo socialized medicine and since you hate socialized medicine and you don't support any public option aka Medicare for all then one would assume that you don't believe in or accept a Governmental Healthcare program such as Medicare. From: Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 9:16 AM hypothyroidism ; JAMES Subject: Re: Rationing Nancie, your argument is flawed. Medicare and social security benefit me greatly. I seriously question whether either of them are good FOR THE COUNTRY long term. And it is FOR THE GOOD OF ALL CITIZENS OF THE COUNTRY that I present my arguments; _not_ for what I think will benefit me or some other individual. I paid into those systems for 37 years to whatever extent that was required to earn the benefits I receive. No hypocrisy here. Where is the " RIGHT " to have medical insurance written??? What other RIGHTS do we have to access the results of the work of others? Food? Clothing? Shelter? A new car every year? What is the basis of the RIGHTS you quote??? If I choose to sit on my @$$ while you spend your life in productive labor what RIGHT do I have to demand that you provide me what I would like to have? Okay; so you're a liberal which means you will have a different answer to that question that I will give. As a conservative I suggest I have NO RIGHTS to the results of your labor. If I am destitute and in need your efforts to help me are not because I have some RIGHT to your resources/money/help; but rather because you see it as moral/religious/other imperative. But NEVER because I have the RIGHT to demand such from you. .. .. > > Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@... > <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> > aspenfairy1 <aspenfairy1> > > > Sun Jan 10, 2010 1:04 pm (PST) > > > > that is YOUR OPINION. NOT MINE at all. I have professional colleagues > who have personally worked on the bills in both houses and thus I know > what is REALLY going on. Since they are medical providers with > political connections they were asked to help create the Bills. To do > nothing is stupid and incomprehensible and amoral and unethical. > 1000's of people die every year from lack of health insurance. how can > you deny them the RIGHT to have health insurance and the RIGHT to be > able to get medical care when they are sick. > The insurance companies have to be reigned in on their daily abuses to > people who have coverage and to those who can't get coverage. > If you don't Governmental health care then you better not use any > Medicare benefits otherwise you would be a hypocrite. > > From: > Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:17 AM > hypothyroidism > <mailto:hypothyroidism%40> > Subject: Re: Rationing > > The bottom line is you're going to face massive rationing IN SOME MANNER > or massive increases in taxes; whether you call it a " death panel " or > something else won't really matter to the person suffering or dying due > to lack of treatment. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2010 Report Share Posted January 11, 2010 People are paying and over paying for the insurance companies to enslave us right now. The issue is that all citizens need access to medical care and if this is not made possible the will continue to have to go to emergency rooms, and we will end up paying for their medical care with higher prices for doctors, hospitals and insurance. It's six of one half a dozen of the other. Pick your poison. Roni <>Just because something isn't seen doesn't mean it's not there<> > that is YOUR OPINION. NOT MINE at all. I have professional colleagues who have personally worked on the bills in both houses and thus I know what is REALLY going on. Since they are medical providers with political connections they were asked to help create the Bills. To do nothing is stupid and incomprehensible and amoral and unethical. 1000's of people die every year from lack of health insurance. how can you deny them the RIGHT to have health insurance and the RIGHT to be able to get medical care when they are sick. > The insurance companies have to be reigned in on their daily abuses to people who have coverage and to those who can't get coverage. > If you don't Governmental health care then you better not use any Medicare benefits otherwise you would be a hypocrite. > > > From: > Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:17 AM > hypothyroidism > Subject: Re: Rationing > > > > The bottom line is you're going to face massive rationing IN SOME MANNER > or massive increases in taxes; whether you call it a " death panel " or > something else won't really matter to the person suffering or dying due > to lack of treatment. > > > . > . > >> >> Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@... >> <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> >> aspenfairy1<aspenfairy1> >> >> >> Sun Jan 10, 2010 12:38 am (PST) >> >> >> >> - >> there are NO " death panels in the bill and there wasn't ever any death >> panels in the bill. that is just another republican LIE . -- Steve - dudescholar4@... " The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher " Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism " Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html ------------------------------------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 I believe that everyone needs to pay something towrds their health insurance, unless their company gives it as one of their perks. That being said, I agree with Nanci that everyone should have access to health care, We are the only industrialized country in the world that doesn't take care of it's citizens with the tax money that is paid by them. Instead, our tax money goes for wars, for aid to other countries and a bunch of things the people have not asked for and don't want. So who's getting ripped off here? We the people are. Roni <>Just because something isn't seen doesn't mean it's not there<> From: nancie barnett <deifspirit@...> Subject: Re: Re: Rationing hypothyroidism Date: Monday, January 11, 2010, 11:49 AM Medicare is a GOVERNMENT run healthcare program ergo socialized medicine and since you hate socialized medicine and you don't support any public option aka Medicare for all then one would assume that you don't believe in or accept a Governmental Healthcare program such as Medicare. From: Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 9:16 AM hypothyroidism ; JAMES Subject: Re: Rationing  Nancie, your argument is flawed. Medicare and social security benefit me greatly. I seriously question whether either of them are good FOR THE COUNTRY long term. And it is FOR THE GOOD OF ALL CITIZENS OF THE COUNTRY that I present my arguments; _not_ for what I think will benefit me or some other individual. I paid into those systems for 37 years to whatever extent that was required to earn the benefits I receive. No hypocrisy here. Where is the " RIGHT " to have medical insurance written??? What other RIGHTS do we have to access the results of the work of others? Food? Clothing? Shelter? A new car every year? What is the basis of the RIGHTS you quote??? If I choose to sit on my @$$ while you spend your life in productive labor what RIGHT do I have to demand that you provide me what I would like to have? Okay; so you're a liberal which means you will have a different answer to that question that I will give. As a conservative I suggest I have NO RIGHTS to the results of your labor. If I am destitute and in need your efforts to help me are not because I have some RIGHT to your resources/money/help; but rather because you see it as moral/religious/other imperative. But NEVER because I have the RIGHT to demand such from you. .. .. > > Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@... > <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> > aspenfairy1 <aspenfairy1> > > > Sun Jan 10, 2010 1:04 pm (PST) > > > > that is YOUR OPINION. NOT MINE at all. I have professional colleagues > who have personally worked on the bills in both houses and thus I know > what is REALLY going on. Since they are medical providers with > political connections they were asked to help create the Bills. To do > nothing is stupid and incomprehensible and amoral and unethical. > 1000's of people die every year from lack of health insurance. how can > you deny them the RIGHT to have health insurance and the RIGHT to be > able to get medical care when they are sick. > The insurance companies have to be reigned in on their daily abuses to > people who have coverage and to those who can't get coverage. > If you don't Governmental health care then you better not use any > Medicare benefits otherwise you would be a hypocrite. > > From: > Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:17 AM > hypothyroidism > <mailto:hypothyroidism%40> > Subject: Re: Rationing > > The bottom line is you're going to face massive rationing IN SOME MANNER > or massive increases in taxes; whether you call it a " death panel " or > something else won't really matter to the person suffering or dying due > to lack of treatment. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 Well, that's probably true too. We have been lied to by everyone. The governments of both parties, the congress, the AMA, doctors, hospitals, Big Pharma, the food industry, oil companies, insurance companies and drug companies. I guess it all depends on what little benefits we can eke out of all these lies. Just think, all of these entities benefit from our taxes but us. Roni <>Just because something isn't seen doesn't mean it's not there<> > > From: <res075oh@... <mailto:res075oh%40verizon.net>> > Subject: Re: Rationing > hypothyroidism > <mailto:hypothyroidism%40> > Date: Sunday, January 10, 2010, 9:17 AM > > The bottom line is you're going to face massive rationing IN SOME MANNER > or massive increases in taxes; whether you call it a " death panel " or > something else won't really matter to the person suffering or dying due > to lack of treatment. > > ------------------------------------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 Nancie, I cannot understand how your experience could be so different from that of, say, my allergy specialist. He showed me the letters he received objecting to the treatment he provided, and told me how much time he and his staff had to expend to get it approved. It was a most impressive stack of paper. Further he stated that for him it is epidemic now, but will get much worse if Obamacare becomes law. And the treatment provided was basically totally conventional; nothing alternative or weird. More below... .. .. > > Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@... > <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> > aspenfairy1 <aspenfairy1> > > > Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:18 pm (PST) > > > > - > I deal with Medicare All the time and I never have any problems with > Medicare vs. I have problems with PRIVATE insurx providing care for > patients. talk about rationing- the privates ration all the time and > you always feel like there is a " 3rd person " in the room with you. I > never have to write a TAR aka treatment authorization request with my > Medicare patients but I have to it constantly with every private > insurx out there. .. .. > It guarantees the right to LIFE .. .. No; it doesn't guarantee anything; it ASSERTS that those rights exist. Death is guaranteed if you're alive; that you will continue to be alive is not. And the right of liberty is taken away if you are inslaved to benefit another. Further, your pursuit of happiness will likely be somewhat less than enthusiastic once it becomes clear that your efforts in your pursit will go to enhance the happiness of someone else who would like to have the results of your labor. .. .. > and today that means the right to have healthcare so that if you are > sick you can get medical care and then you can have a LIFE. EVERY > civilized nation on the planet provides universal coverage for it's > citizens, except for the USA. .. .. Yes; according to the Marxists/socialists/liberals the USA is the pit of the earth. Not so to those from the utopias that you so admire who risk torture and murder for themselves and their families to come here. I guess things must be so bad here that you're probably planning to emigrate to the UK or some such, right? .. .. > It is no wonder that over 40,000 Americans DIE every year for lack of > healthcare insurx and that our life expectancy is worse than South > Korea and the total cost of medical care per person is the highest in > the world, @ $7,290 yet life expectancy is shorter than in most other > developed nations and many developing ones. Lack of health coverage is > a major factor in life span and contributes to an estimated 45,000 > deaths per year. These figures are for 2007 so just imagine what the > cost is now in 2010. > Source: Gerard , professor at s Hopkins Bloomberg School > of Public health who studies health insurance worldwide. .. .. And once Obamacare really gets into full swing you will most likely see the numbers who die from lack of _adequate_ healthcare increase by orders of magnitude; while the total costs will be many times what Obamacare supporters are suggesting. .. .. > > so, you are saying that those 45,000+ Americans that die every year > from lack to access to healthcare don't deserve to LIVE? Are you > saying that those 46+ million people who don't and/or can't > have/afford health insurx don't have a right to have the same options > that you or I have just because we can afford to pay for health insurx?? .. .. I'm saying that none of those 45,000 have the right to demand that I provide them health insurance or any other thing they might like to have. In my county we the citizens voted to pay a 1/2 cent sales tax to provide indigent health care. And we are not a particularly affluent local; quite the opposite. So I doubt many of your supposed 45,000 came from here. In any event if you remove the drunks, druggies and sociopaths from the number you provide I suspect it would be much smaller. PLUS those who choose to spend their money on cigarettes, beer and large screen TV's instead of health insurance. When you give someone the " right " to the income of another person then you have made the second person the slave of the first person. That's a " right " I won't buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 I see it as more like 6 of one and 6,000 of another. It's still a PITA to get treatment for free from the emergency room unless you're absolutely destitute. Once you make healthcare a " right " then there are about 15 million people [government figures] who will be immediately eligible for inclusion in medicaid. No ability to pay [supposedly]; and now no requirement to pay. Anyone vaguely familiar with economics knows what happens when the price of any good or service is reduced to zero. .. .. > > Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@... > <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> > matchermaam <matchermaam> > > > Mon Jan 11, 2010 1:10 pm (PST) > > > > People are paying and over paying for the insurance companies to > enslave us right now. > The issue is that all citizens need access to medical care and if this > is not made possible the will continue to have to go to emergency > rooms, and we will end up paying for their medical care with higher > prices for doctors, hospitals and insurance. It's six of one half a > dozen of the other. Pick your poison. > > Roni Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 It is the theories of socialism that have failed. Even when the government assumed and applied the " right " to murder millions of their own citizens they still failed. Democracy will fail too, I'm afraid. When those who do not produce find out they can vote themselves an ever greater share of the income of those who do produce a point will be reached that those who do produce will be reduced beyond that necessary to support the society. At that point it will collapse. Most likely a dictator will then take over by promising to take care of everyone's needs and so many will naively follow that it becomes possible. Obamacare is just one of many steps in that direction. Free medical care for everyone, and no costs involved. How could anyone be so foolish... .. .. > Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@... > <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> > matchermaam <matchermaam> > > > Mon Jan 11, 2010 1:15 pm (PST) > > > > Steve you talk in theories. Theories are fine up to the point that > they come up against reality. The reality of healthcare is that the > only way the haves will not somehow pay for the havenots to get > healthcare is to shoot them dead. Otherwise one way or the other > their healthcare will be paid for. > > Roni Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 Tort reform would not remove the ability to sue; what it would do is make it less profitable to sue for some frivolous cause. It would do that by [hopefully] limiting compensation to lawyers who get literally millions of dollars for some suits [in one of the tobacco suits it was a billion or more]. Further it would do so by imposing a risk of having to pay all legal fees on the loser, and that would discourage anyone from suing if they did not in fact have a good case. I actually don't have a good handle on this so maybe I'm off base; but I know the cost of litigation and insurance to pay for possible litigation are a major factor in our medical costs. .. .. > > Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@... > <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> > matchermaam <matchermaam> > > > Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:24 pm (PST) > > > > Chuck, I agree there are frivolous law suits, but from what I see they > come under the heading of female customer gets huge settlement for > spilling hot coffee on herself. > > If a doctor did something that caused the death or total disability of > one of your or anyone else's child that you knew, would you call that > a frivolous law suit? Yet, if there is so called tort reform, that is > what will be curtailed, the ability to sue for something that is anything > but frivolous. > > Roni Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 Roni, did you read what he wrote? He told you they should be allowed to buy insurance from whatever state they choose; that the regulation that prevents that should be abolished. .. .. > > Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@... > <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> > matchermaam <matchermaam> > > > Mon Jan 11, 2010 6:11 pm (PST) > > > > So now Chuck, you have a perfect example of a family who doesn't have > access to healthcare through no fault of their own. So do you think > they should just be allowed to become ill (G-d forbid) and not have a > doctor or hospital that would take care of them? > According to you, they have no right to health care. > > Roni > <>Just because something > isn't seen doesn't mean it's > not there<> > > > > > > and whx portions do you object to? > > I already gave you the specific paragraphs. If those sections setting up > a committee to ration care in the face of shortages are so benign, why > did congress need to make expensive back room deals, the Cornhusker > Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, to get Democrats to vote for it? > > There are several causes for the current high costs of health insurance. > One is covering the cost of frivolous law suits. Yet, there is no > mention of tort reform in the bill. Nor did I see any provision for > improving the competency of medical providers, which seems to be the > most common complaint with the current system voiced on this list. > > Another major cost factor is that state governments have negotiated > large price breaks for state employees in exchange for effective > insurance monopolies. The result is that the favored few insurance > companies in those states can raise rates with impunity to make everyone > else subsidize the savings to the state. Some states are much worse than > others, so the cost of care varies wildly from state to state. > > My son's family is one of the many who have been priced out of health > insurance, because he lives in one state but is employed in California. > My son and his company cannot afford the out of state rates, but they > are not allowed to buy from a much more competitive company from my > son's home state, at about half the price. We could cover a near > majority of the estimated uninsured by simply prohibiting state > governments from interfering with free trade and competition. > > Chuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 Our pediatrician had to stop accepting medicaid because he was spending so much time doing paperwork he was missing out on family time. CW -- Re: Rationing Nancie, I cannot understand how your experience could be so different from that of, say, my allergy specialist. He showed me the letters he received objecting to the treatment he provided, and told me how much time he and his staff had to expend to get it approved. It was a most impressive stack of paper. Further he stated that for him it is epidemic now, but will get much worse if Obamacare becomes law. And the treatment provided was basically totally conventional; nothing alternative or weird. More below... .. .. > > Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@... > <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> > aspenfairy1 <aspenfairy1> > > > Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:18 pm (PST) > > > > - > I deal with Medicare All the time and I never have any problems with > Medicare vs. I have problems with PRIVATE insurx providing care for > patients. talk about rationing- the privates ration all the time and > you always feel like there is a " 3rd person " in the room with you. I > never have to write a TAR aka treatment authorization request with my > Medicare patients but I have to it constantly with every private > insurx out there. .. .. > It guarantees the right to LIFE .. .. No; it doesn't guarantee anything; it ASSERTS that those rights exist. Death is guaranteed if you're alive; that you will continue to be alive is not. And the right of liberty is taken away if you are inslaved to benefit another. Further, your pursuit of happiness will likely be somewhat less than enthusiastic once it becomes clear that your efforts in your pursit will go to enhance the happiness of someone else who would like to have the results of your labor. .. .. > and today that means the right to have healthcare so that if you are > sick you can get medical care and then you can have a LIFE. EVERY > civilized nation on the planet provides universal coverage for it's > citizens, except for the USA. .. .. Yes; according to the Marxists/socialists/liberals the USA is the pit of the earth. Not so to those from the utopias that you so admire who risk torture and murder for themselves and their families to come here. I guess things must be so bad here that you're probably planning to emigrate to the UK or some such, right? .. .. > It is no wonder that over 40,000 Americans DIE every year for lack of > healthcare insurx and that our life expectancy is worse than South > Korea and the total cost of medical care per person is the highest in > the world, @ $7,290 yet life expectancy is shorter than in most other > developed nations and many developing ones. Lack of health coverage is > a major factor in life span and contributes to an estimated 45,000 > deaths per year. These figures are for 2007 so just imagine what the > cost is now in 2010. > Source: Gerard , professor at s Hopkins Bloomberg School > of Public health who studies health insurance worldwide. .. .. And once Obamacare really gets into full swing you will most likely see the numbers who die from lack of _adequate_ healthcare increase by orders of magnitude; while the total costs will be many times what Obamacare supporters are suggesting. .. .. > > so, you are saying that those 45,000+ Americans that die every year > from lack to access to healthcare don't deserve to LIVE? Are you > saying that those 46+ million people who don't and/or can't > have/afford health insurx don't have a right to have the same options > that you or I have just because we can afford to pay for health insurx?? .. .. I'm saying that none of those 45,000 have the right to demand that I provide them health insurance or any other thing they might like to have. In my county we the citizens voted to pay a 1/2 cent sales tax to provide indigent health care. And we are not a particularly affluent local; quite the opposite. So I doubt many of your supposed 45,000 came from here. In any event if you remove the drunks, druggies and sociopaths from the number you provide I suspect it would be much smaller. PLUS those who choose to spend their money on cigarettes, beer and large screen TV's instead of health insurance. When you give someone the " right " to the income of another person then you have made the second person the slave of the first person. That's a " right " I won't buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 we do not live in a democracy. We are suppose to live in a republic! I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands...... This is the best video I've ever watched that really analyzes different forms of government. It will show you that the US is suppose to be ruled by law. CW -- Re: Rationing It is the theories of socialism that have failed. Even when the government assumed and applied the " right " to murder millions of their own citizens they still failed. Democracy will fail too, I'm afraid. When those who do not produce find out they can vote themselves an ever greater share of the income of those who do produce a point will be reached that those who do produce will be reduced beyond that necessary to support the society. At that point it will collapse. Most likely a dictator will then take over by promising to take care of everyone's needs and so many will naively follow that it becomes possible. Obamacare is just one of many steps in that direction. Free medical care for everyone, and no costs involved. How could anyone be so foolish... .. .. > Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@... > <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> > matchermaam <matchermaam> > > > Mon Jan 11, 2010 1:15 pm (PST) > > > > Steve you talk in theories. Theories are fine up to the point that > they come up against reality. The reality of healthcare is that the > only way the haves will not somehow pay for the havenots to get > healthcare is to shoot them dead. Otherwise one way or the other > their healthcare will be paid for. > > Roni Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 You can pick your insurance company, form a cooperative with a group of people, or start your own insurance company. You have choices and it only involves spending your own money or going in with a group of people for a common cause you all agree one. Forcing other people to pay for your choices is not a republic, it's communist-socialism. Citizens are not entitled to the resources and time of anyone else who does not agree, not are they entitled to it at all. Taking, stealing, redistributing, is all evil when one takes by force the resources, time, or life of another. If you like to live in an evil world, then make sure all the people with you share a common system that you all agree on. I don't agree that anyone has a right to force me to work for their benefit and their particular circumstances in love doesn't give them that right of forced slavery no matter what those circumstances might be. There can be a two system medical economy, one in which people choose how they want to live their lives and one in which people agree to be controlled by a central medical committee (government medical). The only way for real rights to endure is when people get to choose which system they want of their own free will. Steve On 1/11/2010 2:10 PM, Roni Molin wrote: > People are paying and over paying for the insurance companies to enslave us right now. > The issue is that all citizens need access to medical care and if this is not made possible the will continue to have to go to emergency rooms, and we will end up paying for their medical care with higher prices for doctors, hospitals and insurance. It's six of one half a dozen of the other. Pick your poison. > > > Roni > <>Just because something > isn't seen doesn't mean it's > not there<> > > >> that is YOUR OPINION. NOT MINE at all. I have professional colleagues who have personally worked on the bills in both houses and thus I know what is REALLY going on. Since they are medical providers with political connections they were asked to help create the Bills. To do nothing is stupid and incomprehensible and amoral and unethical. 1000's of people die every year from lack of health insurance. how can you deny them the RIGHT to have health insurance and the RIGHT to be able to get medical care when they are sick. >> The insurance companies have to be reigned in on their daily abuses to people who have coverage and to those who can't get coverage. >> If you don't Governmental health care then you better not use any Medicare benefits otherwise you would be a hypocrite. >> >> >> From: >> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:17 AM >> hypothyroidism >> Subject: Re: Rationing >> >> >> >> The bottom line is you're going to face massive rationing IN SOME MANNER >> or massive increases in taxes; whether you call it a " death panel " or >> something else won't really matter to the person suffering or dying due >> to lack of treatment. >> >> >> . >> . >> >>> >>> Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@... >>> <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> >>> aspenfairy1<aspenfairy1> >>> >>> >>> Sun Jan 10, 2010 12:38 am (PST) >>> >>> >>> >>> - >>> there are NO " death panels in the bill and there wasn't ever any death >>> panels in the bill. that is just another republican LIE . > -- Steve - dudescholar4@... " The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher " Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism " Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 something has occurred to me. Do you have a medicare advantage plan? Roni <>Just because something isn't seen doesn't mean it's not there<> From: <res075oh@...> Subject: Re: Rationing hypothyroidism Date: Monday, January 11, 2010, 8:58 PM Nancie, I cannot understand how your experience could be so different from that of, say, my allergy specialist. He showed me the letters he received objecting to the treatment he provided, and told me how much time he and his staff had to expend to get it approved. It was a most impressive stack of paper. Further he stated that for him it is epidemic now, but will get much worse if Obamacare becomes law. And the treatment provided was basically totally conventional; nothing alternative or weird. More below... .. .. > >     Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@... >     <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> >     aspenfairy1 <aspenfairy1> > > >      Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:18 pm (PST) > > > > - > I deal with Medicare All the time and I never have any problems with > Medicare vs. I have problems with PRIVATE insurx providing care for > patients. talk about rationing- the privates ration all the time and > you always feel like there is a " 3rd person " in the room with you. I > never have to write a TAR aka treatment authorization request with my > Medicare patients but I have to it constantly with every private > insurx out there. .. .. > It guarantees the right to LIFE .. .. No; it doesn't guarantee anything; it ASSERTS that those rights exist. Death is guaranteed if you're alive; that you will continue to be alive is not.   And the right of liberty is taken away if you are inslaved to benefit another. Further, your pursuit of happiness will likely be somewhat less than enthusiastic once it becomes clear that your efforts in your pursit will go to enhance the happiness of someone else who would like to have the results of your labor. .. .. > and today that means the right to have healthcare so that if you are > sick you can get medical care and then you can have a LIFE. EVERY > civilized nation on the planet provides universal coverage for it's > citizens, except for the USA. .. .. Yes; according to the Marxists/socialists/liberals the USA is the pit of the earth. Not so to those from the utopias that you so admire who risk torture and murder for themselves and their families to come here. I guess things must be so bad here that you're probably planning to emigrate to the UK or some such, right? .. .. > It is no wonder that over 40,000 Americans DIE every year for lack of > healthcare insurx and that our life expectancy is worse than South > Korea and the total cost of medical care per person is the highest in > the world, @ $7,290 yet life expectancy is shorter than in most other > developed nations and many developing ones. Lack of health coverage is > a major factor in life span and contributes to an estimated 45,000 > deaths per year. These figures are for 2007 so just imagine what the > cost is now in 2010. > Source: Gerard , professor at s Hopkins Bloomberg School > of Public health who studies health insurance worldwide. .. .. And once Obamacare really gets into full swing you will most likely see the numbers who die from lack of _adequate_ healthcare increase by orders of magnitude; while the total costs will be many times what Obamacare supporters are suggesting. .. .. > > so, you are saying that those 45,000+ Americans that die every year > from lack to access to healthcare don't deserve to LIVE? Are you > saying that those 46+ million people who don't and/or can't > have/afford health insurx don't have a right to have the same options > that you or I have just because we can afford to pay for health insurx?? .. .. I'm saying that none of those 45,000 have the right to demand that I provide them health insurance or any other thing they might like to have. In my county we the citizens voted to pay a 1/2 cent sales tax to provide indigent health care. And we are not a particularly affluent local; quite the opposite. So I doubt many of your supposed 45,000 came from here. In any event if you remove the drunks, druggies and sociopaths from the number you provide I suspect it would be much smaller. PLUS those who choose to spend their money on cigarettes, beer and large screen TV's instead of health insurance. When you give someone the " right " to the income of another person then you have made the second person the slave of the first person. That's a " right " I won't buy. ------------------------------------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 It's sucks, it's loosing money, and it is naturally full of fraud as are all government systems. One should have to opt-in in order to be forced to participate in using or paying for this wasteful system. Steve On 1/11/2010 12:49 PM, nancie barnett wrote: > Medicare is a GOVERNMENT run healthcare program ergo socialized medicine and since you hate socialized medicine and you don't support any public option aka Medicare for all then one would assume that you don't believe in or accept a Governmental Healthcare program such as Medicare. > > > From: > Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 9:16 AM > hypothyroidism ; JAMES > Subject: Re: Rationing > > > > Nancie, your argument is flawed. Medicare and social security benefit > me greatly. I seriously question whether either of them are good FOR > THE COUNTRY long term. And it is FOR THE GOOD OF ALL CITIZENS OF THE > COUNTRY that I present my arguments; _not_ for what I think will benefit > me or some other individual. I paid into those systems for 37 years to > whatever extent that was required to earn the benefits I receive. No > hypocrisy here. > > Where is the " RIGHT " to have medical insurance written??? What other > RIGHTS do we have to access the results of the work of others? Food? > Clothing? Shelter? A new car every year? What is the basis of the > RIGHTS you quote??? If I choose to sit on my @$$ while you spend your > life in productive labor what RIGHT do I have to demand that you provide > me what I would like to have? > > Okay; so you're a liberal which means you will have a different answer > to that question that I will give. As a conservative I suggest I have > NO RIGHTS to the results of your labor. If I am destitute and in need > your efforts to help me are not because I have some RIGHT to your > resources/money/help; but rather because you see it as > moral/religious/other imperative. But NEVER because I have the RIGHT to > demand such from you. > > > . > . > >> >> Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@... >> <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> >> aspenfairy1<aspenfairy1> >> >> >> Sun Jan 10, 2010 1:04 pm (PST) >> >> >> >> that is YOUR OPINION. NOT MINE at all. I have professional colleagues >> who have personally worked on the bills in both houses and thus I know >> what is REALLY going on. Since they are medical providers with >> political connections they were asked to help create the Bills. To do >> nothing is stupid and incomprehensible and amoral and unethical. >> 1000's of people die every year from lack of health insurance. how can >> you deny them the RIGHT to have health insurance and the RIGHT to be >> able to get medical care when they are sick. >> The insurance companies have to be reigned in on their daily abuses to >> people who have coverage and to those who can't get coverage. >> If you don't Governmental health care then you better not use any >> Medicare benefits otherwise you would be a hypocrite. >> >> From: >> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:17 AM >> hypothyroidism >> <mailto:hypothyroidism%40> >> Subject: Re: Rationing >> >> The bottom line is you're going to face massive rationing IN SOME MANNER >> or massive increases in taxes; whether you call it a " death panel " or >> something else won't really matter to the person suffering or dying due >> to lack of treatment. >> >> -- Steve - dudescholar4@... " The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher " Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism " Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 I see it as a direction problem. Instead of directing our tax dollars in directions that don't benefit the taxpayers, they should be redirected to those things that do benefit the tax payers. Roni <>Just because something isn't seen doesn't mean it's not there<> From: <res075oh@...> Subject: Re: Rationing hypothyroidism Date: Monday, January 11, 2010, 9:19 PM It is the theories of socialism that have failed. Even when the government assumed and applied the " right " to murder millions of their own citizens they still failed. Democracy will fail too, I'm afraid. When those who do not produce find out they can vote themselves an ever greater share of the income of those who do produce a point will be reached that those who do produce will be reduced beyond that necessary to support the society. At that point it will collapse. Most likely a dictator will then take over by promising to take care of everyone's needs and so many will naively follow that it becomes possible. Obamacare is just one of many steps in that direction. Free medical care for everyone, and no costs involved. How could anyone be so foolish... .. .. >     Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@... >     <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> >     matchermaam <matchermaam> > > >      Mon Jan 11, 2010 1:15 pm (PST) > > > > Steve you talk in theories. Theories are fine up to the point that > they come up against reality. The reality of healthcare is that the > only way the haves will not somehow pay for the havenots to get > healthcare is to shoot them dead. Otherwise one way or the other > their healthcare will be paid for. > > Roni ------------------------------------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 No, anyone who CHOOSES to have medical insurance should select what they want. Insurance companies should not be protected from competition (like they are now) with regulation. If you want to participate in a system that allows you to always access health insurance, however limited that might become because of thousands of new regulations, then one should be free to OPT-IN. So put it this way, everyone should have the OPTION to OPT-IN. That proves insurance to everyone who trusts government to be a good mommy while preserving freedom of choice and natural rights. Steve On 1/11/2010 6:12 PM, Roni Molin wrote: > I believe that everyone needs to pay something towrds their health insurance, unless their company gives it as one of their perks. That being said, I agree with Nanci that everyone should have access to health care, We are the only industrialized country in the world that doesn't take care of it's citizens with the tax money that is paid by them. Instead, our tax money goes for wars, for aid to other countries and a bunch of things the people have not asked for and don't want. So who's getting ripped off here? We the people are. > > > Roni > <>Just because something > isn't seen doesn't mean it's > not there<> > > > > > From: nancie barnett<deifspirit@...> > Subject: Re: Re: Rationing > hypothyroidism > Date: Monday, January 11, 2010, 11:49 AM > > > Medicare is a GOVERNMENT run healthcare program ergo socialized medicine and since you hate socialized medicine and you don't support any public option aka Medicare for all then one would assume that you don't believe in or accept a Governmental Healthcare program such as Medicare. > > > From: > Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 9:16 AM > hypothyroidism ; JAMES > Subject: Re: Rationing > > > > Nancie, your argument is flawed. Medicare and social security benefit > me greatly. I seriously question whether either of them are good FOR > THE COUNTRY long term. And it is FOR THE GOOD OF ALL CITIZENS OF THE > COUNTRY that I present my arguments; _not_ for what I think will benefit > me or some other individual. I paid into those systems for 37 years to > whatever extent that was required to earn the benefits I receive. No > hypocrisy here. > > Where is the " RIGHT " to have medical insurance written??? What other > RIGHTS do we have to access the results of the work of others? Food? > Clothing? Shelter? A new car every year? What is the basis of the > RIGHTS you quote??? If I choose to sit on my @$$ while you spend your > life in productive labor what RIGHT do I have to demand that you provide > me what I would like to have? > > Okay; so you're a liberal which means you will have a different answer > to that question that I will give. As a conservative I suggest I have > NO RIGHTS to the results of your labor. If I am destitute and in need > your efforts to help me are not because I have some RIGHT to your > resources/money/help; but rather because you see it as > moral/religious/other imperative. But NEVER because I have the RIGHT to > demand such from you. > > > . > . > >> >> Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@... >> <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> >> aspenfairy1<aspenfairy1> >> >> >> Sun Jan 10, 2010 1:04 pm (PST) >> >> >> >> that is YOUR OPINION. NOT MINE at all. I have professional colleagues >> who have personally worked on the bills in both houses and thus I know >> what is REALLY going on. Since they are medical providers with >> political connections they were asked to help create the Bills. To do >> nothing is stupid and incomprehensible and amoral and unethical. >> 1000's of people die every year from lack of health insurance. how can >> you deny them the RIGHT to have health insurance and the RIGHT to be >> able to get medical care when they are sick. >> The insurance companies have to be reigned in on their daily abuses to >> people who have coverage and to those who can't get coverage. >> If you don't Governmental health care then you better not use any >> Medicare benefits otherwise you would be a hypocrite. >> >> From: >> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:17 AM >> hypothyroidism >> <mailto:hypothyroidism%40> >> Subject: Re: Rationing >> >> The bottom line is you're going to face massive rationing IN SOME MANNER >> or massive increases in taxes; whether you call it a " death panel " or >> something else won't really matter to the person suffering or dying due >> to lack of treatment. >> >> -- Steve - dudescholar4@... " The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher " Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism " Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 It's a major factor because the AMA refuses to police the doctors and hospitals that should truly be thrown out. The insurance companies know there are bad doctors and hospitals, and know that because they are still practicing they will end up paying for huge law suits for their blunders. THAT'S why it's such a major factor. If the government or the insurance companies would get the bad apples out of there, a huge amount of money could be saved and maybe the insurance companies would lower their premiums. Roni <>Just because something isn't seen doesn't mean it's not there<> From: <res075oh@...> Subject: Re: Rationing hypothyroidism Date: Monday, January 11, 2010, 9:30 PM Tort reform would not remove the ability to sue; what it would do is make it less profitable to sue for some frivolous cause. It would do that by [hopefully] limiting compensation to lawyers who get literally millions of dollars for some suits [in one of the tobacco suits it was a billion or more]. Further it would do so by imposing a risk of having to pay all legal fees on the loser, and that would discourage anyone from suing if they did not in fact have a good case. I actually don't have a good handle on this so maybe I'm off base; but I know the cost of litigation and insurance to pay for possible litigation are a major factor in our medical costs. .. .. > >     Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@... >     <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> >     matchermaam <matchermaam> > > >      Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:24 pm (PST) > > > > Chuck, I agree there are frivolous law suits, but from what I see they > come under the heading of female customer gets huge settlement for > spilling hot coffee on herself. > > If a doctor did something that caused the death or total disability of > one of your or anyone else's child that you knew, would you call that > a frivolous law suit? Yet, if there is so called tort reform, that is > what will be curtailed, the ability to sue for something that is anything > but frivolous. > > Roni ------------------------------------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 Yes, I read it. However as it stands now, there is no ability to go across state lines, or is there. My insurance company is based on the east coast and I live in Washington. It's a medicare plan. Â My point with Steve was that as long as no one is very sick, things seem to be pretty good,. It's only when things get really bad that people suddenly come up with ideas to change things. Roni <>Just because something isn't seen doesn't mean it's not there<> > > > > and whx portions do you object to? > > I already gave you the specific paragraphs. If those sections setting up > a committee to ration care in the face of shortages are so benign, why > did congress need to make expensive back room deals, the Cornhusker > Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, to get Democrats to vote for it? > > There are several causes for the current high costs of health insurance. > One is covering the cost of frivolous law suits. Yet, there is no > mention of tort reform in the bill. Nor did I see any provision for > improving the competency of medical providers, which seems to be the > most common complaint with the current system voiced on this list. > > Another major cost factor is that state governments have negotiated > large price breaks for state employees in exchange for effective > insurance monopolies. The result is that the favored few insurance > companies in those states can raise rates with impunity to make everyone > else subsidize the savings to the state. Some states are much worse than > others, so the cost of care varies wildly from state to state. > > My son's family is one of the many who have been priced out of health > insurance, because he lives in one state but is employed in California. > My son and his company cannot afford the out of state rates, but they > are not allowed to buy from a much more competitive company from my > son's home state, at about half the price. We could cover a near > majority of the estimated uninsured by simply prohibiting state > governments from interfering with free trade and competition. > > Chuck ------------------------------------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 You are under the illusion that AMA is there to protect patients when if fact it is a modern version of a guild who's goal is to limit the number of doctors for the benefit of the practicing doctors to maximize their income. The AMA also attempts to limit any health practices that don't require a doctor. The AMA protects their doctors since the the AMA exists for and only for the doctors. Steve On 1/12/2010 12:41 AM, Roni Molin wrote: > It's a major factor because the AMA refuses to police the doctors and hospitals that should truly be thrown out. The insurance companies know there are bad doctors and hospitals, and know that because they are still practicing they will end up paying for huge law suits for their blunders. THAT'S why it's such a major factor. If the government or the insurance companies would get the bad apples out of there, a huge amount of money could be saved and maybe the insurance companies would lower their premiums. > > > Roni > <>Just because something > isn't seen doesn't mean it's > not there<> > > > > > From: <res075oh@...> > Subject: Re: Rationing > hypothyroidism > Date: Monday, January 11, 2010, 9:30 PM > > > Tort reform would not remove the ability to sue; what it would do is > make it less profitable to sue for some frivolous cause. It would do > that by [hopefully] limiting compensation to lawyers who get literally > millions of dollars for some suits [in one of the tobacco suits it was a > billion or more]. Further it would do so by imposing a risk of having > to pay all legal fees on the loser, and that would discourage anyone > from suing if they did not in fact have a good case. > > I actually don't have a good handle on this so maybe I'm off base; but I > know the cost of litigation and insurance to pay for possible litigation > are a major factor in our medical costs. > > > . > . > >> >> Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@... >> <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> >> matchermaam<matchermaam> >> >> >> Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:24 pm (PST) >> >> >> >> Chuck, I agree there are frivolous law suits, but from what I see they >> come under the heading of female customer gets huge settlement for >> spilling hot coffee on herself. >> >> If a doctor did something that caused the death or total disability of >> one of your or anyone else's child that you knew, would you call that >> a frivolous law suit? Yet, if there is so called tort reform, that is >> what will be curtailed, the ability to sue for something that is anything >> but frivolous. >> >> Roni -- Steve - dudescholar4@... " The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher " Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism " Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 The republic is gone so there can be no allegiances pledged. But you do get to get drafted and fight as many Vietnams as war profits require. Steve On 1/11/2010 10:40 PM, Crystal wrote: > we do not live in a democracy. We are suppose to live in a republic! > I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the > REPUBLIC for which it stands...... > This is the best video I've ever watched that really analyzes different > forms of government. It will show you that the US is suppose to be ruled by > law. > CW > -- Re: Rationing > > > It is the theories of socialism that have failed. Even when the > government assumed and applied the " right " to murder millions of their > own citizens they still failed. > > Democracy will fail too, I'm afraid. When those who do not produce find > out they can vote themselves an ever greater share of the income of > those who do produce a point will be reached that those who do produce > will be reduced beyond that necessary to support the society. At that > point it will collapse. Most likely a dictator will then take over by > promising to take care of everyone's needs and so many will naively > follow that it becomes possible. > > Obamacare is just one of many steps in that direction. Free medical > care for everyone, and no costs involved. How could anyone be so foolish... > > > . > . > >> Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@... >> <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> >> matchermaam<matchermaam> >> >> >> Mon Jan 11, 2010 1:15 pm (PST) >> >> >> >> Steve you talk in theories. Theories are fine up to the point that >> they come up against reality. The reality of healthcare is that the >> only way the haves will not somehow pay for the havenots to get >> healthcare is to shoot them dead. Otherwise one way or the other >> their healthcare will be paid for. >> >> Roni > -- Steve - dudescholar4@... " The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher " Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism " Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 The only rational taxes in a free republic are those taxes necessary to preserve the natural rights of it's citizens. Anything more is not a free republic. Any economic interference by providing any kind of government care, no matter what kind, should always be opt-in AND not require any taxes of those that don't opt-in, not even for admin costs. Steve On 1/12/2010 12:34 AM, Roni Molin wrote: > I see it as a direction problem. Instead of directing our tax dollars in directions that don't benefit the taxpayers, they should be redirected to those things that do benefit the tax payers. > > > Roni > <>Just because something > isn't seen doesn't mean it's > not there<> > > > > > From: <res075oh@...> > Subject: Re: Rationing > hypothyroidism > Date: Monday, January 11, 2010, 9:19 PM > > > It is the theories of socialism that have failed. Even when the > government assumed and applied the " right " to murder millions of their > own citizens they still failed. > > Democracy will fail too, I'm afraid. When those who do not produce find > out they can vote themselves an ever greater share of the income of > those who do produce a point will be reached that those who do produce > will be reduced beyond that necessary to support the society. At that > point it will collapse. Most likely a dictator will then take over by > promising to take care of everyone's needs and so many will naively > follow that it becomes possible. > > Obamacare is just one of many steps in that direction. Free medical > care for everyone, and no costs involved. How could anyone be so foolish... > > > . -- Steve - dudescholar4@... " The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher " Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism " Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 Keep in mind that he also wants to make the health care paperless and do everything with computers. And with medicare you don't need referrals. You can go to any doctor that you want unlike the private insurances that make just finding a doctor a pain in the ass. from Illinois ________________________________ From: <res075oh@...> hypothyroidism Sent: Mon, January 11, 2010 10:58:08 PM Subject: Re: Rationing Nancie, I cannot understand how your experience could be so different from that of, say, my allergy specialist. He showed me the letters he received objecting to the treatment he provided, and told me how much time he and his staff had to expend to get it approved. It was a most impressive stack of paper. Further he stated that for him it is epidemic now, but will get much worse if Obamacare becomes law. And the treatment provided was basically totally conventional; nothing alternative or weird. More below.... .. .. > > Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspiritmsn (DOT) com > <mailto:deifspiritmsn (DOT) com?Subject=%20Re% 3A%20Rationing> > aspenfairy1 <http://profiles. / aspenfairy1> > > > Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:18 pm (PST) > > > > - > I deal with Medicare All the time and I never have any problems with > Medicare vs. I have problems with PRIVATE insurx providing care for > patients. talk about rationing- the privates ration all the time and > you always feel like there is a " 3rd person " in the room with you. I > never have to write a TAR aka treatment authorization request with my > Medicare patients but I have to it constantly with every private > insurx out there. .. .. > It guarantees the right to LIFE .. .. No; it doesn't guarantee anything; it ASSERTS that those rights exist. Death is guaranteed if you're alive; that you will continue to be alive is not. And the right of liberty is taken away if you are inslaved to benefit another. Further, your pursuit of happiness will likely be somewhat less than enthusiastic once it becomes clear that your efforts in your pursit will go to enhance the happiness of someone else who would like to have the results of your labor. .. .. > and today that means the right to have healthcare so that if you are > sick you can get medical care and then you can have a LIFE. EVERY > civilized nation on the planet provides universal coverage for it's > citizens, except for the USA. .. .. Yes; according to the Marxists/socialists /liberals the USA is the pit of the earth. Not so to those from the utopias that you so admire who risk torture and murder for themselves and their families to come here. I guess things must be so bad here that you're probably planning to emigrate to the UK or some such, right? .. .. > It is no wonder that over 40,000 Americans DIE every year for lack of > healthcare insurx and that our life expectancy is worse than South > Korea and the total cost of medical care per person is the highest in > the world, @ $7,290 yet life expectancy is shorter than in most other > developed nations and many developing ones. Lack of health coverage is > a major factor in life span and contributes to an estimated 45,000 > deaths per year. These figures are for 2007 so just imagine what the > cost is now in 2010. > Source: Gerard , professor at s Hopkins Bloomberg School > of Public health who studies health insurance worldwide. .. .. And once Obamacare really gets into full swing you will most likely see the numbers who die from lack of _adequate_ healthcare increase by orders of magnitude; while the total costs will be many times what Obamacare supporters are suggesting. .. .. > > so, you are saying that those 45,000+ Americans that die every year > from lack to access to healthcare don't deserve to LIVE? Are you > saying that those 46+ million people who don't and/or can't > have/afford health insurx don't have a right to have the same options > that you or I have just because we can afford to pay for health insurx?? ... .. I'm saying that none of those 45,000 have the right to demand that I provide them health insurance or any other thing they might like to have. In my county we the citizens voted to pay a 1/2 cent sales tax to provide indigent health care. And we are not a particularly affluent local; quite the opposite. So I doubt many of your supposed 45,000 came from here. In any event if you remove the drunks, druggies and sociopaths from the number you provide I suspect it would be much smaller. PLUS those who choose to spend their money on cigarettes, beer and large screen TV's instead of health insurance. When you give someone the " right " to the income of another person then you have made the second person the slave of the first person. That's a " right " I won't buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 I agree with you to a certain extent. We HAVE to stop giving the govt more power!!!!!!!! If we continue in this direction then we didn't learn from history! CW -- Re: Rationing > > > It is the theories of socialism that have failed. Even when the > government assumed and applied the " right " to murder millions of their > own citizens they still failed. > > Democracy will fail too, I'm afraid. When those who do not produce find > out they can vote themselves an ever greater share of the income of > those who do produce a point will be reached that those who do produce > will be reduced beyond that necessary to support the society. At that > point it will collapse. Most likely a dictator will then take over by > promising to take care of everyone's needs and so many will naively > follow that it becomes possible. > > Obamacare is just one of many steps in that direction. Free medical > care for everyone, and no costs involved. How could anyone be so foolish.. > > > . > . > >> Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@... >> <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> >> matchermaam<matchermaam> >> >> >> Mon Jan 11, 2010 1:15 pm (PST) >> >> >> >> Steve you talk in theories. Theories are fine up to the point that >> they come up against reality. The reality of healthcare is that the >> only way the haves will not somehow pay for the havenots to get >> healthcare is to shoot them dead. Otherwise one way or the other >> their healthcare will be paid for. >> >> Roni > -- Steve - dudescholar4@... " The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher " Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism " Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 I am well aware of the role and practices of the AMA since Rockefeller brought it into existence. I know full well that they are the reason for big fees, big pharma, crooked incompetent doctors and hospitals and greedy, nefarious insurance companies. Roni <>Just because something isn't seen doesn't mean it's not there<> > > > From: <res075oh@...> > Subject: Re: Rationing > hypothyroidism > Date: Monday, January 11, 2010, 9:30 PM > > > Tort reform would not remove the ability to sue; what it would do is > make it less profitable to sue for some frivolous cause. It would do > that by [hopefully] limiting compensation to lawyers who get literally > millions of dollars for some suits [in one of the tobacco suits it was a > billion or more]. Further it would do so by imposing a risk of having > to pay all legal fees on the loser, and that would discourage anyone > from suing if they did not in fact have a good case. > > I actually don't have a good handle on this so maybe I'm off base; but I > know the cost of litigation and insurance to pay for possible litigation > are a major factor in our medical costs. > > > . > . > >> >>      Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@... >>      <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing> >>      matchermaam<matchermaam> >> >> >>       Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:24 pm (PST) >> >> >> >> Chuck, I agree there are frivolous law suits, but from what I see they >> come under the heading of female customer gets huge settlement for >> spilling hot coffee on herself. >> >> If a doctor did something that caused the death or total disability of >> one of your or anyone else's child that you knew, would you call that >> a frivolous law suit? Yet, if there is so called tort reform, that is >> what will be curtailed, the ability to sue for something that is anything >> but frivolous. >> >> Roni -- Steve - dudescholar4@... " The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher " Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism " Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html ------------------------------------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.