The best health care in the world

[pocketfullofshells]

as for the percent of people with no health care, I was talking about texas..who has a very high rate of Uninsured..not the national..But take out those who get coverage from the goverment for low incomes and other issues and that number is a lot higher...Yet you guys want see that gone as well. Hope none of you ever get major long term health issues, and happen to lose your jobs...see where you go crawling

 

[PLC1]

WRONG! Many young people change jobs knowing they will lose HC because they are not concerned about it. Some young people also opt out of health coverage to get a higher salary.

Your statement does not apply to many young people. So, your statement is incorrect.

Not incorrect. I said it was "unlikely", not that it wouldn't happen. Of course there are deadbeats who don't think they need health insurance, until they are involved in an accident or are diagnosed with a serious illness, then they expect the rest of us to cover them and pay for it. There are some so young and foolish as to think that they are invulnerable, and so don't need to be prepared for medical emergencies.

The problem with expecting the rest of us to pay for their unexpected medical bills is that (1) it raises the cost for all of us, and (2) they don't get adequate care. They may be treated for that crushed pelvis after their motorcycle crashes with a big rig, but won't get the therapy they need to recover and become employable once again.

So, your solution to this problem is????

 

[bododie]

Mod edit. This post is nothing more than a personal attack, and has nothing at all to do with the issue being discussed.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Mod edit. This post is nothing more than a personal attack, and has nothing at all to do with the issue being discussed.

awww but I wanted to see what he said about me and I am pretty sure I know it was aimed at me lol

 

[bododie]

Some times "an entity in the vast universe" can be right....

 

[Dr.Who]

its sad you guys actually think that having no insurance still equals good enough health care...If that was the case...don't buy insurance...you guys are clearly stating that its not needed.

Don't put words in my mouth. Insurance is better than public aid largely because public aid is run by the gov.

But the services of public aid are adequate. Are YOU arguing that they are not?

also there is no law that says if you work for a company for any amount of hours they have to legally give you health care...

If the company is not a tiny one then yes there is.

that was company policy, to do so at full time...but thats why I worked the max possible all the time. and then You work more then that for a few weeks at a time, then after a few weeks they cut your hours back to make sure do not "accidentally" become full time...WE where even told that if we did...we would be fired. Also having 2 part time jobs means that I could work 80 hours in a week...and sometimes when it was slow I got almost no hours.

You picked that company not me.

And yes I had a tv...I fail to see your point..I got a tv long ago spent less then 100 bucks..what you think I was going to sell it for health care?

Yes you do fail to see the point don't you? That $100 plus a bunch more should have been put in the bank and left there so that later when you needed to buy COBRA you would have had the money.

But you guys just keep pretending you don't realy need insurance...and your bull**** crap about well just get goverment assistance then...your the ones against goverment health care...and cutting those programs all the time..I know I have a friend who Is unable to work, and that is her health care plan...and She has her fair share of medical issues as well...but the stuff she really needs to help her, are not covered...the only thing covered is the stuff to keep her alive..thats it...Sad thing is, if she could get the help she realy needs...maybe one day she would be able to work again and I know she wants to...Before she was told she could not...she had tried and tried putting applying at hundreds of places..with no luck.

As a welfare plan it is adequate and you just demonstrated that. As a plan to move up the ladder then no that is not what it is designed to do.

Again, I never said insurance was not good and useful. People need insurance to protect their assets so they don't get wiped out in a medical time of stress. If you don't have assets then public aid is adequate for providing health care. If there are problems with public aid lets fix them - the first is lets just give it to people who are actually poor and not to every single person who makes less than 11k per year but with all the other benefits he gets owns his own home and has A/C and jewelry and 3 tv's and two cars...There would be more money for those that need it if we stopped giving it to those who do not. There would probably even be enough to make a program for those who need to climb the ladder like your friend - programs that were not welfare and were designed for a different purpose (ignoring whether or not such programs should be made based on other criteria)

Given the amount of money you have implied that you make I sure hope you are using some of it to help your friend better her situation in life rather than just arguing that some stranger should do it.

 

[bododie]

Given the amount of money you have implied that you make I sure hope you are using some of it to help your friend better her situation in life rather than just arguing that some stranger should do it.

Are you suggesting that those who cry "share the wealth" should actually share THEIRS?

What an "insensitive ...ideology".

 

[pocketfullofshells]

you keep talking about goverment health care, yet the Republicans attack goverment health care all the time...you use it as a excuse to not do anything for the many who have no insurance, or not enough insurance...While at the same time you try to hack it away. Maybe one day you will be lucky enough to have a really had health issue that cost a fortune...even for those who have insurance...let alone those with poor or little.

some 20-45,000 a year die from lack of Insurance...tell me when enough are dieing for you care and say hey, you know maybe they don't get enough care without insurance.

 

[bododie]

Being against a plan that is being shoved down our throats with a lot of contention, doesn't mean one is against reform.

Those who will buy into the mentality of "we have to pass it so you can see what's in it" fall into this category:

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

 

[Gipper]

you keep talking about goverment health care, yet the Republicans attack goverment health care all the time...you use it as a excuse to not do anything for the many who have no insurance, or not enough insurance...While at the same time you try to hack it away. Maybe one day you will be lucky enough to have a really had health issue that cost a fortune...even for those who have insurance...let alone those with poor or little.

some 20-45,000 a year die from lack of Insurance...tell me when enough are dieing for you care and say hey, you know maybe they don't get enough care without insurance.

Total and complete BS. How does one believe such unadulterated sh*t?

But, you do tow the lefty line as your leaders in the left wing press feed it to you.

This from Wolfe Blitzed....what a jackass..."let them die!!!" If you don't give the Left what they want (in this case socialized medicine) you must be for letting people DIE!!!! And amazingly, libs like POS fall for this idiotic childishness.

http://youtu.be/MF64QzDSG60

 

[Openmind]

Total and complete BS. How does one believe such unadulterated sh*t?

But, you do tow the lefty line as your leaders in the left wing press feed it to you.

This from Wolfe Blitzed....what a jackass..."let them die!!!" If you don't give the Left what they want (in this case socialized medicine) you must be for letting people DIE!!!! And amazingly, libs like POS fall for this idiotic childishness.

http://youtu.be/MF64QzDSG60

Could you please remind me what is wrong with "socialized medicine" based on how it has worked for the last 50 years at least in MANY other developped countries?

The cost?. . . . it is about 1/3 to 1/2 cheaper than our system
The quality? . . .life expectancy and birth survival is better under their system
The access? almost 100% of the people in the other systems have access to health care, without having to resort to "charity" pretence

So, what is YOUR argument for limiting real competion by rejecting a public OPTION?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Total and complete BS. How does one believe such unadulterated sh*t?

But, you do tow the lefty line as your leaders in the left wing press feed it to you.

This from Wolfe Blitzed....what a jackass..."let them die!!!" If you don't give the Left what they want (in this case socialized medicine) you must be for letting people DIE!!!! And amazingly, libs like POS fall for this idiotic childishness.

http://youtu.be/MF64QzDSG60

you know a better person when they yelled something was a lie..would back it up with something....but don't worry I never expect you to. Let me show you a example
http://blog.chron.com/medblog/2011/09/census-confirmed-texas-had-highest-uninsured-rate-in-2010/

see that, its called evidence..try it..maybe one day then someone will care what you say.

 

[Gipper]

Could you please remind me what is wrong with "socialized medicine" based on how it has worked for the last 50 years at least in MANY other developped countries?

The cost?. . . . it is about 1/3 to 1/2 cheaper than our system
The quality? . . .life expectancy and birth survival is better under their system
The access? almost 100% of the people in the other systems have access to health care, without having to resort to "charity" pretence

So, what is YOUR argument for limiting real competion by rejecting a public OPTION?

You change the subject like always. I was commenting on the idiotic post by your lib friend. If one disagrees with the left, one hates the poor, hates the homeless, wants all old people to die, wants uninsured to die, children to die, one is racist, one is homophobic, one is sexist, one wants to lynch black people, one is etc................................................................................................................................................................................................................................and amazingly lefties fall for this BS EVERYTHING STINKING TIME!

This tactic of demonizing your opponent with absurd accusations is so common on the left. What was it BO's hero Saul Alinsky said????????

And, do you really need to know what is WRONG with socialized medicine? Are you that clueless? If you do a little research, you will find a lot WRONG with it. Socialized anything is nearly always WRONG.

 

[BigRob]

Could you please remind me what is wrong with "socialized medicine" based on how it has worked for the last 50 years at least in MANY other developped countries?

The cost?. . . . it is about 1/3 to 1/2 cheaper than our system
The quality? . . .life expectancy and birth survival is better under their system
The access? almost 100% of the people in the other systems have access to health care, without having to resort to "charity" pretence

So, what is YOUR argument for limiting real competion by rejecting a public OPTION?

The public option as was written is not "real competition"...how about we let insurance companies sell across state lines if we want any semblance of competition at all?

 

[PLC1]

The public option as was written is not "real competition"...how about we let insurance companies sell across state lines if we want any semblance of competition at all?

I've often wondered about that. Why not allow companies to sell insurance nation wide? Not that doing so would be anything close to comprehensive health care reform, of course, but increased competition should help keep costs down.

Oh, Here's why.

Right now, the regulation of insurance is left to the states. Without any regulation, insurance is an open invitation to fraud. A company could simply collect the premiums and then when it came time to pay a claim, they could just say no.

As things stand now, the behavior of the insurance company is governed by the state in which the policy holder resides. Under the “across state lines” plans, the behavior of the insurance company would be governed by the state where the insurance company is located.

So let’s say that Texas has very loose insurance regulations, and New York has very tough regulations. New York makes sure that insurance companies have to pay out on claims that are made, while Texas allows the insurance companies to come up with excuses for not paying. Thus, Texas policy will be much more profitable for the insurance company than New York.

Now, New York is a very big market, so the insurance company does not want to walk away from that business altogether. It will set its rates so they fit with the actuarial conditions in New York. But if Aetna were now able to sell insurance to people in New York from its Aetna Texas subsidiary, why would they continue to sell policies from its Aetna New York subsidiary?

You'd have to read the whole thing to get the picture, but the idea is that companies would simply find the state with the loosest regulations, and sell insurance from that state. As it is now, a New York (as an example) company can sell insurance in California (as another example), through a subsidiary, but it has to follow the laws of California.