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.
You're providing your own circumstances again as an excuse for rushing this through for millions of people?
You aren't paying premiums now(other than for the kid?) so your out of pocket isn't any more than if you were.
Did't you get offered a plan with a wait time for existing? A year was it?
Did you take it ? How long do you have left to wait?
I offered my situation as one example along with others.
I found a plan that I could get for myself that I could afford, however, becasue i have to pay out of pocket for the next 12 months I can't afford both.
As you may not have picked up on in my posts above my out of pocket for meds etc. are $600/month. Doctor visits 3x's a year run around $200 plus without tests. I can't fork over the premuim every month to the insurance company AND cover all the out of pocket for the pre-existing condition at the same time. Hence the reason I'm now trapped in an uninsured cycle.
And that happens to a lot of people with pre-existings (that is if there is a plan available to them to purchase. some don't even have one option!)
I've noticed people play the "level-headed" sanctimonious position before. However, what's funny is that when legitimate points are raised such as the Bill's effort to protect Insurance companies against torts ie the public can't sue the insurance companies for failing to provide services...people like you won't respond to that. You will just ignore it and then respond to a thread in which you go about your "everyone is crazy but levelheaded me"
POINT: There has been legitimate fact driven talk by those against this bill but you conveniently choose to ignore those points. What you are doing is no different than the strategies espoused by others. They are taking the inflammatory approach and you take the paternalistic and sanctimonious "objective level-headed" approach when you are anything but objective.
I laughed when your first post drew almost no response until you posted again with "Democrats" in the title.
(If I'm remembering all the way back to yesterday correctly
Memory id the first thing to go
THat is your "proof" of this leading to a single payer system.
Let's break it down..
Obama said that a single payer system.. back in 2003 and 2007 as referenced in the video WAS what he was hoping for.. hell it's what I hoped for too. Doesn't mean that it's what is hapenning.. because it won't happen now. Perhaps, through realization and actualy GROWTH from then till now, Obama found a solution that is NOT a single payer system.. but one that works best without actually BEING a single payer system.. a compromise of sorts. The public 'option' is just that .. a compromise.. one that co-exists with private options.
However, this bill.. NOT WRITTEN by the President. .mind you, but by the committee..and those who were on it to write it.. may NOT be ones that WANT a single payer system.
THIS PLAN.. as it STANDS NOW.. is NOT setting up a single payer system.
BARNEY FRANK .. gave his OPINION that he felt it COULD lead to the single payer system.
Another insurance exec gave his OPINION that it could put insurance people out of business.
OPINIONS.. NOT FACTS!!
CLEARLY the insurance companies are afraid of competition from the Government.. funny that at the same time they claim that the government is "inefficient".
People will have CHOICES.. CHOICES.. they can choose private or they can choose the PUBLIC.
NOW. .if the public option offers EXCELLENT services EXCELLENT coverage at a cheaper price.. well then perhaps those insurance companies have something to fear.
But PERHAPS it will lead insurance companies to CUT some of that exhorbitant overhead (think one exec salary of $14M.. think corporate jets and corporate excess) to be able to actually COMPETE. WOW.. imagine that.. the insurance companies are going to have to stop WAISTING money on ridiculous things to cut their overhead to actually be able to offer coverage that APPEALS to the American Public!!
By the way.. we have the Post office right.. but we also have UPS, Fed Ex etc. Just because the government option exists doesn't mean the others do not and that there is no competiion among the three.
Ironic.. how those that tout competition.. are the same ones that are afraid of competition.
And, btw, if there are so many that "fear" the government.. well then the private companies have no reason to worry about loosing those consumers because they wouldn't DREAM of buying into the government option.. after all teh governement is completely inefficient right?
BOTTOM LINE.. THIS BILL AS IT STANDS NOW IS NOT A SINGLE PAYER SYSTEM , IS NOT A UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE BILL. It does NOT achieve what Obama ULTIMATELY wants...
Just because he WANTS it doesn't mean that this is going to achieve it.. it won't be until it is actually WRITTEN as such.. and this bill is NOT written as such.
FYI 83% of people studied are in FAVOR of having a public option plan, BTW.. which I linked to before. AND that study was paid for by those that actually OPPOSE the bill.
FYI 83% of people studied are in FAVOR of having a public option plan, BTW.. which I linked to before. AND that study was paid for by those that actually OPPOSE the bill.
So with only 17% opposed to this why are the town halls turning into shouting matches ?
So with only 17% opposed to this why are the town halls turning into shouting matches ?
Think about that one.
Again.. that study was paid for by those opposed to the bill.. so their agenda, if intended to find in favor of their "client" actually found otherwise.
Why.. because only those that are opposed are turning up! Did I not also read that people from outside communities are being bussed in to these "town hall" meetings.
When you have a room of 100 people, if only the people actually opposed to it show up.. then those peoples voices will be the loudest.
And without having attended..we do not know about what exactly that shouting match was about.
I mean look at the lies I uncovered here.. perhaps those people were addressing THOSE lies!
Again.. that study was paid for by those opposed to the bill.. so their agenda, if intended to find in favor of their "client" actually found otherwise.
Why.. because only those that are opposed are turning up! Did I not also read that people from outside communities are being bussed in to these "town hall" meetings.
When you have a room of 100 people, if only the people actually opposed to it show up.. then those peoples voices will be the loudest.
And without having attended..we do not know about what exactly that shouting match was about.
I mean look at the lies I uncovered here.. perhaps those people were addressing THOSE lies!
First off - you have made statements about what you perceive to be untruths -
And, why don't you attend one of the "town halls" in your area? Why don't you go and see, and hear - with your own eyes - your own ears, what is being said?
First off - you have made statements about what you perceive to be untruths -
And, why don't you attend one of the "town halls" in your area? Why don't you go and see, and hear - with your own eyes - your own ears, what is being said?
Well. how do you know I won't? I do have to find a town hall meeting in my town.. but I do a lot of work for not for profits AND I have a 3 year old. So I'm waiting or my mother in law to return so that i have more freedom to do such things.. because my husband is working all the time and I am the only one to care for our son.
But I do plan on attending one as soon as I can.
in the meantime Iv'e written my senators and congressman about this bill.. I'm also doing my part to spread the TRUTH on the net via my social networking and my blog.. and doing exactly what I did yesterday here on this board.
AND.. its not what I PERCEIVE as untruths.. there are CLEARLY lies being spread . it's as clear as the nose on your face when you actually READ hte lines the commentator references.. READ what he SAID was in the bill and then y ou actually READ the line he references..
One of Obama's promises was to create a national health insurance exchange. He envisioned people being able to one-stop shop for health insurance, with benefits and coverage spelled out in clear, standardized language.
The House bill creates the National Insurance Exchange under a Health Choices Administration, with a commissioner to run it named by the president. The Health Choices commissioner "establishes a process through which to obtain bids, negotiate and enter into contracts with qualified plans, and ensure that the different levels of benefits are offered with appropriate oversight and enforcement," according to a summary of the legislation from the House Ways and Means Committee. PolitiFact | Create a National Health Insurance Exchange - Obama promise No. 52:
"Large employers that do not offer meaningful coverage or make a meaningful contribution to the cost of quality health coverage for their employees will be required to contribute a percentage of payroll toward the costs of the national plan. Small businesses will be exempt from this requirement.
"http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/promise/55/require-large-employers-to-contribute-to-a-nationa/
THat is your "proof" of this leading to a single payer system.
Let's break it down..
Obama said that a single payer system.. back in 2003 and 2007 as referenced in the video WAS what he was hoping for.. hell it's what I hoped for too. Doesn't mean that it's what is hapenning.. because it won't happen now. Perhaps, through realization and actualy GROWTH from then till now, Obama found a solution that is NOT a single payer system.. but one that works best without actually BEING a single payer system.. a compromise of sorts. The public 'option' is just that .. a compromise.. one that co-exists with private options.
However, this bill.. NOT WRITTEN by the President. .mind you, but by the committee..and those who were on it to write it.. may NOT be ones that WANT a single payer system.
THIS PLAN.. as it STANDS NOW.. is NOT setting up a single payer system.
BARNEY FRANK .. gave his OPINION that he felt it COULD lead to the single payer system.
Another insurance exec gave his OPINION that it could put insurance people out of business.
OPINIONS.. NOT FACTS!!
CLEARLY the insurance companies are afraid of competition from the Government.. funny that at the same time they claim that the government is "inefficient".
People will have CHOICES.. CHOICES.. they can choose private or they can choose the PUBLIC.
NOW. .if the public option offers EXCELLENT services EXCELLENT coverage at a cheaper price.. well then perhaps those insurance companies have something to fear.
But PERHAPS it will lead insurance companies to CUT some of that exhorbitant overhead (think one exec salary of $14M.. think corporate jets and corporate excess) to be able to actually COMPETE. WOW.. imagine that.. the insurance companies are going to have to stop WAISTING money on ridiculous things to cut their overhead to actually be able to offer coverage that APPEALS to the American Public!!
By the way.. we have the Post office right.. but we also have UPS, Fed Ex etc. Just because the government option exists doesn't mean the others do not and that there is no competiion among the three.
Ironic.. how those that tout competition.. are the same ones that are afraid of competition.
And, btw, if there are so many that "fear" the government.. well then the private companies have no reason to worry about loosing those consumers because they wouldn't DREAM of buying into the government option.. after all teh governement is completely inefficient right?
BOTTOM LINE.. THIS BILL AS IT STANDS NOW IS NOT A SINGLE PAYER SYSTEM , IS NOT A UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE BILL. It does NOT achieve what Obama ULTIMATELY wants...
Just because he WANTS it doesn't mean that this is going to achieve it.. it won't be until it is actually WRITTEN as such.. and this bill is NOT written as such.
FYI 83% of people studied are in FAVOR of having a public option plan, BTW.. which I linked to before. AND that study was paid for by those that actually OPPOSE the bill.
You may want to rethink your example of the US Postal Service as providing a means for healthy competition.
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.
