A Health Care Scenario

commiekat, it matters when the document comes out as each day that passes and more of this massive bill comes to light the CBO has to raise the numbers to cover more expected costs.
again i ask you to go back and see what they projected the cost of medicare and medicaid and then see what it costs today. medicare is way smaller than this bill, so how will they control costs. there is not a shred of proof that they can and will.
again i ask you to show me one gov't project that has not spent at least multiple times what it was supposed to do, it just ain't going to happen, there is what people are not liking, they know congress will not stick to their guns and control anything.
there are other ways to get coverage for people and lower costs, but that would be too simple for these idiots in congress to even consider.
again you prove my point, it is all about greed and nothing less. people do not want to provide for themselves, just let the gov't take care of them. they can't even get the number right on how many it will cover, it is from 7 million all the way up to 45 million(a big portion illegals). senate majority leader even conceded that there were going to be many who will not be covered in a speech given last week, if that is so, then where is the universal coverage. it is a scam and another lie they are trying to feed us..WAKE UP

AGIAN, get all the facts, most doctors are NOT members of the AMA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Navaja

If you need to read that info somewhere it's because you don't have a clue.

What business could compete against a government funded (with taxpayer dollars) health insurance business, where they would make the enrollment mandatory.

And those who would like to take the private option, will have to pay for both.

Do you get it now?

---

UPS and FedEx are competitive, aren't they? Enrollment won't be mandatory, either. I'm growing tired of looking up these documents and citing them properly for you guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 59caddy

again you prove my point, it is all about greed and nothing less. people do not want to provide for themselves, just let the gov't take care of them. they can't even get the number right on how many it will cover, it is from 7 million all the way up to 45 million(a big portion illegals). senate majority leader even conceded that there were going to be many who will not be covered in a speech given last week, if that is so, then where is the universal coverage. it is a scam and another lie they are trying to feed us..WAKE UP

---

What point of yours did I prove? You're right that it is about greed -- corporate greed. Right now private insurance companies have all the leverage and the customers are powerless. A competitive option will change that in favor of the people.

45 million citizens uninsured currently, and that has nothing to do with illegals. You know who pays for illegal coverage now? We all do, so even if your statement was correct it wouldn't be relevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 59caddy

AGIAN, get all the facts, most doctors are NOT members of the AMA

---

You need to read what I write more carefully because I never mentioned anything about the AMA's membership. Honedright put up a clip of Reagan speaking out against Medicaid. I was pointing out that he made that clip on behalf of the AMA in the '60s, and that the AMA is currently supportive of the health care reform proposal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by commiecat

Well I have no idea what Katrina has to do with this, but again you're absolutely lying about the H1N1 numbers. 6000 people have died worldwide, and only about 1400 in North America. The vaccine is available now.

Actually it's for about 45.7M citizens.

---

Does the following excerpt from Jonh Kerry's speach in 2002 have any application in the present?

Flu vaccine shortages five years ago. . . "If you can't get flu vaccines to Americans, how are you going to protect them against bioterrorism? . . ."


<table class="ts"><tbody><tr><td style="padding-top: 5px; padding-right: 10px; font-size: 78%; line-height: normal; width: 80px; text-align: center;" valign="top">
</td><td style="padding-top: 3px;" valign="top">
</td></tr></tbody></table><table class="ts"><tbody><tr><td style="padding-top: 5px; padding-right: 10px; font-size: 78%; line-height: normal; width: 80px; text-align: center;" valign="top">
</td><td style="padding-top: 3px;" valign="top">
</td></tr></tbody></table>

if you go back and read the rather long winded documents posted you will find that when and if you lose your private health care you will go on to gov't care and will not be able to come off.
you keep saying it is an option, then i say it should be an option for me to pay into it, it is not. states that opt out still have the mandated taxes and payments into the system.
fedex and ups are great examples of how things run. but you forget one thing that the usps is still in operation with massive cost overruns and deficits and continue to raise rates on postage. a good example of what i have been saying all along, if it is run by the gov't it will cost many times what a private system costs.
another note on the great usps. i suppose you do not remember when the mail used to run 2 times daily instead of 1 time. now they are even thinking about stopping service on saturday to stop cost overruns. sounds like a great gov't program again going to hell in a hand basket.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by commiecat

So you're finally seeing the light? Reagan made that LP in the early '60s in support of the AMA.

Today the AMA supports health care reform.

---

I don't see why achievement of these goals requires intervention by the federal government. In fact, it appears to me that government intervention has created some of the problems that these AMA goals are intended to correct.

I think we're seeing two different light sources.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by commiecat

UPS and FedEx are competitive, aren't they?

---

That sounds like Obama on one of his talks, trying to sell that the idea that the Postal Service doesn't have an impact on UPS or FedEx.

Let me educate you a little bit, UPS and FedEx are successful private parcel delivery services, USPS is a government mail delivery organization. The parcel delivery of USPS is subsidized by he First Class Mail. That tells you that USPS doesn't follow fair competition practices and they can have the luxury of loosing money, all they do is raise the price of the First Class Mail.

Does this give you a clue how the government will run health care? Reducing services and raising taxes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by commiecat

Does it matter when the document came out? I posted a PDF straight from the CBO's website and quoted it with citations. Show me where it says that there will be no more private insurance companies after 2012.

---

Yes it does matter. The new bill that came out on 10/30/09 is 2 times larger than the last one. Start at Page 92 of the new health bill. It describes what an insurance plan shall be and guess what it is to be the same as the government plan. No exceptions so that means we will naturally be shoved into the government plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by commiecat

Well I have no idea what Katrina has to do with this, but again you're absolutely lying about the H1N1 numbers. 6000 people have died worldwide, and only about 1400 in North America. The vaccine is available now.

---

Well if the parallel thought about how government run programs is lost then..... let's move on. It, as of today, is not available to me and once we take the shot it will take at least 2 weeks till we get any benefits. By the way the numbers that have been reported are low

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by commiecat

Actually it's for about 45.7M citizens.

---

[IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/RICHAR%7E1/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot.png[/IMG]


So.... We are down to 9.3 Million non citizens and 10 Million of original 45M. From what I have read of the 9.3M 90% are here legally and have a job. Of the 10 Million over half don't wish to purchase insurance and want to pocket the money they make, not a wise decision in my book but it is theirs. Another thing that is not taken into account is, for instance, in California we have a lot of uninsured but there is nobody in the state that can not apply for free medical and dental and mental health programs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Navaja

If you need to read that info somewhere it's because you don't have a clue.
And by not providing it, you are keeping him clueless. So which is worse: Not knowing or knowing and not caring?


What business could compete against a government funded (with taxpayer dollars) health insurance business, where they would make the enrollment mandatory.

UPS and Fedex certainly did a bang up job against the USPS in their respective industry. This ignores the third party pay set up of the current health industry and the issues that come with it as I have stated in previous posts. Still, it serves this point well: free enterprise can compete with the government. I too haven't seen any documentation that says it will be mandatory to use the public option in this legislation. I guess if I need to read that I should refer to your first statement.

And those who would like to take the private option, will have to pay for both.

Do you get it now?
I think I understand. You seem to enjoy arguing more than debating.

---

*Off Topic*
There are some very well articulated points of view in this thread. Thanks to all for the lively debate!

-Rob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by honedright

Don't forget that doctors also care about optimizing their patient's treatment. No doctor wants to waste his, or his patient's, time and money on unnecessary, and sometimes uncomfortable, procedures. But, who better to decide what is medically necessary than the one who completed medical school training where a standard of care is taught?

---

Well as you know not all doctors are equal, so what is 'necessary' can vary quite a bit. I don't think allowing every doctor to perform anything they feel like with the only control their own judgment is going to get you the results you want. Now if there was no insurance involved and the patient would have to be convinced by their doctor that the cost is necessary because they will have to cover it in full, preferably upfront, now that would work better, but still biases the system in the wrong way - the personality of a doctor can have much more significant role in what decisions end up made, than their medical competence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by honedright

And who better to decide what to bill for services than the one providing those services? Does not the doctor own his or her knowledge? along with owning the skills he or she is selling?

---

And that's what they do right now. Except that most can't or don't want to deal with billing directly their patients, so they accept to do it for whatever money they agree with an insurance company. And while some rates may be outdated, I think in general they are not all that bad - they were decided by panels of doctors after all.

I've gotten medical bills and I've seen some rates, and the number that the insurance company pays them is there and the discount is rather large.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by honedright

The insanity is in denying doctors the fruits of their labor, their liberty.

---

What? You must've been reading some odd fiction lately


Withe the same validity we can take the alternative point of view and say that who better knows how much money are actually available to be spent than the insurance companies? The matter of fact is that certain things are prohibitively expensive, for example many people can be kept for a very long term on ventilators, why not keep everybody's body functional and for as long as technically possible, because there is always a chance that future medical advances will be able to heal them completely.