RE: Health measures in stimulus package

RE: Health measures in stimulus package (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

blacksword404 -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/11/2009 8:00:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveboy291 quote: When the state controls our bodies because (it reasons) that it pays the medical bills, a certain percentage will be allowed to go without treatment anyway - see the part of the thread concerning the elderly, for example. Nothing will change with more socialized medicine, except government will behave as if it owns us even more than it does now. The sad part of this statement is that Sanity(oh can say ironic name) actually believes this drivel he's spewing. Goverment owns your body? Can you say, propaganda. Can you say military?

Owner59 -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/11/2009 8:05:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda There's the fundamental disconnect right there - the typically conservative belief that a health care system in which 1 out of every 7 people do not even have healthcare is "a system that works." The fundamental disconnect is your argument. EVERYONE has healthCARE, not everyone has INSURANCE. Not ONE emergency room in this country will throw you out because you can't pay. An ER is a poor excuse for healthcare,preventive care,aftercare or prescriptions. Your post is a poor excuse for an argument. Dealing with the tough problems of healthcare is one thing. Dealing with the bullshit added to the debate only makes things tougher.

Sanity -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/11/2009 8:16:58 PM)
Can you say 73,237,000 people killed by socialists in China, 58,627,000 killed by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 3,163,000 killed by Socialists in North Korea, 2,627,000 killed by socialists in Vietnam... If socialists don't feel that they own the bodies of what they consider to be the worthless individual, why are they always so quick and so eager to brutally destroy them for what they call the benefit of "the greater society". I'm not crazy, everyone else is. [sm=brush.gif] , quote: ORIGINAL: blacksword404 quote: ORIGINAL: slaveboy291 quote: When the state controls our bodies because (it reasons) that it pays the medical bills, a certain percentage will be allowed to go without treatment anyway - see the part of the thread concerning the elderly, for example. Nothing will change with more socialized medicine, except government will behave as if it owns us even more than it does now. The sad part of this statement is that Sanity(oh can say ironic name) actually believes this drivel he's spewing. Goverment owns your body? Can you say, propaganda. Can you say military?

Vendaval -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/11/2009 8:24:46 PM)
And if you go to an ER in a poor city or neighborhood be prepared for long, long wait times. People that are uninsured, undocumented, homeless and/or have warrants out for their arrest know to give a false name and not present identification. The poorer people especially those with families will often not have the funds for a minor problem because it is either pay rent and utilities and buy food or go to the doctor but not both. So the problem becomes worse and thus more expensive, more difficult to treat and requires longer care. Who looses in this scenario? We all do. quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda There's the fundamental disconnect right there - the typically conservative belief that a health care system in which 1 out of every 7 people do not even have healthcare is "a system that works." The fundamental disconnect is your argument. EVERYONE has healthCARE, not everyone has INSURANCE. Not ONE emergency room in this country will throw you out because you can't pay. An ER is a poor excuse for healthcare,preventive care,aftercare or prescriptions. Your post is a poor excuse for an argument. Dealing with the tough problems of healthcare is one thing. Dealing with the bullshit added to the debate only makes things tougher.

Owner59 -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/11/2009 8:32:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Can you say 73,237,000 people killed by socialists in China, 58,627,000 killed by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 3,163,000 killed by Socialists in North Korea, 2,627,000 killed by socialists in Vietnam... If socialists don't feel that they own the bodies of what they consider to be the worthless individual, why are they always so quick and so eager to brutally destroy them for what they call the benefit of "the greater society". I'm not crazy, everyone else is. [sm=brush.gif] , quote: ORIGINAL: blacksword404 quote: ORIGINAL: slaveboy291 quote: When the state controls our bodies because (it reasons) that it pays the medical bills, a certain percentage will be allowed to go without treatment anyway - see the part of the thread concerning the elderly, for example. Nothing will change with more socialized medicine, except government will behave as if it owns us even more than it does now. The sad part of this statement is that Sanity(oh can say ironic name) actually believes this drivel he's spewing. Goverment owns your body? Can you say, propaganda. Can you say military? How long will it take the Iraqis to live down the hundreds of thousands of people your favorite president killed? Quite a while. Thanks neo-cons.[>:] Oh,they don`t con`t,do they? [8\|] <neo-cons thinks> never mind......

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/11/2009 8:36:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda There's the fundamental disconnect right there - the typically conservative belief that a health care system in which 1 out of every 7 people do not even have healthcare is "a system that works." The fundamental disconnect is your argument. EVERYONE has healthCARE, not everyone has INSURANCE. Not ONE emergency room in this country will throw you out because you can't pay. An ER is a poor excuse for healthcare,preventive care,aftercare or prescriptions. Your post is a poor excuse for an argument. Dealing with the tough problems of healthcare is one thing. Dealing with the bullshit added to the debate only makes things tougher. Amen. I'm guessing that "dumping" doesn't really happen because the system is so perfect. At least not in the neoCon galaxy. [:D] http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-johnston28feb28,1,7964726.story?coll=la-news-comment

MmeGigs -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 5:03:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy if we assume that health care resources are effectively finite......on what basis do we portion them out? The question follows from the assumption, of course. But why assume an insufficiency of health care resources, and then work forward from there? Personally, I'd rather see a line of thought that refuses to accept an insufficiency of health care resources as tolerable, and works forward from there. That we have finite resources isn't an assumption, it's a fact. If there were sufficient resources to take care of everyone, we wouldn't be having this discussion. We have to work forward from where we are, not from where we'd like to be. It would be great to have enough money, staff time and facilities that everyone could have the best care, but none of the discussions I've heard about this issue have involved putting more money into the system. People seem to think we're spending too much now, and want more bang for their buck. If you refuse to accept an insufficiency of resources and that we have to ration care, the first thing you have to do is figure out how we're going to come up with sufficient resources to provide the kind of care you expect for everyone. How do you propose to do that?

corysub -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 5:39:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MmeGigs quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy if we assume that health care resources are effectively finite......on what basis do we portion them out? The question follows from the assumption, of course. But why assume an insufficiency of health care resources, and then work forward from there? Personally, I'd rather see a line of thought that refuses to accept an insufficiency of health care resources as tolerable, and works forward from there. That we have finite resources isn't an assumption, it's a fact. If there were sufficient resources to take care of everyone, we wouldn't be having this discussion. We have to work forward from where we are, not from where we'd like to be. It would be great to have enough money, staff time and facilities that everyone could have the best care, but none of the discussions I've heard about this issue have involved putting more money into the system. People seem to think we're spending too much now, and want more bang for their buck. If you refuse to accept an insufficiency of resources and that we have to ration care, the first thing you have to do is figure out how we're going to come up with sufficient resources to provide the kind of care you expect for everyone. How do you propose to do that? The democrats have come up with a way to "standardize" healthcare in the stimulus bill by telling doctors the way patients should be treated and punish doctors who don't adhere to these standards. It give me a warm cuddly feeling to know that someday some level G-10 Government worker telling my doctor that I can't have certain tests because it's not "cost effective"! If you want to see class bitterness in this country it's going to be when really outstanding doctors opt out of receiving any payments from federal programs and work only for cash as so many do in Europe..as in Germany, for example, where my daugher went to one of the best dentists in Fankfurt and paid her Euro's for treatment even though she was elegible for State healthcare as a student. We are heading for a depression with the farce of a stimulus Bill and bad health with the agenda driven Obama healthcare program.

Truthiness -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 7:16:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cagey18 quote: people who no longer want to work their way through college as so many of us did but want a check from me and others to finance their college Gosh yes, so much better to spend that money on a useless war. Or how about not spending it at all when we can't afford to?

Truthiness -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 7:18:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 How long will it take the Iraqis to live down the hundreds of thousands of people your favorite president killed? Of course, many of the people who were actually there can probably tell you that the number of Iraqi lives saved by the intervention will probably far outnumber those killed.

cadenas -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 7:32:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: corysub The democrats have come up with a way to "standardize" healthcare in the stimulus bill by telling doctors the way patients should be treated and punish doctors who don't adhere to these standards. It give me a warm cuddly feeling to know that someday some level G-10 Government worker telling my doctor that I can't have certain tests because it's not "cost effective"! And that would be just so much worse than an HMO coming up with a way to "standardize" health care and telling doctors the way patients should be treated and punish doctors who don't adhere to the standards. quote: ORIGINAL: corysub If you want to see class bitterness in this country it's going to be when really outstanding doctors opt out of receiving any payments from federal programs and work only for cash as so many do in Europe..as in Germany, for example, where my daugher went to one of the best dentists in Fankfurt and paid her Euro's for treatment even though she was elegible for State healthcare as a student. I've lived in Germany for decades. First of all, there is no "state healthcare" there; the system actually is very similar to the US system (and also constantly at the brink of collapse). Germany has private insurance companies just like the USA - just much more heavily regulated, with mandated coverage and regulated premiums. If your daughter got her teeth whitened - yes, she probably would have to pay out of pocket for that. If she paid out-of-pocket for a filling and had insurance, she probably wasted her money. Secondly, dental care is, just as in the USA, separate from medical care to begin with.

cadenas -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 7:37:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 The fundamental disconnect is your argument. EVERYONE has healthCARE, not everyone has INSURANCE. Not ONE emergency room in this country will throw you out because you can't pay. Yes. Not ONE emergency room will throw you out. But when too many people show up in the ER like that, the hospital will simply close the ER altogether because they can't afford that kind of subsidized care any more. We are losing Emergency Rooms left and right.

Coldwarrior57 -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 8:11:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval There is a difference between analyzing and listening and balking just for sake of being stubborn and contrary. Yes, and then there is history that shows , by the time congress acts recessions are already on the way out. http://www.reason.com/blog/show/131636.html

rulemylife -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 8:48:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Can you say 73,237,000 people killed by socialists in China, 58,627,000 killed by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 3,163,000 killed by Socialists in North Korea, 2,627,000 killed by socialists in Vietnam... If socialists don't feel that they own the bodies of what they consider to be the worthless individual, why are they always so quick and so eager to brutally destroy them for what they call the benefit of "the greater society". Can you say "Socialism does not equal Communism"?

subrob1967 -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 9:17:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda That's total bullshit. I'm not calling you a liar, mind you - I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you simply don't know what you're talking about. But either way, it's total bullshit. The federal law mandating emergency treatment only requires hospitals and physicians to treat "potentially life-threatening, limb-threatening, or organ-threatening" emergencies. In other words, they're basically only obligated to treat people if they are in immediate danger of dying, losing a limb, or losing the function of an organ - and even then, they're only obligated to treat you up to the point where they're stable, and then they can toss you out the front door. Do you seriously maintain that this means "everyone in the United States has health care?" If so, I'd like to hear your argument explaining how that counts as having health care. Go on, check Rush Limbaugh's website; I suspect he's the one who got you into this embarrassing position, so make him get you out of it. Explain to me why hospitals are going bankrupt for treating illegal aliens, if they're only treating the forementioned symptoms. Every state has a plan to help their citizens in a time of need, no it's not total coverage, I never claimed it was. But who goes to the hospital for treatment for non emergency care? Health care, IMO is being able to walk into any hospital or clinic to be treated an emergency. As for Rush, don't listen to him, never have, he's nothing but a Coporate whore.

Sanity -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 11:00:32 AM)
Communism is what you get when Socialists hold all the keys. quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Can you say 73,237,000 people killed by socialists in China, 58,627,000 killed by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 3,163,000 killed by Socialists in North Korea, 2,627,000 killed by socialists in Vietnam... If socialists don't feel that they own the bodies of what they consider to be the worthless individual, why are they always so quick and so eager to brutally destroy them for what they call the benefit of "the greater society". Can you say "Socialism does not equal Communism"?

Sanity -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 11:04:55 AM)
Cut out the Nanci Pelosi "Marsh Mouse" provision from the Mount Porkuls bill and you'll have an additional 30 million dollars. quote: That we have finite resources isn't an assumption, it's a fact.

philosophy -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 11:16:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Cut out the Nanci Pelosi "Marsh Mouse" provision from the Mount Porkuls bill and you'll have an additional 30 million dollars. quote: That we have finite resources isn't an assumption, it's a fact. ...and in this context, $30million is a drop in the ocean. You still haven't addressed the question i asked you earlier. On what basis do you portion out health care, given that it is a finite resource? It's almost like you're ducking the question....

slaveboy291 -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 11:17:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Can you say 73,237,000 people killed by socialists in China, 58,627,000 killed by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 3,163,000 killed by Socialists in North Korea, 2,627,000 killed by socialists in Vietnam... If socialists don't feel that they own the bodies of what they consider to be the worthless individual, why are they always so quick and so eager to brutally destroy them for what they call the benefit of "the greater society". I'm not crazy, everyone else is. [sm=brush.gif] , quote: ORIGINAL: blacksword404 quote: ORIGINAL: slaveboy291 quote: When the state controls our bodies because (it reasons) that it pays the medical bills, a certain percentage will be allowed to go without treatment anyway - see the part of the thread concerning the elderly, for example. Nothing will change with more socialized medicine, except government will behave as if it owns us even more than it does now. The sad part of this statement is that Sanity(oh can say ironic name) actually believes this drivel he's spewing. Goverment owns your body? Can you say, propaganda. Can you say military? Correction, COMMUNISTS. Big difference. And once again, it's not goverment owning anybodies body that is far fetched it just goes to show that those who are against public healthcare have no leg to stand on. Can't you come up with a real argument against it? Obviously not if you have to make such a statement. You have no argument. None of the anti goverment run healthcare side have come up with a single solitary argument against it or in favor of private healthcare other than pure fearmongering bullshit and lies like your statement about goverment owning your body. Your arguments are about as legit as the propaganda record Regan made in the 50's. And about as truthful.

Vendaval -> RE: Health measures in stimulus package (2/12/2009 11:38:18 AM)
So are you saying that Congress should not extend Unemployment Insurance benefits, COBRA, homeless vouchers for emergency housing or provide tax relief? quote: ORIGINAL: Coldwarrior57 quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval There is a difference between analyzing and listening and balking just for sake of being stubborn and contrary. Yes, and then there is history that shows , by the time congress acts recessions are already on the way out. http://www.reason.com/blog/show/131636.html

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875