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.
Balfour stop bringing logic into this it confuses the "sooth sayers"...lmao
Actually, he brought to the table what Obama supports which clearly IS NOT WHAT YOUR SUPPORT
I think you should know and/or realize that.
And in reality, I can support the Presidents plan. It differs in some respects from what we recommended to the Congress, but there is room for give and take.
So I for one, thank my good fried Lord Balfour for his post.
Yeah, I don't THINK Obama is pushing for a single-payer system. Hillary wanted that, but Obama was trying to work more-or-less within the existing system (just with a few changes). Much less drastic than Hillary's plan.
Ken
Ken, I know for a fact Obama does not push for a single payer system. And he does support the voluntary system as well. In fact, in many of his position papers, he notes that there will be some who, for whatever reason, still will be without insurance.
Yeah, I don't THINK Obama is pushing for a single-payer system. Hillary wanted that, but Obama was trying to work more-or-less within the existing system (just with a few changes). Much less drastic than Hillary's plan.
Ken
It will start slow but will move to a UHC.
Too many Americans are now losing health care from their jobs etc.
UHC will happen but everything has to start somewhere.
I respectfully disagree. Nor, does it need to come to a UHC system.
Think about this for a moment: I now have family coverage with a "super duper" policy and pay a tad less than $800 a month - $9600 a year. So, let's round it up to $10,000.
Now, along comes your UHC scheme and the government is gonna tax me for it - they are gonna get me $9000 a year. Wow - a savings. Or, is it. Because the UHC plan is a "basic", plain Jane Plan.
Well you say, I can get a supplemental plan to make it my "super duper" plan - yep, you are correct. Except now, that's gonna be, say, and extra $2,000 a year. So now, to get back to where I was, it is more costly.
Then, there is the issue of legality. And I know you don't agree with me on this but, the reality of the situation is, for a government run program as you espouse, eminent domain would kick in - and the cost, to the taxpayers, would, by all accounts, make this latest bailout look pale by comparison.
It would put this nation into literally BK. Again - you won't agree, but all the best legal minds in the Government agree that Eminent Domain would be necessary.
Then, there is the legal question of, can the US Government legally have a UHC? Many Constitutional scholars say no. Our Constitution does not allow for it.
To do a UHC in the US, legally (and I'm assuming you would want it legally done), a Constitutional Amendment would have to be proffered and put to the States for ratification. If ratified, then a UHC could go forward.
I for one support an Amendment being put to the States. Let the People decide what they want to do for the future.
It will start slow but will move to a UHC.
Too many Americans are now losing health care from their jobs etc.
UHC will happen but everything has to start somewhere.
I agree. I don't think Obama was advocating a single payer system, but that is what we need. That is probably the most effective way to control health care costs. Any plan that involves working through private insurance companies is just too cost prohibitive.
Ken, I know for a fact Obama does not push for a single payer system. And he does support the voluntary system as well. In fact, in many of his position papers, he notes that there will be some who, for whatever reason, still will be without insurance.
Again - thanks my friend
You are quite welcome.
The fact is, the health care problem is severe and it's going to be difficult to deal with - so I don't think anyone can say for sure what we'll end up with.
One thing is for sure though - SOMETHING has to be done. It's not JUST the uninsured who are suffering, the cost is VERY HEAVY on business and unless something is done to reign in the costs to them they're going to start shifting more and more cost on to their employees and start reducing coverage.
This crushing cost to business is one of the reasons I'm pretty hopeful there will be progress of some kind. The business community has a HUGE stake in getting the health care issue under control - as does the general population.
you people are nuts. one only has to know a few seniors on medicare/medicaid to hear about the fraud they encounter everyday in their circles. something on the scale of uhc will be another liberal disaster.
and this is the least of it...
you people are nuts. one only has to know a few seniors on medicare/medicaid to hear about the fraud they encounter everyday in their circles. something on the scale of uhc will be another liberal disaster.
and this is the least of it...
I know a lot of seniors on medicare and others on medicaid. I know of no fraud.
What is with the $2500 savings? Why did both Obama and McCain claim they could save taxpayers that exact amount in the campaign.......Obama via electronic record keeping and McCain via letting insurance companies cross state lines.
Does anyone have a link to actual figures that shows how the Obama administration determined that proposed savings, or did they just pull numbers out of their arse?
The daily reference to the health care "crisis" by the administration makes me think they are just looking to push something through probably without a thorough analysis of the costs.
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.