|
||||||
|
Title: Hilarycare? Post by ClusterChuck on Aug 23rd, 2007, 5:33pm Is this what Hilary wants to do to us? We need some work done, but THIS is NOT the way to do it! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_Rf42zNl9U BTW, this is NOT meant as a slam, or insult, or anything bad against our dear Ontario family members. It is just a travesty that this man, and his wife, had to go to such extraordinary means to get a serious condition corrected. As bad as things can be here in the States, there is NO WAY I want to go to a system like this man had to deal with! Chuck |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Jonny on Aug 23rd, 2007, 5:49pm Thats just what you will get if you vote for her! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Big_OUCH on Aug 23rd, 2007, 6:01pm This sounds like a propaganda piece put out to deny universal health care in the US: pick a serious case that is caught up in a bureaucratic snafu and then generalize it to condemn the, in this case, Canadian Health Care System. Did you know that the US health care system ranks somewhere around 92nd in the world in terms of quality of care? Worse than some poor African countries. Canada is among the top 10 if I remember correctly. People in Western Europe, all of whom have "socialized" medicine, are among the healthiest people in the world and have just about the best health care system in the world. Sure, they pay a lot in premiums, deducted from their paychecks, but they don't have to worry about hospital or medical bills and their quality of life is very, very good. A person shoud never have to make a choice between getting medical attention or buying food or paying rent (and the docs in Canada and Europe are paid quite well and can even take private patients as private health insurance is an option). My 2 cents. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Thimk on Aug 23rd, 2007, 6:01pm on 08/23/07 at 17:33:08, ClusterChuck wrote:
It depends on who you are - people in the US are being denied coverage here and are dying every day. And the same is happening in Canada. But maybe to a lesser degree. Who was it here that has a sick kid, lost his job, and lost his insurance, and is now going bankrupt? I'm not sure that one dramatic case of injustice elsewere is proof that our stinking rotten system is worth keeping. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Big_OUCH on Aug 23rd, 2007, 6:19pm on 08/23/07 at 18:01:19, Thimk wrote:
Amen |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Jonny on Aug 23rd, 2007, 6:28pm on 08/23/07 at 18:01:19, Thimk wrote:
Gee, thats an awful lot to know seeing that you just got here four hours ago! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Rosybabe on Aug 23rd, 2007, 6:35pm Thousands of Mayan Indians lost homes as Hurricane Dean blew through the Yucatan peninsula, but their real wealth was the trees, now scattered and broken in the storm's wake. Village after village is carpeted with fallen mangoes, oranges, guanabanas and mameys that will never be harvested. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Kevin_M on Aug 23rd, 2007, 6:46pm on 08/23/07 at 18:01:19, Thimk wrote:
Hardly ingenious of you to pick one case to exemplify your reasoning, followed by saying you're not sure if one case is proof. A hot housing market created millions of new home owners; the greatest property boom of the decade, on the coast of south Florida, made many Americans instantly rich -- at least those who cashed in before the bubble burst in 1925 and 1926. (Even William Jennings Bryan moved to Florida and secured a small fortune with a series of well-times investments and promotional activities. "Miami," quipped Bryan, "is the only city in the world where you can tell a lie at breakfast that will come true by evening." ) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by artonio7 on Aug 23rd, 2007, 6:58pm Perhaps Hillary should fashion our national health care plan after the care that the Disabled American Veterans are receiving now. That should spur a revolution. Sadly our current administration has no problem with the holes our soldiers are getting poked in them... but has significant problems with getting them band aids. I still can not believe we are allowing this to happen... come on folks... why isn't or hasn't the current administration done anything to give our troops THE BEST CARE POSSIBLE when they return broken and bruised? Oh that's right.... Hillary sabotaged them. with warm regards, Tony |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by ClusterChris on Aug 23rd, 2007, 7:00pm Being from Ontario, I actually agree with ya Chuck, you DON"T want it. It is great for minor injuries such as breaks strains, and pains etc, however serious medical issues seem to get shelved for a very long time. If they would reduce our taxes significantly I would glady switch to the healthcare you guys recieve down in the States. Most people think we get "free" healthcare, but we pay for it through our taxes which actually costs us more in the long run. Good Clip! Chris |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Jonny on Aug 23rd, 2007, 7:20pm on 08/23/07 at 19:00:41, ClusterChris wrote:
Cant argue with a dude that lives it, thats for sure! ;) Edit to add: Great post, Tony!!!! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Grandma_Sweet_Boy on Aug 23rd, 2007, 8:05pm Y'know, I guess there's good and bad in any health care system. We've sure experienced our share of it over the years and to be honest, there's never been one time that I felt we weren't getting all we should have. We've dealth with cancer, massive heart attacks, blown aneurysms (sp?), a 3 year old grandson with medula blastoma, and even though our little guy didn't make it, believe me, it was not from doctors or a health care system that did not do all in their power for him. It doesn't cost us tens of thousands of dollars for a simple hospital stay or to see a specialist. Not to suggest it's free - it isn't but when a family member has to be hospitalized, there's no bill handed out on departure. Our health care system is there for that reason. Maybe we've just been lucky. Not lookin' for a debate - just sayin'! ;) Carol Edited - to tell Chuck - there was nothing offensive or slammy (is that a word?) about your post, my friend. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by artonio7 on Aug 23rd, 2007, 8:18pm edited to point out: This is NOT Tony. It is Chuck. Dummy me, did not realize that it was Tony who was logged in. Sorry for the confusion. on 08/23/07 at 20:05:21, Grandma_Sweet_Boy wrote:
Thanks, Carol, this is what I was looking for, sort of, with my original post. I wanted to hear from several of you about YOUR experiences with your health care system. ClusterChris, I appreciate your input too! As the two of you Ontarians (is that a word?) have shown, some have good luck, and some don't. I guess the frustration that I would feel is that stupid law (in my mind) that says you CANNOT seek private care, that you are willing to pay for. Thank you, both of you, for your input. Let's hear from more of you in that fine province! Chuck |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by deltadarlin on Aug 23rd, 2007, 8:23pm Hmm, just ask the good people of Tennessee what they think if Hilarycare (the system went bankrupt). on 08/23/07 at 18:01:09, Big_OUCH wrote:
Don't think you'll be getting any change back on your 2 cents. I'm sorely afraid that wherever you got your information from shortchanged you. According to WHO (World Health Organization, not *the* Who), the US ranks 37 in health care (Canada comes in at 30th) and there are no poor African countries that come in higher than the US. There are only 2 countries that outrank the US in population. They are China and India and they rank 81 and 134 respectively in healthcare. Canada has apprx. 1/9 the population of the US, the UK and Australia of course are far less than that. Universal health care will not work in the US the way it does in other countries, simply for the fact that you have 50 states that are an entity to themselves and not under one *umbrella* so to say as these other countries are. I can imagine New Yorkers would be more than willing to pay health care expenses for the poor in Louisiana! Want more facts? Suck it up and google it. 'darlin (whose daughter was the object of so called universal healthcare and received substandard treatment). |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by ClusterChris on Aug 23rd, 2007, 8:27pm One more problem with our healthcare that was not mentioned is that all of our good doctors head down to the states where the money is. 1 family member and 1 close family friend went to the states for their treatment of cancer. That tells ya somethin! Chris |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Jonny on Aug 23rd, 2007, 8:29pm on 08/23/07 at 20:23:53, deltadarlin wrote:
This IS the quote of the year!!!!!.....LMAO ;;D |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Grandma_Sweet_Boy on Aug 23rd, 2007, 8:39pm on 08/23/07 at 20:27:38, ClusterChris wrote:
Chris - I'll give you that we have lost "some" good doctors to the US and it is truly our loss, however, there are others that have gone and returned as they didn't like working within the system there. And we still have lots of very good doctors here. Damn - and I said this wasn't going to be a debate! ;;D Carol |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by ClusterChris on Aug 23rd, 2007, 8:52pm Carol, you better watch it, I'm heading to the CNE tomorrow morning. I don't want to have to make a detour to your place first lol! :P :o Chris |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Grandma_Sweet_Boy on Aug 23rd, 2007, 8:56pm on 08/23/07 at 20:52:45, ClusterChris wrote:
Not to hijack a thread or anything - but why on earth would you come all this way for the CN. She's a tired out old lady anymore. Just kidding you - wish I'd known earlier you were coming - could have arranged to meet up for coffee somewhere - like the Food Building! Enjoy your day. Carol |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Charlie on Aug 23rd, 2007, 9:50pm I'll take it any time. We have to put up with our compassionate conservative. Here is the latest: The Bush administration, continuing its fight to stop states from expanding the popular Children’s Health Insurance Program, has adopted new standards that would make it much more difficult for New York, California and others to extend coverage to children in middle-income families. Administration officials outlined the new standards in a letter sent to state health officials on Friday evening, in the middle of a monthlong Congressional recess. In interviews, they said the changes were intended to return the Children’s Health Insurance Program to its original focus on low-income children and to make sure the program did not become a substitute for private health coverage. After learning of the new policy, some state officials said yesterday that it could cripple their efforts to cover more children and would impose standards that could not be met. “We are horrified at the new federal policy,” said Ann Clemency Kohler, deputy commissioner of human services in New Jersey. “It will cause havoc with our program and could jeopardize coverage for thousands of children.” Stan Rosenstein, the Medicaid director in California, said the new policy was “highly restrictive, much more restrictive than what we want to do.” The poverty level for a family of four is set by the federal government at $20,650 in annual income. Many states have received federal permission to cover children with family incomes exceeding twice the poverty level — $41,300 for a family of four. In New York, which covers children up to 250 percent of the poverty level, the Legislature has passed a bill that would raise the limit to 400 percent— $82,600 for a family of four — but the change is subject to federal approval. California wants to increase its income limit to 300 percent of the poverty level, from 250 percent. Pennsylvania recently raised its limit to 300 percent, from 200 percent. New Jersey has had a limit of 350 percent for more than five years. As with issues like immigration, the White House is taking action on its own to advance policies that have not been embraced by Congress. In his budget in February, President Bush proposed strict limits on family income for the child health program. Both houses of Congress voted this month to renew the program for five years, but neither chamber accepted that proposal. Legal authority for the program expires on Sept. 30. The administration’s new policy is explained in a letter that was sent about 7:30 p.m. on Friday to state health officials from Dennis G. Smith, the director of the federal Center for Medicaid and State Operations. The policy would continue indefinitely, though Democrats in Congress could try to override it. The Children’s Health Insurance Program has strong support from governors of both parties, including Republicans like Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota and Sonny Perdue of Georgia. When the Senate passed a bill to expand the program this month, 18 Republican senators voted for it, in defiance of a veto threat from Mr. Bush. The House passed a more expansive bill and will try to work out differences with the Senate when Congress reconvenes next month. In his letter, Mr. Smith set a high standard for states that want to raise eligibility for the child health program above 250 percent of the poverty level. Before making such a change, Mr. Smith wrote, states must demonstrate that they have “enrolled at least 95 percent of children in the state below 200 percent of the federal poverty level” who are eligible for either Medicaid or the child health program. Deborah S. Bachrach, a deputy commissioner in the New York State Health Department, said, “No state in the nation has a participation rate of 95 percent.” And Cindy Mann, a research professor at the Health Policy Institute of Georgetown University, said, “No state would ever achieve that level of participation under the president’s budget proposals.” The Congressional Budget Office has said that the president’s budget, which seeks $30 billion for the program from 2008 to 2012, is not enough to pay for current levels of enrollment, much less to cover children who are eligible but not enrolled. When Congress created the Children’s Health Insurance Program in 1997, it said the purpose was to cover “uninsured low-income children.” Under the law, states are supposed to make sure public coverage “does not substitute for coverage under group health plans.” It goes on the drift is that Bush & Co. have zero interest in anyone not in the oil business. It's a classic Bush eliminating by not funding anything that helps those that need it most. It's shameful. Anything beats what we have. Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Paul98 on Aug 23rd, 2007, 11:00pm I will be for universal health care when the politicians sign on AND USE the same system of health care they are trying to pawn off on the masses and don't use the one they are using now. How 'bout them apples Hillary! -P. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Linda_Howell on Aug 23rd, 2007, 11:11pm Quote:
When that happens pigs will fly and maybe they can do something for that rash of yours Paul. ;;D |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by ClusterChris on Aug 23rd, 2007, 11:31pm Quote:
Been taking the kids for 4 years straight, they love it. It's only a little over an hour to get there and we are staying at the quality in suites inn oakville as well. It's a little get away for the familly. Sorry I didn't know sooner I would have loved to meet up with ya. This was a last minute trip we decided to do over breakfast this morning since We havent done much on our holidays thus far. Chris |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Big_OUCH on Aug 24th, 2007, 1:22am on 08/23/07 at 20:23:53, deltadarlin wrote:
Thanks for correcting my figures, 'delta. Still, for the US to be 37th in the health care ranking is, IMHO, a disgrace. Charlie did a good job of summing up the Bush attitude towards health care. In most countries that have public health care, one can always purchase private insurance if one wants to, so people do have a choice. Years ago, public health care was equated with Communism-now that the Commies are gone, scare stories are trotted out to try to convince Americans that universal health care would result in terrible consequences for patients. Emergency rooms are very expensive to use and many poor people use them when they are desparately ill because they can't afford to visit a family doctor and the cost is passed on to the rest of us, raising hospital costs for all. The system needs to be fixed; it is ironic that American farmers are paid tons of money NOT to grow crops-and that is considered OK-but people are denied health care or go bankrupt getting it. This is wrong. The US should be #1 in terms of health care, not 37th-the future of our country depends upon it. The military health care system is pure socialist, generally works well (and the majority of patients are not wounded soldiers but the wives and children of active duty military with colds, infections, broken bones, the usual stuff one sees anywhere). Why can't the rest of us have such good care? I'm sure that most people would gladly pay extra health care taxes to be guaranteed decent care and not have to worry about losing the house or car or putting off care until it becomes a serious or life threatening condition. I am in favor of the free enterprise system and capitalism, but in the area of health care call me a Socialist. I happen to have excellent health insurance, so I don't have to worry about cost, but millions of fellow Americans have poor or no health insurance (I couldn't afford mine without my employer paying the majority of the premiums-they are really outrageous). |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Batch on Aug 24th, 2007, 2:45am Many of you responding to Chucks post have hit on parts of the problem, but are pointing mostly at symptoms. Congress, not the President, is in the driver's seat, and without pressure from voters, will roll with the special interest groups as they push big buck$ into their pockets... Tony brought up a good point on the VA... Our fighting men and women get the very best medical treatment in the world, but when they are forced out of the military service and into the VA... they fall in a BIG CRACK controlled by laws passed in congress and insufficient funding appropriated by the house. If you really want to do something, write, fax, and email your congressman and senators. Tell them what you think, and if they don't take responsible action, you'll not be voting for them in the next election. They all go to be treated by the best medical professionals in the world at Walter Reed and Navy Bethesda... And, they will continue to do so after leaving office until they die... They don't need to worry about medicare or medicaid... They've voted themselves the very best medical insurance money can buy. On the other hand, Military Veterans, our nations finest, who risked their lives to keep America free and safe from foreign threats, will be subject to the bureaucratic vagaries of medicare and medicaid (and congressmen that hide bribe money in their freezer) if they are able care for themselves, and the VA if they cannot. IMHO... As far as Hillary goes, she's a marxist trained socialist, and she's been one since she was in school. She had the opportunity to push socialized medicine when she was FLOTUS... Congress and the voters told her to stuff it... in no uncertain terms for good reason. It was a terrible disastrous plan. Her present plan isn't going to be any better. Back to congress... The present leftists in the house just passed a child health care bill with a fast gavel by one vote prior to departing on a month long vacation. If this bill is passed by the senate and not vetoed by the President, it will: 1. Provide illegal aliens free health care outside the ER 2. Pay for free health care for folks up to the age of 21 3. Reduce medical coverage to citizen taxpayers on medicare/medicaid 4. Result in an uncontrollable increase in the budget deficit, and 5. Likely result in the single largest tax increase in history. Neat Huh? Some Federal Budget Figures from Wikipedia: 2007 Federal Budget Proposed by the President $2.8 Trillion 2007 Total Receipts $2.4 Trillion Budget Breakdown $2.98 Trillion in total spending bills passed by congress and approved by the President - (these are just the BIG ones): Defense $439.3 billion - 24.9% of the total Federal Budget Social Security $586.1 billion Medicare $394.5 billion Unemployment and Welfare $367.0 billion Medicaid $276.4 billion Interest on the Debt $243.7 billion Education and Training $89.9 billion Transportation $76.9 billion Veterans' benefits $72.6 billion Education and Training $89.9 billion Now ask yourself... Are you happy with the following? 1. the safety of the bridges you drive over on a daily basis 2. the quality of public education 3. the fact that congress still has not fully funded the fence 4. that illegal aliens will be given free health care while you will not 5. that the VA has never been fully funded to take care of our Veterans 6. that social security is still broken and illegal aliens will get it if given amnesty and you will get less... a lot less 7. that illegal aliens, drug smugglers, and terrorists are still pouring over our Southern boarder 8. that if Hillary's social medicine comes to pass, bureaucrats, politicians, and their special interest groups will decide what you will and will not be treated for and what medications you may or may not get instead of these decisions being made by doctors. If you are... vote for Hillary and the rest of the socialists. I'll not. And if you do, we'll all still be waiting in line to get medicare/medicaid to pay for our O2. My 2 cents... |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by LeLimey on Aug 24th, 2007, 2:48am Batch for President! oh how I wish we had people like you in politics! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Batch on Aug 24th, 2007, 2:59am Oh you clever girl... what a way with the words... thank you. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Batch on Aug 24th, 2007, 3:35am Here's another perspective of the big picture, and why our system of government although not perfect, is the best in the world. It's good at some things (we are still free after 211 years) and terribly inefficient at nearly everything else... http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m236/petebatch/DefenseSpendingAndGDP.jpg Ah... Yes... and if you think taking funding away from defense to pay for socialized medicine will work... think again. There are millions of islamofacists going nose down on their rugs several times daily praying to give their lives to kill the infidels... and we are the infidels. Look at it this way... The cost of Hillary's socialized medicine could easily exceed the present defense budget... And if that sounds like a good idea, then we'll all get free health care and we'll be very healthy when the islamofacists take over and blow us all to pieces. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Big_OUCH on Aug 24th, 2007, 5:18am (Read Batch's post) If the Germans and the Japanese, far more technologically advanced during WWII than the Islamic radicals are now, could not invade or cut our naval supply chain during WWII, I seriously doubt that Al-Qadia or other splinter groups can cause much damage to us. The tragic event of 9/11 was a lucky (for them) fluke-I do not think that Homeland Security has been so effective that they have stopped further attacks, but rather that these groups are a disorganized polyglot of terrorist cells whose operations are largely confined to Iraq and the immediate area around that country. Despite dubya's speeches, these groups are not in a position to invade the US nor to cut off our trade. Oil continues to flow and not one allied cargo or military ship has been sunk-they ain't got no submarines! The US Joint Chiefs of Staff are in favor of getting out of that region. Iraq is in the midst of a civil war, the Sunnis hate the Shihites, a situation that has been going on for over a thousand years; just the other day, the US revealed that it has little or no confidence in the Iraqui leader. We are accomplishing nothing by being in Iraq except to prop up an unpopular and undemocratic government and protecting our troops that are there. Our Army is running out of men to send there-multiple, back to back combat tours are the norm rather than the exception and this is having a negative effect on troop morale, suicide among troops who have served there, disrupting the famiy lives of our troops-the list goes on and on. We cannot impose our way of life on those who don't want it. We have lost almost 4,000 of our best and brightest young men and women and what have we accomplished? Hussein and his henchmen are dead and that is about it. Had we concentrated our efforts on Afganistan-their former government was responsible for 9/11, not Iraq, then we might have had a chance to bring that country into the 21st century. Unfortunately, Bush and Rumsfeld had a hair up their asses about Sadam, so they fabricated stories of weapons of mass destruction, used a twisted form of illogic to tie in Sadam with 9/11, invaded without enough troops, not listening to the Joint Chiefs about the chaos that would follow our invasion of Iraq and now we are stuck there, to protect Bush's ego at the cost of thousands of American and Iraqui lives for nothing. My dad knows General (Retired) Eric Shinseki; he is an honorable and honest man and soldier and publically stated that going into Iraq was a mistake. He was forced to retire; his predictions were accurate. It was the same situation with retired General Jay Garner (dad knows him too), whose tour as the American administrator of Iraq shortly after the invasion, was cut short for saying the same things that General Shinseki said. We will leave Iraq, either before or after the Presidential election in the US; I'm sure that we will declare our intervention a "success" and then we will leave the Iraqi factions to fight it out among themselves until a new dictator emerges. The sooner we leave the better, because we are ruining our Army which, under the reorganization to mobile combat brigades, designed for small, regional conflicts, has been torn to shreds and will need to be rebuilt. Forgive me for rambling on, but I honor those who serve in our military and hate to see their lives wasted, either by death or serious injuries or post traumatic stress disorder for a "cause" that is not worth one soldier getting a hangnail. Just one more thing: our chief ally, Pakistan, was a supporter of the Taliban, is a corrupt dictatorship, provides sanctuary for bin Laden and his friends and now, with the US telling them that General Musharrif should share power with Benezar Bhutto, a civil war is a very distinct possibility. Since they have no oil to speak of and no one to hate like Sadam, we will stay out of it and let the chips fall where they may, probably in Bhutto's lap. No more politics for me, I'll just write about Cluster Headaches from now on, I swear![/size][size=2][size=2][/size] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Brewcrew on Aug 24th, 2007, 7:38am Paragraphs are our friends. I'd love to read the post above, but I can't. Literally. My eyes start on it, and they give up 2 lines into it. Paragraphs are our friends. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Big_OUCH on Aug 24th, 2007, 8:34am on 08/24/07 at 07:38:33, Brewcrew wrote:
Paragraphs are our friends. Forgive my lapse of proper composition-I hadn't slept, my CH was really bad and my composition suffered. I fixed my post as best as I could-I'm starting to fall asleep. I hope that it is more readable now. Thanks for the input-English was one of my majors in college (intellectual history the other) and I hate it when I compose poorly. Read on and thanks again; good night, or rather good morning! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by deltadarlin on Aug 24th, 2007, 8:55am If we can get all 50 states to agree on a *plan* and a way to implement said *plan*, then it might. HOWEVER, that ain't gonna happen in my lifetime. Again, noone addresses the fact that such a *plan* could easily bankrupt most states (even the wealthier states, because they would have to cover expenses in *poorer* states). Will provide backup data later. Boss just called and needs info from me. 'darlin |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Big_OUCH on Aug 24th, 2007, 9:12am on 08/24/07 at 08:55:57, deltadarlin wrote:
'Darlin: In most of Western Europe there are no military or VA hospitals. If a soldier gets sick, he/she is sent to a civilian hospital for treatment and the government pays the bill. I think that such a system would be great here: it eliminates thousands of bureaucratic jobs,, servicemen and woman and eligible veterans can get sent to a hospital that specializes in whatever the illness is and the money saved by doing away with the whole VA bureaucratic, wasteful system can be applied to heath care! Another benefit is that hospitals that are in danger of closing because of a lack of patients get a new lease on life. Makes sense to me-what do you all think? |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Batch on Aug 24th, 2007, 9:21am Sorry if I hit a nerve Big_Ouch. Differing opinions and spirited debates are healthy... so why are you coming back in bold font? No offense, but you sound like a smart gal. Why do you keep spouting the same old liberal spin put out by the DNC over the last 6 years and not something original or constructive. BTW... you missed Vice President Cheney... err was that Darth Vader that planned all this? Yes, Iraq is a mess. No argument. Hind sight is always 20/20. And yes, Gen. Shinseki and Gen. Garner are entitled to their opinions... I've served with and worked for many more 4 Star Generals and Admirals like Gen Hugh Sheldon, Adm William Crowe, and Gen Peter Pace. They all served or currently serve as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They think a bit differently, are a cut well above in the art and science of military warfare, and, imho, are clearly more erudite. Our fighting forces are stretched too thin, but why? Could it be that slick willey continually cut the defense budget and gutted the military end strength so he could pay for his social welfare programs? I served in the Navy for 24 years and was working in the Pentagon when Sadam pulled the Iraq-attack on Kuwait. I was also working in the NMCC standing near Gen Powell when Barny Shaw came on CNN saying "Something is happening in Baghdad" as our Tomahawk cruise missiles hit their targets. We had barely enough military forces then. After the clintonistas got done cutting the defense budget for 8 years, the end strength went down hill fast. How we get out of Iraq and when is another story... and likely to be a long one with lots of political posturing on both sides of the isle. It's unfortunate the liberals are worried more about their political asplrations than they are about the security of our country. At least you're well read and using the latest call from from new liberal play book like the main stream liberals... You've clearly noticed they've backed off on getting out of Iraq and are now calling for Prime Minister al-Maliki to be unseated. There's a big difference between letting the cards fall where they may and actually causing Iraq to fail like a house of cards... And if you think the islamofacists are not a threat, do you whistle as you walk past graveyards? There are thousands of terroists already here in the US. Ask the folks in Minnesotastan about the taxi drivers and Target sales clerks... With the help of the ACLU and CARE, our tax dollars will be paying for the flying imams to teach sharia law and how to kill infidels in federally funded madrases, not to mention elect the next caliphate right there in river city... You brought up Japan and Germany. Ever wonder why these two countries are doing so well today after making war on us? Could it be because we helped them after WWII, that they're free, and have democratically elected governments? What I wonder about now is what would have happened during WWII if the socialist pinko hippies from the 1960s now in positions of leadership in congress today, had been in congress then... Would we be speaking German or Japanese? As you appear to have a handle on all things liberal, please tell us what meaningful things they've done for all of us. While you're at it, tell us what the present crop of presidential hopefuls are really going to do for us if elected in stead of spinning the same old liberal vitriolic drivel. I'm not picking on you... I just can't stand idle when I see that much liberal spin go unchallenged. Now... on to more immediate issues... Howz the head... and are you able to use O2 effectively to abort your cluster headache attacks? Take care. Batch |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Angie on Aug 24th, 2007, 9:34am My brother had congested heart failure at the end of July. He was hospitalized. Within four days he was taken by ambulance to a Newmarket hospital for a Angiogram. He needs triple by pass surgery which is scheduled for the first week in October. Pre op is scheduled for September 24. That is pretty quick. Waiting for specialists takes a long time. Everyone in Ontario is treated the same way whether you have money or not. Angie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by BarbaraD on Aug 24th, 2007, 1:46pm Taking a middle of the road stand (which I don't usually do) - it seems to me we're spending too much time trying to pass blame instead of trying to come up with a solution (and I'm speaking of the powers that be - Congress, the prez and Darth Vadar Cheeney as well as folks here). It doesn't matter who's to blame for the current situation -- WE NEED A SOLUTION - not more blame. Our troops are spread too thin... We need to get the hell out of Iraq - things are only getting worse and I personnaly don't think they're gonna get better (this is not Germany or Japan -- different thing altogether). As someone stated - the Arabs have been fighting in the mideast since time began and they'll be fighting each other when we're all dead and gone, so what do we expect to accomplish? Our way of life just ain't gonna happen over there - they don't want it and they ain't gonna have it. We can't force it on them. And that's just a fact of life. I personally think it's time politicians quit worrying about all the poor people in the world and start worrying about the people they were elected to defend and protect -- US normal people who went to the damn polls and elected them. We've got enough problems in the good old US to keep them busy without worrying about the rest of the world. We NEED medical care. We NEED food. We NEED care for our kids and elderly. We NEED our borders protected. We NEED all the things they're spouting off that they're trying to GIVE to foreign countries who hate our guts. I think it's time they started taking care of US and let the rest of the damn world take care of their own. Of course that's just my opinion and I thought I'd express it while I still can. Hugs BD |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by ClusterChuck on Aug 24th, 2007, 3:01pm This has become a FASCINATING thread! Keep up the discussion! Chuck |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by BlueMeanie on Aug 24th, 2007, 7:09pm on 08/24/07 at 02:48:53, LeLimey wrote:
DITTO...... |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Jonny on Aug 24th, 2007, 7:47pm on 08/24/07 at 19:09:18, BlueMeanie wrote:
Ditto X2.....never met the dude, but hes what this country needs.....NOT these fucking millionaires that think they know how it is to be poor!!!!! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Charlie on Aug 24th, 2007, 9:48pm Quote:
I didn't know Goldwater Girls were indeed Marxist trained socialists. Wow. I dunno Batch. Your calling liberals "pinko socialists" is the rhetoric early 1950s. Our current batch of Republicans are nothing to write home about. The Democrats have been in the White House for only 12 years since Nixon & Co. I'm so glad that things are running so well as a result. There is nothing inherently wrong with socialism...IF it works. It rarely does; it mostly runs against my grain but the health care systems of the rest of the industrialized world are mostly just that, work incredibly well, and for the right strata of society. Drug company hired or approved economists will have to face this. Three hundred million Americans won't forever put up with all those preposterous scary scenarios provided by heartless, short-sighted greedy dimwits appointed by Bush & Co. People like Svenn get along with socialized medicine in Norway just fine, and unlike here have nowhere near the problems we do getting the medicine we need. They treat their citizens as adults...someday we may be so lucky. Quote:
I have to pretty much agree with that. God help us when we leave. Iraq will be over-run by Iraqis. You know, when you fight a war, the whole country is supposed to make sacrifices. Instead, sacrifices are confined to our young men and women suffering, dying or getting maimed. Fighting a war with six consecutive tax cuts for only those making no sacrifice at all but tons of money on their fun-for-all no-bid war contracts; sickens most of us. This thing is wearing us down because it was designed by a man that fires those that don't agree with him. It's a beautiful thing. The Germans did things like that. Ronald Reagan did a better job. He actually knew some history and at least had a foot in the door of reality. When the Marine barracks were bombed Beruit, he cut and ran and said that it was no place to make this kind of sacrifice for people that have no interest in democray. He knew better. You know, if we succeed in bringing about true democray in Iraq, they might just use it and elect the majority: Theocratic despots. Atta boy George. Democrats do just fine, by the way. They were in charge during WWI, WWII, Korea, and of course a lot of Vietnam. Wimps they are not. Whew. Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Jonny on Aug 24th, 2007, 10:15pm on 08/24/07 at 21:48:22, Charlie wrote:
Yeah, thats a great big kiss! :-* |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Big_OUCH on Aug 24th, 2007, 11:20pm on 08/24/07 at 21:48:22, Charlie wrote:
You're a good man, Charlie (Brown) :)! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by LeLimey on Aug 25th, 2007, 5:03am on 08/24/07 at 09:12:46, Big_OUCH wrote:
I suggest you get your facts straight as we have a whole army medical section with hospitals, the lot here. We have Army nurses and doctors with ranks etc and army navy and RAF hospitals. The only time soldiers are sent to civvy hospitals here are if its for compassionate reasons, ie family visiting etc. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Batch on Aug 25th, 2007, 9:34am Barbara, I know this may come as a surprise, but I agree with much of what you said. And, you can always express your opinion… That’s what our form of government is here to protect. Either I failed to make my points clearly in the first two posts on this thread, or you mistook my points as passing blame. I was merely providing an indication of performance in some of the elected officials. That’s something we need to look at in each candidate before we vote, as it’s our elected officials that will ultimately need to work out acceptable solutions to the problems we’ve discussed in this thread. I agree Iraq is not like the Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan our fathers fought in WWII. But then we’re not fighting Iraq, we’re not even fighting a sovran country. We are fighting the islamofascists in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and sadly, even here it the good old USA in a war on terror. Yes the government of Iraq is different than ours, but it is a democratically elected government. And yes, the various Muslim sects have been killing each other since Mohamed assumed room temperature, and that’s no big deal to most us. What is a big deal, is when the most evil of those sects kill Americans, and is actively planning to kill all of us. That is a fact, and that fact should give you serious cause for concern because these bastards want to die to kill you and your family, and destroy the good old USA. Who among the presidential contenders has the experience, a proven track record of responsible accomplishments, demonstrated leadership skills, and a political philosophy consistent with the majority of the voters, to be best qualified to serve as the commander in chief in the war on terror? If you think the front running democratic hopeful have the right idea think again. This is not the democratic party of FDR, Harry Truman, Scoop Jackson, or even Joe Lieberman. This isn’t the democratic party that guided us to victory in WWII. Today’s democratic party has been shanghaied by the extreme socialist on the left. They want more than anything to turn the good old USA into a socialist welfare state. They want this power to make it happen because they know better than you, what to do with the money you earn, and they will tax all of us into the poor house to get control of that money. These extremists are not really ant-war. They just want the money in defense budget to carry out their socialist agenda. If you don’t believe me, take a look at what they’ve said, then look closely at what they’ve done. Taking a responsible role in preparing to vote for leaders to run our government and make its laws means taking a critical look at each candidate and forming your own opinion before you pull the handle. Unfortunately, too many take a passive role and jerk the lever for one party or the other without taking the time to be critical in the selection process. Getting our troops out of Iraq is only one of the battlefield decisions in the war on terror. Unfortunately in the polarized political climate we’ll be in until November 2008, it’s become and will continue to be the leading issue. If you recall, I urged folks with a fire in their belly to call, email, and fax their congressmen and senators to take responsible action. That's a good thing to do and we all should do it more often. We all need food, shelter, and medical care for our families. And most of us take a responsible role working to provide for those needs. If you think your are paying too much tax and are not seeing any tangible returns for that tax money, becareful who you vote for. If you see the money you paid into your federal and state income tax, social security, medicare, and medicaid, going into schools and free medical care for illegal aliens who do not deserve it, think hard before you pull the handle in the voting booth. So you see Barbara, I respect your opinions. I may not agree totally with all of them, but I respect them. This is likely not what Chuck had in mind when he lit the fuse on this little imbroglio, but I think it comes close. Take care. V/R, Batch |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Batch on Aug 25th, 2007, 9:59am For the folks who are confused about Hillary's political philosophy or where she came from, you may have AHS. That's Ambivalent Hillary Syndrome. Fortunately, there's always OXY-CLINTON. It's a powerful political medication and it has some serious side effects, but if you lean that hard in her direction, IBS should not pose a problem. Listen carefully to what Hillary says... http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m236/petebatch/Hugo_and_Hillary.jpg |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by 1stdonna on Aug 25th, 2007, 11:29am The two most important jobs do not require experience or prerequisites of any kind. The first is parenting. Watch how mom or dad handles their children under age six when the kids "act up". They call them names ( you little brat, or you stupid idiot, or you BAD boy/girl"). Almost all underachievers have little or no self esteem. There's a lot more to this problem..this is just one example. But this is another thread. The second is politics. Most candidates have never even balanced a check book, let alone know how to run a country. They have no clue what it is NOT to be rich. They don't know what it's like when the parent goes without important medical attention so that they can take care of their childrens' need. This country is quickly developing into two classes....the very wealthy and those on their way down. Middle class should be considered an endangered species. (Quote from Batch) "And most of us take a responsible role working to provide for those needs." Sure, the unemployment rate is down, but how many of these people are earning minimum wage or perhaps a little more? I'd really love to see a survey on how many people in this country pay the usual fixed expenses, have medical insurance and eat a balanced diet.. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Charlie on Aug 25th, 2007, 9:40pm Quote:
Ah....politics. We're going to have some good fun, Batch 8) When it comes to extreme fringes overtaking a political party, nothing compares to what happened to my former party; the Republicans. Democrats usally move a bit toward the center during Presidential elections. The Republicans did the same but it's a brave new world in the GOP. They have deal with Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell's Church of the Presumptuous Assumpton that Christians are all of the "Duh, I ain't related to no damn monkey" stripe, to get votes. Thank God most Christians have broader minds, however. Never in my lifetime did I imagine hearing a 21st Century President, and some of his would be successors, say that the jury is still out on Darwin and scientific thought. It's a stunningly sad comentary on contemporary politics. I'm not crazy about most candidates but unlike the wimpy politicians on the right, promising to make life not too uncomfortable for Red State Bible belters, you will not find science-denying Democrats. It was Democrats that came up with the New Frontier after Sputnik, not those that say things like "stay the course." There ya go. kids..... ::) Such fun. Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Jonny on Aug 26th, 2007, 3:18am The motor city madman rips Obama and Hilary....LOL ;;D http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=757_1187963465 |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Batch on Aug 27th, 2007, 9:51am 1stDonna, Interesting comments about the two most important jobs of parenting and politics not requiring any prerequisites or experience. Can I assume you had tongue in cheek when you typed out the parenting example as you make later comments that indicate you do know how to prioritize your family's needs and that you handle your financial matters responsibly to meet those needs as best you can. Let’s see if I have this right. You think parenting and politics are the two most important jobs, but too many parents don’t have the benefit of the experience and training that comes from an up bringing in a responsible nurturing home – family environment. And, there are too many fiscally irresponsible fat cat political candidates. I’ll raise you one to include the majority of our elected members of the house and senate, but qualify that by saying they are only fiscally irresponsible with our tax dollars, but very frugal in hiding money pocketed from special interest groups. One member of congress is so frugal, he hides his special interest bribe money in his freezer wrapped in aluminum foil. I can agree with you on these two points. You also appear to postulate that fiscally irresponsible fat cat political candidates, affordable health care, and a failing middle class that's resulting in a two class society are all related, and you want proof by saying, "I'd really love to see a survey on how many people in this country pay the usual fixed expenses, have medical insurance and eat a balanced diet.." That caught my interest as well so I looked for the existence of a survey like that. I didn't find one with all your query terms, but using “shrinking middle class” I did find over 1.6 million hits. If you filter out articles by spin meisters on both sides of the political spectrum, and look just at the US Census for 2000 and 2004, they indicate the number of families in the income rage of $30,000 to $99,000 did shrink by 1.5%. As this figure is the difference between the 2000 and 2004 census in this income range, it includes the post-tech-crash, 9/11-influenced recession, and excludes the huge boom of 2005 so may not be totaly representative. There’s also no way to factor in the effect of 20 Million illegal aliens on this 1.5 % from the US Census, except to say, thanks to the illegal aliens, your taxes and medical insurance costs are clearly higher. Lots of factual reports on that point. Please take a few minutes and watch the video on immigration at: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4094926727128068265 Then tell us what you think the problem is. This video only deals with immigration, and does not include the impact of 20 Million illegal aliens. There’s also a DHHS report with their analysis of Welfare. You can find the that report at following URL http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/indicators06/index.htm#TOC http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/indicators06/ch3.pdf The information in that report covers the period 1959 through 2004 I agree we all need affordable health care insurance. The real questions is how do we get it. If you think our government is capable of managing socialized medicine efficiently, please take a critical look at the Veteran's Administration and how it treats our Nations' finest. I would rather see legislation that provides tax incentives to families so they can select their own medical insurance. With socialized medicine, you'll have folks like Hillary setting policy so bureaucrats not doctors can tell you what you can and cannot be treated for or medications you may or may not have coverage to receive. So you see, it all boils down to who you vote for. Be critical in your selection process. Do they have a favorable track record if already in congress and up for re-election, and if a first time candidate, do they have clearly stated positions on what they will do if elected. BTW. The one of the qualifications for president I spoke of in earlier posts includes experience. To me, that kind of experience includes running a major corporation, a prior career as a flag rank general or admiral, or prior experience as a state governor. With the exception of her employment in a Law firm where she was clearly unable to maintain or locate her financial records, Hillary has been on the public dole since she married Bill. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Charlie on Aug 28th, 2007, 12:57am Who else could lose money in the oil business....George Bush. If his billionaire family wasn't around to pick up after him, his CEO credentials would be even more laughable. His failures harm nobody in his strata. I'll take the government over those sweethearts from the drug company lobbiests any day. It's they that have been trying to scare us for the last 60 years. I have to wonder whom are they working for.... ::) Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Batch on Aug 28th, 2007, 4:47pm Charlie, Be careful what you wish for... Remember, the present flock of liberal democrats have already signaled their socialist underpinnings by saying they do not intend to renew most if not all the tax cuts President Bush made. This will happen in 2010 so no matter what the liberals want this to be called, it's a TAX INCREASE! Among other things, you'll no longer be able to deduct your home mortgage interest and any capitol gains will be taxed at a much higher rate. You'll also pay inheritance tax and a death tax. And, If all that is okay with you, then I hope you'll enjoy it when the liberals make you pay a significant increase in social security, medicare, and medicaid, while making sure you take a major deduction in all of these entitlements including socialized medicine. The liberals are going to do all this because THEY, not you, know what best to do with any money you might earn. I hope you're ready for this, because the best is yet to come... They also intend to give free access to all these entitlements including the socialized medicine you want, to 20 million illegal aliens. You see, liberals feel it's their right to spend your tax dollars to buy votes. BTW, President Bush did a credible job as Governor of Texas. That's a lot more of a qualification than anything you can attribute to the Tyson's subsidized junior senator from New York. Take care and be well, V/R, Batch |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Brewcrew on Aug 28th, 2007, 6:47pm on 08/28/07 at 16:47:10, Batch wrote:
This is a pretty good plan for people who don't earn any money. ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Charlie on Aug 28th, 2007, 9:19pm Quote:
Nope. Your side of the aisle since the beginning of time. Quote:
The Neo Cons have been calling it the death tax to scare the bejesus out of us. It comes from the same think tank came up with "climate change" rather than global warming. The thing about liberals ideas of taxes is that they hit everybody, not just the poor bloke working two jobs to keep afloat. Inheritance tax? Those that it might now hit have friends in DC, that thanks to them, make enough to want to keep things quiet. It's aimed better at least. It's really not popular if you are weathly and have a flock of useless kids waiting for your demise. Quote:
Yeah. He got away with a lot iffy financial dealings that would put little guys away for a few years. That's okay though because otherwise we would have missed out on all those bright shining Lone Star stars he dragged to DC to save use from ourselves. I'm verklempt. Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Jonny on Aug 28th, 2007, 9:35pm on 08/28/07 at 21:19:37, Charlie wrote:
Really?......not like Ted Kennedy that has all his shit off shore.....no tax on that shit, but he wants us to pay for all the illegals......LMAO....you have to be fucking with me! Didnt Teds Mother die in Mass, but they went by the Fla tax code even though she hadent even stepped foot in the state in twelve years? Lets see one of US get away with that shit! You know how they say "If you dont vote, dont bitch?" I got a new one...."If you dont pay income tax.....STFU!" |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Batch on Aug 28th, 2007, 9:41pm If they are US Citizens, unable to work for a living due to valid medical reasons or a severe physical handicap, then I agree. That is why we pay into welfare. On the other hand, giving these entitlements to folks who are able to work but don't, or to illegal aliens who've neither worked for them nor deserve them as a reward for breaking the law is just plain wrong. Giving these entitlements to illegal aliens because they dropped an anchor baby on US soil, or because the liberals, the President (I'm unhappy with him on this point), and a few turkey republicans want to grant amnesty to them in order to create an entire economic class of people dependent on social welfare who will vote for these politicians so they can remain in power, is also wrong and i object... and I did so by sending several emails, fax, and phone calls to the White House, my representatives, and senators. I was not alone in helping to kill this bogus legislation on comprehensive immigration. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Batch on Aug 28th, 2007, 9:46pm Ooooo Jonny, Well said... Your stock just jumped a 1000 points.... Good on you. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Charlie on Aug 28th, 2007, 9:56pm Geeze.... Very few people in the world were "crookeder" than old Joe Kennedy. Need Scotch? Socialist; he was not and knew were the bodies were. Teddy nor Clinton aimed high. JFK had more fun and for the most part better taste in women. What a guy. The thing about JFK is that he was fun. Too little of that around politics today. Batch: It can be summed up this way: Republicans want cheap labor, Democrats cheap votes. Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Batch on Aug 28th, 2007, 9:58pm Charlie, I can't argue with a thing you just said... Good on you too. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Jonny on Aug 28th, 2007, 10:01pm on 08/28/07 at 21:56:10, Charlie wrote:
Huh?......I was talking about how all Teddys money is off shore and not taxed like mine. What are you talking about? |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Batch on Aug 28th, 2007, 10:32pm OUTSTANDING exchange and a BIG THANK YOU to all who took the trouble to put an oar in the water and opine on this thread... I sense we came to a near total, albeit violent agreement on many important points. This is the kind of healthy dialog that makes our Nation the greatest. If we all take a critical look at who we vote for and why, we will remain the greatest Nation. Let's turn this thread back to Chuck and await his next little bolus. Ah... Yes... And in my capacity as your friendly O2 Pusher, please use it often and use it correctly... It works!!! V/R, Batch ;;D |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Charlie on Aug 29th, 2007, 2:01am Quote:
Sure. One of thousands. Big money takes our politicians for golf weekends in the Bahamas all the time. http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/handshake Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by deltadarlin on Aug 29th, 2007, 8:25am on 08/28/07 at 21:35:38, Jonny wrote:
I think I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you here. I know a lot of people (especially those who are on Social Security or medical disability) who don't *pay* income tax but are quite active politically. Should we just tell those people to shut up? What about women/men who depend on a spouse's income, but don't actually pay income tax themselves? I agree with Charlie here, " Republicans what cheap labor, Democrats cheap votes. ". |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Jonny on Aug 30th, 2007, 7:56pm on 08/29/07 at 08:25:51, deltadarlin wrote:
Seems to me that that family is paying, no? Heres a video anyone that votes needs to watch. pay attention to John Fund and what he has to say. Things never change even when you know better! http://youtube.com/watch?v=lMIOcdfE_QM |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by deltadarlin on Aug 31st, 2007, 8:14am Jonny, what about people who are retired or possibly on disability? Some don't pay tax, some do. According to your reasoning, they wouldn't be able to have an opinion. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by BarbaraD on Aug 31st, 2007, 8:36am Delta - I think Jonny is talking about people who've never paid into the system.... Now I'm on SS and still working (sometimes) but I'm using every loophole I can find to pay as few taxes as possible (the loopholes are there if you look for them and you can bet that those who have a few bucks DO look for them and USE them). I DO check the voting records of those in office and write them almost weekly. Right now my Congressman is voting pretty much like I'm telling him to, one Senator is doing ok and the other one needs to be horsewhipped and out of office (and I plan to campaign against her). I think the problem is people just don't care to get off their apathetic rears to FIND OUT what their REPRESENTATIVES are doing in DC, so they just keep voting them back in office. Personally, I think we need to clean house in DC - get a whole new bunch of representatives (term limits would do the trick) and rewrite the tax code so it's "fair" to everyone (maybe write it so it's understandable to the "common man", cut out the give-aways and cut the loopholes for the rich). Cut out lobbist in DC. And my one big thing - Any money raised in a campaign that's left over goes in the GENERAL FUND of the US and NOT in the pocket of the candidate when the campaign is over. That would cut out a lot of these $1000 a plate dinners and maybe cut down some campaign spending. Of course that's just wishful thinking...... Hugs BD |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Racer1_NC on Aug 31st, 2007, 10:53am on 08/31/07 at 08:36:38, BarbaraD wrote:
A flat tax or national sales tax would do the trick rather nicely. Never happen....... |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by BarbaraD on Aug 31st, 2007, 5:59pm Bill, you're right -- it would solve the problem, but that would be too simple and too fair.... Hugs BD |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by 1stdonna on Aug 31st, 2007, 10:44pm Bill: You have just reinforced what I've been saying for a few years. It's the best answer and fair. Too bad that thinking people don't pay attention! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Jonny on Aug 31st, 2007, 10:47pm I agree, Bill!!!....Big time! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by 1stdonna on Sep 1st, 2007, 12:36am Bill......I think you're right. I've been saying this but no one had paid attention. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by catlind on Sep 1st, 2007, 8:57am You want hilary care?????? Talk to my mom. She has a 9mm opacity 95% likelihood malignant. In ONtario the only place that can do breast MR is BY PANEL!!!!!!! A committee meets to see who should be first in line based on how severe the case is. And to add insult to injury, to avoid the discrepancy of the haves and the have nots, the OHIP system has decided on the most part they will NOT accept diagnostic data from outside the country. Is that the health care you want? Dead before they can even test? I've never been so utterly, completely disgusted in all my life. Here's hoping the biopsy on the 18th of Sept. will be soon enough. Oh as side note, they found the lump June 27. YOu get what you pay for. Yeah, so lets model the health care system over a broken system in Canada (Ontario to be exact) the other provinces have their shit together for the most part. </rant> Cat |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Charlie on Sep 1st, 2007, 8:54pm Quote:
The flat tax has a lot of appeal. It's important to pay attention to wants it the most. Might work of course but I can't imagine a national sales tax that would be aimed at those that buy yachts. You're right. It ain't gonna happen. Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Maffumatt on Sep 1st, 2007, 9:08pm I've seen first hand what government health care would be and already is. Go take a walk around your local VA hospital, talk to a few of the patients, I have. I want no part of it. That place is nothing more than an assembly line for death. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Charlie on Sep 1st, 2007, 9:58pm VA hospital patients are treated like lepers here. I've never understood it. Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by catlind on Sep 2nd, 2007, 8:16am Take that VA model and move it to Ontario CAnada. NOt quite as despicable but not far behind. YOu are lucky if you can even GET a primary care doctor in Ontario, and if you should choose to raise a stink about your care, you no long have a doctor. Socialized health care if a wonderful pipe dream, but someone has to pay for it, and from what I can tell with the VA and the OHIP (Ontario Health Insurance Plan) are as broken as broken can get. Case in point - cancer patient had to wait 6 MONTHS for radiation treatment (I now this person), heart by pass surgery unless you are bout die in the waiting room can take up to 2 YEARS to get the surgery done. In all fairness, I've been away from Canada for 8 years, however my mother is still there, and the breast cancer is slowly eating away at her because a committee and a panel doesn't think she's close enough to deaths door yet. *sigh* again </rant> p.s. I might add that the first of 3 lumps was detected in Aug. 2006!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now Aug/Sept. 2007 they decided maybe they should do something. >:( |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Charlie on Sep 2nd, 2007, 5:27pm even worse here: No money, no care, Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by BarbaraD on Sep 2nd, 2007, 6:17pm Well something needs to be done. My insurance company just sent me a lovely note telling me they are raising my premiums -- from $189 a month to $525 -- Now for the past year I've been to the doctor 5 times (didn't meet the deductible so they didn't pay anything). Most of my meds are BELOW the co-pay so they don't pay anything on them -- and they don't pay much on the ones that are above the copay -- I still pay over $100 for the topamax each month and they never "approved" the celebrex so I paid ALL of it. I figure they've made at least $100 on me each month and NOW they want to more than double my premiums. WHY????? All I've had is a sinus infection and pneumonia in a damn year..... We NEED to put a noose on the insurance companies and STOP them. They've become way the hell too powerful. Who can afford them? I sure can't. One thing I don't understand tho is --- why will the docs discount for the insurance companies and NOT for the patients paying out of pocket? That just doesn't make a bit of sense to me. Docs and hospitals get real uptight when you ask them to discount if you pay cash. They act like you're insulting them. No one's been able to explain this to me. Hugs BD |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by ClusterChuck on Sep 2nd, 2007, 7:15pm on 09/01/07 at 08:57:24, catlind wrote:
THIS is what my original thought was, when I started this thread ... I wanted feedback from those that are familiar with the Ontario system, to comment on how well it is or is not working. BUT, let me also add, that I have found this whole thread to be VERY interesting. Good healthy discussion, sometimes wavering a fair distance from the original statement, but fascinating to read. I don't agree with all the statements and ideas (isn't that what good debates and discussions are for?), but I am VERY happy to see everyone's thoughts in this thread. Thanks for all the thoughts! Keep the discussion going! Chuck PS: Cat, my heart goes out to your Mom. Prayers and vibes from my house to hers ... |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Redd on Sep 2nd, 2007, 7:31pm http://www.legis.state.wi.us/senate/sdc/Issues/HealthyWisconsin.asp Not sure if this will go into effect or not, but here is what is on the table in Wisconsin. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Charlie on Sep 2nd, 2007, 7:38pm Quote:
Because the only thing lower than the medical insurance business is the drug companies, that consider the United States a wholly owned subsidy. Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by testy01 on Sep 3rd, 2007, 9:26am OK, I don't usually get involved in this kind of thing because it is so hard to convince anyone of anything except what they already believe. I don't trust or believe politicians (or lawyers). My own experience is that they use language to conceal the truth rather than to communicate anything important. The thing is, everyone talks like it is a choice between the appalling health care that the US has now and some kind of socialist setup that has its own problems. There are other alternatives and private medical care can be extremely cheap if it is done right. Instead, let me tell you about some experiences I've had lately and how they might change your thinking. I live in Saudi, a country with socialized medicine. They are called GOSI hospitals and anyone that walks in the door will get some kind of attention. The problem is that they are underfunded, understaffed, and generally offer a poor level of care. Everyone that can afford it goes to private hospitals. My wife came from Thailand, another country with a socialized medical scheme. Again, the publicly funded hospitals offer a VERY poor standard of care. They use trainee doctors, trainee nurses, and have very little in the way of equipment or supplies. Again, anyone who can afford it goes to private hospitals. Socialized medicine may be great for some things, but my own experience has been that anyone who can afford it will go to a private hospital where they have some control over what's done to them. I suspect that in every country in the world with socialized medicine, the people with money go to see a private practitioner. On the other hand, medicine in the US is completely screwed up. In June of 2000, my wife developed thymic cancer. She was in Thailand at the time. The symptoms were alarming and I took her to the best hospital in Bangkok. She checked into a nice, private room on the eighth floor and had a balcony, a sitting room, refrigerator and microwave etc. It was more like a hotel than a hospital. There were rooftop gardens to walk in and restaurants inside the hospital made room-service deliveries. The nurses were clean, efficient, and actually seemed to care how you were doing. The equipment was fresh out of the box and the doctors were trained in the US or the UK. My wife's doc was a professor of oncology at Baylor university in Texas and a consulting oncologist at M.D. Anderson. Very good credentials. Anyway, my wife had the usual CT scans, MRIs, and numerous other tests. They found and diagnosed the cancer within 48 hours and she was in surgery 24 hours after that. She spent two weeks in the hospital. The bill? All told, they charged me US $8000 for that. Compare that to what it would have cost in the US. Likewise in Saudi. She was in a private hospital having yet another surgery (abdominal this time) and spent two weeks inside. The hospital wasn't as pretty but was entirely adequate. The bill? US $7000. We had two other surgeries with similar prices. The problem in the US is not that the insurance companies charge too much. The problem is that you can't afford to have anything done without it. It is the hospitals and clinics that overcharge. I've seen excuses that they have to admit people to the emergency room and take care of those that cannot pay. I've been told that it is due to the doctors making too much or having to pay too much for malpractice insurance. I personally know the excuse about the docs making too much is crap. I know what they make and it's good money, but nothing amazing. The malpractice insurance thing is a serious problem, and the care for the indigent MAY be a problem, I don't know about that. And another thing, while I'm on a rant. Drug prices here in Saudi or in Thailand are generally about a third of what they are in the US. Hell, they MAKE the things there, why should they cost more? The problem is that some group of people in the US is getting rich off the suffering of others. It may be the drug companies, it may be the hospitals, I don't know. Someone has to root this out and stop it. Regards Jack |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Hilarycare? Post by Jonny on Sep 3rd, 2007, 1:16pm Good rant, Jack....I like it!! |
||||||
|
Clusterheadaches.com Message Board » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1! YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved. |