Health Care Bill and Gun Compromise...

[Trlsmn]

A preview of the new health care for all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5lQEI8Xtmk

 

[thatkidwho]

Medicare-Medicaid are the lowest paying insurance. They pay about 20% less to doctors for services provided and restrict what tests and medications can be used. On Medicare/Medicaid you must be prescribed a generic drug if one is available. Those generic drugs may contain up to 20% less active ingredient than the brand name drug.

They control their costs by regulating the types and amount of service you can have regardless of your Doctors' decision. Medicare also decreases the amount they pay every year. Many insurance companies follow Medicare's payment schedule and decrease their payments as well. Many Doctors are dropping Medicare/Medicaid because their cost of doing business with them out weighs the benefit.

Doctors are in business to make money. They can make a lot of money but they also have a high overhead. A single specialty doctor can make about $500k a year with a steady flow of patients. That same provider will have one or two full time employees for reception and billing. He will also have to pay for malpractice insurance which starts at about $75k a year, most pay around $100k and +$250k if your do surgeries. Almost half of their income is taken right there. We haven't even considered office leases, postage, paper, office supplies, equipment, computers, etc.

While I feel universal health care is a noble idea, its not practical. We might get lower insurance premiums and pay less upfront but your out of pocket might go up as doctors need to cover their costs. When being a doctor is no longer profitable their will be less and less doctors.

Now imagine a influx of government controlled health insurance policies flooding the system. Limiting the payments to providers, restricting which services/test can be preformed at any given time and ultimately downgrading your healthcare to control costs.

If you think socialized medicine is the save all then you will be disappointed. I have family in Canada who have bought private insurance to cover what the government won't. I had a cousin who had breast cancer and was on a waiting list for surgery. Our families pulled together the funds to bring her to Seattle to have the surgery immediately.

Do I have a solution? No. Do I think our current system needs improvement? Yes. Who will this hurt? Everyone involved.

 

[U201491]

The penalty for not having health care insurance is going to be some extra taxes, honest they are never going to put anyone in prison for it, sheesh!

We have a law that mandates that you have car insurance if you drive, and that makes sense because otherwise taxpayers are going to have to pick up the tab if you have an accident. do you object to that law too?

Because it is pretty much the same argument, we all have bodies.

Driving is not protected by the US Constitution. Your freedom of travel and movement is, but not the means. With what you say, what will happen when some idiot decides you have to have insurance to own a firearm??
That right IS protected by the Constitution as is the Life you have. Mandates to buy health insurance is a violation of your constitutional freedoms when it is forced upon you.

One other issue that seems to have gone by the wayside.
The debtor prison. They are reinstuting that in this bill also. You don't pay, you are fined and, or, go to prison.. No one should ever be prosecuted for debt of any kind. That is Moscow and Beijing thinking. Is that where you want us to be?

 

[Partsproduction]

No one should ever be prosecuted for debt of any kind. That is Moscow and Beijing thinking. Is that where you want us to be?

I'll disagree with you on this, private property rights follow the lender's money after he loans it until the terms of the loan are met.

If there is no penalty for irresponsible behavior (Theft) then irresponsible behavior becomes the norm. If that happens there will be no lenders of any kind except the street kind that will break your legs or kill you is you don't pay.

This country was set up honoring property rights, and anytime anyone doesn't pay their debts they should be liable for prison if they continue to refuse to pay what they agreed to.

Sounds like you want government to step up and help thieves?

 

[U201491]

I'll disagree with you on this, private property rights follow the lender's money after he loans it until the terms of the loan are met.

If there is no penalty for irresponsible behavior (Theft) then irresponsible behavior becomes the norm. If that happens there will be no lenders of any kind except the street kind that will break your legs or kill you is you don't pay.

This country was set up honoring property rights, and anytime anyone doesn't pay their debts they should be liable for prison if they continue to refuse to pay what they agreed to.

Sounds like you want government to step up and help thieves?

There are recourses that can be taken to collect debt.
Let them be used, but there should never be anyone imprisoned for debt, PERIOD.

There are far too many things that can make you or anyone else have financial troubles and it can hit anyone at any time.
That is NOT an offense that warrants imprisonment.
If it is part of theft or deception that is a seperate crime.
Being forced to buy something and imprisoned for not abiding by that government dictate
is part of what America faught for independence to break from !!!
Don't go back there. America still has the backbone to fight again.

 

[Partsproduction]

there should never be anyone imprisoned for debt, PERIOD.

Sounds like an opinion. In my opinion thieves do in fact deserve prison time, PERIOD.
Any argument you make for rationalization due to circumstances can also be used to justify planning. Borrowing property and not returning it is theft.

Mao and Lenin would agree more with your position than mine.

But being forced to buy insurance, being unconstitutional, is theft. I submit that the people who are behind that plan could use prison time too.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

This monstrosity has passed....forced on us by our progreeeeeessive neighbors through a socialist President and Congress and unquestioningly accepted by a complicit press.

Thank them properly. Fire Them ALL this fall. Get a conservative Congress in place...then IMPEACH Obama.

This will be a good start

 

[U201491]

Sounds like an opinion. In my opinion thieves do in fact deserve prison time, PERIOD.
Any argument you make for rationalization due to circumstances can also be used to justify planning. Borrowing property and not returning it is theft.

Mao and Lenin would agree more with your position than mine.

But being forced to buy insurance, being unconstitutional, is theft. I submit that the people who are behind that plan could use prison time too.

Well, looks like you get your wish, not mine
They abolished debtors prisons here in 1833.

They are back, so you can relax and rejoice.

THE DEMOCRAT'S NEW DEBTORS PRISON

<broken link removed>

By Jeff Kropf
November 2, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

IRS enforced health insurance mandate is the new debtor’s prison.

I love the progressive social movement. They are so full of contradictions and hypocrisy that it would be laughable if it wasn’t so sad, or so dangerous to our liberty. After all, the irony of the progressives purporting to care more about the poor, but actually instituting policies which hurt them is stunning.

If you aggregate all of the concepts that the President and the Democrat controlled Congress are trying to implement (not to mention here in Oregon), it amounts to a huge increase in the cost of living, which disproportionately hurts poor people. Higher fossil fuel prices because Congress locks up America’s oil, higher overall energy prices from cap and tax schemes, higher cigarette taxes, alcohol taxes and on and on. Obviously, these higher prices ripple through the economy creating inflation that affects every aspect of life making it harder for the average person to live the American dream, but especially poor people.

Now add to this absurdity, the idea that Congress would mandate that each person in America (including illegal aliens) must buy health insurance, pay new taxes on their health care and if they don’t, the IRS will fine them up to $25,000 and up to a year in jail and it is clear what the result would be: the modern version of debtors prison. The Heritage Foundation has an analysis of the effect of this mandate on lower income and middle income people here.

So let me get this right: We are going to help those who don’t have health care because they can't afford it by taxing them up the wazoo for that very health care? And, if they don’t buy health insurance, then we are going to turn the limitless power of the IRS against them, fine them outrageous amounts of money and throw them in prison?

Next they will charge you for insurance to own your guns and imprison you if you don't pay..................

 

[bugeye]

Driving is not protected by the US Constitution. Your freedom of travel and movement is, but not the means. With what you say, what will happen when some idiot decides you have to have insurance to own a firearm??
That right IS protected by the Constitution as is the Life you have. Mandates to buy health insurance is a violation of your constitutional freedoms when it is forced upon you.

One other issue that seems to have gone by the wayside.
The debtor prison. They are reinstuting that in this bill also. You don't pay, you are fined and, or, go to prison.. No one should ever be prosecuted for debt of any kind. That is Moscow and Beijing thinking. Is that where you want us to be?

So many constitutional experts in here who just know the limits of federal power. I've had one 300 level, 4 credit college class in constitutional law and I got an A, but I can't claim to have your insight, sheesh! everything is so cut and dry, black and white, amazing, you'd think this wasn't complex applying a vague 12 page document from the 1700's to 2010 America.

So, your argument is that people are like guns so they don't require insurance, hummmm?

Your prison argument falls flat too, because you can go to prison now if you don't pay your taxes, and not even bankrupcy gets you a free of the IRS! You and I may be in agreement on this issue but it's nothing new, and this law does not change it.

 

[bugeye]

....

Next they will charge you for insurance to own your guns and imprison you if you don't pay..................

I can see the policy now, it will not pay if the gun is used in a crime, it won't pay if someone unauthorized is using the gun, it won't pay if the gun is not properly locked away, it won't pay if the gun is used as a gun and fires a projectile, and it will cost a thousand a year per gun. This will be a real money maker for the insurance industry, and as we have seen they are more than happy to throw millions at congress for a little consideration.

 

[U201491]

So many constitutional experts in here who just know the limits of federal power. I've had one 300 level, 4 credit college class in constitutional law and I got an A, but I can't claim to have your insight, sheesh! everything is so cut and dry, black and white, amazing, you'd think this wasn't complex applying a vague 12 page document from the 1700's to 2010 America.

So, your argument is that people are like guns so they don't require insurance, hummmm?

Your prison argument falls flat too, because you can go to prison now if you don't pay your taxes, and not even bankrupcy gets you a free of the IRS! You and I may be in agreement on this issue but it's nothing new, and this law does not change it.

It adds just another way that you can be imprisoned, ie' criminal record, ie; no more guns for you.
It is funny how the point gets missed. If the socialist dems had their way, everyone would have a criminal record and they would not have to enact any more gun laws. What is this... a cloud that just goes over everyone's head ????
I am retired, but say your son, brother, you... lose your job, your unemployment has run out or you only make enough to meet the mtg and food expenses. You or they still better have the way to come up with their thousand dollars a month to buy mandated health care or you are suddenly labled a criminal and you just lost your second amendment rights. Come on people think a little here :-\ Not everything should have to be spelled out to understand the ramifications of all this.

I think the Tom Peterson technique needs a rebirth..."Wake Up...Wake UP....Wake UP"

 

[mudnducs]

So many constitutional experts in here who just know the limits of federal power. I've had one 300 level, 4 credit college class in constitutional law and I got an A, but I can't claim to have your insight, sheesh! everything is so cut and dry, black and white, amazing, you'd think this wasn't complex applying a vague 12 page document from the 1700's to 2010 America.

So, your argument is that people are like guns so they don't require insurance, hummmm?

Your prison argument falls flat too, because you can go to prison now if you don't pay your taxes, and not even bankrupcy gets you a free of the IRS! You and I may be in agreement on this issue but it's nothing new, and this law does not change it.

Just like you're an expert on overhead costs for medicare/medicade....weird eh?


Who cares how many classes you took....you apparently don't get the basics.
This nation was founded on the notion of maximizing individual liberty and minimal government.
We have a Declaration, a Constitution, and a Bill of Rights that says so.

Becasue you don't understand what they mean or what limits are imposed does not constitute approval for you to ignore what they actually mean. You may know more facts than Thomas Jefferson....but rest assured, you are certainly no wiser.

 

[Stomper]

You guys should get a padded cell together.

LOL.. if that time ever does come, I hope you're my cell mate too, 'cuz the schoolin' sessions would COMMENCE!!

 

[mudnducs]

There are recourses that can be taken to collect debt.
Let them be used, but there should never be anyone imprisoned for debt, PERIOD.

There are far too many things that can make you or anyone else have financial troubles and it can hit anyone at any time.
That is NOT an offense that warrants imprisonment.
If it is part of theft or deception that is a seperate crime.
Being forced to buy something and imprisoned for not abiding by that government dictate
is part of what America faught for independence to break from !!!
Don't go back there. America still has the backbone to fight again.

Come on man....you're pulling your point too far.

Are you saying that people like Ken Lay shouldn't be rotting in prison? Surely not. If you don't pay your debts...you are stealing just as sure as that creep.
If you can steal with impunity, what's the down side?

We fought for independence for independence.

 

[bugeye]

It adds just another way that you can be imprisoned, ie' criminal record, ie; no more guns for you.
It is funny how the point gets missed. If the socialist dems had their way, everyone would have a criminal record and they would not have to enact any more gun laws. What is this... a cloud that just goes over everyone's head ????
I am retired, but say your son, brother, you... lose your job, your unemployment has run out or you only make enough to meet the mtg and food expenses. You or they still better have the way to come up with their thousand dollars a month to buy mandated health care or you are suddenly labled a criminal and you just lost your second amendment rights. Come on people think a little here :-\ Not everything should have to be spelled out to understand the ramifications of all this.

I think the Tom Peterson technique needs a rebirth..."Wake Up...Wake UP....Wake UP"

OK, Yes another way, but another way for people to get some health care at lower cost before they show up in the emergency room for $50,000 worth of care that we will pay for. Also, if you want to get rid of pre existing conditions you have to make sure that everyone is insured, else people will wait till they know something is wrong before getting insurance.

I guess you love facist republicans better, while I can't do much to defend the dems, the repubs are a total party of lock step sell out nitwits who have no vision whatsoever and wouldn't even dream of trying to solve any problems even ten times less complex than heatlh care. Yeah, a vote for them is a vote for our extinction.

Your example is wrong too, when they made health insurance manditory they put in subsidies to help the lowers pay for it. But given your current example they have to go without any coverage, and when they do manage to get another job the new insurance company won't cover pre existing conditions.

Maybe you should wake up and think a little deeper!
Yeah, I know it's easy being a dittohead in this bushel of bubbas.

 

[bugeye]

LOL.. if that time ever does come, I hope you're my cell mate too, 'cuz the schoolin' sessions would COMMENCE!!

The odds of me ending up in prison are slight, but based on your advanced anger management problem, your deep feelings of persecution, and your wild opinions that are backed by arguments that couldn't win a kindergarden debate, I wouldn't give you a year.

 

[mudnducs]

OK, Yes another way, but another way for people to get some health care at lower cost before they show up in the emergency room for $50,000 worth of care that we will pay for. Also, if you want to get rid of pre existing conditions you have to make sure that everyone is insured, else people will wait till they know something is wrong before getting insurance.

I guess you love facist republicans better, while I can't do much to defend the dems, the repubs are a total party of lock step sell out nitwits who have no vision whatsoever and wouldn't even dream of trying to solve any problems even ten times less complex than heatlh care. Yeah, a vote for them is a vote for our extinction.

Your example is wrong too, when they made health insurance manditory they put in subsidies to help the lowers pay for it. But given your current example they have to go without any coverage, and when they do manage to get another job the new insurance company won't cover pre existing conditions.

Maybe you should wake up and think a little deeper!
Yeah, I know it's easy being a dittohead in this bushel of bubbas.

"fascist republicans" eh? OK.

Isn't it just like progs socialists to demand that their neighbor pay their bills at the point of a law...but call those that balk at that unConstitutional notion...as facist? Funny eh?


Isn't it just like progreeeeesive socialists to demand that we pay a trillion dollars to cover something they admit is already being paid for! "....before they show up in the emergency room for $50,000 worth of care that we will pay for"
But conservatives are the fascists.


Isn't it funny when progrereeeeesive socialists shred the Constitution by insisting in nonexistent interpretations...trying to destroy the greatest nation, the nation that has done the most good for the most men in this history of mankind....so that they can implement a one world utopina vision by "spreading the wealth arooound a litte".

But conservatives are the fascists! .....

 

[mudnducs]

OK, Yes another way, but another way for people to get some health care at lower cost before they show up in the emergency room for $50,000 worth of care that we will pay for. Also, if you want to get rid of pre existing conditions you have to make sure that everyone is insured, else people will wait till they know something is wrong before getting insurance.

I guess you love facist republicans better, while I can't do much to defend the dems, the repubs are a total party of lock step sell out nitwits who have no vision whatsoever and wouldn't even dream of trying to solve any problems even ten times less complex than heatlh care. Yeah, a vote for them is a vote for our extinction.

Your example is wrong too, when they made health insurance manditory they put in subsidies to help the lowers pay for it. But given your current example they have to go without any coverage, and when they do manage to get another job the new insurance company won't cover pre existing conditions.

Maybe you should wake up and think a little deeper!
Yeah, I know it's easy being a dittohead in this bushel of bubbas.

"fascist republicans" eh? OK Bubba.

Isn't it just like progreeeeesives socialists to demand that their neighbor pay their bills at the point of a law...but call those that balk at that unConstitutional notion...as facist? Funny eh?


Isn't it just like progreeeeesive socialists to demand that we pay a trillion dollars to cover something they admit is already being paid for! "....before they show up in the emergency room for $50,000 worth of care that we will pay for"
But conservatives are the fascists.


Isn't it funny when progrreeeeesive socialists shred the Constitution by insisting in nonexistent interpretations...trying to destroy the greatest nation, the nation that has done the most good for the most men in this history of mankind....so that they can implement a one world utopian vision by "spreading the wealth arooound a little".

But conservatives are the fascists! .....

 

[bugeye]

Just like you're an expert on overhead costs for medicare/medicade....weird eh?


Who cares how many classes you took....you apparently don't get the basics.
This nation was founded on the notion of maximizing individual liberty and minimal government.
We have a Declaration, a Constitution, and a Bill of Rights that says so.

Becasue you don't understand what they mean or what limits are imposed does not constitute approval for you to ignore what they actually mean. You may know more facts than Thomas Jefferson....but rest assured, you are certainly no wiser.

So, this is you refuting the figures I provided after you apparently did some extensive research? I have provided more accurate facts and figures in this website than any one else, you see I actually use facts to make decisions about what is good or bad, yeah I know its a lot more work then just doing the dittohead. As to the arguments your side makes, well where are they I can't seem to find any in this sea of emotional pablum.

I like Jefferson, but we don't have access to his opinion of the current state of our legal system, but why stop with just Jefferson being a supporter of your point of view why not throw in Erik the Red and Saint Paul.

You don't get our legal system, it is a pay per use system and if you pay enough you can nearly get any decision.

 

[mudnducs]

OK, Yes another way, but another way for people to get some health care at lower cost before they show up in the emergency room for $50,000 worth of care that we will pay for. Also, if you want to get rid of pre existing conditions you have to make sure that everyone is insured, else people will wait till they know something is wrong before getting insurance.

I guess you love facist republicans better, while I can't do much to defend the dems, the repubs are a total party of lock step sell out nitwits who have no vision whatsoever and wouldn't even dream of trying to solve any problems even ten times less complex than heatlh care. Yeah, a vote for them is a vote for our extinction.

Your example is wrong too, when they made health insurance manditory they put in subsidies to help the lowers pay for it. But given your current example they have to go without any coverage, and when they do manage to get another job the new insurance company won't cover pre existing conditions.

Maybe you should wake up and think a little deeper!
Yeah, I know it's easy being a dittohead in this bushel of bubbas.

Here you go...read a little Hanson. You might learn something.

An Historic Pelosi?

I suppose one could interpret the healthcare bill as "Pelosi's historic achievement," as the media has been insisting, but that would also mean that an unpopular President and a more unpopular Congress and a most unpopular Speaker together railroaded through an unpopular, sweeping piece of legislation without a single opposition vote, and through the sort of tawdry legislative bribery and procedural gimmicks we haven't seen since the 19th century. So the bill is historic mostly in the minds of the D.C.–New York liberal punditocracy and Democratic stalwarts, for about another seven months, before the people weigh in themselves.

I don't think by year's end too many will call the bill historic; and when the opposition eventually takes over the Congress (and it always does), and its zealots begin to ram through radical, partisan changes, in the manner of Pelosi's precedent, "historic" will be the last adjective we used to look back on March 21 and the role of the Speaker. The means live on; the ends are ephemeral — and Pelosi's conduct tarnished the Congress and will unleash a no-holds-barred reaction when she is out of power that will make historians think very carefully about the real lasting wages of her most unpopular tenure.