email from the Pres

I'm a total advocate for health care reform, I think most agree the health care system needs some to a lot of reform. But the idea of the federal govt running this, scares me to death. It will mean the death of most health care providers as well. How many employers are going to be willing to pay for more expensive insurance when you have the cheap govt insurance? It could been so many people unemployed again. It could be another massive hit to an economy that is already on the brink.

I know rushing into this is a huge mistake. This is massively important and should be given discussion and dialoge before we rush into anything.

I think you're a little crazy to make up your mind at the beginning, without really knowing where this is headed.

Betty
I'm glad you support reform. The government does a great job running medicare. No fear from me, I fear the private insurance bureaucrats more. Can you get full medical insurance for $90 a month? I can. For another $25 I get full prescription coverage. My spouse had to pay $600 a month for insurance before medicare, just for allergy medicine. People will not lose jobs and medical practitioners will make more money than ever. Hopefully the obscene profits of the pharmaceutical and insurance giants will be reduced.

This is not rushing despite the "mantra" of the republican politicians. This is over 20 years in the works. It is past time to get the job done.

Actually I'm not in the minority. Maybe you have good reasons why you might want the government to offer you health care, but apparently there are many Americans that are ambivalent. And just for your information I do want this to be sabotaged, thank you. I would like to see a well thought out plan of reform be introduced.

http://www.gallup.com/video/121940/No-Groundswell-Support-Healthcare-Reform.aspx

And I might ask you, why the big hurry to pass this bill? And since you personalize a bit, may I ask if you have health care coverage.

"The government does a great job running medicare."

You're kidding right. Do you know that most doctors would love to see medicare patients and would rather not bill the government. That's right for free.

more like misinformation.

PS I'm on Medicare.

"The government does a great job running medicare."

You're kidding right. Do you know that most doctors would love to see medicare patients and would rather not bill the government. That's right for free.

more like misinformation.

PS I'm on Medicare.

No, I'm not kidding. I think despite some shortcomings (nothing is perfect) Our government does a good job of running Medicare. If I did not have Medicare insurance, THEN I WOULD LIKELY BE ON THE STREET. I surely would have had to declare bankruptcy (over 60% of bankruptcies are caused by medical bills). I had bills for thousands of dollars for cancer surgery last year that were paid in full by Medicare.

I'm glad you have your MEDICARE...why can't others get affordable insurance too? That's what really ticks me off, the " I have mine so the heck with everybody else attitude"

I repeat, once again...We have needed reform for decades, we are NOT moving too fast. We are already too late for too many.

For my final comment on this subject, I want to make clear that I believe that Americans have great health care providers and very good health results. Our doctors and hospitals are competent and caring. Statistics can be used to prove or disprove any contention, so I don't use them to make a point. In all this discussion, some people forget, that we are not going to change the system of health care delivery. No new government clinics or doctors or hospitals.

The problem with our health system is the COST. It is a system that is being abused by the health insurers and pharmacy companies. It is a system that is far too expensive, So expensive that most people can not afford it with out help. The millions of seniors on Medicare get help from the government, some very needy people get help from the government with Medicaid, some veterans get help from the government, active military gets a free ride from the government, congress and government workers gets almost a free ride from the government. What about the rest of you working stiffs out there? You need help too.

I got my Medicare, I hope you get the help you need too.

You certainly are something else. I paid into medicare for about 40 years so there, neener neener. And those that know me know damn well, I don't run on the basis of I got mine so screw the others.

But good luck in your search for the government to take care of you. And as they say when they serve me ribs and corn bread, enjoy

i could have insurance right now if carambola did'nt discriminate, the last hotel in mpls i worked at offered domestic partner benefits as did the one in omaha it was called single plus one, my boss can't afford to offer insurance to his employees because the costs are way to high and i can't afford a single payer policy on my own and i mean one that covers a once a year physical and dental cleaning 3 or 4 times a year,i pay into the tax system,yet because i'm not old enough or am popping out babies i get nothing, all i'd like to see is the same policy i had at the hotels with the same premiums i paid,which was like 120 a month,probably 160 by now and then i had like a 20 buck co pay, not too much to ask for in my opinion

Ah, dnt, crazy to one is crazy good to another. 😉 As long as we can discuss things in a civil manner... To your other statement, yes, the government is way too involved in health care and many other aspects of daily life. That is why we need to keep the complete takeover of the insurance business off the table.

I'm not a fan of any health care reform options I've studied.

I think the first national conversation that needs to take place is whether or not health care should be an entitlement; using ERs as primary care physician loots taxpayer coffers, and a lot of state budgets would be significantly closer to balanced if health care were treated as a service available for purchase.

I'm in favor of subsidizing health care for children, and for matters of public health, but adults have received a taxpayer funded education and should work and pay to meet their own health care needs.

I am also in favor of limiting reproductive rights, and have promulgated a parent licensing scheme, as I think we should care about people's abilities to rear children at least as much as we care about their abilities to share our roads.

Unfortunately fixing these issues in any meaningful way will involve sacrifice, and the populous does not want to relinquish perceived entitlements to health care and the unrestricted bearing of children, and the only people able to require these sacrifices of us are unwilling to risk their political careers for the collective good,

So some band-aid or other will be slapped on the problems before the next election cycle, and various political candidates will claim credit for inventing the new-and-improved system, and just like we knew the politician lied when he claimed he invented the internet, we won't be surprised when the reformed health care system is as miserably flawed as the current health care system.

I don't think health care can be reformed under our current system of government, because the drastic changes necessary to effect substantial change are too politically risky for career politicians. Should our nation ever become serious about change, we would first need to change the way we choose our leaders. To attract suitable leadership we should offer incentives to the best and brightest among us to serve their country. We should grant lifetime immunity from federal taxes to well qualified individuals willing to take a hiatus from their positions in industry to manage their nation's affairs. Campaigns should be federally funded, and lobbying should involve discussion rather than an exchange of money for favors. All political offices should have the same two term limit as POTUS, because government does not serve the people well when people in power are afraid to act for fear of losing political capital. I think we are fools if we believe that positive change can occur before "career politician" is an oxymoron.

yes health care should be an entiltlement ,alot of people on this board were alive before ww2 and back then people died and starved to death in the streets, working people need to contribute their fair share to the cost, but never more than an established health plan through employment,would you as a nation rather have a healthy population or an unhealthy population draining the system by going to emergency rooms all the time, the territory is a perfect example, the hospitals cannot turn us away, but what if we were allowed some preventative stuff before we ever had to go to the emergency room?

I fear that there is a default health reform, already in effect. It seems to be a slow progression, but I think I'm seeing it:
- my family doctor used to be a DOCTOR
- now, I never see the DOCTOR, I see the Nurse Practitioner (I don't think they get the same education/training as a doctor)
- if I have any sense of ailment (other than fever) I am immediately referred to a specialist
- so, I can imagine the day that:
--- I first see an administrator, who hands me a form to describe my ailment
--- based on my answers, I am referred to a "specialist"
--- the specialist is not a doctor.. more like an engineer (with much less training than a doctor)
--- the specialist knows how to use equipment to diagnose only a few ailments
--- if I need surgery, I go to another engineer who is trained in providing that and only a few related surgeries
--- I can't sue the initial administrator because I filled out the form
--- I can't sue the specialist or surgeon because he/she is "certified" to use the equipment, or do the surgery
--- doctors only do research and development (drugs, NIH, etc)
--- so, we get rid of this massive pool of expensive doctors, which brings down cost and keeps the concept of pooled risk. In place of doctors, we have all of these low paid engineers that don't have their own businesses, they work for larger employers.

Seems to me, this is the "managed quality" model that has hit many industries (look at customer support people that you currently talk to on the phone).

How about the other elephant in the room. Why should people have kids they can't afford let alone their insurance?

you are right. people should not have children if they are ill-equipped to raise them properly.

the children still need health care. and people need to be able to afford health insurance even if they made choices that put them at disadvantage. I'm not perfect and i don't want to think of people who "deserve" vs people who don't "deserve" health care or health insurance.

edited to say: i promise not to weigh in any more on this issue, everyone's made up their minds, including me. i am going to advocate for health care reform, some will not. accepted. i will continue to read the thread though, because some good info is being shared in here. i may pm someone, if that's ok.

So, why would people have kids if they can`t afford them?????
Most have children for INCOME!
It is how they LEECH the welfare system!
No one gets married(or they loose their government (erm Taxpayer) check!
Ten there is free or subsidized (but you payed for it) housing!
And Free food stamps!
And WIC free food checks!
Free medical to have these babies!
And the more babies you make, the bigger the checks get!
Then you feed `m beans & rice, leave `em with grandma(daddy's never home) & go out hoeing to get another dic (man) to make more babies!
Now, you have bred another (larger) generation of welfare recipients!

Oh, I don't know, Personal Bankruptcy, Corp Bankruptcy, Foreclosures, Bail out Funds for Banks, Bail out Funds for the auto industry, stimulus checks, cost of the war in Iraq, subsidies for farmers, Grants to cities, Grants to Students, Trial Lawyers, HMO's, Foreign Aid, outsource jobs, etc. the list goes on and on, but the majority zero in on the poor . What a Great society we live in.

...So, why would people have kids if they can`t afford them?????
Most have children for INCOME!
It is how they LEECH the welfare system!
No one gets married(or they loose their government (erm Taxpayer) check!
Ten there is free or subsidized (but you payed for it) housing!
And Free food stamps!
And WIC free food checks!
Free medical to have these babies!
And the more babies you make, the bigger the checks get!
Then you feed `m beans & rice, leave `em with grandma(daddy's never home) & go out hoeing to get another dic (man) to make more babies!
Now, you have bred another (larger) generation of welfare recipients!

...

may HIM send a plague upon you and yours

"Unfortunately fixing these issues in any meaningful way will involve sacrifice"

"....The word that has destroyed you is 'sacrifice.' Use the last of your strength to understand its meaning. You're still alive. You have a chance."
"'Sacrifice' does not mean the rejection of the worthless, but of the precious. 'Sacrifice' does not mean the rejection of the evil for the sake of the good, but of the good for the sake of the evil. 'Sacrifice' is the surrender of that which you value in favor of that which you don't"

dnt, I trust you know the author? 😉

so nobodies answered my questions, how do i go about getting affordable insurance,simple question, should be a simple answer

oh and i find it very interesting that one of the posters on this thread condemning social services is a restaurant owner that cannot afford to pay his employeesand as of 3 weeks ago still had not paid after about 6 months

trw, have you looked into catastrophic coverage insurance? The type that costs less per month but has a high deductible and is meant for major illnesses/injuries, not for routine care.

yeah my boss has it, BUPA,2500 a year

Seems like I heard that the Chamber of C had some sort of an arrangement for a group policy, but I don't remember if it was actual or just talk of how they wanted one. You might call them and ask. If T doesn't belong you can always join as an individual member. I don't suppose the CRRA has a group policy either.

i think that is only for STT,divi offers bupa, bucc has good ins but you need to work there for about a year to get it, carambola has the best policy and it kicks in after 90 days and i think the dishwasher at bacchus gets insurance as well,breezes has a policy

Alright it's time to chime in on this kid thing. I've seen this alot on this site. This is very bothersome thinking that we should limit people the number of children people can have. I don't want to become a society like in Asia where they have limits on how many children you can have. If we even think about doing that - we better start kicking some illegals and people with visa's out of this country first. I'll fight if someone tries to implement something like that. My daughter loves kids and when she's ready to settle down she wants to have 3 or 4. She should always have that right.

This is a recent article about child limits in China:
Apr 12 2009
China has proclaimed that it will continue its one child policy, which limits couples to having one child, through the 2006-2010 five year planning period.
China's one child policy was established by Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping in 1979 to limit communist China's population growth. Although designated a "temporary measure," it continues a quarter-century after its establishment. The policy limits couples to one child. Fines, pressures to abort a pregnancy, and even forced sterilization accompanied second or subsequent pregnancies.

It is not an all-encompassing rule because it has always been restricted to ethnic Han Chinese living in urban areas. Citizens living in rural areas and minorities living in China are not subject to the law.
SOURCE: http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/onechild.htm
-----------------------------------
I do have issues with welfare mommas that are baby factories. I would agree that after a certain number of children if you haven't been able to work your way off welfare that you are limited to only getting assistance based on that certain number of kids(say 3 for example - arbitrary number chosen). If you have more than that - your benefits are capped at that number and you will have to make due - or not have more kids.
Welfare is good for those that truly need it. I won't lie and say I never had to use it - but only when I absolutely had to have help.

I believe we as a society need to review and re-design the whole welfare system or put in place an real, workable incentive program for them to get off the welfare rolls. I think we need to (for a short time) incentivize (read TRAIN) young adults to learn a work ethic and help them strive for a better way of life. We need to hold young people up to a higher standard. But to do that we have to have programs and systems in place to support them. These are our future leaders. I still believe there should be programs around the country like I had talked about in an earlier thread - I will find it and re-post it later - a transitional housing program for those who want to get off welfare and out of public housing. I'll find it and post it again.

I apologize. I dd not mean to morph this thread, but I've heard that phrase long enough. It gets my fire going. At first glance it reeks of "sterilize them after 2 children" and such. That is so very wrong. If you don't ever fix the systemic problems you will always end up with the same issues again. It's like tan tan or bamboo - if you don't get it all out - roots and all - it keeps coming back.

Hey EE -

Yes, I recognize the author and the text, but I think her take on sacrifice assumes people's moral compasses to be more aligned with one another than they really are.

dnt: You are hard to stump! 😉 One cannot change the moral compass of another, that is the reason we have laws.

I don't see why we can't limit the number of children people have. If they can't afford them and have them anyways and keep them instead of adopting them to a family that can afford them then how is that not child abuse to bring a child into poverty? Where the child can not even expect basic care?