Health Care Bill Moves Forward

[Johnnyorganic]

first off, it's not illegal aliens, it non-citizens. if you don't know the difference, fine.

I believe the PC term is undocumented immigrants, but I find illegal aliens to be much more accurate.

Legal immigrants are fine in my book.

if your saying that people over 200% of the poverty level can afford good health coverage, i suggest you try to live on 40g's a year, with a $1300 per month insurance bill.

Your example is a worst case scenario. A single person making $40,000 is doing just fine unless they blow everything they make on frivolities.

Anyway, the cut off for those who can afford insurance yet choose not to purchase it is $50K.

and why aren't the folks who are "eligible for existing programs" covered? you don't say.

The question you should be asking yourself is why would someone currently eligible for a government program choose not to take advantage of it?

Furthermore, what makes you think this proposed series of entitlements will change anything as far as they are concerned?

My feeling is that their reasons for not utilizing existing programs aimed at them will not change and they will choose to remain uninsured.

and as far as I'm concerned, that leaves the total back at 46 million, which is the number from the year 2005. it's gone up since then.

As far as I'm concerned, you choose to see what you want to see in spite of evidence to the contrary.

 

[CrackerJax]

Why let facts get in the way of an issue?

 

[jeffchr]

I believe the PC term is undocumented immigrants, but I find illegal aliens to be much more accurate.
so you don't know the difference between non-citizens and illegal aliens/undocumented immigrants


Legal immigrants are fine in my book.

Your example is a worst case scenario. A single person making $40,000 is doing just fine unless they blow everything they make on frivolities.

Anyway, the cut off for those who can afford insurance yet choose not to purchase it is $50K.
i don't believe your stat. the official census reports quote this statistics in terms of 200% of the federal poverty level - $50k (2x25,790) would be for a family of 5.

it goes all the way down to 2x$10k for a single person.

the $40k I mentioned would be for a family of 4. so your post is generic and doesn't account for, well, the facts.



The question you should be asking yourself is why would someone currently eligible for a government program choose not to take advantage of it?

Furthermore, what makes you think this proposed series of entitlements will change anything as far as they are concerned?

My feeling is that their reasons for not utilizing existing programs aimed at them will not change and they will choose to remain uninsured.
i'm for single payer system - who the hell would decline that?


As far as I'm concerned, you choose to see what you want to see in spite of evidence to the contrary
ditto

.

..........

 

[Johnnyorganic]

so you don't know the difference between non-citizens and illegal aliens/undocumented immigrants

I'm pretty sure I do, but apparently you don't seem to think I do.

I clearly made a distinction between legal immigrants and illegal aliens.

Why don't you enlighten me?

i don't believe your stat. the official census reports quote this statistics in terms of 200% of the federal poverty level - $50k (2x25,790) would be for a family of 5.

it goes all the way down to 2x$10k for a single person.

the $40k I mentioned would be for a family of 4. so your post is generic and doesn't account for, well, the facts.

They are not my stats.

And I really don't care what you choose to believe or disbelieve.

Here is an excerpt from the source I referenced previously in this thread:

In addition, some of the 46 million could theoretically afford health coverage, but chose not to purchase any. In 2007, 17.6 million of the uninsured had annual incomes of more than $50,000 and 9.1 million earned more than $75,000. In fact, as Sally Pipes notes in the Top Ten Myths of American Health Care: A Citizen's Guide, those making more than $75,000 per year are part of the fastest growing segment of the uninsured population.

i'm for single payer system - who the hell would decline that?

And I'm for the Federal government getting its big nose out of issues that do not concern it. Health care is a state/local issue.

See the 10th Amendment.

ditto

You have presented no evidence in our little exhange. Just empty rhetoric.

 

[CrackerJax]

Johnny....all the data would sink his position. Don't be so harsh ..

 

[jeffchr]

I'm pretty sure I do, but apparently you don't seem to think I do.

I clearly made a distinction between legal immigrants and illegal aliens.

Why don't you enlighten me?

They are not my stats.

And I really don't care what you choose to believe or disbelieve.

Here is an excerpt from the source I referenced previously in this thread:

And I'm for the Federal government getting its big nose out of issues that do not concern it. Health care is a state/local issue.

See the 10th Amendment.

You have presented no evidence in our little exhange. Just empty rhetoric.

i saw no delineation in your original post between illegal and not-illegal non-citizens.

i'm using the census bureau stats. Sally C. Pipes is a right-wing maniac. I wouldn't believe ANYTHING she writes. Why, I'd believe Glen Beck before I'd believe that nut job. She makes Michelle Bachman appear sane.

And good luck with the constitutional argument. I see that argument all the time around here, but never from a congressperson, constitutional lawyer or the media. But then again, I don't watch fox noise.

 

[Johnnyorganic]

i saw no delineation in your original post between illegal and not-illegal non-citizens.

Illegal aliens are not legal immigrants. What's to delineate?

Did you really need me to spell that out for you?

However, for your benefit, I did stipulate the difference in a follow up post.

i'm using the census bureau stats. Sally C. Pipes is a right-wing maniac. I wouldn't believe ANYTHING she writes. Why, I'd believe Glen Beck before I'd believe that nut job. She makes Michelle Bachman appear sane.

Priceless. I suppose dismissing a source out of hand is fundamental to your line of 'reasoning.'

Anyway, had you bothered to read the document I presented at Paddy's request, you would see that those figures were census numbers as well.

But can you refute her point about the $75K earners being the fastest growing segment of the uninsured population?

I did not dispute your statistics, just your application of them.

And good luck with the constitutional argument. I see that argument all the time around here, but never from a congressperson, constitutional lawyer or the media. But then again, I don't watch fox noise.

Of course you don't. But then again, neither do I.

 

[jeffchr]

Illegal aliens are not

Priceless. I suppose dismissing a source out of hand is fundamental to your line of 'reasoning.'

well lets see...

she was an advocate for the Youth Smoking Prevention Program, which was a attempt by the tobacco companies to forestall tobacco regulations

she was an advocate of the total deregulation of water works in Ca. imagine water distribution as a for profit venture as supply is declining and demand is rising. a gold-mine at the expense of EVERYBODY in the west.

her think tank is funded by big oil, PhRMA, Pfizer, Lilly, and Wall Street. who do you think she is working for? you?

 

[Iron Lion Zion]

well lets see...

she was an advocate for the Youth Smoking Prevention Program, which was a attempt by the tobacco companies to forestall tobacco regulations

she was an advocate of the total deregulation of water works in Ca. imagine water distribution as a for profit venture as supply is declining and demand is rising. a gold-mine at the expense of EVERYBODY in the west.

her think tank is funded by big oil, PhRMA, Pfizer, Lilly, and Wall Street. who do you think she is working for? you?

Oh come on, now you are just grasping in the air...
I was actually looking forward to a response, but instead I have seen "You do not know what illegal aliens are" as well as "that lady is owned by the government."
You distract with one statement and then attempt to discredit a single writer, when just by typing Uninsured Americans into google you will find multiple statements supporting the fact that the 50 million should have an asterisk next to it.
Fix malpractice issues and fix preconditions. That's all that needs to be fixed.

 

[CrackerJax]

It's a typical ploy by ppl who can't actually defend their positions.

 

[jeffchr]

Oh come on, now you are just grasping in the air...
I was actually looking forward to a response, but instead I have seen "You do not know what illegal aliens are" as well as "that lady is owned by the government."
You distract with one statement and then attempt to discredit a single writer, when just by typing Uninsured Americans into google you will find multiple statements supporting the fact that the 50 million should have an asterisk next to it.
Fix malpractice issues and fix preconditions. That's all that needs to be fixed.

i think it's "gasping for air" or "grasping for straws", but since details don't contribute to a constructive discussion you probably could have used any misstated idiom

i totally agree with the malpractice issue. the dems are wrong not to include tort reform. ditto on preconditions.

 

[Illegal Smile]

Trial lawyers are major supporters of democrats. No way were they going to include tort reform.

 

[jeffchr]

Trial lawyers are major supporters of democrats. No way were they going to include tort reform.

yup. so really we need campaign reform. financial lobbying should be eliminated. campaign contributions seem to speak louder than votes and the "system", the democracy based on our constitution, did not anticipate the skew towards corporate America.

 

[medicineman]

yup. so really we need campaign reform. financial lobbying should be eliminated. campaign contributions seem to speak louder than votes and the "system", the democracy based on our constitution, did not anticipate the skew towards corporate America.

Exactly. I'm sorry to say, this bill will ever see the light of day. The insurance lobby is too strong once again. The people need to vote out every one of those senators and congressmen that vote against it. Untill we can get rid of lobbyists, we will never have control of our government. I feel bad for all the uninsured, but come on now, shouldn't they have been in the streets screaming for reform? The repukes certainly were there screaming against it.

 

[Jack*Herrer420]

Exactly. I'm sorry to say, this bill will ever see the light of day. The insurance lobby is too strong once again. The people need to vote out every one of those senators and congressmen that vote against it. Untill we can get rid of lobbyists, we will never have control of our government. I feel bad for all the uninsured, but come on now, shouldn't they have been in the streets screaming for reform? The repukes certainly were there screaming against it.

Yeah blame it on the insurance lobby. It's not like Americans don't want this or anything. I believe the next election cycle will prove that Americans are against this. People who DO vote for the bill are gone. Just like every presidency, they can never maintain both houses and the presidency. That is why the need to get it done now, because they won't have a shot like this for a long time.

 

[tical916]

Yeah blame it on the insurance lobby. It's not like Americans don't want this or anything. I believe the next election cycle will prove that Americans are against this. People who DO vote for the bill are gone. Just like every presidency, they can never maintain both houses and the presidency. That is why the need to get it done now, because they won't have a shot like this for a long time.

Lobbyists control the government, they put up the money to get officials elected and then the officials become their puppet. This has been going on forever...

 

[Iron Lion Zion]

Exactly. I'm sorry to say, this bill will ever see the light of day. The insurance lobby is too strong once again. The people need to vote out every one of those senators and congressmen that vote against it. Untill we can get rid of lobbyists, we will never have control of our government. I feel bad for all the uninsured, but come on now, shouldn't they have been in the streets screaming for reform? The repukes certainly were there screaming against it.

You would have to fire ever single political figure who has any power and/or spends any time in D.C.

 

[medicineman]

Yeah blame it on the insurance lobby. It's not like Americans don't want this or anything. I believe the next election cycle will prove that Americans are against this. People who DO vote for the bill are gone. Just like every presidency, they can never maintain both houses and the presidency. That is why the need to get it done now, because they won't have a shot like this for a long time.

Are you actually trying to tell me the American people are against healthcare reform. Just what cave are you living in?

 

[medicineman]

You would have to fire ever single political figure who has any power and/or spends any time in D.C.

I'll vote for that. Put it on the ballot.

 

[CrackerJax]

Trial lawyers are major supporters of democrats. No way were they going to include tort reform.

Obama is a puppet of the lawyers.