RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION'

RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 9:18:50 AM)
Nanny government decides what you can do and when you can do it, even with the things you own.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 9:26:26 AM)
quote: Well, no, I work. Nanny government doesn't spoon feed me and wipe my chin. Politicians take my taxes and so I do what I can to minimize what the politicians manage to steal from me to buy your votes with, and business's campaign contributions, etc, but that isn't the same as depending on government for my every want and need. Excuse me, but so the FUCK do -I-... and I pay insurance premiums, and I pay taxes -- but MY insurance company gets to decide that the treatment for my disease is too expensive for their bottom line, and refuse to cover it, even though my doctor has shown that it will likely result in another remission, and may give me up to 10 more YEARS to work and be productive and pay taxes and contribute to society. I'm lucky. I have a group health insurance policy at work. Before I started this job, I owned my own company, and ran it for 10 years -- but we had to close our doors... see... I -have- to have health insurance. My life and productivity depend on it. However, the insurance company that provided the small-business plan for my company decided that our risk-pool was too small to have someone like -me- included, and dropped us, so I had to close my doors and take a corporate job with a company that -had- health insurance, regardless of the cost (because no PRIVATE plan will cover me -- see cancellation by insurance company for my business above). I didn't choose this. I didn't do anything stupid or lazy or careless to end up here. I have -multiple sclerosis- and a genetic autoimmune failure. Yes, I'm fat. I've spent over a decade on corticosteroids. That's what happens... and guess what, I am -still- working, 5 years after my doctors mutually agreed that I should consider applying for disability. You are NOT the only person who works, and your ilk are NOT the only people who pay taxes and thank whomever you want that you've never really been sick, and clearly, nobody you love has ever been significantly and chronically ill, either -- lucky you -- but just because someone -does- get sick doesn't mean that they're lazy or shiftless or should just die, which is what your whole attitude and every argument you've made thus far suggests. DC

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 10:01:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW You are NOT the only person who works, and your ilk are NOT the only people who pay taxes and thank whomever you want that you've never really been sick, and clearly, nobody you love has ever been significantly and chronically ill, either -- lucky you -- but just because someone -does- get sick doesn't mean that they're lazy or shiftless or should just die, which is what your whole attitude and every argument you've made thus far suggests. God damn! Now that was a post! Fucking good post. Damned well done. Thank you. [sm=applause.gif]

stella41b -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 10:07:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Well, no, I work. Nanny government doesn't spoon feed me and wipe my chin. Politicians take my taxes and so I do what I can to minimize what the politicians manage to steal from me to buy your votes with, and business's campaign contributions, etc, but that isn't the same as depending on government for my every want and need. What's that got to do with it? Thanks to big business and corporations, not to mention the government, you're probably only less well-subsidized than your average welfare bum - subsidies on the food you eat, the roads you use, the water you drink, etc. If you had to cover the real costs of these things yourself minus the subsidies you'd probably shit yourself.

Mercnbeth -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 10:08:42 AM)
quote: However, the insurance company that provided the small-business plan for my company decided that our risk-pool was too small to have someone like -me- included, and dropped us, so I had to close my doors and take a corporate job with a company that -had- health insurance, regardless of the cost (because no PRIVATE plan will cover me -- see cancellation by insurance company for my business above) Are you saying that there are no examples of that occurring in the current Federal programs for health coverage? My first hand experience with a friend in the military indicates that the 'cost benefit' of treatment is a standard part of any treatment program funded with government money. Our friend, close enough to have the privilege of hosting his wedding at our place, told me about going to his Doctors under his Veteran's health program, hoping that they thought the treatment necessary to keep him alive was 'cost justified'. Belief it or not, that was the exact terminology they used. He was over the house one day and looked a bit distracted and when I asked him why he told me of the meeting he had to attend the next day to find out if the chemo therapy keeping his cancer in remission was "cost justified". I had to have him tell me the story 3-4 times to make sure I was hearing what how our government rationed out care to Veterans. When he went to his appointment he was going to hear if he was going to be allowed to take treatment or be put in a hospice program. Swear to all that's good in my life - if they didn't approve him, I would have done my best to either pay for him, or organized a fund raiser to make sure he got whatever treatment he needed for however long he needed it. Truth is, there are already 'Death Committees' (my friends name for them) that meet regularly, funded and run within the current government health-care bureaucracies. Using that model for the military, you think they would have changed it when in charge of everybody's health care? Putting your hope in the government will produce bad results. At least with an insurance company you have an appeals process and can use the government for what government was designed to do - enforce access. The problem you identify with the private sector health industries is in reality a problem resulting from the politics of election campaign money. The health industry can be regulated but will never be as long as PAC contributions insure maintaining the ongoing bureaucracy at cross purposes with the health care you or my friend with cancer need.

rulemylife -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 10:20:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity So you're all for nuking hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in order to win a war, so long as it's a DEMOCRAT who's doing it. Nothing inconsistent there... [:D] Truman made that decision because the Japanese code of honor would have had required them to fight to their death any invasion of their homeland. Which was estimated would have involved more than a million Allied casualties. Sad that you would choose it to further a partisan political argument that has absolutely nothing to do with it. Alsos: Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire With the premise that America’s use of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was justified, the author, Richard Frank, attempts to re-create the historical context of 1945 in Japan and the United States in this book. He shows that Japan’s leadership, including Emperor Hirohito, and its military were not remotely close to surrendering in August of 1945. The author estimates that between 33,000 and 39,000 American servicemen would have died in an invasion of Kyushu. The book opens with a chapter describing the firebombing of Tokyo in March 1945. Presenting evidence from decoded Japanese radio signals, it documents a military buildup and a willingness to fight a land invasion. Frank illustrates the resistance of Japanese leaders against continued American bombardment and naval blockade, even in the face of appalling firebombing raids over Japan’s major cities. The thesis of this work is summarized in the following sentence from the last chapter: “Given the abrupt changes in the military calculus and the sterile prospects for diplomacy, the chance that atomic weapons would not have been employed is nil” Operation Downfall - Wikipedia Estimated casualties Because the U.S. military planners assumed "that operations in this area will be opposed not only by the available organized military forces of the Empire, but also by a fanatically hostile population",[8] high casualties were thought to be inevitable, but nobody knew with certainty how high. Several people made estimates, but they varied widely in numbers, assumptions, and purposes — which included advocating for and against the invasion — afterwards, they were reused to debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Casualty estimates were based on the experience of the preceding campaigns, drawing different lessons: In a study done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in April, the figures of 7.45 casualties/1,000 man-days and 1.78 fatalities/1,000 man-days were developed. This implied that a 90-day Olympic campaign would cost 456,000 casualties, including 109,000 dead or missing. If Coronet took another 90 days, the combined cost would be 1,200,000 casualties, with 267,000 fatalities.[37]

rulemylife -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 10:47:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Are you saying that there are no examples of that occurring in the current Federal programs for health coverage? My first hand experience with a friend in the military indicates that the 'cost benefit' of treatment is a standard part of any treatment program funded with government money. Our friend, close enough to have the privilege of hosting his wedding at our place, told me about going to his Doctors under his Veteran's health program, hoping that they thought the treatment necessary to keep him alive was 'cost justified'. Belief it or not, that was the exact terminology they used. He was over the house one day and looked a bit distracted and when I asked him why he told me of the meeting he had to attend the next day to find out if the chemo therapy keeping his cancer in remission was "cost justified". I had to have him tell me the story 3-4 times to make sure I was hearing what how our government rationed out care to Veterans. When he went to his appointment he was going to hear if he was going to be allowed to take treatment or be put in a hospice program. Swear to all that's good in my life - if they didn't approve him, I would have done my best to either pay for him, or organized a fund raiser to make sure he got whatever treatment he needed for however long he needed it. Truth is, there are already 'Death Committees' (my friends name for them) that meet regularly, funded and run within the current government health-care bureaucracies. Using that model for the military, you think they would have changed it when in charge of everybody's health care? Merc, this is total bullshit. My father was a disabled veteran. I spent decades dealing with the VA and VA hospitals and have never seen or even heard of anything remotely resembling this. I suggest you get some further clarification from "your friend".

Mercnbeth -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 11:18:30 AM)
quote: Merc, this is total bullshit. My father was a disabled veteran. You know that's what I thought too, except I wasn't such an ass to contradict the man going through the process. I got involved, and guess what - it is EXACTLY what occurred. I have no idea how your father's situation has any relevance. Maybe he doesn't have this form of cancer, or this group of doctors assigned, or doesn't appreciate the discussions going on around him. In our friends case - you are flat out wrong - First hand, was there with him and his wife - it is the was it was, and is. Sorry to burst your bubble about a government solution. It is an example of what to expect from any government bureaucracy. Fortunately, I've never considered going to the government to help me in my life, but speaking for the people who do - nobody has favorable reviews regarding their experience with anything from housing to child welfare. There are only about 50 people who confirmed the story and were ready to mobilize to help him. However I'll pass on your your call of "bullshit" about how he represented his situation, and tell him that per your vast knowledge and expertise on government controlled health care pertaining to Veterans, he's a lying sack of shit who doesn't deserve better. Maybe you can also tell him and his wife how they were lying to us about not being allowed to get a proper diagnosis and access to an MRI from his government care provider, because the MRI was too expensive and was only given after 6 months of trying other alternative remedies. It's obviously his fault that the government let those six months go by, thinking that he just had a touch of jaundice and his diet caused the problem instead of pancreatic cancer. As we all know from our readings - YOU provide the one-true-way representation of what our efficient government can do for (to?) you if given the opportunity. PS - Tell you what - I happened to have called him this morning. He was too weak to get on the phone, but I spoke with his wife. Contact me on the other side and I'll pass along their number so you can call them on their "bull-shit" directly. I suggest you're better off rationalizing what happened in 1945. At least many of those around at the time, won't be able to provide a first hand reference of exactly how wrong you are.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 11:23:54 AM)
quote: Are you saying that there are no examples of that occurring in the current Federal programs for health coverage? I can't speak to veteran practices, though I know that, at the cancer hospital that I work at, we have an arrangement with the VA hospital down the street. Many of our doctors have admitting privileges and treat patients at both hospitals, and we regularly get transfers from the VA hospital that are paid for by patient VA benefits. I work with general oncology surgeons, so we see everything from colorectal to breast to endocrine, etc., and haven't had to turn away a vet yet on our service. We also collaborate regularly on IND and Compassionate Use protocols to allow VA patients to get cutting edge care and have access to cutting edge clinical trials, and again, the VA funds many of these, and covers all Standard of Care costs for patients on-study with no issue (and actually pays pretty promptly, compared to some of the other insurance where our surgeons can go 6-12 months before getting payments on completed procedures!). What I -can- speak to, with some authority after having had 13 years and 3 offspring in the system is PRIMUS/CHAMPUS and the Army and Air Force hospital system. In our 13 years in the system, our family never went without care, had excellent preventive care (including dentistry), and, when caring for us dependents would have put too much strain on the system, or when our medical care proved too complex for the system where we were at, provided either access to a military facility that -was- capable of providing care to us or provided non-availability statements that allowed us to seek out practitioners in the private sector who were then paid for through PRIMUS/CHAMPUS. In 13 years, I went through three pregnancies, four major surgeries (including a 5 hour surgery to repair adhesions binding my lung to my diaphragm as a result of my own immune-system issues and an injury which happened 5 years before we even got INTO the military, when I was stabbed by a patient during a call as an EMT.), a knee replacement from a shattered femoral cap and patella (our cat knocked a block in front of me when I was carrying my son and fell knee-first on the block to avoid landing on my son), and ongoing treatment for my MS and autoimmune issues. The worst complaint I had with them was a loss of my medical records when we transferred from Alaska to Georgia. The fact is, nothing is perfect -- but I can tell you that for the 13 years that my husband was in the military, one thing I -didn't- worry about was whether, if my kids got sick, I got sick, or my husband got sick, whether or not we would be able to get care. Yeah, sometimes I got generic drugs, but heck, I do that now. Yeah, sometimes I saw a PA instead of a doctor, but that happens now with insurance that I'm paying for. Heck, I have a medical plan that won't pay for me to get cancer care at the hospital that I -WORK- at... go figure that one out. DC

Mercnbeth -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 11:25:29 AM)
quote: I have a medical plan that won't pay for me to get cancer care at the hospital that I -WORK- at... go figure that one out. What you need to figure out is how involving the government will change that fact.

mnottertail -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 11:31:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: I have a medical plan that won't pay for me to get cancer care at the hospital that I -WORK- at... go figure that one out. What you need to figure out is how involving the government will change that fact. My sister, head of inhalation therapy at a local hospital, when informed she had cancer was besieged by the doctors at said hospital, who each in kind wanted to treat her. She said, fuck you, not one of you butchers is going to touch me, I am going to Mayo in Rochester. Her physician was from Chile, and her and her husband became fast friends with him and his wife, and even visited their villa in Chile, he died of cancer some years later. She has been free for about 10 years now..... Fuckin' ironic, huh?

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 11:33:22 AM)
quote: What you need to figure out is how involving the government will change that fact. I can tell you how involving the government will change that fact. If -only- current reforms go through, I will be able to select a health-care plan that allows me to receive the treatment that I need and choose the doctors that will provide that care, and I won't be able to be DENIED access to the plan because of my pre-existing conditions. Right now, my INSURANCE COMPANY is basically deciding who I can and can't use for my medical care. DC

Mercnbeth -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 11:44:43 AM)
quote: If -only- current reforms go through, I will be able to select a health-care plan that allows me to receive the treatment that I need and choose the doctors that will provide that care, and I won't be able to be DENIED access to the plan because of my pre-existing conditions What makes you believe this? What bureaucracy will be created overnight insuring this treatment path? What part of the current Bill being proposed gives you that confidence? You're relying on the opinion of those on the side you think will benefit you. It's not different than the opposition side, believing in the worst case. Your expectation, and theirs, is 'faith based'. Reality will be something much different than either side expects. Meanwhile, the best way to predict what that reality will be is by seeing what the reality is when a similar service is being utilized, as is the case with the Veterans. quote: Right now, my INSURANCE COMPANY is basically deciding who I can and can't use for my medical care. No, all the insurance company ever can do is authorize or not authorize PAYMENT for care. You have the opportunity to go outside their decision; be it at the Mayo Clinic, as Ron referenced or any other place, or none. Your decision is no different than that taken on behalf of my friend. It comes down to 'cost justified' action, personal, from the government, or from an insurance company. In his case, the cost decision was first coming from a government. Had it gone the other way, he would have had to seek another source for the funds.

mnottertail -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 11:52:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Meanwhile, the best way to predict what that reality will be is by seeing what the reality is when a similar service is being utilized, as is the case with the Veterans. Or the stuff that Orion is going thru with his Ma, but an anecdote here and there isn't the mode OR the mean. Something needs to be done about the shitty system we have, and if it is going to take years of bureaucracy to weed thru, then goddammit, let's begin NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Maybe our grandkids will get healthcare. Maybe we will catch up to the rest of the world and spend like portions of our treasure for our health............ I mean, what the fuck? Why have clean water? Drink outta the river where everyone shits and pisses in, we are all gonna die sometime anyway.......what's the use? Ron

Mercnbeth -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 12:05:04 PM)
quote: Maybe we will catch up to the rest of the world and spend like portions of our treasure for our health............ Ron, Until the elephant in the room is shot - Tort Reform - there is no way to manage any health-care system, private or public, which resembles any other in the world. The existing tort policy in the USA is the only other common denominator regarding the current health care options. But, even at the hostile disrupting 'town meetings' that was one issue off the table in this proposal. When you have vast majority of the people writing the Bill listing their occupation as 'lawyer' there is not much chance that they will make a change to the status quo anytime soon. John Edwards and his ilk would not be able to afford their $500 haircuts in their private jets without ambulance chasing opportunities in their past. It isn't the excessive settlement or judgments that cause the problem. The problem is the waste of resources that go into the 'risk management' mentality of health care administrators. Better to waste $500 screening every incoming patient with a chest X-ray and other tests, versus getting sued when the one in a hundred thousand has something that is diagnosed from those tests. Agreed, that the status quo is almost as bad as the proposed solution; but without any positive and productive government entity to point to, bureaucratic failure is a reasonable expectation.

servantforuse -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 12:29:28 PM)
Tort reform might just be on the agenda when congress returns. Nothing will come of it though. This administration will cave into the lawyers like they cave in to everyone else. All talk and no action on real reform..

DedicatedDom40 -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 1:21:11 PM)
Regarding tort issues, Any other profession in the US where there exists a public safety issue, there are regulations that dictate just how many hours in a day a person can work, or how many tours of duty in a given time frame can occur. Lots of professions where life-and-death issues exist for the public, be it airplane pilots, train engineers, truck drivers, et al, are restricted to a specific set of hours-of-service laws for their particular profession. With these restrictions, the employers are required to keep, at their cost, sufficient back-up staffing. The concept of working a 'double shift' is nonexistent in these professions. Do these regulations exist in healthcare professions, where similar life-and-death outcomes are possible? No. That’s why you have doctors on duty for 22 hours in the ER, ordering every test known to man. And the healthcare companies profit even more, because they have a certain 'staffing flexibility', shall we say, that airline and railroad companies do not have. The healthcare industry is unique in its lack of hours-of-service regulation when combined with the public safety threat the industry represents. Its also no surpise its an industry that also features the biggest tort problem. This unique situation breeds accidents (90% of medical tort is over tired practitioners and operating room mistakes), so some of the tort is created by the healthcare industry beast itself. Its not only caused by the rif-raf of society out looking to win a lottery. Will hours-of-service or patient-load restrictions ever be accepted among healthcare workers to cut down on tort volume? No, because its the difference between the doctor owning 2 homes or 3 homes. In any other profession in America, there is downward pressure from global competition on prices and wages. For some retarded reason, the healthcare industry thinks its exempt from such pressures. They also fight legislation that restricts patient loads in the name of public safety, all because it results in money being taken out of their pockets.

Loki45 -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 2:33:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Truth is, there are already 'Death Committees' (my friends name for them) that meet regularly, funded and run within the current government health-care bureaucracies. Using that model for the military, you think they would have changed it when in charge of everybody's health care? Yes, there are already those 'committees.' However, the insurance companies do the exact same thing. So it looks like no one is happy. YOu say your friend had someone else in charge of his fate over a terminal illness and so does Calla. It's same-same. It seems that the only ones happy with the way things are currently are those who are not sick.....I guess you have to get a terminal illness to be unhappy with the way things are and you'd be unhappy regardless of who was in charge, because everyone wants to save a buck.

Loki45 -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 2:36:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth No, all the insurance company ever can do is authorize or not authorize PAYMENT for care. Which is why people HAVE insurance in the first place. If we could pay for our own care, we wouldn't be at the mercy of some middle-management fuckwad trying to save a dime at the cost of our health.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: RETREAT: TEAM OBAMA DROPS 'PUBLIC OPTION' (8/17/2009 2:45:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth No, all the insurance company ever can do is authorize or not authorize PAYMENT for care. Which is why people HAVE insurance in the first place. If we could pay for our own care, we wouldn't be at the mercy of some middle-management fuckwad trying to save a dime at the cost of our health. And if 5 days in a hospital bed in a room with 3 other people in it didn't run $95,000 (ok, admittedly, it was the ICU, which does make a difference because the nurse-patient ratio is 1:3 instead of 1:9 or 1:10, so they have to pay more staff), then we might be able to -afford- to pay for our own medical care and wouldn't -need- insurance. Hell, my monthly medications, without insurance, are over $700 a month -- that's almost more than I pay in -rent-. I would have to go off my meds, which would, without a doubt, mean that I could no longer work...

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875