Health Care Riots (fit in, real estate, mortgage)

[MadManofBethesda]

Originally Posted by kanling

I wish the congressmen (and women) would provide details on the specifics of the plan. The fact that they don't makes me very suspicious.

I have a novel suggestion for you.

Instead of being "very suspicious" of what's in the bill, why not educate yourself on thie issue by - you know - actually reading the bill yourself. Then you won't have to rely on wingnuts like Sarah Palin talking about idiotic things like "death panels" and euthenasia for poor little Trig. Here's an official link to the bill from the Library of Congress:

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress):

[NJ2MDdude]

Originally Posted by MadManofBethesda

Actually, this administration has been in place for a little less than seven months. Let's see how the last six months have gone:

March: stock market/economy - UP

April: stock market/economy - UP

May: stock market/economy - UP

June: stock market/economy - UP

July: stock market/economy - UP

Aug (so far): stock market/economy - UP

Now, what was your point again?

All that tells me is that the market is forward looking and has already priced in the recovery, assuming, of course, the economy doesn't double dip.

Quite frankly, I don't understand your response.

[westsideboy]

I find it disingenuine to dismiss the protesters because they are "organized." Where are the proponents of health care? If the majority of the US population is behind the plan it should be easy to find scores of people willing to shout loudly in support of the proposals, right?

[ToneGrail]

Originally Posted by MadManofBethesda

Actually, this administration has been in place for a little less than seven months. Let's see how the last six months have gone:

March: stock market/economy - UP

April: stock market/economy - UP

May: stock market/economy - UP

June: stock market/economy - UP

July: stock market/economy - UP

Aug (so far): stock market/economy - UP

Now, what was your point again?

It's Bush's fault!

[cutgarden]

Both sides are using the fear factor on this issue, like most other issues. There are no death panels, etc.... both sides are taking quotes totally out of context. They wonder (or is it hope) that only 1/4 of voters vote?

I've never been in favor of "free" health care. For one thing, nothing is free, someone (the middleclass) pays for it. However, I do think the health care system we now have is not sustainable. A large part of the fault lies with the public. Doctors pay out HUGE liability premiums and order a dozen tests when normally they'd only do one, all to cover their ass. They do this because everyone wants to sue. Have something go wrong in your recovery? Hot dog, you've hit the lottery!

Health care doesn't need to cost so much. And the number of people that go trotting to the doc for antibiotics every time they get the flu just astounds me. It's no wonder insurance premiums are through the roof, and that's just one example. And maybe if more people ate a little better and exercised a little more, we wouldn't be spending billions with the drug companies.

And yes, I know there are many exceptions to the broad brush I'm painting with. But I see cars idling in line at McD's and Dunkin Donuts cuz they're too lazy to walk their overloaded self inside for their 2000 calorie snack. I don't think I should have to subsidize their health care, sorry.

[14thandYou]

Originally Posted by cutgarden

Both sides are using the fear factor on this issue, like most other issues.

I don't know that I'd say the pro-reform camp is using "fear"; their sin has been in an inability to develop a single, coherent plan. It completely left the door open to absurd attacks such as the "death panels" and "kill grannie" lines we're all so familiar with. But the need for reform can't be overstated.

I've never been in favor of "free" health care. For one thing, nothing is free, someone (the middleclass) pays for it. However, I do think the health care system we now have is not sustainable. A large part of the fault lies with the public. Doctors pay out HUGE liability premiums and order a dozen tests when normally they'd only do one, all to cover their ass. They do this because everyone wants to sue. Have something go wrong in your recovery? Hot dog, you've hit the lottery!

Yeah, unless that "something goes wrong" costs you your health, the use of a limb, your life, etc.

I'll agree that many unnecessary tests are frequently ordered, and that those drive up the costs of medical services provided--but where is the evidence that this is done out of fear of a malpractice lawsuit? I've yet to see that. Interestingly, if this is a concern, you should be highly supportive of Obama's efforts to curtail exorbitant costs by eliminating waste and frivolous tests.

And furthermore, no one is asking for "free" health care--there's no such thing in existence. What most reformers are calling for is broader ACCESS health care; meaning, health care that is available to all, including the less-fortunate. We're far too wealthy and progressive a nation to have 1/6 of our population with no health care safety net, and millions more at risk of medical bankruptcy.

I'm beginning to come to the realization that a public option is probably not going to be in the works. That's unfortunate. However, simply arriving at a point where insurance companies are banned from dropping you or raising rates to obscene levels as a result of preexisting conditions or sickness would go a long way. The system in place now is so heavily skewed towards the insurance companies as to scarcely be believed.

Health care doesn't need to cost so much. And the number of people that go trotting to the doc for antibiotics every time they get the flu just astounds me.

That's not only costly, it's downright dangerous. It's creating strains of antibiotic-resistant viruses, which are going to become a real problem in the not-too-distant future.

And yes, I know there are many exceptions to the broad brush I'm painting with. But I see cars idling in line at McD's and Dunkin Donuts cuz they're too lazy to walk their overloaded self inside for their 2000 calorie snack. I don't think I should have to subsidize their health care, sorry.

Well, if only it were that simple. Unfortunately, people get sick and require medical treatment for a host of reasons. Do you deny coverage to someone injured in an auto accident because they were driving too fast? How about someone who came down with the flu because they didn't wash their hands?

Obtaining health care shouldn't rely on social status or employment with a company that offers coverage, it's really that simple. We accept that certain things in our lives are inherent "rights"--from highways, to police and fire protection, to national parks, to national defense, to trash pickup, to unemployment and worker's compensation benefits, to mail delivery, to legal defense--and fund them appropriately (at least, we pretend to). Health care should be no different--we're far too good and prosperous of a nation for it to be any other way.

[14thandYou]

Originally Posted by westsideboy

Where are the proponents of health care? If the majority of the US population is behind the plan it should be easy to find scores of people willing to shout loudly in support of the proposals, right?

They're there, they just aren't as rabid as the "death panel"-ists. That's a whole different level of loony.

[cpterp]

Originally Posted by westsideboy

I find it disingenuine to dismiss the protesters because they are "organized." Where are the proponents of health care? If the majority of the US population is behind the plan it should be easy to find scores of people willing to shout loudly in support of the proposals, right?

Well, those people aren't actually extremly rude like the ignoramuses who disrupt the town hall meetings. The majority of the people at many of those meetings are supporters of health care.

[westsideboy]

Disruption? Maybe, but then again why should the elected officials control the format in which they engage the public? Ultimately elected officials are accountable to the people, and if the people want to use their access to their representatives to yell and shout their outrage, that is their right.

[14thandYou]

Originally Posted by westsideboy

Disruption? Maybe, but then again why should the elected officials control the format in which they engage the public? Ultimately elected officials are accountable to the people, and if the people want to use their access to their representatives to yell and shout their outrage, that is their right.

It may be their right, but it's completely unproductive. I feel exactly the same way regarding groups such as PETA and Greenpeace--they may have legitimate points or concerns, but those are trumped by the fanatical actions of group leaders and members.

I think everyone would welcome a legitimate dialogue about this issue--there are a lot of points to address, and a lot of potential solutions to consider. But you can't do that when people are screaming incoherently about wanting their America back.