Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-25-2010, 02:13 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,685,448 times
Reputation: 35920

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
Can you honestly say you approved of the way this bill came to be, the way it was passed, the back room deals, vote buying, legislative chicanery employed by the democrats?
Pot, meet kettle! It's like sausage; you don't want to see it being made!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-25-2010, 02:16 PM
 
14,247 posts, read 17,913,622 times
Reputation: 13807
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
It ALREADY is - why do you think the law is so unpopular...right now?

We have seen all the nasty details come out, things we should have known about (well, SOME of us tried to warn you) well before the vote was taken. Congress didn't read the bill, they voted on a bill, party line vote, 2000+ pages, that WILL fundamentally change our HC system...without reading and understanding what was in it.

Can you honestly say you approved of the way this bill came to be, the way it was passed, the back room deals, vote buying, legislative chicanery employed by the democrats?
58.5% of Americans have employer sponsored health insurance and have not really been impacted as yet. Another 46.3 million Americans don't have any health insurance so have not been impacted. Right now, it is a minority who are feeling any negative effects.

As you know from my comments in other threads, I believe that health care in the USA is fundamentally broken. Obamacare has attempted to put a band aid on parts of it but has not addressed the cost issues which are fundamental to the problem. At some point, politicians are going to have to deal with structural reform of the system. This will probably happen when the political consequences of not doing it outweigh the benefits of the current system to vested interests.

It is easy to be in opposition to what Obama is trying to do. It is much harder to come up with a workable structural fix.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2010, 02:20 PM
 
4,183 posts, read 6,521,797 times
Reputation: 1734
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547 View Post
The health care bill we passed is basically IDENTICAL to one proposed by the republicans during the Clinton years, in response to Hillary Care. That's what's insane about this entire debate. The only reason the republicans are opposing the bill now is because the Dem's won it, and they don't want them to have 15 seconds of credit for anything. It's disgusting...this country is a mess, and all these people care about is power.
I agree. The opponents of this law are totally dishonest. The law is not even remotely close to what the progressives actually wanted (the public option, which was shot down). The law is also just a federal version of Romneycare in Mass.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2010, 07:33 PM
 
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,750,914 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Oh, for G*d's sake! Licensing is for the protection of the public.

The idea of "de-licensing" the health care professions is just plain nuts!
The question is, does the PUBLIC really NEED this protection? I think not. If people choose to go to a board certified MD or DO, they have the right to do so and pay the fees for it. But if other doctors with less training or foreign training or training at non AMA certified schools want to practice and people want to go see them, why should they not have that right?
A lot of this is not about "protecting the public" but more about limiting competition and driving up cost. It is the same thing in the legal profession. Most states require you to attend an "ABA approved" law school to get a law license in that state. But California will let you take the bar exam without having went to an ABA school. In fact you can sit for the California exam by going to a correspondence law school. And I doubt that California has many quack lawyers because the EXAM itself weeds out those who are not legally competent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2010, 07:36 PM
 
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,750,914 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndfmnlf View Post
The AMA does not certify or license anyone. Licensure is a function of the state. Certification is a function of specialty boards eg American Board of Internal Medicine which certifies internists and all other IM subspecialists. The AMA has nothing to do with any of it.
I know that. My argument is that licensure is not needed and that the AMA, FACS and other medical PRIVATE organizations can do the job of testing and certifying medical professionals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2010, 07:49 PM
 
Location: mancos
7,786 posts, read 8,024,187 times
Reputation: 6650
Everyone should be responsible for their own health. having employers and the gov involved is stupid and very expensive. be responsible for yourself and you will probably eat better and stay in shape rather than depending on someone else to fix you after you ruined your body. be free from this garbage
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2010, 10:23 PM
 
19,226 posts, read 15,313,154 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLCPUNK View Post
I couldn't think of a dumber move politically than a stunt like that. You'd be essentially taking away a "travesty" from parents who can now cover their children, or patients who can now get insurance regardless of "pre existing conditions."

Is the GOP dumb enough to try and repeal health care for Americans? I didn't think they would be, but guess I was wrong.
The GOP probably has a defunds fence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2010, 06:23 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
37,794 posts, read 40,986,531 times
Reputation: 62169
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
They can't repeal - not enough GOP seats in the Senate (this time around) to override obama's certain veto.

Defunding portions of the law will have to suffice, for now, as well as the lawsuit, joined by 20+ states that will likely go ahead.

To fully repeal the disaster would have to wait for 2012.
Okay, this makes sense. Thanks. I'd rep you but they won't let me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2010, 06:29 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,229 posts, read 17,846,493 times
Reputation: 4585
The Timeline for implementation -- Implementation Timeline - Kaiser Health Reform

The Timeline for repeal -- .............. Does anybody know when Hell freezes over?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2010, 06:37 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,752,379 times
Reputation: 24862
First - We need to remove the private sector insurance companies from the health care process. The savings in excessive salaries and profits will pay for most of the system.

Second - We need to stop the pharmaceutical industry from violating the patent laws and restricting trade in medicines. If a drug sells for less in Canada or Mexico it should sell for the same price in the US.

Third - We still require certification of medical professionals. Otherwise the uncertified would be providing unsafe procedures for those that could not afford to go to the certified doctors. The result would be like using uncertified electricians to wire your house. You would be far more likely to die in an electrical fire. Certification of doctors and electricians is cheaper than the alternative.

Fourth – We still need most of the provisions that require insurance companies to pay form preexisting conditions and long term care. These are the most important parts of the existing legislation. After November we should be able to rewrite the bill to get rid of the insurance companies. They can then sell phony auto insurance of rigged life insurance policies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:31 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top