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 problem is that you feel that it is the GOAL of the liberal Congress.. however, this bill does not achieve that Goal..
I don't argue that you feel that that is the ultimate goal . If you want to believe that then believe that..
However, this bill DOES NOT achieve that. If it did, then I'd get that argument.. but it doesn't. WE ARE NOWHERE NEAR a European system of health care.. NOT EVEN CLOSE!
In my utopia .. health insurance wouldn't exist accept for only the 'expensive' treatments and illnesses..
Everything else, including drugs and Dr. Visits would come down to reality of what is actually affordable for Americans, and without the middle man accept in cases of major illness.
Health insurance is the cancer of medical profession , IMO. They are the greatest example of conflict of interest to ever exist.
First off - why are you jumping to a conclusion that I am referencing a "European" system? I never said nor alluded to such a thing.
Next, it would appear that YOU have not studied the position(s) of major "players" in the Health Care debate / reform. You have not studied their individual positions. You have not listened to, or read, their positions on the public "option" and how it is a "step" toward a government run system. It would appear that what you are relying on is generalized "talking points" of the Democrats in the Congress. I will suggest you study the players - ALL OF THEM. You might find it an eye opening experience.
First off - why are you jumping to a conclusion that I am referencing a "European" system? I never said nor alluded to such a thing.
Next, it would appear that YOU have not studied the position(s) of major "players" in the Health Care debate / reform. You have not studied their individual positions. You have not listened to, or read, their positions on the public "option" and how it is a "step" toward a government run system. It would appear that what you are relying on is generalized "talking points" of the Democrats in the Congress. I will suggest you study the players - ALL OF THEM. You might find it an eye opening experience.
There are some for it that feel it is a step toward government run health care. There are those for it that feel it isn't a step toward it.. .. what they "think " it will lead to or hope it will lead to are irrelevant. The opinions are all over the map.
I for one am for it NOT because I feel it will lead to government run system (I am not in favor of a Canadian system, or one that is entirely run by the governmnet, by the way). What I like about it is the option. That perhaps without the nonsensical overhead and exorbitant salaries of a CEO at the head we can cut premiums by atleast 20%.. a huge savings IMO. Perhaps it may even make the private insurance companies compete more fairly and trim their excess in order to compete. I think it's fair that if they government must negotiate prices the same as any private company and not automatically get thier "medicare" and "medicaid" price, that it is quite a fair competition.
I referenced European health care because they are the example of government run health care in the world.. I didn't say YOU referenced it. UK is government run with private mixed in. Swiss is entirely private with government subsidies .. etc. ALL other systems manage to cover their entire population for less GDP by far then the United States.
There are some for it that feel it is a step toward government run health care. There are those for it that feel it isn't a step toward it.. .. what they "think " it will lead to or hope it will lead to are irrelevent.
What EVERYONE thinks is VERY relevant. The fact that you seem to dismiss the thoughts and opinions of those you disagree with is disconcerting at best.
What EVERYONE thinks is VERY relevant. The fact that you seem to dismiss the thoughts and opinions of those you disagree with is disconcerting at best.
I didn't..
The opinions are all over the map.. from both sides.. it's not like all that are for it are for it because they feel it WILL lead, no more than those who are against it are against it for that reason. THAT is my point.
It's irrelevant BECAUSE it's only a FEAR or an OPINION of what MIGHT be and NOT what IS. People FEARED what medicare would be, but despite it's problems it has been a great thing for this country and the elderly population for decades and will continue to be. If we went on some opinions based on FEARs we wouldn't have medicare and then where would our people, our elderly be without it
A government option, as it stands now, does NOT achieve a complete government overtake of the health care system.
Health insurance 'fear' the government competition? REally... the same that hey accuse of being mismanaged and "horrible"? Well, then offer a better product at a better price to entice people to take the private insruance over the public option. If hte public option offers a great product at an affordable price , but private refuses because they "can't" (why can't they.. because they have to buy their corporate marble laden buildings, private company jets, pay lobbyists and mulit million dollar salaries) well then that is their problem.
Private will have NO problems competing whatsoever if they offer a better product at an affordable price. I will elect to purchase private over public if I feel that a) the price is affordable and reasonable for b) what they are offering. And with the pre-existing condition things lifted I will be more able to shop and pick and choose. If hte public option is more attractive to me, then I will take that product. If I'm not happy with the public then I will leave that option and go for a private option... no different than anything else I buy or shop for.
Perhaps we should go back and rewind the price tag on things.. so as not to price something as needed as health care as a "luxury" item. That is, after all the ultimate problem. Getting care is priced well beyond what average people can pay. so then, are average people just not worthy becasue they happen to not be wealthy. We all can't afford to buy Gucci or Prada, but we can be well clothed with less expensive product. In health care, that doesn't exist. THE entire gammit of health care is priced so high!
Last edited by TristansMommy; 11-25-2009 at 06:22 PM..
A government option, as it stands now, does NOT achieve a complete government overtake of the health care system.
Correct. "As it stands now".
That is the point that I, and many others, are trying point out. It does NOT achieve a government run health care system NOW. BUT, it is, undeniably, a STEP in that direction. No one is saying or suggesting that a government run system will emerge from these current bills. BUT, these bills are a large step TOWARD that ultimate goal.
Again, study the positions of those I mentioned, and others. IF YOU DO, you will see that not only I, but millions of others are correct - and it is not "fear mongering" as some would charge. It is "FACT" mongering.
That is the point that I, and many others, are trying point out. It does NOT achieve a government run health care system NOW. BUT, it is, undeniably, a STEP in that direction. No one is saying or suggesting that a government run system will emerge from these current bills. BUT, these bills are a large step TOWARD that ultimate goal.
Again, study the positions of those I mentioned, and others. IF YOU DO, you will see that not only I, but millions of others are correct - and it is not "fear mongering" as some would charge. It is "FACT" mongering.
But listen to what your are saying.
You are admitting that it doesn't achieve it as it is written!!!
In order for it to achieve that.. it will have to be amended, re-written etc. And then we'll be back to debating and passing or not passing bills/amendments and changes to the laws!
THAT is my point.
To stand FROZEN out of fear of something that MAY occur is insane!
By the same token, this bill could solve a lot of the problems we have in a major way and restore some sort of balance to the sytem and open up insurance/medical care for millions of people.. and then it wuoldn't have to be touched, changed in any way shape or form!!
THAT is the point. Why defeate something out of FEAR. .it may be a STEP.. but then you just dont' take ANOTHER step.. you stay on that step!!
You don't go backwards.. that's not a good thing.
You don't stay on the step that is collapsing.. that is not a good thing.
You move to the next step , give it a chance to work and then re-evaluate WHERE your step , if any, is taken after that. THe "next step" may not be even remotely neccesary.. and it may not even be THAT step that we take (government run entirely that is)
You are admitting that it doesn't achieve it as it is written!!!
In order for it to achieve that.. it will have to be amended, re-written etc. And then we'll be back to debating and passing or not passing bills/amendments and changes to the laws! )
This bill will not create a government run health care system. But, it is a STEP. Do you understand what the concept of a "step"? I don't think so.
Future legislation can take us further into a government run system. Another step.
Then more.
The legislation today is a STEP towards a government run system
Have you ever looked at the position statements of the members of Congress I mentioned? I will bet you have not. And that is the point. You have not read what the REAL AND ACTUAL GOAL is.
This bill will not create a government run health care system. But, it is a STEP. Do you understand what the concept of a "step"? I don't think so.
Future legislation can take us further into a government run system. Another step.
Then more.
The legislation today is a STEP towards a government run system
Have you ever looked at the position statements of the members of Congress I mentioned? I will bet you have not. And that is the point. You have not read what the REAL AND ACTUAL GOAL is.
I've looked at htem.
yes, I understand what a STEP is.. A step is just that.. a step.. again.. that doesn't mean we have to take ANOTHER STEP. This ONE step could achieve enough of a change to satisfy the population..
A much NEEDED step.
And as I already said and you acknowledge, that would take more laws, amendments etc.
We need to do SOMETHING... and a STEP is SOMETHING. Whether it goes BEYOND that step will depend on what comes of the first step. If it turns out NOT to be the thign we all hope it will be, then the next step will NEVER be taken. Hell it's taken us THIS LONG to take that ONE STEP it could be forever before the NEXT STEP is achieved.
I, for one, do not even believe that those steps are such a horrible thing. Look at Eurpoean nations and their health care systems. It's hardly the debacle and "hell and spitfire" repubs and the right make it out to be.. anyway.
The only other option is to stand still. We learned that standing still and doing nothing makes our problems worse and even more expensive to fit.
Paralyzed by fear is not a solution either. STaying on the same step or int he same place, is not the answer either.
Fear is very paralyzing
By the way.. this can also be a step toward a Swiss type system.. which is a universal system NOT government run, but completely private.. the next step doesn't mean that it leads to a complete government take over of health care. It's a step in a direction that leads to improvement in our screwed up system of health care.. and what the next step will be will be determined by how successful the first step is. WE can never evaluate that if we just stay frozen out of irrational "fear". The system and many other things are doomed if we just stay where we are. .. Progress is not made standing still and being still.
This bill will not create a government run health care system. But, it is a STEP. Do you understand what the concept of a "step"? I don't think so.
Future legislation can take us further into a government run system. Another step.
Then more.
The legislation today is a STEP towards a government run system
Have you ever looked at the position statements of the members of Congress I mentioned? I will bet you have not. And that is the point. You have not read what the REAL AND ACTUAL GOAL is.
That is no reason to oppose health care reform. The current system is a mess, no doubt about it.
So you believe the CBO when it works for you and discount them when you don't like their numbers? It was their report - they are the ones that conclude that the public option might actually cost more than private insurance. You already have stated you can't afford the cost of private insurance now....the public option might be more. What will you do at the point when it is FORCED on you?
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.
