[Masthead] A Few Clouds ~ 52°F  
High: 66°F ~ Low: 41°F
Thursday, Oct. 23, 2014

Insuring a less healthy future

Posted Wednesday, February 24, 2010, at 7:40 AM

Looks like Americans' health is taking the back burner this week while politicians promote party and big business first and people last in the arguments over President Obama's health care proposals.

Should Americans be legally required to have health insurance or be hit with fines?

Should the government be allowed to block large premium increases?

Should insurance companies be forced to insure those with pre-existing conditions?

Obama and Democrats think so. Republicans disagree. And I guess many of us feel caught in the middle.

I've thought for years that insurance companies charge ridiculous premiums with little other than market forces to stop them. Suppose the "oil company" mindset hits the insurance industry. What happens then?

But I'm also hearing some conservative voices increasingly using the word "socalism" in claims that the federal government wants too much control -- read "regulatory authority" -- over business.

All I know is last year it cost over $1,800 for me to get six stitches. Yes, America has a problem.

And I suspect that whatever happens, if anything, concerning insurance it'll end up costing us more.


Comments
Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]

Unfortunately the Democrats want to drive a nail into a board with a bulldozer while the Republicans just want to ignore the nail and hope that eventually it takes care of itself. Both solutions are wrong and instead of common sense solutions, both parties want to follow paths that don't actually solve the problem and just create more debt or just ignore the problem in general. I also disagree with the many bribes and special deals that the Democrats have made in creating their healthcare legislation . . . I thought this was something Obama campaigned against?

I do believe that the Democrats are wrong in wanting to force Americans into acquiring insurance by threatening to use fines. I however do agree with them in that no person should be denied healthcare coverage due to preexisting conditions and illness.

-- Posted by jaxspike on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 11:14 AM

This requirement of carrying insurance is not a new thing, we are required to have car insurance, in Michigan you can not even get your tags without proof of it. We are required to have home insurance by banks to protect their intrest in your home. Yet we have little to no up rise against those.

I do not think there is anything wrong with people being required to have coverage, what I do have a problem with is what seems to be a vague explanation of how they are to afford it, and what it will cover.

The one thing that is certain is that it is being treated as a political battle first and a concern for the people last. The latest threat from the republicans to tie up the summit with "hundreds of amendments" is a slap in the face of all Americans. They have no intention of coming forward and in any honorable way addressing the issue. They have the opportunity to step up to the plate and help make a difference in this country for millions of people, yet they want to play games. If they don;t like the democrats plan get involved and help create a plan that works across the lines. These people ( both sides) are playing games with the lives of our citizens. They all ( both sides) need to grow up, drop the political ego games and get the priorities in order. Remember they represent us not the insurance companies. The plan as it is needs a lot of tweaking and even some serious changes it's true, but unless everyone involved up there make an honest and honorable effort to get it right we will have to settle for what we get.

I only wonder if they are (both sides) even capable of putting on their big kid pants and going at this as responsible adults, looking out for OUR intrest or if they continue the preschool playground bickering that is going on now and does little more than stab the American people in the back.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 12:20 PM

Wonderwhy . . . while I agree with most of your post I do disagree with your comparison of health insurance with car and home insurance. People are not required to own a home or a car so when you decide to buy a car or a home; you willingly make the choice to accept the fact you will have to acquire insurance for both. With this legislation on healthcare, there is no choice in respect to acquiring insurance because they are forcing you take it no matter if you use it or not unless you want to be penalized.

-- Posted by jaxspike on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 1:06 PM

"The one thing that is certain is that it is being treated as a political battle first and a concern for the people last. The latest threat from the republicans to tie up the summit with "hundreds of amendments" is a slap in the face of all Americans. They have no intention of coming forward and in any honorable way addressing the issue."

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 12:20 PM

No, the threat is not to tie up the summit. What is being talked about is to add ammendments when and if the Democrats attempt to ram the legislation through in a process known as budget reconciliation.

As far as the President and the Democrats coming to the summit with and open mind, it does not hardly seem so, considering they are standing pat that the legislation they have proposed is the only starting point for discussion.

I have posted polling data on Mr. Melson's other blog that clearly shows that the party in charge is also disregarding the voice of the peopole.

http://www.t-g.com/blogs/davidmelson/ent...

Here is a link to the polling data if you don't want to click through to the other blog:

Americans are opposed to the Obama/Democrat health care plan

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls

Americans think that the process should start over and pass smaller versions, taking on a few issues at a time

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-r...

-- Posted by Midnight Rider on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 1:32 PM

Medicaid was the previous government answer to a "healthcare crisis". If the government solution works so well, Medicaid would have worked and we wouldn't be discussing obamacare.

David, if you don't like the use of Socialism to describe the obama-pelosi-reid trifecta's plans, would you prefer marxist instead?

I leave you with definitions for both so you can decide.

Socialism:

1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

#3 sound exactly like what is being proposed through obamacare.

Marxism

The doctrines of Karl Marx and his associate Friedrich Engels on economics, politics, and society. They include the notion of economic determinism -- that political and social structures are determined by the economic conditions of people. Marxism calls for a classless society in which all means of production are commonly owned (communism), a system to be reached as an inevitable result of the struggle between the leaders of capitalism and the workers.

This has been the message of current day liberals for some time...if only the "poor" were given ________ (fill in the blank with the entitlement program of the day) then they could be successful like everyone else.

I leave the choice up to you, but any honest person can see both at work here.

-- Posted by quietmike on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 4:39 PM

well, i have not at any point indulged in fantasies that the current system is about to be improved. while the cost of medical care borders on criminal, and availability is a growing issue, there are not yet enough people disenfranchised from receiving medical care to create sufficient pressure to compete with the debts owed by both parties to the insurance companies... which are growing fat on the current system.

i will have to say, however, that i am thoroughly disgusted with the republican party on this and every other issue. why not the democrats? well, as a conservative the democrats do not pretend to represent my views. the republicans do... and calling it pretending is being kind. while the Party has decided to adopt a strategy for returning to power based on doing everything in their ability to bring about national failure on every front, i do not place the party ahead of the country, not any party. as a thinking conservative (so, perhaps not part of the population the republicans hope to bring under their umbrella) i am fully aware that the democrats and liberals represent a fairly equal part of the population. and, despite the rather childish practice of using liberal as some sort of swear word, the other side represents a range of people, from the same brainless sheep, to thinking liberals, whose desires to see the country succeed differ from mine only in the philosophy which they feel would be successful. both liberals and conservatives would like to see the economy prosper, health care and education improved, etc, etc. true representatives of the people, conservative and liberal alike, would be working to address these issues, and seeking to find compromise solutions, not stirring up the emotional and weak-minded to protect the patry's interests.

-- Posted by lazarus on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 6:37 PM

If the Republicans would spend half the time they are spending saying "no" to everyting, we might see a reasonable comprimise. As long as they are in the "no" mode....we can expect more of the same partisan politics as usual.

-- Posted by chs61 on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 8:47 PM

As far as requiring individuals to buy insurance, the federal government is going to find it tough sledding in court. That is clearly unconstitutional and state AGs are already lining up to challenge that in court. The comparison with car insurance is only marginally valid since those come from individual state mandates.

The federal government may try to circumvent the constitution by requiring states pass mandates for universal insurance by threat of holding back medicaid matching payments. It would stink but it's been done with highway funds so look for that in the future.

This issue is now no longer about coverage, health care or any other altruistic issue. This is now hardball politics. The democrats and the President see this as their signature issue. If this passes, his legacy will be set (for better or for worse). The republicans saw the absolute hatred for this bill this summer and have seized upon this as a weakness. Tomorrow will probably be a well choreographed political dance with both sides claiming they took the high road while the other guy was inflexible. That leaves the reconciliation option i.e the "nuclear option". One thing about nuclear options is that they tend to have a larger kill zone than originally intended. If the democrats throw that bomb I have one suggestion. Run. Really. Fast.

-- Posted by Tim Baker on Wed, Feb 24, 2010, at 10:05 PM

If the Republicans would spend half the time they are spending saying "no" to everyting, we might see a reasonable comprimise. As long as they are in the "no" mode....we can expect more of the same partisan politics as usual.

-- Posted by chs61

The republicans should be applauded for listening to the American people. Nearly every poll you can find clearly shows Americans don't want obamacare, recent elections also point to the fact Americans are tired of obama's shenanigans. obama is so blinded by his wish to create his own legacy that he can't see the obvious facts in front of him.

-- Posted by quietmike on Thu, Feb 25, 2010, at 1:26 AM

Mike, the obvious facts ( if you care to see them)are millions of people are unable to afford health care that if they could afford it would buy it, millions of people have preexisting conditions, many will die because of the inability to get coverage for one reason or another, (I am not referring to those who can afford it but choose not to). You and your republican no Sayers are choosing not to listen to those people, they are being swept under the rug, most of them are most likely at work when these polls are done or just conveniently not polled , we all know that polls are taken to "prove" a point and thus are taken with the intent to back what the poll taker wants them to. They are geared toward their followers with a touch of opposition to make them look good. Do you really believe those against heath care will zero in on those who need it to get their numbers? You go ask someone who is without coverage, who has lost their retirement or home, can not afford their medication, whose only option for care is a free clinic or ER ( stabilization and release with no follow up ) Ask them and you see who your heroes are shutting out, ask the obvious questions to those who are not sitting all nice and cozy with the needed care. Those of us who have coverage take it for granted, it is easier to look away than to see the suffering of others.

I wonder how much the opinions of those out their fighting against health care reform would change if they were the ones who had watch or endure going without coverage? Let them walk in the other guys shoes for awhile, reality can wake a hard heart up fast when they are the ones suffering.

I am not saying that what they walked through the doors to the summit with today is a complete and ready solution, but it is a place to start. So far what I have seen they are off to a good start. If both side truely go in there with the welfare of ALL Americans in mind it will be a success, if they go in with a chip on their shoulder and party pride first the American people will lose. They need to pass what they themselves would accept for themselves and their families. Those up their trying to kill reform would not like one of their loved one to be left in the gutter with the millions of people that their actions will be leaving there should they get their way.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Thu, Feb 25, 2010, at 1:48 PM

I'm not opposed to helping people. I am opposed to the government overstepping the bounds of the constitution. They tried Medicaid for the same reasons we are discussing today-it has failed. Locally we tried Tenncare-it is ripe with fraud and abuse and still we have Tennesseans without coverage.

Health care is a finite resource so sadly there will be people who will not receive the same treatment as others. This is not some fantasy utopia that we live in, it is the real world.

How many of the currently unemployed would still have jobs if it wasn't for our oppressive tax rates that send jobs overseas and cause layoffs? How many people with jobs could afford insurance more easily if they weren't spending ~40% of their income towards some type of taxes?

Our current system creates the problems of poverty, crime, and helplessness-then they tell us they can fix those same problems if only we surrender more of our freedoms and money to them.

Please show me where in the constitution the feds are allowed to make healthcare insurance mandatory for all Americans?

-- Posted by quietmike on Thu, Feb 25, 2010, at 2:13 PM

People who are old enough to remember can tell you that most people used to have only "hospital insurance" or something along those lines. It paid for really big problems that required you to be laid up for a while ( it generally paid 100% as well). It also ignored things like a broken bone, the flu or similar issues, leaving the person to work those out with the doctor.

Then people started wanting insurance to cover everything. Soon no one asked the doc if a procedure or test was really necessary because only a $20 copay was required-so what's the difference?

If we started demanding our auto insurance to pay for new tires, oil changes, and wiper blades what would happen to the cost?

Government involvement has never lowered the cost of anything it can only shift the cost to someone else. Government programs are usually more likely to be havens for fraud and abuse as well.

Again I will ask-

Can anyone name a single government program that has worked as promised while coming in at or below budget?

-- Posted by quietmike on Thu, Feb 25, 2010, at 2:29 PM

Health care is a finite resource so sadly there will be people who will not receive the same treatment as others. This is not some fantasy utopia that we live in, it is the real world.------------

Mike That is true but a minimum basic level of care should be available to all. Just because some are unable to pay the ridiculously high premiums charged by insurance companies and then the soaring high co-pays that go with them does not make that person expendable or any less worthy as a human being. There are many hard working people who bust their butts for low wages who are just as deserving if not more so than some who have higher paying easy jobs, people who have worked and served this country their whole lives and now are at an age they can no longer do their work, they deserve to be valued as much as you and I do. Nobody is asking for the premium Cadillac plans for the whole nation. In a country as great as America I am amazed some are so shallow that they determine the worth of a person by the size of their pay check, and some are willing to consider those who do not live up to their standards expendable. There are many wealthy people who can not hold a candle to the lower income people who make this country what she is.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Thu, Feb 25, 2010, at 5:48 PM

That is true but a minimum basic level of care should be available to all.

-- Posted by wonderwhy

A minimum basic level of care is already available to all at no charge. We may not agree where that minimum basic level should be, but one is there.

-- Posted by quietmike on Fri, Feb 26, 2010, at 5:27 AM

What might that be Mike? The ER/ They just stabilize you, at an over inflated expense to to public, takes up valuable emergency care space, then sends people home with no access to the follow up care they need. That is nothing more than Bushanomics. Why should a parent have to take their child to the ER for a condition that should be done in the office for a 10th the cost? My husband went to a local doctor recently for an ear ache, they billed 170.00 dollars. he was a new patient, mind you he did not even see the "doctor" but the nurse practitioner, was seen for less than 5 min. no test or anything complicated. She walked in, looked in his ear, took his temp, gave a prescription and walked out. They told us 60.00 up front when we came in and surprised us with the rest later. And we have good insurance. This is all what our insurance did not cover. Now tell me how people on lower incomes can reasonably be expected to pay this? Along with hundreds of dollars in premiums besides. This is reality, and we have it good.

So my questions Mike are: just what basic care is available to those who are stuck in between those who can afford coverage and those who are eligible for assistance? What is available for those who have pre-existing conditions who can not get coverage? Would you want your loved ones to have that care, God forbid you were forced into their shoes, and like many of them have no other options? Those who need medical assistance are not the low life maggots like those fighting against them would like you believe, most of them consist of hard working responsible people who just don't have pay checks that are good enough to suit those on the ivory towers looking down their noses at them. True some people don't do what they should and milk the system, but do we throw away all the good people because of a few bad apples? Heck we're not talking breast implants here, we are talking basic necessary, needed health care. And we're referring to kids, elderly, neighbors and family you respect and love, someday it may even be you!

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Fri, Feb 26, 2010, at 11:26 AM

What makes you believe people are "entitled" to...well anything?

We already agree healthcare is a finite resource. So, what exactly makes someone entitled to something they can't pay for?

I'm sure we can think of other things as well. Shouldn't children who live in government housing be entitled to a large backyard so they can run and play like other children?

Like it or not money is the metric by which people are judged. In most cases it is a fairly accurate judge of how hard someone works and how wisely they make decisions.

If they can only find a menial minimum wage job, have you asked what type of education and skills they have trained themselves with over the years to deserve an "easy high paying job"?

-- Posted by quietmike on Fri, Feb 26, 2010, at 2:41 PM

What makes you believe people are "entitled" to...well anything?

-- Posted by quietmike on Fri, Feb 26, 2010, at 2:41 PM

Basic humanity and the teaching of Christ to help the poor.

I'm sure we can think of other things as well. Shouldn't children who live in government housing be entitled to a large backyard so they can run and play like other children?

-- Posted by quietmike on Fri, Feb 26, 2010, at 2:41 PM

Now that is an apples to orange comparison.

I would like to see some of your answers to wonderwhy's questions in her last post.

We already agree healthcare is a finite resource. So, what exactly makes someone entitled to something they can't pay for?

-- Posted by quietmike on Fri, Feb 26, 2010, at 2:41 PM

Everything except God is finite, but I don't think we are going to "run out of" health care any time soon.

Here is a question of my own: Do people deserve to die because they have no health insurance?

-- Posted by Midnight Rider on Fri, Feb 26, 2010, at 5:02 PM

Hey Mike,"menial minimum wage job" wow your sure up on your pedestal with that one aren't you? Tell me where would you be with out all those doing what you call "menial" jobs? Who would cater to you at restaurants, if there were no servers? Who would supply and check you out in the grocery store? Who would do the "menial" work in nursing homes? Clean up the ER rooms between patients? Wal-mart could not function. Who would make this country run if all the so called menial workers were not there? Who would cash your pay check when you go to the bank if not for that menial teller behind the counter? Gee who would process your insurance claims and pay your doctors with out the clerks that do the paper work?My, my your nose is so far in the air that you can not see the all those menial workers in it's shadow. These menial workers are every bit as human as you, they feel pain every bit as deeply as you, if they get sick though they have a lot lower chance of survival than you because too many people out there like you consider them to be expendable and unworthy, not as good as , and some even consider those menial workers to be a plaque on our country. That thinking is disgraceful and an embarrassing in a country as great as this.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Fri, Feb 26, 2010, at 8:33 PM

Wonderwhy,

I notice during your tirade you failed to answer any of my questions.

-- Posted by quietmike on Sat, Feb 27, 2010, at 5:22 AM

Basic humanity and the teaching of Christ to help the poor.

-- Posted by Midnight Rider

Christ taught that "if any would not work, neither should he eat." 2 Thessalonians 3:10

and under Mosiac law God said:

"By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food."

Genesis 3:19

IMHO eating would rank far ahead of visiting the doc on most people's priority list.

I know it is just an archaic document to most liberals (until the ACLU makes a case), but WHERE EXACTLY IS THE CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY FOR THE FEDS TO BE INVOLVED IN HEALTHCARE?

-- Posted by quietmike on Sat, Feb 27, 2010, at 5:34 AM

Christ taught that "if any would not work, neither should he eat." 2 Thessalonians 3:10

"By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food."

Genesis 3:19

-- Posted by quietmike on Sat, Feb 27, 2010, at 5:34 AM

There are still plenty of people who eat there food by the sweat of their brow and are still poor.

Here are a couple more quotes for you:

12 And He also went on to say to the one who had invited Him, "When you give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, otherwise they may also invite you in return and that will be your repayment. 13 "But when you give a reception, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, 14 and you will be blessed, since they do not have the means to repay you; for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous." Luke 14:12-14 (NASB)

Jesus said to him, "If you wish to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me." Mathew 19:21 (NASB)

The point is that there are plenty of hard working people who can't afford health insurance in its current state.

My question remains: Does someone deserve to die because they can't afford health insurance?

Better yet, leaving out the word deserve, Is it right to let people die simply because they can't afford health insurance?

-- Posted by Midnight Rider on Sat, Feb 27, 2010, at 7:21 AM

Midnight Rider,

Great posts... and to answer your question. NO! People do NOT need to die because they can't afford health insurance, and if NOT-SO-QUIETmike really felt the same way he would understand THAT is the fundamental issue at hand.

So much for this "country first" mantra b.s., because in case people can not seem to remember, the COUNTRY elected Obama, and the Democrats as a warning that they WANTED health care reform, among many other things. I, understand you disagree with Obama, the Democrats and anyone else who may say yes to reform, but you needn't forget that the current majority in every single branch of the government did not get there by self-appointment. They were ELECTED, to pass sweeping health care reform, to end the Iraq war, and try to revive a plundering economy. Do facts not sit well with the other side of the aisle or is bitterness, divide and conquer still the party's motto?

It is so easy for the party of "no" to emphatically plead that they want to compromise and they understand that the current health care system does need reform. They had SIX consecutive years to "reform" health care and they certainly did... health insurers saw dramatic revenue and profit increases, pharmaceutical companies saw record revenues and profits and the American people suffered. Their idea of reform is to allow people with the ability to cut off funding tell you if your life is worth the insurance you can't afford.

I also might add, the Times Gazette had an unscientific poll that asked, "Are you satisfied with the current health care system in the United States?" and the results can be found here http://www.t-g.com/scripts/poll/archive.... ....219 people or 69.7% said "NO" while 95 people or 30.3% said "YES".... so tell me Mike, if the Republicans "should be applauded for listening to the American people", are you applauding them for listening to just 30% or are you applauding them for ignoring the other 70%?????

-- Posted by darrick_04 on Sat, Feb 27, 2010, at 1:55 PM

darrick_04

Your obama had a super majority in both houses of congress and still couldn't get health care reform passed (remember that was what he and the dems were ELECTED for)! the dems had a veto proof majority for a year and didn't get the job done-what happened?

-- Posted by quietmike on Sat, Feb 27, 2010, at 2:11 PM

Midnight rider

No people shouldn't be allowed to die, but neither should we pass an unconstitutional measure that, based on historical data, will not achieve the outcome obama would have you believe.

No where in the bible does it say to create a government program to help the poor. It is left as an individual choice as an expression of God's love being shown through each of us.

The sad fact is that the majority of the poor are poor through their own lack of foresight and/or bad behavior. The number one health problem among the poor is obesity-a condition created solely by poor lifestyle choices. In fact the vast majority of all health care problems in the U.S. are caused by lifestyle.

Instead of spending trillions that are more about marking obama's place in history, than about health care, why not reform our current welfare and tax system that rewards poor behavior and punishes good behavior? that would more directly affect the health of the American people.

-- Posted by quietmike on Sat, Feb 27, 2010, at 2:20 PM

I have noticed no one wants to address the elephant in the room, though I've asked several times now:

WHERE IS THE CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY FOR THE FEDS TO BE INVOLVED IN HEALTHCARE IN THE FIRST PLACE?

Yes, darrick_04 this is why the repubs should be applauded-for abiding by the law!!!

-- Posted by quietmike on Sat, Feb 27, 2010, at 2:23 PM

Thanks darrick, but you should understand that I am not in favor of this massive piece of legislation. I do recognize that we have a problem and something needs to be done.

I also say, as I have said a few times, that even though Obama was elected by a wide margin, and I will give you the point that part of his promise was health care reform, it is wrong to say that what is proposed is what the people were looking for.

Actually, I believe most people voted him into office more for the desire for change than anyone specific campaign promise that he made.

It will be interesting to see the polling data later in the week about how Americans feel about this piece of legislation after the summit. But, for now, the fact remains there was a wide majority of opposition to this particular legislation. This is a broad opposition that includes republicans, democrats, and independents.

I did not get to see all of the summit coverage, but from the what I did see, neither side was willing to give much.

The thing that bothered me most was the way Obama tried to downplay the importance of the polling data showing most people are opposed to this legislation. I would be interested to see if the statement he made will show up on factcheck.org.

But for now, here is the polling data again. Now, I have not clicked on every one of these polls, but the ones I did click were very specific in seeking to measure how people felt about passing the legislation as it is written. Here are the numbers:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/...

-- Posted by Midnight Rider on Sat, Feb 27, 2010, at 3:30 PM

WHERE IS THE CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY FOR THE FEDS TO BE INVOLVED IN HEALTHCARE IN THE FIRST PLACE?

-- Posted by quietmike on Sat, Feb 27, 2010, at 2:23 PM

Hmm, It's in the same part of the Constitution where the FDA, SEC, USDA, and multiple others are. Did the founding fathers understand that in the future there would be issues which required amending the Constitution? Of course, that's why we have 27 amendments and counting....

When the country faced a crisis, i.e., an attack on our soil, our Congress speedily passed the "Patriot Act" which flies in the face of nearly every civil liberty the Constitution guarantees. So, since what many Americans are facing is arbitration and pure hell from those with the pockets lined in gold, someone has the responsibility to protect it's citizens. Surely, if Congress can authorize war with a fictitious enemy, that same body of people can protect its citizens from outright fraud, perpetuated by the very industry which is in business to "protect" you to begin with.

-- Posted by darrick_04 on Sat, Feb 27, 2010, at 7:14 PM

FDA, SEC, USDA, Patriot Act

-- Posted by darrick_04

So it's the old two wrongs make a right argument?

For the record I believe all the above should be abolished as well.

-- Posted by quietmike on Sun, Feb 28, 2010, at 5:41 AM

You know Mike, it is very sad that there are people out their who place such low value on people whom they do not consider to be as wonderful as they see themselves to be.

The biggest hurdle to cross here is that. We can debate for ever but unless we can find a way to instill the value of life and respect for each other, even those whom are not as well off as we are, we will never get any where. Too many as lost touch with their human side, they has lost the ability to comprehend that anyone who does not have the wealth or education to impress them, those who live by the sweat of their brow, those who do not fit their white collar standards, are just as human and valuable as they are. That it takes even those lowly blue collar workers that make those lower wages, doing jobs that are not impressive to make this country work.

There was an old joke/story that went around back when I was in high school, you may have read, it was about all the parts of the body arguing about which was the most important, they bragged about their great and wonderful duties,the brain did the thinking, the heart pumped the blood, but rather than argue, the colon just shut down and did not let the waste pass through. Well after a time all the other parts were unable to function and where forced to shut down. The moral of this was that even the so called nastiest of jobs, those that are nowhere as impressive as the brain, are key to the success of the function whole unit, and with out any one of them the system will fail. I admit my rendition of this is not as creative or colorfully as the original, but the truth of the message is still the same.

I had a minister who one day made a very strong sermon about the value and importance of everyone's place in this world. He pointed out that it takes all parts of a society to make it function, you need the big officials but you also need the dog catchers and garbage men. They are all gears in the same machine, and even though the gold plated decorations that impress the masses look good, it is the little greasy gears that are hidden out of sight doing all the hard work that actually got the job done. He pointed out that it takes all the parts to make the machine work, that even the little shims of sight play their part.

It is sad that there are so many brains and shiny plaques in this country that are unwilling to acknowledge the worth and importance of the parts that don't look as impressive as they think they do. You know there is more to making this country function than looking impressive, or sitting on the edge taking credit for the actual work done behind the scenes by the low paid, demeaned greasy gears.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Sun, Feb 28, 2010, at 10:42 AM

Wondewhy,

Instead of debating the facts of the matter you instead turn to class warfare and emotional pleas.

I'll bet the DNC is proud of you!

-- Posted by quietmike on Sun, Feb 28, 2010, at 2:03 PM

The facts of the matter are that our country has millions of hard working people who have been priced out of health care. They may not be as educated, may not have come from wealthy families, they're wages may not be impressive to you, but reality is they are every bit as worthy as you - you are no better, no more deserving that any of them. You seem to live in a fairy tale cloud where you have the right to judge those you feel are beneath you, and consider anyone that is not in your vision of "worthy' as expendable. Do not fool yourself, you are no better than any of them and fate could at any moment put you right there next to them. I some how doubt that you would let your loved ones die rather than accept the necessary aide should you or your loved be in position it were needed. I doubt you would allow your family to starve or live under a bridge should your plaster tower crumble. Not one of us are not immune or too good for hard times to hit us, not even you. When it comes time to accept Medicare and social security if your eligible your big words here will have a different meaning. Once a person walks in the shoes of reality they see thing from a different light.

Your comment about the DNC being proud was really so grown up.LOL If the DNC is proud of someone who values life (from birth to grave not just until the cord is cut like the right does) then I'll take that as a compliment. I value the lives God has seen fit to grace this world with, it is HIS place to judge them not ours. I'm not worried about what the DNC think of me, I am more concerned about what my Lord thinks of me. Compassion is a gift from him, greed is something he warns us against. I know where I stand on those and trust HIM to tell me otherwise. I know of no instance in the bible where he said only those with the biggest paychecks are worthy, but I do remember "Matthew 19:24 (New American Standard Bible)

24"Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

What does that say to you about class warfare? Sounds like the wealthy are at a bit of the disadvantage.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Sun, Feb 28, 2010, at 7:48 PM

First off I'm not rich by anyone's definition, but because I refuse to accept the victimhood mentality that is so widely preached by the left, you automatically assume I am one of those oppressive, evil, rich people. That must be more of that liberal indoctrination showing itself.

I have said no one should be left to die because they are poor. But obamacare isn't the only alternative as liberals would have us believe.

As I have pointed out (several times) before, and you have ignored (several times), if a government run healthcare plan for the poor was the answer, Medicaid would have solved that problem decades ago.

It hasn't.

So why would another government run healthcare plan do what the previous government run healthcare plan failed to do?

Can you answer that simple question?

-- Posted by quietmike on Mon, Mar 1, 2010, at 5:36 AM

4"Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

What does that say to you about class warfare? Sounds like the wealthy are at a bit of the disadvantage.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Sun, Feb 28, 2010, at 7:48 PM

I am so glad you pointed that out. So based on your interpretation of the bible all rich people should just run amuck. It is so obvious that you are like so many others, you would rather cry oh why oh why can't I have what the other man has worked for? As far as the Lord, Christ paid the price for my sins and he will sit in judgement not the DNC. By the way how about John 3:16. The only thing I "wonder why" about is, now that the DNC is in charge wonder why nothing is getting done? I can tell you they are so busy creating a poverty class that will alway keep them in office.

-- Posted by outonthefarm on Mon, Mar 1, 2010, at 2:38 PM

You know there is more to making this country function than looking impressive, or sitting on the edge taking credit for the actual work done behind the scenes by the low paid, demeaned greasy gears.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Sun, Feb 28, 2010, at 10:42 AM

You have a point. Answer me this. Who put those gears into motion? Who went in debit to place the grease on the gears? Who applied for a job that would not be there is some"rich" person had not risk their money to start the business? You cannot have all things your way. The fact is America and American Business carry the weight of everything. If you are such an advocate of socialism why don't you start a business and send every penny it grosses to the DNC and just sit and wait and see what they do with it. I am all for helping the hungry. But I would do it by teaching them to plant their on crops and stop reaching into my crops...outonthefarm

-- Posted by outonthefarm on Mon, Mar 1, 2010, at 2:50 PM

Today even die hard obama supporters are calling for obamacare to be removed from the table.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmDflUJ6O...

-- Posted by quietmike on Mon, Mar 1, 2010, at 6:19 PM

Until people actually take the time and effort, till you actually decide that you are not any better or more worthy that your neighbor because of some ego related ivory tower. Until people realize that all of us have an important roll in the out come and value of our nation, be it in a menial job cleaning toilets or the big CEO of a company. Until we know what it is to walk in another persons shoes and see the reality of how and why they are there. True many are functioning well below their abilities for what ever reason, be it illness, circumstances, and yes some are just good at working the system that has many flaws. We can only guess the reason, but truth is unless you have walked in their shoes you do not know, you only assume what best fits you desired reason to be, the reason that makes YOU feel the best about it. Berating and playing the "I'm better than you - your scum game" gets us no where. Reality is to just throw them all to the curb will create more problems than we have now. What is needed is a way to move these people from where they are to a place where they can and will function independently. The state of this country is not healthy enough to provide employment that can at this time support all families in manners that can make them totally independent. There is not enough gainful employment to go around. We need to find solutions that not only encourage those on aide to become more independent we need to find ways to make that possible. Sure it is easy for those who have to feel entitled and allow their egos to convince them they are better than the others so they do not matter, but the truth of the matter a persons integrity, honor and heart says a lot more about a person than their social status and pay check.

The person who is willing to share their last dime, who would be there to help another ( not just with money but emotionally and by encouragement)Those who have good solid principles and love for each other, these are the people whom should be looked up to, they have honor and integrity they are the ones who are of the true value to this country. They are the ones who when push comes to shove will be there for each other and not throw those they consider below them under the bus. The people who are so high up on their ivory towers( usually mode of plaster and can crumble at any time) who can see nothing in the shadow of their up turned noses may be impressive to each other but as far as humanity goes they are mere warts on the backs sides of honorable people who actually value the lives of others. No a big pay check does not make a person more valuable, just because a person does not have a fancy car and big in house does not make them expendable. I have met and been around wealthy people who in spirit and all that really matters are poorer than a church mouse under a bridge. The bum in many cases will share his last 2 beans should some one be in need, where as many wealthy men would rather die or let the other one die than spare a bean, they would never actually miss.That is truely pitiful. I know people who go around flaunting themselves as high and mighty in their big houses and fancy cars, looking down on and condemning those who are in their eyes beneath them, who in reality if you were to take their portfolio and compare it to the bum under the bride would be of a financially lesser status. The bum may have nothing, but the ego is far in a hole of debt it would take him years of paying those he owes money to, to rise up and break even with the bum. They look good to those who they want to impress but in reality they are nothing but fakes with little to no integrity to stand on, just smokes and screens to impress the shallow people they wallow around with. How impressive is that?

Don't be too quick to judge that person whom you feel Superior to, you may not be all that when all the qualities that make a person truely gifted and honorable are taken into account.

Snobbery is not a good quality, it can effect any income level, however it much easier for those who find their worth in a pay check to fall vulnerable to. I am not judging any one here to be a snob, but we can all use a good check up in the mirror from time to time to check for the signs. A good sign to look for is feeling superior to your neighbor, feeling that your more entitled to basic human necessities than the person next to you for what ever reason. people often only choose to see what they want to, shutting out reality much of the time to make their worlds what they choose them to be. it takes a big person to look outside their safety zone an really see the things that make them uncomfortable and might make them have to change their opinions of themselves. We are all only human, and can be guilty of being inflexible, that is why it is so important to evaluate our own motives often when we judge those around us.

Go look at yourself, do you bow to your ego or do you look beyond that for reality?

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Tue, Mar 2, 2010, at 12:23 PM

Wonderwhy,

So you're saying you're incapable of debating the issues, or even answering a simple question? Are you so thoroughly programmed that you always return to the class warfare spiel?

Domo Arigato Mr.(or Ms.) Roboto!

-- Posted by quietmike on Tue, Mar 2, 2010, at 2:05 PM

Even with all it's flaws those programs

provide life lines to millions of people, many who would have dies or been disabled the rest of their lives without them. Not everyone considers this sort of thing failure. But then again by your standards those people did not deserve the cures and help they have received do they? I would place a large bet on the fact that should you ever be in the position of becoming disabled, possibly even death, and needed the assistance you would refuse others ( while you smiled and patted yourself on the back for doing so) that you would choose health and life- you would get right in line for the assistance. You would do like you appear to do now and put your self first. So you just go ahead and keep on proudly kicking those whom you consider beneath you down as far as you need to keep your ego fed. But when you reach the age of retirement you'll surly cash those social security checks and use your medicare plan same as the rest of.

Now I'm sure you have better things to do than try and convince lil ole me to accept your snobbish attitudes, I just don't accept that hard working, honest people are not any good if their pay checks are less than yours. So go polish your plaster tower, would not want it to lose it's ivory shine. Yea, call it class warfare, go shine your sword, I'm sure you'll fight to their death to keep um down where you think they belong. Personally, I would rather fight to help them get back on their feet and prosper than to enjoy their demise. I'm grateful there were those ahead of us caring enough to help when the bottom fell out for us. It only took a couple months but we made it. Without the temporary help we would have lost everything. Now we are helping others who will pass it on in the future. It's what being compassionate, caring is about. It is what honorable caring people do. I just do not fit the republican way of greed first first, people last.

I am not " programed" by the rabid rights classfare war against the middle class,I just care about others. And by speaking outI hope people like you will give up your puppet strings and actually look around you and see the people in this country are in trouble, and the more we let corporations and their greed take over the worst that trouble is going to get, don;t fool yourself they will be at war with you too as soon as they run out of the ones they're working on now, it's just not your turn yet. Obamacare is not perfect, but it is a start in the right direction.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Wed, Mar 3, 2010, at 4:33 PM

Wonderwhy,

End the end, taxes will have to be raised n order to pay for this 'reform'.

I'm taxed enough, my business is taxed enough, and I'm certainly not in the mood to pay for some 'pie in the sky' program that shows no hope of being successful.

-- Posted by gottago on Wed, Mar 3, 2010, at 4:49 PM

Obamacare is not perfect, but it is a start in the right direction.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Wed, Mar 3, 2010, at 4:33 PM

If nothing else you have a future as a fiction writer. just what part of the "plan" do you see as a step in anything other than a steaming pile? I commend you in that you want to do something to change the status quo. However, doing something in the name of just making noise is not the answer.

I too care about those around me. I came from nothing and with no assistance from anyone. The fact I came from nothing, is what drives me to help those with no means of helping themselves. What you fail to understand is, that until those that can, do, those of us that have, won't.

Do you own a business? I doubt it very highly. If you did you would understand what I and many others keep saying. We are taxed to the point of being forced to lay off workers. Your only response is what? That the owner of the business should forgo a profit? Why? I did not get this country into the mess it is in, neither did just one party. You are very clearly a left winger and for that I understand your diminished capacity to understand that the only way this economy will ever turn around is a massive tax cut for business. You can say what you want. You can go tell it on the mountain. But the truth is the truth, Obama cannot do this, the republicans cannot do it, nor the democrats. It will be small to medium businesses grossing from 250 K to one million a year that will pull the country back from the brink. Trust me when I say that group will not hire, spend, or expand under the current atmosphere of the forced contribution to anything, including the so called health care overhaul. During the "Bush" tax cuts I was able to purchase over a half million dollars in vehicles, equipment, and facilities. That half million dollars translated into jobs in the automobile industry, the construction industry and new jobs in my work force. What does this administration do? They divided the country and polarize the population. Why? So they can expand the portion of the population that looks at the world as one big entitlement program. Why? so they will vote and keep them in office. When you have a constructive solution that works for everyone offer it. Until then you can just keep grinding away acting like the wealthy are headed to hell in a hand basket. See what that attitude garners.....just saying from ...outonthefarm

-- Posted by outonthefarm on Wed, Mar 3, 2010, at 5:44 PM

You seem to not realize taxs may go up for some, but at the same time the coverage will be better, the co pays go down and the cost of ER service used because nothing else is available will help cost go down.

The fear mongers out there cry on the mountains " taxs will go up" but in their dishonest successful attempt to manipulate you they do not offer ALL the information, they conveniently leave out details that tell the whole story. Thus is the way of politics.

I'm sorry for your mood but dear that really has nothing to do with it. Your business will be considered for tax breaks to help cover these plans, but the right is down playing that information because it does not help with the fear monger messages they are feeding you. That pie in the sky you so hate will actually save lives, but I guess your mood doen't care about that.It does not concern YOU. The plan does need work, sadly only one side cares enough to be putting an honest, productive effort towards producing it. Republicans have decided that NOTHING will be accepted if if might actually pass. If they would truely take the effort, truely represent the people between the two parties we could come out with the best plan, but since they find being anti Obama is more important then we will have to get the best we can with out them. The ones who took the summit serious had many good ideas, but sadly guys like Lamar put kill it before us. Be realistic, if they did scrap it and start over both sides would just say the same things they did in the first one, all it would accomplish is wasting time, stalling it.

You have such a strong opinion tell me what is your answer? What would like see done? Keep in mind there are millions of people who need health care, as long as they don't have a chance at AFFORDABLE ( I did not say free) care, as long as they can be dropped if they get sick, as long as there is free rein for price goudging and increases, they will continue to use the ER, and if that doesn;t work they will become disabled and thus end up on higher assistance or end up on the streets. Look at the whole picture not just the little couple hundred square feet around your drive way.

Hey I have great insurance, I have a simple but stable life style, and don't see the need for this personally. But I can see what many are going through, I know a lot of hard working people who have lost jobs, insurance, and their homes not to mention any and all pride that thye had work long and hard all their adult lives to achieve. Step out of you safety zone, and see the reality of those around you. I don;t say we need to pamper and spoil these people, but there needs to be a minimum level that gives people something to work up from and it has to be possible to survive while they climb back up, or learn how to get out of the rut they have been born into.

Mike says people have victim mentalities, but many people are forced into victim positions buy no choice or fault of their own. with out a bit of help they have no way to get up out of it. If that single mother has insurance payments that take up half of her income, has to pay child care, and because she was a good mother and wife while married is only prepared for a menial job, after all the other expenses there is nothing left for Goodwill shoes for the kids yet alone college. Reality sucks, but it is there, even if we have been blessed enough to not have to be in those shoes. YOu think your mood has had enough try thinking about the mood they are in after their days????

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Wed, Mar 3, 2010, at 5:59 PM

I have to agree with 'farm' on his assesment that you don't own a business.

Tax breaks will NEVER have the same effect as not being taxed (or more properly, taxed additionally) at all.

-- Posted by gottago on Wed, Mar 3, 2010, at 6:08 PM

Your right I do not "own" a business but I sure have provided a lot of the sweat needed for some to succeed. And I am not any less valuable than those of you who "own" them. Workers are what make your business survive, with out them it wouldn't be much more than a hobby size venture would it? I deserve health care, I deserve respect, and I have just as many rights as a citizen of America as you do. Same as every other person in this country does. It amazes me the way you folks are so eager to berate others you deem are not as wonderful as you because they don't own the business. It is great you own your own business, and I respect all that goes into your getting to that point, but you ever considered that if we all owned businesses there would be no workers for you to look down on? Do you think that person who works for you is any less worthy of health care than you are? True small business can not afford to offer the same benefits as larger ones, but the workers are still viable living beings that should have health care coverage same as you available at rates that the wages pay them can be affordable. Have you actually sat down and tried to write a reasonablee budget for someone who earns the wages you pay? it will truely open your eyes. Step down from your comfort zone and crunch some numbers with the income that your employees try to live on. I am not knocking what you pay them, you don't sound like the type who intentionally take advantage of your employees. Look at them, are they the scummy lowly people Mike would like us to believe those menial workers whom earn low wages are? Or are they for the most part people like you and me just trying to get by in life?

You chose to go into business, respect for your workers should be a given. A working wage is not to much for someone to hope for. Do you pay one? ( I don;t want an answer only for you to think about it)

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Wed, Mar 3, 2010, at 7:08 PM

Tax breaks will NEVER have the same effect as not being taxed (or more properly, taxed additionally) at all. gottago

Well I'm not so sure that is always the case. At a certain point you can get wealthy enough that you can buy into enough tax beaks that your have enough tax write offs to make it where they actually end up paying less taxes than the average middle class person. (I'll bet not many of those people would want the straight tax system.)

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Wed, Mar 3, 2010, at 7:20 PM

Wonderwhy,

You are really delusional if you feel that any poster here is 'looking down' on someone else. We are simply stating that all things are not 'rights' to be provided by the government and small business is taxed beyond what you may imagine.

-- Posted by gottago on Wed, Mar 3, 2010, at 7:30 PM

WONDERWHY,

Are you incapable of answering a question?

Why do YOU believe obamacare will succeed where Medicaid has failed, when both were advertised as the cure for the same thing?

CAN YOU PLEASE ANSWER THIS ONE SIMPLE QUESTION?

-- Posted by quietmike on Thu, Mar 4, 2010, at 5:26 AM

You go ask those who have been saved by these programs, or who have loved ones who are still alive and well because of these programs if they work. I do not believe medicare has failed, neither will you when you reach retirement and find need of it. They need some improvement true, but they are only failures to those who don;t at this time need them. Tell me ( I've asked before ) when your reach retirement age were you planning on not going on the program and just paying the preimums out of you pocket? My Dad's are 800.00 in addition to medicare. Will you turn down the Social secuirty when you retire? SInce you find these this so horrible I can not imagine why you change your mind and actually become a part of that system you do despise.

SO now it your turn to answer questions isn't it? Nothing is perfect, but these are the best available for now. Perhaps you would prefer to go without or use Bushanomics and just run up ER deficits.

WHat this boils down to in simple terms is there are millions of people who need heath care at a rate they can afford to pay ( not free ) and there are people who would would not care one iota if those people lived or died. I pay a lot of taxes same as you, I don't like them any more than you, but unlike you I can go with out the extra Starbucks if it means some one who would go without care can get at least the basic care at an affordable rate.

I asked do you pay a living wage for your employees to be able to afford health care at today's rates? If not what would you suggest they do to get it?

Here is your chance to convince me, tell me what you would do about the health care problem in this country. Tell me what you think the people who are not able to pay the hundreds of dollars monthy, plus the high co-pay and out of pockets besides. Tell where you think those who can not get coverage should go when they need care. What solutions do you think will work, would you put on the table if you had the chance.

What is your workable answer to this nation wide problem ?

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Thu, Mar 4, 2010, at 11:19 AM

I asked do you pay a living wage for your employees to be able to afford health care at today's rates? If not what would you suggest they do to get it?

Here is your chance to convince me, tell me what you would do about the health care problem in this country. Tell me what you think the people who are not able to pay the hundreds of dollars monthy, plus the high co-pay and out of pockets besides. Tell where you think those who can not get coverage should go when they need care. What solutions do you think will work, would you put on the table if you had the chance.

What is your workable answer to this nation wide problem ?

-- Posted by wonderwhy

If a person is unsatisfied with their wage I would suggest they make themselves more valuable, by learning a skill, improving their education, or maybe just working harder. If they have those things and still don't have a good wage they need to find a new employer.

What should be done about the cost of health insurance?

Create a tax deduction for the cost of insurance.

Allow people to purchase insurance across state lines, eliminate laws that limit competition.

Allow individuals to form groups to pool their resources to buy insurance at cheaper rates.

Bring in tort reform to limit ambulance chasing lawsuits and the unnecessary CYA testing that is a result.

Reverse the way of thinking that insurance is supposed to pay for EVERYTHING!

Most babies are born after ~7 months of warning, yet how many people shop for the better prices for a delivery? Same with an annual physical. Or numerous other routine procedures.

Admit that the majority of healthcare problems in the U.S. are directly caused by lifestyle choices, and take some personal responsibility for our own health.

Recognize that we are all going to die. If we save ourself from one disease we will just find another way to die.

As for social security and medicare.

I am well past half of my working life and have paid into both programs for many years. I would gladly forfeit the money I have already paid into them and any right to collect any benefits from them if I could be exempt from paying into them any longer.

Since you're not going to answer my question about Medicaid, I'll ask another.

If you owned a small retail business here in town would you still believe people are "entitled" to things they can't pay for? If someone walked out of your store with a product in their pocket w/o paying would you chalk it up to neediness or would you confront them?

Or would you have a sliding scale of prices based on their ability to pay?

A loaf of bread is free if you're below the poverty line, $3 if you're income is average, and $20 if you're wealthy (to ensure fairness).

-- Posted by quietmike on Thu, Mar 4, 2010, at 2:21 PM

One more question for anyone who supports obamacare:

If it is such a great plan, why was an exemption for congress written into the bill?

-- Posted by quietmike on Thu, Mar 4, 2010, at 2:27 PM

""Since you're not going to answer my question about Medicaid, I'll ask another"".

I DID ! ! !

Again since you refuse to accept my answer I'll repeat it ---- Me and millions of others DO NOT think it is a failure, we realize there is room for improvement , but it is not something so flawed it should be scraped. Ask the people and families of those whose lives have been saved, who because they were able to get health care are not disabled and on public assistance but were able to return to work because they had medical care provided by these program,

""If a person is unsatisfied with their wage I would suggest they make themselves more valuable, by learning a skill, improving their education, or maybe just working harder. If they have those things and still don't have a good wage they need to find a new employer.''

Spoken like a person who has lived a rather sheltered life.

You have some good suggestions but in the real world it not as easy as you make it sound. There are many people through no fault of their own ( I am not calling them victims, they are just at different starting points than others)are in situations they are doing the best they can in (one example, the mothers who stayed home to raise a family only to have the husband dump them later, these women did the right thing and were thrust into single parenthood, some how I can see you out there complaining about child support being to constrictive for the fathers, but what should that woman do? I have worked with many women in this position, they married men who claimed they would be there, that wanted their wife at home taking care of him and the kids, so she trusts him, does not go to college. Well now he's off with his new twit and she is doing the best she can to raise kids, work 1 or 2 jobs at below poverty wages ( for a family of 4 takes a wage of about 10.60 an hour, if I remember correctly). She is not a low life, she did not neglect her duties, now she is putting in every hour she can, where does time or money for college come from? Should she neglect her kids? Now I bring this example to point out that even though you have good suggestions often times in the real world they are a bit in the "pollianna" mentality.

Lets not forget the millions who lost their lives savings in this last economy fall down we just had, they worked saved and earned their retirements only to have businesses fail, pensions lost and 401k disappear. They did the right thing all along and now are in some cases worst off than those who never did a thing. Are they trash and unworthy too?

You can come up with all your excuses about why people are worthy in your eyes for basic affordable heath care, but in the end we are still all human, we do not now the whys or hows of where a person is in their lives, how they got there, why they stay there or even if they deserve to be there. I find your attitude as very offensive because I come from a family that my parents started out way below the poverty level and busted their tails to climb tooth and nail to the middle class they respectfully live. They did every thing in their power to get their, but by your narrow minded self righteousness views they do not deserve to be treated as respectable humans , they deserve to be left on a corner somewhere, because they don't have the 800 dollars pr month for health care ,while some fool whose had Mommy and Daddy cover their silver platter with all the goodies that life could want with out a bit of hard work are great and wonderful in your eyes, oh , they have money so they are better people. Your a very shallow fool in my eyes. Any one who can not see value in the hard work and devotion of somebody unless they show it with big impressive pay checks, anyone who can honesty feel and believe that those who have climbed from less than nothing to just above poverty is substandard, and undeserving,well those people may have money but they are so poor in spirit they have little to no real human value.

You know what I don't have the answers anymore than you do, I don't claim to, but I know that just because a person does not have wealth does not mean they choose to be that way, it does not mean they have been lazy, lack willpower or character. It does not mean they are less worthy of basic necessities in this world than you or I

Yes some are lazy of what you accuse them of , but they are not the rule but rather are the exception. DO you actually believe that you are able to just throw a blanket judgment over them all to suit what you want them to be so they fit your pigeon hole, thus you can feel entitle to berate them with out guilt to turn your back and feel superior. How sad.

Yes you will take your "socialist" medical , and socialist Social Security check, your words will become empty once there is something in the plan "for" you. Once your one of them, then it will be ok.

The simple fact is some people feel they are so far superior to others that they are incapable of looking at the facts, seeing reality, and looking for anything but what will help them to continue to feel better than those around them. You portray yourself as one of them. No I don't know the answers to how to fix things, I do now that most people do not choose to be poor, I know many who have worked harder, climbed farther, have more worth in their calloused wrinkled bodies than any of us ever will, yet they can never achieve what has been given you by birth right ( I don't claim to know where you came from but I can promise it was well above those I refer to)

Class warfare? Oh yea, average hard working people have always had to fight for anything they get, work twice as hard, get a tenth the credit and dodge the manure being throw at them from people with attitudes of entitlement snobbery.

I am all for responsibility, hard work, accountability, and pushing as hard as one can, (I do not think people should just sit back with their hands out) but I have seen and watched many honorable hard working people, take everything in themselves to push harder than you have a concept people can do to get UP to and barely pass poverty. You don;t have the ablity to comprehend the reality of others livesyet you give yourself the right to judge them. You and I don't have an ounce of the honor they do, we have been blessed enough not to be in their shoes. Where we differ is I respect them and you despise them. How sad for you.

No I don;t know about why congress does anything, I don't claim Obama's plan is perfect, I don't pretend we have the answers, but I am proud to be of a heart and mind that values life (even after the cord is cut) that does not think a pay check shows how worthy a person is in this would - Madoff had a big bank account - yet a Nun's is not much to brag about. By your standards the Nun would be trash compared to Madoff.

There are people with the mind set that greed is value and compassion is evil. I can not follow that mind set. Enjoy your ivory tower, should it crash and you get a good dose of reality, don't worry not everyone assumes the worst of people who need help as you do. I'm done here.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Fri, Mar 5, 2010, at 1:11 PM

loaf of bread is free if you're below the poverty line, $3 if you're income is average, and $20 if you're wealthy (to ensure fairness).

-- Posted by quietmike on Thu, Mar 4, 2010, at 2:21 PM

I sure would not let them starve, how about you?

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Fri, Mar 5, 2010, at 3:04 PM

I DID ! ! !

Again since you refuse to accept my answer I'll repeat it ---- Me and millions of others DO NOT think it is a failure, we realize there is room for improvement , but it is not something so flawed it should be scraped. Ask the people and families of those whose lives have been saved, who because they were able to get health care are not disabled and on public assistance but were able to return to work because they had medical care provided by these program.-- Posted by wonderwhy

medicaid was created as a safety net for the poor who could not afford medical services. the fact that it is a failure is amply demonstrated by the fact that we are debating the need for a new safety net for the medical care of the poor.

Do you realize the tax rates necessary for your idealism is the single largest reason the poverty level is so high? Even your evil repressive rich people only have a certain amount of money. They can use that money to either pay taxes that will be wasted or they can reinvest that money to hire employees, buy equipment, or invest. ALL OF WHICH create jobs- real jobs, not the "shovel ready" ones we hear about from obama.

I have already explained a couple of times I am not rich-Is it that hard for you to separate your debate from liberal talking points?

-- Posted by quietmike on Fri, Mar 5, 2010, at 4:41 PM

loaf of bread is free if you're below the poverty line, $3 if you're income is average, and $20 if you're wealthy (to ensure fairness).

-- Posted by quietmike on Thu, Mar 4, 2010, at 2:21 PM

I sure would not let them starve, how about you?

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Fri, Mar 5, 2010, at 3:04 PM

It depends, did they help bake the bread? did they attempt to help make the bread? or did they sit on their --- and wait until the break was baked by someone else? If you suggest that those who refuse to attempt to care for themselves have the right to demand the bread. I offer this, the one who bakes the bread eats first, then those who helped make the bread, once the "bread earners" have their share then what is left might go to the do nothings. It's the usual pecking order of things...outonthefarm

-- Posted by outonthefarm on Mon, Mar 8, 2010, at 7:06 PM

Something needs to be done to reign in spiraling health care cost. But, a massive bill such as the one being considered is not the way to go.

Why? One of the arguments that has been put forward is the problems that beset currently run government health programs Medicare and Medicaid.

"Waste and fraud are pervasive problems for Medicare and Medicaid, the giant government health insurance programs for seniors and low-income people. Improper payments -- in the wrong amounts, to the wrong person or for the wrong reason -- totaled an estimated $54 billion in 2009. They range from simple errors such as duplicate billing to elaborate schemes operated by fraudsters peddling everything from wheelchairs to hospice care."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100310/ap_o...

This is from an article about Ohama's plan to employ hi-tech bounty hunters. In order to try to eliminate waste and fraud. Why did he not propose something like this when he was a senator?

That is just 2009. I shudder to think of what the dollar amount would be over the life of this program. Yes, it has provided much needed services, but we can't just continue to allow this to happen. And, until we figure out a way to eliminiate this wastes and fruad, we should not add more fuel to the fire.

In light of the current waste and fraud taking place now, there is no logical reason to think that healthcare proposed by this current legislation would be any more efficiently managed.

-- Posted by Midnight Rider on Wed, Mar 10, 2010, at 1:44 AM

posted on

Politics Daily

Jill Lawrence

Columnist

Ten Wrong Reasons to Oppose Health Reform

Posted:

03/10/10

Filed Under:Senate, House, Health Care, Congress, Conservatives

Greetings to my conservative readers, who have vented and philosophized about President Obama's health reform drive in countless comments and e-mails. I want to talk today to you.

Obviously, it is your perfect right to oppose what Obama and Democrats are trying to do. And there are legitimate reasons to do so. Maybe you think the government shouldn't be in the business of trying to make sure all Americans have health coverage. Maybe you think that would be nice, but we can't afford it. Maybe you oppose raising any taxes or fees to help finance changes in the health care system, or you think any savings we can wring out of it should be used for other priorities.

Yet these are not always the reasons readers offer for their (sometimes ALL-CAPS, often vitriolic) opposition -- as anyone can see in the comments sections of every column I write about health care. Here are some of the charges and claims, and why I think they are not the right reasons to oppose the health overhaul before Congress:

Get the new

PD toolbar!

1. It is socialism. The Democratic plan would add about 15 million people over 10 years to Medicaid, the existing federal-state program now serving about 60 million poor and low-income Americans. It also would provide subsidies to middle-income families to help them buy private coverage. The bottom line, however, is there is no new government health program in the bill. The House passed a government-run plan (the "public option") in its health bill, but the Senate bill doesn't have one and the final product won't, either. Private insurance companies would not only survive under this bill, they would get millions of new customers. That doesn't sound like socialism.

2. It is a government takeover. The federal government would certainly be more involved in regulating insurance companies. The government would also set up and regulate a competitive new exchange, or marketplace, where small businesses and the uninsured could buy coverage. But the coverage would all be plans offered by private companies. The bill is, in fact, designed to preserve employer-based health benefits and the private insurance industry. So, increased government role, yes. Government takeover, no.

3. It is being "rammed through." There's a 100-year history of failed presidential attempts to achieve universal health coverage. The topic was discussed at length throughout the 2007-2008 presidential campaign. Since last January, it has consumed 15 months of hearings, legislating and debate in Congress. The House passed its bill in November and the Senate, by a 60-40 super-majority, passed its version in December. Take your pick -- a century, three years, 15 months -- but this doesn't meet any definition of "ramming."

4. Reconciliation is "ramming" AND cheating. Reconciliation is a Senate budget process instituted 30 years ago. Since reconciliation bills can't be filibustered, they need only 51 votes to pass -- so everybody uses them to get things done. A chart of 15 major reconciliation initiatives in last weekend's New York Times shows that Republicans have used the process many more times than Democrats. And we're not talking small ball. Republican presidents have signed reconciliation bills that, among other things, cut welfare benefits, expanded health coverage, raised taxes, reduced taxes and overhauled the student aid system. In this case, reconciliation will be used to amend a bill that's already passed the Senate with 60 votes. Cataclysmic, as Sen. John McCain put it? I think not.

5. It is unconstitutional. The bill requires every American to buy health insurance, including healthy people, and offers subsidies to help middle-income families. Insurance companies sought the mandate, saying it is the only way to keep premium costs from skyrocketing once they are not allowed to deny coverage to people with pre-existing medical conditions, drop sick people or limit annual and lifetime coverage (all popular provisions of the health bill). The mandate would not be the first imposed by state or federal governments -- they already require people to buy car insurance, buckle seat belts and wear motorcycle helmets, not to mention make sure their children are educated. Conservatives used to promote the health insurance mandate on grounds of personal responsibility. It's the law in Massachusetts.

6. It has sleazy special deals. The most notorious are the Cornhusker Kickback for Nebraska (permanent federal payments for Medicaid expansion) and the Florida exemption (seniors there would get to keep private Medicare Advantage plans that cost more than regular Medicare and are subsidized by taxpayers). The final package will not have these special deals. For procedural reasons, House members must first approve the Senate bill, which does include them, but the "fix" package -- possibly to be voted on the same day -- will remove them.

7. It would penalize senior citizens by cutting Medicare. The Senate bill would save more than $400 billion over 10 years by ending subsidies to Medicare Advantage and reducing projected payments to insurance companies, hospitals, drug companies and other players (some have already agreed to keep prices down). Seniors in regular Medicare would get the same benefits they have now, as well as additional services, like free preventive care. The AARP, which has 40 million members over age 50, says it supports health reform because it will put Medicare on a sounder fiscal footing.

8. It would do too little to curb costs. Amazingly, some people argue both No. 7 and No. 8. There are, in fact, many provisions intended to control costs. They include financial incentives for doctors and hospitals to provide efficient, coordinated care (rather than getting reimbursed for every test, procedure and hospital readmission); research into what treatments work best; a focus on preventive services and chronic care; pilot programs on ways to limit malpractice suits and awards; and an independent advisory board to recommend cost-saving changes in Medicare. These and other cost-cutting steps are described here.

9. It isn't popular. Did voters in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts send clear messages -- by electing Republicans -- that they don't want this health package? Inconclusive at best. The economy is almost always the primary factor in election outcomes. Beyond that, Democrats had exceptionally weak candidates in all three states. The latest national poll from Gallup found slightly more people saying they'd advise their representative to vote against rather than for health reform. In a new poll from The Economist, 53 percent said they support Obama's proposed changes to the health care system. It's fair to say the country is split. In any case, Obama and Congress are not bound by polls.

10. It doesn't give us the same coverage as Congress. Actually, Congress is trying to provide similar coverage through these state exchanges. They are modeled on the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan, which looks like this. The offerings are mostly from private insurers and every federal employee -- including members of the House and Senate -- pays for his or her own coverage. In time, I'm betting people who get coverage at work will be jealous of those who get it on the exchanges. They'll have choices, just like Congress does. Eventually the exchanges may open up to the rest of us as well.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Wed, Mar 10, 2010, at 9:23 AM

1-10 POST BY

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Wed, Mar 10, 2010, at 9:23 AM

You post the 10 items as if they will some how magically sway everyone that the answer is as simple as stated. The problem is there is not a finished product. You can attempt to paint any picture you wish but anytime the government gets involved in any aspect of private enterprise they effectively take it over. Just look at GM. The governement raised ______ wanting the evil CEO removed because he was basically dead weight and highly over paid. Obama stated CEO's should have a cap on their pay and that anyone should accept that mega wealth is evil and unfair to the poor. Now the goverment is paying the man 3000.00 an hour to consult on how to run the corportation. Really, is it going to be hard for you to grasp that the same thing will happen to Obamacare? Do you really think he or anyone of the majority really cares if little Johnny is healthy? No, they do not, What they want is a segment of the population that is large enough in mass and dependent enough on entitlement that will keep the tax and spend liberals in power. It is that simple. Now before you jump up and preach you will understand it will fall on deaf ears......outonthefarm

-- Posted by outonthefarm on Wed, Mar 10, 2010, at 3:17 PM


Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.


David Melson is a copy editor and staff writer for the Times-Gazette.