To the People on the Other Side .... Can We Talk? (house of representatives, deport)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The hikes are not just in ACA insurance. The regular non-ACA insurance (that most business employers provided already) have skyrocketed too. Our families insurance went up 80% and our deductible went up 400%. I hate to see what is coming for 2017.
I asked my daughter who is turning 26 this year what she plans to do when she goes off my insurance. She is a graduate student. She said she can buy insurance from her university for $2000/year. She will have to borrow additional student loan money to do that. If that insurance does not comply with ACA or if those premiums double, she will just pay the fine and hope she does not get sick.
Virtually all insurance today is ACA insurance, as in ACA-compliant. People confuse the policies you can buy on the exchanges with ACA or "Obamacare". There are a few grandfathererd-in policies, but the vast majority are compliant with the ACA laws in the benefits they provide, etc. Employer provided insurance is generally ACA compliant.
Problem w/ Medicare, too, as I see it is the use of it for many people who are very, very elderly. Not denying them need for coverage, but some of the "tests" and other related expenses are beyond ludicrous. I've personally seen this. Multiple high tech scans of people in their 90's. Surgery for a brain clot at 90 something and person passes away a few days later or dies of complications, pneumonia, clot. Hip replacements at 85. To me, it's crazy. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think we need some practical, common sense limits on things. Not sure who decides, but maybe a physician can say "This procedure and the recovery are too excessive for your age." Some do, but many are greedy and will operate on anyone. I think it's complicated, but just a free for all of the system isn't good either.
Speech and actions are completely different. And last I checked, we had free speech in this country. Quite simply, I can say whatever I want to you. You are free to ignore me, answer back, or become offended. But you are NOT free to hit me.
Political correctness is a movement to silence the person you are too ignorant to have a meaningful discussion with, and to debate intelligently. I don't have to use neutral terms, especially when it's YOU who has decided what those terms are, and which I may disagree with. So you'll bully me into silence (because let's be fair here, PC is really just bullying behavior), and instead of debating me, you've just stopped the conversation.
Of course there are consequences to speech. You might hate me. I will decide whether I care about that or not. But you CANNOT destroy property in response to my freely speaking.
Of course the consequences are sometimes violence. What do you think the Civil War was about? That was a pretty big protest about an election. What do you think most religious wars have been about?
You can say what you want to me... but how do you know I'm a person that respects laws? To steal a bit from the from the gun argument... criminals do not obey laws.
Or maybe I do respect laws and am willing to just pay the fine... however, you better have strong proof that I actually did hit you though and you're not just making it up.
If I shout "wet-back" from the rooftops of a latino neighborhood and I get attacked by a latino gang... well I would consider that my own fault.
Of course the consequences are sometimes violence. What do you think the Civil War was about? That was a pretty big protest about an election. What do you think most religious wars have been about?
You can say what you want to me... but how do you know I'm a person that respects laws? To steal a bit from the from the gun argument... criminals do not obey laws.
Or maybe I do respect laws and am willing to just pay the fine... however, you better have strong proof that I actually did hit you though and you're not just making it up.
If I shout "wet-back" from the rooftops of a latino neighborhood and I get attacked by a latino gang... well I would consider that my own fault.
And if I say that we need to get rid of illegals who committed crimes and I get attacked by a Latino gang.. well either we let the gang win, or we protect law, order, and free speech.
Speech and actions are completely different. And last I checked, we had free speech in this country. Quite simply, I can say whatever I want to you. You are free to ignore me, answer back, or become offended. But you are NOT free to hit me.
Political correctness is a movement to silence the person you are too ignorant to have a meaningful discussion with, and to debate intelligently. I don't have to use neutral terms, especially when it's YOU who has decided what those terms are, and which I may disagree with. So you'll bully me into silence (because let's be fair here, PC is really just bullying behavior), and instead of debating me, you've just stopped the conversation.
Of course there are consequences to speech. You might hate me. I will decide whether I care about that or not. But you CANNOT destroy property in response to my freely speaking.
There has already been a huge thread on this before. You have the right to express yourself in any way you see fit. But if you do on someone's private property and establishment and it is affecting their business then they have the right to remove you from that establishment. Once you come into their space your free speech becomes limited.
For example, once you post on a forum like this you agree to abide by the terms of service. If you don't you get penalized in some way.
And no one should get physically assaulted for saying something but hey human nature and no it is nothing new. There was once a phrase, "fighting words" that was apart of the vernacular in some regions in this country and if you say the wrong thing it was socially expected that there would be a confrontation. This was once an acceptable custom in some parts of this country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ummagumma
And if I say that we need to get rid of illegals who committed crimes and I get attacked by a Latino gang.. well either we let the gang win, or we protect law, order, and free speech.
The gang will get arrested and deported but you would probably killed. That's only worth it if you're willing to become a martyr. There are some people that do not care about the consequences of their actions. It's really a matter of being smart. Are you going to walk into a neighborhood crawling with Mexican gangs saying we need to get rid of illegals?
Problem w/ Medicare, too, as I see it is the use of it for many people who are very, very elderly. Not denying them need for coverage, but some of the "tests" and other related expenses are beyond ludicrous. I've personally seen this. Multiple high tech scans of people in their 90's. Surgery for a brain clot at 90 something and person passes away a few days later or dies of complications, pneumonia, clot. Hip replacements at 85. To me, it's crazy. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think we need some practical, common sense limits on things. Not sure who decides, but maybe a physician can say "This procedure and the recovery are too excessive for your age." Some do, but many are greedy and will operate on anyone. I think it's complicated, but just a free for all of the system isn't good either.
I totally agree and have posted similar thoughts in post #325 on this thread.
As I stated before and reiterate, what needs to be done is some serious reigning in of care in the latter years of life. Some examples:
My mother, who I loved dearly died demented after a six-plus year struggle with uterine cancer, and then a recurrence of the cancer added to dementia;
My father-in-law, of whom I am rather fond, is 82 and relatively intact mentally, but has had at least 10 hospitalization and lots of other treatments int he last three and one half years for a variety of problems, mostly cardio-vascular; and
My mother-in-law, of whom I am also rather fond, has been battling MS for at least 40 years. In early 2013 she had a leg (non-walking since 1996) amputated as a result of an infection and has had other surgeries relating to a catheter.
These are all illustrations of the "free for all of the system" to which you refer. Someone is going to have to bite the bullet on these problems. I repped this post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
You're essentially in favor of death panels.
Call them death panels if you wish. I keep on asking if there are better ideas and not just from you. I hear crickets.
Call them death panels if you wish. I keep on asking if there are better ideas and not just from you. I hear crickets.
Thats because no one is willing to actually say it. Theres a point at which we should not extend someones life. And we should balance lifespan vs quality. And I want to be held to the same standard, so I am feeling pretty generous. In fact I feel REALLY really darn generous.
My late mother had knee replacement surgery when she was around 83; and I certainly do not view it as wasteful - it improved her mobility for several years. If she hadn't had the surgery, she probably would have had much more pain, and lost the ability to walk. As it was, she was able to walk for nearly 10 years after her operation and live in her own home; at which point she took ill over a period of a few months and died at 92.
I would certainly want to be able to have the option to have medical procedures available for me in ten or twenty years. I realize that there are some that would be wasteful; but being able to walk on one's own with little to no pain is important whether one is young or old.
...As I stated before and reiterate, what needs to be done is some serious reigning in of care in the latter years of life. Some examples:
My mother, who I loved dearly died demented after a six-plus year struggle with uterine cancer, and then a recurrence of the cancer added to dementia;
My father-in-law, of whom I am rather fond, is 82 and relatively intact mentally, but has had at least 10 hospitalization and lots of other treatments int he last three and one half years for a variety of problems, mostly cardio-vascular; and
My mother-in-law, of whom I am also rather fond, has been battling MS for at least 40 years. In early 2013 she had a leg (non-walking since 1996) amputated as a result of an infection and has had other surgeries relating to a catheter.
These are all illustrations of the "free for all of the system" to which you refer. Someone is going to have to bite the bullet on these problems...
Call them death panels if you wish. I keep on asking if there are better ideas and not just from you. I hear crickets.
Why just the late years? What about the early years? Very early years? Why spend millions of dollars on an extremely premature baby who - even if he/she lives - will never have the IQ of a turnip?
These are thorny issues to be sure. And I don't react the same to your 3 examples. When it comes to your FIL - I suspect he could stay out of the hospital for longer periods of time if someone was managing his case better. Medical care in the US tends to be pretty uncoordinated - especially for chronic conditions. When it comes to your MIL - I'm prejudiced. My husband has MS. Does your MIL want to die now? If not - give her the non-heroic care she needs. As for your late mother - dementia is a huge issue - and will only become worse as people live longer. We should develop protocols as to what care is/isn't appropriate for people with various degrees of dementia. I think people have to resist the urge to lump together all people of the same age. Because they're not all the same
One nice thing about these issues is they don't seem to divide people along party lines (except perhaps at the extreme fringes). So we'll always have something to talk about . Robyn
The party out of power virtually always gains seats in a midterm election. I suspect where Trump was elected with such a marginal mandate anyway, the likelihood of a midterm reversal is even greater.
You want to roll the dice? I'm fine with that too.
If he does very well, the Republican majorities may increase. Remember - the 2018 map is not structurally favorable to Democrats.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. Robyn